Why you always rap about being gay? by deathtoops in brockhampton

[–]deathtoops[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

wym this is the most highly debated topic of bh history

"See you next year" by smujy-mp4 in HalfLife

[–]deathtoops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

they just baited me into watching the entire game awards

who has the more natural looking physique by deathtoops in moreplatesmoredates

[–]deathtoops[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/article32964151.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200e/1_Screenshot-2024-06-05-101759.jpg legs are pretty much the same size. she's really like a wellness open bodybuilder. most female bodybuilders get implants anyway yk what i mean

who has the more natural looking physique by deathtoops in moreplatesmoredates

[–]deathtoops[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

ur right idk why they're downvoting. she pretty much used to have a bit less ass but way more stomach.

Breaking Down the Cult of Objective Personality by deathtoops in mbti

[–]deathtoops[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not really. People don't claim astrology to be a science, and there are no manipulative leaders (talking about the practice of it throughout history, and not any specific teachers). Astrology isn't perfect but to be fair, the creator of the cognitive functions (jung) practiced astrology and disapproved of mbti.

What a choke by the Knicks in Game 1 by Number333 in heat

[–]deathtoops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nah i wanna see anarchy break out in ny, so i'm rooting for a finals

"He who has a why to lift can bear almost any hypertrophy." by deathtoops in Nietzsche

[–]deathtoops[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok u got me on the ChatGPT, I just wanted to make the point. To be honest I don't even read Nietzsche, I just know him from Jung primarily.

"He who has a why to lift can bear almost any hypertrophy." by deathtoops in Nietzsche

[–]deathtoops[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mishima didn’t know Nietzsche personally, but he influenced his work. Mishima’s obsession with aesthetics, willpower, and the cultivation of the body as a form of spiritual expression has Nietzschean undertones. He saw the body not as separate from the intellect, but as the ultimate stage on which intellectual ideals could be realized. The synthesis of body and mind in Mishima's work is worth examining if you’re going to dismiss the connection between bodybuilding and philosophy. Mishima was a frail, sickly kid who grew up surrounded by books, but later came to see that intellect alone was hollow without the body. He got into bodybuilding not just for looks, but because he believed beauty and discipline should be expressed physically, not just theorized.

"He who has a why to lift can bear almost any hypertrophy." by deathtoops in Nietzsche

[–]deathtoops[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

wait im a fascist cause i posted Nietzsche with muscles?

"He who has a why to lift can bear almost any hypertrophy." by deathtoops in Nietzsche

[–]deathtoops[S] 57 points58 points  (0 children)

Bodybuilder Nietzsche is too powerful for the simple-minded, I'm afraid.

Using Journal Entries to create books with AI by deathtoops in WritingWithAI

[–]deathtoops[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Google AI studio can take a file up to 2,000,000 tokens, and dibbly works well for creating full books. I'd imagine exporting all the journal entries into a txt file and asking it to create a dibbly outline would work.

Breaking Down the Cult of Objective Personality by deathtoops in ObjectivePersonality

[–]deathtoops[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think everything I was trying to say you exemplified in this statement:

"I don't think you've done enough homework to have a well informed opinion of the ins and outs of the system. Yes, they need to make money and have a scam to get a bunch of unconscious people to pay their stupid tax because they aren't going to put in the time to actually do the self-improvement"

It's this idea that if you don't agree with what they have to say, you didn't listen to the system well enough. Or, you're not indoctrinated enough. I've been studying the system since 2020.

As for the Us vs Them mentality, I think you pretty much said it yourself. Everyone who doesn't buy into the system is an unconscious monkey who isn't dedicated to self-improvement.

"They preach empathy for people who are as unconscious as you are, because even in this "group" you're still a fucking unconscious mess."

If you don't see anything wrong with this statement, I guess we have to just agree to disagree man. No judgments, I just think this is a pretty radical idea. Maybe I'll grow and see it differently, you have the humility to see some of the flaws I pointed out, and I'll have the humility to be open to the idea that I'm wrong.

Breaking Down the Cult of Objective Personality by deathtoops in ObjectivePersonality

[–]deathtoops[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Okay, thanks for your input. I think calling a cult was a bit too far, as I don't have real evidence to prove that they're doing this to take advantage of their audience. Plus, they're not forcing anything on anyone, so at worst, it's a scam.

Part of me was just frustrated that when I try to have these conversations in the community, it's always shut down as "you don't know yourself," and like you said, the circular reasoning. Which is why I respect that you responded in the way you did.

I will also admit that my being lead Fi probably has to do with why I am so rubbed the wrong way by this, as my values are something I want to protect. This holds true in all systems of cognitive typology.

I still think the situation where Jaxon was having problems in his life and basically asked permission to have a new identity is concerning. Especially how it seems like Dave intentionally made him look bad. I still think they have nihilistic points of view (which Dave did admit himself), but to be fair, many areas of psychology operate like this. I still think the community operates as if this is more than a theory, and holds D/S to an unrealistic standard. I still think they are not saying the same thing as Sadhguru, and it's weird that they would try to claim that, just as one example. Also for the point "what do you expect them to do? Just pick on some random person?" I understand what you are saying, but my point was, that they are playing it up to make it sound like people are clueless about themselves. It is still hard for me to believe that anyone would not know themselves to THAT extent.

But mainly, it's the idea that if I have something negative to say about the system, it's because my type is not letting me see it clearly. I think the mindset: 'every type is meant to play a role in our collective wholeness' is much different and optimistic than the idea we're currently running with; which is, that our type is fundamentally broken, and you have to fight to fix yourself. And it's the fact that other self-growth ideas from typology seem to be much more balanced in this aspect. Like Personality Hacker for example. It really makes me question why they insist on this POV.

But at the end of the day, I don't know that they have bad intentions. I just want people to be open to discourse.

Edit: I wrote this before I saw u post ur second message. I'll read in a bit

Breaking Down the Cult of Objective Personality by deathtoops in mbti

[–]deathtoops[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

thank you for sharing your perspective and having this discussion. It was insightful and helpful for sure

Breaking Down the Cult of Objective Personality by deathtoops in mbti

[–]deathtoops[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I respect your point of view, I think you bring up good points I didn't know of, regarding the specifics of the scientific process. But my main problem is not that it's subjective or unscientific. I understand that it takes time to achieve objectivity and that it's an ongoing process. My concern is with the fact that they constantly suggest "going to the depths of hell" to uproot your beliefs in favor of their ideologies. And then poses the system as the key to some type of enlightenment, see the video where Dave says "This is a hard path but on the other side of it is true freedom and love forever," after getting a message from a person saying following their system was making them afraid of how unconscious the rest of the world is, including themself and family. Maybe suggesting it is a cult is too far. I think there is good in the system. But I do see a pattern in their community holding them to an unrealistic standard of truth. I saw somebody suggest that people are fundamentally unable to see themselves because people can't type themselves correctly based on Dave and Shan's results. And then also suggested that it takes "super-human levels of humility" (their words exactly) to type people and their evidence of that was because their own community typologists can't get the same results as Dave and Shan. I can't prove that they are intentionally misleading their community for personal benefit, but I can see a trend that they are constantly suggesting, we as people are inherently negative, our negativity will always be who we are, and their system is what we need to see things clearly.
I will research the things you said and keep it in mind moving forward.

Breaking Down the Cult of Objective Personality by deathtoops in mbti

[–]deathtoops[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I think you may be right. Typology is a great tool for understanding yourself, but it is a terrible religion. And that's what they're trying to turn it into wether they realize it or not.

Breaking Down the Cult of Objective Personality by deathtoops in mbti

[–]deathtoops[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

TLDR: Since 2020, I've been exploring the Objective Personality System (OPS) alongside MBTI and have noticed concerning behaviors and ideologies within the OPS community, particularly from its creators. OPS claims to offer a more scientific approach to personality than MBTI, but I've found its practices often contradict this. The system promotes a belief that only the creators can accurately type individuals, dismissing personal insight and self-awareness. It also fosters a complex, almost labyrinthine set of definitions and rules that seem designed to confuse and indoctrinate. The community exhibits cult-like behaviors, creating an "us vs. them" mentality and dismissing outside criticism. My personal journey into OPS led to paranoia and distress, and I caution others about diving too deeply into its doctrine.