How abstract is too abstract?

[Cimarron]

Originally Posted by Antisocial one

Would you be mad at me if I say that I don't believe you?

My opinion of you would go down. (not like you care)

[Bella]

Originally Posted by Antisocial one

Would you be mad at me if I say that I don't believe you?

No, I'll just laugh - why would I say something like that if it's not true?

[Antisocial one]

Originally Posted by Bella

Do you mean, for example, someone that comes from a violent home life has recently started killing bunnies and you know the next step will be killing a human? And you want to intervene before it happens?

I didn't have anything specific in mind, but if you want to picture it this way I don't see why not.


In this example it is more or less obvious what will happen on the long run and would you be confortable with this approach if entire thing is a little bit more complicated, so it is harder to figure out what will happen?

[Bella]

Originally Posted by Antisocial one

I didn't have anything specific in mind, but if you want to picture it this way I don't see why not.


In this example it is more or less obvious what will happen on the long run and would you be confortable with this approach if entire thing is a little bit more complicated, so it is harder to figure out what will happen?

(Well, I think this ^ is complicated already. What are you going to do with this person - he hasn't killed anyone yet.)

You're point was that you want to hold someone responsible before they do something. Am I understanding you? (You have to tell, because I get it wrong a lot.)

So what would be a more complicated example?

[Antisocial one]

Originally Posted by Bella

(Well, I think this ^ is complicated already. What are you going to do with this person - he hasn't killed anyone yet.)

You're point was that you want to hold someone responsible before they do something. Am I understanding you? (You have to tell, because I get it wrong a lot.)

So what would be a more complicated example?

Ok I will try to describe sitations in more detail.

The example you took was in area of criminal activity but this does not have to be in this area.

Here is more complex example: You have elections in your country and there are polititians that are running for many positions.

Let's say that one of them claims that he will do this and that if he/she gets elected and you want this and that to happen.

But you remember that few years ago some people from his/her party that are close to him did exactly the oppostite when it comes to this topic.


Would you trust that man/woman or would you vote for the other guy that is promising less and his background is unknown.
Or you wouldn't vote at all.

After all he didn't do anything bad to you why wouldn't you trust him?

[Cimarron]

Now again, I hate interrupting, so I hope you don't mind me answering.

Originally Posted by Antisocial one

How do sensors see time?
I think the question of "what is time" is a great question. Because it is both very fascinating to me and difficult to grasp, I try to collect all the possibilities for the answer, and try not to make a hasty conclusion or judgment. In my mind, a hasty conclusion is more likely to be wrong.

In what time limits do you function?
By this I mean
How far ahead are you thinking?
How big does a time period have to be for you not to be interested in it?
I think these all depend on the situation.

How big does a time period have to be for you not to be able to imagine it?
I may be wrong (it happens often ), but I think this has much less to do with type than you think it does. I think the previous question (about how interested we would be) has much more merit and relevance.

Originally Posted by Antisocial one

For example when I do an analysis and outcomes show that something is likely and it is likely because of someone, I will in my head think about this person like it already did it.

How does this idea sound to a sensor ?

I think it's a very good idea to consider the possibility that the person may do it, and to keep in mind how likely it would be. I think it's a bad idea to assume that the person will do it.

As I see it, the best response would be to make sure conditions are safe from either outcome, whether the person does that thing you expect him do, or whether he doesn't. In other words, build in safety measures that cover all possible courses and outcomes. This is ideal, but is often impractical.

[Antisocial one]

Originally Posted by Cimarron

Now again, I hate interrupting, so I hope you don't mind me answering.

I think it's a very good idea to consider the possibility that the person may do it, and to keep in mind how likely it would be. I think it's a bad idea to assume that the person will do it.

As I see it, the best response would be to make sure conditions are safe from either outcome, whether the person does that thing you expect him do, or whether he doesn't. In other words, build in safety measures that cover all possible courses and outcomes. This is ideal, but is often impractical.

Why you start so many of your posts with some kind of a excuse?

You often say that I am implementing something. That is not true I am just exploring and I can't ask a quetion with out sounding that way.

The question about the time and imagening it asks the person that is willing to answer how much zeros that number has.
And If I remember correctly Ns are also welcome to answer the questions in the thread.

As I have said it all depends on how much data is showing that some person will do it.

[Cimarron]

Originally Posted by Antisocial one

Why do you start so many of your posts with some kind of an excuse?

Because I talk a lot more on these boards than I do offline. You and Bella seemed to have been locked in conversation, so it would have been rude to interrupt. Indeed, I think I would be a little presumptuous if I expected you to care about my opinion when you were having a conversation with someone else.

And for the body of your post, well, experience has taught me (personally) not to throw away possibilities, even unlikely ones. And like I said, there's no need to even make a conclusion if you can account for all possibilities--but this is usually very impractical.

[niffer]

My best friend is an ISTJ and one of the things she enjoys talking about with me the most is abstract concepts.

I don't believe anything can get "too abstract" in a conversation for someone to understand. As long as they are interested in the first place and you take the time to explain things properly, it should be fine.

Originally Posted by Antisocial one

But what would you say on the idea of accusing someone for something that he/she is going to do?

By accusing in the third example I actutally mean "hold responsible".
Form social prespective it is smart not to let other people to know what you think because people find it strange.

For example when I do an analysis and outcomes show that something is likely and it is likely because of someone, I will in my head think about this person like it already did it.

I know that intuition can be wrong but if detail analysis of some situation shows that there are good chances that you will be correct, it will have large impact on what I will do.

How this idea sounds to a sensor ?

This is normal, but it would probably piss people off. I'd also say it's more J-related than N, because sensors can do this too.

Unless very similar situations and outcomes with your predicted outcome/cause have happened multiple times with people to witness it, you should not tell anyone about your thoughts. Then they just seem too unfounded, and if your assumption about someone is a negative one, you'll just seem like an ass.

We all have thoughts like this sometime from our intuition, but again you have to know when to base your opinions on and act upon them. I see through this thread that you are trying to get this sorted out. Good for you.

[Antisocial one]

I stoped with this thread because I was talking a lot about how everything around us is not real and was thinking that I will have to post something to show it in more visual way to make a real point.
So I have spent some time looking for something that will show the point and still be simple enough and I found it in my professional interests.

Since this is a Youtube video I can understand if someone thinks this is a fake. But I have seen this kinds of things for real and workeed with them.
I could post some similar things but I think that this simple example will probably be enough for now.

The thing is that if picture we get from the senses is correct then this should be impossible and an entire sections of science should not exist.

+ "Polarized light " via YouTube