o_19kdfsn0q18e31dfraas1esh19vta.pdf

the operation of the transporter, the Romulans might open fire before he could produce the
evidence. What could he do?
Here is where Picard's INTJ straightforwardness and capacity to see all angles came in. He opened
a communications channel to the Romulans and stated flat out,
Commander, both our ships are ready to fight. We have two extremely powerful and destructive arsenals
at our command. Our next actions will have serious repercussions. We have good reason to mistrust one
another, but we have better reasons to set our differences aside. Now, of course, the question is, who will
take the initiative? Who will make the first gesture of trust? The answer is, I will. I must lower our
shields to beam these men up from the planet surface. Once the shields are down, you will of course have
the opportunity to fire on us. If you do, you will destroy not only the Enterprise and its crew, but the
cease-fire that the Romulans and the Federation now enjoy. Lieutenant, lower the shields. Leave the
hailing frequency open.
Picard essentially said, "He's what I want, here's what you want, here's the conflict between us,
here's the best way out for everyone, and here's what I'm going to do. Now what are you going to
do?" He evaluated everyone's point of view, found the most acceptable compromise, laid it all out
plainly with his typical objective logic, and made the first move towards the most logical solution.
The other party was often forced unwillingly to follow suit. This pattern happened over and over in
his dealings with other people, including his staff. If Kirk's enemies usually ended up cursing him
for his inevitable treachery, Picard's enemies usually ended up grinding their teeth in silent
frustration at Picard's inexorable logic.
Picard seldom bent the truth one iota; like all thinkers, he preferred the hard truth rather than a
comforting deception. For example, in one incident on the holodeck—a virtual reality room—a
holocharacter accidentally realizes that he is just a holographic simulation. The character says to
Picard, "Tell me something... When you've gone. will this world still exist? Will my wife and kids
still be waiting for me at home?" Picard replies, "I honestly don't know. Good-bye my friend."
Then he ended the program. No comforting white lies from this INTJ. Certainly Picard was
capable of deception, and he could lie with a perfect poker face. But this was not his preferred
method of solving problems. Complete straightforwardness meant telling the hard truth.
Attitude Towards Rules
Picard encouraged a culture of professionalism on the Enterprise. By setting the example himself,
he made it clear to his subordinates that poor rules should be reformed rather than subverted;
emotions should be kept under control; proper procedures should be followed; the rules should
apply equally to everyone; complaints should be dealt with through official channels; the chain of
command should be respected; and problems should be dealt with on top of the table rather than
underneath it.
To the Rationals, moral principles are logic-based algorithms that have the same rigor, complexity
and consistency as the laws of nature. This is actually very different from the way moral principles
are understood by other temperaments. To most people, rules are important because everyone
agrees on them, or because they have been put in place by authority figures, or because they have
always existed. To the Rational, such reasoning holds little weight. To them, rules are but
imperfect embodiments of abstract, universal moral ideas. 171
We know, for example, that stealing "Taking your neighbor's possessions away without permission"
is wrong. Or is it? What if you were to go over to your neighbor's property, pick up a piece of
gravel from their driveway, and walk away with it? This meets our definition of theft, does it not?
171 Keirsey, 1998