I have a suspicion that being humans we also would be happier living in more social ways... But we haven't necessarily built up the correct approaches or the ability to use them in comfortable ways.

	Its only specific advantages you're losing... like my natural criticism... it does cause advances in intelligence.. but in its normal form, it also damages relationships.

It is worth stopping to think twice before firing. I have learned that, too. Even so, one can actually be very critical if one sticks to the facts.

You are right about building a support network. People are actually very helpful if you treat them with respect. It's just that (as an INTJ) I'd rather be independent anyway and avoid asking for help as much as I can.

Anyway, it is always interesting to analyse and improve one's behaviour or attitude.

I agree the follow your positive instincts part was a bit iffy and assumed the same makeup for everyone. To keep giving at a reasonable pace without creating back-log... fair decision. I'd primarily notice the beginnings of the cycle of blame though - that emotion is easy enough to recognize and that likely implies that you've done something you suspect is wrong and are now trying to shore up your self-esteem.. basically, we could use it to identify areas where we are being dishonest with our internal view of things.

And I agree with your suggestion that most of the time if you act with positive intent, it should either go right or should be able to adapt and make it go right (and even if it fails, one failure is rarely that big a deal when you're being honest with yourself and learning from your experiences... so good will and self-honesty should work well on the whole)

I think if you maintain openness (realistically people aren't that much of a threat to you and if you're friendly enough to have a decent network, even stuff like potentially losing a job isn't really a significant threat, so people can't really harm you), and honestly care about people as they suggest... all the time... you'll likely do fairly well. People skills are 8/10ths of the battle in the world

Its only specific advantages you're losing... like my natural criticism... it does cause advances in intelligence.. but in its normal form, it also damages relationships.

It is true that they do not give a lot of examples of when one needs to be defensive or when one realises that one needs to stand up for oneself but one hestitates. I read the book thinking of this case as well and considered it implicitly included. To me this book is about setting the right emotional boundaries and about integrity. This includes not taking advantage of others but also to prevent others from taking advantage - out of the box (this is a terrible expression). The typical parenting example is when to say 'no' in the right way. - 'No, because you are getting on my nerves' and 'No, I'm tired' are entirely different answers. - Another learning curve.

Reacting on one's impulses intstantly implies that one can completely rely on one's initial impression. This is something I have some doubts about. Intuition is a great help here but it can also be wrong. Maybe it is still better to act and be wrong than to be passive when one has the feeling that something is not right?

You can also consider it primarily in terms of the active emotions being projected while communicating, or using the emotion state examples of 'in the box mode with respect to people', and recognize similar patterns being used in dealing with other types of problems where people are not involved. etc.

For one thing, I find the defensive tendencies of being in the box to have some utility in that the stuff you create to shore up your self-esteem isn't always meaningless (you might find better ways to do things or actual flaws in other people that do need to be dealt with).

Naturally the attitude of not caring about other people doesn't work well if that's dominant when you're actually communicating with them.

Its not necessarily a bad idea to remain open all the time, but I favor complicating things

	I have a tendency to question every idea that comes my way and assess it from different sides.

Interesting. What are the different sides that you see?
I'm all trial and error on this one, too. I see this as more of an F-type approach. It certainly seems to be a good way to interact with my daughter. Not that I had big problems with her but there is always room for improvement.

I'm working on incorporating those ideas although its going slowly. I have a tendency to question every idea that comes my way and assess it from different sides.

Fine, too. Thanks. I can see that you are putting the message of Leadership and Selfdeception into practice on INTJf. That's great! Does it work in real life for you, too?
- I'm actually reading the follow up book - The Anatomy of Peace - as well now.

I'm doing pretty well. How are things with you?

Hi! How are you doing?

One of my friends has actively implemented the ideas in real life and he says he's seen a great improvement in his relationships.

I have just read Leadership and Self-Deception. Great book! Thanks for the tip. This gives me quite a few things to think about.
BTW, the Semmelweis clinic still exists and that's where my daughter was born.

Thanks! Will check it out.

I recently read a book called 'Leadership and Self-Deception' I strongly recommend it, as a reference for attitude in communication (and some general self-improvement)

In my country the school system is currently being reformed. Politicians and psychologists are trying to convince us that it is better to have a more comprehensive school system where kids have a lot of choice of subjects. Separating them too early might lead to wrong decisions that cannot be rectified easily . That's the other way of looking at education. There will have to be some separation to develop different talents in any educatuion system. It is not easy to say how and at what age. Currently kids get split up at 10 in my country.

I do take your point about my communication style. I wait way too long to drop the hammer on people. Somehow I am always hoping that there is some common sense present before doing so.

Its not easy to give opportunity to everybody. Like lets say if most people are SJ, if you accommodate us much more, in doing so you'll likely make other people's lives more inefficient and perhaps disrupt their personal growth.

I actually think that optimizing might require building separate systems. Like identifying people's natures and talents and pulling them into schooling that helps them grow more along those lines, while also learning how to interact better with people who are different from themselves (in a way that doesn't compromise themselves and their own growth)

Interestingly, there are serious differences in communication styles even across different parts of the country, and someone adept in one area might not do well in another.

You see how little it takes to be called stupid.
The way forward has to be about motivation. Maybe there really are innate mental differences between men and women. But unless people are given a chance to develop in an unbiased way we'll never find out.

I think that for farming communities or hunting communities... kids could take part pretty early. There was no school eating up kids time, and people were often expected to be adults much earlier (and real life experience instead of being protected from reality, lets you become adults much earlier)

The last hundred years or so are not indicative of what human life normally is. Actually, if you add school and don't add in broken homes, you normally have both parents at home and the father often teaching and playing with his sons. My dad definitely hung out with us.

Apart from the first two years of my life and a couple of months later in life, both of my parents were usually there at most times. Our dad definitely hung out with us a lot after he got home from work.