User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 24

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Fusion View Post
    I've always been quite skeptical about everything, so I'm not sure how to answer the questions.
    What have been your experiences regarding how people respond to your skepticism?

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    What have been your experiences regarding how people respond to your skepticism?
    They usually just tell me I think too much.

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Fusion View Post
    They usually just tell me I think too much.
    You're young, I suppose. People get less polite as the skeptics get older.

    But in case you express your skepticism in ways that people respond to well. How do you generally express it?

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    You're young, I suppose. People get less polite as the skeptics get older.

    But in case you express your skepticism in ways that people respond to well. How do you generally express it?
    I tend to either persuade them, and change the way they see the world, or baffle them and annoy them.

    But I don't really care what other people believe (I find it interesting to learn about people's ideas, but it doesn't affect my beliefs - at least not until I've thought them through myself and improved the way their ideas are expressed). My skepticism is focused mainly on questioning my own views.

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    .
    Skepticism <<<<<<< Critical Thinking >>>>>>> Dogmatism
    Rationalism <<<<<<<<<<<<< Epic Fantasies Flowing with Meaning >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Empiricism


  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Fusion View Post
    I tend to either persuade them, and change the way they see the world, or baffle them and annoy them.

    But I don't really care what other people believe (I find it interesting to learn about people's ideas, but it doesn't affect my beliefs - at least not until I've thought them through myself and improved the way their ideas are expressed). My skepticism is focused mainly on questioning my own views.
    Ah. A true scholar. Hats off.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  7. #17
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Can you guys elaborate on what you mean?
    Yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ginkgo View Post
    I think fierce skepticism is simply dogmatism masquerading as doubt.
    This isn't too far off from what I would say.

    This would be sentence 3 out of 4 (or so) of the way I'd put it.

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Indeed. But this process you talk about requires a great deal of time.
    This reminds me of a quote I like: "skepticism is the chastity of the modern mind."

    If the notion being presented just doesn't carry enough reward for undertaking that process, would you still fault the skeptic?
    And who determines whether it carries enough reward?

    Perhaps this is one reason you get into trouble with other people.

    You seem to have made a tacit value judgment here about a non-existent hypothetical, and already have devalued it before it even came into existence.

    If this is your default position, or this is at least how you come off from the get-go, it would be understandable why you get a bad reaction.

    Your default position would be "what you find valuable isn't valuable enough for me to listen to you".

    Perhaps why Nardi found Ti doms to be the worst listeners.

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Yes.



    This isn't too far off from what I would say.

    This would be sentence 3 out of 4 (or so) of the way I'd put it.
    What would be the complete way you would put it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    This reminds me of a quote I like: "skepticism is the chastity of the modern mind."
    The similar quote about skepticism and chastity I came across was by George Santayana
    "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and it is shameful to surrender it too soon or to the first comer: there is nobility in preserving it coolly and proudly through long youth, until at last, in the ripeness of instinct and discretion, it can be safely exchanged for fidelity and happiness."

    I know Santayana was a naturalist and a moral relativist (sort of), but I'm not sure if I am thinking of the same thing you were.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    And who determines whether it carries enough reward?

    Perhaps this is one reason you get into trouble with other people.

    You seem to have made a tacit value judgment here about a non-existent hypothetical, and already have devalued it before it even came into existence.

    If this is your default position, or this is at least how you come off from the get-go, it would be understandable why you get a bad reaction.

    Your default position would be "what you find valuable isn't valuable enough for me to listen to you".
    Are you talking about me personally, or a hypothetical skeptic?

    I think the person choosing to spend his/her time gets to choose how to do it.

    Also, what are your expectations here? I spent four years trying to see things as an Evangelical Christian. God, for me, is an important thing. Would you expect me to spend similar effort in search of ghosts, the Yeti, or Bigfoot?

    Would you, for instance, spend four years living as an ardent skeptic to see the value in modern skepticism as an attitude as an adult? Or are you currently too skeptical of skepticism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Perhaps why Nardi found Ti doms to be the worst listeners.
    Well, suppose this pattern turns out to be true, and for larger groups.

    What is it that you expect Ti doms to do? Not be Ti doms? Is that fair?

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  9. #19
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post

    If the notion being presented just doesn't carry enough reward for undertaking that process, would you still fault the skeptic?
    Not necessarily. The process of belief is intensely personal.

    If I shouted someone down for their beliefs, then it would just be a power play. In an academic atmosphere, I think it would be bad form to insist that someone believe something just because you wanted them to. It shows a lack of respect and a disregard for the fundamental nature of decent education. Which is why those who expect others to change for them (or in more extreme cases, expect humanity to undergo some wild transformation of monumental scope) tend to find themselves disappointed as shit.

  10. #20
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    What would be the complete way you would put it?
    That in the realm of belief, you have skepticism on one side, and dogmatism on the other.

    Skepticism represents the side of nothingness, emptiness, zero.

    Dogmatism, on the other hand, represents somethingness, fullness (including of shit), one.

    Somewhere between the two, you have Critical Thinking, which is neither fully skeptical, nor fully dogmatic, but does have some of both.

    Critical Thinking is (somewhat) dogmatic in its commitment to keep an open mind, but (somewhat) skeptical in its desire to not simply believe everything.

    It gives ideas a full hearing, respects what cannot be known, and how that affects the various positions on the issue, and casts its judgment when it feels it appropriate/necessary, knowing the limitations present in the situation.

    Critical Thinking, not skepticism or dogmatism, should be the goal of the good mind.

    The similar quote about skepticism and chastity I came across was by George Santayana
    "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and it is shameful to surrender it too soon or to the first comer: there is nobility in preserving it coolly and proudly through long youth, until at last, in the ripeness of instinct and discretion, it can be safely exchanged for fidelity and happiness."
    Thank you for posting.

    I actually originally posted "chastity of the intellect", but then changed it.

    I couldn't remember who the original author was - I read it via another author - and the piece in which I read it had to do with skepticism and the modern mind.

    I know Santayana was a naturalist and a moral relativist (sort of), but I'm not sure if I am thinking of the same thing you were.
    I've never directly studied him - only read his quotes when other authors have used them.

    Well, maybe one essay, actually.

    I tend to like what he writes - he seems very wise and well-versed - though he comes off as rather inert.

    Are you talking about me personally, or a hypothetical skeptic?
    Both? Perhaps.

    I was trying to offer you potential insight, based on what you'd written.

    I think the person choosing to spend his/her time gets to choose how to do it.
    That's fine.

    But if embedded in their behavior is the tacit assumption that what the other person values is not valuable enough for one to sit, listen to, and consider, then one should not be surprised when the other does not respond well to them in kind.

    Also, what are your expectations here?
    Expectations?

    I'm not sure I have any...

    I spent four years trying to see things as an Evangelical Christian. God, for me, is an important thing. Would you expect me to spend similar effort in search of ghosts, the Yeti, or Bigfoot?
    I think God is the most important of all questions, so no.

    Ghosts I would not necessarily put in the same bucket as Bigfoot or the Yeti.

    One need not put significant effort into researching these things, but could still keep an open mind to them (without necessarily believing in them, and even finding them highly unlikely [as I certainly do with Bigfoot, to a {very} slightly lesser extent the Yeti, and to a lesser extent ghosts {per your explanation, et al, the idea of ghosts/spirits has more room for interpretation, as well as more avenues for possibility (if one is truly open-minded about considering those possibilities)}]).

    Would you, for instance, spend four years living as an ardent skeptic to see the value in modern skepticism as an attitude as an adult?
    Or are you currently too skeptical of skepticism?
    I have already done so.

    What I discovered is that pure skepticism is its own form of dogmatism, and that the two "opposites" are actually the same in one crucial way: they are equally close-minded.

    In between those two poles, right in the middle, is maximum open-mindedness (which actually includes openness to the possibility of closing one's mind at some point [i.e., the notion that, after considering all relevant information, one can actually make an informed judgment that can be correct; i.e., not simply the shallow/false "open-mindedness" of the typical liberal, post-modernist, hippy variety]), which both listens to the relevant information, but also takes a critical view of it (note: not skeptical, but critical [the difference between the two being that one - criticality - comes from a place of genuine open-mindedness, whereas, the other - skepticism - does not {its grounding is actually in close-mindedness (just like dogmatism)}]).

    Well, suppose this pattern turns out to be true, and for larger groups.

    What is it that you expect Ti doms to do? Not be Ti doms? Is that fair?
    No, they should continue to be Ti doms.

    They simply should cease to be Ti reets.

    This means recognizing the limitation and narrowness of their ego block's/fixation's lens, and to eliminate the problems associated with such narrow and limited fixation.

    Awareness -> Acceptance -> Action

    Become aware of the problematic ego fixation (if, indeed, it does exist).

    Accept that this is the current state of affairs, who you currently are, where you currently reside.

    Then act to change, to overcome the problematic elements of one's fixation.

    ***

    Then the cycle repeats itself.

    What new awareness must one achieve next time around?

    (In addition to the remembering of what it learned last time.)

    (This is, in essence, a *deepening* of the awareness.)

    What are the problematic elements of your fixation?

    How could these problematic aspects be remedied?

    What new perspective(s) should you assimilate?

    How does this relate to your shadow?

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTJ] ENTJ reaction to end of relationship
    By Kambro in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 10-01-2010, 08:17 AM
  2. [ENFP] Reaction to emotional problems in ENFP and INFP
    By Chloe in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 09-01-2010, 10:35 AM
  3. Your reactions to other types
    By stellar renegade in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 07-30-2009, 10:05 AM
  4. Fellow dancers - What's your reaction to this video?
    By Snow Turtle in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-05-2009, 11:07 AM
  5. advice on MBTI vs social reaction to changes (ex: environmental changes)
    By Louis-Philippe in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-04-2008, 06:22 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