User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 50

  1. #31
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    The error is in the fact that psychology doesn't have a definition that's as rigid as you pretend it is. The field of psychology is wider than you think and embraces some of the characteristics you think are exclusive to philosophy. When I showed you a counter example of PSYCHOLOGISTS, who study western psychology, you dismissed it as saying that those people were practicing philosophy of mind and not psychology..
    That again depends on your definition of psychology.



    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    Psychoanalysis is a great example of an area of psychology that cannot rely on empiricism. So...you know...wtf...
    There are many professors of psychology in some universities (in fact most) who do not deem psychonanalysis to be part of the science of psychology. Yet certain others disagree.



    I am working with the former definition. The one true scotsman fallacy occurs when the person dismisses a proposition as irrelevant to the discussion when it is not truly irrelevant. In this case, I have defined what psychology is from the beginning and certain ideas you have offered are incompatible with that definition.

    By the way, what is wrong with having rigid boundaries? You are not loosing any information, you just have it all neatly organized and therefore more easily accessed when you need it.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  2. #32
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    That again depends on your definition of psychology.

    There are many professors of psychology in some universities (in fact most) who do not deem psychonanalysis to be part of the science of psychology. Yet certain others disagree.

    I am working with the former definition.
    This "conversation" has become worthless, so I'm dropping out. It's just a word game now.

  3. #33
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    This "conversation" has become worthless, so I'm dropping out. It's just a word game now.
    Its important to get through the word game if you want to discuss the more important topics, as only through words can we adequately discuss bigger ideas.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  4. #34
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Its important to get through the word game if you want to discuss the more important topics, as only through words can we adequately discuss bigger ideas.
    True, but the other topics have been destroyed by your arrogance and reliance on jargon and my short attention span. If neither of us budge, there isn't much more to discuss.

  5. #35
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    True, but the other topics have been destroyed by your arrogance and reliance on jargon and my short attention span. If neither of us budge, there isn't much more to discuss.
    Lets try this.

    1.We are always interacting with our environment. I call this perception.

    How do we do this? If I go to another room my mind will inevitably perceive what is there. I cannot stop myself from noticing the walls, the windows and the floor.

    2. We inevitably translate our perceptions into conscious judgments. We would be tempted to say, this wall is red, or the floor smells good.

    I call this judgment. Logical reasoning or intricate value judgments are sophistications of this process.

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

    Inevitably, we unconsciously interact with our environment and we try to translate our unconscious impressions into intelligible notions. Because all things are either consciously known by us, or are unconscious, I do not see the error in saying that perception and judgment outline human psychology in a very general sense.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  6. #36
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Lets try this.

    1.We are always interacting with our environment. I call this perception.

    How do we do this? If I go to another room my mind will inevitably perceive what is there. I cannot stop myself from noticing the walls, the windows and the floor.

    2. We inevitably translate our perceptions into conscious judgments. We would be tempted to say, this wall is red, or the floor smells good.

    I call this judgment. Logical reasoning or intricate value judgments are sophistications of this process.

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

    Inevitably, we unconsciously interact with our environment and we try to translate our unconscious impressions into intelligible notions. Because all things are either consciously known by us, or are unconscious, I do not see the error in saying that perception and judgment outline human psychology in a very general sense.
    I don't have a problem with that. But, there are more general, or more specific (depending on how you want to look at it), ways of outlining human psychology that are better at explaining human behavior, which is, after all, the original question.

    Lets stick with your framework. I start by perceiving. Everyone perceives the same reality, so that's not going to be a great way to get to know people, at least on a semi-individual basis.

    I next digest that perception. I label it, I evaluate it, I sort it, I group it together with other perceptions (intuition). How do I go about doing that? Or rather, why do I do it at all? The answer to that question has to do with biology, evolutionary psychology, and psychoanalysis. If you want to find out how a person organizes their perceptions and judgments (as you called them) you have to know what kind of hierarchy of values and needs they're working with. If, for instance, I have a fear of abandonment, then I may misinterpret some sign from a lover as a threat. But if you don't know that I have a fear of abandonment, you'll just say I'm irrational and dismiss me. You haven't gotten to know me at all. Our needs and fears guide and comprise our "judgments," then. Therefore, if your aim is understanding people, typology is a blunt tool.

  7. #37
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    I don't have a problem with that. But, there are more general, or more specific (depending on how you want to look at it), ways of outlining human psychology that are better at explaining human behavior, which is, after all, the original question.

    Lets stick with your framework. I start by perceiving. Everyone perceives the same reality, so that's not going to be a great way to get to know people, at least on a semi-individual basis.

    I next digest that perception. I label it, I evaluate it, I sort it, I group it together with other perceptions (intuition). How do I go about doing that? Or rather, why do I do it at all? The answer to that question has to do with biology, evolutionary psychology, and psychoanalysis. If you want to find out how a person organizes their perceptions and judgments (as you called them) you have to know what kind of hierarchy of values and needs they're working with. If, for instance, I have a fear of abandonment, then I may misinterpret some sign from a lover as a threat. But if you don't know that I have a fear of abandonment, you'll just say I'm irrational and dismiss me. You haven't gotten to know me at all. Our needs and fears guide and comprise our "judgments," then. Therefore, if your aim is understanding people, typology is a blunt tool.

    Typology only gives one a very general perspective regarding human nature and human behavior, if one wishes to get a more clear and deeper understanding inquiry into other fields (many of which you mentioned) is necessary. An important point to note is, typology is not antithetical to those disciplines.

    All in all, it seems like we are on the same page.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  8. #38
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Typology only gives one a very general perspective regarding human nature and human behavior, if one wishes to get a more clear and deeper understanding inquiry into other fields (many of which you mentioned) is necessary. An important point to note is, typology is not antithetical to those disciplines.

    All in all, it seems like we are on the same page.
    I think I'd agree.

  9. #39
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Lets try this.

    1.We are always interacting with our environment. I call this perception.

    How do we do this? If I go to another room my mind will inevitably perceive what is there. I cannot stop myself from noticing the walls, the windows and the floor.
    Before perception is sensation, and sensation will filter what we perceive (or don't)


    2. We inevitably translate our perceptions into conscious judgments. We would be tempted to say, this wall is red, or the floor smells good.
    Actually, this *is* the definition of perception, dunno what exactly you mean by ...'perception into conscious judgment' [this would reduce the definition of perception into nothingness].

    Just clarifying, since:

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post

    Its important to get through the word game if you want to discuss the more important topics, as only through words can we adequately discuss bigger ideas.

  10. #40
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    I do not understand your question.

    Obviously an inquiry into philosophy of mind starts with something that could be observed. The observations are made of patterns of thought, or of the mind in a general sense, and not of concrete behavior.
    I am not questioning, at least in that specific instance, what philosophy of mind does or doesn't do. I am bringing up a criticism of typology that seems apparent to me.

    Or, as another member named it (Jack-B-nimble): confirmation bias.


    The rule:

    All dogs bark.

    An example:

    Muttzist is a dog.
    Muttzist barks.

    An exception [psst, barely]:

    Qre:us: *woof, woof*

    Beyond what's the word around the pound, how do you validate Muttzist as a dog and not me?

Similar Threads

  1. Evolution of typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 150
    Last Post: 01-31-2013, 05:33 AM
  2. Principles of Typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 08-20-2012, 08:20 PM
  3. A Survey of Typology Central
    By Caligula in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 03-29-2010, 11:00 PM
  4. Costrin and BlackCat's super duper typology overview (of doom)
    By BlackCat in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 05-11-2009, 10:39 PM
  5. Problems of Typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 04-26-2008, 11:12 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