Sometimes "tough questions" are asked during an interview in order to give the interviewee an opportunity to "defend" themselves to the general public. In this case there's some portion of the population that does think that funding for space research is not worth it. So the question about "is space research worth it" can be asked in order to give Neil Tyson a chance to push back against these ideas, and then also give his sales pitch about why space research is so important. We see this all the time on TV, news, when interviewing a candidate, etc. Someone will ask, "you know, some people think this ___ (Te)... what do you have to say about that?" Then the interviewee can staunchly defend themselves. The issue with this interviewer, is that he sort of makes the question seem like it is "coming personally from him" (Ti), rather than from the "community" (Te). He could have said... "you know some people think this."
That was crazy how the Ti-Head interviewer got on his high horse about the functions and spending on the space programs, and questioning in a way of its value, just to be embarrassed by the expert on the point out the narrowness of his viewpoints----just to do "a get back" by getting off your high horse to talk about allegations and scandals. That is just wild, and to be honest, I wouldn't know how to respond to that, because that was such a quick shift from the conversation, into a borderline ad hominem, that I may have reverted to reprimanding him with a heavy gavel.
I find this sort of behavior very commonly with Ti/Fi doms. The Te/Fe doms usually just stay objective, distancing themselves from the actual question (The Ti guy asked the question in a manner in which it seems it is his own question, whereas a Te dom interviewer would most likely explicitly state before the interview that the questions asked reflect “the people”, and that he/she is not personally tied to the idea, which is the opposite of the Di dom) By doing this, it creates distance from the interviewer and the idea, disallowing the interviwee to attack the idea from the perspective that the conversation is a subjective battle between himself and the interviewer, but rather an objective battle for truth between the interviewee’s idea and the collective questioning of that idea.
@@YesJellyfishPerhaps it is so there is no personal responsibility, as well as other reasons. But that’s the thing, it is their question. It just wouldn’t be perceived that way.
I consider myself pretty good at predicting where most things, especially conversations, are going. I was not ready for the gut punch towards Neil. Did anyone else feel sorry for him?
It’s interesting to hear the Ni/Fi analysis of this interview. Interviewers ask relevant questions, if they are good. They reflect a general societal consensus of people watching the interview and address what the audience wants to know. His question about “we have problems here on earth why space” is a perfect example of this. I think what Dave and shan don’t see here is the Ne: the Impersonalization of intuition and ideas. This is the perfect platform and question lineup for Neil to defend his way of thinking (Ti) via a Ti interviewer who gets it. That’s my take on it anyway
There seems to be an Oe or Ne bias regarding research, science, adventure, and human nature related to curiosity and adventure and possibly another bias related to boundary/limit pushing (e.g. hiking Mount Everest, building the tallest building, etc.)
As a lead Oe, I definitely see that in myself, pushing boundaries and mentally climbing the tallest mountain. Oe, whether Se or Ne, tends to lean more on exploring the spectrum of concepts or physical spaces.
Shan cringing 😬 😬😬😬😬 hahaha The interviewer sucks.... he made the guest uncomfortable, used acusatory tone, then he lost the debate, and went personal. That's dirty!!
I find this kind of amusing as I'm a similar type to the guy on the right and one of my Bf is a Neil... and we literally have arguments like this all the time lol.
The interviewer was out of line (based on my high Fe, lol), but to be fair, Neil drew first blood and made it personal at the end of his answer. People really need to just relax and be able to just have a conversation with making things personal.
Dave, do you really think there's no basis for the observation that children tend to be or start out with curiosity and a sense of wonder, and for example ask why a lot and seek to understand, and that tends to be suppressed by adults whether that's parents and religion handing stock answers and most modern school functioning to compel passive following of rules and pursuit of grades over knowledge, figuring out self-development and so on? I'm and NT and I see this but this isn't just an NT observation. I find it interesting how filtering things through type and seeing functions can also function to distract from looking at what people are actually saying and connecting the dots with what other people are saying, reflecting on how one's own life progressed to where some functions end up as they do, and considering the implications for how education could work differently than a model developed specifically to stifle people's individuality. As philosopher Naomi Scheman put it, "Three year olds are the ones who keep on asking why, and you think you've explained it perfectly well. And maybe you have to a 35 year old, but not to a three year old, they're gonna come back and ask why again... All that unanswered stuff that most people just learn to, you know, good enough, just get on with this series." A.k.a., Hand Wave (TV Tropes) "...a person explaining a process on a whiteboard gets to a part that is not well defined or important so just waves their hand around to indicate that Stuff Happens, then moves on... It could also describe the motion one might use to brush aside questions or objections." If one is interested to gain insight into how people's lives play out and how they often come to be so easy to ridicule, it's worth looking at the series of scenes and situations they navigate from birth. As William Torrey Harris who was a key player in designing and standardizing the way school still tends to be structured in the Committee of Ten in 1892 put it, "Our schools have been scientifically designed to prevent over-education from happening. The average American is content with their humble role in life, because they're not tempted to think about any other role." What does it accomplish to force and persuade most young people to spend something like 8000 hours wit mostly non-negotiable instruction and assessment in school regardless of how much that may drain their energy and take their time away from other efforts, disregarding the functions including especially intuition and feeling, leaving people on their own and often far into adulthood or hitting life crises before tearing down and more consciously building up a better articulated worldview and learning to understand their functions? I personally couldn't learn well in school and found most of the content to be fragmented and disconnected from real life. Several videos with millions unpack these problems at least somewhat and I'm curious if you've watched them, like Suli Breaks - I will not let an exam result, Ken Robinson - Changing Education Paradigms and the Schools Kill Creativity one, Boyinaband - Don't Stay in School and Prince EA - I sued the school system. I have a lot more references but what's the point? One is to figure out how people can be more conscious and informed the way Objective Personality offers some insights about that are relevant to a lot of people. Thoughts?
To be fair the conversation was pretty much doomed from the start. Asking a high profile hobby man to explain why his extremely expensive hobby is supposed to be important, is instantly creating a fight-or-flight situation for the hobby man. He can't defend the hobby, and he also can't admit that his hobby is not that important. There's no possible scenario in which this conversation could end well unless the subject is changed. Which, I suppose, the hobby man did attempt, but the IP man didn't allow it because he just wanted the answer to his question. He perhaps assumed that Neil had thought about this and could actually provide an answer.
IxxP's man, they really tend to ignore the tribe. It's always their point of view. It's okay to laugh at yourself or look like a fool sometimes. Sheesh. So serious. xD
@@Pabz2030 It still depends though like how the word "difficult" is going to be defined. Anyhow, it's a bound to end in a decider-hell scenario with them, that's also bound to happen.
There are interviewers that try to celebrate, expose, or humble their interviewee. You are meant to ask questions that inform people about the person a limited range of topics. But a slant is usually involved somehow because you are not asking the question without a reason behind it. Otherwise it is a boring Se fact and not juicy Fe gossip.
i worked with a INTP an a ENTP.... the entp would slap the intp around verbally and daily... the intp would always smile and act like it was a joke, then the entp would leave the room and the intp would sit there saying how much smarter he was then the entp.... was a lot of fun to watch as a intj myself... rofl... intp's are softies who think their tough... i still like them both though lol and get along with both the intp and entp
I agree with the interviewer, I don't think we're there yet with all societies problems today, to spend billions on space exploration, but bringing up those unproven allegations out of nowhere as a gotcha moment instead of responding to Neil was very obnoxious and off-putting.
One interesting question is: Is the nature of interviewing someone an arena where you *SHOULD* be doing the Ti guy's stuff or not? I'd be surprised if the interview setting is a "fair" 50-50 arena where every personality trait is equally valuable and valid. What is the purpose of an interview? Or this interview? Would it be better fulfilled by going off on a Ne rant with Neil about the wonders of space?
Yeah, cuz lead/savior N. But the real question I have is: How do I learn to speak properly so that I no longer have to object in the middle of people's pre~diatribe "headed WAY off the rails" retorts to their own internal misinterpretation of a point I wasn't even making... ? 🤔🤣
I'm an ENTP and I remember gushing about space to my ISTP bf and him just being like this white guy, seeing no practical purpose to know any of this shit I'm going on about lol. I remember feeling so deflated after that as if I didn't realize some people don't care about the wonders of outer space. 😂 I just finished the video and bc the way interviewer guy did that that, its now sooo obvious 2 me he doesn't actually care about SH unless it can tarnish Neil's character in the public eye and thats pretty disgusting 😒.
@@scoot0boy yes, Neal. Shan and Dave look at Ne incorrectly and have set up multiple systems to compensate for their mistake. Ne finds options for the tribe. Se finds facts for it. Te understands tribe knowledge and Fe understands tribe values.
American DNA... guys.. that got me thinking.. People who came to explore and conquer América from Britain, most have been in its mayority probably Ne doms, cause they saw the potential of the posibilities to explore a new land and where the actual most probable to inbed in something like that. That may explain a bit of USA culture and logo as "the land of freedom and posibilities" and also their desire to explore te moon. USA is maybe a more Ne culture in comparison. A land of desires and wants.
They're introverts, thinkers and planners, it makes sense. A lot of people think Elon Musk is an INTJ. I think Michael Bloomberg might be a Ti/Si type, whom a lot of people type INTJ.
@@endgamez7621 Yeah, it would. But ISTJ isn't a type that's put on a high pedestal they way INTJs are. So typing someone like that, to a lot of people it wont even occur that someone might be an ISTJ. If they're cool and awesome, they gotta be a cool and awesome type. "JUST LIKE ME!"
My Synapses Are Firing ! My synopsis is the following: The big bang was God taking an averaged sized dump. MMmmmm, just look at what's growing out of that cosmic doo doo.
Ti-head's shady interviewing tricks aside, didn't he have a point though? What's the purpose of using so much of resources that are limited into a planet that is very likely not going to sustain life; has high probability of seeing the same fate as Earth does when Earth dies as it's not that far away; and there are many other ideas to explore universe for finding life sustaining location or systems, that don't have funding? And even keeping that aside, our own planet could use the science and resources in many different ways. Maybe we could use some dreams and be curious about something more purposeful than amusement parks for extra rich people
It was literally explained in the video. Maybe you don't see the prospects now, but there will be some in 50, 100, 1000 of years. Not everything is about you, it's about generations to come.
@@dawnriddler I think the point was not about never investing in space travel, rather, postpone it to a future date after we have resolve the shit show we are facing on earth first. At least for "earthly" problems, we know that there are concrete solutions rather than the uncertain outcomes we have with space exploration. We should keep that as a "luxury" good when we have resources to spare.
@@joesr31 he addressed that too, if they postponed building airplanes then, it would never be as accessible as it is now. You can always argue that something else has a priority, but if you're constantly working on present problems, there will never be time for solving the future ones.
@@dawnriddler I didn't say never investigate for future problems, I just said there are better options like Dyson sphere and stuff than Mars and in fact it seems like companies are being near-sighted working on Mars to commercialize it to the very rich, instead of caring for finding location that can sustain life very long not just few years after Earth dies. And I tried including argument for why it's that way for Mars.
@@dawnriddler nah if they postphone it, it would still be as accessible as it is now but just later down the timeline. One day, space travel will become a "present problem", at that point, we can then dedicate precious resources to work on that.
Might just be the lesson. Reminds me of the video about Tom Holland and Jake Gyllenhall they did a while back, where Dave said IxxPs will kill themselves winning you. And Se wants to one-up you in the sensory, so you got a great dynamic in the gym. Se/Ti Tom Holland wanted to one-up Ti/Ne Gyllenhall in the gym, but Gyllenhall wouldn't let himself be beat, so they both ended up completely exhausted ^^
The timber, cadence, and passion of their exchange is pretty uncomfortable. I have observed cycles of topics each type prefers to discuss. They walk around sampling a functional buffet. For example, someone arrives at work and they engage them with Se [did you see the game last night]
What would Fi/Si look like? So arrogance = sleep.. interesting I kinda see myself as arrogant, and I like debates.. But consune probably my first thing
Knowing that this is when Dave and Shannon post their videos gives me something to look forward to Monday mornings
IKR!
It's the same for Monday afternoons for me, right after work.
Yaaas! Literally the only good thing about Mondays
that's why most people die because of heart attack on monday mornings
Sometimes "tough questions" are asked during an interview in order to give the interviewee an opportunity to "defend" themselves to the general public. In this case there's some portion of the population that does think that funding for space research is not worth it. So the question about "is space research worth it" can be asked in order to give Neil Tyson a chance to push back against these ideas, and then also give his sales pitch about why space research is so important.
We see this all the time on TV, news, when interviewing a candidate, etc. Someone will ask, "you know, some people think this ___ (Te)... what do you have to say about that?" Then the interviewee can staunchly defend themselves. The issue with this interviewer, is that he sort of makes the question seem like it is "coming personally from him" (Ti), rather than from the "community" (Te). He could have said... "you know some people think this."
That was crazy how the Ti-Head interviewer got on his high horse about the functions and spending on the space programs, and questioning in a way of its value, just to be embarrassed by the expert on the point out the narrowness of his viewpoints----just to do "a get back" by getting off your high horse to talk about allegations and scandals.
That is just wild, and to be honest, I wouldn't know how to respond to that, because that was such a quick shift from the conversation, into a borderline ad hominem, that I may have reverted to reprimanding him with a heavy gavel.
I find this sort of behavior very commonly with Ti/Fi doms. The Te/Fe doms usually just stay objective, distancing themselves from the actual question (The Ti guy asked the question in a manner in which it seems it is his own question, whereas a Te dom interviewer would most likely explicitly state before the interview that the questions asked reflect “the people”, and that he/she is not personally tied to the idea, which is the opposite of the Di dom)
By doing this, it creates distance from the interviewer and the idea, disallowing the interviwee to attack the idea from the perspective that the conversation is a subjective battle between himself and the interviewer, but rather an objective battle for truth between the interviewee’s idea and the collective questioning of that idea.
@@the99mistakes but what if it is their question? So Te Fe is afraid of taking responsibility and Ti Fi insensitive I suppose?
@@YesJellyfishPerhaps it is so there is no personal responsibility, as well as other reasons. But that’s the thing, it is their question. It just wouldn’t be perceived that way.
But the ti interviewer was right.
Wow, didn't expect it to get THAT personal 😬
I thought I can predict people's behavior but what Shan said in the beginning took the cake :D
I consider myself pretty good at predicting where most things, especially conversations, are going. I was not ready for the gut punch towards Neil. Did anyone else feel sorry for him?
Too many interviewers do that. Liked your analysis.
it as if... they were all the same type ! 😅
I thought the interviewer did well.
It’s interesting to hear the Ni/Fi analysis of this interview. Interviewers ask relevant questions, if they are good. They reflect a general societal consensus of people watching the interview and address what the audience wants to know. His question about “we have problems here on earth why space” is a perfect example of this. I think what Dave and shan don’t see here is the Ne: the Impersonalization of intuition and ideas. This is the perfect platform and question lineup for Neil to defend his way of thinking (Ti) via a Ti interviewer who gets it. That’s my take on it anyway
There seems to be an Oe or Ne bias regarding research, science, adventure, and human nature related to curiosity and adventure and possibly another bias related to boundary/limit pushing (e.g. hiking Mount Everest, building the tallest building, etc.)
As a lead Oe, I definitely see that in myself, pushing boundaries and mentally climbing the tallest mountain. Oe, whether Se or Ne, tends to lean more on exploring the spectrum of concepts or physical spaces.
Shan cringing 😬 😬😬😬😬 hahaha
The interviewer sucks.... he made the guest uncomfortable, used acusatory tone, then he lost the debate, and went personal. That's dirty!!
I find this kind of amusing as I'm a similar type to the guy on the right and one of my Bf is a Neil... and we literally have arguments like this all the time lol.
1:13 Wow - Neil does an amazing Tarantino impression here
Well they are the exact same type so he kind of is him already lol
LLLLOL I love how Tarantino talks
The interviewer was out of line (based on my high Fe, lol), but to be fair, Neil drew first blood and made it personal at the end of his answer. People really need to just relax and be able to just have a conversation with making things personal.
not everyone wants to discus things impersonally
If you are going on British TV for an interview, they will go for the gonads every single time.
Dave, do you really think there's no basis for the observation that children tend to be or start out with curiosity and a sense of wonder, and for example ask why a lot and seek to understand, and that tends to be suppressed by adults whether that's parents and religion handing stock answers and most modern school functioning to compel passive following of rules and pursuit of grades over knowledge, figuring out self-development and so on?
I'm and NT and I see this but this isn't just an NT observation. I find it interesting how filtering things through type and seeing functions can also function to distract from looking at what people are actually saying and connecting the dots with what other people are saying, reflecting on how one's own life progressed to where some functions end up as they do, and considering the implications for how education could work differently than a model developed specifically to stifle people's individuality.
As philosopher Naomi Scheman put it, "Three year olds are the ones who keep on asking why, and you think you've explained it perfectly well. And maybe you have to a 35 year old, but not to a three year old, they're gonna come back and ask why again... All that unanswered stuff that most people just learn to, you know, good enough, just get on with this series."
A.k.a., Hand Wave (TV Tropes) "...a person explaining a process on a whiteboard gets to a part that is not well defined or important so just waves their hand around to indicate that Stuff Happens, then moves on... It could also describe the motion one might use to brush aside questions or objections."
If one is interested to gain insight into how people's lives play out and how they often come to be so easy to ridicule, it's worth looking at the series of scenes and situations they navigate from birth.
As William Torrey Harris who was a key player in designing and standardizing the way school still tends to be structured in the Committee of Ten in 1892 put it,
"Our schools have been scientifically designed to prevent over-education from happening. The average American is content with their humble role in life, because they're not tempted to think about any other role."
What does it accomplish to force and persuade most young people to spend something like 8000 hours wit mostly non-negotiable instruction and assessment in school regardless of how much that may drain their energy and take their time away from other efforts, disregarding the functions including especially intuition and feeling, leaving people on their own and often far into adulthood or hitting life crises before tearing down and more consciously building up a better articulated worldview and learning to understand their functions?
I personally couldn't learn well in school and found most of the content to be fragmented and disconnected from real life. Several videos with millions unpack these problems at least somewhat and I'm curious if you've watched them, like Suli Breaks - I will not let an exam result, Ken Robinson - Changing Education Paradigms and the Schools Kill Creativity one, Boyinaband - Don't Stay in School and Prince EA - I sued the school system.
I have a lot more references but what's the point? One is to figure out how people can be more conscious and informed the way Objective Personality offers some insights about that are relevant to a lot of people.
Thoughts?
To be fair the conversation was pretty much doomed from the start. Asking a high profile hobby man to explain why his extremely expensive hobby is supposed to be important, is instantly creating a fight-or-flight situation for the hobby man. He can't defend the hobby, and he also can't admit that his hobby is not that important. There's no possible scenario in which this conversation could end well unless the subject is changed. Which, I suppose, the hobby man did attempt, but the IP man didn't allow it because he just wanted the answer to his question. He perhaps assumed that Neil had thought about this and could actually provide an answer.
IxxP's man, they really tend to ignore the tribe. It's always their point of view. It's okay to laugh at yourself or look like a fool sometimes. Sheesh. So serious. xD
Someone has to ask the difficult questions without pandering to peoples "feelz". EP's and EJ's sure as hell wont.
@@Pabz2030 It still depends though like how the word "difficult" is going to be defined. Anyhow, it's a bound to end in a decider-hell scenario with them, that's also bound to happen.
Until the tribe thinks its OK to take the piss
There are interviewers that try to celebrate, expose, or humble their interviewee.
You are meant to ask questions that inform people about the person a limited range of topics.
But a slant is usually involved somehow because you are not asking the question without a reason behind it. Otherwise it is a boring Se fact and not juicy Fe gossip.
i worked with a INTP an a ENTP.... the entp would slap the intp around verbally and daily... the intp would always smile and act like it was a joke, then the entp would leave the room and the intp would sit there saying how much smarter he was then the entp.... was a lot of fun to watch as a intj myself... rofl... intp's are softies who think their tough... i still like them both though lol and get along with both the intp and entp
I agree with the interviewer, I don't think we're there yet with all societies problems today, to spend billions on space exploration, but bringing up those unproven allegations out of nowhere as a gotcha moment instead of responding to Neil was very obnoxious and off-putting.
The way Neil DeGrasse talks reminds me so much of Quentin Tarantino LOL
the Niel talks just like Tarantino
Yea that bbc guys final question was cringey
Could not agree anymore... Did not make any sense.
The average BBC anchorman/anchorwoman is just like that
This is gold
One interesting question is:
Is the nature of interviewing someone an arena where you *SHOULD* be doing the Ti guy's stuff or not?
I'd be surprised if the interview setting is a "fair" 50-50 arena where every personality trait is equally valuable and valid.
What is the purpose of an interview? Or this interview?
Would it be better fulfilled by going off on a Ne rant with Neil about the wonders of space?
that's how journalists work
Yeah, cuz lead/savior N.
But the real question I have is:
How do I learn to speak properly so that I no longer have to object in the middle of people's pre~diatribe "headed WAY off the rails" retorts to their own internal misinterpretation of a point I wasn't even making... ?
🤔🤣
I'm an ENTP and I remember gushing about space to my ISTP bf and him just being like this white guy, seeing no practical purpose to know any of this shit I'm going on about lol. I remember feeling so deflated after that as if I didn't realize some people don't care about the wonders of outer space. 😂
I just finished the video and bc the way interviewer guy did that that, its now sooo obvious 2 me he doesn't actually care about SH unless it can tarnish Neil's character in the public eye and thats pretty disgusting 😒.
Hello! Would you please let me know the procedure to get an official typing by Objective Personality?
yes! and it's intolerable waitinf for them to finish their sentence and I can be rude and interupt. i have to bite my tongue.
He has an Fi moral voice and an Se approach to presenting reality to the world.
@@scoot0boy yes, Neal. Shan and Dave look at Ne incorrectly and have set up multiple systems to compensate for their mistake. Ne finds options for the tribe. Se finds facts for it. Te understands tribe knowledge and Fe understands tribe values.
American DNA... guys.. that got me thinking.. People who came to explore and conquer América from Britain, most have been in its mayority probably Ne doms, cause they saw the potential of the posibilities to explore a new land and where the actual most probable to inbed in something like that. That may explain a bit of USA culture and logo as "the land of freedom and posibilities" and also their desire to explore te moon. USA is maybe a more Ne culture in comparison. A land of desires and wants.
you should do Ray Dalio if you haven't already
TiSi INTP jumpers look remarkably like INTJ's at a casual glance
They're introverts, thinkers and planners, it makes sense. A lot of people think Elon Musk is an INTJ. I think Michael Bloomberg might be a Ti/Si type, whom a lot of people type INTJ.
Wouldn't that looks look more like an ISTJ?
@@endgamez7621 Yeah, it would. But ISTJ isn't a type that's put on a high pedestal they way INTJs are. So typing someone like that, to a lot of people it wont even occur that someone might be an ISTJ. If they're cool and awesome, they gotta be a cool and awesome type. "JUST LIKE ME!"
@@someonerandom713 ik which is why mbti is kinda bs
@@endgamez7621 Yup
My Synapses Are Firing ! My synopsis is the following: The big bang was God taking an averaged sized dump. MMmmmm, just look at what's growing out of that cosmic doo doo.
Ti-head's shady interviewing tricks aside, didn't he have a point though?
What's the purpose of using so much of resources that are limited into a planet that is very likely not going to sustain life; has high probability of seeing the same fate as Earth does when Earth dies as it's not that far away; and there are many other ideas to explore universe for finding life sustaining location or systems, that don't have funding?
And even keeping that aside, our own planet could use the science and resources in many different ways.
Maybe we could use some dreams and be curious about something more purposeful than amusement parks for extra rich people
It was literally explained in the video. Maybe you don't see the prospects now, but there will be some in 50, 100, 1000 of years. Not everything is about you, it's about generations to come.
@@dawnriddler I think the point was not about never investing in space travel, rather, postpone it to a future date after we have resolve the shit show we are facing on earth first. At least for "earthly" problems, we know that there are concrete solutions rather than the uncertain outcomes we have with space exploration. We should keep that as a "luxury" good when we have resources to spare.
@@joesr31 he addressed that too, if they postponed building airplanes then, it would never be as accessible as it is now. You can always argue that something else has a priority, but if you're constantly working on present problems, there will never be time for solving the future ones.
@@dawnriddler I didn't say never investigate for future problems, I just said there are better options like Dyson sphere and stuff than Mars and in fact it seems like companies are being near-sighted working on Mars to commercialize it to the very rich, instead of caring for finding location that can sustain life very long not just few years after Earth dies. And I tried including argument for why it's that way for Mars.
@@dawnriddler nah if they postphone it, it would still be as accessible as it is now but just later down the timeline. One day, space travel will become a "present problem", at that point, we can then dedicate precious resources to work on that.
Oh man could you write all the things you say while a video is playing, on the screen? I cannot properly hear most of them unfortunately.
whats the lesson here dont fight with IP's?
Might just be the lesson. Reminds me of the video about Tom Holland and Jake Gyllenhall they did a while back, where Dave said IxxPs will kill themselves winning you. And Se wants to one-up you in the sensory, so you got a great dynamic in the gym. Se/Ti Tom Holland wanted to one-up Ti/Ne Gyllenhall in the gym, but Gyllenhall wouldn't let himself be beat, so they both ended up completely exhausted ^^
Jordan Peterson.
The timber, cadence, and passion of their exchange is pretty uncomfortable.
I have observed cycles of topics each type prefers to discuss. They walk around sampling a functional buffet. For example, someone arrives at work and they engage them with Se [did you see the game last night]
Yes pple are predictable
Sorry only Joseph Joestar can do that.
So good
What would Fi/Si look like?
So arrogance = sleep.. interesting
I kinda see myself as arrogant, and I like debates..
But consune probably my first thing
Bro tyson is not an Si user
Dave and Shan please adopt me
My life has no meaning without Dave and Shan
This whole interview is cringey...😅
shan wtf xd
Anyone else thinking they make this shit up as they go? Imagine boxing humanity into 4 letters
they're boxing humanity into 512 types, not 4 lol