# Rules/Policies/Standard Procedure/Behave Yourself



## dagnytaggart (Jun 6, 2010)

What's your stance on them?

I'm always hearing about how NTs refuse to accept preexisting rules and expectations, but to me, being a rebel for the sake of anti-conformity seems much more of an xNxP or xSFP thing to me.

Maybe I really am an ESTJ, but to me, it doesn't make sense to want to cause upheaval unless the current system really *doesn't* optimally serve its purpose.

Given that plenty of NTs follow the traditional corporate path, and only implement changes if they get to that level of authority where they can see clearly what can be done to fix or improve something, I don't see many NTs refusing to cooperate solely for the sake of going against the grain.

But otherwise, how is it rational to make a mess out of something that's already going smoothly if you're only resisting tradition (instead of actively pursuing a real, actionable plan of change).

Myself, I live a VERY non-traditional lifestyle, that goes against many norms of conformity. But that doesn't matter to me either way, I have a reason for the things I do.


----------



## Chipps (Jun 1, 2011)

Im like this. I dont just go around rebelling to rebel (come on im not an asshole) but if something isnt efficient im going to do it the easiest way. I dont care how its been done if i find a better way the old way becomes obselete. 

Alot of people think that im being argumentative when i said x is better than y and here are 5 reasons why. Basically if i come to a logical conclusion and you dislike it you had better a) find a fault and come up with something better or b) shut the fuck up. I usually only run into conflict with someone who is incompetent and dont know it. You know the person who thinks they set all the rules and should never be questioned because their title is higher? Its laughable. 

I pretty much follow laws. Not because it is a law but because id rathet not do a prison sentence. 

Im completely open ended when it comes to social behavior. Behave how you want. At the end of the day all i can do is like it or dislike it. Social rituals are ridiculous and i refuse to follow them. I actually had someone tell me how not to talk to the director of the department i worked in. I was myself the whole time. I asked direct questions, gave direct answers and navigated through his political bullshit answers. Afterward he told me he appreciated the directness. 

I think that alot of people are only smart enough to live by a set standard on how to behave. An example of this is wine tasting. What could possibly happen if i dont sniff, sip and swoosh it over my tongue? Is the world as we know going to end because in dare to not be a pretentious asshat? 

Ettiquette of any form is a joke to me. It was created by people who need trivial things like the way you eat soup or hold a knife and fork to feel better than "everyone else". The way i see it, we all eat, sleep, and shit. And one day we are all going to die and guess what? Whether or not you followed the "rules" will not have mattered. 

Now some rules are necessary, but for me as an independant thinker, they are not. They are for sheep. Sheep would stand there in a group and all die of thirst if you dont lead them to water. I would have found it on my own. Guess thats just NT independence talking?


----------



## Popinjay (Sep 19, 2011)

dagnytaggart said:


> What's your stance on them?


If they improve efficiency or prevent negative outcomes, they're tolerable.



dagnytaggart said:


> I'm always hearing about how NTs refuse to accept preexisting rules and expectations, but to me, being a rebel for the sake of anti-conformity seems much more of an xNxP or xSFP thing to me.


Rules are only valuable if they improve efficiency or prevent negative outcomes. If rules are respected, revered, even worshipped, just because some dipsh-t wrote them, those rules, my friend, should be brought down and sent back to committee (to die).



dagnytaggart said:


> Maybe I really am an ESTJ, but to me, it doesn't make sense to want to cause upheaval unless the current system really *doesn't* optimally serve its purpose.


Bingo...doesn't optimally serve its purpose.



dagnytaggart said:


> Given that plenty of NTs follow the traditional corporate path, and only implement changes if they get to that level of authority where they can see clearly what can be done to fix or improve something, I don't see many NTs refusing to cooperate solely for the sake of going against the grain.


I wouldn't. I only break stupid rules when they get in the way of my plans/projects.



dagnytaggart said:


> But otherwise, how is it rational to make a mess out of something that's already going smoothly if you're only resisting tradition (instead of actively pursuing a real, actionable plan of change).


I wouldn't. Actionable plans of change usually have to:

1. Go through a committee to determine if a committee should be formed to determine how to form a change committee
2. Go through the committee to determine how to form a change committee
3. Go through the change committee...where things ultimately get tabled and nothing changes...or tiny tiny changes are made and touted as innovative or revolutionary...and the company gets bought out.

I'd rather make a plan fairly quickly (with plenty of input from differently-minded individuals), implement the change quickly, and tweak it as I go, then make no change at all and die/collapse/fail from becoming an irrelevant entity.


----------



## affezwilling (Feb 1, 2011)

I don't think any NT is rebel without a cause. It doesn't matter what the rules say, we do whatever makes the most logical sense. If the rules are logical and efficient we will follow them, if there's a better way of doing things then we'll do that and the hell with the rules. That being said I do do things simply for no good reason.


----------



## antiant (Jul 4, 2010)

dagnytaggart said:


> What's your stance on them?


That's too ambiguous of a question, you need to be more specific.



dagnytaggart said:


> I'm always hearing about how NTs refuse to accept preexisting rules and expectations, but to me, being a rebel for the sake of anti-conformity seems much more of an xNxP or xSFP thing to me.


You missed the point of this "hearing," then assumed that NTs rebel just to rebel. Most often there is a reason behind rebelling, whether or not people share that with you is besides the point and it's also not necessarily type specific, UNLESS, you are specifically talking about cognitive functions, then that's a whole other conversation. Your OP sounds scattered and not well written. 



dagnytaggart said:


> Maybe I really am an ESTJ, but to me, it doesn't make sense to want to cause upheaval unless the current system really *doesn't* optimally serve its purpose.


Your premise is faulty and you are assuming something that isn't even there, plus you seem to be tacking on stereotypes as well and trying to apply it to something that doesn't fit. That's why it's not making sense to you.



dagnytaggart said:


> Given that plenty of NTs follow the traditional corporate path


Says who? What is the "traditional corporate path?"



dagnytaggart said:


> I don't see many NTs refusing to cooperate solely for the sake of going against the grain.


See above.



dagnytaggart said:


> But otherwise, how is it rational to make a mess out of something that's already going smoothly if you're only resisting tradition (instead of actively pursuing a real, actionable plan of change).


More assumptions because you do not understand the underlying behavior or reasons.



dagnytaggart said:


> Myself, I live a VERY non-traditional lifestyle, that goes against many norms of conformity. But that doesn't matter to me either way, I have a reason for the things I do.


Ok, so you have a reason for the things you do, yet you don't give the NTs the same token, why? Where is this coming from? Sense, it makes none to me.


----------



## Ngg (Jul 22, 2010)

I accept rules for which I've established a logical foundation, and promote efficiency as others pointed out. Unfortunately, a large chunk of etiquette and social conventions are entirely useless (small talk makes me cry). 
You also have to remember that while rules may be beneficial for the vast majority of the population, they may not be useful to some, and NT's are more probable than not to fall within that group. From my (brief) work experience, I can honestly say that while standardized protocoles may be beneficial to SJs (sorry for the generalization), they are a pain in the butt for me and hurt my productivity.

Take jaywalking. If the little man is red and there are no cars in sight, you may opt to abide by the rules and not cross the street, and that's your choice. I see many people do this. But there's no way in hell I'm gonna stand there like an idiot if I am capable of assessing with 100% certainty that I can cross safely. That doesn't mean I don't find great value in pedestrian traffic signals.

Seeing the value in rules does not mean you have to act like a robot. 

*Takes off the logic hat and lets Ne loose* 
Anyways, no matter how efficient a rule is, I'm hardwired to challenge the status quo.


----------



## elixare (Aug 26, 2010)

I personally follow the rules most of the time...NTs are natural system thinkers, and institutions/organizations/corporations are just another system...rules serve as the logical foundation of that system....without the rules, the system will break down so they are necessary for the proper functioning of the system...which is why I follow the rules most of time because if you go against the system, it is more likely that the system will expulse you rather than the other way around...moreover, it is much easier to rise to the top when you work within the boundaries of the system...

With that said, I don't just blindly follow the rules either....I think what separates SJs from NTs is the fact that SJs would follow the rules just because it's the rules and it's been there for 100 years and it's been giving them the stability that they yearn so much and therefore leading them to stick to it even though it's inefficient, suboptimal, or outdated....to the contrary NTs care more about efficiency and optimality and if the existing rules are inefficient, we have no problem destroying them and replace them with a new, better one while on the other hand SJs just tend to resist change in general....in fact, we always think of ways to better/improve the existing system all the time....

I also enjoy exploiting systems and turning them to my advantage........also to write the rules themselves..........and most importantly, to actually OWN the system since in this Capitalist world, the owners are king......


----------



## dagnytaggart (Jun 6, 2010)

antiant said:


> That's too ambiguous of a question, you need to be more specific.
> 
> You missed the point of this "hearing," then assumed that NTs rebel just to rebel. Most often there is a reason behind rebelling, whether or not people share that with you is besides the point and it's also not necessarily type specific, UNLESS, you are specifically talking about cognitive functions, then that's a whole other conversation. Your OP sounds scattered and not well written.
> 
> ...


Sorry, I typed all that up on my phone (I was waiting for someone who was late and got bored), so it was more of me spitting out my thoughts than taking the time to clean it up, check/clarify premises assumptions, organize it, etc. There may be typos in there too. xD

Anyway, I'm mainly basing my assumptions of cause-less rebellion on many comments I see on here from NTs themselves - about how they resist conformity and rule-following. Period. I almost never hear them tack on "if conformity doesn't make sense" at the end, or "blind" in front of "rule following." I imagine these clarifiers may be implicitly implied in the majority of cases, but there are people out there who do like to rebel for the sheer sake of proving that they don't conform (which they admit to), so without those additions, I assumed they fell into that group.

Anyhow, that's why I'm asking this question. To clear up any preliminary assumptions I had. I want to know whether NTs (on here at least) do trust *sensible* rules or whether they're actually fundamentally against the concept of conformity under any circumstances. 

And regarding my "corporate path" comment - just from my observation of the self-typed NTs on here, they typically report doing the normal 4-years-at-college thing, getting high grades, and getting into the corporate world and moving up the ranks. If anything, I've noticed SPs tend to veer off the all-purpose career route. Anyway, there's no way to verify this. All I'm doing is stating my impression, which is why I'd like you guys to help me correct it, if it is faulty.


----------



## dagnytaggart (Jun 6, 2010)

Ngg said:


> I accept rules for which I've established a logical foundation, and promote efficiency as others pointed out. Unfortunately, a large chunk of etiquette and social conventions are entirely useless (small talk makes me cry).
> You also have to remember that while rules may be beneficial for the vast majority of the population, they may not be useful to some, and NT's are more probable than not to fall within that group. From my (brief) work experience, I can honestly say that while standardized protocoles may be beneficial to SJs (sorry for the generalization), they are a pain in the butt for me and hurt my productivity.
> 
> Take jaywalking. If the little man is red and there are no cars in sight, you may opt to abide by the rules and not cross the street, and that's your choice. I see many people do this. But there's no way in hell I'm gonna stand there like an idiot if I am capable of assessing with 100% certainty that I can cross safely. That doesn't mean I don't find great value in pedestrian traffic signals.
> ...


Actually, small talk with strangers you'll never see again is pointless. But when it comes to people who could potentially aid you later on down the road, making small, consistent investments by building up rapport can pay off big time when you really need it.

So many times, I've gotten away with things others would've been crucified for, or leapfrogged over others to get something - all because I had the goodwill of the decision-maker, influencer or gatekeeper.

Sometimes it happens with the people you least expect. When I was 16, I would've certainly gotten fired at a certain job, had it not been for the fact that my ass was saved unexpectedly by a "lowly" janitor, who I had chatted with all the time leading up to that point. 

You never know...

ETA: Totally agree about the red lights. They're more of a suggestion.


----------



## Popinjay (Sep 19, 2011)

dagnytaggart said:


> ...but there are people out there who do like to rebel for the sheer sake of proving that they don't conform (which they admit to), so without those additions, I assumed they fell into that group.


No, you're thinking of ISTP's and/or Kurt Russell.

Going against the grain can be horribly counter-productive to long-term goals. When you're lower in the ranks, the plan is to Sgt. Bilko other people into thinking your ideas are their ideas...then offer to implement "their" ideas for them. The net result is things get done the way you want them done and your boss thinks you're great. i.e. Cheney and Bush.

Of course, this only works if your boss is a ladder-climber who pulls you along. If your boss is an over-promoted Peter, it's time to jump ship before they take you down with them. i.e. Cheney and Bush.

I only break stupid rules behind the scenes...I'm not out waving my arms and saying, "I just broke a rule! WOO-HOO!"


----------



## Popinjay (Sep 19, 2011)

Chipps said:


> Im like this. I dont just go around rebelling to rebel (come on im not an asshole) but if something isnt efficient im going to do it the easiest way. I dont care how its been done if i find a better way the old way becomes obselete.
> 
> Alot of people think that im being argumentative when i said x is better than y and here are 5 reasons why. Basically if i come to a logical conclusion and you dislike it you had better a) find a fault and come up with something better or b) shut the fuck up. I usually only run into conflict with someone who is incompetent and dont know it. You know the person who thinks they set all the rules and should never be questioned because their title is higher? Its laughable.
> 
> ...


I could be wrong but I do believe we were separated at birth.


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

Popinjay said:


> I only break stupid rules behind the scenes...I'm not out waving my arms and saying, "I just broke a rule! WOO-HOO!"


You should try it. It's very therapeutic.

Like this one time, I was at work texting on my phone and got caught by my boss. She asked me why I was texting and not working, and I told her I'd be done already but her fat ass was blocking my signal.


----------



## Ngg (Jul 22, 2010)

dagnytaggart said:


> Actually, small talk with strangers you'll never see again is pointless. But when it comes to people who could potentially aid you later on down the road, making small, consistent investments by building up rapport can pay off big time when you really need it.
> 
> So many times, I've gotten away with things others would've been crucified for, or leapfrogged over others to get something - all because I had the goodwill of the decision-maker, influencer or gatekeeper.
> 
> ...


Oh definitely. I know the value of it in specific situations, I just try to avoid it if I can. 
Just last week, I was striking up a conversation with a cab driver, and it turns out I forgot my phone in the cab. The guy was super helpful in getting it back to me, claiming I was a 'nice' guy, and I can't say he would have been as compliant had I not bothered to speak to him during the cab ride.


----------



## DeductiveReasoner (Feb 25, 2011)

It's not so much that I try to break the rules, I just have a tendency to disregard them completely. Especially when they get in the way of something I want to do.

Like I said in a previous thread, I don't try to be a nonconformist, I just do whatever the hell I want.


----------



## Chipps (Jun 1, 2011)

DeductiveReasoner said:


> It's not so much that I try to break the rules, I just have a tendency to disregard them completely. Especially when they get in the way of something I want to do.
> 
> Like I said in a previous thread, I don't try to be a nonconformist, I just do whatever the hell I want.


This is so true. Its funny how other people cant understand that concept.


----------



## Thinkist (Sep 8, 2011)

I'm with NTs regarding rules: make them as efficient as possible, and feel free to disregard those rules that are redundant or get in the way. I'm definitely tempted to be nonconformist, but it's as if SJ scrutiny will hit me like a lightning bolt if I break even one redundant rule, even within good reason or without knowing.

I'm also not a believer in strict social etiquette, and in fact can sometimes find it to be quite annoying. My social etiquette is very simple and very loose.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

*ISTJ Post Sneaking In*

I follow rules unless they are stupid. Then they are no rules of mine, and I will politely tell the creator of said rule why it's stupid and make them change it (unless they explain to me why the rule isn't stupid).

I think I'm going to wear white after next labor day, since I'm so rebellious and all.


----------



## wiarumas (Aug 27, 2010)

I don't just rebel for the sake of rebelling. I rebel when things are inefficient and/or stand in my way.

When I enter the DMV, I have an open mind and understand its purpose. When I walk out, I friggin hate that bureaucratic nuthouse where you have to literally jam your papers down their throat even if you are completely 100% legitimate. I had a woman there tell me she couldn't accept my closing documents on my mortgage as proof of residence because I didn't bring all 60+ pages. Yet, my second proof of residence was a electric bill for the property as if I am some sort of utilities charlatan paying electric bills at random residences.


----------



## Eleventeenth (Aug 24, 2011)

Some rules make a lot of sense and make things run efficiently. Other rules work sometimes and fail other times and should therefore be flexible. And some other rules are just plain stupid and should be ignored. The reason that people have problems with most "rules" is because every situation in life is a little bit different. Taking a hard stance on a rule that doesn't really apply to each situation is just goofy.


----------



## CeeJae_Flippert (Oct 6, 2011)

I don't purposley go arround trying to be rebellious. Rules are rules, if you break em you wind up getting fired, or taken advantage of. Sometimes I jst don't notice rules or see them as insignificant so I break them without meaning to.


----------



## The Prince (Oct 22, 2011)

To me it depends on if I find them logical but I will most likely still follow them but try to change them.


----------

