Sunday, 28 February 2010

XXXX Fairy Loaf

He/she was sponged up all the ancient knowledge from Arcania and now she is a well rounded person, but stone dead inside. A rolling stone collects no moss and rolls down the hill to the bottom under the sea with the urchins and is called the Fairy Loaf.

Fairy Loaves - Sussex

Pull (2003) made a detailed study of the folklore surrounding fossil echinoids from the Chalk in the county of Sussex. Various names have been applied to these fossils, including Sugar Loaves, Fairy Loaves, Shepherd's Crowns and Pixies' Helmets. They were once frequently displayed on the windowsills of Sussex cottages.

When questioned by John Pull in 1938, the occupants of the cottages usually regarded them as harbingers of good luck, but some believed that they prevented the cottage from being struck by lightning or were useful in predicting rain. The last of these beliefs may have a basis because any moisture present in the atmosphere may condense on the fossil first.

In both Sussex and East Anglia, Fairy Loaves are also associated with fairy men, asfarisses or ferrishers comes from the Gaelic word fear sidhean (fairy men) (Evans 1966). According to Lindahl et al. (2000). others considered that the marks on these echinoid fossils resembled claw marks, and thus called these fossil sea urchins eagle stones.

* Need cracks in the pavement, the property landed building interests, otherwise you are a tramp.

Doers not have to be a Fairy Loaf. It could be Shepherd's Bush > Shepherd's Crown.

Saturday, 27 February 2010



From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the philosophy journal, see Noûs.

Nous (pronounced /ˈnuːs/, Greek: νοῦς or νόος) is a philosophical term for mind or intellect. Outside of a philosophical context, it is used, in English, to denote "common sense," with a different pronunciation (/naʊs/).

Good God

Definition: there is one God.
Adherents: Christian, Jews, and Muslims

Definition: there are many gods.
Adherents: Hinduism, Greek / Romans Religion

Definition: God is everything
Adherents: Some forms of Buddhism

Definition: God is in everything.
Adherents: Tribal religions

Definition: There are many gods, but only one
God is meaningful to its adherents and worthy of
Adherents: Mormonism

Definition: God is an unknowable

Definition: There is no God

l'existence précède l'essence

The proposition that existence precedes essence (French: l'existence précède l'essence) is a central claim of existentialism, which reverses the traditional philosophical view that the essence or nature of a thing is more fundamental and immutable than its existence. To existentialists, the human being - through his consciousness - creates his own values and determines a meaning to his life, for in the beginning the human being does not possess any identity or value. By posing the acts that constitute him, he makes his existence more significant.[1][2].

The idea can be found in the works of Averroes in the 12th century,[3] Mulla Sadra in the 17th century,[4] Søren Kierkegaard in the 19th century,[5] and was later more explicitly formulated by French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre in the 20th century. Simone de Beauvoir also uses this concept in her feminist existentialism to develop the idea that "one is not born a woman, but becomes one". In Islamic philosophy, whereas previous methods of philosophical thought held that "essence precedes existence", a concept which dates back to Avicenna[3] and Shahab al-Din Suhrawardi,[6] Mulla Sadra substituted a metaphysics of existence for the traditional metaphysics of essences, giving priority Ab initio to existence over quiddity.[7]

In western philosophy Sartre flips this around arguing that for humans, existence precedes essence. The three-word formula originates with Sartre in his 1945 lecture "Existentialism Is a Humanism"[8] (though antecedent notions can be found in Heidegger's Being and Time).

Sartre's view

The Sartrean claim is best understood in contrast to an established principle of metaphysics that essence precedes existence, i.e. that there is such a thing as human nature, determined by the cosmic order (or a god), laid down by religious tradition, or legislated by political or social authority. A typical claim for this traditional thesis would be that man is essentially selfish, or that he is a rational being.

To Sartre, the idea that "existence precedes essence" means that a personality is not built over a previous designed model or a precise purpose, because that's the human being who chooses to engage in such entreprise.

Space Junk

If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Jupiter there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, I would be talking NONSENSE!

PS: Unless the Americans have thrown one out of the window of their spaceship!

Friday, 26 February 2010

Stars in Her Eyes

Vanessa the French Tart is pegged as a ENFP Polecat variant (Perseus System). This is a wild unmarried version. The standard is the Ferret and the wayward wife is the Cat Weasel.

George kills the Dragon

Saint George by chance rode past the lake. The princess, trembling, sought to send him away, but George vowed to remain.
The dragon reared out of the lake while they were conversing. Saint George fortified himself with the Sign of the Cross, charged it on horseback with his lance and gave it a grievous wound. Then he called to the princess to throw him her girdle, and he put it around the dragon's neck. When she did so, the dragon followed the girl like a meek beast on a leash. She and Saint George led the dragon back to the city of Silene, where it terrified the people at its approach. But Saint George called out to them, saying that if they consented to become Christians and be baptised, he would slay the dragon before them.


George was a Christian Horseman ESFJ

Thursday, 25 February 2010

Loyalty to the Stars Above

It looks like the loyalty of the ENFPs is to the stars above.

The Fox and the Grapes

If something, especially a noise, sets your teeth on edge, it annoys you very much
That DJ's voice really sets my teeth on edge.

Mildred's singing set his teeth on edge.

Ezekiel 18:2 (New International Version) "The fathers eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge." Even there, it is cited as a proverb, so who knows where it began?

To set the teeth on edge, to cause a disagreeable tingling sensation in the teeth, as by bringing acids into contact with them.

Idiom Definitions for 'Sour grapes'
When someone says something critical or negative because they are jealous, it is a case of sour grapes.

sour grapes
If you describe someone's behaviour or opinion as sour grapes, you mean that they are angry because they have not got or achieved something that they wanted
I don't think it's such a great job - and that's not just sour grapes because I didn't get it.


Acting meanly after a disappointment.


In the fable The Fox and the Grapes, which is attributed to the ancient Greek writer Aesop, the fox isn't able to reach the grapes and declares them to be sour - "the grapes are probably sour anyway!".

" Sour grapes "

Idiom Meaning - To decide that the attainment of something you have been trying to get is not worth it after all and probably inferior in quality anyway.
(From Aesop's Fable: The Fox and the Grapes)

Wednesday, 24 February 2010

Fashion by Type

Just to make it easier, I'll post them here.

...sorry INTJ is missing the J. I typed it in, but Looklet doesn't always work perfectly.

Ultimately, being the most "yourself" is the only way to attract someone who's actually attracted to you.

Divine Discontent

The fact that man carries with him throughout his life a discontent of the intrinsic frustration of his infancy leaves him with a "divine discontent" which may spur him on to creative achievement. The creative, especially those with a depressive psychopathology, readily identify themselves with others and they are very fearful of undue influence so that it is their very sensitivity to what others think which makes them avoid company.


The term ‘anti-psychiatry’ was coined in the early 1960’s by Dr. David Cooper. The term has come to symbolise a loose confederation of psychiatrists, psychologists, psychiatric nurses, social and welfare workers, lay people and so-called patients who oppose and offer a critique of ‘traditional mental health practice and treatment’.

Cooper (1980) defines anti-psychiatry as:

"1. Reversing the rules of the psychiatric game; countering medical power as embodied in the diagnosis, the principal way of not leaving the other in the humiliation ceremonial of psychiatric interrogation (’interview’). . .

2. Abolition of hierarchical authority structure, recognising that the madman may express the central authority. . .

3. Attentive non-interference aimed at the opening up of experience rather than its closing down. This means the abolition of all forms of shock treatment (insulin and electric in all forms). . .

4. The ending of all forms of sexual repression between any two (or more) people who desire it."

"I know so many bad jokes. At least I didn’t invent them. Jimmy McKenzie was a bloody pest at the mental hospital because he went around shouting at his voices. We could only hear one end of the conversation, but the other end could be inferred in general terms at least from; ‘Away tae fuck, ye filthy bastards. . . ‘ It was decided at one and the same time to alleviate his distress and ours, by giving him the benefit of a leucotomy. An improvement in his condition was noted. After the operation he went around no longer shouting abuse at his voices but, ‘What’s that? Say that again! Speak up ye buggers, I cannae hear ye!’

R.D. Laing (1984:146)

Corrupt Elf


Originally Posted by JoBo View Post
One thing people always tell me is a bad quality in me is that I'm controlling. Like, crazy controlling. And I always know when I get controlling, but things have to be the way I want them to be, otherwise they're no good. It's just who I am.

I also believe I'm not late unless what I'm "not late" for has started without me. I know some people think this is irritating.
I known an INFP like this. It took me two years to discover she was an INFP despite seeing her every day. She is not controlling in the same way as an ESFJ. The later are the crazy ones (FS) and are called Crazy and if ESFJ "Crazy Horse".

Or if she is, I think it might throw the whole MBTI System and the close Perseus System all up in smoke!

There is another one that professes to be a Black Cat ISFP, behaves more like a Bully ESFJ, but has been known to behave as a PFNI type of INFP, but the agenda is malicious. (Corrupt Elf)

Tuesday, 23 February 2010

Nobody gives a Damn (so why should You?)

Originally Posted by Dupree View Post
Some INTP's can bitch and rant forever and once they realize no one cares what they're saying they maintain the attitude of "oh well, you guys are idiots anyway and I'm above you."
Fair comment.

But in reply to an earlier post, it is the INTJ that never admits they are wrong. My type of INTP defines Idiots within narrow parameters. Then there are relative idiots, depending on the position in psychological time and space and which planet you are from. Earthlings (Terran Empire) only qualify as idiots. Chiron is an ESFJ and although we know that Centaur ESFJ is really an idiot, we don't call him that!

Selection of Bullying Examples (BBC)

Neil Addison, a barrister who specialises in harassment cases, says context is key.
"What might not be bullying in the barrack room, might be harassment in a school. If you're training for the SAS there's no point complaining that a sergeant is shouting at you because that's what goes with the job.
"But if you're a teacher in a school or a worker in an office there's no reason for your boss to shout at you."

My comment:

After suffering horrendous bullying including a premeditated ambush attack that nearly killed me, followed by some even worse bullying; I deduced that Bullying is so ingrained in some personality types that the only remedy is to make sure that these people do not attain positions of authority as they will just abuse.

I do not think Gordon Brown is a bully though. Certain types will regress to bullying under pressure of too much work and he falls into this category. Lesser mortals may bully when they are in a job beyond their capabilities. But they are not bullies by nature. Passive-aggressive behaviour can occur in a strong hierarchal or bullying environment. This is an understandable reaction by the bullied person.

Bullies congregate together and their collective bullying may occur in some jobs more than others. "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the Kitchen".

Chapter 58

Chapter 58

"Come into my Parlour" she beckoned. (the Hook)
"How dare you touch my daughter!"
Bucket of slops from up on high. (> the Switch)
The Bath, the Mother* and her Batwoman. (Unruly Hedge?)

Outside the Gates of Eden

Outside the Gates of Eden

Bewildered (wilderness) and thrown out into the wilderness by the Guards. "He would not be whipped into line," said the Probation Officer ISTJ.

The animals are wild in the dragon-world (there be Dragons!") out there. As there are different types of animals, there are different types of habitats. This is Ecological Animism.


Farmyard (Inside the Gates)
Desert (Mountains, Cliffs)
Jungle (Forest, Woods)
Steppes (Plains)

Sea (=Glaucus Underwater Divination which is "under pressure" and is different)

Private House

Secret Schizoid renamed Private House
cf. Public House

Rescued her from the Black Star bullies, only to be run over by a fleet of taxis.

Mandelson is a Ninety Fathom Dyke

Mandelson is a Ninety Fathom Dyke

Mandelson is a Ninety Fathom Dyke ENTP (Black Mamba)
BBC News - Mandelson denies Brown 'bullying' claims

Ninety Fathom Dyke
Durham Mining Museum - Mining History

They call her the ninety fathom dyke. Her soul is the same colour as her skin, as black as the ace of spades.

Black Mamba
The Sore Dragon: Search results for mamba

Monday, 22 February 2010

Gordon Brown is not a Bully he is a Wolf

Gordon Brown is not a Bully he is a Wolfman

Originally Posted by Perseus View Post
ENTJs never give in. They have to be defeated and destroyed. Gordon Brown ENTJ, take note. Don't elect them as Top Boss, King of SJ Clubs.

Topical Radio Five and BBC News item
BBC News - PM claims by bullying charity challenged by Labour

Gordon Brown is not a Bully ESTJ he is a Wolfman ENTJ. The trouble is "under stress" like doing a job he is not competent at, the Wolfman regresses to bullying.

Sunday, 21 February 2010

Inside the Gates of Eden

Eden shares a number of characteristics with words for 'walled orchard garden' or 'enclosed hunting park' in Old Persian. The word "paradise" occurs three times in the Old Testament, but always in contexts other than a connection with Eden: in the Song of Solomon iv. 13: "Thy plants are an orchard of pomegranates, with pleasant fruits; camphire, with spikenard"; Ecclesiastes

At dawn my lower comes to me
And tells me of her dreams
With no attempts to shovel the glimpse
Into the ditch of what each one means
At times I think there are no words
But these to tell what's true
And there are no truths outside the Gates of Eden

Saturday, 20 February 2010

Friday, 19 February 2010

Mannerly Art of Disagreement

Mannerly Art of Disagreement (or how an INTP sees discussion)

Borrowed from Macedon as an introduction to how to discuss with an INTP

Table of contents:
I. Introduction
II. Rules of Engagement
III. What If One Participant Refuses to Play Fair?
IV. Is It Ever All Right to Break the Rules?

Among the greatest problems faced in a public forum is how participants may disagree without descending into either personal attacks or not-so-witty one-line repartee. There are certain "rules of engagement," if you will, which can prevent name calling and other debate no-nos.

But first, we must dispel the myth that polite equals namby-pamby. In fact, it is possible to disagree--even to disagree significantly--in a civil manner. Disagreement is never comfortable, but if we refrain from permitting it to become a war (or, on the internet, a flamewar) we might learn something and keep our blood pressure down at the same time. Disagreement can be fruitful. But it will be fruitful only so long as certain guidelines are followed.

1. THE paramount rule of Jeffersonian Debate: Grant your opponent respect. This means you must allow that he or she can examine the facts and come to a different conclusion from you. This is harder than it sounds, particularly for those who view disagreement as a personal affront, or a sign of stupidity. Persons who hold such views cannot engage in fruitful debate.

2. ...Which brings up the second point: Learn objectivity. Be able to separate others' disagreement with your ideas from attacks on your person. Beware of the overly subjective individual who identifies with certain ideals/ideas to such an extent that disagreement is considered to constitute a personal threat. Such persons hold to the perception, "You're either with me or you're against me." Should you meet with such a one, disengage immediately unless you enjoy being subjected to Scream and Leap.

3. Part of learning objectivity means recognizing the difference between a fact and an opinion. 2+2=4 is a fact, more or less. That John Mellencamp writes great lyrics is an opinion. In order to disprove a fact, one MUST present contrary evidence. Just saying, "That's wrong!" isn't good enough. It's an opinion, not an argument.

"That's wrong because..." is an argument. When presenting an opinion in a debate, it's usually a good idea to indicate in some manner that you realize it's an opinion. "It seems to me..." or "It's been my experience..." or (in nettese) the ever-popular, extremely useful IMHO (in my humble opinion). In short, avoid stating your opinion as if it were a fact: e. g. "Romance stories are gross," or "Action-adventure is boring." Likewise, another's experience or feelings cannot be "wrong" or "right." Don't confuse the existential with the objective. My experience (the existential) is MY experience and no one else can gainsay it because no one else is living in my head and body but me.

What someone else might justifiably do is question my interpretation of my experience: "Well, it didn't strike me as...."

Now for the fine point: While experiences can never be right or wrong, opinions arising from incorrectly interpreted experiences can be. When dealing with fiction, in which opinions and interpretation come from the experience of reading, this "fine point" is more than splitting hairs. Without encroaching too much on Peg's "Mannerly Art of Critique," being able to recognize that interpretation of fiction is opinion, not fact, is as essential to productive feedback as to productive debate.

4. Refrain absolutely from ad hominem attack. What is ad hominem attack? To criticize or belittle the one who holds a certain position rather than the position itself. Example: "How stupid can you be?" or "That just goes to show you don't know anything." Attacking your opponent rather than your opponent's ideas merely indicates a weakness in your position. It wins no brownie points.

5. Absolutely. Never. Use. Invectives. What's an "invective"? A verbal attack, often one that employs obscenities. No matter what your opponent says to you, do not respond with obscenities. Doing so shows deplorably bad manners and convinces any onlookers that you were raised in a barn. Locker-room talk doesn't belong on the debating block. There's simply no excuse for it. Period. It doesn't matter who started it. (Incidently, there is a difference between obscenity as invective and simple adjectival use: "Fuck you" is invective; "That's a hell of a note" or "You know damn well" is adjectival.)

6. Avoid irrelevancies and non sequiturs. Perhaps that goes without saying, but be sure your points relate to the topic. If your opponent (or someone else) says, "What do you mean by that?" or "Your point/parallel/example doesn't seem to follow," you must be able to explain how it does. By the same token, think through points and parallels before you make them to be certain they DO relate. A good way of weakening any argument is by using non sequiturs or bad metaphors.

7. Remember that there may be more than two sides to any debate. You may find yourself agreeing with neither debater, or agreeing with some points made by one, and some points made by the other. Polite debate includes frank admission of where one may agree with an opponent. It's a debate, not a war. Insisting, "You're with me or you're against me" merely points to the lack of objectivity mentioned in point #2 above.

8. In any debate, even polite ones, there is always a certain degree of side-taking: onlookers who are convinced by, or agree already with the arguments of one participant or another. Onlookers who choose to speak out should obey the same polite rules of engagement as anyone else. Also, it is helpful to state why one agrees. "John's right and you're wrong" is neither convincing nor helpful. However, "I find John's arguments persuasive because...." can contribute to the debate in a positive way. It also prevents "side-taking" from becoming mere ego-massage, which in turns helps to keep the focus on the matter at hand, not the personalities involved. It IS permissible to disagree with a friend. This goes back to being able to separate subjective from objective. I may like you very much, but still disagree with your position.

9. Persons who have tender egos should think twice before leaping into a debate. As Apollo advised, "Know thyself!" If you have a tendency to take disagreement personally--stay out of debates! People have skins of differing thicknesses. What may strike you as insulting may have been meant innocently. Assume ignorance, not malice, and inform your opponent if he or she just said something which struck as hostile or personal. Allow the other the opportunity to qualify remarks which may have been innocently meant. If your opponent says, "I didn't mean it that way!"--accept the refutation. Don't insist otherwise!

10. By the same token, recognize that phrasing is everything.

Bluntness can be plain rude, not charmingly honest. If you are one who does have a thick skin, realize others may not and take some care with what you say and how you say it. Such simple things as noting that your opinion is an opinion (the "In my experience" or "IMHO" mentioned above) can go a long way toward keeping feathers smooth and unruffled.

11. Don't be afraid to employ humor, as long as the humor is not a cover for personal attack. Humor in debate keeps blood from boiling.

12. Don't use religious principles or canons as absolutes. Recognize that not everyone may hold the same beliefs. Some debates directly concern religious points, but introducing them into an otherwise unrelated issue is inappropriate. "The Bible says..." is not an argument unless all participants agree on the Bible as an authority, and on a particular interpretation of the Bible, to boot. Otherwise, the reaction will--justifiably--be, "So what?" The use of religious principles or canons in debate must be treated as opinions, not facts.

13. Be man or woman enough to concede. If one's opponent convinces--admit it! Those who can never admit to being wrong show fragile ego structure. The real point of any debate is not to win, but to learn.

If one enters a debate merely to win, one has entered for the wrong reasons. Whatever the ancient Greeks thought, life is not a continual contest.

14. Know when to quit. There is a point in any debate when continued discussion ceases to be fruitful and becomes mere argument. Graceful closure is as important as graceful conduct. One does not have to have the last word, and it is permissible to say, "I'm sorry, I'm just not convinced." Agree to disagree.

15. Finally, watch grammar, especially when debating in written forms such as that found on the Internet. This is not a petty point. One cannot convince others of one's glittering wit and clever insight if it's delivered full of misspellings and grammar errors. Instead, participants will wonder how one passed eighth grade English. More, bad grammar or lack of clarity will contribute to misunderstanding.

One may say the opposite of what one means, or say something that is unintentionally amusing. ("Except" means the opposite of "accept," yet I see the two all-too-commonly confused in internet posts--with sometimes laughable results.)

If these simple rules are followed, even extremely controversial topics can be safely discussed. If these rules are not followed, the most mundane of matters may turn explosive.

In order for Jeffersonian debate to flourish, all participants must be willing to obey the rules of engagement. If one individual refuses, there's not much the rest can do but ignore him or her.

Nevertheless, a couple of things to keep in mind when this happens:
1. Some people feed on conflict; this is how they get their jollies. It's a sign of unhealthy social adjustment. Such individuals will make inflammatory remarks simply to irritate. On the internet, this may manifest as "trolling": those who post intentionally controversial or insulting statements simply to stir things up. (Trolls are not usually regular participants in any particular group.) Yet there are also individuals who aren't trolls but still jump into debates with both feet for the thrill of pissing off others: gadflies. Don't confuse the two. Nevertheless, the wise response is the same: ignore them and they go away (or at least shut up).

2. Replying to rudeness in kind simply makes you look foolish. As my grandfather used to say, "Don't lower yourself to their level." Temper, temper. Grit your teeth and keep the rules of engagement.

3. In the rare circumstance that a gadfly or troll does not leave even after being ignored for weeks, or whenever one takes his or her harassment from a public forum to a private one (such as email), immediately notify that person's ISP provider (i. e. postmaster@_gadfly's address_). If the mail bounces--that is, if the real ISP provider has been camouflaged--then immediately notify your ISP provider of the harassment and ask them to track the person down, or to give you a new mail address.

Aren't there some topics that just don't deserve Jeffersonian debate? Aren't some positions so disgusting that they shouldn't be dignified by polite responses? What about posts by hate groups, neo-Nazis, pornographers, etc.?

This is a problematic question since it may lead down a slippery slope--rather like censorship. The automatic pitfall of free speech is that it IS free: people you don't like and with whom you disagree have just as much right to state their positions--short of slander--as you have to argue with them. Child pornography or its advertisement is illegal; debate about it is not... however disgusting or horrifying one may find the phenomena.

There are certain topics which are so widely regarded as morally objectionable that if one attacks them with non-Jeffersonian methods such as name-calling and invective, one may be cheered by most if not all the on-lookers. Yet there are other subjects, more controversial, which involve opinions just as virulent--such as homosexuality or abortion--but about which there is far less consensus. Some consider homosexuality or abortion to be as reprehensible as child pornography or murder, and refuse to engage in any polite debate about it because, of course, they are right and everyone who disagrees is wrong (and usually disgusting and stupid, too). The reverse can be equally true: defenders of either may automatically see all opponents as bigoted or irrational (often based on past experience), and refuse to even listen to other positions as they're too busy screaming their own at the top of their (virtual) lungs.

Neither side is trying to debate. They're just on rampage and should be treated accordingly: Laugh at them, ignore them, or get out of their way, but don't lower yourself to their level by copying their methods. Doing so certainly won't accomplish anything except to make you look just as foolish. If, however, you meet up with someone who IS being polite in debate--no matter what you may think of his or her position--IF YOU WISH TO CONVINCE ANYONE ELSE OF YOURS, stay polite yourself.

In other words, No, it's never wise to break the rules. Not unless you're applying for God's job.


If you can understand these things and you're not already disgusted, you'll probably get along quite well with your INTP . Even if you can't... they're probably subconsciously seeing things from this point of view. Each of these articles comes from the same site, found at To be INTP...

There are many more articles there, but I found these three particularly useful (some of them are downright bad... so take care if you go poking around) if you want to understand how an INTP sees things that many other types think are common to everyone in a different way.
And I may just waste away from doing nothing
But you're a martyr for even less

Tuesday, 16 February 2010

Eris (Goddess of Strife)

Dialogue: You are orbiting too close to the sun (syn. Horsemen or Centaurs= Atrebates worshipping the God Mercury). Rome sent Chiron to live amongst the Centaurs (cf Cogidumnus)
Opposite is the far out Eris

In Hesiod's Works and Days 11–24, two different goddesses named Eris "Strife" are distinguished:

So, after all, there was not one kind of Strife alone, but all over the earth there are two. As for the one, a man would praise her when he came to understand her; but the other is blameworthy: and they are wholly different in nature.
For one fosters evil war and battle, being cruel: her no man loves; but perforce, through the will of the deathless gods, men pay harsh Strife her honour due.

But the other is the elder daughter of dark Night (Nyx), and the son of Cronus who sits above and dwells in the aether, set her in the roots of the earth: and she is far kinder to men. She stirs up even the shiftless to toil; for a man grows eager to work when he considers his neighbour, a rich man who hastens to plough and plant and put his house in good order; and neighbour vies with his neighbour as he hurries after wealth. This Strife is wholesome for men. And potter is angry with potter, and craftsman with craftsman, and beggar is jealous of beggar, and minstrel of minstrel.

Sunday, 14 February 2010

The Black Hole

The Black Hole ?
Posted: 12 Feb 2010, 16:04


The Black Hole is where your job applications disappear and you don't hear any more.

What to do?

Teacher in the Officer's Club

Tired of teaching but don't know what else I can do!
Posted: 28 Jan 2010, 14:39


I've been teaching for almost 9 years now, and have made my way up the ranks to deputy head teacher in a secondary school. I can't stand the profession any more, this year alone I've had more time of sick than I have in my entire working career, and I desperately need a change.
Discussion on

Saturday, 13 February 2010

I Need a Corporation Meal Ticket (I was born with a plastic spoon in my mouth)

Originally Posted by ethylester View Post
Dang, this thread is long. Well here i go making it longer...

My fiance is an INTP and the things that piss me off the most are:
His obliviousness to the responsibilities of the future. He is constantly immersed in whatever he is doing at the moment with no sense of responsibility. I know paying the bills, doing laundry, returning library books on time, setting mousetraps, calling the landlord back, fixing his jalopy car, checking his voicemail, eating food other than crackers, getting a JOB, etc, are boring mundane things, but if you leave them alone for too long, it comes back to bite you in the ass. He just doesn't think that stuff is important and would rather sit in his study all day and remind himself how calculus works, what the scientific name for the warthog is, and which words contain glottal stops. I admire this about him, too. however, I wish he wouldn't push me to the point of having to be a nag. I don't like nagging but I don't want him to be trapped in a regrettable situation which could have easily been prevented had he just planned ahead a little better.

A most interesting post. I can see that I descend to this state if I act according to character type and I get stuck in a rut. The problem is finding a JOB (that pays).

A NAG is ESFJ the Providor. WARTHOG is a wild IXTP variant.

Thursday, 11 February 2010

Steppenwolf: Video Trailer Link

Steppenwolf: Video Trailer Link

For Madmen Only, September 24, 2007
By Dawoud Kringle "Renegade Sufi" (New York City) - See all my reviews
Adapting a Hesse novel to film is no easy task. In his introduction to Steppenwolf, Hesse said that almost no one under the age of 50 would understand the book; but cest la vie. I first read the book in my teens. I would come back to it several times through the next three decades. It impressed me very differently each time.

Max Von Sidow is perfect as Harry Haller. An outwardly respectable man who is fighting a war within himself between his "human" and "animal" nature. He meets Hermine, the woman who helps him find some enjoyment in his life. A jazz musician named Pablo completes the picture, with his "refreshments" that permit Harry to enter the Magic Theater. Therein he comes face to face with all the repressed elements of his psyche; and after a series of crisis, comes to accept the whole of his being; and "Laugh with the Immortals".

There are some parts of the movie that are a bit dated. Some that are very very "European" for an American palete. Some that could have been done a bit differently (and it would be interesting to see how a talented director of today, with an appropriate CGI budget, could handle this). but all in all, it is a very good movie.

Sunday, 7 February 2010

Bad Taste in my Mouth

Bad Taste in my Mouth

Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
i love how so many people used the word "disgust" and its variants. it's interesting.

and it's a very accurate word.
I don't get disgusted (word use), I get a bad taste in my mouth which amounts to the same thing. Gust = taste rather than wind.

Saturday, 6 February 2010

Global Fetishes (Context Operator PNIT)

As befitting a non-addictive personality, I do not seem to have any fetishes. I have preferences and turn-offs.

This might be enhanced global-type fetishism (as befitting a PNIT) as the context has to be suitable.

Friday, 5 February 2010

Enemies of Choice (Tall White Ghost with a Magnet)

"Inner World of Self" by Frances Wickes

"He takes you and cleans away all of your Ghosts"

Dialogue: Are you Drunk?

Cat World

Originally Posted by Caila View Post
O_o...Are YOU drunk???

You must be a Cat ISFP. Theory (Quenk) says their is a communication problem between the ISFP and INTP and I have repeatedly found this to be true. We appear to get on at first, but as soon as trouble starts (third party) the misunderstandings become apparent.

The usual comment is for the ISFP to accuse the INTP of being drunk !

"You've been drinking again!"

"No, I have not!"

"Alright then, if you insist." Goes out drinking.

Black Mamba

Black Mamba is a very dangerous ENTP. Might not even be defeated by a Mongoose ENFP.

The Black Mamba can be destroyed by an Army of Guards SJ


Black Mambas are among the most venomous snakes in Africa and the World, with a LD50 of 0.25 mg/kg. A bite from a black mamba delivers about 100–120 mg of venom on average; however it can deliver up to 400 mg. About 10-15 mg of its venom is enough to kill an adult. The initial symptom of the bite is local pain in the bite area, although not as severe as in a bite from snakes with cytotoxins. The victim soon experiences a tingling sensation in the mouth and extremities, dizziness, erratic heartbeat, ptosis, diplopia (double vision), dysphagia, tunnel vision, ophthalmoparesis, severe confusion, dysarthria, fever, diaphoresis (excessive perspiration), excessive salivation (including foaming of the mouth and nose), and pronounced ataxia (lack of muscle control). If the victim does not receive medical attention, symptoms rapidly progress to severe abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting, lymphadenopathy, severe dyspnea (shortness of breath), epistaxis, pallor, shock, nephrotoxicity, cardiotoxicity, and paralysis. Eventually, the victim experiences convulsions, cardiac arrest, respiratory arrest, coma, and then death. Without antivenom, the mortality rate nears 100%, the highest among venomous snakes.[6][7] Depending on the nature of the bite, death can result at any time between 15 minutes and 3 hours. On average, however, death usually occurs 30 to 60 minutes after envenomation.[8] Factors associated with the nature of the bite include penetration of one or both fangs, amount of venom injected, location of the bite, and proximity to major blood vessels. The health of the snake and the interval since it last used its venom mechanism may also be factors. The health, size, age, and psychological state of the individual victim is also a determining factor.

She sure was a dangerous lady. He might appear drunk, but we all know it is a little mores serious than that!

Monday, 1 February 2010

Nature of Genius

Genius in Roman mythology is the individual instance of a general divine nature that is present in every individual person, place or thing.

A genius (plural genii or geniuses,adjective ingenious) is a person, a body of work, or a singular achievement of surpassing excellence. More than just originality, creativity, or intelligence, genius is associated with achievement of insight which has transformational power. A work of genius fundamentally alters the expectations of its audience.

Ingenious types acccording to the Perseus System:

ENTP Snake
INTP Eagle

genius | dins | n. Pl. -ii | -L | , -iuses. LME. [L, f. base of gignere beget, Gk gignesthai be born, come into being.] 1 The tutelary or attendant spirit in classical pagan belief allotted to every person at birth, or to a place, institution, etc. Formerly also, an allegorical figure representing the moral instincts keeping passion within bounds. LME. b Esp. in good genius, evil genius. Either of the two mutually opposed spirits or angels supposed to attend each person. Hence a person who or thing which for good or bad powerfully influences another. L16. c The personification or embodied type of something immaterial. rare. L16. d Astrol. The combination of sidereal influences represented in a person's horoscope. M17. 2 A demon or spirit; esp. = GENIE 2. L16. 3 a Characteristic disposition, bent, or inclination; natural character or constitution.

Excerpted from The Oxford Interactive Encyclopedia
Developed by The Learning Company, Inc. Copyright (c) 1997 TLC Properties Inc.

Faun and Pan

In Roman mythology, fauns are place-spirits (genii) of untamed woodland. Romans connected their fauns with the Greek satyrs, wild and orgiastic drunken followers of Bacchus (Greek Dionysus). However, fauns and satyrs were originally quite different creatures. Both have horns and both resemble goats below the waist, humans above; but originally fauns had goat-like hooves, satyrs human feet. The Romans also had a god named Faunus and goddess Fauna, who, like the fauns, were goat-people.

In Roman paganism and its mythology, Faunus was the horned god of the forest, plains and fields; when he made cattle fertile he was called Inuus. He came to be equated in literature with the Greek god Pan.

Pan (Greek Πάν, genitive Πανός), in Greek religion and mythology, is the companion of the nymphs,[1] god of shepherds and flocks, of mountain wilds, hunting and rustic music. His name originates within the Greek language, from the word paein (Πάειν), meaning "to pasture".[2] He has the hindquarters, legs, and horns of a goat, in the same manner as a faun. With his homeland in rustic Arcadia, he is recognized as the god of fields, groves, and wooded glens; because of this, Pan is connected to fertility and the season of spring. The ancient Greeks also considered Pan to be the god of theatrical criticism.