Personality Cafe banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Most personality theories deal with the mature version of the temperament. "NF Idealists are warm, cuddly, naturally altruistic; primarily interested in making everyone around them happier." But Hitler was an idealist, right?

What do the temperament types look like when they go bad?

Primarily, I am interested in your thoughts on the dark side of the SJ Guardian. Guardians are "stable, caring, law-abiding citizens who mow their lawn before the grass gets too high." But what happens when Guardians are broken--how do you break one?

I am posting this question on your wall because I already posted it on the SJ wall and didn't get many responses... I thought I might get better luck with you guys. I know it's a strange question but I am a writer and I want to know more about the dark side of my characters according to the integrity of their temperament.

Unfortunately for you guys, the dark side of the NT is pretty obvious--Stalin, Napoleon, Emperor Palpatine... Same goes for the SP's who splash their dysfunctional hedonsim all over Hollywood. NF's have a pretty deep dark side--borderline personality disorder, madness, raging irrationality.

But the SJs? All I can think of is Nurse Ratched from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Keirsey says that when they become self-destructive, they tend to do it literally--i.e. suicide. Thoughts?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
So antisemetic SJs might have been happy to serve as SS guard perhaps, or Javert from Les Miserables would likely have been an SJ--taking too much pleasure in the enforcement of unfair and hurtful rules out of a misguided belief that the person actually deserves it.

I suppose, then, that what drives their evil potential is fear of non-conformity. More than other types, perhaps, they are vulnerable to the sway of propaganda, fear-mongering, assuming non-conformity or personal differences to be indicative of a problem (leading to ill-founded prejudices such as racism or xenophobia), pointing fingers at easy targets because they lack the N to see the differences more deeply, or the P which is more willing to live and let live...

What about the guardians who become indignant about seniority issues? Like being "passed over" for a job or a desired role for someone they disparage as "younger, less responsible, etc." Like--to take it back to high school--the STJ friend who became all snarky because one of her "besties" dared to have a crush on the same guy: "I liked him first!"

What's up with that? Are they sincerely unable to see that a task is best handled by the person best suited for it--regardless of who's been there longer or who has desired that position more acutely? Or are they subconsciously aware of their ill-qualifications and--being unable to honestly address them, out of immaturity or fear perhaps--dishonestly find a scapegoat for their disappointment?

I mean, is all of SJ anger directed at non-conformity, or is there a sliver of deeper evil possible based on feelings of inadequacy being projected onto others? Was Javert being an asshole because he really resented Valjean's original crime, or was there a degree of illogical grudge involved in which (for instance) Javert's parents had been criminals and, being ashamed of his heritage, being terrified of his connection with the criminal class, he doled out justice with an extra degree of hatred? Almost a self-hatred?

And what's up with all the SJ's who try to get other people whom they don't like (NTs for instance) fired? I hear this so often--SJ feels humiliated by the NT (who, to be honest, often think meanly of their intelligence) and wages a long-standing crusade against them in order to get them fired. Are these crusades honest (based on "righteous anger" that the NT broke some of the rules--it doesn't matter to the SJ's that the rules didn't make any sense in the first place, or that they were causing systematic inefficiency)--or are they dishonest? --the preemptive destruction of someone they fear might destroy them first (fear that their incompetence might be real)?

And (not that I hope any of you have personal experience with this, but) what exactly would an SJ do to get someone fired? I mean, they can't break rules, right? They can't soil their conscience by doing something which is obviously wrong--wait in a dark corner with a knife, plan out a crime and frame their "enemy" in it--right? They play by the book, so how do you--legitimately--get someone fired who doesn't deserve to be fired? (Offhand, that is such a difficult task--hats off to any SJ who can pull this off...)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
If this was true cops would not commit abuses. They stick to the power structure not the rules in themselves.
Not all cops are SJs. A lot of them are other, less rule-abiding types. SPs, for instance, make fantastic detectives. They like the danger, the focus, the hunt. I would be really surprised, actually, if most cops were SJs. The job is pretty unstable for a guy who prefers stability over french fries.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Think for themselves you mean? I am not sure a guardian ever feels comfortable leaving the system. An evil SJ example would be Nurse Ratched on One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Never once did she break a rule or step outside the line.

An SJ stepping outside of the system seems as contrary to character as an INTJ preferring to knit over a game of Settlers of Catan.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts
Discussion Starter · #30 ·
Here's an interesting find: Abuses at infamous Florida boys reform school even more widespread, report says - U.S. News

My theory is beginning to take shape--

I suspect that SJs and NFs are the types most capable of demonizing someone we perceive to be bad, which is why, even though we are normally good-natured and cooperative, at our worst we are capable of tremendous evil (i.e. NF Hitler). We rationalize away our guilt by telling ourselves things like, "He is bad for worker moral; he broke these rules" or, in the case of this boy's home, or Hitlers's anti-semitism, "These people are bad through and through--nothing is ever going to change that." I now suspect a lot of Dickensian bad guys were SJs or NFs--as well as Jane Eyre's old school master.

SPs and NTs, on the other hand, tend to be grimly realistic about their foes, and at their worst, become cynical or apathetic about evil, even going so far as exploiting it for their own ends (i.e. NT Stalin.)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts
Discussion Starter · #31 ·
An interesting bad cop case from @DarkBarlow's list:
Sherri Rasmussen’s Murder: Tracing the Shocking Resolution to a 23-Year-Old Cold Case | Vanity Fair. "Lazarus had a reputation for being tenacious, tough, and strictly by the book. In fact, in all of her years in the department, she had never had a disciplinary hearing. Not one." This one includes a video of the full interrogation.

Wish I could now add something cheerful. Despite everything, I believe that people are really good at heart.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top