# What function is the worst when unhealthy?



## Rydori (Aug 7, 2017)

What function do you reckon would be worst in display with unhealthy type ?


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

(Unhealthy) cognitive (typology) functions _do not exist_.

Neither do strong "loops" lasting more than a few second(s) to a minute and/or constant 'unhealthy looping'.


----------



## Aldys (Nov 14, 2011)

Unhealthy Fe in ESFJ is horrifying for anyone who values their sanity

Unhealthy Fi looks like self inflicted torture and its painful to watch

Unhealthy Se... imagine being SO in the moment that you cannot comprehend ANYTHING beyond the moment. The amount of damage this person could do to themselves and others is insane.


----------



## TalNFJ (May 5, 2017)

They're all probably equally terrible, but we can only really speak for our own expriences. With Ni the worst thing is how difficult for you it is to find meaning in life and risk the option of completley disconnecting from the world. I think all people regardless of type can exprience those two things but I think it's pretty easy for Ni doms.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

In my head, Se would lead to some pretty serious problems in the long term.

I imagine Se to be impulsive, doing what it wants at the moment, without much thought about the consequences.
I can easily picture Se giving in to things like drugs, driving too fast and crashing, spending money they don't have on things they want - causing long-term financial problems, this kind of behaviour could easily lead to an addiction and cause real issues.

I picture Se perhaps not getting to work on time as often as it should and getting fired, etc, that kind of thing - impulsive behaviour.

I'm also of the opinion that a load of people who claim to be Ni doms, who speak of issues with their inferior Se, are actually either Se dominant or auxiliary users, who have terrible Ni - they've got it all backwards, and fail to recognise they are not in an inferior Se "grip", they are infact impulsive by nature and prone to making poor decisions in the moment due to a lack of foresight - not a one-off thing, not out of the ordinary, it's who they are.


----------



## Drecon (Jun 20, 2016)

It's not a competition right?


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Drecon said:


> It's not a competition right?


Don't think anyone implied it was.


----------



## Surreal Snake (Nov 17, 2009)

Fe when unhealthy is pure horror show


----------



## Robotshorts (Sep 22, 2017)

Being in the grip of an unhealthy bout of inferior Se could do lots of physical damage.

I for example, when my Ni is dying a death at a particular moment in time (in other words, utterly failing at it's role), would be likely to suddenly rely on inferior Se and likely think something along the lines of:

"Fuck it - this issue right here would be best solved by drinking all the drink, eating all the eats, and smoking myself into sensory oblivion."

It rarely happens, but when it does I at least have the rationale to go do it away from other people.


----------



## Gilead (Oct 5, 2017)

The notion of unhealthy type is absurd.

Either all people whose cognition is evident enough for them to assigned with a "type" are unhealthy (as were many of Jung's examples) or they just have natural preferences and functions that may seem dysfunctional to an outside observer due to "type problem" or "type conflict".

Either way it means that the observer must be aware of their own inborn level of "unhealthiness" - or a natural bias that turns them against other people - but not many have the self-awareness or guts to admit to this.


----------



## Bhathaway (Dec 17, 2016)

Catwalk said:


> (Unhealthy) cognitive (typology) functions _do not exist_.
> 
> Neither do strong "loops" lasting more than a few second(s) to a minute and/or constant 'unhealthy looping'.


How do you approach poor behavior/unhealthy behavior then?


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Bhathaway said:


> How do you approach poor behavior/unhealthy behavior then?


When discussing 'unhealthy function(s)' like unhealthy (Fe)-users / (Ti)-users / (Ni)-users, et al - they almost always are utilizing a subjective or personalized biased 'criteria' that appears external/separate via typology itself, similar to those who utilize high-functioning cognitive biases & _hueristics_ & other unreliable 'diagnosistic' methods to label those of their same type as "mistypes," because they ignore the distinctions between two separate individual INTPs for example; and how said behaviors may differ: 

In other words;

"That's either an _UNHEALTHY INFJ - or NO INFJ_" at all because I do not agree/like how that specimen is behaving, which simply fallacious.



Such as "(Fe)" users are shallow / manipulative - and (Te) users are controlling / bossy - et al, labelling such behaviors "unhealthy", which incoherent.

It would depend on the behaviors in question, but I approach 'unhealthy (sub-optimal) behaviors' - or "bad behavior" with *other areas of Psychology* unrelated to the typology-dichtonomies or 'cognitive-functions', but psychology nonetheless. In the same way heavy "introverts" aren't autistics, and such 'bad behaviors' can be explained via more reliable areas of psychology, such as *disorders, cognitive-defects, environmental-factors, & other*. 

If we follow the common logic of "unhealthy" (X)-cognitive users, I could label a (Te)-dom unhealthy simply because of a '_bossy attitude_' which is demonstrably absurd - nor can it be demonstrated that is has any (sound) correlation to a 'malfunctioning unhealthy function for the user' because:

(A) - _"What is a malfunctioning 'function'" regarding typology & the user?_

(B) - _"What is a 'unhealthy' function regading typology & the user? 
_

Not simply pointing to 'bad behaviors'. As this does not examine - nor expound on _the how_ [which is sufficiently important].


----------



## Bhathaway (Dec 17, 2016)

Catwalk said:


> When discussing 'unhealthy function(s)' like unhealthy (Fe)-users / (Ti)-users / (Ni)-users, et al - they almost always are utilizing a subjective or personalized biased 'criteria' that appears external/separate via typology itself, similar to those who utilize high-functioning cognitive biases & _hueristics_ & other unreliable 'diagnosistic' methods to label those of their same type as "mistypes," because they ignore the distinctions between two separate XNTXs for example; and how said behaviors may differ:
> 
> In other words;
> 
> ...


When I read this it more seems like a rejection of the label of unhealthy behavior fundamentally. If we are to assume that all behaviors result from the 8 cognitive functions, that is all cognition and thus all actions are resulting from a combinaton of the 8 cognitive functions(the mbti model, therefore not particularly up for personal interpretation unless you are also rejecting the mbti model), then we are going to have to label some behaviors as unhealthy. Rejecting unhealthy behaviors in general just kills all talk of good or bad so it's essentially arbitrary, but we can define "creating human happiness" as a pretty good standard for what good/healthy behavior is. Then behaviors that don't produce this are going to be labeled unhealthy and thus some behaviors resulting from the cognitive functions would, by extension, be unhealthy as well. Then it's simply a matter of finding which behaviors typically result from which cognitive functions and concluding that usage of that cognitive function in that way is unhealthy i.e. unhealthy function.

You could very well reject the mbti/jung model, but I sense the OP is looking for interpretation within this model. This isn't to say bringing up an alternative viewpoint for the OP is bad, and he may agree with that interpretation more, but it should also be made clear that it your intention to produce this.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

Functions aren't unhealthy; people are. And what people are like when unhealthy depends on more than type.


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

Unhealthy Se is the scariest thing ever, no competition there. 

Unhealthy Fe and Fi is just unbearable to be around.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Bhathaway said:


> When I read this it more seems like a rejection of the label of unhealthy behavior fundamentally.


What is '_seems to be_', is not what is actually said in my post. Although, I can admit my claim it _does not exist_, is rather extrodinary - it would've been better to simply say the 'unhealthy/healthy' perscriptions are simply incoherent / inexplicit. (I am not sure why dubiously submitting or passing on an incoherent / inexplicit) system is good for the OP, regardless. I encourage the OP to participate on the grounds of warranted scrutiny equally with his acceptance.



> If we are to assume that all behaviors result from the 8 cognitive functions, that is all cognition and thus all actions are resulting from a combinaton of the 8 cognitive functions(the mbti model, therefore not particularly up for personal interpretation unless you are also rejecting the mbti model), then we are going to have to label some behaviors as unhealthy. Rejecting unhealthy behaviors in general just kills all talk of good or bad so it's essentially arbitrary, but we can define "creating human happiness" as a pretty good standard for what good/healthy behavior is. Then behaviors that don't produce this are going to be labeled unhealthy and thus some behaviors resulting from the cognitive functions would, by extension, be unhealthy as well. Then it's simply a matter of finding which behaviors typically result from which cognitive functions and concluding that usage of that cognitive function in that way is unhealthy i.e. unhealthy function.
> 
> You could very well reject the mbti/jung model, but I sense the OP is looking for interpretation within this model. This isn't to say bringing up an alternative viewpoint for the OP is bad, and he may agree with that interpretation more, but it should also be made clear that it your intention to produce this.


I am not sure I would say, "creating happiness," is necessarily a good demonstration of 'healthy' in so far as one can create happiness without such creations be optimizing to agent itself, thus sub-optimal & unhealthy regardless of how 'happy' the _drug user feels_ when using. In other words, what is sub-optimal for the agent may or may not preduce hedonic 'feel goods' (due to its objective-basis). I consider 'unhealthy' an overall depletion/deterioation of homeostasis (objective / biological) - which typologists have yet to mesh the theory into, and explain_ how/why that is_, [as I am aware].



I haven't rejected "_unhealthy behavior fundamentally_," nor "_rejected unhealthy behaviors in general_," nor have I rejected "_the MBTI/Jungian model,_", I do, however, reject the 'unhealthy/healthy' perscriptions asisgned to so-called 'unhealthy behaviors uniqely attributed to types' or cognitive "function", as they are simply incoherent - and the way they are attained is fallacious, in so far as there is no posed objective non-personal/non-subjective criterion in which it is presented & explained on how it is being applied. 


On top of, neither Jung nor Myers has successfully meshed typology with linked '_psychological/mental disorders_,' that eliminates intellectual scuitiny (re: "NT-s suffer from narcissism").

If you can explain (or present a good sources explaining) *the how* of the below questions (that merely isn't a personal or subjective) '_I dislike the way that (Fe) person is behaving_' therefore, it can be reasonably said this person is an 'unhealthy type':


_
(A) - "What is a malfunctioning 'function'" regarding typology & the user?

(B) - "What is a 'unhealthy' function regading typology & the user? _




Even if there is a 'predisposition' for (Te)-users to bossy, this does not demonstrate how this is (A, unhealthy in the sense, it is uniquely attributed to the (T)' in general) and (B, it is a uniquely so because the person is '_unhealthy_') rather than simply a bossy T. 

If you are saying that the MBTI/Jungian model warrants no intellectual scruinity, this is simply untrue, which in so far as (both) systems warrant intellectual scruitiny, for the reasons, not mere 'personal interpretations', I presented.

_
(C) - There is no objective criterion based on the 'persceptive' means of 'unhealthy/healthy' type function actually is: (no knowledge presented) that goes beyond mere 'correlative data'.


(D) - There is no explanation of the 'how' (how this works, how this looks, how this operates), that simply isn't riddled in cognitive-biases & huerstics._

_________________


What is perhaps, skipped over is a majority of the specimens answering to OP - have supplied no answers, or actual knowledge of what an 'unhealthy' type looks like beyond: 

"Oh, an unhealthy (X)-user is so bad!", or simply ancedotally pointing figures at 'weird people', which is void of anything knowledgeably useful as none was presented within the model itself.


----------



## twistedblade056 (Oct 26, 2014)

Udoen said:


> What function do you reckon would be worst in display with unhealthy type ?


unhealthy Fi/inferior Te:


----------



## Krayfish (Nov 3, 2015)

I mean from what I see... They can all be pretty bad

Unhealthy Ne goes on delusional idealistic rampages where they generate 100s of unrealistic ideas and end up accomplishing nothing or defies anything and everything that is "the same" or "traditional"
Unhealthy Si goes into itself and drowns in memories. Everything becomes a threat, the idea of changing their situation seems impossible even if they know the situation is bad. Hyper comfort seeking.
Unhealthy Ni completely detaches itself from reality and makes up a bunch of theories of how it thinks the world works and plans that are unrealistic because they have no reliance on outside input
Unhealthy Se is overly hedonistic, brash, or completely ignores everything that isn't in the present. Ignores consequences for the sake of excessive opportunity seeking.
Unhealthy Fi becomes hyper moralistic and oversensitive to criticism, retracting into their mind and believing that the world is out to get them
Unhealthy Te becomes demanding in controlling, trying to make everything around them work "the right way" or linearly and throwing tantrums when it doesn't 
Unhealthy Ti refuses to empathize, becomes robotic, and gets stuck in their heads with theories and is so distrustful of proven facts they deny reality because that doesn't make sense
Unhealthy Fe becomes outwardly emotive and manipulative or completely self effaces until they feel that they are hallow and nothing of themselves is left

Idk this is just what I observed, could be wrong


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

Krayfish said:


> I mean from what I see... They can all be pretty bad
> 
> Unhealthy Si goes into itself and drowns in memories. Everything becomes a threat, *the idea of changing their situation seems impossible* even if they know the situation is bad. Hyper comfort seeking.



OUCH! 

I consider myself a healthy type, but yeah, when things don't go my way that's exactly how it feels (especially the bold part).


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

Emulsions said:


> What function do you reckon would be worst in display with unhealthy type ?


I'd say dominant Te because it includes high ability to exercise power with no concern for ethics and humaneness.

Like for example Stalin, lots of politicians, mobsters and serial killers.

I think nothing comes close when it comes to sheer amount of harm inflicted on others.


----------



## Liove (Sep 16, 2017)

What you're all describing sounds like: Function-Dom without any Aux-Tert-Inf


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

It seems difficult to believe that cognitive functions themselves can be unhealthy. They just are. However, the way they are used can be counter-intuitive, against societal norms, etc...

I have found that Ti/Fe (ISTP, INTP) can get really butt hurt when questioned. I'm not certain why this is; it's something that I've been wondering about for about 6 months or so. Sometimes an INTP will say something that is really interesting and I'll ask them to elaborate further and they respond as if I'm criticizing them. (So, one could argue that maybe that's Ni & Te looking overly aggressive & starved for information maybe, to them?)

Anyway, me and my INTP partner hit this every so often and when it happens, it's fascinating to me so while I'm also asking for some background into why he thinks what he thinks and where his ideas came from, etc..., I'm also saying things like, "It's fascinating how upset you're getting. What's so upsetting about this?" 

Stepping back it looks pretty stupid for me to keep prodding, but in the moment my curiosity gets the best of me. I've learned simply to not do this online but I haven't quite mastered it with my partner yet.

I think a *hypothetical* example is needed. For example, 

INTP might say, "I like Seinfeld". 
I might respond like, "Really? I have never understood that sense of humor. It doesn't make sense to me. Can you explain to me why it's funny to you?"
INTP: ... 
INTJ "Well you just said you like Seinfeld, so you should know what's so funny about it."
INTP "Calm down gees, I was just making a statement. I ... d..don't know. It just is funny I can't explain it!"
INTJ "Wow, you're getting upset! Why are you getting so upset that you can't tell me how Seinfeld is funny?!"
INTP "GOD, INTJ..."
INTJ "I mean, they just do the same thing over and over. They feel so much pressure from society and no one acts autonomously. They bring their suffering on themselves. Why can't they just be assertive and stand up for themselves every so often?"
INTP "It's just funny to me."
INTJ "So you think watching people be non-assertive and watching people suffer is totally hilarious?"
INTP "I never said...!"


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

brightflashes said:


> It seems difficult to believe that cognitive functions themselves can be unhealthy. They just are. However, the way they are used can be counter-intuitive, against societal norms, etc...
> 
> I have found that Ti/Fe (ISTP, INTP) can get really butt hurt when questioned. I'm not certain why this is; it's something that I've been wondering about for about 6 months or so. Sometimes an INTP will say something that is really interesting and I'll ask them to elaborate further and they respond as if I'm criticizing them. (So, one could argue that maybe that's Ni & Te looking overly aggressive & starved for information maybe, to them?)
> 
> ...


I think the fact you were telling him that he was upset was the key there, not to mention you kept making assumptions without anything to support them. I am not an INTP (I think) but I would probably be annoyed at the way you questioned him, too, though I would probably ask you to back off and mind your own business.

I think deep inside he might have his reasons for liking the show, but he might not be comfortable with sharing the reasons or he might not be able to find the right words to express why he likes it.

But what do I know. I am only making assumptions, too, all based on that little text you typed.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Reila Nimu said:


> I think the fact you were telling him that he was upset was the key there, not to mention you kept making assumptions without anything to support them. I am not an INTP (I think) but I would probably be annoyed at the way you questioned him, too, though I would probably ask you to back off and mind your own business.
> 
> I think deep inside he might have his reasons for liking the show, but he might not be comfortable with sharing the reasons or he might not be able to find the right words to express why he likes it.
> 
> But what do I know. I am only making assumptions, too, all based on that little text you typed.


I was giving a hypothetical example. I didn't actually have that conversation with anyone.


----------



## Firemoon (Sep 19, 2015)

brightflashes said:


> I have found that Ti/Fe (ISTP, INTP) can get really butt hurt when questioned. I'm not certain why this is; it's something that I've been wondering about for about 6 months or so. Sometimes an INTP will say something that is really interesting and I'll ask them to elaborate further and they respond as if I'm criticizing them. (So, one could argue that maybe that's Ni & Te looking overly aggressive & starved for information maybe, to them?)


I actually have the same issue with an INFP. Whenever I question this INFP about their intentions/thoughts/preferences, they get defensive as if I was invaliding their values or something...I don't quite understand. I once asked them why they didn't like some sort of juice...and I expected them to respond something like "It's too sour".... I was genuinely curious about their preferences. But instead, they were kinda offended and said "I just don't like it! Am I not allowed to hate this?" 

Perhaps, Ti and Fi dom users don't like to be questioned. It makes sense since both functions are deeply protective of their personal beliefs.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Relative to 'display', all the extraverted functions in shadow.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Firemoon said:


> Perhaps, Ti and Fi dom users don't like to be questioned. It makes sense since both functions are deeply protective of their personal beliefs.


Talked to my INTP about this and he suggested that the reason might be because of leading with a judging function vs a perceiving function. He suggested that He and other dom judging users make conclusions about things and then store those conclusions, not bothering to analyze what was behind the conclusions. That's what a person with dominant judging does; they make conclusions. However, me and you lead with a perceiving function, so we're constantly storing information about what is impressed upon us; what is _meaningful_ to us. 

So, when someone outside of ourselves mention a thing *juice* or *TV Show* or whatever, we can quickly access the "whys" and then make a judgement there on the spot whereas the Ti/Fi dom has access to seemingly unlimited judgements and can access the "conclusions" there on the spot.

I don't know if this is actually true, but the conversation with my partner was interesting enough that I thought it might be appreciated to mention here. 

credit to @hornpipe2 for the discussion.


----------



## twistedblade056 (Oct 26, 2014)

brightflashes said:


> It seems difficult to believe that cognitive functions themselves can be unhealthy. They just are. However, the way they are used can be counter-intuitive, against societal norms, etc...


I don't think cognitive functions can be unhealthy. I think a certain personality type can be unhealthy like his entire function-stack is not working properly, if that makes sense.



brightflashes said:


> I have found that Ti/Fe (ISTP, INTP) can get really butt hurt when questioned. I'm not certain why this is; it's something that I've been wondering about for about 6 months or so. Sometimes an INTP will say something that is really interesting and I'll ask them to elaborate further and they respond as if I'm criticizing them. (So, one could argue that maybe that's Ni & Te looking overly aggressive & starved for information maybe, to them?)
> 
> Anyway, me and my INTP partner hit this every so often and when it happens, it's fascinating to me so while I'm also asking for some background into why he thinks what he thinks and where his ideas came from, etc..., I'm also saying things like, "It's fascinating how upset you're getting. What's so upsetting about this?"
> 
> ...


That could sound like Fi defensiveness though but maybe you're correct and that they're a Ti dom issue.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

dragonhead66 said:


> That could sound like Fi defensiveness though but maybe you're correct and that they're a Ti dom issue.


That conversation was made up, so if it reeks of Fi, it might be a reflection of my own tertiary function attempting to conjure up Ti thinking. I needed to make an example of something contrived because I didn't want to broadcast any problems that I've had with people in my personal life; especially when these disagreements or miscommunications have been resolved.


----------



## Zeus (Oct 8, 2011)

Possibly Ni? It’s attributed to psychosis.


----------



## hornpipe2 (Nov 3, 2015)

Reila Nimu said:


> I think deep inside he might have his reasons for liking the show, but he might not be comfortable with sharing the reasons





dragonhead66 said:


> That could sound like Fi defensiveness though


Nah, it's not "fear of expression" going on here. Seems like people misinterpreted the (fictional) conversation... the point was to demonstrate the INTJ's repeated "why" questioning to look for an underlying logical system, and how it sometimes goes off the rails when looking into ill-formed rationale behind someone else's subjective experience.

EDIT: BTW I am her INTP partner


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

ClOwNkInG said:


> Possibly Ni? It’s attributed to psychosis.


I might have "suffered" from that in the past, at least the delusions and "false beliefs" (who is to say they are false, anyways?) aspects of the condition. Lack of motivation was there, too, but I never hallucinated. I didn't know it was related to Ni, but it makes some sense.


----------



## TornadicX (Jan 7, 2015)

Turi said:


> In my head, Se would lead to some pretty serious problems in the long term.
> 
> I imagine Se to be impulsive, doing what it wants at the moment, without much thought about the consequences.
> I can easily picture Se giving in to things like drugs, driving too fast and crashing, spending money they don't have on things they want - causing long-term financial problems, this kind of behaviour could easily lead to an addiction and cause real issues.
> ...


You are SPOT ON. I'm a mentally unstable ESTP , (borderline with anxiety/psychosis).. who was mistyping myself as INFJ with "great Ti" for awhile. My impulses sent me to the ER more times than I can count but I didn't care because YOLO. I use my Se as a foolish ass function sometimes but the most pleasurable .

I am a fuck up but life is better this way

You are right as fuckkkkk!!


----------



## Fimbrethil (Oct 5, 2017)

I don't think functions can be unhealthy in themselves, and I doubt that one unhealthy function is worse than another unhealthy function. Also, I hesitate to answer because of the stereotypes surrounding unhealthy functions that I don't agree with. But Jung did imply that differing dominant types, when not mitigated by the other attitude in their auxiliary function, are susceptible to different sorts of psychological problems, such as hysteria in an extraverted type, and the characteristic narcissism in an unhealthy Ti dom.


----------



## InkMyUmbrella (May 23, 2017)

Whatever mine is XD

I think I'm an ESFJ. I ended up pretty screwed up in several ways due to Fe and inferior Ti


----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

Unhealthy inferior Ti 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## InkMyUmbrella (May 23, 2017)

Catwalk said:


> (Unhealthy) cognitive (typology) functions _do not exist_.
> 
> Neither do strong "loops" lasting more than a few second(s) to a minute and/or constant 'unhealthy looping'.


Huh. Are you sure about this?

The thing is, I've had low self esteem since a child which broke into full-on mood disorders and anxiety...but I thought that perhaps it's because I wasn't able to do what my natural type most desired, so I ended up looping and/or trying to find other ways around this issue. Does that mean that if someone has long term mental health issues, they're probably not going to be any for-sure type as of yet?


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Unhealthy in terms of Jungian types, 
will be in a large part dependent on the balance between extroversion and introversion.
Too much extroversion was termed hysteric and too much introversion was termed neurotic by Jung.

If we want to label mental health beyond that, one must look at the enneagram.
The levels of health in that system, is a good guide to an individuals ego-integrity.
In other words how much pressure is on the ego and how well it is holding up.
This points to defence mechanisms, the more defence the more unhealthy.
The defence mechanisms warp reality, 
making a person act more and more out of sync with the world around them.
Hence mental health from a typology perspective comes down to this.

Balanced extroversion and introversion and minimal need to use defence mechanisms.
Hence the worst function is the one having the most defence online.

Other than that everyone will be biased to some cognitive function,
that they think is particularly disruptive.
But that is only so because their mental order rest upon a certain area being stable.
Someone who does not rest upon that will not experience it as bad.
The PoLR function in Socionics should be the most disruptive in theory.
In personal experience I find it to be terrible.
It makes me go into defence very fast, especially when it creates conflict.


----------



## OliveBranch (Aug 30, 2017)

Any unhealthy function can result in an equally negative way, it's not really something you can compare...


----------

