Feeling obligated

[substitute]

Just curious... something going on in my life at the moment that's making me wonder if SJ life is like living under constant feelings of obligation to one thing after another... and whether these obligations are resented by the SJ or not, and whether there's any way for an SJ to understand a person not feeling obligated by the same things without concluding that that person is therefore a bad person?

Obligations like... oh, anything. But things that are not actually legal obligations, I mean, things you do, in a real sense, have the choice as to whether or not you fulfill them as opposed to things that you'd be arrested for not fulfilling like paying taxes and stuff.

So, things like spending time talking to a guy who's bought you a drink; going to visit a family member who's in your neighbourhood even though you're not close to them and it's quite an effort for you to get there, because you've been invited; bringing a bottle to a BYOB party (like I know this ISFJ woman who got sidetracked by an emergency on the way to a party and didn't get time to buy a bottle before the store closed, so she wanted to go home but I refused (and was driving lol) so we went but she felt guilty for days afterwards whilst I had no intention of taking a bottle cos I wasn't gonna be drinking anyway since I was driving - she's a teetotaller anyway "but it says BYOB on the invitation!! :cry:"); donating money to somebody who rattles a charity collection box under your nose; going to a wedding you've been invited to even though you won't know anyone else there; going to a birthday party of a person you don't like much because they've invited you and they give you a ride into work occasionally... and any other things you can think of.

I guess this is more aimed at SFJ's than the T's, but I'd be interested in the STJ's point of view too and really anyone else's! :)

[dnivera]

My life is full of things that I "should" be doing, and the proper way to do things. I'm constantly thinking over social situations in the past where I didn't do something I should've done, or when I should've said something in a better way, or behaved differently. I don't consider them obligations, though, (in the sense of something negative that you dread doing), it's just the way I live my life.

Those other things that you mentioned (like donating to charity or talking to a guy who bought me a drink), on the other hand, actually sound like real obligations that most people would dread doing (myself included). I'm guessing a lot of people would not want to do those things.

But my sense of "obligation" is not like that at all - it comes more from a sense of doing the right thing for the benefit of society and the good and maintaining healthy friendships in general. Things like holding doors for people, making sure that I say happy birthday to someone I don't know very well if I know it's their birthday, and showing the right amount of enthusiasm at a party I'm not really enjoying....that's more of what my sense of is like obligation. I don't resent having to do these particular gestures...I feel they're really necessary to maintaining order.

I probably sound like a walking stereotype.

[Recoleta]

Very interesting topic, Subs. Hmmm...yes, I'd say I do live under a lot of obligations; but I wouldn't say that I necessarily resent them. Sometimes they do get obnoxious and frustrating and really wear me down, but I am happier when I have some obligations rather than having none at all.

I think SFJ's suffer much more from social obligations than STJ's do. I can pass up a wedding invitation to someone who is not very close to me, or a birthday party of someone I don't particularly care for, but I will at least make an effort to acknowledge the celebrations. I might give a card (or present for the wedding), or send a happy birthday email/text message/phone call to the person so they know I am thinking of them even though I will not be in attendance. I might feel a little more obligation to family....just because...they're family.

The places that I really feel obligation are the places that I willingly commit myself to such as my schoolwork, friends, family, and job. I almost enjoy these kinds of obligations because it means that in fulfilling these obligations I am making a difference in the lives of those I care about, and am doing work that I generally find meaningful and rewarding. Sometimes though, if I feel I am underqualified or do not feel like I can reasonably commit the time and energy needed to fulfill my obligations I begin to feel guilty and negligent. Obligations are kind of like a blessing and a curse. I love when people depend on me for things, but at the same time sometimes my efforts are taken for granted and I end up with too much responsibility piled up on top of me. I try to keep a reasonable balance in my life though -- I pick my battles.

Take for instance, I recently accepted a job to teach Spanish at a university (I start on Monday), and while I love the Spanish language, and am studying to be a teacher I still feel vastly underqualified for this job. I am expected to teach completely in Spanish from day 1 and am supposed to focus on speaking communication. Now, my reading and writing skills in Spanish are very good, but my speaking abilities are lacking and I KNOW I'm gonna get stuck in class and will be fumbling around for words. Plus, I have never taught before -- much less at the university level. This is going to be a huge challenge/burden for me, but I know it will undoubtedly teach me lots, so that's why I accepted the job. I put that obligation on myself. I will, in turn, commit myself to being the best teacher possible while trying to follow the guidelines that the department has set out for me to follow. I like the challenge, it's just that sometimes I will work myself too hard and will be too critical of myself.

Does that make sense?

[substitute]

yeah it makes sense, you both sound quite a lot like my sister and mom who are the ones who've got me thinking about this stuff.

Especially the part where you say "because they're family". That's exactly what we've clashed over - they take this as read that "they're family" is, on its own, something that has a claim over a person, whilst I don't. And because I don't, they can't seem to see me as anything but a cold, uncaring duty shirker and all round bad egg. And I don't know how to explain to them that if I care about someone then it's because we have some level of bond between us, naturally - y'know, we have to have spent at least some time together, have talked quite a bit, know and understand each other to some level. But to them, somebody being their cousin seems to be enough for it to have a claim over them somehow, even though they might not have seen that person since they were two years old and wouldn't recognize them if they saw them on the street.

They could've had nothing to do with a person for thirty years and yet if they happen to be in their neighbourhood and invite them to a barbecue to say hello they feel completely obligated to go and, like you say, they don't resent it, they just consider it their duty and a pleasure to fulfill it. I'd see it as a total drag to give up some of my time to spend an afternoon pretending to care about a person when we haven't even thought about each other for 30 years and after they're gone, we'll continue to not think about each other.

They don't seem to see any difference between that and if I were to refuse to go to my own sister's birthday party (which I wouldn't, because there is a natural and genuine bond between my sister and I and I'd want to go even if it were the lamest party ever). I think it's a question of them believing they owe somebody something just because they're related, whilst I don't necessarily.

Hmm... it's interesting... I also have a sense of duty, a very strong one, but I find it fascinating how it's turning out that the difference between myself and my SFJ relatives is exactly what things we consider to actually be obligations.

[pure_mercury]

Well, sug, I like having people rely on me, and I like being respected for my can-do attitude. Also, I tend not to cultivate relationships with people who only take, take, take, so I feel that I get a lot back from the people who care about me. Plus, I can find a way to enjoy events thrown by even the dullest acquaintances, because I'm such an extrovert and I drink. ;) If you'd like me to be an annoying ESFJ, though, I'll gladly hector you for neglecting to call your parents and for poor grammar.

[Little Linguist]

I'm not an SJ - but sometimes I feel I have to take responsibility and/or pick up the pieces, which really blows because it is not my strong point.

After a while, you learn a very important concept and that is: SOMETIMES YA JUST GOTTA SAY NO!!!!

No. N-O. Two letters with a lot of power. You're not letting other people down; you are setting your priorities. You need what I call "YOU" time, and if people do not want to give it to you, screw 'em. You have to take it in order to be able to continue giving.

So if you notice people are being ass rats and not giving you the time you need to recoup, tell 'em you CAN'T. Be polite but firm. And if they won't give up, tell them to go "where the sun don't shine" because some people need a direct, straight answer. :yes:

[substitute]

Well, sug, I like having people rely on me, and I like being respected for my can-do attitude.

I'm the same, people do rely on me - about the only people I know who say I'm unreliable are my immediate family and if anyone else I know heard them say that they'd burst out laughing - and I'm baffled as to why the family think that because I have never, to my knowledge, broken a promise or let them down on anything I've taken on. I totally do not flake!

I think though for some people if they don't understand your reasons for doing things they might fear that you're sorta like a loose canon? Like could it be that because my reason for doing an obligation isn't "because it's family!" or "because it's expected", then for all they know I might not bother next time... like because they can't pin me down they assume I won't voluntarily pin myself down? lol

Also, I tend not to cultivate relationships with people who only take, take, take, so I feel that I get a lot back from the people who care about me.

Yeah, I don't really think about stuff like that though when I get to know someone, I just take things as they come and take the person as I find them. Often people do turn out to be more take than give but I tend to find myself still putting up with them in the hopes that I can gradually sorta convert them to a more balanced approach, thinking if that happens then they'll be happier and so will all the other people in their lives. I'm not a pushover or martyr though... I guess I'll just 'keep trying' whilst a lot of people will do the sorta 'two strikes and you're out, door slammed and locked forever' thing.

Plus, I can find a way to enjoy events thrown by even the dullest acquaintances, because I'm such an extrovert and I drink. ;)

Me too on all the above. Doesn't mean though, that when I've planned something already that I'm looking forward to that I automatically want to drop it to get drunk and party just because some long lost relative claims they'll be hurt if I don't turn up... like I mean so much to them even though they've been out of my life for so many years and will be back out of it again afterwards. I guess I just resent the sorta emotional blackmail angle of it... y'know like feeling like the idea that they'd be 'hurt' obligates me to go even though it doesn't make any sense.

If you'd like me to be an annoying ESFJ, though, I'll gladly hector you for neglecting to call your parents and for poor grammar.

Haha, God no! Actually the worst person I know for that is an INFJ :laugh:

[Jennifer]

It is an interesting thread, especially to hear ISTJs talk about their perspective. And yes, my experience with ISFJs vs ISTJs is that ISTJs can more easily draw a line or reduce the level of their involvement based on a detached eval of the situation; ISFJ is much more inclined to do something bigger than perhaps they logically needed to do.

As point of contrast, I was raised in a heavily in SFJ house and spent a lot of my life in that sort of environment. So I am the sort of person that can still blow off family stuff or not follow the social niceties if I think they don't make sense or are inconvenient for everyone; but I also am very very aware of it when I do it, and I often can feel some level of guilt, because I feel like they might misunderstand MY commitment to them and take it as a sort of slight if I don't do what was expected. (So sometimes I will do it anyway, even if it's unnecessary, just so that they understand I still care.)

And not to say sometimes I don't enjoy doing these things, but not because it's expected of me.

[SquirrelTao]

Especially the part where you say "because they're family". That's exactly what we've clashed over - they take this as read that "they're family" is, on its own, something that has a claim over a person, whilst I don't. And because I don't, they can't seem to see me as anything but a cold, uncaring duty shirker and all round bad egg. And I don't know how to explain to them that if I care about someone then it's because we have some level of bond between us, naturally - y'know, we have to have spent at least some time together, have talked quite a bit, know and understand each other to some level.

I dislike family obligations for a different reason. I don't like it when somebody in the family only wants me present so that they don't have to face their own discomfort in knowing that we don't really have a relationship. In other words, I want a real relationship or nothing at all. It hurts me to try to have a real relationship only to fail. I don't find any comfort at all in maintaining a facade. It is draining and it reminds me of my failure to improve the relationship. I have thought about why somebody wants me to be there if all they do is ignore me when I'm there, and it can only be so that they can keep up appearances, even to themselves. It can only be that they don't want to face that they really don't want at all to relate to me.

It seems like what hurts me makes them feel comfortable. I can sense when somebody really cares for me or not. Some people in my family are cold and always will be, and I don't want them to do their duty by me. If they really have never liked me I would rather just let them not like me and not pretend that I think they really do like me. I used to try and try in my teens to play my role and get them to play their role, so my life would be the way it should be, the way it is on TV. It never worked, and it made me miserable. So now I'm done trying. Any other kid would not try so hard to get an adult relative to like them. With most kids, it's the other way around. The adults have to try to reach out to them. With me, I tried to reach out, and it got me nowhere.

My parents will not admit the truth of this. There are some truths about relationships that seem to be things that most people cannot or do not want to face or admit.

[Hmm]

substitute, the short answer for me is, no, I don't know how to not feel obligated. Thinking about it, I would say it's pretty much impossible.

[substitute]

I relate very strongly to what you say Squirrel, it's pretty close to how I feel, too, except that I don't feel any sorrow like you describe through being reminded of my failure to improve my relationships with them, because I don't feel any obligation in the first place or duty to even have a relationship with them.

If we're talking siblings, parents, maybe even grandparents then yeah. But extended family no, like I say I don't see them as any different to anyone else that I'm not related to at all - if I click with someone, then I'll pursue a friendship with them. If not, then I won't. I don't see why it suddenly becomes a duty to flog a dead horse and fake all this chumminess just because a person happens to share some genetic material. I don't see there being anything wrong with not clicking with anyone else, so why would I blame a person, family member or not, for not clicking with me?

Friendship's something that either happens or doesn't, you can't force it and I think it's wrong to make someone feel like they have to try and force it or face being called mean, cold, antisocial, whatever. Y'know like if you don't get on with one of your work colleagues you're not obliged to keep going out with them until you're bosom pals (which will never happen)... I guess it's possibly a question of detachment, which, if that's a person's default position (as it is with the NT) then it's kinda like you're guilt tripping someone for not being attached, like as if they can just attach, just like that, because you tell them they "should".

Hmm - it's funny though... I guess I'm seeing that the things that I see as obligatory and where the sense of it being so comes from, my response to that etc, are quite different from the SFJ, which isn't surprising really!!

I guess there's a difference then between fulfilling obligations through a sense of honour or a sense of duty... if there's a slight shade of difference in meaning between the two, the former being that say I'd never break a promise I made to anyone through a sense of honour, as in, I would think poorly of myself if I broke a promise so I do it for my own self-respect. Whilst I know my sister would, if it became difficult to keep the promise, be content to apologize to the person she made the promise to and feel that, so long as they accept her reason and her apology, her self-respect is still intact...?

[Hmm]

I guess there's a difference then between fulfilling obligations through a sense of honour or a sense of duty... if there's a slight shade of difference in meaning between the two, the former being that say I'd never break a promise I made to anyone through a sense of honour, as in, I would think poorly of myself if I broke a promise so I do it for my own self-respect. Whilst I know my sister would, if it became difficult to keep the promise, be content to apologize to the person she made the promise to and feel that, so long as they accept her reason and her apology, her self-respect is still intact...?

I am the same as you. I would not break a promise I made to someone out of respect for them and for my own self-respect. I am bothered by people who do what your say you sister does. I know someone like that, and she constantly breaks her promises, but thinks that as long as she is able to apologize and give an explanation centered around her own feelings (oddly enough she's an ENTJ) that she should be completely freed of blame of any negative consequences that have occurred because of her broken promise.

But now it seems like I've gone off topic of your original post. To get back to it, I enjoy doing things for people. There are times and people who I don't feel like doing things for and they may still act like they expect me to do things for them. The weird thing is that somehow I still feel obligated to do things for them and I don't know why.

[Fuent]

Preach substitute. Keep it coming.

[SquirrelTao]

To get back to it, I enjoy doing things for people. There are times and people who I don't feel like doing things for and they may still act like they expect me to do things for them. The weird thing is that somehow I still feel obligated to do things for them and I don't know why.

My mother is an ISFJ, and she is the same way, I think. She is the classic example of a person who tries to be everything to everybody and who can't say no. Unfortunately she has given and given and given until she has become severely depleted. She has finally learned to take care of herself rather than putting herself last and everybody else first. But now she's starting to feel better again, and I fear she may overdo it again.

[oasispaw]

So, things like spending time talking to a guy who's bought you a drink; going to visit a family member who's in your neighbourhood even though you're not close to them and it's quite an effort for you to get there, because you've been invited; bringing a bottle to a BYOB party (like I know this ISFJ woman who got sidetracked by an emergency on the way to a party and didn't get time to buy a bottle before the store closed, so she wanted to go home but I refused (and was driving lol) so we went but she felt guilty for days afterwards whilst I had no intention of taking a bottle cos I wasn't gonna be drinking anyway since I was driving - she's a teetotaller anyway "but it says BYOB on the invitation!! :cry:"); donating money to somebody who rattles a charity collection box under your nose; going to a wedding you've been invited to even though you won't know anyone else there; going to a birthday party of a person you don't like much because they've invited you and they give you a ride into work occasionally... and any other things you can think of.

i can't say that any of your examples would bother me if i didn't do them. i feel obligation to those close to me, not random people. like, my parents were in town a little while ago and i felt torn between devoting all my spare time to them or my boyfriend and my parents won because i don't get to see them very often. i did have this minor nagging feeling that i should invite my boyfriend along for everything, but knowing that he likes time to himself, not inviting him or him not wanting to join us was no big deal.

example: one of the vp's of my company planned a potluck for tomorrow, just today, and i felt like maybe i should bring something, but a) i think all courses are taken care of, b) i'm the lowest on the totem pole at work therefore the lowest paid- i'm not wasting money on a dumb potluck.:nono: conclusion: any feeling of obligation was quickly resolved.

[substitute]

yeah you see oasispaw, that's the obligated feeling I'm talking about that I can't relate to. I don't honestly consider anyone as having any right or claim over my time except my own kids - and when they're grown up and are no longer dependent on me so much then even that will diminish.

The ONLY reason I ever spend time with ANYONE, EVER, is because I want to, for my own reasons. Never because of any feeling that I "should". If my parents were in town, no matter how long ago I last saw them, if I didn't honestly want to see them, if I wasn't close to them and had other plans or other things I'd rather do, I wouldn't hesitate to just carry on. I wouldn't feel even slightly obligated to them.

For me the idea that anyone is spending time with me out of feelings of obligation rather than purely because they want to, the idea that anyone feels obligated to give me their time, as though I had some claim over them - well, it's horrendous!!

[Xander]

How to get accepted despite not responding to expectations like you should?

I've so far only found that I can't but I can bring the other parties attention to when I exceed mandate and leave them to either see the balance or boil their heads. It's not exactly my job to ensure that people are happy with my choices only to try to ensure that my passing through doesn't capsize all those in my wake.

As for whether I feel it or not, of course I do. I feel it because there are people I care about who DO see these things as expected and by not doing them I do let them down. It actually prays on my mind from time to time (brain kicks in a feels worse about not having told a certain friend that he's not going to be there for her thirtieth.. :doh: ...yet). However there's also a certain amount fo "screw you hippy" as I require time unmolested by such things and yet they feel no compunction about inflicting it upon me.

Fair's fair in my book.

[Hmm]

For me the idea that anyone is spending time with me out of feelings of obligation rather than purely because they want to, the idea that anyone feels obligated to give me their time, as though I had some claim over them - well, it's horrendous!!

Maybe it makes them happy to please you.

[substitute]

Maybe it makes them happy to please you.

I've thought of that. But it's important for me that people know my friendship is not dependent on those things though, that if they sense obligation then it comes from themselves and not from anything I'm expecting or requiring.

I guess I just can't understand a mindset that would actually think they can 'command' affection, which is all I think a choice to spend free time with someone should be based on, genuine affection. Like just because they manage to, one way or another, get a person to spend their time with them, that this equals that person actually loving them. It doesn't. It could just mean they dread and want to avoid the grief they'd get if they didn't, but would rather not. The idea of a person seeing me that way is mortifying. That's why it's so important to me not to interfere with a person's freewill.

[Hmm]

I've thought of that. But it's important for me that people know my friendship is not dependent on those things though, that if they sense obligation then it comes from themselves and not from anything I'm expecting or requiring.

No, honey. It's not like that. I seriously doubt they think your friendship is dependent on any sense of obligation. I think you are taking a pessimistic view in removing all sense of sincerity or enjoyment from them when in reality it's probably the opposite of a bother. Just because they find enjoyment in pleasing you does not mean that it is not genuine. And whether or not it was your idea or theirs, it doesn't matter. It has the same result.

I guess I just can't understand a mindset that would actually think they can 'command' affection, which is all I think a choice to spend free time with someone should be based on, genuine affection.

Who do you think is doing that? Tell me who "they" is referring to.

[substitute]

No no, I'm not saying I do think anyone who just wants to make me happy is being insincere, hell no. I'm just saying that if it's out of a fear that I wouldn't like them or be offended or whatever, no matter how sincere the affection or whatever that's based on, y'know, that doesn't please me one bit!!

'They' is just meaning people generally, people with whom I interact, anyone really. I have known specific people who have behaved towards me as though they feel guilty for not fulfilling expectations i didn't even have, and genuinely fearful that I had held them as obligated and held it against them that they didn't fulfill these things. I've also known people who've been at the other end of that - the people who demand duty, obligation and stuff off people just because of their 'position' in that person's life, despite that person not genuinely feeling that these expectations were fair in any way. Usually by the reasoning that this person is related to them, and hence, owes them something. But I've seen other 'holds' used, like manipulative friends who expect their friends to always agree with them, to like who they like and dislike who they dislike, who see a friend having lunch with someone they don't like as a betrayal. That sort of thing.

I'm being vague because I don't want to go into detail about people I know in RL, but suffice it to say I have encountered many times people feeling obligated by things I don't personally agree are obligations at all.

Actually one example that springs to mind right now is when I was a teenager, a friend of mine would say occasionally, in a sullen, resigned voice, "Oh and I'll have to get a gift for my Dad's birthday of course..." in a way that didn't seem to suggest she felt at all like she wanted to get him a gift, but just felt like she was obligated to because he was her father and it was his birthday, even though she had very little money at all and he already had everything he could possibly need or want. Interestingly, she tests now as ISFJ. And she'd go into town and spend all day looking around and spend the last bit of her money on a gift for her father's birthday, resenting it all the way because there were other things she'd rather have spent that money on and then when her dad got the gift it's, y'know, gone into the closet and never really been used or whatever... and I've been bewildered at all this wasted time and money and stuff over this obligation that was so unnecessary, and yet I know if she hadn't got her dad this pointless thing he didn't even want, her dad would have been offended.

I just found all of that incomprehensible. I used to say to her "for god's sake, you're only a kid, it's not like he expects you to..." but she insisted that he did, and therefore she must. For all my parents' faults, I know they never expected anything like that from me, though of course I have got them birthday gifts and they've enjoyed them. But the fact that I didn't feel obligated to get them has increased the enjoyment of the whole experience both for me and for them. But I always got the feeling with my old friend that it was just some kind of habit or ritual that they all did and it was just a drag to everyone involved, I never got any sense of the joy that I saw when I got my mom a gift and when she opened it.

[Hmm]

Substitute, you don't strike me to be a demanding person. Most people only feel resentment towards demanding people, especially if they give little to nothing in return.

[animenagai]

i like this thread. it's not often an SJ gives out so much information and insight about themselves on these boards. i do have a question though, how often does a SJ question obligations?

[Hmm]

I question fairly often but not always.

[Grayscale]

i reject the notion completely :)

[Cimarron]

It is an interesting thread, especially to hear ISTJs talk about their perspective. And yes, my experience with ISFJs vs ISTJs is that ISTJs can more easily draw a line or reduce the level of their involvement based on a detached eval of the situation; ISFJ is much more inclined to do something bigger than perhaps they logically needed to do.
That sounds reasonably true, more than the "stereotypical SJ image". My mom seems pretty squarely in the ISFJ category, too.

[FDG]

Wow, it's so strange to know that people can actually do many things during the day out of feeling of obligation. Noone of my actions are dictated by feelings of obligation but exclusively by what I want to do (of course with the boundary of what other people want to do).

[Condor]

After typing and re-typing as the thoughts swirl, I think I have finally put a finger on it - everything is an obligation. My life consists of simply moving from task to task. It may sound weird, but that's the best way I can phrase it. For me, life is a job. Marriage, employment, relaxation - everything has a purpose. What serves no purpose is not relevant (for me).

As far as obligations, then; they are simply to myself.

[Cimarron]

...everything has a purpose. What serves no purpose is not relevant (for me).
I'm a very strong believer in this system, as well. I...think I can see how that would be an obligation. Don't really picture it that way.

[substitute]

Condor, do you see relaxing and having fun as serving a purpose? I mean, I know an ISTJ who finds it very difficult to let go, and never seems to really enjoy himself as much as other people. It feels to me like he sees 'having fun' as another task, one that has prescribed rules and ways to do it properly and even when he's 'having fun' he's still worried about whether he's doing it Properly and sorta defeating the point!

It's funny cos in a way, yeah everything has a purpose, because even 'pointless' things like lying on your belly and making cat noises until you feel so silly you laugh your head off can be very useful in the scheme of psychology, since we know from many studies that've been done, how vital laughter and relaxation are to human psychological well-being.

[Condor]

Condor, do you see relaxing and having fun as serving a purpose? I mean, I know an ISTJ who finds it very difficult to let go, and never seems to really enjoy himself as much as other people. It feels to me like he sees 'having fun' as another task, one that has prescribed rules and ways to do it properly and even when he's 'having fun' he's still worried about whether he's doing it Properly and sorta defeating the point!

It's funny cos in a way, yeah everything has a purpose, because even 'pointless' things like lying on your belly and making cat noises until you feel so silly you laugh your head off can be very useful in the scheme of psychology, since we know from many studies that've been done, how vital laughter and relaxation are to human psychological well-being.

substitute, (btw, nice to meet you) before I answer let me explain that I don't equate relaxing and having fun as the same - I have fun doing the everyday things in life. They are fun because I am able (and willing to) complete them. Perhaps fun and satisfaction mean the same for me - it's quite possible.

Relaxation, on the other hand, is just that. I'll sit in the yard watching the sun move from here to there or in my study listening to music. My purpose is to recharge, so to say.

So, yes, I do consider them tasks - things to do. As to "letting go", that's something I never really understood. For the life of me, I can't think of what I would want (or ever wanted to) to let go of.

[substitute]

:) You make me think of the episode of DS9 where Odo goes into the holosuite and gets lessons from Vic Fontaine on loosening up before he finally scores with Kira.

YouTube - ds9 his way part 1 620 (http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=XaM-iIRB6Og&feature=related)

...or the one where Worf, Jadzia, Bashir and Leta go to Risa and Worf gets disgusted by all the decadence and stuff and joins an extreme 'call to duty' type group. Can't remember the title of the episode though to give a link lol

[Condor]

I did watch the clip (thanks for the link) - it seems the only way for him to "score with Kira" as you put it was to become something he inherently wasn't. Extrapolating the movie clip to real life would most likely result in - at the least - an unhealthy relationship when perceived happiness is formed around one of the partners being something he is not.

I would think one would have an obligation to be honest about who and what they are (and feel). Just my two cents...

[runvardh]

Wow, I must be more in touch with my SJ side than I thought. Must have been my partial asian upbringing as the eldest child or something like that. I do feel strongly about my obligations; but I also feel quite strongly about my need to drop things once in a while and leave duty for another day. Wow, it's almost like Ecclesiastes 3 when I really think about it.

[substitute]

I did watch the clip (thanks for the link) - it seems the only way for him to "score with Kira" as you put it was to become something he inherently wasn't. Extrapolating the movie clip to real life would most likely result in - at the least - an unhealthy relationship when perceived happiness is formed around one of the partners being something he is not.

I would think one would have an obligation to be honest about who and what they are (and feel). Just my two cents...

I can see why you'd see it that way, though I also agree with you about the importance of being true to yourself, I don't see this as excluding the possibility of adapting to new circumstances.

It's possible to evolve, for a person to grow and lose some of their fears, it can mean being happier, it doesn't have to mean you're no longer the same person or being something you're not. I'm very different now than I was 15 years ago, but I'm still the same person, I'm not pretending to be who I am now and I wasn't pretending back then. Quite simply, I've learned some things that have caused me to grow up: I've changed. But I'm still me.

If you watch the rest of the episode and susbequent ones you'll see that he stays true to himself and is still the same old Odo, he's just a lot happier :)

[Condor]

I agree that it is possible - even probable - that we evolve as we age; our store of experiences is more to draw upon. Again, speaking only for myself I don't necessairly fear making decisions based on emotions, or displaying emotions, or anything emotional in general. I have no problem displaying emotions, they are - as I mentioned earlier - responses to feelings (or, manifestations of feelings, if you will). Feelings change, and emotions change as well. I simply don't see the prudence in making a decision (or obligation) based on criteria (emotions) that will change. If the criteria changes, then the decision may well become unsound.

With respect to the movie character, the fact that he "goes back to being the same old Odo" would - IMO - substantiate the fact that he changed for a specific purpose and then "goes back..." I just don't see that as being honest to yourself.

I understand (and am happy with the fact) that I don't change easily - if at all. People at work can't understand how I, in over 30 years in the work force, am only on my second job (and the reason I'm not still in my first job is because I retired from it). Most of them average about two or three jobs every five years. They accept change much more easily. I honestly believe, however, that is how I "show emotion". I feel good about fulfilling my obligations, so I continue to do so.

I seem to get the sense from the title of the thread that "feeling obligated" is perceived by some (not necessairly the thread starter) as a bad thing. I just don't see it that way. It doesn't mean that I'm right or wrong, I'm just me.

[substitute]

Hm well, I can't really disagree with most of what you say there. It's interesting actually how much I do agree, considering our types are almost total opposites.

I don't necessarily see feeling obligated as a bad thing, some things ARE obligatory and I think it's good and right that people should do their duty and fulfill their obligations. I was just wondering because it seems that some things are only subjectively obligatory, in that where one person says they are, another says they're not, so who's to decide who's right and wrong? Where it's a question of that sort of thing, I was wondering what the decision process is, in choosing what you feel obligated by and what you don't, as an SJ in particular, where it isn't something that's strictly or explicitly laid out in some law, tradition or policy or other external enforcing agent.

I share your apprehension of the idea of decision making based on emotions, but I have learned there's a distinction between Feeling and emotions and that someone can feel a certain way about something long-term, whilst emotions about it can fluctuate all over the place. In myself I can't really tell whether that Feeling is actually just the product of my logical reasoning forcing me to believe X is 'right' and to stick with it even when my emotions tell me I'm hating it and want out. Sometimes though I do think that I'm going with Feeling, though it's very rare that I can recognize myself as doing so, occasionally I think something triggers some value that's Feeling based in me and not necessarily a matter of purely logical principle. It's quite mysterious, I admit... to me anyway, so that's why I was particularly wondering how the SFJ might see that, being more value/Feeling driven.

[Condor]

With regard to your query about "subjectively obligatory things" - whenever there is no standard (law, tradition, policy or external enforcing agent) I rely on my internal standards. I couldn't care less about what others feel I should do (e.g. I actually read the documents before I sign here or initial there - the fact the person on the other side of the table can't understand why I simply don't just believe them and sign where I'm told to is of no consequence to me).

So to answer your question about what I feel obligated by - the answer is myself.

I do hope more answer this question you raised. I am probably an extreme case and perhaps others can enlighten you with other viewpoints.

[EJCC]

With regard to your query about "subjectively obligatory things" - whenever there is no standard (law, tradition, policy or external enforcing agent) I rely on my internal standards. I couldn't care less about what others feel I should do (e.g. I actually read the documents before I sign here or initial there - the fact the person on the other side of the table can't understand why I simply don't just believe them and sign where I'm told to is of no consequence to me).

So to answer your question about what I feel obligated by - the answer is myself.

I do hope more answer this question you raised. I am probably an extreme case and perhaps others can enlighten you with other viewpoints.

I agree with you on a lot of things (duh, we're almost the same type), but I'll try to do what you said - show another viewpoint. I think a topic like this needs ranting folks like you and me, Condor, and I mean that in a good way :)

I also feel obligated by myself. I was very struck by that statement... you put it very well. It's like that scene in "The Bourne Supremacy", when they discover that he's giving himself the orders. I think SJs (or at least STJs) do that in their everyday lives, minus the killing and the espionage :yes:

But to answer the basic question, yes, I do feel a sense of obligation in almost everything I do. For example - doing my best. If I don't do my best at everything, I feel like I've failed something, even if it isn't a competition. I don't resent it, because it's who I am.

Also, your example at the very beginning of feeling obligated to give money to an obnoxious Salvation Army-type charity person... it doesn't really work like that for me. We do feel obligated to give back to the community in some way, but not so spontaneously like that. We don't resent that sense of obligation, because functioning like that is the only way we can be fulfilled. Without completing our necessary tasks, checking off the things on our internal lists, we feel empty.

One example of this, for me, is weekends. On weekends, I sometimes sleep late, and relax in the traditional sense - reading, etc. But whenever I do this, at the end of the day, I feel... unhappy. I achieved nothing. I DID nothing. For me, living like that makes the days blur together, and that mild satisfaction from the first day eventually stops carrying over from day to day. I'm certain that if I was forced to live like that my whole life (in what most would consider the lap of luxury), I would have no reason to live. (LOL, that's why I'm never going to retire!)

Of course, that doesn't mean we don't have fun. I'm guessing that anyone reading Condor's and my ideas is thinking that we're like robots with no feeling and no joy. But his comment about satisfaction and fun possibly meaning the same thing really resonates with me - at least, from day to day. I love parties. I love socializing. But I don't NEED that. I'd be happy never going to a party, because I'd still see and socialize with my friends at work or around town, and I feel like it's an event whenever I do. Maybe we just appreciate the everyday more than most? I dunno.

And I HAVE to bring up that basic SJ idea: WE ENJOY GETTING THINGS DONE. It's nice. Relaxing, for me, could be cleaning. (We may be the only types that actually like jobs like doing data entry :)) Watching TV is always nice, too and I tend to do productive things (i.e. knitting) while I watch TV. This might be internal obligation, but for the most part it's just because it's fun. But of course, I'm not as hardcore as Condor (hardcore Condor! it rhymes!)...

I'm sorry. I ranted a lot there (kind of off topic). Here's my thesis statement: Obligation, for SJs, is not a bad thing. It's not something we resent. It's just a way of life - simple as that.

[Recoleta]

I also feel obligated by myself. But to answer the basic question, yes, I do feel a sense of obligation in almost everything I do. For example - doing my best. If I don't do my best at everything, I feel like I've failed something, even if it isn't a competition. I don't resent it, because it's who I am.

One example of this, for me, is weekends. On weekends, I sometimes sleep late, and relax in the traditional sense - reading, etc. But whenever I do this, at the end of the day, I feel... unhappy. I achieved nothing. I DID nothing. For me, living like that makes the days blur together, and that mild satisfaction from the first day eventually stops carrying over from day to day. I'm certain that if I was forced to live like that my whole life (in what most would consider the lap of luxury), I would have no reason to live. (LOL, that's why I'm never going to retire!)

And I HAVE to bring up that basic SJ idea: WE ENJOY GETTING THINGS DONE. It's nice. Relaxing, for me, could be cleaning. (We may be the only types that actually like jobs like doing data entry :)) Watching TV is always nice, too and I tend to do productive things (i.e. knitting) while I watch TV. This might be internal obligation, but for the most part it's just because it's fun. But of course, I'm not as hardcore as Condor (hardcore Condor! it rhymes!)...

I'm sorry. I ranted a lot there (kind of off topic). Here's my thesis statement: Obligation, for SJs, is not a bad thing. It's not something we resent. It's just a way of life - simple as that.

Good post. The parts that I quoted resonate with me as well. I think you and Condor are right...I do have an obligation to myself to do my best. I really don't compete with other people...I compete with myself. I know when I have done my best, and when I have slacked. I love seeing the fruits of my labor pay off, and I hate the feeling of "I could have done better." I'm likely my own worst critic, and that is fine with me. I like the challenge.

I wonder if SJ's are very self-aware people? I know I constantly reflect on what I did/said and try to think of ways I could potentially improve or make my actions or words more efficient or concise. I would say that I am very aware of my limits and capabilities, which allows me to set reasonable goals for myself. Sometimes I'll stretch myself to see how far I can go, but that usually ends in exhaustion -- and the outcome could either be a success or a failure.

Anyway, going back to your OP, Subs, perhaps I see family as something valuable, and therefore worth going out of my way to cultivate. Now, do I like visiting distant relatives or cutting in to my personal time? No. Simply put, I do not. But I make that sacrifice (i.e. live under that obligation) because I figure "You never know when you may need them, and it always helps to have connections." Sometimes my family is really a means to resources. I know that if I ever go back to Argentina I can stay with my cousin, or if I visit New York/Miami/Kentucky I've got plenty of family to accomodate me. If I want some crazy/sage and witty advice, there's grandma -- and if I ever felt the need to dabble in the stock market or pharmaceuticals I have my uncles. No, it's not always about what "I want," but as much as you'd love to hate your family at times, there is value to having them around. Don't think of visiting relatives as being in a room with someone who can't even tolerate you; instead, try to find some common ground. You're inevitably not going to like many things in life, but sometimes you just have to suck it up and deal with it. Burning bridges doesn't get you too many places, so for me it just seems easier to put a small amount of effort into maintaining those bridges.

*Also, please note that I'm not talking about obscure distant relatives like people who aren't any more related to you than a perfect stranger off the street. When I refer to family I mean grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc.

[substitute]

This is all very enlightening. Must say though, I couldn't help this clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51ZhEjB_KvU) from popping up in my mind... :)

[Condor]

I'm not sure how the clip pops up based on our discussion - then again, it probably isn't surprising that I don't get it, is it?

[EJCC]

I'm not sure how the clip pops up based on our discussion - then again, it probably isn't surprising that I don't get it, is it?

I was literally thinking exactly the same thing! NOT joking! :O

[Recoleta]

:huh: Yeah, I don't get it either....

Subs, why don't you tell us about the correlation you see...because I'm really at a loss as well.

The only thing that I could possibly see is that Bert puts up with Ernie as an obligation to his brother when he'd probably rather not be associated with Ernie, or would at least rather be doing something "awesome" (like collecting paper clips or argyle socks). However, once Bert gives in to Ernie's whims Bert discovers that it's not so bad afterall.

[Condor]

:huh: Yeah, I don't get it either....

Subs, why don't you tell us about the correlation you see...because I'm really at a loss as well.

The only thing that I could possibly see is that Bert puts up with Ernie as an obligation to his brother when he'd probably rather not be associated with Ernie, or would at least rather be doing something "awesome" (like collecting paper clips or argyle socks). However, once Bert gives in to Ernie's whims Bert discovers that it's not so bad afterall.

I think that's it. The obligation to acknowledge what is being done is obivously not grounded in reality, but still participating nonetheless. Something along the line of an adult participating in a child's make believe world? I guess so. I can understand and accept the concept of not squashing a child's disbelief with reality - to a point. And the amount of politicial, social and religous concepts that can be paralleled to the clip would be staggering.

Obligations - a good example of a double-edged sword.

[substitute]

Excuse the connection making, sorry, it's a 'flaw' of my type ;)

I just thought of it when you were talking about not understanding 'letting go' and having fun. Bert doesn't want to let go of feeling silly and like it's a waste of time, but eventually gives in and once he starts he genuinely seems to enjoy it . It wasn't supposed to be a cast-iron analogy, just a bit of... fun :)

[Recoleta]

Oh...

http://i430.photobucket.com/albums/qq26/birdy224/fun.jpg?t=1220543389

Riiiight! :)

[Condor]

Excuse the connection making, sorry, it's a 'flaw' of my type ;)

I just thought of it when you were talking about not understanding 'letting go' and having fun. Bert doesn't want to let go of feeling silly and like it's a waste of time, but eventually gives in and once he starts he genuinely seems to enjoy it . It wasn't supposed to be a cast-iron analogy, just a bit of... fun :)

Ah....

And please excuse the attempt at seeking a cast-iron analogy - one of my (many, many, many, ad infinitium) flaws...

[substitute]

LOL you guys! :hug:

[EJCC]

Excuse the connection making, sorry, it's a 'flaw' of my type ;)

I just thought of it when you were talking about not understanding 'letting go' and having fun. Bert doesn't want to let go of feeling silly and like it's a waste of time, but eventually gives in and once he starts he genuinely seems to enjoy it . It wasn't supposed to be a cast-iron analogy, just a bit of... fun :)

LOL back!!! Please excuse MY flaw of being totally confused by metaphors. Not really a flaw on your part at all.