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.

ChainedDivinity

Members
  • Content count

    321
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About ChainedDivinity

  • Rank
    Member

Personality

  • MBTI
    INTP
  • Enneagram
    Type 4
  • Astrology Sign
    Libra

Converted

  • Biography
    The ultimate wetware engineering. Now if only they fixed the loading times...
  • Location
    Larchmont, NY
  • Occupation
    Student
  • Interests
    Role-playing games, intellectual discussion and debate, music (sort of)
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,189 profile views
  1. Fair. I'll link up that post for our convenience and add to this once I've got it. Here is the first post you've made on your position, which is that males do not get hired into teaching positions because they are more likely to be pedophiles. I think I was confused because this on its own doesn't really explain the hiring gap, since this would require that a. people in the education industry know these statistics and b. That they are able to use them in a way that allows them to discriminate. Both of these are relatively easy to support, but that they were left unsaid makes your position harder to interpret here. It also leaves unanswered important questions, such as what the mechanism for weeding male teachers out of the system is (whether it's a raised bar or an evaluation of "vibe", for instance). It also doesn't directly state whether you view the use of this mechanism to be ethical. So you can see my confusion @Distance . Now, this may be due to lack of info available, which I sympathize with, but even in that case I think it would be productive to at least discuss hypotheticals about different ways this could look. None of your later posts really added to your position, from what I've seen, at least not in the respects I've mentioned here. You do go on to suggest that there may be other factors, which I do find interesting because at most 5% of the population at large would molest children, before factoring in whether they've already been convicted, whether that fact was accurately interpreted on its way to that site, and so on--I'm not sure this would explain most of a large hiring gap. I understand that may not have been your intention, and it's still worth bringing up, but it does make me look askance, especially in light of later comments such as "men can't be trusted around children". Feel free to correct me though.
  2. Well yes, but if we're going to make a decision exact numbers would be helpful. If only a small portion of males are pedophiles, then more refined techniques might be justified--for instance, using data mining. If it's a larger number a full ban seems more justified.
  3. Wasn't talking about records of what they did at work. More about records of what they did at home. That's likely possible to get already, given the prevalence of data mining. As for your other point, proving the majority of pedophiles are male=/=proving the majority of men are pedophiles.
  4. Couldn't google+porn sites provide search listings to companies/schools that asked, if you're that concerned? (Also, "teen" is not "young child"--all you're proving is that it's not safe to leave adult men with teens, depending on what the data says about sexual contact there, you have not proven that they would be attracted to and/or inclined to have sex with young children)
  5. You're gonna enjoy it more when it's started.
  6. Mmmmm, I'm gonna be That Guy and raise you the Unabomber. And realize I misread the subject because I'm an idiot. Still, I do think he'd be fun to talk to, same with other crazies of that stripe. Just sort of becomes an exercise in "how did they get there?" I'd almost say INxJs are the most annoying to argue with though--they're just so goddamn vague. I have to spend so much time piecing together what half of them mean by what they said. However, perhaps that's what might make someone like me annoying to INTJs, so....I think who's most annoying to argue with typewise depends on your type.
  7. I wonder if a strategy more like scenario planning would be better--first analyzing the woman, and from there analyzing the types of scripts that would be most useful.
  8. I might hate worrying more in women, but I can't draw a definitive link between gender and any of these for me.
  9. You vibe really 5 in those videos, hah. :) That said, I don't completely trust vibe. Mention of model rockets as a hobby fits though. Why'd you give them up?
  10. No idea. I was leaning 7w8 because ENTP and blunt confidence, but 5 is possible. What are you currently doing with your life?
  11. You think 5? Por que? (I'll still take it though...)
  12. In my defense, it'd be a reasonable thing for an ADD person to say yes to having without knowing context. I don't think they'd expect someone to get into the differences between the two. (Also, the diagnoses were merged) However, in a sense, you're right--people I don't like had ADD so I always preferred the ADHD label. Differentiated me from them.
  13. Ah, between those two, I'm ADD rather than ADHD (I got the latter diagnosis only due to the technicality that the two types were merged into one acronym again when I officially received it--if you had my files, you could actually see that I was predominantly Inattentive type, which means basically there wasn't an H).
  14. Hah. Funny you mention that, I do have ADHD. My own theory is that it shouldn't matter for typing, as a cognitive difference is a cognitive difference, but I'm curious where you fall on that. ...... added to this post 5 minutes later: Yeah, I should probably change that but I haven't yet. And my username was actually one of the first few consistent forum usernames I picked out for myself, and was inspired by the growing part of me that was starting to enjoy playing female characters in games. There was a particular game I played (Exalted, for anyone that knows it) that had a type of being in it called the Raksha or Fair Folk that were basically raw chaos in (super)human bodies, and I was trying to make a character for that, and was starting to imagine one with that name that I was sort of taken by the appearance of. And...the rest is history, hah. (Swear to god I'm cis/straight. Swear to god.)
  15. The article also said that AIs were only aggressive when apples were scarce, suggesting more that an AI designed for strategy will use the better strategy than anything bad about AI in general.