More Harry Potter Shit

More Harry Potter shit

You know sometimes I wonder what would it have been like if instead of Hagrid following Dumbledores orders and you know giving him to Dumblys will if he said nah fuck it I’m taking care of him now. Like can you imagine? Small Harry having so many different animal friends and being still socially awkward because of this. Hagrid taking such good care of him and Fang becoming super overly protective over Harry everywhere he went ESPECIALLY with Argog.

Then McGonagall getting attached to him like a grandma and teaching him all this rad stuff. All Hogwarts professors lowkey getting him ahead of the learning curve and raising him. And the most exciting thing I think about is SNAPEY BUDDY. Like at first he’s like meh no back away child and then he starts to melt because he’s such an adorable small child and Snape turning super good and not being a big bully. The war ends early because he was much more into protecting him. Harry still goes into Griffindor and ends the whole thing against Slytherins because Snape is head and he grew up knowing some of the students.

And he already knows about the Room of Requirement because when he was sad he’d just go in there to be alone. Oh my god and him knowing all the people in the paintings and the ghosts. The painting peeps placing bets on what house he’ll get into. Awww and at Christmas Harry’s never alone and all the professors get these cute homemade gifts from Harry made from little things he found around the shack he’d call home :3. I love thinking about this

189

a

Can we just talk about how there’s a big floof dog called a Russian BEAR dog?! Like they’re big and fluff and such good babies. Yeah sure they’re expensive af, but you should show up to your neighborhoods barbecues, uninvited, look like a badass and like Maleficent. LIKE SURPRISE BITCHES CANT GET ME OUT NOW. Fear me.

INTJ/ Psychology/Ravenclaw

Reblog with your MBTI, favourite subject and hogwarts house

INTJ / Computer Science / Hufflepuff

Honestly this really opened my eyes and made me self aware that I am literally building my personality on this. Thank you for posting and does anyone know where I can find Zir. Kings work??

TYPING YOURSELF (2): QUESTION WHY

Why do you want to know your type?

This is the most important question in the context of typology. It’s quite a few levels above the mostly tiring and many times meaningless “what is your type?”. The reason behind your desire for knowing which MBTI code applies to you (or others) is where you really should spend some time after learning how this whole typology thing came to be, and before getting into details. The rest of the subjects in this series of posts are numbered but not intended to be arranged in any particular order, only to be all kept in mind (the same with the list of points below).

Asking yourself why is not as simple as it sounds. Asking why is being open to the answer. Why do you really want to know your type? Think about your answer for a moment. Then keep reading.

✸ Don’t do it just because your friends are all into it. I know some people look into MBTI only to “fit” and have something in common with other people. They aren’t that interested in theories or realities, they just want to chat about stuff. For them, it doesn’t matter if it’s inaccurate, as long as it keeps the conversation going. But that’s not as harmless as it seems: they are fooling themselves, and they might end up believing (or making others believe) they know something “with certainty”, when it’s actually all lies. And lies never help anyone.

Also, just because the people you know are into something, doesn’t mean that’s for you, and even if you get into it and identify your type, you don’t have to share it with anyone, or change your behavior in the slightest. Lots of people don’t seem to notice the adverse consequences of telling others their type. Think about it: with all the misinformation about typology, and the huge amount of things that are far from understood, what good does it do to publicly include yourself in a group whose “known” characteristics, at a certain point in time (or always), might be just complete falsehoods that anybody can invent? This actually happens with all human classifications (with more or less intensity), so the larger the number of groups you identify as a “member” of, the worse.

And of course, don’t do it to be part of the echo-chamber. Stay away from MBTI “communities” where it seems everybody knows a lot of “deep” things: they won’t help you. They look like “experts” because they use some strange words and acronyms, and they combine concepts and ideas and can talk for hours about anything, but that’s only appearances. In reality everyone is repeating the most absurd distortions of Jung’s psychological terms and ideas, using and abusing them in a way that’s completely disconnected from the truth of how our minds work. If you get involved, at first you’ll be confused. Then you might reach a point when you think you’re finally “getting it right”, so it might feel like progress, but if you keep learning you’ll find it’s all wrong. Some make it out of there, most likely with a feeling of wasted time. But for others, it becomes a “safe space” to freely indulge in their particular obsessive illusion. Yes, there’s a definite cult-like aspect in most of these circles, where it’s all smiles but no one can say anything against the established “truths” of the matter, just like in a religion, with its “sacred texts” (or, in this case, more like “stacks”). Also, behind the scenes, everybody is fighting and backstabbing each other, with hidden intentions that usually include trying to be the “most/best/superior ABCD” in town, or lecturing the rest on what a “real” WXYZ (or whatever) should be. (This is not exclusive to typology collectives, it happens with all kinds of groups).

✸ Don’t do it to build your “identity” around it, or anybody else’s. Just like the “experts” of the previous point, a lot of people take their knowledge about types as some sort of pattern, ideal or exemplar for [their] behavior, [their] “individuality” and [their] “uniqueness”. See? that right there is a contradiction: if you have any kind of model you are not unique, you are a copy. And even more importantly: every [mental] image of what you are, or anybody else is, is a lie that can only hurt you and others. You don’t need any external or known reference of [supposed] value to “embody”, “perform” or “represent”. You don’t need to be predictable, static or set, about anything. That’s silently asphyxiating your mind. All those attachments, just like the rest of the points in this list, are ways of killing it.

✸ Don’t do it just to put it alongside your “zodiac sign” or any other fictional “typology”. They are not the same thing at all. There’s a misinformed idea out there that a lot of people repeat, about MBTI not having been “scientifically proved”, or something like that. Well, if Myers made sure of something it was precisely that: to make her indicator statistically reliable. As it is now, the official MBTI (that is: the letters/dichotomies, not the “functions”) is “scientific” in the same way the Big Five is, for example. It’s not a “hard science”, but not superstition either. Some call it “soft-science”: statistics prove its usefulness in the way it consistently reflects personality traits, while astrology (and lots of other meaningless “typology systems”) is just superstition: statistics always prove it wrong.

✸ Don’t do it for the characters in the shows/movies/books. A lot of times characters are not even meant to represent people. Just because they are played/voiced by actors, doesn’t mean they are intended as depictions of [hypothetical] human beings or their patterns of behavior. They might be mental concepts, states, symbols, figments, etc. Also, fictional characters are not real people, and only real people have real types. This means that, on top of the rampant faulty knowledge about typology that everybody seems to share as “accepted principles”, you have a subject of study that doesn’t even have a real type to be discovered in the first place. No wonder you find lots of different types assigned to the same character: typing fictional characters is literally an unattainable goal. People are way more complex, strange and intricate than any character anyone can imagine, because people are real, and fictional characters don’t exist.

✸ Don’t do it for the humor and the jokes. Some people are in love with not having the slightest idea about something but posting as if, in a “humorous” or “joking” manner, trying to use that as a mask or an excuse for their lack of accuracy, understanding and caring, and their unwillingness to even try to learn. This might be, in part, due to the general illusion of having it all figured out already: since the types and their “functions” have been “explained” for a long time now, there’s no harm in making fun of it, right? Wrong. The types and, especially, the “functions”, are intergalactically far from “figured out”. The common understanding of all these things is a complete inconsistent mess, and joking about it only makes it worse for everybody. (More about this here).

✸ Don’t do it for the aesthetics, please. Just don’t. Make your own aesthetic, and don’t even stop to think if it fits with anything in any typology.

✸ Don’t do it so you can read other people’s descriptions about what you [presumably] are. Even if you set aside the fact that all the descriptions that use the function stack are wrong, you still face other problems. One is that there are lots and lots of different portraits for the types, from different people, with different perspectives, different uses of language and words, and different intentions. The most “good-looking” of those descriptions share a common intention that’s not exactly about helping you. Also, lots of them are contradictory to the point of talking about opposite types, when they should be about the same kind of person. Descriptions are always rather superficial, but that doesn’t prevent them from confusing people if there isn’t a perfect match between what’s being described and the real type of the reader. Probably the best approach here is to simply forget about depictions that don’t feel right to you.

✸ Don’t do it to have a label and then merely talk about yourself using that label, with those awful “As an ABCD…” sentences, as if you were a representative for all ABCDs. Because that’s what a lot of people do online. They get their [mis]type and then write about themselves saying “This might not be about all ABCDs but…” Then why do you feel the need to point out that you [supposedly] are an ABCD? Seeing as you’re actually declaring that you don’t know… Why do you assume the topic of your post has anything to do with being an ABCD? What is this absolutely insane global mania of talking only in terms of groups and categories of people? Can’t we just talk about ourselves without stamping everything with labels? Labels that are also amazingly likely to change in the future, because people find they were mistyped all along (of course), or they start “identifying” more with some other group, probably at random, or following some kind of hype or “fashion”.

✸ Don’t do it to find “proof” of some “intrinsic worth” in yourself. We don’t need any system or typology to show us the value of life.

✸ Don’t do it to “claim” anything about you, either. There are no prizes here, and no pride to be found in something you just can’t decide. It seems some people [mis]type themselves [consciously] as if they were in some kind of race to get the most “personality” points, or something like that. And that’s wrong on so many levels that it must come from an absolute ignorance of psychology and the reality behind the types. You can’t choose anything about your type. Your type has always been a reality, inseparable from you, and it always will be, so trying/wishing for it to be something in particular, or lying to yourself and others about it, is the worst thing that you can do.

✸ Don’t do it to find a “suitable partner”. We have only a few general ideas about type compatibility, but in real life there are lots and lots of other things that determine how friendships and relationships start and develop, and they are not about the types of those involved. Typology may be useful after people have known each other for a while. But that’s another matter altogether.

✸ Don’t do it to “plan your career”, or anything like that. That was one of Myers’ main goals, but it’s not as good as it sounds. I know lots of people like feeling related to [gone] celebrities, famous “soul mates”, etc. Some consider following the steps of those type-twins, but that’s a huge mistake. Not only because of what we already know: the huge amount of mistypes (the possibility of your own plus the virtually unavoidable mistypes of public figures), but also because your life is not comparable to any other. There is no mold, no blueprint, no map, and no road. This is only you.

✸ Don’t do it to know your “strengths and weaknesses”, or to go from “unhealthy” to “healthy”. Those are some of the most maliciously manipulative expressions that people use to exploit others, making them feel “flawed” about something, and then selling them some “training” or “life advice” for “growth” and “development”. Basically the “psychological” version of “sin” and “atonement”.

All this “opposed states” talk implies, again, some kind of “model” or “goal” that everybody must admire and aspire to, and a “path” to achieve it. Sorry, but that’s pure deception. You can’t place any image of “perfection” out there for individual people, so you can’t do it for the types, either. If there is any definite rule, any system for measuring how “well developed” someone is, then that’s not development, but adjustment, adaptation or [self]domestication. That is: self-denial.

This doesn’t mean that your type is some sort of excuse for any kind of behavior. If you use it as a mental thumbs-up for your ideas, that is, of course, only you, trying to justify yourself. (Some people use other things, but that’s a topic for another post). The question here is: are you trying to learn something, or are you trying to confirm your own opinions/desires? Because you don’t have the duty to type anyone, not even yourself. If there is any duty about this at all, that would be to understand what people are actually doing, which is, 99% of the time, fooling and hurting themselves and others.

Typing yourself can be helpful because you are different from other people, and it’s useful to know that some shared concepts apply to you, but not all of them. You try to identify your type to know yourself better. That’s the only improvement, and probably the only and ultimate wisdom: know yourself.

In the context of the types this includes knowing more about everybody, so you can use the right words when describing yourself and others, because you know where you stand in the global spectrum of these common ideas and adjectives. You type yourself to understand that you are different from lots of other people, and similar to some others. You type yourself to know that certain “problems” are actually not problems, but the way things are and always will be, because the deepest workings of type stay with people for life. You can’t change or give new ways of perception or judgement to people, for example. An introverted sensor (ISP) is never going to see things only as they are, and you can’t expect an extraverted thinker (ETJ) to ever be satisfied with only theorizing in his mind.

You don’t try to type yourself out of boredom, peer pressure, or social inertia. You only do it if there’s something that doesn’t fit, or if nothing fits, and you think that this might help you. But you don’t do it only for yourself. This is a very important thing: you do it for everybody, because learning about types is learning about the whole world, and the amazingly diverse ways in which it is perceived and understood by different people who are, in fact, different worlds themselves. Typing is about bringing comprehension, about noticing the unfillable gaps and still managing to feel a larger connection. It doesn’t necessarily mean “acceptance” or “surrender”: it might imply that you need to do or to stop doing something. And there is no fixed/known “result” of typing. It doesn’t automatically follow that you “become a better person” in some definite way. In fact, there is no “becoming”, at all.

There is only what you are, and how well you see it.

Based on the end of a video game 😅