User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 31

  1. #1
    DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    Hype
    Posts
    2,078

    Default Possible Sensor philosophers

    As Foxy Sarah once pointed out before her departure, many people on this board make illogical inferences as to the abilities of senors: being a sensor does not mean one is incapable of intuition. Preference does not necessarily predict prevalence.This thread is a prime example of the inherent bias on this message board population and their biased perceptions toward the past and consequently themselves. An education-rich childhood can easily bring the intuitive world (as well as develop "thinking" processes) that would otherwise go unfostered in many young. As such, I think there is a SEVERE bias in the assesments of types in the philosophy and scientific realms. Normally this would be ok, but I argue that an improper consideration of typology could lead students of philosophers towards illogical inferences about their works.

    As such, I wish to present two key philosophers, their type, and I will focus on how their works and life reflect their overall type (and not some bias towards sensors in general)

    John Locke - (ISTP) - Actually, I'm gonna fill this one out later, because I forgot all the points I wanted to bring to the table about his ISTP nature.... but anyone familiar with his works should be able to argue in defense or criticism of his S status.




    Karl Marx - (ESTP) - If you look at Synarch's thread (here, you can easily see a bias towards ESTPs, how they operate and what are capable of..... These biases must be cleared from the reader's mind as best as possible before this consideration to be fairly weighed...

    Like most ESTPs, Marx was a piss-poor student. He didn't hit the books that much and would oftentimes have no motivation or reasoning to study. He started off as a law student, by the way, the nature of which involves a LOT of book study, not something an ESTP could put up with for very long. However, he was not devoid of abstract thinking. ESTPs are very much capable of discussing any concept they have studied. When he found Kant, he almost shit his pants, because he was fascinated by Kant's system of law and thought it was a crucial part of THE solution.

    Marx's intellect (or Te as you like to think it) was focused externally - Why the fuck are all these people without food? why are there fat cats down the street not DOING anything about it? When he brooded over this long enough, and had produced several volumes explaining this (which do not read very well, in English anyway) - he set out to do what the "armchair" thinkers, that he heavily criticized, never do: Trying to FIX the world through action rather than passive theorizing.

    Once Marx saw the solution, he didn't stop and never backed down for the rest of his life. If any of you know ESTPs, this should ring home about their stubborness. Marx was convinced of what the problems were and no one could tell him otherwise. He lived out the rest of his life as a journalist/promoter for his idealism that he forged with Engels: Communism.

    Primary argument: Marx was "Thinker" enough to be INTP as he is typically assumed, but an INTP would never bother with "doing" as zealously as Marx did: an ESTP could likely muster and put up with that many people for his cause.

  2. #2
    DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    Hype
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    By the way, I want to formally state that this thread is in support of demonstrating and sustaining "Sensor" over N hypotheses rather than F/T or P/J distinctions --- I just want to show it's very possible many philosophical minds were senors, since Fs and J/Ps don't have that bias against them (as much)

    Also, I thought Berkeley might be ISTJ, but I couldnt' think of enough arguments in support of this. Anyone is welcome to suggest other S-dom philosophers.

  3. #3
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Do you think there is a positive correlation between empiricist epistemology and S preference?

  4. #4
    DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    Hype
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    see, this is the question i would've prefered not to see first...

    Yes, there might be a correlation, but if there is it could very well be incidental (or not depending on how you infer ability to rebel from N/S). I think Hume was INTP.

  5. #5
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nozflubber View Post
    As Foxy Sarah once pointed out before her departure, many people on this board make illogical inferences as to the abilities of senors: being a sensor does not mean one is incapable of intuition. Preference does not necessarily predict prevalence.This thread is a prime example of the inherent bias on this message board population and their biased perceptions toward the past and consequently themselves. An education-rich childhood can easily bring the intuitive world (as well as develop "thinking" processes) that would otherwise go unfostered in many young. As such, I think there is a SEVERE bias in the assesments of types in the philosophy and scientific realms. Normally this would be ok, but I argue that an improper consideration of typology could lead students of philosophers towards illogical inferences about their works.

    As such, I wish to present two key philosophers, their type, and I will focus on how their works and life reflect their overall type (and not some bias towards sensors in general)

    John Locke - (ISTP) - Actually, I'm gonna fill this one out later, because I forgot all the points I wanted to bring to the table about his ISTP nature.... but anyone familiar with his works should be able to argue in defense or criticism of his S status.




    Karl Marx - (ESTP) - If you look at Synarch's thread (here, you can easily see a bias towards ESTPs, how they operate and what are capable of..... These biases must be cleared from the reader's mind as best as possible before this consideration to be fairly weighed...

    Like most ESTPs, Marx was a piss-poor student. He didn't hit the books that much and would oftentimes have no motivation or reasoning to study. He started off as a law student, by the way, the nature of which involves a LOT of book study, not something an ESTP could put up with for very long. However, he was not devoid of abstract thinking. ESTPs are very much capable of discussing any concept they have studied. When he found Kant, he almost shit his pants, because he was fascinated by Kant's system of law and thought it was a crucial part of THE solution.

    Marx's intellect (or Te as you like to think it) was focused externally - Why the fuck are all these people without food? why are there fat cats down the street not DOING anything about it? When he brooded over this long enough, and had produced several volumes explaining this (which do not read very well, in English anyway) - he set out to do what the "armchair" thinkers, that he heavily criticized, never do: Trying to FIX the world through action rather than passive theorizing.

    Once Marx saw the solution, he didn't stop and never backed down for the rest of his life. If any of you know ESTPs, this should ring home about their stubborness. Marx was convinced of what the problems were and no one could tell him otherwise. He lived out the rest of his life as a journalist/promoter for his idealism that he forged with Engels: Communism.

    Primary argument: Marx was "Thinker" enough to be INTP, but an INTP would never bother with "doing" as zealously as Marx did: an ESTP could likely muster and put up with that many people for his cause.
    Marx is not a philosopher.
    A philosopher is not an utilitarian.

    Marx is a pamphletist.
    So is Lenin.

    The road to hell is paved with good intention.

  6. #6
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nozflubber View Post
    see, this is the question i would've prefered not to see first...
    I can delete it.

    What question would you prefer to see first?

    Quote Originally Posted by nozflubber View Post
    Yes, there might be a correlation, but if there is it could very well be incidental (or not depending on how you infer ability to rebel from N/S). I think Hume was INTP.
    Agreed. Although I find it easy to assume that S's preference for working with empirical data would make empiricism more attractive to them for any number of reasons.

    I 'spose Hume could be INTP. From what I know of him, he was very thorough and very consistent.

  7. #7
    DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    Hype
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    Marx is not a philosopher.
    A philosopher is not an utilitarian.

    Marx is a pamphletist.
    So is Lenin.

    The road to hell is paved with good intention.
    Perhaps, but marx is only taught by philosophy professors these days! Not even economists like talking about him and they HAVE TO just for historical reasons....

    however, none of this refutes his S nature. But we always love you stopping by!

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    I can delete it.

    What question would you prefer to see first?

    no no... I just wanted to get the ball rolling on considering or even re-considering some philosophers as Sensor. Asking broad-based questions on whether a sensor would more likely accept empericism is about a general audience and their preference (so yes, this by definition of "Sensor" would be likely to happen)... but again, this is about particular philosophers, and not groups or "camps" of philosophy.

    If you meant just the big 3 empiricsts (locke/berkeley/hume) by your question then nm, cuz that can easily be covered in 1 thread. Populations are for statisticians.

  8. #8
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Oh, OK.

    I'm actually quite interested in why you think Berkeley and Locke were S's, but not Hume.

    You wouldn't happen to know what the consensus is on Aristotle's type? I might argue that he's an S, but if that's already widely thought then there wouldn't be much point.

    (I'm hung up on the possible S --> empiricist link)

  9. #9
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    Marx is not a philosopher.
    A philosopher is not an utilitarian.

    Marx is a pamphletist.
    So is Lenin.

    The road to hell is paved with good intention.
    Ha, yes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    I 'spose Hume could be INTP. From what I know of him, he was very thorough and very consistent.
    Almost certainly.
    Quote Originally Posted by nozflubber View Post
    By the way, I want to formally state that this thread is in support of demonstrating and sustaining "Sensor" over N hypotheses rather than F/T or P/J distinctions --- I just want to show it's very possible many philosophical minds were senors, since Fs and J/Ps don't have that bias against them (as much)
    This is a weird thread. What is your point exactly? That Ss can think abstractly? That some philosophers are mistyped because of iNtuitive bias?

    MBTI tests for preferences. And pursuing a career in philosophy indicates a marked preference for abstract thought. Are you disputing that? Why does it even matter?
    And how do you substantiate this claim?
    I argue that an improper consideration of typology could lead students of philosophers towards illogical inferences about their works.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  10. #10
    Reason vs Being ragashree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Mine
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,770

    Default

    I'll just quote my posts from the thread you mentioned in your OP as they seem relevant to this discussion. They are also the only posts in that thread to date to make something amounting to a detailed argument in favour of specific philosophers having a preference for sensing over intution. I may develop this further when I'm properly awake if anyone's interested, but I'll just say for now that we should probably not underestimate the influence of Epicurus despite the paucity of surviving work. He has for a start been credited as a primary influence on Locke via his rediscovery by Pierre Gassendi.

    Quote Originally Posted by ragashree View Post
    Epicurus:

    Reserved in personality, and secluded in lifestyle, advocated this above intervention in world affairs (I, also suggests P over J)

    Strongly empirical and believed nothing that was not based on direct observation of phenomena and logical inferences drawn from them, eschewing abstract speculation (thus the father of the modern scientific method); focused moral philosohpy on avoidance and maximisation of sensations of pain and pleasure respectively; "rational" seeker of pleasure based on these premises (S)

    Highly logical in his inferences, sought to develop unifed and consistent theoretical systems for all his ideas and relate them back to his core sensation-based principles (Ti)

    Relatively "passive", self-based moral philosophy for which he recieved criticism at various times, based on avoidance of harm and maximisation of pleasure to oneself and others; essentially "live and let live", "avoid drawing attention to oneself", "enjoy what is to be enjoyed" (P)

    ISTP


    Quote Originally Posted by ragashree View Post
    Hobbes:

    Definitely TJ, probably I from what we know of his personality, however an Ni primary seems a little unlikely given his strongly mechanistic philosophy, marked disdain for abstract reasoning, and apologism for authoritarian government and maintenance of what equated to the political status quo.

    ISTJ fits very well for me.
    Look into my avatar. Look deep into my avatar...

Similar Threads

  1. Which Philosopher Do You Dislike the Most?
    By logan235711 in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 113
    Last Post: 08-02-2017, 11:14 PM
  2. Philosophical personality test
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 323
    Last Post: 09-03-2013, 10:06 PM
  3. [MBTItm] Question for sensors?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 116
    Last Post: 03-12-2009, 03:30 AM
  4. [ISTJ] Famous dead Sensors
    By labyrinthine in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-11-2008, 01:10 PM
  5. Do Sensors read faster than iNtuitives?
    By Dufresne in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 05-26-2007, 03:18 AM

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