On 2002-01-17 08:05, Kiff '61 wrote:
Oh, dear. I mentioned our geek/nerd discussion to my husband last night, and he told me something I had to follow up on.

From the online Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: geek
Pronunciation: 'gEk
Function: noun
Etymology: probably from English dialect geek, geck fool, from Low German geck, from Middle Low German
Date: 1914
1 : a carnival performer often billed as a wild man whose act usually includes biting the head off a live chicken or snake
2 : a person often of an intellectual bent who is disapproved of

- geeky /'gE-kE/ adjective

Oh, the things you learn in the dictionary!

Kiff '61

Many of what we call ourselves used to be insults. Where in the 1900s decade, muckrakers was used initially as an insult, the muckrakers quickly took the word and used it to describe themselves. Basically, I would say that the transformation of the word geek happened first in the 1970s, in the elite computer circles. This spread in the 1980s, and the work geek became much more acceptable. Today, we take the word in stride. How things change.

On 2002-01-17 15:37, Justin'79 wrote:
what the hell is an INFP?
and who said i was one?

Uhhhh.have you been following the discussion?

On 2002-01-17 15:48, Justin'79 wrote:
Hmm I cant figure out if Im an extrovert or not. I like to talk in class, because it annoys me that people are afraid to talk.
But I am usually very quiet in social gatherings, except with close friends. I find I dont have much to say to people that they want to hear about.
I also am very creative and imaginative about things, but often Id like it if more people would just cut the crap and tell me what I need to know...ie on Sept 11, dont tell me "its a day that will live in infamy" tell me who did it and if they are going to do it again.

I would definitely say that you are an INFP. If you are quiet in social gatherings, except with close friends, then you are introverted.

An ISFP, for instance, is an artist. An INFP is more of a poet, more of someone who goes on crusades. In fact, the word "crusade" describes INFP more than any other type. Joan of Arc, for instance was an INFP. Let me ask you a couple of questions. Are you someone who is always aware of your surroundings? Are you sensitive to sensory perception? Are you prone to withdrawing from the world, and living in your mind?

On 2002-01-17 16:15, Susan Brombacher wrote:
I posted that before I saw your most recent post, Justin. Well, anyway, it doesn't matter. Anyway, 'd say you're probably I as opposed to E, since you say you prefer to socialize with close friends. Introverts are not necessarily asocial or lack friends, they just choose carefully and don't care for loud, boisterous parties and socializing much with people they don't know.

See Susan? You could've handled this! Maybe I'll speak to you to learn more about INFPs. :smile:

On 2002-01-17 17:22, madscientist wrote:

For instance, here is farming of the future (on a proposed future space station).

There is no place for the Simmental cattle that I can see...where's the beef?

On 2002-01-17 17:48, Virgil K. Saari wrote:
There is no place for the Simmental cattle that I can see...where's the beef? {Sorry for changing your post, Virgil, I couldn't resist}

Too inefficient. It would require several times as much area and resources to farm cattle, or many other animals.

[quote]
On 2002-01-17 17:54, madscientist wrote:

Too inefficient. It would require several times as much area and resources to farm cattle, or many other animals.

What??!!! there is not enough room between the billions and billions of stars for a few cows? I guess, I won't go then.

On 2002-01-17 18:02, Virgil K. Saari wrote:
What??!!! there is not enough room between the billions and billions of stars for a few cows? I guess, I won't go then.

Actually, there is more than enough room in the universe. However, you are forgetting the fact that the nearest star is 4.2 light-years, or 25 trillion miles away, and will take tens of thousands of years to reach with the current technology we have. We can do this in Mars habitats, inside O'Neilian space habitats, inside Lunar habitats, and on asteroidal habitats that have been hollowed on the inside and spun to create gravity. Can we produce cattle in space? Definitely. I am of the belief, however, that we much get rid of the practice, as it will make farming more efficient, and therefore, smaller. Maybe you should try to get used to soy burgers. :smile:

_________________
Robert Reed III (1982)
---------------------------------------------
"Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madscientist on 2002-01-17 18:08 ]</font>

Thanks, Robert.

Actually, INFPs don't strike me as the crusading type. A crusading type would need to be much more extraverted and probably J over P as well. At least I would think so. Think Artist generation as opposed to Prophet generation. An INFP would be sort of analogous to the Artist generational archetype; an ENFJ or even ESFJ to a Prophet archetype. Artists are not crusaders; they are interpreters of a sort, only they interpret the subjective and feelings as opposed to the objective and facts.

I was reading some posts over on the Enneagram Insistute bulletin board and there was a discussion going on about Fives and bottling up emotions. I consider myself essentially a Four (or INFP), even though I tend to suppress or even deny strong emotions (though less here on this board than in real life) and sometimes feel there's something wrong with me because I don't get very emotional at losses and setbacks. I tend to think these things out rather than feel them intensely, at least at first. I think this is due to my rather weak F and very strong 5-wing. Since most of you are INTPs (and Fives), tell me if this is true for you-- do any of you tend to use movies, music, poetry, or other art forms as a cathartic tool, either consciously or not? That is, do any of you Thinking types cry buckets at movies or are very emotionally affected by music, etc. (perhaps even more than the average person), but tend to remain calm and collected (or at least seem to) over things that happen to *you* or your loved ones?

What I was thinking, is that T types are actually so sensitive (to extenal/environmental stimuli, and everything else) that they must protect themselves by suppressing their ability to feel emotion, at least on a conscious level. It's safer to cry or get worked up over things happening to people on a movie screen than things happening to yourself. But in a sense, the movie or musical piece is acting as a conduit for the individual's own feelings that they have tried to suppress or deny.

I get emotional during movies. I absolutely hate emotional death scenes, as they can get me teary. Seeing love in movies makes me happy. I never told anyone this, but I actually jerked some tears when I watched Titantic, which is probably why I absolutely despise that movie. That movie was an embarressment. I still love to see bloody violence, though. I absolutely despise being emotional, and I hate movies that try to bring out emotion in me.

As for poetry, I am very apoetic. I cannot read more than a few pages of poetry. I would rather read a 1500 page book on writing device drivers in C++ and/or asm than read a 50 page book that is poetry. I had a very hard time reading Beowolf (translate to modern English, for god's sake!!!). I can easily read code, but not poetry. In fact, I can very easily relate to computers. I understand computers. I guess my mind works in zeros and ones.

_________________
Robert Reed III (1982)
---------------------------------------------
"Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madscientist on 2002-01-17 18:44 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madscientist on 2002-01-17 18:45 ]</font>

How can the word "traditional" apply to a computer?

I'm speaking of traditional "design".

Rocking the Ages, The Yankelovich Report of Generational Marketing

"A person's generation, however, is one group that does not offer a choice."

Hence the following "Generational Boundaries..."

BABY BOOMERS (Born 1946 - 1964)
? Born in 1951
? Danced the Twist
? Wore bell-bottoms
? Saw the Beatles
? Played with Hula Hoops
? Attended Woodstock
? Prefers old jeans
? Runs to reduce stress


Generation X (Born 1965 - 1976)

? Born in 1970
? Tuned into MTV
? Played with Rubik's Cube
? Drank New Coke
? Loved his skateboard
? Started listening to CDs
? Has a laptop
? Sees the movie; doesn't read the book


Millennials (Born 1977 - 1994)

? Born in 1980
? Has a tattoo
? Listens to Destiny's Child
? Loves her cell phone
? Downloads music to her MP3 player
? Played organized soccer
? Shops at Old Navy


<center> :smile: </center>





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc S. Lamb on 2002-01-18 09:12 ]</font>

Hey, I'm gone for a few days, a sex discussion takes place, and then you guys completely abandon it in favor of another Jungian discussion! What's up with that?! :smile:

Stonewall, I knew you would like that skanky dress bit!

Susan, you saw my webpage? I didn't know I had one! Send me a private message and let me know where I can find pictures of myself on the web. I sort of like not really knowing what everyone looks like.

Justin that's so funny! Everyone, including me, has been going around saying you are an INFP! It looks like this site is filled with INTPs, INFPs and ISTJs! What does that mean, all you Jungians?

On 2002-01-17 18:24, Susan Brombacher wrote:
Since most of you are INTPs (and Fives), tell me if this is true for you-- do any of you tend to use movies, music, poetry, or other art forms as a cathartic tool, either consciously or not? That is, do any of you Thinking types cry buckets at movies or are very emotionally affected by music, etc. (perhaps even more than the average person), but tend to remain calm and collected (or at least seem to) over things that happen to *you* or your loved ones?

What I was thinking, is that T types are actually so sensitive (to extenal/environmental stimuli, and everything else) that they must protect themselves by suppressing their ability to feel emotion, at least on a conscious level. It's safer to cry or get worked up over things happening to people on a movie screen than things happening to yourself. But in a sense, the movie or musical piece is acting as a conduit for the individual's own feelings that they have tried to suppress or deny.

Well, I can't speak for the INTPs, but this ISTJ loves to cry at movies, TV shows, and books, and gets shivers over certain musical passages. And during times of crisis (as when my father-in-law died in 2000), I tend to be in a lot more control than my husband does.

Kiff '61

On 2002-01-18 10:37, Neisha '67 wrote:
It looks like this site is filled with INTPs, INFPs and ISTJs! What does that mean, all you Jungians?

Probably that we spend a lot of time in front of our computers.

Kiff '61

On 2002-01-18 10:37, Neisha '67 wrote:

Hey, I'm gone for a few days, a sex discussion takes place, and then you guys completely abandon it in favor of another Jungian discussion!

It sounds like you are disappointed that it isn't still on sex. Get the ball rolling and change it back if you must!

Neisha, maybe it wasnt a webpage I saw...I think it was actually an article you wrote that included your picture...surely you must remember! It was about Gen-X parenting, I think.

I didn't think the discussion was getting to be about sex, but maybe it was hinted at. Go ahead, write something on the Generations and Sex thread if you want...or here! I'll try to throw in my 2c. Who was it who said that put any group of people together in a room and eventually the discussion will turn to sex? Was that here?

Robert, I cried at Titanic too. But not so much at the love story part. I cried a lot during the part where the band was playing while vignettes of different people on the sinking ship were being shown. The one that *really* got to me was the Irish mommy tucking here two children into bed--for the last time (I can't even imagine how heartrenching an experience like that must have been). The scene of old Mr. and Mrs. Strauss (who unfortunately were left out of rest of the movie) holding onto each other on the bed while the water swirled around them was pretty moving too. I had read somewhere Mrs. Strauss, as a first-class passenger, could have saved herself, but she chose to stay behind on the ship with her husband instead. Talk about love--and heroism!
Lots of other movies make me cry, too. But as a general rule, I don't cry much at all.

I saw Titanic my senior year of high school sandwiched in between two of my grandmas.
still it has a bit of a romantic effect on me. I was also listening to a Mamas and the Paps record (glad to be unhappy?) at that time. So it was a more emotional time in my life than other times.
As for Mr yankelovich.
I played with Rubiks and was tuned into MTV.
Those dates totally dont match the generational descriptions at all.
Mr yankelovich is stupid :smile:
As for sex, I am now accepting private messages.
If any married or non married people feel like taking advantage of a poetic scorpionic 22 year old male, be my guess. Beats the hell out of my classes :smile:

You're right, Susan! I had forgotten that the article included a photo as well! Ouch, that was a pretty unflattering one too, but Frank wanted something multi-generational and that's what I had.

On 2002-01-18 17:11, Justin'79 wrote:

If any married or non married people feel like taking advantage of a poetic scorpionic 22 year old male, be my guess. Beats the hell out of my classes :smile:

Hey, you mean there aren't any sexy tanned blonde women over there in Denmark who can keep you warm at night? :smile:

On 2002-01-18 16:17, Susan Brombacher wrote:

I didn't think the discussion was getting to be about sex, but maybe it was hinted at. Go ahead, write something on the Generations and Sex thread if you want...or here! I'll try to throw in my 2c.

OK, sincere apologies in advance (borrowing from Virgil). The invitation to take up this general topic has gone out a number of times and, since nobody has the balls to take up the gauntlet, allow me to do so. This post is actually quite serious (as I hope you will see) and I will try to put it as delicately and respectfully as possible:

Does women's "personal grooming" change with the saeculum?

I invite anybody to look at, say, '70s movies, porno or mainstream, anything showing nekkid women, and focus on the "personal grooming." As a guy, you find yourself wishing that you had a pith helmet and a machete. Then move on to the '80s and focus on the same thing. Then on to the '90s and through to the present and focus on the same thing. As a guy, you go through imagining yourself playing infield at Fenway Park to landing an F-14 on a flight deck to crawling through a desert looking for an oasis.

There are unambiguous changes in "style" and a clear trend. Women literally go from one extreme to the other extreme: from the set of Tarzan to the set of Lawrence of Arabia. Does this have anything to do with the saeculum and, if so, can we predict how, for example, a '20s Flapper might have been "groomed"? How about a Missionary woman from the turn of the century? Can we even predict when we have entered the 4T by this measure?

All right, I put my head on the block seeing as no one else would. But you gotta admit that there may be a saecular pattern here. Perhaps S&H might consider incorporating this saecular artifact in their next analysis. [cough, cough, cough]

There are plenty in denmark but im back in antiseptic washington DC now.
:sad:
BOOOO!
I am just a friendly computer person.
What else can I say?
I am into extending the boundaries of the bizarre and untapped, (be them compurotic or not) in all directions that dont wind up with me in jail for too long, or in a box underground. :smile:

On 2002-01-18 20:58, choselh wrote:

Also, maybe you shouldn't use porno for your standard. Real women don't look that way underneath our clothes.

Haha, very funny! The point is that you do not have a time machine so in order to observe the trend in real time today, you have to compare movies spanning the period (I can see Robert doing this in his dorm room now). I personally have never watched a whole lot of porno but logically it would provide the most "data," would it not? But you don't even need porno. Just watch a mainstream movie from the '70s and you cannot help but notice the difference. It hits you in the face (no pun intended). And, yes, real women did look like that back then (or many of them did) and, yes, real women look like they do today which most often is a whole lot different. There are always exceptions to the rule but there is a real trend here. Be sure and get S&H to deal with the saecular ramifications here.

I don't *think* I'd be afraid to try to answer your question, Stonewall, except I am not sure exactly what you mean by "personal grooming." Could you be more specific, please? Only then can I answer (or choose not to answer) appropriately.

Forgive my ignorance, but as Neisha has mentioned and I just wrote in another post, we IN's can sometimes be pretty oblivious to what is obvious to others. Enlighten me.