Prior to the IT crash my company herded groups of us new-hires to cabins in South Texas for a week at a time where they plied us with liquor and taught us how to interact with different types of people within the Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) along with those hokey team-building exercises which people in my specific area of the MBTI entirely disdain; Ironic, really. Regardless, while I knew then what I was, I never gave it much thought because my own filters were firmly in place and helped me adjust the information to fit my worldview. Its a wonderfully flawed built-in self-preservation system of checks and balances we employ.
Its also very flawed. Flawed in that the ways in which we automatically preserve our safety/sanity is often by suppressing our natural instincts. And while this is very, very good news for those of us who interact with the majority of the population who's basic default is often carnal destruction, those of us who operate less linearly begin to behave in a manner contrary to our own very edifying nature.
Where laxists require a roadmap to ethical answers, I simply alter the way the question is asked to nullify its riposte - not because I'm immoral and not because I disregard the basis of your morality as fallaciously fallible - but because you refuse to question it. There is no room in my life for your blind-faith close-mindedness. At all. Ever. That being said, my mate's Type is neither identical to mine, nor the polar opposite - More a complementary parallel. So its not like-mindedness I'm in pursuit of, rather more like...anti-dumb. And there's a lot of dumb out there.
Which leads me to my next new assumption. As my MBTI is only one to two percent of the population, there is truly no such thing as a "jury of my peers." Interestingly enough, while I would want to be judged by those identical to my MBTI, my wife would not. Rather than consider one superior over the other, I am fascinated that she understands her Myers-Briggs Type Indicator so very well.
Throughout all of this, I've learned why I question so all that I do. I "apply (often ruthlessly) the criterion "Does it work?" to everything from [my] own research efforts to the prevailing social norms. This in turn produces an unusual independence of mind, freeing [me] from the constraints of authority, convention, or sentiment for its own sake." And its very freeing. These days, while I sneer at morality for morality's sake (and often cause my poor wife to have to question her own motivations and level of comfort with new ideas), hers are the only ones I lend any credence to, for if I lose her in this discovery of self, I've lost the war. Thankfully, she's as bull-headed and open-minded as I am.
Nothing else matters.
For my type, anything is possible; everything is negotiable. Whatever the outer circumstances, I am ever perceiving inner pattern-forms and using real-world materials to operationalize them. Others may see what is and wonder why; I see what might be and say "Why not?!"