By "yesterday" I only literally meant yesterday. I'm not doubting that perhaps back then INFJs were "normal".
- you just have a way with words, miss...
Here's a caveat comment to make you feel good and special though: Maybe if INFJs were more common, the world would be a better place than it's been all these years. Maybe Rome fell because all your INFJ savants migrated out of it.
Thank you so much for this, I honestly appreciate it, I and many INFJs, I really do
BUT:
-this is not a debate with babysitting, I am so sorry for leaving you with that impression. Like any person in this world, I need indeed to feel
good and special, but in a argument like this, wich has some real heavy implications, I just need to be taken seriously, not to feel
good and special. In fact, if you will really consider/ponder my points, not necessarily agree with them, that will make me feel really good ( i'm not sure about special ).
Now, I will explain as clear as I can why
weirdness is
NOT an intrinsic term.
-object that exists have properties, for example a
red chair,
redness is a property of that chair
-there are two kind of properties :
intrinsic and extrinsic
-
intrinsic property=a property that an object or a thing has of itself, independently of other things, including its context.
-
extrinsic property= a property that depends on a thing's relationship with other things.
Wich one is
weirdness ? If it were a intrinsic property, it could be
described very easily, independent, it would be a stand-alone property. But you can't describe weird by itself, you can describe it only in relation with what is usual. Example: E.T.s came to Earth (supose they exists). We will see them very weird, and probably they will have the same reaction. We would never seen something like them, and neither them something like us. This is to say this weirdness will be
only in our/their minds. It would be
a perception of something unusual and unexpected based on something that is usual. Also this perception will only be in the mind of the observer a property that describes us, it would
not be a property that describe us in a intrinsic, objective way. It is not a stand-alone, independent weirdness,
it is dependent by the mind of the observer. So, we discover that
intrinsic weirdness is an ilusion, which is a false perception of reality. Nothing/nobody is weird, because weirdness as an intrinsic property doesn't even exists. The funny thing about this, even what is
usual is
not an intrinsic property.
Now, I do not dismiss intrinsic weirdness
based on any of these following "reasons":
-it would be really
cute and nice to pretend that all people would be "normal";
-I have a very bad memory with this word, and because I am deeply hurt and full of resentment, every time I hear this word I enter into "convulsion mode"
-it is
just/fair to believe that all people are alike, and every one of them is very normal;
Still, even
IF I dismiss weirdness
because - not
based - of any of these reasons listed, this does not mean at all that weirdness would be "real": to believe so would be a logical mistake, namely a
genetic fallacy, which is trying to dismiss an idea by showing how it originated;
