pretentious, chest-pounding, protecting the damsel-in-distress, woman-protecting, hero of Canton speeches by leadb

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

I don't like that word... "chivalry."

Quote:
chivalry

noun

Respectful attention, especially toward women

There's a one-sided-ness to it in the history of the word. Why can't we all just be polite to each other? (Rhetorical question.)

Maybe I'm just weird to focus on the definition like that... but I don't like the word.

Gotta go to class, I'll come back to this later!

---

"If I were a Nazi, someone would defend my constitutional right to hate Jews. If I were a Klansman, someone would defend my rights to hate blacks. It's a funny place, this world. Hate has rights. Love has none." - Jeff, Murphy's Boy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:33 AM

REDHEAD

Heck, I respect and value men, children, women, and dogs of all shapes and sizes. Therefore, I open the door for anybody who needs my assistance. And if someone holds the door open for me, I say "thank you" and walk on through. And if one of them did it with the ulterior motive of thinking I'm cute and he'd like to get to know me, I'm a grown woman quite capable of taking the flattery and not ending up in his bed.

River, here's a hug. I hope you find some people that help you trust yourself 'cause I'm guessing that it isn't men you're afraid of--it's that you don't trust and have confidence in yourself. I've had my bad experiences with a man or two (or three) but they were just people on the wrong path in life. I've found most people are pretty decent given half a chance. Next time a man opens the door just smile and walk on through add a thank you if you can manage it and I'll bet that's the last interaction you have with him.

I consider myself a feminist (and Whedon's essay on Dua Khalil reminds me why) but there's no need for hatin' half the human race. Opening a door for somebody is just a kindness that we all ought to do for each other (not as a particular honor to sex or age or beauty) but just a simple human kindness that I'd do for my dog.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Oddsbodskins:
Whatever the opinion, however distasteful I find it, they still have a right to hold it and, so long as they can try to avoid causing too much offense to those around them, every right to express it.

While I agree with you in principle, I have to agree with Khyron, that this is just not how it works, here or elsewhere. There is a majority on the boards and disagreement with majority opinion brings swift and withering criticism, and thinly veiled contempt (and sometimes not-so-thinly-veiled). I agree with Khyron. If a male on these boards made the same sorts of pronouncements about women that River is making about men, they'd have the "is offensive" tag in a heartbeat. There is more than a hint of hypocrisy about all this.

Of course, the other option is that River is just making these outrageous claims in a bid for attention or to play devil's advocate. But given the vitriol, I'd say she believes them. Why she isn't being censured for her sexist attitudes against men is something I don't quite understand. Seriously, men are to be gutted? We're inferior to women? We all of us are heartless, scheming bastards? Are these the sorts of claims we're OK with?

________________________________________________________________________

- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:05 AM

May I just point out the irony of River hijacking this thread when the whole reason that this thread was started was because of her objection to the hijacking of her thread?

________________________________________________________________________

- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:06 AM

ODDSBODSKINS

It's a self-centered attitude to have, but I'm less concerned with the majority on the boards then I am with being comfortable with my owns words and actions.

However, I must be brief, as I just got a faceful of hot fat (overheated it before I added the beef) and I'm going off to be in considerable amounts of pain right now.

Our criminal institutions are full of little creeps like you who do wrong things.
Many of them were driven to these things by a horrible force called Music.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Oddsbodskins:
It's a self-centered attitude to have, but I'm less concerned with the majority on the boards then I am with being comfortable with my owns words and actions.

That's the real trick, isn't it? To do the right thing, in spite of what anyone else says. It's especially hard when doing so will bring wrath down on your head. That's why I'm such a big fan of Jesus: he took all the abuse, and when they drove the nail through his wrist, he said, "Father, forgive them." I want to be like that (though I'll admit, I have a long way to go).

Quote:
However, I must be brief, as I just got a faceful of hot fat (overheated it before I added the beef) and I'm going off to be in considerable amounts of pain right now.

Good heavens! I do hope your OK. Good luck with the convalescing!

________________________________________________________________________

- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:16 AM

REDHEAD

Casual, I think River has been in Troll country before and is trying to overcome her tendency to go off. Check her last post out. (not that she's exactly gracious but...)

You know I agree with you that if a man said similar statements about women he would be being trounced. In fact, I might have been one who at least felt like jumping on him (though I try not to be too hostile).

I could point out that when someone in power (ie a man) does something it has a different effect then when someone not in power (ie a woman) does the same thing. However, that would be hypocrisy. You've convinced me. I'll admit it. You are right.

Yet, I agree with whichever wonderful poster suggested that instead of treating River differently than we are, we should treat that hypothetical woman-bashing man differently. Maybe the world would be a heck of a lot nicer if we all gave men the same benefit of the doubt we tend to give women.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by redhead:
Yet, I agree with whichever wonderful poster suggested that instead of treating River differently than we are, we should treat that hypothetical woman-bashing man differently. Maybe the world would be a heck of a lot nicer if we all gave men the same benefit of the doubt we tend to give women.

Well, I'm with you 50% and not the other 50. I do think that we should make more space for kindness in the way we treat people. Maybe we should treat the hypothetical woman-basher the same as we're treating River. But at the same time, I don't think that it's the case that we should roll completely and allow such ugliness to go unchallenged. And I think that's Khyron's point. At some point we'd say, "All right, that's just about enough of that." But so far, even River's assertion that all men should be gutted hasn't raised so much as an eyebrow, and it's the irony of it all that kills me.

________________________________________________________________________

- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:40 AM

REDHEAD

(while I was off composing my last post, Oddsbodskin got hurt. Hopefully, you soon will be better!)

Actually, Casual, I think you are doing a great job of challenging her. You are making clear intelligent points on why she is misbehaving. Hopefully, she is listening. She certainly hasn't continued to post.

In either case, you've helped me to see things from a different perspective and I appreciate it. And, oddly enough, if River had been sent to Troll country earlier, I might never have gotten a chance to hear your point of view.

And that is an argument for saving Troll country for a last resort!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
And I think that's Khyron's point.

It sure is.

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:17 PM

Oddsbodskins replied, obliquely:

Quote:
...On another note, Zoid, I beat you by 3 points xD

(Just a little male competitiveness for the benefit of any who may seize on it ^^ )

Usually, when I examine the subject of my 'IQ' and how it affects my life, I truly wish it was in the 125 range. I consider it more of a curse than a blessing. But, I also think God made me the way S/He needs me to be, in order for me to be a proper implement in Her/His plan. So, I'm suffering it as best as I can. It just hurts to be so out of whack with the vast majority of people, including my loved ones.

If I envy anyone anything, it's the ability to not be forced to continually be keenly observant of every little detail and extrapolate the 'big picture', by osmosis, as it were.

If I had a dime for every time somebody thought I was psychic when it's really only pattern recognition... And when I start speaking freely (free associating), just letting my mind have its way...and then notice that everyone's sorta standing around, eyes glazed...and then I have to go back and restate the whole idea in small, easy to consume pieces...

It's not that I mind having to strictly marshal my thoughts in order for people to understand them. Quite the contrary. I admire all people and want to be accepted and liked, just like anyone else. What I borderline hate is that my mind skips ahead like that in the first place.

So, you can keep your three extra points. If I could give 30 points away to somebody who'd be happy with 'em, I would. For the most part, there is very little opportunity to use them in our society at large, with its lowest common denominator formulations. And you're drawing a target on your chest on the rare occasion when they are useful, imho.

I mean, don't you ever get tired of knowing how the movie is going to end, 10 minutes in? Of being able to see who's going to wind up arguing with whom? Of being able to foretell how people are going to act, in general?

In my job as air traffic controller, I'll routinely be able to predict my next ten radio calls in the correct order, almost to the second, and be able to tell you who's gonna screw up (turn the wrong way, get lost, misreport their position, etc.). Other controllers are stunned when I do this. But I always tell them, "I ain't psychic, I'm just paying attention to details." I'm not sure they believe me, regardless how painstakingly I explain the process that took me only a blink of an eye to perform.

I don't do it to impress anyone. I don't require the validation of others to feel good (or bad) about myself. I do it because it's what I do, who I am. And I would fervently wish to God it was otherwise, but it's Her/His gift; I'm just carrying it for awhile...

Thoughtfully,

zoid

P.S.
There really is no good way of stating this sentiment. I'm going to take some heat for having expressed it, either publicly or -- in the case of those who keep their opinions to themselves -- privately. But, damn it, it's how I feel, so, I'll leave it in (against a strong urge to delete the whole thing without posting it). If it helps even one person know that they aren't suffering alone, it's worth my pain. Chivalry requires it of me.
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:28 PM

This thread is going weird places too... Male competitiveness.. lol.. so I guess that is a stereotype we embrase with fondness?? Im only asking... Or is it merely an excuse when a male is competitive.. always wondered. Ive heard that excuse a lot.

Im happy with my 127 IQ.. might not be useful for anything other than strengthening my false sense of superiority but hey.. thats enough for me..

Constance

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
If I envy anyone anything, it's the ability to not be forced to continually be keenly observant of every little detail and extrapolate the 'big picture', by osmosis, as it were.

If I had a dime for every time somebody thought I was psychic when it's really only pattern recognition... And when I start speaking freely (free associating), just letting my mind have its way...and then notice that everyone's sorta standing around, eyes glazed...and then I have to go back and restate the whole idea in small, easy to consume pieces...

Boy, oh boy, do I feel your pain. The thing that many people don't get is that it's not like being gifted in one area means being gifted in every area. I think I have above-average conceptual and analytical skills. But that comes at the cost of social and emotional intelligence. Sometimes I'd give my right arm (no biggie, I'm a lefty!) to have the same sort of insight into emotional motivations that I have with conceptual and analytic problems. Plus, you can't really open a conversation by saying, "So, what do you think of Plantinga's modal reformulation of Anselm's Ontological argument?"

________________________________________________________________________

- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Constance:
This thread is going weird places too... Male competitiveness.. lol.. so I guess that is a stereotype we embrase with fondness?? Im only asking... Or is it merely an excuse when a male is competitive.. always wondered. Ive heard that excuse a lot.

Im happy with my 127 IQ.. might not be useful for anything other than strengthening my false sense of superiority but hey.. thats enough for me..

Constance

I'm telling you, you are positively normal and the world is designed for normal people. Being 'top 10%', as Simon put it, is a royal pain in the ass. Look at all the friends it made him aboard Serenity. Every once in awhile it comes in handy, but only rarely, and those few occasions don't come close to off-setting the drag life can be the rest of the time.

Don't wish for what you have not already got. If you're not careful you might get it, to your own greater detriment. Ask RiveR6213 sometime how happy getting to the top of her particular pile has made her...

Dumbly,

zoid

P.S.
I love RiveR6213. Unfortunately, she is a bleeding mass of open psychological wounds (many of them self-inflicted), compounded by physical illness, a chemical imbalance. She is a lost soul, not an evil one. I would not rebuke someone for being sick, infirm. Neither would I condone them spreading their illness to others. Such a quandary...

_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:05 PM

Zoid:

Im not asking for anything. Im more of a wait and see what happens kind of person.. I certainly have never wanted to become a MENSA member. You play the hand your dealt, the best way you can. (only I dont believe in any dealer...) I think Im more than intelligent enough. I am (and this would have surprised the 15 year old me a great deal) happy with who I am too. (as for what is normal... well take that another time in another thread should the need arise)

going back to the topic now?? Or is this part of it,and it was just me who didnt pay attention in class?

Constance

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid (to Constance):
I'm telling you, you are positively normal and the world is designed for normal people. Being 'top 10%', as Simon put it, is a royal pain in the ass.

I don't know much about IQ testing and I never had mine tested (I mean seriously, what's the point!? I already know everybody else sucks

), but isn't Constance's 127 close to Mensa level? Wouldn't that put her around the top 2%? It doesn't seem like that would make her 'normal'.

Besides, I don't think a lower IQ corresponds to a person being more 'normal'.

EDIT: Okay, I checked ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensa_International), she misses out by 5 points. Still, should put her well within the top 5%, plus I'm sure an IQ isn't fixed, it depends what sort of day one is having when one takes the test and what sort of questions come up. Right? Or am I making even more of a fool out of myself at the moment?

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Khyron:
Besides, I don't think a lower IQ corresponds to a person being more 'normal'.

I think the normal here is where on the IQ scale most people are...

And having my IQ discussed here is kind of embarrasing *blushes*...

Anyways, normal is a difficult consept...

Where is the chest ponding btw?

Constance

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Constance:
I think the normal here is where on the IQ scale most people are...

Maybe, but his "designed for normal people" made it sound like the all-round kind of normality.

Quote:
Where is the chest ponding btw?

I opened a door for a lady today! I'm a hero! *pounds chest*

She didn't have sex with me though...

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Khyron:
Quote:
Where is the chest ponding btw?
I opened a door for a lady today! I'm a hero! *pounds chest*

She didn't have sex with me though...

LOL!!

Constance

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
...Plus, you can't really open a conversation by saying, "So, what do you think of Plantinga's modal reformulation of Anselm's Ontological argument?"

________________________________________________________________________

- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

You can't?!?

I'm more or less fine in social and emotional situations (with the exception of those what takes sudden irrational dislike). My blind spot takes the form of a sort of myopia: When I'm concentrating on a specific object of investigation, the rest of the world could burn down around me. Single-minded, I call it; Rude, my wife calls it.

I know people better than they know themselves. It's written all over them. It's in the words they say and the words they don't say, and in between the lines...

So, ummm, chivalry, huh?

Non-Formulaically,

zoid

P.S.
Whichever so-called dictionary editor wrote that simplistic definition of chivalry in one of the posts above should be taken out and hanged. Here's a better one, and this is just the first one that popped up on Google and scanned for a half a minute... http://www.chronique.com/Library/Chivalry/code.htm

And then there is bushido, http://mcel.pacificu.edu/as/students/bushido/bindex.html developed half a world away, with a completely different worldview and spiritual association; and yet which matches Christian chivalry in more than just a passing way.

So perhaps, Constance, we should just pay a little respect for men being what men are. Not admiration, just awareness that there is some evidence that men are different from women in some fundamental ways.
(NB: I've still got my money on it all being down to the physiological effects of testosterone. Especially since it's a sucker bet...)
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
[
I'm more or less fine in social and emotional situations (with the exception of those what takes sudden irrational dislike). My blind spot takes the form of a sort of myopia: When I'm concentrating on a specific object of investigation, the rest of the world could burn down around me. Single-minded, I call it; Rude, my wife calls it.

I know people better than they know themselves. It's written all over them. It's in the words they say and the words they don't say, and in between the lines...

So, ummm, chivalry, huh?

Non-Formulaically,

zoid

P.S.
Whichever so-called dictionary editor wrote that simplistic definition of chivalry in one of the posts above should be taken out and hanged. Here's a better one, and this is just the first one that popped up on Google and scanned for a half a minute... http://www.chronique.com/Library/Chivalry/code.htm

And then there is bushido, http://mcel.pacificu.edu/as/students/bushido/bindex.html developed half a world away, with a completely different worldview and spiritual association; and yet which matches Christian chivalry in more than just a passing way.

So perhaps, Constance, we should just pay a little respect for men being what men are. Not admiration, just awareness that there is some evidence that men are different from women in some fundamental ways.
(NB: I've still got my money on it all being down to the physiological effects of testosterone. Especially since it's a sucker bet...)
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

Your.. er.. superiority/arroganse is of the most charming kind zoid..

Im not really that conserned about the fundamental differences between man and woman. I would just like to see everyone treated the same way, with equal opportunities and with respect. Im imto treating people as people not gender. (Yes I am a feminist and leftwing at that) So Ill never (or try to never) excuse anyones behavior with "oh MEN!" or "thats just what women are like".. Its not fair... Its not right to reduse a person to a gender stereotype.. Just as its not fair to blame ones mistakes on ones gender...

Constance

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Constance:
Quote:
Originally posted by Khyron:
Besides, I don't think a lower IQ corresponds to a person being more 'normal'.

I think the normal here is where on the IQ scale most people are...

And having my IQ discussed here is kind of embarrasing *blushes*...

Anyways, normal is a difficult consept...

Where is the chest ponding btw?

Constance

When I said 'normal', I meant the norm, the median, the mean average; where the majority of people fall.

My IQ of 154 places me in the top 7% of the tested population.

Anyone can buy a Mensa membership, if they're only at the top of the norm (120-130). My wife took a quicky online IQ test and scored a 123. She is much smarter than me, in a practical way, which is the only way that really counts. She was deeply hurt that her IQ was lower than mine, despite my personal testimony along the lines of that presented above. I tell her, intelligence does not necessarily equate to smart, let alone wise; she is not mollified...

I would never be a member of Mensa. I adhere to Groucho Marx' admonition: "I would never belong to a club that would allow a person like me to be in it." (paraphrased).

Khyron added:
Quote:
...Maybe, but his "designed for normal people" made it sound like the all-round kind of normality...

That is correct. The world is not designed for the over- or under-endowed of any characteristic: Too tall, too short. Too pretty, not pretty enough. Too rich, too poor. (Although you've really got to work at it to get your head wrapped around those last two, immersed in our narcissistic, materialistic society: One can be too pretty and/or too rich for one's own good. Think of Marilyn Monroe, Howard Hughes and Princess Diana, for example. Their essential life experiences were just too warped to be satisfactory.)

Anyone who falls even marginally outside the median, the norm for the population, is going to struggle to fit in with the 'straights'...

Respectfully,

zoid
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:11 PM

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

Can women be chivalrous? Would anyone call a woman chivalrous? And, just how many female knights were there "back in the day"?

I don't have a problem with the basic ideas of chivalry - my beef is with the implications of the word ("I am a good Sir Knight"). It's a word that in my experience is applied solely to men, when there are virtues in it that everyone should share.

Besides, in a way, it perpetuates the stereotype. We hold decent men up like we're surprised there are so many of them, like the rule is that "men are pigs" until proven otherwise. Is the rule "women are good" until proven otherwise? 'Cause that's not true, either.

On door-holding - I know this guy my age (high school) that flat out refuses to let me hold a door for him. I always have to leave a room or go down the stairs before him. I've tried to let him go first (because I want to be polite, too), but eventually I just get fed up with it and go. He's trying to be nice, but it's really irritating, because he treats me (and all the other girls he knows) differently than his male friends when he shouldn't.

---

"If I were a Nazi, someone would defend my constitutional right to hate Jews. If I were a Klansman, someone would defend my rights to hate blacks. It's a funny place, this world. Hate has rights. Love has none." - Jeff, Murphy's Boy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:18 PM

ODDSBODSKINS

Well now what a turn this conversation has taken, paracetamol and a few bottles of wine for the painkilling and I can rejoin it in a slightly inebry...pissed state.
IQ is, to my mind, and seemingly most other people's here, a poor measure of, well, more or less everything. Mine is certainly above average, and yet I flunked school, screwed up my life, had a series of disasterous relationships and work in a minimum wage getting to clean up shit and get assaulted several times a day. However, only takes a little bit of constructive lying to yourself, and some carefully selective choices as to when to speak your mind, and you can get away without too many glazed expressions ^_~

Okay so all of that can safely be attributed to laziness, a lack of motivation, a habit of insulting the examiners (and everyone else I know) and generally poor interpersonal skills, but i don't see any reason to let it get me down xD

And while I get the 'psychic' moments, truth be told they're not terribly impressive, and mostly a result of knowing my patients, I get no edge over people with more experience. Yours sound rather more, well, less fun, but more creepifying ^^

Have I talked enough to end the post? Good.

Signing out for passing out, Odds.

Our criminal institutions are full of little creeps like you who do wrong things.
Many of them were driven to these things by a horrible force called Music.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
My IQ of 154 places me in the top 7% of the tested population.

I'm really confused... what test are you using? Mensa's cutoff point is 132 using the Stanford-Binet test, and that's for the top 2%. You getting 154 and being placed in just the top 7% seems kind of odd. Probably should be top 0.07% or something like that.

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:24 PM

Well, you've all been busy while I was at work then dinner.

A few points...

As the demi-official host of the thread, I'd like to say that I consider River's posts to be -entirely- within scope of the thread topic purpose, and that not in the least has she hijacked the topic. To wit, she was expressing her opinion about "pretentious, chest-pounding, ... speeches", and I declare that to be "on topic."

I am willing to admit I really hoped she join us over here; and pleased she did.

Besides that, I'd like to thank you all for your calm, cool and collected responses and comments throught out, including River's.

Key point here; as far as I'm concerned we are here to talk about thoughts and feelings; and while I will express concern at some of the positions, I belive all have kept well to expressing them. It is not fair to say "What do your really think?" then bash someone for saying what they really think. Thoughts are messy. Emotions are messy.

Now, >I'm< probably going to have to duck for cover....

I believe that River's "position" might be entirely reasonable and necessary... for her. Frankly, I do not know what she's been through, and, perhaps, for whatever reason, she needed (or needs) to keep men at a safe distance; this distance being realtively great compared to what most folks think and feel.

I'm a firm believer you are accountable for your actions; however, thoughts and feelings are while... directionable?... are not quite the same issue. She -feels- that all men are worthy to be gutted; however, has she in fact acted upon it? If so, I sincerely hoping she's posting from inside a "controlled environment". If not, well, I can't say I'm -pleased- she feels that way, but it might "where she's" at.

I will point out she herself said her "position" is not based on logic, but instead experience and emotion. -That- is keen; it tells me that trying to reach her with logic is... well, obviously not the course to take. I believe she acknowledged her position is not "rational", ergo, why would you continue down that path?

I'd particularly like to thank Redhead for saying what I couldn't to River; not that it didn't occur to me, but that given River's "place", I cannot say it to her with credability; as I am that which is offensive to River and thus cannot be granted credence (at least, on this topic).

I accept that fact that River -may- hate me for no reason other than I'm a man; that is not personal. That is "where she's at." It does not please me, but neither does it hurt nor offend me. I admit, the "gutting" comment worries me a bit; I sincerely hope she is merely expressing her thought/feelings and that she will in fact not act on it.

Of course, that's just me. And I'll let that drop there...

So, shields are charged, hard cover is found, .... ducking!!!!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Khyron:
Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
My IQ of 154 places me in the top 7% of the tested population.
I'm really confused... what test are you using? Mensa's cutoff point is 132 using the Stanford-Binet test, and that's for the top 2%. You getting 154 and being placed in just the top 7% seems kind of odd. Probably should be top 0.07% or something like that.

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

Statistics never lie; liars often use statistics.

Key phrase is "tested population"; in this case is likely a self selected set. So, given that people who are less bright are less likely to wish to have a low IQ confirmed are less likely to test, therefore not be in the "tested population." Mensa, on the other hand, probably is quoting a "general population" estimate.

I no longer remember my IQ; nor do I care to be reminded. I seem to be bright enough to get by, and not so bright as to find it a burden.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:
Can women be chivalrous? Would anyone call a woman chivalrous? And, just how many female knights were there "back in the day"?
...

Did you by any chance read the link I appended above? Here it is again... http://www.chronique.com/Library/Chivalry/code.htm ...and it barely scratches the surface, but it's a fair enough representation. If you read it, it certainly applies to anyone regardless the variables of their physical bodies.

No, there were no female knights back in the day (with the exception of perhaps Jean D'Arc, and the Church looked harshly upon her transvestism).

It was a different world. Hell, it was a different world less than a century ago. The real Women's Rights movement began with the end of WWII. Okay, there were suffragettes in the early 1900's, et cetera; but the real sea change occurred when 'Rosie the Riveter' refused to return en masse to the kitchen when all the GIs came home. These were not a handful of outspoken idealists, they were 'real' women -- normal housewives and mothers -- who for the first time knew for a fact that they could do 'Man's Work' as well as any man.

That realization changed the world. Everything else has followed; the good and the bad, because Change is a double-edged sword...

Women still have a few more impediments to their total equality to hurdle. They still have a few potential self-inflicted pitfalls to avoid, too, lest they become as power-drunk as some men are...

But, I'm pulling for us all to come out of it peers, and with our basic humanity intact.

Respectfully,

zoid
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 3:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by leadb:
Quote:
Originally posted by Khyron:
Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
My IQ of 154 places me in the top 7% of the tested population.
I'm really confused... what test are you using? Mensa's cutoff point is 132 using the Stanford-Binet test, and that's for the top 2%. You getting 154 and being placed in just the top 7% seems kind of odd. Probably should be top 0.07% or something like that.

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

Statistics never lie; liars often use statistics.

Key phrase is "tested population"; in this case is likely a self selected set. So, given that people who are less bright are less likely to wish to have a low IQ confirmed are less likely to test, therefore not be in the "tested population." Mensa, on the other hand, probably is quoting a "general population" estimate.

I no longer remember my IQ; nor do I care to be reminded. I seem to be bright enough to get by, and not so bright as to find it a burden.

From http://www.extremeintellect.com/ei2007/IQ/faqIQ.html :

Quote:

FAQ IQ

What is the IQ of the average person?
The average IQ score for the normal person is supposed to be 100 (the mean) with a standard deviation of 15 (which means you can add or subtract 15 from 100). Different IQ tests give you different scores, so defining someone strictly by score is not the best idea.

How high does your IQ have to be to be considered a genius?
It varies. An IQ score of 140+ or 145+ is the minimum to be considered a genius.

Who held the highest IQ in history?
Who had the highest IQ in history is up for debate. Some people believe that Marilyn vos Savant (228) had the highest IQ in history. Others believe it to be William James Sidis whose was roughly estimated at (250-300).

NOTE: When evaluating who had or has the higher IQ, take into account that the early IQ tests differed greatly from the IQ tests of today. So you won't really get an accurate picture of IQ simply by looking at a number. Also, many of the early "geniuses" never took an actual IQ test. Many of the IQ's noted in biographies may be estimates of the person's IQ.

To quote myself, which I avoid more strenuously than discussing my IQ:

Quote:
...Longtime eNTP. A real fan of MBTI, since I find it more useful than IQ (154). Intelligence is more of a hindrance than a help, in my experience. It only tends to alienate. Knowing your transactional type gives the individual something to work with when trying to improve oneself (a perpetual goal to which I am motivated)...

...I have since stated in every possible way I know how -- and given prime examples, mind you -- that 'IQ' is worthless in and of itself. First, it only measures potential, not actualization. Second, if you've got a 'high IQ', it's more likely to turn you into a pariah or skid row alcoholic than a prince/ss of the universe.

So, to recap:
'IQ' = worthless

Myers-Briggs type = very useful tool in gaining knowledge of yourself = wisdom (hopefully)

Wisdom = only game worth playing (a.k.a., "The Meaning of Life")

Respectfully,

zoid

P.S.
The server is, methinks, going down the proverbial sh*tter... *crosses fingers and clicks 'Post My Response'*

__________________________________________________
"People who boast about their IQ are losers," -Stephen Hawking

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 3:39 PM

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
Did you by any chance read the link I appended above?

Yes. And it talks about knights. Hence the questions.

I also object to some of the specifics, but I suspect I'm in the minority with regards to ideas such as loyalty, justice and patriotism, so I'll leave it at that.

I'll ask it again, because I don't think you really answered it: would you call a woman chivalrous if she acted according to that code? Because I don't think the word chivalry applies for women, not really, given its historical roots (which I admit I may be overly-focused on).

---

"If I were a Nazi, someone would defend my constitutional right to hate Jews. If I were a Klansman, someone would defend my rights to hate blacks. It's a funny place, this world. Hate has rights. Love has none." - Jeff, Murphy's Boy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 4:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:
Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
Did you by any chance read the link I appended above?

Yes. And it talks about knights. Hence the questions.

I also object to some of the specifics, but I suspect I'm in the minority with regards to ideas such as loyalty, justice and patriotism, so I'll leave it at that.

I'll ask it again, because I don't think you really answered it: would you call a woman chivalrous if she acted according to that code? Because I don't think the word chivalry applies for women, not really, given its historical roots (which I admit I may be overly-focused on).

---

"If I were a Nazi, someone would defend my constitutional right to hate Jews. If I were a Klansman, someone would defend my rights to hate blacks. It's a funny place, this world. Hate has rights. Love has none." - Jeff, Murphy's Boy

Yes, a female who acts and believes in accordance with that set of ideals would be chivalrous, to me.

'Old code' chivalry was in equal parts a response to Christian ideals (protect the weak, fight for justice, be generous, et cetera), the society of the time (i.e., the lack of female knights was a reflection of women's roles during that era), and the threats associated with Islamic expansion into Europe (i.e., kill the Infidels without mercy; remember, Vlad Drăculea is still a hero in Romania for having virtually singlehandedly stanched the flow of the Ottoman Empire into southeast Europe, c. 1450 A.D., albeit by gruesome means).

So, subtract the antiquated social mores and the justifiable xenophobia of the times, and one is left with the behavioral ideals. You read it, you figure out which ones are which.

While it is true that those who do not remember the past are doomed to relive it, I hold that it is also true that those who dwell on the past will never escape it... But, to each their own.

Respectfully,

zoid
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 4:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:

...I have since stated in every possible way I know how -- and given prime examples, mind you -- that 'IQ' is worthless in and of itself. First, it only measures potential, not actualization. Second, if you've got a 'high IQ', it's more likely to turn you into a pariah or skid row alcoholic than a prince/ss of the universe.

So, to recap:
'IQ' = worthless

Myers-Briggs type = very useful tool in gaining knowledge of yourself = wisdom (hopefully)

Wisdom = only game worth playing (a.k.a., "The Meaning of Life")

Respectfully,

zoid

Just curious if you thought I had in someway disagreed with you? If any thing, I would have said I was agreeing with you. I even would have accepted have been doing my own bit of chest pound ing in my own subtle way ;-)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 5:07 PM

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

So, I guess I'm the odd-one-out for thinking that chivalry is a package deal (it's comparable to taking away the idea of Jesus from Christianity, I think), or for even caring that the word is generally imprecise. It's cool.

Quote:

While it is true that those who do not remember the past are doomed to relive it, I hold that it is also true that those who dwell on the past will never escape it... But, to each their own.

Ah, but which is worse... forgetting it all together (and thus repeating actions which were easily preventable), or dwelling in the past and never being able to move forward? Hmm.

---

"If I were a Nazi, someone would defend my constitutional right to hate Jews. If I were a Klansman, someone would defend my rights to hate blacks. It's a funny place, this world. Hate has rights. Love has none." - Jeff, Murphy's Boy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 5:24 PM

leadb asked:

Quote:
Just curious if you thought I had in someway disagreed with you? If any thing, I would have said I was agreeing with you. I even would have accepted have been doing my own bit of chest pounding in my own subtle way ;-)

Well, Khyron and Constance seemed to be...fixating?...on IQ, and you responded in kind. So, since I was able to capture the essence of all three posts in quotes, encapsulating this entire sub-theme *cough* of the thread, I responded to all three of y'all in go...

I was only trying to steer people away from IQ and back onto MBTI, as originally suggested by the thread initiator (*psst! that would be you!*). The only thing I said about IQ throughout the thread was that it was useless. It's like saying, "I wear a size sixteen triple-e shoe. Someday I'll be a legendary baller in the NBA!" It doesn't equate to anything meaningful (except, 'it's gonna be hard to stay supplied with proper socks').

MBTI, though, gives you an idea of how to develop a meaningful relationship with the society around you. One can work on accentuating the positive and neutralizing the negative tendencies inherent within their individual personality. Everyone should take the test, wouldn't you agree? ...And then tell us what their type is and how they feel about chivalry, door holding, flat tire fixing, medical assistance from persons of the opposite sex, et cetera...

I do have a question of my own, to those females who say that A Man holding a door open for them is insulting/degrading to their integrity as a human being:

Uhhh... What?!?
(Sorry, had a caveman moment there)

...If a another woman held the door for you, would you tell them to "f*ck off" (as one respondent put it) "I don't need you to hold the door for me! I am my own person!" ?

...If you did tell her to...perform a copulatory act on herself... and a.) the ambulance left the hospital en route to your location traveling at 55 mph, while b.) the police cruiser was traveling 5 additional miles but doing 95 mph (because it was being driven by A Man with typical disregard for pedestrian safety), which one would arrive first to attempt to resuscitate your lifeless body?

Just curious, y'all...

Transactionally,

zoid

P.S.
Or would you just let her hold the door, and then have sex with her?
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 5:53 PM

Ah, got it. thx for the explanation. A couple fine points...

Zoid "MBTI, though, gives you an idea of how to develop a meaningful relationship with the society around you. One can work on accentuating the positive and neutralizing the negative tendencies inherent within their individual personality."
One can. The trick is to identify positive, negative; and then to survive the result.

"Everyone should take the test, wouldn't you agree?"
No... I try not to should on people. I would agree it is a reasonable idea, and folks might find value in it.
"...And then tell us what their type is"
only if they feel comfortable so doing.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by leadb:
Ah, got it. thx for the explanation. A couple fine points...

"Everyone should take the test, wouldn't you agree?"
No... I try not to should on people. I would agree it is a reasonable idea, and folks might find value in it.
"...And then tell us what their type is"
only if they feel comfortable so doing.

I was joking. This would have been a good place to use some of those emoti-thingies, huh?

I thought the list of improbables following "and then tell us what their type is and how they feel about" made it obvious. There I go, jumping to conclusions again...

Tiredly, And Going To Bed-edly In An Entirely Adverbal Way,

zoid
_________________________________________________

"I aim to !YAWN! *scuse me* misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, sorta, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:51 PM

AGENTROUKA

Quote:
Originally posted by Constance:
Im not really that conserned about the fundamental differences between man and woman. I would just like to see everyone treated the same way, with equal opportunities and with respect. Im imto treating people as people not gender. (Yes I am a feminist and leftwing at that) So Ill never (or try to never) excuse anyones behavior with "oh MEN!" or "thats just what women are like".. Its not fair... Its not right to reduse a person to a gender stereotype.. Just as its not fair to blame ones mistakes on ones gender...

Constance

A person after my own heart! *G*

Very few things make me angry the way "I'm a guy!" or "Women shouldn't have to.." or "any red-blooded man/woman" or such phrases.

First? People. Persons. Mind.

I don't care how hormonally influenced, every independent adult is capable of controlling their base response in favor of thinking and then acting. There is always room for respect.

Gender comes later, with all its messy, shifty priorities that it might entail.

Men shouldn't hide behaind their penis and women shouldn't hide behind their supposed inability to learn something to do with dirty hands. Or whatever the going stereotype is.

And could, maybe a new topic be opened to talk about the IQ thing? Zoid and all of you seem to enjoy it well enough but it has little to do with the subject here (I know I am throwing stones in my glass house, considering my own track record.) and it takes up a lot of space here that could be used to make broad-sweeping statements about What People Should Do.. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
Well, Khyron and Constance seemed to be...fixating?...on IQ, and you responded in kind.

Hardly fixating on IQ, I'm fixating on your population estimate - I wanted to know why there's such a huge discrepancy between the population estimates of the test you took compared to the estimates from other tests. Your estimates would hint at 10%+ of the population being genius level, which can't be true. As Leadb said, the clue might be in the phrase "tested population", which would indicate that the test you took is a specifically-designed test that doesn't have a wide circulation, or it's a common test restricted to a smaller group (fellow air traffic controllers?) and the results given only wrt that group, or maybe it's a test you took when you were younger (different IQ tests for kids). Anyway, I did some reading and the accepted upper limit for adult IQs is around 200 using a STD 15 test, and usually the people who have IQs above that achieved that feat in IQ tests during their childhood, where much higher scores are possible.

Btw, whether you or I assign any importance to IQ values is neither here nor there wrt my question...

I'm an INTJ, leaning towards INTP, according to the MBTI and the description suits me fine, however I know a number of people who took the test who aren't at all like their given profile. I'd be more enthusiastic about personality testing if it were more accurate when my friends and family try it.

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
And could, maybe a new topic be opened to talk about the IQ thing? Zoid and all of you seem to enjoy it well enough but it has little to do with the subject here (I know I am throwing stones in my glass house, considering my own track record.) and it takes up a lot of space here that could be used to make broad-sweeping statements about What People Should Do.. :)

I'll be done with the topic as soon as I get some clarification.

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 23, 2007 1:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:

I was joking. This would have been a good place to use some of those emoti-thingies, huh?

I thought the list of improbables following "and then tell us what their type is and how they feel about" made it obvious. There I go, jumping to conclusions again...

This is a thread for honest and open discussion; and I am prepared to risk making a serious observation where it is not appropriate Vs the alternative.

The problem I had with your post was the smooth transition from (I still supsect 'serious') discussion of the personality types to the joking. Obviously, the comment about the speeding police officer was a joke, which I found mildly amusing, if that helps any.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 23, 2007 1:35 AM

I was not fixating on IQ, IQ is an exceptionally boring topic of conversation, I was trying to ask some questions about a certain male stereotype... nobody answered.

Constance

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 23, 2007 1:36 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6683241.stm

Zoid, regarding personality testing, I thought I'd link this in case you missed it.

http://fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=27992

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 23, 2007 5:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
Quote:
Originally posted by Constance:
Im not really that conserned about the fundamental differences between man and woman. I would just like to see everyone treated the same way, with equal opportunities and with respect. Im imto treating people as people not gender. (Yes I am a feminist and leftwing at that) So Ill never (or try to never) excuse anyones behavior with "oh MEN!" or "thats just what women are like".. Its not fair... Its not right to reduse a person to a gender stereotype.. Just as its not fair to blame ones mistakes on ones gender...

Constance

EDIT: I am a INTJ (Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, Judging) according to the test someone posted a link to..

A person after my own heart! *G*

Very few things make me angry the way "I'm a guy!" or "Women shouldn't have to.." or "any red-blooded man/woman" or such phrases.

First? People. Persons. Mind.

I don't care how hormonally influenced, every independent adult is capable of controlling their base response in favor of thinking and then acting. There is always room for respect.

Gender comes later, with all its messy, shifty priorities that it might entail.

Men shouldn't hide behaind their penis and women shouldn't hide behind their supposed inability to learn something to do with dirty hands. Or whatever the going stereotype is.

I like you... not that I only like people who agrees with me, but you know its a bonus. It would be a lot easier for everybody I think if we wouldn't think so much about gender. Not the social gender anyway (this is translated directly from Norwegian so I'm not completely sure if social gender is the correct term in English)

Constance

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 23, 2007 5:21 AM

From http://www.personalitypage.com/ENTP_car.html : (parenthetical commentary mine)

Quote:
ENTPs generally have the following traits:

* Project-oriented (NB: Although, everything is a project, from getting up and dressed for work, to juggling finances, to maintaining relationships, to keeping pilots from committing suicide in the pursuit of being number 1 to the airport, etc.)
* Enjoy generating ideas and theories
* Creative and ingenious (sunshine)
* Bright and capable (more sunshine)
* Flexible and Diverse (still more sunshine)
* Excellent communication skills (meh...)
* Enjoy debating issues with other people (debatable, but I'll accept it as a given)
* Excellent people skills (errr...)
* Natural leaders, but ~~do not like~~ refuse to control people
* ~~Resist being~~ Refuse to be controlled by people
* Lively and energetic; able to motivate others (usually, toward the nearest exit, but, okay)
* Highly value knowledge and competence
* Logical, rational thinkers
* Able to grasp difficult concepts and theories
* Enjoy solving difficult problems (NB: See 'Project-oriented', above)
* Dislike confining schedules and environments
* Dislike routine, detailed tasks (NB: ibid; 'dislike', yes; but recognize they are essential and prefer to dispose of them as rapidly as possible and then get on with important/fun things)

ENTPs are fortunate in that they have a wide range of capabilities. They are generally good at anything which has captured their interest. ENTPs are likely to be successful in many different careers. Since they have a lot of options open to them, ENTPs will do well to choose professions which allow them a lot of personal freedom where they can use their creativity to generate new ideas and solve problems. They will not be completely happy in positions which are regimented or confining.

The following list of professions is built on our impressions of careers which would be especially suitable for an ENTP. It is meant to be a starting place, rather than an exhaustive list. There are no guarantees that any or all of the careers listed here would be appropriate for you, or that your best career match is among those listed.

Possible Career Paths for the ENTP:

* Lawyers (NB: Couldn't I just sell my soul to the Devil, and get on with the living on a tropical island sans extradition policies, avec incompletely clothed, simple native folk who will do my every bidding on less than $5 per day? I'd sooner shoot myself than start writing/interpreting The Law.)
* Psychologists
* Entrepreneurs (NB: "I don't want to sell anything, buy anything, or process anything as a career. I don't want to sell anything bought or processed, or buy anything sold or processed, or process anything sold, bought, or processed, or repair anything sold, bought, or processed. You know, as a career, I don't want to do that." -Lloyd Dobler, Say Anything.)
* Photographers
* Consultants
* Engineers
* Scientists
* Actors
* Sales Representatives (NB: See 'Entrepreneurs' and 'Lawyers', above)
* Marketing Personnel (NB: ibid)
* Computer Programmer, Systems Analyst, or Computer Specialist

(NB: What?! No 'Air Traffic Controller'?! Perhaps I'm an Actor, doing an Oscar-worthy performance of one, for the past 20 years, hmmm? How would one know the difference between the Act and the 'real thing'? Although, I do have a "The rule book is a good place to start" mentality that is a frequent irritant to the more literally minded amongst all the people I encounter in this world, to include some of my managers...)

I am an eNTP. Others have provided links to type descriptions, so I'm not repeating them. For the most part, they reflect my outward behavior and internal motivations fairly accurately. I use 'chivalry' as a template, a moral compass, to determine which of my personality traits are desirable or undesirable, and which ones to cultivate or weed out (or, at least, attempt to stem the growth of).

I am a Christian, so chivalry comes easily to me. Others may prefer bushido, based on Buddhism, Shintoism, and a select number of other influences, as a 'code of honor'. Others may prefer a strict Buddhist, Islamic or Jewish code of conduct through which to filter Life's ethical quandaries. As Book said, "It doesn't matter what you believe, just believe in something." (i.e., other than just your definitively selfish Self) Even Islam, much maligned today, is at its heart a philosophy of love and mutual respect. You and I may disagree with portions of chivalry, bushido, Islam, Buddhism, Christianity...but we also have the spiritual freedom to say, "No. That does not feel right to me. As a rational, self-governed individual, I choose to act in accordance with what I perceive is Right, even if it clashes with parts of my belief system or societal expectations. (NB: See, 'Refuse to be controlled by people' and 'Refuse to control people', in quote above.)

MBTI type and behavioral motivations -- to include the instinctive reaction to social injustices -- are related. Knowing why one reacts in a specific instinctive (reactionary, 'knee-jerk') way to societal stimuli is necessary in order to know oneself completely. No joking.

Some could probably care less about the 'why' of their instinctive behavior. Fair dinkum.

Respectfully,

zoid

P.S.
The key to getting an accurate reading from MBTI is to answer the questions as honestly as possible. Don't give answers based on how you'd like to behave; Do answer based on how you actually behave. For example, I'd love to say that I ignore a ringing telephone; the telephone annoys me to no end. However, in reality, I'm always first to answer a ringing phone; I feel compelled to do so, and it causes less internal strife to just give in to my natural impulse than to try and stifle it.

That's what I mean when I say, 'answer honestly'. Sometimes it's hard to distinguish between an idealized version of our motivations and the actualized version. It requires introspection...
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:34 PM