User Tag List

First 5678917 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 216

  1. #61
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    I disagree, Bluewing... for the simple reason that in every logical argument there must be premises, axioms, which govern the inferential steps which ensue. These foundational statements of accepted truths and governing principles, the premises/axioms which undergird all logical thinking thereafter, must be based in some part on a value judgment. Thus, a highly-developed feeling function is imperative to making decisions based on reason.

    Furthermore, those few disciplines which rely on axioms which are not value-based cannot be gainfully applied to truly human endeavors and governance without impositions of values. Pure mathematics is the only value-free discipline around and ultimately, as a result of its value-lessness, it becomes worthless when its lessons are applied rigorously to truly human sciences and affairs. The realms of physics and biology and chemistry are fraught with problems for he/she who would discard Feeling in applying lessons from physics and biology and chemistry to truly human realms, the problem of the erroneous extrapolation from 'is' to 'ought'.

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

    Feeling is our foundation and the edifice of pure thinking / logical inference is entirely dependent on that foundation when the resulting structure would be used in human affairs like politics or moral issues.
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

  2. #62
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    Look, Bluey, I'm not trying to attack you, buddy. Really. But sometimes I think you need to curb your passionate crusade and think about how to really change things. Granted, speculation for speculation's sake is interesting, but not if you constantly spew theoretical diatribes without any possible effect and/or possibility for development.

    I want to know what you would do if you were president. And spare me the philosophical jibberish. I mean REAL POLICY. Because if you cannot provide us with that, your critique of people who try to make this world livable is unfounded in my eyes, no matter how messed up politicians are.

    Socialization IS AWFUL - I agree. But if you let everyone try to decide what is rational, that would be awful, by your own OBSERVATION that NOT everyone is rational. So you are just spewing theoretical nonsense that is not even consistent because you are on a crusade against feeling.

    No worries. If you want to annihilate feeling because you cannot stand feeling, go ahead. I won't stop you, pal. But don't try to mask your ideas with long vocabulary words and eloquent academia. Just call it a diatribe against feeling with no purpose other than to serve as a ventile for your Fi that you suppress.
    If you are interested in language, words, linguistics, or foreign languages, check out my blog and read, post, and/or share.

  3. #63
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    I disagree, Bluewing... for the simple reason that in every logical argument there must be premises, axioms, which govern the inferential steps which ensue. These foundational statements of accepted truths and governing principles, the premises/axioms which undergird all logical thinking thereafter, must be based in some part on a value judgment. Thus, a highly-developed feeling function is imperative to making decisions based on reason.

    Furthermore, those few disciplines which rely on axioms which are not value-based cannot be gainfully applied to truly human endeavors and governance without impositions of values. Thus, pure mathematics is perhaps the only value-free discipline which ultimately, as a result of its value-lessness, becomes worthless when its lessons are applied rigorously to truly human sciences and affairs. The realms of physics and biology and chemistry are fraught with problems for he/she who would discard Feeling in applying lessons from physics and biology and chemistry to truly human realms, the problem of the erroneous extrapolation from 'is' to 'ought'.

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

    Feeling is our foundation and the edifice of pure thinking / logical inference is entirely dependent on that foundation when the resulting structure would be used in human affairs like politics or moral issues.
    Okay, this makes more sense to me.
    If you are interested in language, words, linguistics, or foreign languages, check out my blog and read, post, and/or share.

  4. #64
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    I disagree, Bluewing... for the simple reason that in every logical argument there must be premises, axioms, which govern the inferential steps which ensue. These foundational statements of accepted truths and governing principles, the premises/axioms which undergird all logical thinking thereafter, must be based in some part on a value judgment.issues.
    Yes. What we need is not an arbitrary value judgment. But dispassionate analysis of those value judgments. Obviously we cannot altogether get rid of subjectivity, but we must make an effort to cut back on it as much as possible.

    The fact that we can't get the whole task accomplished is no excuse not to attempt it at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    Thus, a highly-developed feeling function is imperative to making decisions based on reason..
    True, but irrelevant. It is still in the backseat to the dispassionate rationale.

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    Furthermore, those few disciplines which rely on axioms which are not value-based cannot be gainfully applied to truly human endeavors and governance without impositions of values. ..
    Again, we need to analyze the human element as dispassionately as possible. We can figure out why we hold the values that we do, whether it is possible that they be changed, is that desirable, and if yes for both, how we should go about changing them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    Thus, pure mathematics is perhaps the only value-free discipline which ultimately, as a result of its value-lessness, becomes worthless when its lessons are applied rigorously to truly human sciences and affairs...
    Philosophy is the endeavor of applying the rigorous, value-less judgment most notable in mathematics to all things. It is obviously not as organized and clear-cut as mathematics, but it has made significant progress and we have reasons to expect for this to continue to happen.
    "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/

  5. #65
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little Linguist View Post
    Look, Bluey, I'm not trying to attack you, buddy. Really. But sometimes I think you need to curb your passionate crusade and think about how to really change things. Granted, speculation for speculation's sake is interesting, but not if you constantly spew theoretical diatribes without any possible effect and/or possibility for development.

    I want to know what you would do if you were president. And spare me the philosophical jibberish. I mean REAL POLICY. Because if you cannot provide us with that, your critique of people who try to make this world livable is unfounded in my eyes, no matter how messed up politicians are.

    Socialization IS AWFUL - I agree. But if you let everyone try to decide what is rational, that would be awful, by your own OBSERVATION that NOT everyone is rational. So you are just spewing theoretical nonsense that is not even consistent because you are on a crusade against feeling.

    No worries. If you want to annihilate feeling because you cannot stand feeling, go ahead. I won't stop you, pal. But don't try to mask your ideas with long vocabulary words and eloquent academia. Just call it a diatribe against feeling with no purpose other than to serve as a ventile for your Fi that you suppress.
    I have not yet figured out how to make this happen. Its not primarily a diatribe, because there is rationale for why such a view is sound in theory.

    Its all very consistent.

    Not everyone is rational? Too bad. We are going to set up a society in a way that they will have to be rational, or starve!
    "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. #66
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Yes. What we need is not an arbitrary value judgment. But dispassionate analysis of those value judgments. Obviously we cannot altogether get rid of subjectivity, but we must make an effort to cut back on it as much as possible.
    Yes... I agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    The fact that we can't get the whole task accomplished is no excuse not to attempt it at all.
    I never said that... indeed, I am quite sympathetic to your viewpoint on the whole, but I was wary of the possibility of reading your words (which some obviously have) as saying that Feeling needs to be abolished or tossed aside when making judgments on issues in human affairs. To be human is necessarily to feel (among other things). Would it be fair to say the brush of feeling might do with significant pruning with the shears of dispassionate reason? Yes... wholeheartedly.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    True, but irrelevant. It is still in the backseat to the dispassionate rationale.
    It's not at all irrelevant that value-judgments provide the foundation for dispassionate rationale in the construction of models of behavior! Far from taking a backseat, feeling-based intuitive understandings of human behavior, the role of empathy in moral judgments, is of paramount importance. Without feeling, our moral universe would probably collapse, because most people's moral universes are founded not on Kantian edicts but on instinctive repulsion from inflicting harm on other human beings.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Again, we need to analyze the human element as dispassionately as possible. We can figure out why we hold the values that we do, whether it is possible that they be changed, is that desirable, and if yes for both, how we should go about changing them.
    Okay... works for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Philosophy is the endeavor of applying the rigorous, value-less judgment most notable in mathematics to all things. It is obviously not as organized and clear-cut as mathematics, but it has made significant progress and we have reasons to expect for this to continue to happen.
    I myself am one of philosophy's biggest fans, but I have been irreparably affected by excellent arguments by the likes of Nietzsche and Derrida, who alerted me to the fact that the form of logic-centrism you're espousing, if taken too far, can do grave injustice to the humanity of the human beings concerned in the philosophical endeavor at hand.

    _____________________________________

    On an aside...

    I think you have much to provide and am a bit surprised that you present so much excellent work on this forum... usually posts are of the tyro sort, with good-thinking but poor execution, since the very nature of this forum is to be informal. But I assume you have done some publishing and do the academic rounds. You will find in me a supporter bitten by the bug of skepticism.
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

  7. #67
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    I am not saying I have the answer. All I am saying is, we need to sit down with a cool-head, lay our values aside and analyze the problem as carefully and dispassionately as possible. We are not doing this because our personal sentiments get in the way and we are too worried about being impinged upon by people whose values may be offended.
    Nicely theorized.

    Reason is not a singular intellectual tree - neither is emotion. Our brains cannot clinically divorce one from the other, as one would select an apple from a pear. Conscious efforts to magnify either for a sustained period are not without infection - emotion is but evolved instinct; logic but a mechanical description of falsifiable event. The fusion of these schools is what we commonly describe as one's psychological makeup and is impossibly linked the inherent sustainability of the individual to use both accurately and appropriately.

    Laying values aside for the purpose of mutual gain presuposes that reason is inherently able to generate the best-fitting solution to any paradigm; that emotion will create summary failure.

    This isn't the case.

  8. #68
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    Nicely theorized.

    Reason is not a singular intellectual tree - neither is emotion. Our brains cannot clinically divorce one from the other, as one would select an apple from a pear. Conscious efforts to magnify either for a sustained period are not without infection - emotion is but evolved instinct; logic but a mechanical description of falsifiable event. The fusion of these schools is what we commonly describe as one's psychological makeup.

    Laying values aside for the purpose of mutual gain pressuposes that reason is inherently able to generate the best-fitting solution to any paradigm; that emotion will create summary failure.

    This isn't the case.
    Whats the problem? Dont just say you feel an emotion. Try to make sense of it. Not sure if I see the reason why this would not work. Or was this what you were implying. Not sure how to interpret the thesis of your post. What is your point?

    Important claims in your post seemed to involve the following:

    Emotion is part of who we are. Cannot get rid of it. Yes, I get that, so what?
    "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/

  9. #69
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Whats the problem? Dont just say you feel an emotion. Try to make sense of it.
    Precisely why their divorce is impossible.

    A mind determined to make sense of emotion will unavoidably allow emotion to toxify reason; reason to disrupt emotion.

    I agree with your mindset. Yet, in a purely scientific/logical sense, it isn't possible to absolutely distinguish the two.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post

    Emotion is part of who we are. Cannot get rid of it. Yes, I get that, so what?
    Do you want legitimate theory or not? Pure results must involve untainted variables/critical objectivity.

  10. #70
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    My biggest fear, Bluewing, is that the sort of dispassionate thinking you are forwarding is found only in the domain of a handful of people... higher academics, yogis, people with a deep understanding of themselves...

    Meaning, imagine that I had great difficulty divorcing myself from many of the prejudices of my society until I developed deeper emotional understanding of myself.... this deeper emotional understanding of myself allowed me to more fully embrace and/or explore philosophies and thought-systems that thitherto would have been alien or downright noxious to my own. Contrariwise, most people are very grounded in their beliefs and haven't even the inclination to attempt such a revolution of understanding in themselves.

    I mean, we have as much proof as one could possibly need for a landing on the moon, and there are disbelievers. There has been so much research done on animal emotion, and yet many people persist in believing that animals don't have feelings (they remind me of those Medieval 'scientists' who would lacerate and torture dogs and marvel at the mechanical complexity of the anatomy which produced sounds which resembled cries of pain with such verisimilitude...)

    People believe what they want to believe?

    I see Plato attempting to run a nation-state and quickly running for his life...
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

Similar Threads

  1. Thinking/Feeling and Mercy
    By Asterion in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 12-31-2011, 04:58 PM
  2. What personality type do you think he has?
    By Tish211 in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-05-2011, 06:32 AM
  3. [INTP] I think Feelings are important. And I'm an INTP
    By Cypocalypse in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 02-19-2009, 04:44 PM
  4. Thinking/Feeling game: Same Difference
    By rivercrow in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-14-2007, 08:17 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