User Tag List

View Poll Results: Do you use doublethink?

Voters
41. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes.

    22 53.66%
  • No.

    14 34.15%
  • I don't know.

    5 12.20%
First 910111213 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 203

  1. #101
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mkenya View Post
    Damn you for keeping me up...lol

    The first quote? I gained some meaning from it..possibly a different meaning than what you intended...
    In short..I don't follow..elaborate.

    I'll check in the morning.
    It's a pithy remark meant to demonstrate the folly of rejecting the principle of non-contradiction. Doublethink is a patent rejection of that principle. Believing that these things -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mkenya View Post
    1) For all things, there is more than one answer.
    2) For all things, there is only one answer.
    3) For all things, there is no answer.
    - can all be true at the same time is a patent rejection of that principle (for whatever weird solipsistic reasons you gave in your response to my post.)
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  2. #102
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    It's a pithy remark meant to demonstrate the folly of rejecting the principle of non-contradiction. Doublethink is a patent rejection of that principle. Believing that these things -



    - can all be true at the same time is a patent rejection of that principle (for whatever weird solipsistic reasons you gave in your response to my post.)
    So, you're saying that I CAN reject the principle of non-contradiction, you just think it's irrational? Okay, then... I never said that I was using reason in the first place, so that wouldn't be much of a leap.

    I'm generally trying to AVOID the use of reason as you know it when I'm using doublethink. This is how my mind works when I'm REJECTING it for the sake of something other than reason.

    I would have to say Mkenya expressed the idea pretty well with the nine statements he concluded would indicate doublethink. That's kind of funny... it took an INTP explain the logic behind my absence of logic.

    Oh, and I wasn't so much offended earlier, so much as feeling like I couldn't explain my idea adequately, and was being pressured to give it up by certain lines of reasoning that I wasn't ready to accept. I've very susceptible to accepting the assumptions of whoever I'm arguing with, rather than realizing that I can reject them (though I do still try to reject their conclusions)... and because I was unconsciously accepting your assumptions earlier, there was no way to defend my idea, which frustrated me.

  3. #103
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    So, you're saying that I CAN reject the principle of non-contradiction, you just think it's irrational? Okay, then... I never said that I was using reason in the first place, so that wouldn't be much of a leap.
    Yes, and I'm saying that its irrationality makes it a useless and potentially dangerous way of thinking. With doublethink one can believe both, for instance, that racial segregation is wrong AND that Apartheid is right. Moreover, in 1984, the very book from which you've derived the term, doublethink was a dangerous tool used to preserve the power of The Party through thought control.

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    I'm generally trying to AVOID the use of reason as you know it when I'm using doublethink. This is how my mind works when I'm REJECTING it for the sake of something other than reason.
    Yes, I know. The very definition of doublethink requires the abandonment of rationality, as has been stated many times earlier in the thread. The issue is why would it be desirable to abandon rationality? (Which I also asked earlier in the thread.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    I would have to say Mkenya expressed the idea pretty well with the nine statements he concluded would indicate doublethink. That's kind of funny... it took an INTP explain the logic behind my absence of logic.
    But you just said there was no logic to it (and indeed there isn't.) Also, his wasn't an explanation; it was a list of mostly contradictory categorical statements followed by the assertion that his thought process and perception allowed him to find them all true at the same time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Oh, and I wasn't so much offended earlier, so much as feeling like I couldn't explain my idea adequately, and was being pressured to give it up by certain lines of reasoning that I wasn't ready to accept. I've very susceptible to accepting the assumptions of whoever I'm arguing with, rather than realizing that I can reject them (though I do still try to reject their conclusions)... and because I was unconsciously accepting your assumptions earlier, there was no way to defend my idea, which frustrated me.
    I don't mean to be rude, but none of this ever was (nor is) a subject of my concern.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  4. #104
    Probably Most Brilliant Craft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    1,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mkenya View Post
    You made a positive claim without proving it.
    Why is it more logical to assume nothing?
    Argument from Ignorance. Don't believe everything your mom tells you.

  5. #105
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Yes, I know. The very definition of doublethink requires the abandonment of rationality, as has been stated many times earlier in the thread. The issue is why would it be desirable to abandon rationality? (Which I also asked earlier in the thread.)
    Well, because rationality makes me uncomfortable? Also, it forces you to believe unpleasant things about yourself and others that often don't do you any good except to make you miserable and internally conflicted.


    But you just said there was no logic to it (and indeed there isn't.) Also, his wasn't an explanation; it was a list of mostly contradictory categorical statements followed by the assertion that his thought process and perception allowed him to find them all true at the same time.
    Well, there's a kind of logic behind it, but it's so alien to the kind of logic that's founded on the principle of non-contradiction, that it shouldn't even be called logic.
    I don't mean to be rude, but none of this ever was (nor is) a subject of my concern.
    This wasn't really directed at you (I know you wouldn't care if you had offended someone, LOL), but at the people who apologized to me earlier in the thread.

  6. #106
    Diving into Ni-space Crescent Fresh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    807

    Default

    I consider the power of doublethink opens the door for those who are eager to win an argument.

    It is a necessary tool to weigh out all the pros and cons before entering to a heated debate, especially during cross-examination.

  7. #107
    Senior Member Bamboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    XXFP
    Posts
    2,706

    Default

    I'm disappointed that nobody played my "imagination game" above, especially because a clever person could easily refute it.

    I'll do all the work for you. *Sigh.*

    It's long, read it, I promise it makes sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bamboo View Post
    Ok, if that's what you believe, then play along with me.

    So lets say there are other people. They exist in your external reality. Let's say they really exist out there, play along if you don't think they do. They also exist in your internal reality, and you prefer to work with them in that sphere.

    Ok. Now lets say these other people do things and go about their business. Well to do those things they can't just do whatever they want by thinking it, they have to navigate certain limitations and barriers. To navigate those limitations, they have to form a consistent understanding of what is "out there." If there understanding is incorrect or distorted, they won't be able to do things as well, or at all.

    This is how a lot of people think, you say you don't think like this but pretend if you did. Let's get a little more involved in this imagination game.

    So these people approach you and they want to navigate limitations. You tell them whatever is convenient to tell them at the moment - let's say it's something that you know isn't true but you doublethink into believing it is true. Does this ultimately help them?

    Let's say you do the same thing for yourself: you tell yourself what most is convenient with doublethink. Does this ultimately help you?
    * What you're supposed to say is:

    "Based on these assumptions on the nature of reality, leading people down false paths, many times, doesn't help them (although sometimes doing so leads to productive learning, but I digress). It also hurts you, because you cannot effectively make choices. It may be uncomfortable to accept some types of truth, but learning to deal with that discomfort ultimately makes you a better decision maker. "

    ------------------------------------------------

    * But then, if you want to show your viewpoint you say:

    However, if you change the nature of reality, the use of doublethink is beneficial. Assume that only the mind exists. In that case, you'll likely see the world as an attempt to preserve your psyche. In that case, you use doublethink to avoid discomfort. Why go through discomfort when the external world isn't that important anyway?

    --------------------------------------------------

    * If you were truly clever, you'd turn my whole argument on it's head by reversing the imagination game. Refer back to the original to note the changes. Like this:
    (placed in quote box for ease of use)
    If you believe that the outside world exists, then play along with me.

    So lets say that you are the mind. You only exist in your internal reality. Let's say those "other people" out there either also exist in their minds, or are just part of your mind, play along if you don't think that's true. They exist in your internal reality, and you prefer to work with them in that sphere.

    Ok. Now lets say you experience things in your mind. Well you can't just experience whatever you want, you have to navigate certain mental limitations and barriers. If you can't effectively change the way you see things, then you'll frequently be experiencing discomfort.

    Let's get a little more involved in this imagination game.

    Some people approach you and they want to navigate limitations. You tell them whatever is convenient to tell them at the moment - let's say it's something that you know isn't true but you doublethink into believing it is true. Does this ultimately help YOU (they are just in your head, hence you)?

    Let's say you do the same thing for yourself (redundant, in this case): you tell yourself what most is convenient with doublethink. Does this ultimately help you?
    * What I'd say here would be:
    "Based on these assumptions on the nature of reality, leading people down false paths, as long as it eliminates discomfort, helps you, because the path is irrelevant. It also helps you more directly. It may be uncomfortable to accept some types of truth, but learning to deal with that discomfort by making it disappear ultimately makes you more comfortable."


    ---------------------------------------------

    * The most clever person would find a way to eliminate this dichotomy entirely.

    Tl, dr:
    What it comes down to is this: by questioning the assumptions in play, both philosophies are easily picked apart.
    Don't know how much it'll bend til it breaks.

  8. #108
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bamboo View Post
    Tl, dr:
    What it comes down to is this: by questioning the assumptions in play, both philosophies are easily picked apart.
    +1

    That's probably why we're having so much trouble coming to an agreement or understand on this. We all make different assumptions that are incompatible, and in order to debate, we have to work with the others assumptions, and if their assumptions negate our argument completely... then there's little to be done.

  9. #109
    (blankpages) Xenon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    836

    Default

    I think at times, we all hold contradictory ideas in our minds without being aware of it, but people respond differently to gaining awareness of a contradiction. I usually feel the need to work through it somehow, to revise and refine ideas, to reject some outright if I have good reason to, until everything makes sense together. Or, if I don't have enough information to decide, I leave it undecided. I don't deliberately use 'doublethink'. That doesn't get anyone closer to the truth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Yes, and I'm saying that its irrationality makes it a useless and potentially dangerous way of thinking. With doublethink one can believe both, for instance, that racial segregation is wrong AND that Apartheid is right. Moreover, in 1984, the very book from which you've derived the term, doublethink was a dangerous tool used to preserve the power of The Party through thought control.
    Exactly. I was surprised this didn't come up earlier. I was starting to question my memory of that book, because I was thinking...uhhh...doublethink was used for social control; it was one of the things that helped preserve the screwed-up status quo. Why would anyone recommend thinking that way?

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Well, because rationality makes me uncomfortable? Also, it forces you to believe unpleasant things about yourself and others that often don't do you any good except to make you miserable and internally conflicted.
    No one likes discomfort, but sometimes it's necessary. Being willing to feel uncomfortable at times is part of growth and change, and that includes intellectual growth and change. Sometimes people need to face truths that hurt, or let go of ideas they're attached to. The people in 1984 would have been horrified and sickened if they really became aware of how they were being manipulated. But the fact that few ever did allowed the Party to stay in power.

    And, I agree with those who pointed out a lot of people aren't really getting what 'doublethink' means. Being aware of pros and cons of each side of an ethical decision, or 'feeling out' certain positions so you can understand people who hold them, are good things to do, and are not true doublethink.

  10. #110
    lab rat extraordinaire CrystalViolet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    XNFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crescent Fresh View Post
    I consider the power of doublethink opens the door for those who are eager to win an argument.

    It is a necessary tool to weigh out all the pros and cons before entering to a heated debate, especially during cross-examination.
    So is staying quiet and listening.

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    This wasn't really directed at you (I know you wouldn't care if you had offended someone, LOL), but at the people who apologized to me earlier in the thread.
    If you must know my assumptions/judgement weren't directed at you, personally, Athenian, but rather the concept as I see it. The purpose of double think (in terms of 1984) I think is to make sure there are no concrete facts to grasp a hold of, a form of sensation deprivadation (it's the best allusion I can come up at this point.) If there are no certainties, you can mould people at will.
    It's also a way with regards to the novel of keeping people powerless and on a slippery slope....if the landscape keeps changing, how can you build foundations?

    Your version seems to about creating your own personal reality. More a rearrangement of reality into a more pleasing configuration. Willful obilivion maybe?
    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]

Similar Threads

  1. How much Ti do you use?
    By sculpting in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 01-03-2017, 12:06 PM
  2. What Enneagram Test Do You Use?
    By Trobon in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-15-2009, 11:29 PM
  3. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 06-17-2009, 08:07 AM
  4. Do you use MBTI professionally?
    By dnivera in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-28-2008, 09:42 PM
  5. Which Layout Style Do You Use, Comprende?
    By Mempy in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 03-19-2008, 08:55 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