User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 44

Thread: Theorem of Feel

  1. #31
    AKA Nunki Polaris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    451 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INFp Ni
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    The reversal of the process is not possible in all cases.
    I misunderstood you, then. I assumed you meant a conclusion that can be explained only by a particular premise (and vice versa): for example, most people who believe in them hold that miracles can only be explained by the will of God. If a miracle occurs, therefore, it can be concluded that God performed it; and furthermore, since God's will necessitates a miracle, the same connection must be made if you use God's will as the starting point.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    That is true, but this is not what Modus Feel is. Modus Feel is an arbitrary use of whatever rules are adopted.
    How is that a problem? You're bound to have changed the rules you go by several times in your life. I know you're not still laboring under the convictions of an infant.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    When we are making a system of Logic we are concerned only with one system. If you are doing Classical Logic, you are not going to be concerned with anything that is used in the Non-Standard logic that is used to build computers.
    That's kind of beside the point, though. A contradiction in a system's rules constitutes two separate systems, whether you intend it to or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    He doesn't say that only his feelings lead to the truth, he says that Feeling is what leads to the truth, hence a feeling of anyone.
    Then what did you mean by this:

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    Namely, his feelings are indicative of the truth and the feelings of those who disagree with him do not.
    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    I never said that the mystic and the Feeler have an identical definition.
    Do you deny that a "mystic" is a Feeler?

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    some political or religious leaders maintain that others can become their disciples if they do as they do. For example, many religious leaders had a very detailed discussion about what one must do to become a prophet of theirs. They mentioned that they must experience a certain feeling in order to legitimately claim that they are prophets. Very often when they do claim to have the exact same feeling as their leaders their leaders deny that they are prophets.
    It's not as if the leaders can read minds and know for sure that a claimant really feels the same as them. It comes down to the leaders' judgment, and apparently the leaders didn't believe the claimants in those cases.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    Only if he maintains that it is not the case that feelings in general lead to the truth.
    A disingenuous feeling is automatically misleading since disingenuity is by its nature a mask over the truth. So one could very well believe that all feelings are true--true in their pretenses, even--and still accept disengenuity as the explanation for apparent disagreements.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    The other thing he does is simply refuse to explain his views and just says he has a feeling that he has knowledge. In that case he inadvertently makes a claim that a 'feeling' in general leads to the truth.
    That doesn't follow at all. For me to claim that my feelings lead to truth is an entirely different thing than to claim that yours lead to truth. I have all kinds of convictions that hold true for me simply because they're convictions; that doesn't mean I also support the views of rapists and murderers.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    In any case, whether this persona describes many people or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is that it describes the concept of modus feel.
    The concept of Modus Feel is either impossible or used only in rare, extremely peculiar circumstances. What you take for Modus Feel is more commonly people being inconsistent or saying things that they don't literally mean.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    I did not condemn modus Feel. I only maintained that it is an unreliable guide to the truth.
    That's only your opinion, though. For someone else, Modus Feel might be the only reliable guide in all the universe.
    [ Ni > Ti > Fe > Fi > Ne > Te > Si > Se ][ 4w5 sp/sx ][ RLOAI ][ IEI-Ni ]

  2. #32
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    Fi isn't necessarily Utilitarian. It's more like having an instinctive reaction about what is and isn't in accord with your true nature. It's hard to put into words, but basically that means being in tune with what is healthy, what is right, and what leads to personal growth. You can develop a conscious set of rules out of this mindset, but I think that most of us keep it at the level of an instinctive reaction or maybe adopt a ready-made framework like religion.



    Ti users... there's a paragraph getting close to what is inference in an Fi system (maybe)...

    if you switch out the value words and categories, putting your value words and categories in their place, do you get a paragraph that sounds like what you do?



    (I dunno, I'm just asking. And it's a weird question. I don't know what Ti does.)

  3. #33
    AKA Nunki Polaris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    451 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INFp Ni
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post



    Ti users... there's a paragraph getting close to what is inference in an Fi system (I think, maybe, seems like)...

    if you switch out the value words and categories, putting your value words and categories in their place, do you get a paragraph that sounds like what you do?



    (I dunno, I'm just asking. And it's a weird question. I don't know what Ti does.)
    I don't know if this what you're asking for exactly, but Ti and Fi are quite similar--they're both like having an internal set of scales. The main difference is what gets weighed. Ti weighs according to whether things are in tune with the logical order; Fi weighs things according to whether they mesh with a sense of what is right, for lack of better word; and both check for consistency in their respective domains (ethical and logical).
    [ Ni > Ti > Fe > Fi > Ne > Te > Si > Se ][ 4w5 sp/sx ][ RLOAI ][ IEI-Ni ]

  4. #34
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ne-Monster View Post
    totally true. However. all of us evolved under the same pressure more or less. So to work alongside of the rest of society, to change them, interact with them, convince them and so on, you must recogize those instincts and recognize how each will work with and against you in the projects/tasks that wish to accomplish.
    I agree that it is important to carefully evaluate our instincts and our circumstances in order to see how they may serve us. The instincts that we discover are useful to us should be encouraged. Those that are not, we should make an effort to repudiate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ne-Monster View Post
    During evolution we have to assume they were beneficial. The argument has be taken for each instinct/behavior-is it still beneficial? It's a line by line evaluation. In spite or our airplanes, vaccines, and space ships we are but a step away from our ancestors 20,000 years ago cognitively and socially. Unitl we change dramatically as a species, those establish rules likely still work quite well.
    It is not the case that we have changed dramatically, but our environment has. The fact that we have not changed much is attested by your claim, as you have aptly noted that we have many of the same instincts that our ancestors did. However, our ancestors needed those instincts to fend off wild beasts for example, we no longer need to do this, hence the instinct that they needed is not useful to us.




    Quote Originally Posted by Ne-Monster View Post
    I think I have confused two issues. The concept of Modus feel-the conclusion is correct in spite of having no premises.

    I should have been more clear. Modus Feel is the Theorem that the conclusion is always true, but any premise could be used to derive the conclusion. This means that the intrinsic essence of the premises is not relevant as they all give the same results. However, by the definition of logic, there is always a reasoning process, arguably that is how logic can be defined, simply a reasoning process. This presupposes that there are premises of some kind.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ne-Monster View Post
    From your perspective as the two the same? Do you have to be able to cognitively follow/understand my premises in order to recognize the validity of the conclusion? .
    Your argument is unsupported unless it is shown that it follows from premises. In the case of Modus Feel, the conclusion is asserted to follow from the premises in all cases.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ne-Monster View Post
    ohh that stings a bit. It says empathy and caring are pure instinctual responses like eating. Yet that reduces Fi/Fe then from being judging functions. Rather than making judgements, rationally, they are just responding to stimuli? So they are not built to solve a problem step by step with defined premises like Ti? .
    No, but very often Feeling and Thinking work together. For example, a counselor may have an instinct to help his patients and he will then use Thinking to figure out exactly how he should go about doing so.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ne-Monster View Post
    Yet I'd say depending upon the nature of the problem they will do a much better, quicker job of solving it then a slower Ti which has to connect the dots in a logical fashion. They are not pure dot to dot logic on the surface, but are they still based upon a system of rules-rules, premises which may not be understandable/observable to you... ? That would make them not instincts but rather different ways of rationlizing..
    I would say that what you are describing is a partnership between Feeling and Thinking, though clearly with Feeling being more influential. We were conditioned by evolution to think in a certain way, as this is what we needed to survive. Such ways of thinking are ingrained in our unconscious and as a result manifest when we make value judgments. (Use Feeling) I would agree that many things are easier to do this way, or by simply following our instincts as opposed to evaluating our circumstances.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ne-Monster View Post
    The neatest thing to watch about a Ti dominant, is how slow the thought process can actually be at times. I work with two brilliant INTPs who will sit for several seconds before speaking the next sentance. I would argue Ti is energetically inefficient for many problems encountered in society due first to the speed and energy involved in the solution and second the fact that it may not cope well with the fuzzies. However every answer they ever give me will be exact and accurate, well thought out. They are utterly brilliant. ..
    That is true, the Ti approach to problem solving is very methodical, if not punctilious. Tasks that require an immediate response would be performed by methods other than this. How does Modus Feel tie into this? When doing such tasks, you may be tempted to find out if you truly know what you are doing, to do this you'd want to carefully work out the problem. (Ti)

    You just can't be confident in yourself unless you believe you know the truth. But you do not have time to figure out what is true in an intellectually honest way as it just takes too long to get from the premise to the conclusion. Modus Feel is basically your express way to any conclusion you desire. This gives you the belief, mistaken or not that you have the truth which may be empowering enoug to compell you to finish the task in a short notice.






    Quote Originally Posted by Ne-Monster View Post
    Does it provide the best solution for the problem at hand? That is the question I think that has to be answered. I think it is problem dependent.

    I would agree with that.



    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    Bro, you need to lay off Schopenhauer.

    I'll echo what I said in your earlier thread that dealt with this topic. This type of thinking ought not to be encouraged.

    My thesis is that humans are essentially rational, with the capacity for meaning.

    If something is clear to reason, then the only way to fail to believe that which is clear to reason is to fail to use reason, but if a rational being fails to use reason, then that being is acting in a manner that is contrary to its nature, and for a being to act contrary to its nature is to say that that being is harming itself.
    Please provide an argument to support the thesis that man is a rational animal. I am certainly deeply interested in how this view could be supported. Although I do not think it is a defensible position, I find it charming and ambitious to say the very least.

    So please be brief or thorough, whichever serves you better.

    Even if you do prove that man is a rational animal, you need a separate argument to show that acting like a rational animal or pursuing the truth is good. It is a mistake to equate what is good with what is natural, I believe that is now known as the naturalistic fallacy.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post


    Do you deny that a "mystic" is a Feeler?.
    The Mystic is a feeler in a very restricted sense, nearly neologistic. He is a feeler strictly in the regard that he uses Modus Feel. I do deny that he has to be a Feeler in a pedestrian sense of the word, or in the typological. With regard to the typological, there were many Feelers, especially those who became scientists, mathematicians or philosophers who tend not to use Modus Feel consistently. Remember, a type is merely a solidified unconscious disposition, it can entail a variety of personalities, some akin to that of the mystic I introduced you to, some otherwise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    It's not as if the leaders can read minds and know for sure that a claimant really feels the same as them. It comes down to the leaders' judgment, and apparently the leaders didn't believe the claimants in those cases.?.
    In my story the mystic acknowledges that the other person has that exact feeling he claimed is a hallmark of prophethood, but denies that the person in question is a prophet.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    A disingenuous feeling is automatically misleading since disingenuity is by its nature a mask over the truth. So one could very well believe that all feelings are true--true in their pretenses, even--and still accept disengenuity as the explanation for apparent disagreements..?.
    Simply the person is confusing a deductively invalid argument for a valid one, and Modus Feel comes in when he establishes the Theorem that all arguments whether valid or not entail true conclusions, granted that the premises are true.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    That doesn't follow at all. For me to claim that my feelings lead to truth is an entirely different thing than to claim that yours lead to truth. I have all kinds of convictions that hold true for me simply because they're convictions; that doesn't mean I also support the views of rapists and murderers. ..?.
    Truth is absolute and universal. If you say something is true, it is true for all. If you say you know something is true because you have a feeling that it is, I could say that I have a feeling that the exact opposite of what you said is true, thereby refuting the claim to knowledge you're making. By doing so I would merely show that your conclusion does not follow from your premises, not necessarily that it is false.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    The concept of Modus Feel is either impossible or used only in rare, extremely peculiar circumstances. What you take for Modus Feel is more commonly people being inconsistent or saying things that they don't literally mean...?.
    It is much more common than you think. Devious politicians and theologians make use of it to simply dismiss the criticisms of their dissenters. This is how they justify their hypocrisy. For instance, they could say that you should not sleep around under the circumstances of the Blue Moon, yet they somehow are allowed to do so under the same circumstances. Of course though, they would not state this in such terms, they would cover the true meaning of their statements using sophisms.

    A benevolent counselor could use Modus Feel to convince his seemingly hopeless patients to believe in themselves. If he adopts Modus Feel as a theorem and gets his patients to accept it he could get them to believe in a lot of things he otherwise would not be able to. Of course, just like the devious politician, he would not be open and direct about what exactly he is doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    That's only your opinion, though. For someone else, Modus Feel might be the only reliable guide in all the universe.
    Modus Feel can't be a reliable guide to the truth because we cannot use it to prove anything because it engenders contradictions.
    "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. #35
    AKA Nunki Polaris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    451 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INFp Ni
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    I've already addressed everything you just said, Solitary. At this point I would be repeating myself, so if you have nothing to add, I must take leave of you.
    [ Ni > Ti > Fe > Fi > Ne > Te > Si > Se ][ 4w5 sp/sx ][ RLOAI ][ IEI-Ni ]

  6. #36
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Was a pleasure discussing with you, I appreciated your thoroughness and persistence. I wish to thank many others involved in this thread too, as quite a few of you made an honest effort to answer the questions posed in the OP as well as explore issues that are at least tangentially relevant.
    "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/

  7. #37
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    *Ahem* Is this thing on? Okay...


    And we were so close to getting it too. Assholes. But anyway.

    There is a Modus Feel. It does work on what it's supposed to work on. It is an inference system and it does produce valid results. That a given Fi user may be, say, conflict avoidant, or immature, or willing to take detours on the path to value, is neither here nor there. It's about the same as saying Ti users are idiosyncratic in what they choose to think about and they hate falsehood.

    Technically speaking, and I like making up technical domains, but whatever, there are four broad areas for inference, and they might as well be classified by the names of the functions that deal with them: Fi, Fe, Ti, and Te.

    So suck it up, people! You're all doing the same thing in different domains.

    Now, if there were just some way to prove it...


    And, but wait, there's more... the different modes of inferences... wait for it... they can operate on domains other than their own! :horor:

    How? Well, lets suppose the F domains can relatively easily interact, as can the T domains. Now, F logic at work on a T domain, and vice versa... that's a little more difficult to make sense of, but... what the hell, why not? Dunno. But if they don't, how is "the whole picture" discoverable?

    Or... something.


    For example, "it's my feeling that quarks aren't really our friends, so you scientist guys had better look into your hearts for happier explanations of our physical universe."

    It sounds dumb, but is it? It amounts to providing direction for thinking. The thinking then finds out if it's "true" according to thinking lights. Or the thinker says, "I think you're being a retard, get a different feeling, for this reason and this reason and this reason quarks totally are our buddies, and don't you forget it!"

    Or am I mistaking something for something else.

  8. #38
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Kalach that quark thing sounds totally nuts but I think your general Ni derived theme is correct.

    Quit calling ma an asshole asshole.

    Thanks SW for making me use Ti, you should post these sorts of things more often..

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    RaptorWizard's responce to SolitaryWalker's Theorem of Feel thread:

    SolitaryWalker wonders how desirable it is for people to believe in things that are not supported by an argument. He begins by describing the process of logic, saying it deals with chains of reasoning. The formalities behind logic seem like mathematical operations, a much more abstract and theoretical discipline than the dynamic and transformative discipline of cosmology, in which case I support the latter discipline while SolitaryWalker seems to prefer the former. One thing that both disciplines have in common though is that when they show us our short-comings, few are able to do so without simultaneously losing self-respect. However, even the most disciplined among us will wish for a brighter future, perhaps putting too much faith in beliefs like karma. This feel method has been historically a consistent craft of manipulation of others to their delusion and detriment, even in service of altruistic causes.

  10. #40
    Not Your Therapist Sinmara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,092

    Default

    Why don't you just be honest about what is going on here: Instead of trying to get Solitary Walker's attention by resurrecting all his threads, just write him a gooey love letter about how much you adore him and send it with a box of chocolates and thong underwear.
    Never wrestle with a pig. You will get dirty and the pig will enjoy it.



Similar Threads

  1. Origin of Feeling
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 01-30-2013, 04:59 AM
  2. [INTJ] INTJs, do you gain more pleasure out of feelings or thoughts?
    By DigitalMethod in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-19-2009, 06:09 AM
  3. The importance of feelings?
    By Virtual ghost in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 10-28-2008, 05:51 PM
  4. Avoidance of Feelings = Ignorance of Facts? What Does that say About Ts?
    By Mempy in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-17-2008, 09:33 PM
  5. [MBTItm] Essence of Feeling
    By SolitaryWalker in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 04-20-2008, 05:20 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