# feelers talk a lot about trust?



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

I don't get it when feelers talk about trust? Could I be screwed up or is it them?

I don't most of the time believe I live in an antagonistic universe but maybe most feelers do? Most of the people I meet in life are not ruthless jerks and liars, as far as I know. Guarding against being taken advantage of just seems like a non issue, easy enough to decide matters as I go?

But I also don't lean on people for advice if they don't demonstrate something that inspires me to want their input. And I don't volunteer help that hangs on desperation for them to reciprocate. And I have no trouble asking for what I want, or saying what I mean until I sometimes meet a gentle spirit and have to decide how careful I want to be around them or not. Some people play too many games and I walk away.

Am I missing something?


----------



## Kitty.diane (May 12, 2014)

Old Intern said:


> I don't get it when feelers talk about trust? Could I be screwed up or is it them?
> 
> I don't most of the time believe I live in an antagonistic universe but maybe most feelers do? Most of the people I meet in life are not ruthless jerks and liars, as far as I know. Guarding against being taken advantage of just seems like a non issue, easy enough to decide matters as I go?
> 
> ...


I think this all just means you're an ENTP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

Yeh! What's with that?


----------



## IncoherentBabbler (Oct 21, 2013)

Old Intern said:


> I don't get it when feelers talk about trust? Could I be screwed up or is it them?
> 
> I don't most of the time believe I live in an antagonistic universe but maybe most feelers do? Most of the people I meet in life are not ruthless jerks and liars, as far as I know. Guarding against being taken advantage of just seems like a non issue, easy enough to decide matters as I go?
> 
> ...


I don't know about feelers but I only talk about trust in relation to people I don't trust.. Everyone else is neutral, thus a non-issue.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Truly dependable/honest people are rare. Few people do what they say. Few people's word mean anything. The world isn't necessarily antagonistic, as it is unsympathetic and unhelpful. We glorify competition. 

Just think of the everyday clockwork of society. Some cop sits out there, trying to bust people, extract money from them, just going to work and shit. Everyone is trying to fuck somebody else over, if you look closely enough. Everybody is doing the absolute minimum to keep the facade of civilization going.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Old Intern said:


> I don't get it when feelers talk about trust? Could I be screwed up or is it them?
> 
> I don't most of the time believe I live in an antagonistic universe but maybe most feelers do? Most of the people I meet in life are not ruthless jerks and liars, as far as I know. Guarding against being taken advantage of just seems like a non issue, easy enough to decide matters as I go?
> 
> ...


Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Why do you ask?


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

I can't imagine trust issues are related to personality of just feelers.


----------



## Kitty.diane (May 12, 2014)

Cinnamon83 said:


> I can't imagine trust issues are related to personality of just feelers.


I think you are absolutely right. Im starting to think that everyone has trust issues! I dont trust anyone to the extent that i used to and i think its because im "growing up" lol. I was actually talking to my bf (INTP) about it the other day. He asked how many best friends i had..... Boy was he shocked when i said ZERO! Friends are people you can wholeheartedly trust with anything and everything. I dont have anyone like that. I am hoping one day to be able to open a position for him though. 😊


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

I don't think I keep secrets unless I know that people who will hear them can do something such information. I have a group good friends that I could tell anything yet feel no need to tell anything to. I really hate certain people who will take what you say and gossip behind your back. It's hypocritical because those people have trust issues. Almost everyone says they have trust issues these days and it makes them undesirable to me to pursue as a friend.


----------



## Kitty.diane (May 12, 2014)

Grandmaster Yoda said:


> I don't think I keep secrets unless I know that people who will hear them can do something such information. I have a group good friends that I could tell anything yet feel no need to tell anything to. I really hate certain people who will take what you say and gossip behind your back. It's hypocritical because those people have trust issues. Almost everyone says they have trust issues these days and it makes them undesirable to me to pursue as a friend.


But do you honestly unwaveringly trust these friends with all you have?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Kitty.diane said:


> But do you honestly unwaveringly trust these friends with all you have?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Can you help me get an idea of what you mean? I don't know because I don't hide feelings (because 90% of the time they just go away). I hide my works. If I wrote an awesome story it would have an audience, I wouldn't show or reveal any info about that story to my parents. Or let's say I got sexually harassed, I wouldn't tell my family because they would probably overreact. If I tell my friends they wouldn't go crazy. You need to consider that when I say something, I don't have a strong feeling associated with it. Sure sexual harassment may be a bad example but something I would hide from people is more "Ti". Can you explain it better? I don't understand, I think there's a wide range of things I'd tell my friends. But not everyone, especially crazies who will go around and tell everyone.


----------



## Kitty.diane (May 12, 2014)

Grandmaster Yoda said:


> Can you help me get an idea of what you mean? I don't know because I don't hide feelings (because 90% of the time they just go away). I hide my works. If I wrote an awesome story it would have an audience, I wouldn't show or reveal any info about that story to my parents. Or let's say I got sexually harassed, I wouldn't tell my family because they would probably overreact. If I tell my friends they wouldn't go crazy. You need to consider that when I say something, I don't have a strong feeling associated with it. Sure sexual harassment may be a bad example but something I would hide from people is more "Ti". Can you explain it better? I don't understand, I think there's a wide range of things I'd tell my friends. But not everyone, especially crazies who will go around and tell everyone.


Sure. What embarrasses you? (You may be too young for this answer but we can try it anyway)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Effy (Feb 23, 2014)

Old Intern said:


> I don't get it when feelers talk about trust? Could I be screwed up or is it them?
> 
> I don't most of the time believe I live in an antagonistic universe but maybe most feelers do? Most of the people I meet in life are not ruthless jerks and liars, as far as I know. Guarding against being taken advantage of just seems like a non issue, easy enough to decide matters as I go?
> 
> ...



Idealists tend to think the best of people and as such may give trust freely before it's earned: if you take people at face value, trust is the default state rather than something built over time. People with a strong desire/need for intimacy, too, will give trust and closeness quickly. They want to believe people are good. They're more concerned about sustaining the relationship than guarding themselves and protecting their own interests. If you have weak, inconsistent or invisible boundaries, people will trample all over them.

Human nature is generally opportunistic, and if you create or leave open the opportunities, people will take advantage. If you go through life without clear boundaries, you _will_ live in an antagonistic universe. You _will_ end up seeing people as ruthless jerks and liars, because that's how they'll likely treat you - even if the same people behave differently to others. And once you get the belief in your head that that's how people are, subconsciously you're going to seek out people like that in order to repeat those experiences and reinforce your existing worldview and prove yourself right. It's a neverending cycle.

Healthy boundaries come naturally to some people but not others. It's not necessarily a thinker v.s. feeler thing: if you've grown up in a certain type of environment, it is really not intuitive, and you won't understand until you learn it the hard way.

Different people have different outlooks and priorities. Someone is only 'screwed up' when these beliefs and behaviours start to impact their lives in the wrong way.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Kitty.diane said:


> Sure. What embarrasses you? (You may be too young for this answer but we can try it anyway)
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


So for example if a boy likes a girl. Like that? I don't trust most people with that. I don't even like telling me friends. I've done that and it's just a horrible idea. I no longer trust anyone with this information.


----------



## Kitty.diane (May 12, 2014)

Grandmaster Yoda said:


> So for example if a boy likes a girl. Like that? I don't trust most people with that. I don't even like telling me friends. I've done that and it's just a horrible idea. I no longer trust anyone with this information.


That is exactly what im talking about. Wise beyond your years you are. Once again. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

tanstaafl28 said:


> Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Why do you ask?


I was reading a recent book where the author was talking about being civilized and comparing humans to domesticated animals . . . . and talking about genetics. If you read it he qualifies a lot of his comments, not what you might think but rather interesting.

He wants us to believe society is not the result of invention and inteligent collaboration and opportunity, but more about social trust and becoming "domesticated". ?

The thing that stood out to me was that he seemed to be a big fan of gossip!? He associated this with ocytocin and loyalty, like its a good thing for people to want to verbally punish each other. My thought was partly that he's an Si dom. But then again if I lived in a different part of the world in a war zone I might resonate more with his thinking?


----------



## Gruvian (Feb 6, 2014)

I didn't notice the frequency of discussions whose subjects was ''trust'' among those who have a feeling dominant function, but I don't think it's just them who have trust issues. It could be reasonable, though many would say I don't trust anyone easily either so it's not just feelers. Yet I think it's just that I don't feel an obligation to tell my secrets to anyone. If they don't have any use of such information I don't see why should I tell them? Of course, skepticism plays a role in this too, I'm often skeptic of others' motives which stops me from spilling my secrets even when I see how could such information be useful in a situation. 

I haven't put much thought into this, though my guess is that I do this simply because I fear this information could be used against me in some form.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Old Intern said:


> I was reading a recent book where the author was talking about being civilized and comparing humans to domesticated animals . . . . and talking about genetics. If you read it he qualifies a lot of his comments, not what you might think but rather interesting.
> 
> He wants us to believe society is not the result of invention and inteligent collaboration and opportunity, but more about social trust and becoming "domesticated". ?
> 
> The thing that stood out to me was that he seemed to be a big fan of gossip!? He associated this with ocytocin and loyalty, like its a good thing for people to want to verbally punish each other. My thought was partly that he's an Si dom. But then again if I lived in a different part of the world in a war zone I might resonate more with his thinking?


 The entirety of Freud's work is basically based on that idea. That humans are tamed animals. He summed it up in Civilization and Its Discontents. 

"Civilization, therefore, obtains mastery over the individual's dangerous desire for aggression by weakening and disarming it and by setting up an agency within him to watch over it, like a garrison in a conquered city."

-Freud

The title explains it all. Freud thought humans could never be happy in civilization, because it requires too much repression of human instinct. Humans can't be happy in society, for the same reason wild animals can't be happy in a zoo. The repression is enforced from the outside, not from within. It is the outside that makes us go against instinct. So, every human mind does have a "garrison" in it, as conscience, or guilt. Culture has been internalized. 

This is why culture, and human behavior have changed so much in the last few thousand years --even in the last few hundred. Even though there has been no biological change. It has been cultural. 

And Freud is as big a thinker as they come. Hobbes was big on this idea too. Rousseau thought humans were most civilized in their natural state. Guys like Freud and Hobbes thought they are only civilized through civilization. I agree with Freud and Hobbes.


----------



## knife (Jul 10, 2013)

Old Intern said:


> I was reading a recent book where the author was talking about being civilized and comparing humans to domesticated animals . . . . and talking about genetics. If you read it he qualifies a lot of his comments, not what you might think but rather interesting.
> 
> He wants us to believe society is not the result of invention and inteligent collaboration and opportunity, but more about social trust and becoming "domesticated". ?
> 
> The thing that stood out to me was that he seemed to be a big fan of gossip!? He associated this with ocytocin and loyalty, like its a good thing for people to want to verbally punish each other. My thought was partly that he's an Si dom. But then again if I lived in a different part of the world in a war zone I might resonate more with his thinking?





FearAndTrembling said:


> The entirety of Freud's work is basically based on that idea. That humans are tamed animals. He summed it up in Civilization and Its Discontents.
> 
> "Civilization, therefore, obtains mastery over the individual's dangerous desire for aggression by weakening and disarming it and by setting up an agency within him to watch over it, like a garrison in a conquered city."
> 
> ...


Freud is _probably_ not the best exemplar for this, seeing how most of his work is now obsolete in psychology.

But yes, there's a longtime theory that humans self-domesticated, and this process is (a) what allowed us to domesticate other plants and animals, and (b) produced civilization. I see it crop up fairly regularly, here and there.


----------



## Sevenblade (May 26, 2014)

I don't think having trust issues has much to do with being a feeler vs. a thinker. I'm betting life experiences and one's early childhood environment have much more to do with that kind of thing. But the way thinkers vs. feelers approach the whole matter may look and sound very different.


----------

