User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 86

  1. #31
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pancreas View Post
    One of the main base points of your arguments seems to be that a world that was less emotional would have fewer problems. This would be true if most problems were caused by emotions running rampant. IF that were the case, then yes, what youíre purporting would have some merit. However, I donít think thatís the case.

    Iím not saying that problems must therefore must be caused by logic/thinking. Itís just that in the real world, things are usually quite complicated. I believe most problems would be caused by a roughly equal combination of both thinking and feeling.

    Then thereís this:

    If everyone was highly T, like you as you have said, then maybe people would be more emotionally stable. But a preference for thinking causes just as many problems as an equally strong preference for feeling does. It just causes different problems. So you have emotional stability. But other issues instead.

    If most had a slight preference for thinking, then you would have maybe a marginal improvement, if any, in emotional stability overall.

    Also:



    I didnít attack you. I merely pointed out that eliminating emotion may have repercussions.


    Did you read the thread?

    I said that I am not against the feeling it is just that it sems that there is to much basesd on them. What I was saying was that world where majority of the population is in lower thinking area would probably be a better place to live.

    I used myself to explain that hight T can be very hard to destabilize exactly because of emotional deficit.

    Can you pinpoint where I said that everybody should be like me?
    Since I don't think I said that. Even in quoted part there is a part that says the opposite. I think you are stereotyping or you did not think this through.

  2. #32
    Senior Member Pancreas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    176

    Default

    You didnít say that everyone should be like you. You initially said that people would have a low preference for T, but then used yourself as an example of emotional stability. I tried to use that to show what I believe to be the difference between high T and low T. Which is high T is more likely to be emotionally stable, and low T, not so much. Which means that a society where people mostly have a low preference for thinking may have slightly more emotional stability, but not a remarkable amount.

    Iím not stereotyping. I did think this through. Youíre either giving no consideration to a view that contradicts yours (and not even hugely at that), or weíre misunderstanding each other.

    Iím wondering if itís the latter. This is your main point, then?

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    What I was saying was that world where majority of the population is in lower thinking area would probably be a better place to live.
    And I disagree. It might be slightly more stable emotionally. There might be a higher prevalence of logical decisions. But there would be, in my opinion, the same number of problems. There would just be slightly different problems. The sort of problems you get for being too logical.

    So, unless youíre actually trying to say ďa world where majority of the population has a slight preference for thinking would probably have less emotionally fuelled problemsĒ I disagree.

  3. #33
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,673

    Default

    I would say that in this case we are misundersatnding each other.

    The thing is that my argument is counterintuitive to some degree.

    My emotional stability is quite high but I don't think that everyone should be that much emotionaly stabile.

    I don't agree that world of a low T would be different by such a small degree. I could explain this but I would need to write a book to explain what I am thinking in details.


    Since my argument includes Politics, spirituality, economy, mining , water supply, food production , infrastructure , familiy dinamics , entertainment, history and...........


    What I am saying is that many things you take as default would not be there.


    We are talking about T/F but other letters play a part in this as well.
    I am not saying that everyone should have same type.

  4. #34
    Senior Member Pancreas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    I don't agree that world of a low T would be different by such a small degree.
    I was probably a bit cloudy on that issue. I think it would have some difference, but I think that other problems would replace the ones that were fixed. T has as many problems as F. It follows that while a world that was more T might have less problems more commonly associated with a preference for F, it would have other problems. So there would be a difference, but in an overall comparison, taking into account the fact that human nature is human nature, I think there would still be just as many problems. So in an overall comparison, there would be a very small difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    Since my argument includes Politics, spirituality, economy, mining , water supply, food production , infrastructure , familiy dinamics , entertainment, history and...........

    What I am saying is that many things you take as default would not be there.
    True, I just think that there would be other things that would act against it being a better world. It would be different, but not necessarily better.

  5. #35
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pancreas View Post
    I was probably a bit cloudy on that issue. I think it would have some difference, but I think that other problems would replace the ones that were fixed. T has as many problems as F. It follows that while a world that was more T might have less problems more commonly associated with a preference for F, it would have other problems. So there would be a difference, but in an overall comparison, taking into account the fact that human nature is human nature, I think there would still be just as many problems. So in an overall comparison, there would be a very small difference.



    True, I just think that there would be other things that would act against it being a better world. It would be different, but not necessarily better.
    Well I don't plan to start writting that huge argument right now.

    You are talking about different kinds of problems so I am interested in hearing some of them.


    Also I will not hide that I think that the world can't be in worse shape then it is. (I am not talking just about the economy).

  6. #36
    Senior Member Pancreas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    Well I don't plan to start writting that huge argument right now.
    No, fair enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    You are talking about different kinds of problems so I am interested in hearing some of them.
    Well, I clearly have given this as much thought as you, so my response is not going to be that detailed. That and while trying to put my thoughts into words I hit an immense roadblock.

    As youíve said, relying on emotion too heavily can lead to illogical decisions. And relying too much on logic, while disregarding emotion, can lead to a disregard for life. If youíre always thinking about what is better, logically, you miss out on what is better morally, etc.

    You could have a world where political decisions are made on logical basis only. But logic can benefit the greedy as much as the good at heart. Taking human nature into account, youíd be more likely to end up with a dystopian society than you would a better place. I think this part is my main issue. Emotion can be used as a tool just as much as logic. How you use it depends entirely on the individual and humans, as a species, tend to be selfish. It's a trait, among others, that helps aid survival.

    This could be two entirely different conversations if you were hypothesising about what could be in this world if the population were suddenly more inclined to thinking and what would the world be if humans had naturally, and originally, more of a preference towards thinking. And it becomes more and more complicated the more facets you introduce, such as religion, culture, etc, etc. Iím not sure where you want to draw the line.

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    Also I will not hide that I think that the world can't be in worse shape then it is. (I am not talking just about the economy).
    Iíd agree that itís pretty bad. But I do believe it can, and will, get worse. How much worse remains to be seen.

  7. #37
    lab rat extraordinaire CrystalViolet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    XNFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,170

    Default

    The theory would work so long as everyone was on the same page. Seeing as people are rarely on the same page together (yes, even logical T's) I think it wouldn't be better, just different. Too many other factors involved. There are still motivations, and agendas involved.
    And for a NF, I'm not so attached to the human race. Convince me on my terms, and I can be just as ruthless, and heartless as any other type (and efficient).
    I think the real problem with the world today, is we don't learn from history, we don't focus on the future, and western civilization is far too disconnected from nature.
    I don't think whether you are a T or F really comes into play.
    Last edited by CrystalViolet; 12-26-2008 at 09:55 AM. Reason: Spelling mistake.
    Currently submerged under an avalanche of books and paper work. I may come back up for air from time to time.
    Real life awaits and she is a demanding mistress.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  8. #38
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pancreas View Post
    No, fair enough.


    Well, I clearly have given this as much thought as you, so my response is not going to be that detailed. That and while trying to put my thoughts into words I hit an immense roadblock.

    As youíve said, relying on emotion too heavily can lead to illogical decisions. And relying too much on logic, while disregarding emotion, can lead to a disregard for life. If youíre always thinking about what is better, logically, you miss out on what is better morally, etc.

    You could have a world where political decisions are made on logical basis only. But logic can benefit the greedy as much as the good at heart. Taking human nature into account, youíd be more likely to end up with a dystopian society than you would a better place. I think this part is my main issue. Emotion can be used as a tool just as much as logic. How you use it depends entirely on the individual and humans, as a species, tend to be selfish. It's a trait, among others, that helps aid survival.

    This could be two entirely different conversations if you were hypothesising about what could be in this world if the population were suddenly more inclined to thinking and what would the world be if humans had naturally, and originally, more of a preference towards thinking. And it becomes more and more complicated the more facets you introduce, such as religion, culture, etc, etc. Iím not sure where you want to draw the line.



    Iíd agree that itís pretty bad. But I do believe it can, and will, get worse. How much worse remains to be seen.
    To tell you the truth I was just waiting when this will come up and I disagree as usual.

    You say greed, but greed is emotional need for sure. Also if you have much more thinking society it would be harder to sell nonsense which polititians are selling today.
    Also having a disregard for life is ilogical since this is what keeps you alive in the first place.
    Totalitarian regimes are totally based on emotion(s) and the need the to succsed. For example fear is one of those emotions.
    Have you ever seen/heard Hitlers speeches?


    The main reason why life today worths so little because there is so many of us and I think that current population trends are not sustainable.
    Why we have a such a trends? I think it is because someone wasn't thinking straight when was the time fot it.

    Exactly because of this this it will happen what you are saying about a T world. Actually we are living in that kind of a world already.


    I am taking if we start to act more T since that scenario is maybe even possible. If you take that we are T form the start enite history would be totally different and there would be so many variables, that I don't see the point of talking about it right now.

    As of status of the world I was thinking "It can't be much worse and that entire thing still works". Of course it can be much worse then this.

  9. #39
    Senior Member Pancreas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    176

    Default

    Just because someone has a preference for thinking doesn't mean they are logical. I come across people with flawed logic and thinking all the time, and not all of them have a preference for feeling.

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    You say greed, but greed is emotional need for sure.
    If this is what you believe, there's no real reason for me to argue anymore. Because I disagree upon that.

  10. #40
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pancreas View Post
    Just because someone has a preference for thinking doesn't mean they are logical. I come across people with flawed logic and thinking all the time, and not all of them have a preference for feeling.

    If this is what you believe, there's no real reason for me to argue anymore. Because I disagree upon that.
    That is true but I think that things are not that simple.
    I think that you need T ( in T and F people) to make a decision but there is a factor of education here as well.
    But some people don't want to heve logical education since it is against what they believe. In my country there are problems with sexual education.
    Just because 30% percent thinks something, that does not means that their logic is a correct one and I am sure that there are Ts in that 30%.


    The thing is that people in T world not be flawless the point is that there would be less flawed logic.


    What is greed for you ?

Similar Threads

  1. [NF] Why Do NFs Apologize So Much?
    By Totenkindly in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 228
    Last Post: 09-25-2017, 02:49 AM
  2. Do we have any animal doctors in the house? pro help needed.
    By Betty Blue in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-30-2012, 01:47 PM
  3. [NF] Do we care too much about humanity??
    By chipy100 in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 12-23-2008, 05:33 PM
  4. [JCF] why do infjs care so much about people/relationships/interactions
    By peppermint13 in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08-16-2008, 06:47 AM
  5. How Do You Post So Much?
    By Crabapple in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 05-17-2007, 03:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO