User Tag List

First 910111213 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 151

  1. #101
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    You people need to start out with your arguments, not conclusions. For now, most of the feedback has been wholly arbitrary or irrelevant to the given text.

    I can say all I want how God does not exist, or Darwin's theory is superior to creationism, or whatever point I want to make, but this is all substanceless unless some good reasoning preceeds such claims.
    "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. #102
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    The human race could be divided into 2 classes. The passionate and the intellectual.
    There are those who are neither passionate nor intellectual, and there are those who happen to be both.
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  3. #103
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainChick View Post
    There are those who are neither passionate nor intellectual, and there are those who happen to be both.
    Oh of course. Its not a dichotomy. It is a continuum. Some of us are very passionate and hardly intellectual. Some of us are very intellectual and hardly passionate. Some of us are a lot more passionate than intellectual and vice versa. And some of us are close to being as passionate as intellectual.
    "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. #104
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    My existence, alone, disproves the viability of this passionate/intellectual continuum you propose, why? Because, relative to the human population, I happen to be/exhibit extreme characteristics/signs/tendencies of both.
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  5. #105
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainChick View Post
    My existence, alone, disproves the viability of this passionate/intellectual continuum you propose, why? Because, relative to the human population, I happen to be/exhibit extreme characteristics of both.
    I am thinking of natural predilections. 'Be/exhibit' is the catch here. That is not relevant enough to the matter.
    "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. #106
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    I have a natural predilection for both.

    I'm a passionate intellectual, always have been, always will be.
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  7. #107
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sassafrassquatch View Post
    It's classifying ESTJs, ESFJs, ESTPs and ESFPs as the Gammas and Deltas and INTPS as the Alphas in his brave new world that reeks of intellectualized bigotry. BlueWing sounds like those old racists going on about "the Negro", how they're inferior and unfit for all sorts of things. It's all a bunch of self serving bullshit designed to inflate his flaccid little ego.
    But wait...if his theory says that in the future the INT's (or INT type traits) will be better equipped for the tasks of the technologically advanced environment, then doesn't that mean that the current environment doesn't favor these same traits? How do you gather that he's being bigoted towards "passionate" ESF types if he has already admitted that the INT traits are relatively unfavored in our present environment? From what I understand, in order to claim that he's being bigoted by simply stating that INT "intellectual" traits would be favored in a technologically advanced environment that's conducive to "dispassionate reflection", you (1) apply a positive value to "intellectual", (2) assume that all technological advancement is "better" or "good", and (3) devalue "passionate". Who's to say that being "passionate" in this techno-future won't be a valuable trait? All BW is saying (or at least this is how I understand him) is that if being intellectual is more conducive to the future environment, then the INT traits must in general be better suited to it since "I" is better for reflection than "E", "N" is more abstract than "S", and "T" lends itself better to detached reflection and analysis than "F". If anything, I might say that the limited number of "passionate" types present in this " intellectual future" scenario in relation to "intellectual" types might cause it to be the more valued because of its rarity.

    I would argue (which I think some people have already mentioned) that technological advancement doesn't necessarily lend itself to "reflection". Think of "Idiocracy". Perhaps the ease with which we could occupy ourselves with noise and other distractions caused by the decrease in time spent doing menial things (because the technology does it for us) would lend itself more to indulgence in sensation (not the function, necessarily) than in reflection. And also, maybe if we developed machines that did much of the complicated thinking for us (true AI), the majority of people wouldn't even need to engage much in it unless they were naturally predisposed to it. People already argue that television and portable media devices ruin children's minds. There is no reason to suppose that the increase in reflective abilities since our primitive days will continue.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  8. #108
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    961

    Default

    Pharyngula: There are no marching morons

    Idiocracy shreded by a scientist who understands and teaches evolution. Please stop citing that eugenicist bullshit. It's a freaking movie, not peer reviewed research.

  9. #109
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sassafrassquatch View Post
    Pharyngula: There are no marching morons

    Idiocracy shreded by a scientist who understands and teaches evolution. Please stop citing that eugenicist bullshit. It's a freaking movie, not peer reviewed research.
    I mentioned the movie to lend an image to the speculative "future" I was describing. I never cited it as evidence or tried to present it as credible research. Anyway, I'm not seeing how the article you posted is even relevant to anything I was saying (if you are in fact responding to my post, which I assume since you mentioned my use of "Idiocracy".) It seems to be attacking the idea that some populations (a lot of the time based on an idea of race or class) are genetically 'dumber' than others and will therefore continue to produce 'dumb' offspring well into the future. I never said or suggested such a thing. What I said was that IF we say that INT traits are better suited for "reflection", and reflection lends itself to being "intellectual", then a future environment that makes it more likely for people with a high capacity for "intellectual reflection" to reproduce will produce more INT types (not that I accept these premises, but that's what BW presented). What on Earth does that have to do with eugenics or the idea that certain subpopulations are and always will be genetically inferior to others?

    When I cited "Idiocracy", I was doing so in order to lend a mental image to the argument I was presenting. And the argument I was presenting was absolutely unrelated to eugenics, as that would suggest some sort of purposeful genetic manipulation by people. The argument was meant to go against the idea that the end of menial labor due to technological advancement would result in an environment more suitable to reflection. Or, to partially-quote BW, an environment that would create circumstances under which "their [people's] survival were truly contingent upon" the ability to competently undertake intellectual endeavors such as theoretical physics. I was going completely off of the arguments presented in the OP (or at least what I understood them to be).
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  10. #110
    Senior Member Gabe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    You people need to start out with your arguments, not conclusions. For now, most of the feedback has been wholly arbitrary or irrelevant to the given text.

    I can say all I want how God does not exist, or Darwin's theory is superior to creationism, or whatever point I want to make, but this is all substanceless unless some good reasoning preceeds such claims.
    in other words, you want people to engage in your If-then-therefor nonsense (extraverted thinking), because you are a __TJ type.

Similar Threads

  1. Principles of Typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 08-20-2012, 08:20 PM
  2. The Evolution of Human Cognition, Artificial Intelligence, Supervenience
    By ferunandesu in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-16-2012, 09:46 AM
  3. Overview of Typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 03-07-2009, 03:10 PM
  4. Problems of Typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 04-26-2008, 11:12 PM
  5. The evolution of the workplace...
    By sdalek in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 07-12-2007, 09:21 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