MetaChat is an informal place for MeFites to touch base and post, discuss and
chatter about topics that may not belong on MetaFilter. Questions? Check the FAQ. Please note: This is important.
25 June 2007
You be the judge. We all judge others, for better or worse. What are your criteria?
- Eating in bed, especially a bed I am sharing with you
- Dusty furniture
- Not being a member of a library
Worthy of praise:
- Using cold water in the washing machine
- Inventing something useful and cheap for those who benefit (Skype, polio vaccine)
- Putting education first: never stopping the learning process
1. Is so-and-so a know-it-all? Do they, in fact, know it all (if so, it's okay)? How do they respond when they're wrong?
2. Is so-and-so a liar? If so, are their lies funny?
3. Is so-and-so satisfied with what I give them? I show as much of me as I want, and little more. Prying eyes get poked out.
4. Does so-and-so have an inordinate amount of self-esteem? If so, does it seem to be there because someone was around to tell them how smart/pretty/witty/obedient they've been all their lives? I'm trying to process out my loathing for the esteem-spoiled, I know it's one of my least attractive qualities, but there it is.
5. Is so-and-so hereditarily wealthy or a white South African? Not all of the hereditary wealthy are a problem for me, and I actually like a couple white South Africans, but both are a big bugbear for me because of my (upbringing? education?)
6. Is so-and-so intolerant of other (political partisans, races, sexes, religions, occupations, sports fans)?
Personal hygiene.
Honesty.
Kindness
Spelling, grammar and punctuation.
I know, I know, but it really irks me to see terrible written English and to hear how horribly people mangle the language. In my defence, I don't correct it or make fun of people who use the wrong word, To do so would be unkind.
I've been criticized before because I admit that I judge everybody I meet and will make an assessment of them based on a first impression. But I don't see anything wrong with that as long as you refine that judgement with each future interaction. I have been wrong MANY times about people, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse.
The main thing I judge people on is how they treat other people. If you're rude, mean, or act as if your place in life is significantly more important than others, than I will generally try to deal with you as little as possible.
After that, I judge people by their sense of humor. Almost everybody that I'm friends with or look forward to talking to have a great sense of humor. It's real important to me, since most of the people I know with a good sense of humor tend to be a little more easy going. And I love to laugh.
The one I feel a bit ashamed about, but I still judge people on, is how smart I think they are. I have a low tolerance for people that I think are stupid. And I'm not just talking book smarts (although I do prefer people that are well rounded in their education), but common sense. That and a desire to learn. Are they curious and always trying to learn more? Again, all of my close friends have an insatiable quest to learn new things and be turned on to new things. And they want to share that with others, which I think is incredibly cool. It makes for some great conversations, which in turn spark my desire to always learn new things.
Those are the main three. I'll never be mean to somebody if they don't meet my expectations or write them off, but they'll move down in my priority list of who I want to spend my time with. When I was younger I was vocal about who didn't meet my standards, which as I matured I realized made me a complete dick, since it's not my place to judge others out loud. Judging others is best kept to yourself in most instances.
From there the list gets insanely petty real quick. Do they like cool music? Do they like cool movies and books? And they don't have to like the same music and movies I like, just things that somehow in my head are cool. There's nothing carved in stone, my list of what's cool today is radically different than what I thought was cool five, ten, fifteen years ago (actually, I'd love to know exactly what I thought was cool and uncool 15 years ago - I'm sure some of it would be quite embarrassing now). Do they swear? I like people that swear. Do they drink? I like people that drink. Do they smoke? No sir, try to avoid smokers (or least rude smokers) whenever possible. Do they try too hard to please? Ultimately I think I just judge people on weather I'd like to hang out with them.
7. Does so-and-so invade my personal space or interrupt me? I've only ever made one exception to this.
8. Is so-and-so incredibly brazen or monstrously ruttish?
9. Whether they speak in monosyllables or fancy-pants SAT words, is what so-and-so has to say interesting? This matters more to me than just being smart; there are plenty of smart people who bore me to tears (plenty of dumb ones, too).
10. Is so-and-so interrupting me to tell me how to say what I've just said (S&S: "They're not black, they're African Americans." HJ: "Listen, asshole, I said Alexandre Dumas was black. He can't be African American, he's fucking French. Get the sand out of your ears and yourself out of my face.").
11. Does so-and-so show pity for me to my face, treat me like a toy, condescend to or otherwise unman me? I'll blush the first time, and make it clear that it makes me uncomfortable, but if it goes on, I'll grow distant and eventually disappear from so-and-so's life.
12. Does so-and-so think they don't judge anyone, don't hate anyone, don't have a hypocritical bone in their body, don't harbor some pretension or other? I don't mind liars who know they're lying (unless they're lying to me). But the ones who think they're unique? Fuck 'em.
And fuck me, too. I wouldn't like me very much if I wasn't me already.
1. Intelligence.
2. Knowledge, skill, or talent, and the continued cultivation of such qualities as they may possess.
3. Intention - do they mean well? Or is their behavior an indirect attempt to fill an unmet need?
4. Responsibility. Do they follow through? Are they accountable? When they screw something up, do they make an attempt to mend it?
5. Drive toward self-improvement, humility - do they have goals? Do they build on their strengths and address their weaknesses? Do they acknowledge faults and work to overcome them? Do they accept their imperfections while still striving to become a better human being? Do they continually seek knowledge, experience, and a better understanding of the world around them?
The thing is: yeah, we all judge eachother, and one way or another, we'll all come up short somehow, so the best thing is to just say to hell with everything and just let people be whatever they want to be as long as they let you do the same.
Drive toward self-improvement
I dunno, Miko, that sound dangerously close to Anthony Robbins for me. You reach a certain age, you get a lot more accepting of your own faults and vices and then of others, and to me anyway, that seems healthier than striving for some ideal that can never be attained.
I'm not surprised you'd say that, but the people I most admire are ones that never stopped believing they could grow and improve throughout the course of their lives. I'm always looking forward to the next project, the next trip, the next new activity to try, and I'm always working on a personal quality or two I'd like to cultivate. If I had given up on physical fitness, for instance, in 2004 when I had little history of exercise and just quit smoking and gained about 50 pounds, well, I'd be fat and lazy to this day. But because I opted differently I became a triathlete at age 35 with no real athletic background, and now I really enjoy the level of activity in my life and the benefits, physical and emotional, that the achievement brings.
That's one concrete example. Life offers countless opportunities to experience new things and develop ourselves. Some you choose, and some are thrust upon you - but by actively choosing to keep growing, I feel young, open, optimistic, and hopeful most of the time.
I don't care if it sounds 'Anthony Robbins-ish' to you - I was answering the question about how I judge people, and that's my answer. This is how I am. Live by your own advice - if you're such a live-and-let-live advocate, then don't take me to task for expressing my sincere opinion.
You can accept your own faults but still try and better yourself. That's what I try and do.
For me...
- Flexibility of thought.
- Compassion
- Humour
- Acceptance of others.
- Doing above saying.
I'm not big on "intelligence" because any measures seem so weighted towards education that I can't tell who's clever and who is not. I've seen too many "stupid" people pull themselves out of the stupid pit through hard work and further education it's not even funny any more.
My own personal bugbears, and the things that drive me away from people faster than anything are dogmatism, self promotion and an inability to listen to others. If you're willing to lecture me about {A} for half an hour, then you'd better be willing to listen to Not {A} for the same amount of time. Strangely, this applies also to those people who believe the same things as me and it's one of the reasons I have a tendency to piss off the more radical people in my extended circles.
Intelligence is one I can't get past. I try to let go of that, sometimes, but it's pretty entrenched. As Slack points out, it's not necessary for it to be school lernin', and I am very happy dealing with a wide range of kinds of intelligence, but I need some indication that the person I'm talking to structures his or her world in a way that indicates understanding, knowledge, curiosity, and open-mindedness, and a sense that the person's actively examining ideas -- on whatever subject -- and making connections between them.
That's pretty much my only do-or-die hang-up, I think. As in, anyone I judge not meeting those criteria, I pretty much lose patience with and avoid.
Beyond that, confidence (not arrogance) and a general sense that the world is a good place and we're here to help each other. I get fed up with apathy and all-encompassing cynicism fairly quickly.
well, ask yourself this: would you rather have a drink with a smart person who's a complete asshole or a not-too-bright person who's genuinely friendly and nice?
I dunno, it seems to me that judging people means implying that some people are bad or wrong and others are good and right and I try to avoid those kinds of value distinctions as much as possible. I mean, yeah, I am evil myself and I have been known to sit at the bar and crack jokes about the tourists walking by and I have even told my friends that if they ever, ever see me walking down a street in a resort town wearing a matching outfit with my husband which probably includes a fake hawaiian shirt and ill fitting khaki bermuda shorts and blazing orange crocs with white gym socks then, yeah, they should just shoot me. So that's judging, I guess, for people that you don't know. Or if I saw someone with an axe dripping blood who was hauling a screaming one armed child down the street I would probably note that I shouldn't invite him to my next party. Judged and found wanting. My point is, those are preconceived notions that may or may not be valid. I don't cling to them. If the matching outfit tourist couple sit down next to me and start talking and they're really nice, awesome. If blood dripping guy turns out to have just chased extraterrestrial demons out of his house, then he can still come to the party. I'm not going to make a real call until I actually have spoken to somebody for a while and even then, I don't think of it as judging.
Because people I actually know? I don't want to judge them; that's not my business. Either I like them or I don't and then of course there are a whole bunch of variants there from people I like well enough to have a beer with once in a while to people I see every other day or so because I totally adore them to people who aren't all that bright but, hell, I wouldn't kick them out of bed for snoring because, well, rowr. And all the possibilities in between. Everyone has faults and good points and blind spots and wild hairs and so on.
And then there are people I don't much like and I try to avoid them as much as possible while causing everyone as little pain as possible: just because I don't like them or they don't like me doesn't mean that there's necessarily anything wrong with them; it's just the way it goes. So is that judging? Or is it just the way we all work in this sort of social world?
That's just typical Bukowski. He's playing with your head jon. Don't fall for it.
He could be saying "Don't try."
But, given the picture of the boxer that comes with it, and the fact that it's a well known phrase he may also be saying "Don't Try, Do."
And he may be trying to expand our minds with a deliberately contradictory statement.
And in all probability, he's saying all those things plus a couple of other things only he knows about.
On non-preview: Actually, seanyboy's "flexibility of thought" is a really eloquent way of getting at what I'm trying to mean by "intelligence."
One of my classmates, who I'd thought of as intelligent, gave a presentation the other day in which he expressed a great deal of confusion that there weren't strict guidelines for which type of therapy should be used with which population. I mean, he claimed it was all "confusing," as if he were seriously expecting a guidebook of "When A, then Z" in dealing with human beings -- there was no recognition that people can, and do, disagree with each other, and that there's no "right" answer, just theories that one should be open to examining.
And I just felt my stomach plummeting with a "Ah, well, guess he's off the list" sort of feeling.
well, ask yourself this: would you rather have a drink with a smart person who's a complete asshole or a not-too-bright person who's genuinely friendly and nice?
Out: egotistical (seeming) people.
Loud talkers, yellers and interrupters.
An unthinking conservative political outlook is not an out, but it's definitely a strike.
Those who like to foment soap operas in their network of friends and family.
Those who talk in positive-speak, particularly when it's not backed up with actions.
Lecturing know-it-alls.
Like the other dan, people who cannot admit they made a mistake.
In: geeks who really know what they're talking about - and I mean any kind of geek: computer, book, trains, cars, whatever.
People who get my sense of humor.
People who follow through on promises they've made.
People who honor others' sense of space.
I'm sure there's other stuff, but that's what I come up with for now.
But And he also said "Somebody at one of these places asked me: What do you do? How do you write, create? You don't, I told them. You don't try. That's very important: not to try, either for Cadillacs, creation or immortality. You wait, and if nothing happens, you wait some more. It's like a bug high on the wall. You wait for it to come to you. When it gets close enough you reach out, slap out and kill it. Or if you like its looks, you make a pet out of it."
His wife says this about his epitaph ...
"I think it means, if you spend all your time trying, then all you're doing is trying. So, the thing is to do. Don't try. Just do."
Hearing (and using, to be brutal to myself, too) the word "intelligence" always makes me think of how sportscasters describe black athletes as "athletic" and white athletes as "intelligent," with the rare exception that proves the rule: if black athletes are described as "intelligent," the describer is astonished.
Not that I'm really commenting on how often "intelligence" comes up as a criteria when we judge others, just that I'm chary of the risks involved in describing other people as intelligent (or most anything else, for that matter).
And on preview, I think it's all judgment. People like to think they don't judge, because the bible or their kindergarten teacher tells them so, but that just sets us up to be holier-than-thou, and hypocritical. Both of those things are natural, too. Most people think they're very tolerant. And very even-handed about others. But when they dig in themselves, they find all sorts of contradictions, but -- and here's the kicker -- they don't think those contradictions affect their general status as a tolerant person.
Trick is, as far as I'm concerned, those contradictions don't affect how tolerant they are, or how self-deluding they are, or anything, really. They're just like people, who judge one another every day, but don't like the idea that they judge one another at all. Just one of those beautiful little illustrations life presents to us about how special we are, that we turn around and label hypocrisies.
And on another preview, though I dislike Dane Cook in general, I thoroughly enjoyed Employee of the Month.
Actually, I should amend one of my criteria: it's not that I find conservative thought worthy of being judged, it's the unthinking part I find unpalatable. It's just that I happen to live in an area that is quite socially conservative, so I hear quite a bit of that type of thing. And truth be told, I think it's not so much the conservative thinking itself I find repugnant, it's the uneducated and unearned judgement that flows from such thinking.
Well, let me venture an opinion on that: you value intelligence for the same reason that athletes value physical prowess and supermodels value looks, because it's the attribute you have in the most abundance. As someone in the midle of the curve on all three, I can realize that they're all neat in their place, but none of them is everything.
It's funny, deadcowdan; I have more of a problem with unthinking liberalism, but only because I expect conservative opinions to be received and not thought-out (the exceptions are a pleasant surprise, and I have many interesting conservative friends because of it). But when I run into someone who can't elucidate their reasons for cleaving to the reason and enlightenment of our Founding Fathers, I wonder why they bother at all: liberalism isn't something handed down to us, like aristocracy, untouchable wealth, or the Bush presidency; it's something we discover as we discover truth, like the orbits of the celestial spheres or the fact that the poor love their children, too.
That's crazy, maybe I just don't like when people agree with me for different reasons than my own.
I like kindness, fairness, patience, humor, especially about oneself. Someone who'll walk in the rain with a hole in their shoe.
I'm rather brutal about bad writers (especially bad poets), especially when they think they're good and don't wanna hear different. I keep my opinions to myself, though, unless asked. Then I charge. Chickens and first borns acceptable.
I hate hypocrites. Anyone trying to run some agenda. I can smell that like bad cheese.
- Acknowledgment serious things with jokes
- Gratitude for the good things in life (health, job, competencies, family, weather, beauty, etc)
- Courage
- Vulnerability (as in, willing to be the dork)
- Changing the world (by walking the walk)
- Forgiveness of other people's weaknesses
- Humor without meanness
- Accountability/ reliability
- Resourcefulness
- Humility
- Patience
I dislike:
- Entitlement
- Complaints about how life has cheated them
(why is it that people who've got the most complain the most?)
- People who don't even try to fix things in the world that are in their power to fix (as in, it's not their job)
- People who talk down to anyone
- Sanctimony through platitudes (this is possibly a left-winger-specific allergy)
I used to like intelligence for its own sake, but now I think it's worse than useless unless combined with compassion, understanding, humor, and an ability and willingness to follow through on things.
Contrary to jonmc's supposition, I am judgmental in these areas because most of them are ones I'm bad at myself.
I actually don't think my snobbishness is a function of my having the quality and therefore valuing it, really. It's more just that I hate trying to censor myself, or rein in whatever's reeling about in my head, around stupid people. And I'd much rather have an interesting exchange in which I learn something than spend an entire conversation feeling like I'm teaching (or like no information of any sort is being exchanged).
ehh... you still learn things from people who are't as smart as you- chances are good they've had a completely different life experience.
Of course, if they're the sort of people who make fun of you for saying "smart" things, then you have a completely different problem and you should just kick them in the shins.
Yeah, like I said, I'm totally ok with different types of intelligence, I just need a feeling that something interesting is going on in someone's head, on at least a subject or two.
And I do realize that I have plenty to learn from people who don't have any of what I think of as intelligence, and I should drop the snobbery and learn some humility on this topic, but... like I said, hang up.
It's more just that I hate trying to censor myself, or rein in whatever's reeling about in my head, around stupid people.
Well, you'd be surprised. Back in my bookstore days I had a co-worker named Rafael, who was not the sharpest knife in the drawer but very genial and friendly and hard not to like. One day I was in a foul mood and said 'Man, all the fuckin' minutiae you gotta deal with in this job..' and he said 'yeah, man....what's 'minutia?'' which made me kind of love the guy. A few weeks later he drove his car over one of those concrete barrier things between parking spaces and got his Dad's car stuck and it had to be towed, but he took it with admirable equanimity, which was impressive, to me at least.
Also, there'sa difference between intelligence and knowledge. I'm fully aware that somebody who's been somewhere I haven't (like to war, or through the Depression, or whatever) has something to teach me, no matter what their IQ.
I know what you mean, but "insecure in my intelligence" is not really anything close to where I am.
And I'm not publicly snobby; that whole "You must bow down before my superior intellect" vibe is deeply disturbing to me, and it's not what I'm trying to get at. I just mean that I like being surrounded by people who are as intelligent, interesting, and wonderful as I am. :-)
Which does mean I have a pretty kick-ass group of friends. I *want* to be challenged, not fawned over or deferred to.
And I'm not publicly snobby; that whole "You must bow down before my superior intellect" vibe is deeply disturbing to me, and it's not what I'm trying to get at. I just mean that I like being surrounded by people who are as intelligent, interesting, and wonderful as I am
Honest criticism: you may not like that vibe, but sometimes you project it in spite of yourself, to these eyes anyway.
Saturday evening, I took my brother to the local CiCi's Pizza for dinner. It's a very, very cheap all-you-can-eat pizza buffet joint ($4.49 for the buffet and another $1.29 for drinks - 2 people eat for $12.43, tax included, no tipping allowed). He loves the place, because he likes making Suicides at the drink machine, and because of the cinnamon rolls and brownies they offer for deserts. He even likes the French dressing they have on the salad bar, and it's the only place we go where he'll voluntarily eat a salad without me chiding him that he should, because he likes that dressing. So we go there a couple of times a month.
Did I mention that CiCi's is really cheap? It is, and it's important to understand that, because even though the pizza on the buffet is pretty basic (about 12 varieties on any one night), it's always hot, and they do huge business, so it turns over fast. Not where you go if you're a pizza snob, but it's good basic pizza, and hey, it's really cheap.
So they draw a lot of family trade, because kids like the pizza, and parents like the price. They get a lot of regulars from group homes in the area, where people on Social Security disability are trying to stretch their money, and even a visit to CiCi's is a splurge. They don't get many retirees, because pizza isn't easy to eat with dentures. But they're always packed, and people generally seem to be having a good time, and seem to be getting stuffed on cheap pizza.
So, we're in there Saturday night, and there are a lot of the folks from the group homes in the area there, on a Saturday night outs. There are a bunch of adult Down's Syndrome folks at a couple of tables pushed together in the back of the room having a birthday party for someone. And some people in power chairs that are cerebral palsy folks, sitting with a group of other special needs folks, even though the CP folks can't really manage pizza. And a bunch of families with tons of kids, overflowing into the game room, running back and forth asking for quarters for the video games. All in all, a normal Saturday night at CiCi's.
So, we get our trays, and go through the buffet line, and get our drinks, and the only open tables are back near the Down's group, so we go sit there, and within a couple of minutes, we're offered birthday cake, if we'll help sing "Happy Birthday." This tickles my brother no end, and he laughingly agrees. We're the Down's folks first recruits in getting the whole place to sing "Happy Birthday," and they re-canvass everybody in adjacent tables, building on their success with us. They get a couple more families to agree, and some young construction guys in their sweat stained jeans and tank tops.
Pretty soon, it's time to sing, and about 40 people, half of whom don't know anyone they're singing with, are belting out "Happy Birthday To You" over the shouted injunctions from several of the Down's folks to "Sing LOUD!!" The kids in the game room come out to see what's happening, and some of them start singing, too. Encouraged by this first flush of success, the leader of the Down's group launches into the second verse.
Did you know that "Happy Birthday To You" has a second verse? Me neither, but once such a thing get's going, it takes on a life of its own. After a couple of bars of hesitation, nearly everybody that was singing the first verse goes along with it, most of us singing the only lyrics we know, again. "Sing LOUD!!" cries the Down's group leader as we do. End of second verse, much clapping breaks out.
And as we sit down, my brother is shaking his head, and grinning, as if to say "These Down's folks can get away with anything!" And I realized that, for a minute, he felt superior to somebody who was more special needs than he was, and that maybe, that was another reason he liked the place. And I realized that I might like the place because it was easy to enjoy watching a 54 year old man who still liked making Suicides at the drink bar do so. And maybe the sweaty construction workers liked it because they, in their hard muscle prime, could feel a little sorry for fat 50 year old guys who weren't any more. And the family folks with all the kids could feel a little sorry for those of us who didn't have kids, while those of us who didn't have kids could feel sorry for those who did, right back.
And in the end, all of us could just claim to ourselves that we were there for the incredible all-you-can-eat pizza value.
Well, you certainly seemed perfectly lovely and down-to-earth in Vegas, and I don't see the reason for any insecurity, if there is any. Just an observation. I'm secure in my intelligence, too, but I also know there's always someone smarter, including some of my own students. Keeps things interesting.
kick-ass group of friends
You're a lucky gal. I'd settle for someone to go to the movies with. I'd even buy the popcorn. ; )
(this comment meant to go before paulsc... durn, I'm slow)
but I also know there's always someone smarter, including some of my own students. Keeps things interesting.
Yes! That was the point I was trying to make. I like those people, and I'm totally judgmental about people who don't seem to fit into that category. Cuz I'd much rather be the dumbest person in the room than the smartest.
Well, that's not quite what I was going for, occhi, but maybe we'll leave it at that. I guess I don't generally even register whether I'm the smartest or not, and I wonder why someone might. Akin to walking into a room and taking stock of whether one's the "prettiest" or "thinnest."
I'm generally biased in favor of people who are interesting to talk to, which I think is most of what occhiblu is getting at.
Otherwise, I'm basically with mygothlaundry on this one. I form instant impressions based on all kinds of silly stuff, but I'm always prepared to be proven wrong.
I've been thinking about this question for most of the day, and my thoughts don't seem much clearer than they were in the morning. I come up with all-other-things-being-equal's and somewhat-more-likely-to's, and then I think about the people who I like best in the world, and it all falls apart. I spent years thinking that I'd never like anybody who wasn't x, or hadn't y'ed, or didn't like z, and, frankly, that kind of thinking didn't work out very well for me. Anything as complex as a human being, I think, is going to resist these kinds of generalizations.
I'm unrepentant about valuing intelligence, but intelligence is very, very broadly defined in my mind. It has nothing to do with standardized tests or life experiences, and everything to do with actively engaging in thought and reflection. I come from an entire family of unschooled people who nevertheless had tremendous native intelligence, and I'm thankful. When I'm around people who lack intelligence in some form, I'm bored. And I believe that intelligence is an absolutely crucial quality of leadership. But since there is no universally accepted standard of intelligence, it is difficult for people to talk about what they mean by it without referencing other qualities, as we're seeing here.
As to the very idea of judging: Back in high school I got tired of attaching a positive or negative value to 'judging.' Judging is neither right nor wrong, as Hugh Janus points out. It just is. It is a very basic human mental function, part of thought, the thing that enables us to make decisions and exercise free will.
Some people are more inclined to use their judging capabilities than others. That's why one of the continuum points on the Meyers-Briggs is 'perceiving vs. judging.' -- in other words, some people prefer to take in the world as it is; others prefer to exercise the critical type of thought we name judgment. Those people, of course, tend to be good critics, scholars, teachers, and, you know, judges-- you get the idea. Judging is something we all do. Some people do it often and well, others often and poorly. You make judgements all day long, though you may not approach every activity with a mindset of judgement. Still, there is absolutely no shame in exercising judgement. It is not something that is necessarily a negative.
Think of it this way. Do I judge people? Sure. I judge them when I hire them or bring them on as interns. I judge them when they work in my department (as I am judged in turn by my boss). I judge them in my volunteer gigs, when I have to choose to assign a task or project to one person or another. I judge their work when they present art - cooking, music, writing, poetry. I judge people to decide whether I think it's healthy to spend more time with them, get more intimate with them. I judge people to decide whether I want to accept their leadership, politically or personally. I judge people to determine whether I trust them to cat-sit, house-sit, babysit a kid, teach a kid, have access to my bank statement, make decisions about my medical affairs, or sit on an important project team with me. Of course I judge. If I were a poor judge, I wouldn't have my job, and my life would be a lot messier.
So the question is not whether or not you judge - you certainly do - but how much you judge, when, and what you are judging for.
Miko, thanks for referencing back to the
Meyers-Briggs; you're totally right, and that connection had never occurred to me, though I make a similar "What the fuck is everyone's problems with critics? Criticism serves a function, people!" rant on occasion.
I also consistently score about as far over on the J scale as it's possible to go. Though I'm happy when other people take life as it comes, I'm sure as hell gonna make some sweeping judgments about what's going on. :-)
I'm not clear where I stand on this, to be honest. I don't think anybody doesn't judge, but the criteria may be difficult to pinpoint.
I love people who make me laugh, I like quirkiness, I dislike a lot of ego, I very much dislike cruelty - and it's the thing I'm least likely to forgive.
But as far as all the individual traits are concerned, it's really more a matter of how they ultimately knit together.
I know a guy who's kind of rude and bombastic and self-centered - all things that I would put on my "judge" list - and I actively disliked him, but was brought into contact with him on a semi-regular basis because he is a friend of my husband, and because he is a part of the arts/entertainment industry that most of the people I know are somehow related to - so I would see him at parties, gatherings, openings, etc.
I basically ignored him (probably too obviously, since I'm not known for the brilliance of my subtlety when I dislike someone), and when I couldn't, I would often shoot him down when he was trying too hard to pull me in. But he perservered, which was puzzling to me... and over time, he won me over. He's still rude, bombastic and self-centered, but: he doesn't put on airs - though he really is a musical savant, and an authentic genius, and certainly could reasonably lay claim to being "better" than others in some ways; he's entirely authentic and genuine in all his actions and reactions; he is kind, even charitable, in his own rough way; despite being self-centered, he isn't egotistical, and is actually grateful to those who care for him despite his lack of social "polish"; and he will be there if you need him, whatever the problem or difficulty.
I also have friends who are "A-list" in terms of qualities I like or am attracted to, who also have certain characteristics that lead me to avoid them most of the time, because of some proclivity that just puts me off too much. With one friend it is the inevitability of gossip about other people we know. She is bright, funny, lively, loyal, highly educated, and fun. And my heart sinks when I see her, because I know that at some point inside of 15 minutes, I'm going to be feeling really awkward and uncomfortable and trapped when she starts talking trash about somebody.
These are the kind of things that make it really impossible for me to be very clear about my judgement criteria, since, negative or positive, they are almost always susceptible to mitigating or aggravating qualities or conditions.
People who ridicule, bully or humiliate others are right out, though. But since these characteristics are rarely unaccompanied by a host of other negative traits, those individuals pretty much glide right into the DO NOT WANT list, with no friction at all.
photo by splunge
photo by TheophileEscargot
photo by Kronos_to_Earth
photo by ethylene
