# Te scares me.



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> @LiquidLight: That's exactly what I looked at. And it didn't help. XD


LOL I figured you had.

Honestly, Beebe model confuses me. Because by assigning roles the way he does it becomes really limiting in how a person might express themselves. I (as far as I tell) clearly parent with Ni. Most of my posts on here deal more with imparting underlying significance, implications or explaining things in a way to where people go "oooh i seee...". And while that in a broad sense isn't incompatible with INFJ, in the Beebe model it would make me ENFJ (or ENTJ) because he assigns the auxiliary as playing the Good Parent archetype (and I don't think I parent with Fe). So Beebe, for me throws a monkey in the works by introducing the shadow functions, especially considering most people can't figure out their conscious functions let alone add four more that are completely unconscious.

With me, the more and more I learn, the more I tend to keep going back to Jung's definitions. I like what Beebe is trying to do and in a lot of people I can see clear parallels between their type and their behavior (I have an ISFJ friend who does clearly parent with Fe and has childish Ti and my ESTJ brother parents with Si) but in other cases the connections are a bit more nebulous. 

All that being said the inferior function, once its identified is usually enough to situate you, because it removes many of the persona-added aspects which is, I think, where most people get tripped up because they identify too strongly with an ideal or an image of themselves that they project (especially extraverts) and sometimes it's easier to figure out the places where they are touchy or annoyed because they are less guarded about things that get on their nerves. Ignoring all the mismatching of theories, the inferior is the thing that seems the furthest away from 'you'. So when you say "I am" you are also saying "I am not" and the "I am not" is probably pointed at your inferior function.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

I am a timid person in general, but I don't tend to fear any specific type. I'm just shy with people, period. So Te itself doesn't _scare_ me. When I dislike Te (usually ESTJs...it bothers me far less in other TJs), it's because to me it _seems_ small-minded, over-simplified, and needlessly nitpicky (which makes me roll my eyes, not cower). It doesn't seem logical to me - quite the opposite. It seems to latch onto minor facts & silly rules & blow them out of proportion, missing the larger picture. The line of reasoning only works if you ignore all these other factors, often significant ones, which they always seem to ignore.

They also _seem_ to have this bravado about them, like they think a lot of themselves and need to be regarded as important and in-control. Instead of being intimidated, I find it repulsive and pathetic. 

I KNOW this is me projecting my inferior, but it never fails to make me see the person negatively.

I get the impression they underestimate my intelligence & competency also, and/or they assume I am up to no good. They have a weird way of projecting some rule-breaking, defiant attitude onto me, as if I am some opposing agent who sneaked in to tear down their system from the inside.

What's noteworthy here is I, as a Fi-dom, seem to see them as being threatened by my individuality, unfairly zeroing me out to pick on or judging me negatively because I'm "different", and I see them as being incapable of seeing what is truly significant in a situation. They, as Te-dom, seem to see me as threatening the logical order of the world, as if I'm purposely defying them and their standards to just be difficult or destructive (or IDK what), or as being some incapable weirdo who should not be allowed to handle anything serious for fear I'll turn it into a muddled mess of chaos.

Of course, what this causes is an annoyance from me which probably does exude some "rebellious" vibes, and it causes a knee-jerk reaction in them to reign me in by some ridiculous nitpicky criticism. So we sort of feed off the other's projection and make it come true.

I also suspect the ESTJs I clash with are mostly e1s....I don't e6s are as rule-obsessed, but they might be unfairly suspicious.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> I am a timid person in general, but I don't tend to fear any specific type. I'm just shy with people, period. So Te itself doesn't _scare_ me. When I dislike Te (usually ESTJs...it bothers me far less in other TJs), it's because to me it _seems_ small-minded, over-simplified, and needlessly nitpicky (which makes me roll my eyes, not cower). It doesn't seem logical to me - quite the opposite. It seems to latch onto minor facts & silly rules & blow them out of proportion, missing the larger picture. The line of reasoning only works if you ignore all these other factors, often significant ones, which they always seem to ignore.


Heh, considering you're an INFP, I don't find it surprising that you have problems with ESTJs. :tongue:

Anyway, I'm not necessarily shier than anyone else. (Though I do sometimes think that I come off as a little awkward.) It's just that I'm sensitive to criticism, whether I actually get it, think I'm going to get it, or think that someone is secretly criticizing me.



> They also _seem_ to have this bravado about them, like they think a lot of themselves and need to be regarded as important and in-control. Instead of being intimidated, I find it repulsive and pathetic.


I think there may be some truth to that. XD However, I tend to always doubt myself before I doubt other people. What if I'm the one that's wrong? What if I'm really not good enough for something? Etc., etc. That said...



> I KNOW this is me projecting my inferior, but it never fails to make me see the person negatively.


...I still view such a person negatively because they're being insensitive. It's like I _want _the Te teachers/professors to be nice and encourage me, but at the same time I resent them for not behaving that way.



> I get the impression they underestimate my intelligence & competency also, and/or they assume I am up to no good. They have a weird way of projecting some rule-breaking, defiant attitude onto me, as if I am some opposing agent who sneaked in to tear down their system from the inside.
> 
> What's noteworthy here is I, as a Fi-dom, seem to see them as being threatened by my individuality, unfairly zeroing me out to pick on or judging me negatively because I'm "different", and I see them as being incapable of seeing what is truly significant in a situation. They, as Te-dom, seem to see me as threatening the logical order of the world, as if I'm purposely defying them and their standards to just be difficult or destructive (or IDK what), or as being some incapable weirdo who should not be allowed to handle anything serious for fear I'll turn it into a muddled mess of chaos.
> 
> Of course, what this causes is an annoyance from me which probably does exude some "rebellious" vibes, and it causes a knee-jerk reaction in them to reign me in by some ridiculous nitpicky criticism. So we sort of feed off the other's projection and make it come true.


After reading that, I think that in my case it really could be an Fe-Te clash. It's not the individuality factor I'm focused on, but being accepted by them. Hmm...


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

It's actually not that unprecedented that a Fi-dom might not see Te as a threat to their individualism. Because in dominant Fi the depth of values and Feeling is so dramatic I would think a Fi type might recognize that their core was somewhat unshakeable from outside influence so the real conflict is between how resolute the person is in their ideals versus the concretism of Extraverted Thinking. Fi's values may be subjective in principle, but on a personal level they are immovable just like the tenets of Extraverted Thinking. Everyone can express Fi in a different way. This is what marks the difference between Feeling and Thinking because Feelers use values as a form of rationale instead of thinking, so to the Feeling type values are just as steadfast as thinking principles. Fi and Te are truly in opposition to one another because they are both seeking to do the same thing but from different starting points. Te being largely immovable rationale based on externally set conceptual principles and Fi being largely immovable rationale based on humane, subjective and personal principles. 

The reason Fe and Te can't really co-exist is because both are attempting to summon the outside world as the standard-bearer for rationale, so the question would become how would someone decide whether to prefer the Feeling rationale over the Thinking rationale? In fact how would one differentiate the two? If I use Te and say "I use the scientific method because it is accepted methodology" then how is that different from using Fe to say "I use the scientific method because everyone says it is the best way to scientifically problem solve"? Both are appeals to external judgment. The reason extraverted judgment gets paired with introverted judgment is so that (in the case of Fe) the person can appeal to external measures of what is good, bad, abhorrent, beautiful but then rationalize those things internally on a conceptual level. The Te type appeals to external conceptual frameworks but then rationalizes those things from a standpoint of how they feel about them (their own personal value judgments). A person with both Fe and Te would appeal to external evaluations and external frameworks and have no way of knowing for themselves what was right. Does this feel right or is this good (Feeling) or does this make sense (Thinking)? A person like this would have no sense of right and wrong, true or false apart from whatever everyone else said, they would have no way of knowing for themselves what they believed.


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

LiquidLight said:


> LOL I figured you had.
> 
> Honestly, Beebe model confuses me. Because by assigning roles the way he does it becomes really limiting in how a person might express themselves. I (as far as I tell) clearly parent with Ni. Most of my posts on here deal more with imparting underlying significance, implications or explaining things in a way to where people go "oooh i seee...". And while that in a broad sense isn't incompatible with INFJ, in the Beebe model it would make me ENFJ (or ENTJ) because he assigns the auxiliary as playing the Good Parent archetype (and I don't think I parent with Fe). So Beebe, for me throws a monkey in the works by introducing the shadow functions, especially considering most people can't figure out their conscious functions let alone add four more that are completely unconscious.
> 
> ...


My persona has been a big cause of trouble for me, and the unflattering descriptions of S types on many pop-crap MBTI sites did not help, and nor did the tests. I went from INTP to INTJ to INFJ to ISTJ as I better and better understood Jung. When i realized that many of my projections had Ne qualities to them I realized that I was an Si Dom, not an Ni Dom.

As for Te vs Fe, a good signal that a scientist is an Fe user is that he/she will tend to interpret controversial data in a way that is socially and/or politically "kosher". I have seen the late Stephen J. Gould typed as an ENFJ. many accused him of politically-motivated "politically correct" data interpretation in his rejection of IQ as a valid measure of intelligence in his book _The Mismeasure of Man_.


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> I am a timid person in general, but I don't tend to fear any specific type. I'm just shy with people, period. So Te itself doesn't _scare_ me. When I dislike Te (usually ESTJs...it bothers me far less in other TJs), it's because to me it _seems_ small-minded, over-simplified, and needlessly nitpicky (which makes me roll my eyes, not cower). It doesn't seem logical to me - quite the opposite. It seems to latch onto minor facts & silly rules & blow them out of proportion, missing the larger picture. The line of reasoning only works if you ignore all these other factors, often significant ones, which they always seem to ignore.
> 
> They also _seem_ to have this bravado about them, like they think a lot of themselves and need to be regarded as important and in-control. Instead of being intimidated, I find it repulsive and pathetic.
> 
> ...


When I see someone with artistic intrests who gets their pants in a bind over their "special uniqueness" not being respected by "the man" I usually suspect an e4 Fi-dom repressing and rejecting Te.

And I'm sure Ne-Doms think I'm a bore. :laughing:


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

TaylorS said:


> When I see someone with artistic intrests who gets their pants in a bind over their "special uniqueness" not being respected by "the man" I usually suspect an e4 Fi-dom repressing and rejecting Te.
> 
> And I'm sure Ne-Doms think I'm a bore. :laughing:


It's not about "special uniqueness" at all. It's actually about giving the benefit of the doubt in regards to competency, intelligence and motive. I don't want your perception of me being "odd" to discount my other abilities and my integrity, which have nothing to do with being special or unique.

Interesting how a few phrases were latched onto and the big picture point was missed though .


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

LiquidLight said:


> It's actually not that unprecedented that a Fi-dom might not see Te as a threat to their individualism. Because in dominant Fi the depth of values and Feeling is so dramatic I would think a Fi type might recognize that their core was somewhat unshakeable from outside influence so the real conflict is between how resolute the person is in their ideals versus the concretism of Extraverted Thinking. Fi's values may be subjective in principle, but on a personal level they are immovable just like the tenets of Extraverted Thinking. Everyone can express Fi in a different way. This is what marks the difference between Feeling and Thinking because Feelers use values as a form of rationale instead of thinking, so to the Feeling type values are just as steadfast as thinking principles. Fi and Te are truly in opposition to one another because they are both seeking to do the same thing but from different starting points. Te being largely immovable rationale based on externally set conceptual principles and Fi being largely immovable rationale based on humane, subjective and personal principles.


If this is the case then what about an Fi/Te type when they accept the usefulness of Te and find it compliments the Fi to the point where criticism is no longer a sensitive point, but actually useful _and _desirable? I can't say I wasn't always like this, but I sure am now and happily so.

@Angelic Gardevoir I also had a sensitivity to and was intimidated by _some_ Te types but I think it's how they use it and how domineering they are. I won't back down though at least, in fact I kind of end up stubbornly going head to head with them. It's kind of fun now :laughing:


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> Interesting how a few phrases were latched onto and the big picture point was missed though .


ACK, sorry, my Si went off!


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> So what does this say about me? Does this mean Te is my inferior, or does it make it a shadow function?


 Most likely Te is your point-of-least-resistance function. This function is inverse of your tertiary, making you be one of the Ti tertiary types: INFJ or ISFJ. You can read more about it here.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

cyamitide said:


> Most likely Te is your point-of-least-resistance function. This function is inverse of your tertiary, making you be one of the Ti tertiary types: INFJ or ISFJ. You can read more about it here.


 That's discussing socionics, which I don't know that much about. I'm discussing mainly MBTI and JCF. How applicable is this to those systems?


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> That's discussing socionics, which I don't know that much about. I'm discussing mainly MBTI and JCF. How applicable is this to those systems?


 They are same. If you are 'scared' of some function, it's typically a function that is inverse to your tertiary or inferior functions. Those are your weakest, most painful spots. Hence the fear you feel.


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

cyamitide said:


> They are same. If you are 'scared' of some function, it's typically a function that is inverse to your tertiary or inferior functions. Those are your weakest, most painful spots. Hence the fear you feel.


I do not believe in "shadow functions", there are only 4 functions, T F S N, and each can have an introverted or extraverted ATTITUDE. Ti and Te are not separate functions, they are introverted and extroverted attitudes of the same T function. They cannot coexist in the same individual.

Your "scared of" function is your inferior, it is deeply repressed and it is projected onto others.

*End of Radical Back-To-Jung Rant*


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I actually do believe in the shadow functions, but I think that they are buffers to the conscious functions.


----------



## WickedQueen (Jun 1, 2009)

OrangeAppled said:


> I am a timid person in general, but I don't tend to fear any specific type. I'm just shy with people, period. So Te itself doesn't _scare_ me. When I dislike Te (usually ESTJs...it bothers me far less in other TJs), it's because to me it _seems_ small-minded, over-simplified, and needlessly nitpicky (which makes me roll my eyes, not cower). It doesn't seem logical to me - quite the opposite. It seems to latch onto minor facts & silly rules & blow them out of proportion, missing the larger picture. The line of reasoning only works if you ignore all these other factors, often significant ones, which they always seem to ignore.
> 
> They also _seem_ to have this bravado about them, like they think a lot of themselves and need to be regarded as important and in-control. Instead of being intimidated, I find it repulsive and pathetic.
> 
> ...


Interesting perspective.

My former boss is an INFP. He's a really nice old man, very generous, selfless, understanding, and patient. His subordinates love him, including me.

Personally, I don't have any objection of him. But professionally, there were many things about him that I disagree and was the main cause of me quitting my job. Other co-workers have talked about his incompetent leadership style behind his back too. We believe that his style of leadership has caused many failures, problems, inefficiency, and more stress at work.

His company produce in-house (internal) corporate magazines for big companies. He let the designers to have free time work, which means they don't have to work from 8 to 6 like others, they can come anytime they want as long as the job done on time. 

The problem is, these designers always come late at work, from 5 PM to 11 PM. This brings troubles and stress in the way that their work time affecting others' performance, such as the writers, the account executives, the reporters, and editors. My boss failed to acknowledge that. When our clients complain about the delayed delivery or the product that doesn't represent their requirements, instead of fixing the problem, he blamed the clients.

For example, we once had a very demanding client. My boss hate the way they always pushed him. He even had few personal clashes with one of the client’s team members. He despise her so much to the point that he asked me to handle this said client.

When I heard about the client’s complaints, I understand that most of the mistakes lies on my company’s work process. So I made new system in terms of reports, procedures, and work flow. The complaints changed into compliments in less than a month, we won an award from the government, my co-workers admitted that things are getting easier and less-stressful, plus the relationship between my team and the client’s team got better and more solid. Later on, the new system was adopted for another clients.

What my boss failed to see is that that ‘little things’ he had overlooked is actually a crutial matter, in the way that it serves as a basic foundation for a more efficient and continuous as well as sustainable business process. When this ‘details’ were abandoned, the ‘big picture’ started to collapse piece by piece and finally failed totally.

That is why most Te-doms can be fussy about the little things that considered as ‘irrelevant’ or ‘unimportant’. What matter for us when building the ‘big picture’, is to make sure that everything done in precise accuracy in the first time, so we can depends on the system -as we move on- to build a continuous and sustainable process for the future. It’s not just about ‘what matters the most’, it’s also about ‘how to make it sustainable for the long term’.

This might look like nitpicking or micromanaging in the first time, but for a long term goal, it is very helpful and more efficient. It’s like doing an exercise every day to maintain a healthy body and prevent illness, instead of not exercising but continue to use drugs everytime we get ill.

To the OP, I think when you’re dealing with Te-dom criticism, it might be helpful to remember that we’re not criticising you personally, but we’re criticising the performance/work. We are criticising the problem (object), not the individual (subject). If the Te-doms look angry, they aren’t angry with _you_, but they are annoyed by the inaccuracy of the process and result of _the said problem_. And since Fi is our most undeveloped function, we sometimes forgot that others might misunderstand about to where we directing our anger/criticism.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

TaylorS said:


> I do not believe in "shadow functions", there are only 4 functions, T F S N, and each can have an introverted or extraverted ATTITUDE. Ti and Te are not separate functions, they are introverted and extroverted attitudes of the same T function. They cannot coexist in the same individual.
> 
> Your "scared of" function is your inferior, it is deeply repressed and it is projected onto others.
> 
> *End of Radical Back-To-Jung Rant*


It is more accurate to say that dichotomies exist, as functions like Ni Se Te etc. simply define the -version and polarity of these dichotomies in your head. In this light, your claim that "shadow" functions do not exist is akin to saying that black does not exist in the black-white dichotomy, only white exists, or right doesn't exist in the right-left dichotomy. Which isn't the right way to view this at all. The opposite end of the stick has to exist, otherwise the stick itself wouldn't exist.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

WickedQueen said:


> That is why most Te-doms can be fussy about the little things that considered as ‘irrelevant’ or ‘unimportant’. What matter for us when building the ‘big picture’, is to make sure that everything done in precise accuracy in the first time, so we can depends on the system -as we move on- to build a continuous and sustainable process for the future. It’s not just about ‘what matters the most’, it’s also about ‘how to make it sustainable for the long term’.
> 
> This might look like nitpicking or micromanaging in the first time, but for a long term goal, it is very helpful and more efficient. It’s like doing an exercise every day to maintain a healthy body and prevent illness, instead of not exercising but continue to use drugs everytime we get ill.
> 
> To the OP, I think when you’re dealing with Te-dom criticism, it might be helpful to remember that we’re not criticising you personally, but we’re criticising the performance/work. We are criticising the problem (object), not the individual (subject). If the Te-doms look angry, they aren’t angry with _you_, but they are annoyed by the inaccuracy of the process and result of _the said problem_. And since Fi is our most undeveloped function, we sometimes forgot that others might misunderstand about to where we directing our anger/criticism


Sometimes the things some ESTJs nitpick are truly unimportant. Time, effort & resources are wasted with needless procedures which over-complicate things. It becomes a control issue, IMO. They don't trust other people to think for themselves, so they make a rule for everything. They create problems where problems don't exist. 

I worked at a clothing store once where you could not wear jeans. I often wore black dress pants that had a tiny 5th pocket, which the store manager found more than acceptable. The ESTJ district manager comes in & says you can't wear pants with 5 pockets because only 4 are are considered "dressy" (this was her personal interpretation, not even a real company rule). How a 5th pocket interferes with productive work and efficiency and blah blah blah is beyond me. It's not like my appearance was slovenly & driving customers away or not in-line with the store's image. The big picture is the pants were dressy enough for the store, dressier than most things they sold, and I was better dressed than most of the other sales associates (because I actually like fashion & put effort into my appearance). So I wore pants with NO pockets, also dress pants. Nope - she comes in and says these aren't right either. Apparantly, the number of pockets on pants is extremely important!!! This manager was constantly doing this with people, and the general consensus was that she was an uptight control freak who had to nitpick to assert her power. People would make comments behind her back that she needed to get laid because she was so uptight. This is illustrative of ESTJs I've dealt with. To me, this was unreasonable and ridiculous. It certainly wasn't sustaining anything... the turnover rate of employees was high, because no one could stand to work there more than a few months.


----------



## WickedQueen (Jun 1, 2009)

OrangeAppled said:


> Sometimes the things some ESTJs nitpick are truly unimportant. Time, effort & resources are wasted with needless procedures which over-complicate things. It becomes a control issue, IMO. They don't trust other people to think for themselves, so they make a rule for everything. They create problems where problems don't exist.
> 
> I worked at a clothing store once where you could not wear jeans. I often wore black dress pants that had a tiny 5th pocket, which the store manager found more than acceptable. The ESTJ district manager comes in & says you can't wear pants with 5 pockets because only 4 are are considered "dressy" (this was her personal interpretation, not even a real company rule). How a 5th pocket interferes with productive work and efficiency and blah blah blah is beyond me. It's not like my appearance was slovenly & driving customers away or not in-line with the store's image. The big picture is the pants were dressy enough for the store, dressier than most things they sold, and I was better dressed than most of the other sales associates (because I actually like fashion & put effort into my appearance). So I wore pants with NO pockets, also dress pants. Nope - she comes in and says these aren't right either. Apparantly, the number of pockets on pants is extremely important!!! This manager was constantly doing this with people, and the general consensus was that she was an uptight control freak who had to nitpick to assert her power. People would make comments behind her back that she needed to get laid because she was so uptight. This is illustrative of ESTJs I've dealt with. To me, this was unreasonable and ridiculous. It certainly wasn't sustaining anything... the turnover rate of employees was high, because no one could stand to work there more than a few months.


To me, that sounds weird. I don't usually comment on what other people is wearing, especially when they _aren't breaking any rules_. I didn't even notice when my best friend got more weight or when my co-worker coloring her hair. I mean, why should I care? What's the point? I used to have an ESTJ supervisor, and she never nitpicking like that either. 

But I'm now working with an ENFJ supervisor (not my supervisor) and sometimes she did nitpicking like that to her subordinates, she even tell me how to naming _my_ files.

Problem with my INFP boss were that he was very inconsistent when it comes to keeping promises and maintaining product quality; indecisive; not firm; and complain too much without actually achieving anything. His subordinates keep talking about him behind his back. No one want to be direct with him because he takes things personally, but after few months usually there will be someone that send him the resignment letter. 

After I left his company, for instance, there were 3 other co-workers that resigned in less than 2 months, and there were 2 other co-workers that had asked me if my new office need another employee, because they are looking for another job as well. Add that with one co-worker that keep complaining about the way the company handles its clients, and how much he's willing to get out from there after he get a new job.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

WickedQueen said:


> To me, that sounds weird. I don't usually comment on what other people is wearing, especially when they _aren't breaking any rules_. I didn't even notice when my best friend got more weight or when my co-worker coloring her hair. I mean, why should I care? What's the point? I used to have an ESTJ supervisor, and she never nitpicking like that either.


The point was to assert her power & put employees in their place so they don't try and disrupt her order. She didn't comment on anyone's hair or shoes just to comment, the way people do when they notice a change or to offer compliment. In her mind, it probably _was _about the rules. It was based on her interpretation of the dress code. She interpreted "semi-dressy and no jeans" to mean there must 2 pockets, but no more than 5. She acted like the "wrong" number of pockets was some kind of rebellion of my part, like I was trying to get away with something.

I encounter ESTJs like this somewhat regularly. Not all are like this, I know (as I've said before, there are some ESTJs I get along with just fine), but they _do_ exist. This was not a mistyping.


----------



## WickedQueen (Jun 1, 2009)

OrangeAppled said:


> The point was to assert her power & put employees in their place so they don't try and disrupt her order. She didn't comment on anyone's hair or shoes just to comment, the way people do when they notice a change or to offer compliment. In her mind, it probably _was _about the rules. It was based on her interpretation of the dress code. She interpreted "semi-dressy and no jeans" to mean there must 2 pockets, but no more than 5. She acted like the "wrong" number of pockets was some kind of rebellion of my part, like I was trying to get away with something.


I see. If I was her employee, I would confront her about that, though. I do not like her logic, and I would not stand silent if someone treating me like that. Not that I suggest you to do that, though, just saying.

I've had through so many problems due to my rebellious attitude when confronting others that I deemed as unfair, from parents, teachers, seniors, to superiors. To me, everyone deserved to be respected, but respect is earned, not automatically given just because you get a higher status. I also don't see status as 'power', I see it as responsibility, a duty. To me, misusing power is equal with being unfair. And there's nothing irked me more than an arrogant injustice.





OrangeAppled said:


> I encounter ESTJs like this somewhat regularly. Not all are like this, I know (as I've said before, there are some ESTJs I get along with just fine), but they _do_ exist. This was not a mistyping.


I'm a very critical person. It's easy for me to see the negative side of a person. But I don't connect that with the person's personality as a whole.

I mean, in the past, I used to think that people are like butterflies. I hate butterfly. I think butterfly is a manipulative insect. Butterfly use its beautiful wings to cover its real form. Cut the wings and you'll see the real butterfly: a creepy insect. That's how people are at their bottom : creepy insects. Beauty outside, beast inside.

As time goes by, I understand that I see things from very limited angle. The beauty of a butterfly does not lies in its wings. It lies in the harmony of its body and its wings when they united and work together. The wings can not fly without the body, therefore no one will see the beauty. But when body and wings work together, they can fly and you'll be able to see the whole beauty of a butterfly. 

To me, people are not black and white. People are colorful. So when I see the bad side of a person, I try not to let it stop me from seeing his/her good sides. When I state my negative opinion about someone's character, most people misunderstand me by thinking that I dislike that person. I'm not. I see it as one side of him/her, and I understand that the person have lots of both good sides and bad sides. I don't judge a person merely by only one side of him/her.


----------

