User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 84

  1. #31
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Apparently you don't see all the assumptions made there...

    Such as:

    - the meaning of morals
    - the meaning of "to be a function of"
    - the meaning of "the socialization process"

    And, if we use exactly what you said:



    - the meaning of cognition
    - cognition's relation to morality
    - the nature of the effect external factors have upon cognition, and how this relates to morality
    - the meaning of "independent morals"
    Apparently you don't realize that a person literally cannot make a valid point without having assumptions. Yes, that includes you!

    Assumptions are not bad. Being anti-assumption is being anti-thought.

    What a silly point to make.

  2. #32
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Apparently you don't realize that a person cannot make a sound point unless their assumptions are true.

    And you have not demonstrated how the assumptions underlying your statement are true.

    Once again, your statement:

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Anyway, with your view, it seems impossible for a person to truly be an ubermensch, as just existing in reality means your cognition is affected by external factors. Your morals are just a function of that, so in that sense, there's no such thing as independent morals.
    Riddled with questionable assumptions.

    Far too many to simply utter that statement as if it were true.

    To simply accept assumptions that one does not know to be true is the true anti-thought.

  3. #33
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Okay, well let's sit here and point out all of your assumptions. For example, you're assuming you know the definition of every word you use (there go a few hundred assumptions). And you assume you know the definition of every word I use, and that I mean them the same way.

    Silly.

    If you are curious about what I mean, try to understand. If you can't understand, why nitpick about something so worthless?

  4. #34
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529

    Thumbs up

    We are born without control of even our sphincter. But over the next 22 years we slowly gain control of ourselves.

    This is our first life task. And after such an effort we valorize it. Finally after 22 years of effort, we are superman and our parents are proud of us.

  5. #35
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Apparently you don't realize that a person cannot make a sound point unless their assumptions are true.
    By the way, this logic applies more than you think.

    You can't make a sound point unless your assumptions are true. And how do you figure out if those assumptions are true? By assuming more. Rinse and repeat.

    You always assume SOMETHING. Striving for "TRUTH" is stupid, because you can't verify anything without assuming something. Striving for mutual understanding or personal truth are the only goals worth pursuing.

    But, go ahead, bang your head against the wall for the rest of your life.

  6. #36
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Okay, well let's sit here and point out all of your assumptions. For example, you're assuming you know the definition of every word you use (there go a few hundred assumptions). And you assume you know the definition of every word I use, and that I mean them the same way.

    Silly.

    If you are curious about what I mean, try to understand. If you can't understand, why nitpick about something so worthless?
    Actually, I never said that I knew the definition of every word that you used (at least not in the way you use them).

    And regarding my definitions for words, I can state them if you ask.

    No, I was really curious about very specific assumptions you were making.

    Like, the one that stated that there's no such thing as independent morals.

    And how somehow this is proven by three underlying assumptions:

    1) that we exist in reality
    2) that doing so means that our cognition is affected by external factors
    3) and what it means for our morals to be "just a function of this"

  7. #37
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    By the way, this logic applies more than you think.

    You can't make a sound point unless your assumptions are true. And how do you figure out if those assumptions are true? By assuming more. Rinse and repeat.

    You always assume SOMETHING. Striving for "TRUTH" is stupid, because you can't verify anything without assuming something. Striving for mutual understanding or personal truth are the only goals worth pursuing.
    Well, you can assume that some of your assumptions are true.

    Or, at least true enough to accept.

    Or accept that they might not be true, but that you'll listen to your intuition, regardless of whether it's true or not.

    But that does not change whether your assumptions were true in that statement that you made.

    Those are the only assumptions I'm questioning here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    But, go ahead, bang your head against the wall for the rest of your life.
    Don't worry. I don't. Your assumption is, at least in this case, incorrect.

  8. #38
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Actually, I never said that I knew the definition of every word that you used (at least not in the way you use them).

    And regarding my definitions for words, I can state them if you ask.

    No, I was really curious about very specific assumptions you were making.

    Like, the one that stated that there's no such thing as independent morals.

    And how somehow this is proven by three underlying assumptions:

    1) that we exist in reality
    2) that doing so means that our cognition is affected by external factors
    3) and what it means for our morals to be "just a function of this"
    1. all people exist in a world with external inputs.
    2. external inputs affect (change the trends in) cognition
    ---------
    everyone's cognition changes as a function of external inputs (there may be other factors too)

    1. morals are a function of cognition
    2. (the above conclusion)
    ---------
    morals are a function of external inputs

    not exactly reduced down enough to withstand philosophical scrutiny, but I'm sure you can follow my logic if you try to.

    edit: I think you got stuck on my wording "a function of". There are all sorts of factors that affect morals. All I am saying is that external reality is ONE of those factors. The more you interact with the external world, the more the external world affects your morals.


    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Don't worry. I don't. Your assumption is, at least in this case, incorrect.
    It wasn't an assumption. It seemed to be the logical consequence of your argument. Since it was so absurd I expected you to see why I didn't like your reasoning in the first place.

  9. #39
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    1. all people exist in a world with external inputs.
    2. external inputs affect (change the trends in) cognition
    ---------
    everyone's cognition changes as a function of external inputs (there may be other factors too)

    1. morals are a function of cognition
    2. (the above conclusion)
    ---------
    morals are a function of external inputs

    not exactly reduced down enough to withstand philosophical scrutiny, but I'm sure you can follow my logic if you try to.
    I can follow, but, frankly, I'm a bit confused by your presentation...

    How about just doing a simple syllogism:

    Axiom 1:
    Axiom 2:
    Axiom 3:
    etc...

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    edit: I think you got stuck on my wording "a function of". There are all sorts of factors that affect morals. All I am saying is that external reality is ONE of those factors.
    This I can agree with. All three parts of it.

    One of my points is that there is lots of obscurity in the wording "x is a function of y".

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    The more you interact with the external world, the more the external world affects your morals.
    While I would never say this cannot be true, I don't think it's necessarily true.

    The meaning of the word "affects", is important, as is the word "independent" (not included here, but included in your original statement).

    My point here is that, while the external world may affect our cognition, it does not necessarily do so in such a way that our morality could not be called independent.

    Inherent in the definitions of a number of words in your statements(s) ("affects" and "independent", especially) are the implication that it does.

    This is problematic, as your reasoning then becomes circular based on your definitions.

    That's all I'm trying to point out. And it's a worthwhile point to be pointed out.

    You made your statement as if it were necessarily true, and it's not.

  10. #40
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    ^okay fine my statement is not necessarily true. you win the logic war.

    seriously. you do.

    I just didn't want to have the logic war. I wanted to get a point across that was pretty damn simple. If you didn't focus on the fact that it isn't necessarily true in every single case, you would have understood what I meant fine.

    I guess I got all pissed off because it seemed like you were sitting there refreshing until you could find a post with some wording you can find a logical flaw with. Well, that's great, and I'm sure you can prove your points that way...but you miss the substance of other people's opinions and ideas by throwing out 95% of what they mean.

    You don't seem like a stupid guy, and I guess it just seemed childish to me that you chose not to spend a bit of mental energy intuiting the meaning I was trying to convey.

    My original point before getting sidetracked was that I found it odd that people were acting as if whether or not a person is an ubermensch was so completely binary. Nothing in anyone's explanation gave me any reason to believe it wouldn't just be a spectrum. So, can't this thread just be boiled down to "people that are beyond some arbitrary threshold in the multidimensional space of ubermenschness"?

Similar Threads

  1. The manifestations of Fi in real life.
    By Virtual ghost in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-27-2009, 06:36 AM
  2. S and N in real life
    By Virtual ghost in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 08-04-2009, 12:04 PM
  3. The practicality of MBTI in real life
    By NewEra in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 07-15-2009, 10:19 PM
  4. Who here in real life is an outcast?
    By Cool in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 04-01-2009, 10:25 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