User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 49

  1. #11
    Senior Membrane spirilis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    InTP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp
    Socionics
    INTj Ni
    Posts
    2,652

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    Well let's first define some terms here bud.

    Values: deeply held and enduring beliefs, in which people may be emotionally invested

    Beliefs: any cognitive content held as true

    Logic: the concept of reasoning

    Reasoning: engaging in a process that leads to a conclusion using known facts or assumptions

    Now, the statement I made was,

    "Logic is, in and of itself, a personal value."

    So another way of saying that is...the concept of engaging in a process that leads to a conclusion using known facts or assumptions is, in and of itself, a deeply held, and enduring belief in which people may be emotionally invested.

    Is there anything false about that statement?

    And as LL pointed out, Logic is accepted on faith. If I were to make a religious argument against logic, I could simply say that God is not limited to human logic. If I were to make a Skeptic argument against logic, I could simply say that human perception is limited, and therefore all facts and assumptions are inherently flawed by human cognitive bias.
    Sounds reasonable enough, in theory. I was specifically defining Logic as "the concept of impersonal reasoning," but the sequence works out the same there for the most part. It also underlines the extreme plasticity of the brain (which is both miraculous and frightening at the same time, as it can be either a good thing or a bad thing...)

  2. #12
    Senior Membrane spirilis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    InTP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp
    Socionics
    INTj Ni
    Posts
    2,652

    Default

    Speaking of the human brain and plasticity, this article on slashdot was aptly timed

    How Believing Can Be Seeing: Context Dictates What We Believe We See

  3. #13
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    I would define thinking as "the concept of impersonal reasoning". Logic is more codified, and is basically reliant on a series of if-then statements. (Although it is possible to use logic while omitting the words "if" and "then".)
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  4. #14
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spirilis View Post
    Sounds reasonable enough, in theory. I was specifically defining Logic as "the concept of impersonal reasoning," but the sequence works out the same there for the most part. It also underlines the extreme plasticity of the brain (which is both miraculous and frightening at the same time, as it can be either a good thing or a bad thing...)
    Truly "impersonal reasoning" is impossible, at least for humans.

    impersonal: having no personal preference

    preference: a strong liking

    Personality alone makes it impossible for people not to have a preference (or lack of preference) for reasoning. Also, the thought is that reason is objective, undistorted by emotion or personal bias. However, reason is based upon the less than perfect knowledge of the people employing it, so it is bound to unintentionally lean to one particular point of view, even when employed correctly.

    That's why we share reason. Humans can't figure out stuff very effectively as individuals. We need multiple perspectives to compare and contrast.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  5. #15
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mempy View Post
    It is not a given that one who is certain of their beliefs, whatever they may be, sees everyone who disagrees with those beliefs in a negative light. Perhaps they merely ignore them and feel no particular way toward them. Perhaps they look on them with sympathy, confusion, amusement, or some other emotion.
    Yeah, even being a religious person myself, I don't have a strong degree of . . . intellectual certainty about religion, if that makes sense. I believe what I do. I have reasons, some of which are in my control and I am conscious of some which are not.

    It does not seem that far out there for someone else to come to different conclusions about things than I have. You can be standing right next to someone and be very similar to them in many ways, but see the same thing and see it differently from that person. How much easier would it be for someone standing somewhere else, who was very different to see things differently?

    There's just so much that we don't know and there are many things I'm not sure we can know that it seems kind of crazy to be certain your perception of things is absolute truth.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  6. #16
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cafe View Post
    There's just so much that we don't know and there are many things I'm not sure we can know that it seems kind of crazy to be certain your perception of things is absolute truth.
    I concur with that. Once a person decides with absolute certainty that something is certain, they have forever limited their scope to one perception of the world. One must remember that every self evident truth is an assumption, and he who doesn't question his assumptions is a fool of his own making.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  7. #17
    Senior Membrane spirilis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    InTP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp
    Socionics
    INTj Ni
    Posts
    2,652

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    Truly "impersonal reasoning" is impossible, at least for humans.

    impersonal: having no personal preference

    preference: a strong liking

    Personality alone makes it impossible for people not to have a preference (or lack of preference) for reasoning. Also, the thought is that reason is objective, undistorted by emotion or personal bias. However, reason is based upon the less than perfect knowledge of the people employing it, so it is bound to unintentionally lean to one particular point of view, even when employed correctly.

    That's why we share reason. Humans can't figure out stuff very effectively as individuals. We need multiple perspectives to compare and contrast.
    I disagree with this statement. Reason can be accurate or inaccurate, irrespective of the validity of the knowledge in question. The accuracy of one's knowledge, or one's reasoning, will influence the ultimate outcome of such decisioning but that does not mean, for instance, that inaccurate knowledge automatically invalidates your reasoning.

    In the IT world, we call it "garbage in, garbage out." Your reasoning or logic may suck, but you might have accurate data and the outcome will still suck. Your reasoning might be razor-sharp, consistent and accurate, but if you're given bad information, the outcome will suck just the same. Give good information and good reasoning, and you should have a winner.

    edit: actually rereading my text above, it sounds like I don't necessarily disagree, but reiterated the same thing you did from a slightly different angle. I just don't see why one's methodology of reasoning has to always include some kind of personal bias. It can at times, but I know I can utilize logic deliberately in a manner that removes any "personal bias" I may have toward a situation.

  8. #18
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spirilis View Post
    edit: actually rereading my text above, it sounds like I don't necessarily disagree, but reiterated the same thing you did from a slightly different angle. I just don't see why one's methodology of reasoning has to always include some kind of personal bias. It can at times, but I know I can utilize logic deliberately in a manner that removes any "personal bias" I may have toward a situation.
    I think what you are actually experiencing here is the reality that logic is one of your personal values and the subsequent certainty you have placed in it to provide you with secure answers. Reasoning is an important tool, but it is an assumption that reason cannot be influenced by your limited perception. In fact, it is often the case that two perfectly reasonable people, with different perceptions, can correctly reason out two entirely different conclusions about the same thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    Well I believe that certainly is directly linked to our need for security. As my professor remarked, "There is safety in the known."

    Ts may actually invest more certainty in their values than Fs because they are not as aware of them. What many of them don't realize is that logic is, in and of itself, a personal value and a limitation on perception.
    I dislike generalisations where people pit T vs F or P vs J as though it explains the facets of Type accurately. It just creates stereotypes and, IMHO, makes no difference in MBTI other than to incorrectly blanket-shadow people under ignorance of Type, their own and others. It will be entirely within the life span of an individual person's relative and objective concotions of personal rearing + circumstances + crises + people surrounding them + their own brand, evolved or devolved, of Emotional Health + Emotional Maturity.

    An INFJ is as likely to disbelieve in moral of values or logic of values if they were raised to find it meaningless and found no hope in them. An INTJ is as likely to believe in moral of values or logic of values if they were raised to find it applicably useful/helpful and there is hope found in them.

  10. #20
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeliriousDisposition View Post
    I dislike generalisations where people pit T vs F or P vs J as though it explains the facets of Type accurately. It just creates stereotypes and, IMHO, makes no difference in MBTI other than to incorrectly blanket-shadow people under ignorance of Type, their own and others.
    Take it up with those who write the descriptions.


    An INFJ is as likely to disbelieve in moral of values or logic of values if they were raised to find it meaningless and found no hope in them. An INTJ is as likely to believe in moral of values or logic of values if they were raised to find it applicably useful/helpful and there is hope found in them.
    That actually directly contradicts the descriptions. Although it really doesn't have much to do with the topic of this thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

Similar Threads

  1. The Nature of Ne -- a metaphorical visual
    By spirilis in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 03-20-2009, 01:55 AM
  2. On the nature of ethics
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 02-23-2009, 04:55 PM
  3. The Nature of Values
    By Kiddo in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 06-22-2008, 02:42 PM
  4. The Nature of Fi -- a metaphorical visual
    By arcticangel02 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-13-2008, 07:12 PM
  5. The Nature of Generosity
    By Mycroft in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 10-08-2007, 05:53 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