Welcome to INTJ Forum

This is a community where INTJs can meet others with similar personalities and discuss a wide variety of both serious and casual topics. If you aren't an INTJ, you're welcome to join anyway if you would like to learn more about this personality type or participate in our discussions. Registration is free and will allow you to post messages, see hidden subforums, customize your account and use other features only available to our members.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About ajrosales

  • Rank


  • MBTI
  • Enneagram
  • Global 5/SLOAN
  • Astrology Sign


  • Homepage
  • Biography
    see my website
  • Location
    Los Angeles, CA
  • Occupation
    architect / artist
  • Interests
    Architecture, Music, Food, Computers, Graphics, Science, Life
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

438 profile views
  1. I precisely didn't say by who because you can't answer that question. It's a set of determined regulations based on culture, personality, etc. but in general, moral principles are behavioral limitations, aren't they? I think it's easy to agree that morality is a varied human construct. But - I think there is an inverse equatability between it and "animalistic" human behavior. Many moral principles seem to want to escape this as a human possibility, thereby reaching some sort of "higher plane" in which the intellect prevails, at least in terms of modern moral principles. Religions use a higher being as an excuse to prove that these are divinely inspired, but if you take religion out of it, you are left with a philosophical principle of humans reacting against their own animalism. At least, to my mind.
  2. it's a set of checks and balances on behavior to reach a specific outcome so that people's actions do not adversely affect others. in a utopian sense, it would create a society in which pain and suffering would be minimized. I don't think morality is specific to religion but it certainly gets appropriated by religion because of a desire to transcend human beings' baser desires.
  3. There's no way in hell Jim Carey is an ENTJ.
  4. Ok I get it. Another thread in which you can be snarky so that you can project your ego and therefore feel good about yourself because you have insulted people that are clearly inferior to you. Who made you king of the assholes? This is a real question and not just an attack. I'd like to know why you are such an insecure person.
  5. The line gets drawn when you stop caring from an emotional perspective about the effects of your behavior and words on those around you. If all you do is spew bullshit and venom all day long, you're an asshole. Rational people stop and think about what they say either before and while they are saying it so that they can adjust the way they are coming across. Assholes just spew and churn without addressing their impact.
  6. I just want to say something that might be a little controversial. It's topics like these that have led us to the hair-splitting that we see today in the political spectrum. Why does every question have to be so deep and complex that it challenges basic principles in which we exist? I honestly find obtuse topics like this to be quite boring. Nobody learns anything from them, and the fact that you consider yourself clever for having posted it is quite obvious. Despite that, I do want to answer the question. The answer is yes. We are all cannibals. Good day.
  7. The United States Just shot itself point blank in the head. Thank you for ruining the rest of the Century president Trump!

  8. so I also designed a house recently... :nice:


  9. This might help answer a few of your curiosities. Given that being a surgeon is a highly technical endeavor, it doesn't seem like such a stretch that you could look at a study on why women don't always succeed in engineering to understand what might be happening. https://hbr.org/2016/08/why-do-so-many-women-who-study-engineering-leave-the-field
  10. James Cameron is an ENTP
  11. maybe this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Horney
  12. I think this idea of a binary logic applied to painting "with" or "without" rules is somewhat unhelpful from an actual art-creation perspective. I'm not convinced art always has to be "classified" in some way. If an artist decides to (literally) create something instinctual or "random" to see "what happens" then there isn't going to be a conscious rule behind it. (hence the lack of purpose means that there is no initial "idea", just exploration).There are a lot of people that are not ok with such ambivalence. They need the idea to be packaged in some way for it to be meaningful. But that isn't how art is usually created. Perhaps you can post-rationalize a piece of art to discover what may have been happening instinctually in some way, but I'm not sure that means that the artist followed a rule that there are "no rules". I think the reason why people use this phrase is because they are trying to justify why it's ok to (attempt to) think in a free and flowing manner, unrestrained by preconception. To overanalyze this condition within art is a somewhat losing argument. In the end, art is visceral. You either instantly like it or you don't, whether or not you agree with the technique or theory, ruled or not.
  13. "We have twenty girls that write 'Johnson' all day long." "If you would dispose of that cigar I will thank you."
  14. How do you establish what is weird in a good way? Is the only criterion for good and weird that it makes an unusual series of sounds? Because that's pretty easy to do, more often than not. I'm just wondering what you think a "skilled" version of weird actually is. And why are you excluding the darker versions of weird? it seems like a limitation. When you use the words crazy and insane that represents madness, which isn't always expressed in positive terms. wait. huh... are you saying you're a member of the residents?
  15. great track names too.