• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Do you use doublethink?

Do you use doublethink?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 21 53.8%
  • No.

    Votes: 14 35.9%
  • I don't know.

    Votes: 4 10.3%

  • Total voters
    39

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Well, what's wrong with intellectual dishonesty? I don't think anyone really cares about it except NTs, and maybe STs.

It's important to be able to adjust beliefs (not just ideas) dynamically, in order to avoid feelings of dishonesty or cognitive dissonance. Otherwise, conformity is difficult.

NTs and STs combined are about half the population, and I think you're very wrong about Fs not caring about intellectual dishonesty, too.

Also, conformity is not the ultimate goal of living, and doublethink is not even close to necessary for conformity.
 

CrystalViolet

lab rat extraordinaire
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
2,152
MBTI Type
XNFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
^Agreed. Humans are not of a hive mind.
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
NTs and STs combined are about half the population, and I think you're very wrong about Fs not caring about intellectual dishonesty, too.

Also, conformity is not the ultimate goal of living, and doublethink is not even close to necessary for conformity.

+1

Athenian, I'm a little confused. I mean, you're making statements as if they're applicable to everyone else. Just because your 'doublethink' concept is apparently necessary for you to conform, doesn't mean it's necessary for everyone else to 'conform'. 'Conform' is in quotations because I too am not understanding your emphasis on the conformity aspect, and why you think that is necessary in order to survive and excel in this world nor why you think everyone would put the weight on it (or even the same definition/understanding of it) that you seem to be placing.

To the intellectual dishonesty piece and your suggestion that only NT's and ST's would care about that? I don't really understand why you would think that. You seem to be projecting an awful lot based on how YOU are currently operating.
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
NTs and STs combined are about half the population, and I think you're very wrong about Fs not caring about intellectual dishonesty, too.

Also, conformity is not the ultimate goal of living, and doublethink is not even close to necessary for conformity.

I have no further comment. I feel that the two ISTPs and associated opposition have drawn me into talking about this in a way that doesn't reflect the actual process well, and are simply trying to discredit the idea entirely, even suggesting that it's impossible to think that way.

I'm not good at defending my ideas... I wish that someone who was more skilled in it, like O'Brien, could come and explain it better.

I'm also not interesting in justifying my comment about NTs and STs caring about it... I simply said that because I don't like dealing with concepts like "intellectual dishonesty."

*uses doublethink to erase this thread from existence*
 

Bamboo

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
2,689
MBTI Type
XXFP
Well, it seems to be that the assumption that there is one "truth," would be rooted in certain assumptions about the nature of reality, wouldn't it? And most of these assumptions would come from trusting the information provided by the senses... which is something I'm not inclined to do to any greater degree than I must.

The mind is reality. There is no external reality worth mentioning, unless you simply decide to fully trust in the evidence of your senses and memory for more than a few purposes...

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?
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I can't say that I do. There are opinions I hold which seem in conflict to the outside observer, but that is simply because of imperfect information on his part, or my part, or both. Doublethink would require that I be aware of the logical inconsistency of my beliefs, and still hold those beliefs.

Same here..... I can & will certainly play "devil's advocate" with myself (and others) to test all perspectives and see which is most sound, but I don't hold two truly contradicting beliefs at the same time knowingly and without need to resolve it. I AM very comfortable with indecision, holding off on a conclusion until I obtain enough info to safely rule one out, and valuing differing perspectives from my own (valuing does not equal believing in). I also don't see all opposing stances as contradictory; I'm rarely surprised when two people hold contradicting beliefs for the very same reason (the same base principle, but applied differently in reality). In considering an issue, I always try and reduce it to the crux so as to decide which is really coming closest to fulfilling that principle, or maybe synthesize the two beliefs into something more accurately reflective of the principle. At worst, I will reject both contradicting stances if neither seems correct. Things are rarely so black & white anyway.

I think the OP being an NJ is interesting, because they have a strong need for closure AND considering alternate perspectives that could lead to settling a matter differently every time new info is introduced, to the point where instead of just suspending a judgment as a P will, they appear or even feel they hold contradicting beliefs. They have to keep their relationship with reality sure and structured. The tertiary Ji of an INJ can really pull a number on their internal reasoning abilities also.... A P would be more comfortable in a state of indecision, IMO, and I bet many think they use this "doublethink" concept, but I think they do more of what I described above. They can hold both beliefs as POSSIBLE, but not as TRUTHS.
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I have no further comment. I feel that the two ISTPs and associated opposition have drawn me into talking about this in a way that doesn't reflect the actual process well, and are simply trying to discredit the idea entirely, even suggesting that it's impossible to think that way.

I'm not good at defending my ideas... I wish that someone who was more skilled in it, like O'Brien, could come and explain it better.

I'm also not interesting in justifying my comment about NTs and STs caring about it... I simply said that because I don't like dealing with concepts like "intellectual dishonesty."

*uses doublethink to erase this thread from existence*

I'm not trying to bully you. You proposed the idea (in a thread i.e. for discussion) that doublethink is not only good but necessary, and I'm arguing with both but especially with the latter. I didn't say anything about it being impossible.

Distinguishing doublethink from simply being able to see multiple perspectives/subjective "truths" is very very important for this discussion. Feel free to clarify if you think anyone is "leading you" to define it incorrectly.
 

CrystalViolet

lab rat extraordinaire
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
2,152
MBTI Type
XNFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Athenian200,
Whilst I'm not sorry about what I said, I'm sorry that I possibly upset you. I did try to reduce the sting a bit, by making a joke out of my extremely judgmental statement, but my experience with this type of thinking has not been positive. It's like walking on quick sand.

If anything you sound like you just say what you think people want to hear, which personally I don't think is the same as double think, some thing I do think sf and nf engage in more. ST and NT certainly don't always have great mastery of diplomacy (for purposes of this argument.)


^ I pressed the wrong button when I posted this.....incomplete thoughts are incomplete. This what you get, when you lose track of time and have to go to work.
 
Last edited:

Rail Tracer

Freaking Ratchet
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
3,031
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
You guys do realize that this is not doublethink?

Simply believing that some questions can yield multiple answers, or that some questions cannot be answered given the state of our knowledge, or even that some questions can never be answered is not the same as tricking your mind into believing simultaneously in A and not A.

If, for instance, I can see that there are valid arguments on both sides of the debate over legalizing marijuana, it doesn't mean that I simultaneously believe both that it should be legalized and that it shouldn't be legalized. It just means either that I haven't made up my mind as to which side I think is more right, or that I don't believe either side is ever going to be right. In either case, it's not that you believe in contradictory things at the same time, it's that you have effectively given up on the enterprise of choosing your belief.

Sure, I'll submit to that.
 

Thisica

New member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
383
MBTI Type
NiTe
Enneagram
5w4
The concept of doublethink does assume that truth is binary in nature.

In real life, it ain't so simple. We have, as Asmiov wrote, "degrees of wrong". However, as he pointed out later, whilst chatting to John: "...when people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."

This is the essence of science, I think. We get approximations to how the world works, but we always know that our knowledge base is incomplete.

In short:
I'm using doublethink, if the truth of a particular subject matter is binary;
I'm not using doublethink, if the truth of a particular subject matter isn't binary.
 

xisnotx

Permabanned
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
2,144
Correct me if I'm wrong.
This isn't doublethink.

1) For many things, there are more than one answer.
2) For many things, there are only one answer.
3) For many things, there are no answer.

This is..
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.

1) For many things, there is more than one answer.
2) For many things, there is only one answer.
3) For many things, there is no answer.

1) For nothing, there is more than one answer.
2) For nothing, there is only one answer.
3) For nothing, there is no answer.

Double think is holding all those 9 statements as true..realizing that it's a massive ball of contradictions..and hoping that within that ball of contradictions lies the truth/reality because you honestly can't perceive the world any differently (not that you stop trying to..but this is just consistent with your understanding of how the world works). Trying to perceive less is just living a lie but you constantly try to perceive more...
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Correct me if I'm wrong.
This isn't doublethink.

1) For many things, there are more than one answer.
2) For many things, there are only one answer.
3) For many things, there are no answer.

This is..
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.

1) For many things, there is more than one answer.
2) For many things, there is only one answer.
3) For many things, there is no answer.

1) For nothing, there is more than one answer.
2) For nothing, there is only one answer.
3) For nothing, there is no answer.

Double think is holding all those 9 statements as true..realizing that it's a massive ball of contradictions..and hoping that within that ball of contradictions lies the truth/reality because you honestly can't perceive the world any differently (not that you stop trying to..but this is just consistent with your understanding of how the world works). Trying to perceive less is just living a lie but you constantly try to perceive more...

:wacko:
 

xisnotx

Permabanned
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
2,144
For example if the only thing that exists is x.

X.

You can't even prove not X from X. Not without giving X certain characteristics first. Of course we assume that x has certain characteristics just by it's very existence..but we fail to see that we have assumed stuff already. We fail to see that we assume that it exists without any evidence to back it up. Those characteristics are given to it by us...we can never see x without the existence we choose to give it (knowingly or unknowingly)..and if we choose to rid X of the burden of existing just because we choose it to exist..then is X even there to begin with? If we choose to not purposefully give X an existence (because its an assumption..and reality/truth is independent of assumptions) then we are left with a more fundamental question...does X exist in the first place? Well if you choose X to continue to exist you can continue perceiving X. If you choose to not let it exist then you stop perceiving X. But it either exists or it doesn't and it's up to you to let it exist for you or not. (If there is another way oh please please please tell me...) You can choose to do either..but "double think" just realizes that your choice is still a fundamentally flawed choice...and the other is just as viable.

So..in a world where no one/thing gives anyone any characteristics..what can you do with the existence of X? In my experience (so far) not much really..you can't extrapolate other "truths" from X.
So if X,
then X.

x=x
or if you want
( )<-Literally nothing. Not X. Not anything..

any tinkering with that truth equates to you making assumptions. (Not that you can't tinker with it..but it's very important to realize that you are making assumptions.)

I swear this makes perfect sense in my head..it's just way too hard to put it down in writing..
 

Craft

Probably Most Brilliant
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
1,221
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Bullshit is incorrect perspective. It's morel logical to assume nothing than everything.

Ergo, Doublethink is useless.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
"Those who deny [Aristotle's] first principle should be flogged or burned until they admit that it is not the same thing to be burned and not burned, or whipped and not whipped." - Ibn Sina (Avicenna)
 

xisnotx

Permabanned
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
2,144
Lol..so a guy (an influential guy, yes) said something and that makes it true..

How about forming a position based on how YOU perceive the world..and stop clinging to how some guy who you've never met perceives the world. Since when was Aristotle god? Aristotle was human..just like the rest of us. And I've never even heard of Ibn Sina..does that make it more or less likely that he was right (or is my and/or his rightness independent of how influential he was/wasn't?)

Also..from the link.

In a formal logical system, that is, a set of propositions that are consistent with one another, it is probable that some of the statements can be deduced from one another. For example, in the syllogism, "All men are mortal; Socrates is a man; Socrates is mortal" the last claim can be deduced from the first two.

I see no contradiction to what I'm saying.
It has assumption (valid ones, I would say..but who am I too say? who is anyone to say?) but assumptions nonetheless.

And with that..I'm done for the night..
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Lol..so a guy (an influential guy, yes) said something and that makes it true..

How about forming a position based on how YOU perceive the world..and stop clinging to how some guy who you've never met perceives the world. Since when was Aristotle god? Aristotle was human..just like the rest of us. And I've never even heard of Ibn Sina..does that make it more or less likely that he was right (or is my and/or his rightness independent of how influential he was/wasn't?)

Did you not understand the meaning of the quote? Because that's, you know, the important part.
 

xisnotx

Permabanned
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
2,144
Did you not understand the meaning of the quote? Because that's, you know, the important part.

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.
 
Top