The most annoying personality type is...

I pesonally can't see any SJ being as annoying as I am.
 
SPs are annoying in a good way, they know they're annoying, you can tell them they're annoying when they annoy you so they annoy you more but it's fine, everyone is clear on the atmosphere of annoyance.

with SJs the annoyance is repressed and heavy. srs all the time.
 
EyeSeeCold said:
@bickelz How do you abstract emotions from that which is not emotional?
Click to expand...

[MENTION=3375]EyeSeeCold[/MENTION] It's when people take an emotional argument and try to fit it into a logical set of premises because they're so afraid of feeling something. True, you cannot abstract emotions out of something that is unemotional but you can get emotional about an argument, no matter what it is about.

"Logical people" will use fake logic at times to fit their beliefs and they don't see what they're doing. I have a friend who does this with almost every debate I get into with him and he's so oblivious to it, it's ridiculous. Moreover, nobody else seems to really see it.

Logic and emotions/values are not the same language so I hate it when people try to openly convert one to the other. You can rationalize value arguments but logic doesn't really work, not unless it's fake.
 
poshlost said:
SPs are annoying in a good way, they know they're annoying, you can tell them they're annoying when they annoy you so they annoy you more but it's fine, everyone is clear on the atmosphere of annoyance.

with SJs the annoyance is repressed and heavy. srs all the time.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with this.
 
88chaz88 said:
I pesonally can't see any SJ being as annoying as I am.
Click to expand...

I am soo glad you said this cause yea, I mean nobody but nobody is as annoying as you [MENTION=2495]88chaz88[/MENTION]; Um, no that came out bad. Um, er...I wholeheartedly agree with your post...um, not because you are annoying per se, um yea...Because I am supporting your right to express your feelings! Yea, thats the ticket. I agree because it is important to validate your statement! *snickers quietly*
 
bickelz said:
[MENTION=3375]EyeSeeCold[/MENTION] It's when people take an emotional argument and try to fit it into a logical set of premises because they're so afraid of feeling something. True, you cannot abstract emotions out of something that is unemotional but you can get emotional about an argument, no matter what it is about.

"Logical people" will use fake logic at times to fit their beliefs and they don't see what they're doing. I have a friend who does this with almost every debate I get into with him and he's so oblivious to it, it's ridiculous. Moreover, nobody else seems to really see it.

Logic and emotions/values are not the same language so I hate it when people try to openly convert one to the other. You can rationalize value arguments but logic doesn't really work, not unless it's fake.
Click to expand...
[MENTION=3545]bickelz[/MENTION] "Fake logic"? I assume you mean an inappropriate use of logic or rationale. I wouldn't mind clarification though.

I do agree that you should not always rationalize your feelings away, but also that you shouldn't ignore reason and practical thought.


But overall, some people just have trouble connecting emotionally, I understand that you probably think they're being unfair or something, but they can't help it.
 
EyeSeeCold said:
@bickelz "Fake logic"? I assume you mean an inappropriate use of logic or rationale. I wouldn't mind clarification though.

I do agree that you should not always rationalize your feelings away, but also that you shouldn't ignore reason and practical thought.


But overall, some people just have trouble connecting emotionally, I understand that you probably think they're being unfair or something, but they can't help it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, things like circular logic that aren't real logic. Just because it sounds logical doesn't mean it's right. Connecting emotionally isn't really what I'm talking about though. I'll give the example of the abortion argument and my friend's stance on it. He is very pro life, even when the life of the woman is in danger. This is obviously a position taken on values. He then tries to prove his position with logic without admitting that his stance is based on a value judgement and ironically, will not listen to logical arguments against his stance.

I'm a believer that rational thinking and logical thinking aren't the same thing. You can rationalize feelings, still think with your feelings and be a very rational person but feelings and logic do not intertwine. They're different languages. It's like HTML vs Spanish.
 
People without an open mind, talking negatively, gossip and people who chew with their mouth open drive me nuts.
 
bickelz said:
Yeah, things like circular logic that aren't real logic. Just because it sounds logical doesn't mean it's right. Connecting emotionally isn't really what I'm talking about though. I'll give the example of the abortion argument and my friend's stance on it. He is very pro life, even when the life of the woman is in danger. This is obviously a position taken on values. He then tries to prove his position with logic without admitting that his stance is based on a value judgement and ironically, will not listen to logical arguments against his stance.

I'm a believer that rational thinking and logical thinking aren't the same thing. You can rationalize feelings, still think with your feelings and be a very rational person but feelings and logic do not intertwine. They're different languages. It's like HTML vs Spanish.
Click to expand...
Ah I see now. Circular reasoning is usually caused by a strong attachment, or a lack of training in formal argument.

Yeah logical =/= rational. HTML vs Spanish :tongue1:
 
Lerxst said:
ENTP's drive me up a wall. I can usually spot one from the first second they open their mouth and feel like arguing a topic, even if we both agree on the issue. Honestly... just let it go!
Click to expand...

Y U SO MEAN? :(

aerosol said:
WHAT?!
I love most ENTPs. Or maybe I've just met all the good ones.
Click to expand...

You, I love!

Artsu Tharaz said:
And the correct answer isssssssssss
ENTP. And they're fucking proud of it.

Thanks for playing, kids.
Click to expand...

It's not pride, its pure happiness at being acknowledged. Hate us, love us, just don't ignore us :love:
 
LIBERTARIAN or OBJECTIVIST.

Really annoying.
 
Lark said:
LIBERTARIAN or OBJECTIVIST.

Really annoying.
Click to expand...

Funny you should say so, I was gonna say Conservative or Fundamentalist Christian who wants to tell you all about that (hell, I'm not one to discriminate, enter any religion here and it works).

Totally annoying.
 
Lurker said:
Funny you should say so, I was gonna say Conservative or Fundamentalist Christian who wants to tell you all about that (hell, I'm not one to discriminate, enter any religion here and it works).

Totally annoying.
Click to expand...

Do you know anyone who fits that description in person? Excluding celebrities or pundits? I hear people say this but usually they dont have any ready examples, each is the modern folk devil of liberal society, often the people who seem to fit the bill are a lot less aggrivating but people get aggrivated because they are annoyed with an abstract villified character in their minds. Sorry for the speel.

In times and places each of these labels have been applied to me, although I wouldnt choose to use them myself, I think of them as inaccurate now, like calling someone who has manners a gentleman, it originally was a statement about someones birthright, property and social status. They are words which are mainly used in prejorative senses, like socialist has been a lot too.
 
Lark said:
Do you know anyone who fits that description in person? Excluding celebrities or pundits? I hear people say this but usually they dont have any ready examples, each is the modern folk devil of liberal society, often the people who seem to fit the bill are a lot less aggrivating but people get aggrivated because they are annoyed with an abstract villified character in their minds. Sorry for the speel.

In times and places each of these labels have been applied to me, although I wouldnt choose to use them myself, I think of them as inaccurate now, like calling someone who has manners a gentleman, it originally was a statement about someones birthright, property and social status. They are words which are mainly used in prejorative senses, like socialist has been a lot too.
Click to expand...

Why would I say it annoys me more than someone's type if I didn't know people like that? :noidea:

BTW that wasn't a dig at you, it was simply following on from your example of a non-MBTI "type".

Had one guy who thankfully no longer works where I do tell another employee she was going to hell for listening to Slipknott, he looked at the images on their CD and made a snap and harsh judgement call against her for having it. I don't know in what universe information like that is ok to be given when unrequested, let alone thought. He eventually left to go do mission work in South Africa but we were continually subjected to his faith-based and exclusionary Fi judgements for as long as he was there.

I'm about as non-judgemental as you can get so anyone being judgemental kinda shits me, but when it's done in the name of religion, as it often is, it seems highly hypocritical. The bible is very clear that everyone is a sinner and on the "judge not lest ye be judged" part.

It's the one thing that will annoy me quicker than anything else can.
 
Last edited:
Lark said:
Do you know anyone who fits that description in person? Excluding celebrities or pundits? I hear people say this but usually they dont have any ready examples, each is the modern folk devil of liberal society, often the people who seem to fit the bill are a lot less aggrivating but people get aggrivated because they are annoyed with an abstract villified character in their minds. Sorry for the speel.

In times and places each of these labels have been applied to me, although I wouldnt choose to use them myself, I think of them as inaccurate now, like calling someone who has manners a gentleman, it originally was a statement about someones birthright, property and social status. They are words which are mainly used in prejorative senses, like socialist has been a lot too.
Click to expand...

I know plenty and I'm pretty sure everyone living in a predominantly christian society does. but of course other christian extremists wouldn't notice them since their extremism is what they'd consider normality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top