The 4 Types of People
Avoiding the complexities and refinements of MBTI, in basic terms there are 4 types of people:
1 Those who get to know you. Good or bad, these are Genuine.
2 Those who lie about you (Strawman Creators). These are Abusers.
3 Those who believe the lies (Strawman Zombies). These are Egotists.
4 Indifferent. Simply couldn't care if you exist one way or another.
Types 2 and 3 cross over a lot. They are people trapped in 'mind' and are more judgemental (for example, by reputation instead of personally) and are limited in their abilities to be holistic assimilators (they assess conditionally within limited criteria, reliant on assumption and mis-information).
Type 1 is beyond 'mind' and generally functions from higher perception (intuition). They are less judgemental and more empathic in their way of being.
This has nothing to do with who you are 'friends' with, however you criteria that.
At least this is how I have come to regard people after all the shit they have put me through (slander campaigns, envy>malice, etc) and the few occasions where a handful of them have helped vastly.
Types 2 and 3:
Classical, clinical description of "delusional":
having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions:
Psychiatry. maintaining fixed false beliefs even when confronted with facts, usually as a result of mental illness:
"Who is the bigger fool? The fool, or the fool who follows?"
-Obi Wan Kenobi
Somebody posted into FB today the question:
"Are we living in a Dystopia?”
I opine that we are, in social terms, based on that a minority of people are sane, while a majority of people are delusional, and that the delusional people persecute the sane people, describing that their 'difference from normal' is spurious on the basis that it is 'different from normal' - which itself is the example proving they are using delusional thinking strategies for their judgement criteria.
"Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true."