INTJ "Intelligent" Myth

[Zarathustra]

p.p.s. Fyi, it's my opinion that Nietzsche's perspectivism was not Nietzsche's sole opinion on the matter.

More than anything, he wanted to throw down the gauntlet, and thus provide a challenge.

He knew the stakes (relativism and nihilism), and he wanted to challenge the philosophers of the future to take up that challenge, and hopefully bring into existence a new thinking to combat a weak and pathetic relativism and nihilism.

It's even more complicated than that, but, just so you know, that's a leading off point for my opinion's on those quotes by Nietzsche.

 

[simulatedworld]

Precisely.

How'd you know that?!?

::dusts off Ti::

Wow, I guess this thing does something after all.


Anyway though...

How does this conclusion help anything? Absolute truth is not useful if we cannot properly identify it as such! It's like we're holding a million pieces of coal and one of them may (or may not) really be a diamond in disguise, but we have no method at all of determining which one it might be.

How might we discern any absolute truths other than the facts that our consciousness exists and that no one knows for certain whether he knows anything (even though he might know something without knowing for sure that he does)?

p.s. This whole issue of "absolute" truth vs other kinds of truth is, imo, well observed through Aristotle's four causes.

And that Heidegger essay.

Check em out.

Already started on the Heidegger essay. May not finish tonight.

Also, my definition of "absolute" knowledge is just that: something that we can know a priori and despite the problem of perceptual bias, through pure reason alone.

 

[Zarathustra]

::dusts off Ti::

Wow, I guess this thing does something after all.


Anyway though...

How does this conclusion help anything? Absolute truth is not useful if we cannot properly identify it as such! It's like we're holding a million pieces of coal and one of them may (or may not) really be a diamond in disguise, but we have no method at all of determining which one it might be.

How might we discern any absolute truths other than the facts that our consciousness exists and that no one knows for certain whether he knows anything (even though he might know something without knowing for sure that he does)?

By not freaking out about out uncertainty; having an open mind to new perspectives and ways of thinking, always giving them their due chance, but subjecting them to critical analysis, incorporating what you find useful and true to whatever extent that you do, and living and enjoying your life.

 

[Lex Talionis]

Also, they are not silly questions to ask..

There's a reason why philosophers have been asking them for centuries.

The meaning is in the questioning...

They are pointless questions to ask as they are eternally bound to remain unanswered by humans. It is what pseudo-philosophers, or pretentious teenagers ask in order to emanate an aura of philosophical understanding and sophistication; in reality, it's just sophistry.

Philosophy is best applied to answering questions about the human mind and its place in the known universe; not absolute questions that nobody can even begin constructing answers for.

However, if you wish to continue down this fruitless road for your own entertainment, then go right ahead. I will only sit in the background and laugh.

 

[SillySapienne]

matter energy

time space

electricity magnetism

Now, take that shit in the context of complexity and organization

Infinite levels of stuff.

"artificial" intelligence

us

we rely on sensors of detection and lenses of perception to decipher what is and what is not

 

[Zarathustra]

Already started on the Heidegger essay. May not finish tonight.

Well, it's not easy reading. Be prepared for years of dealing with the effect it will have on you.

Also, my definition of "absolute" knowledge is just that: something that we can know a priori and despite the problem of perceptual bias, through pure reason alone.

Well, maybe you need to put that perspective to the side (not away), and try out some new forms of thinking for a change.

 

[simulatedworld]

By not freaking out about out uncertainty; having an open mind to new perspectives and ways of thinking, always giving them their due chance, but subjecting them to critical analysis, incorporating what you find useful and true to whatever extent that you do, and living and enjoying your life.

Good advice, but it sounds more conducive to discovering what is useful to me in my particular life circumstances than to discovering absolute truth. Absolute truth would have to be universally true regardless of the conditions of my life or any external variables whatsoever.

Well, maybe you need to put that perspective to the side (not away), and try out some new forms of thinking for a change.

Maybe so. What other definitions of "absolute" do you feel are worth considering?

 

[Zarathustra]

They are pointless questions to ask as they are eternally bound to remain unanswered by humans. It is what pseudo-philosophers, or pretentious teenagers ask in order to emanate an aura of philosophical understanding and sophistication; in reality, it's just sophistry.

Philosophy is best applied to answering questions about the human mind and its place in the known universe; not absolute questions that nobody can even begin constructing answers for.

However, if you wish to continue down this fruitless road for your own entertainment, then go right ahead. I will only sit in the background and laugh.

And I couldn't care less.

 

[Zarathustra]

Good advice, but it sounds more conducive to discovering what is useful to me in my particular life circumstances than to discovering absolute truth. Absolute truth would have to be universally true regardless of the conditions of my life or any external variables whatsoever.



Maybe so. What other definitions of "absolute" do you feel are worth considering?

Just read that stuff I've given you.

 

[simulatedworld]

Just read that stuff I've given you.

I will. In the mean time...a thought that just occurred to me:

Perhaps your emphasis on absorbing that which is useful to me in my life is influenced by the Te perspective, while I (via Ti) seek truth in the pure, absolute sense, independent of any external variables.

 

[SillySapienne]

Good advice, but it sounds more conducive to discovering what is useful to me in my particular life circumstances than to discovering absolute truth. Absolute truth would have to be universally true regardless of the conditions of my life or any external variables whatsoever.

Are you interested in mathematics and/or physics, or the sciences in general?

There exists univeral laws of nature, outside and inside and beside human beings.

 

[simulatedworld]

Are you interested in mathematics and/or physics, or the sciences in general?

There exists univeral laws of nature, outside and inside and beside human beings.

Only insofar as we assume that our perceptions of the ways those laws of nature operate are not deceiving us.

Of course, in the case of scientific laws of nature, I consider that highly improbable, but we're talking about absolute truth here, which is a tough pill to swallow.

 

[SillySapienne]

Philosophy is best applied to answering questions about the human mind and its place in the known universe; not absolute questions that nobody can even begin constructing answers for.

This is very true.

 

[Zarathustra]

I will. In the mean time...a thought that just occurred to me:

Perhaps your emphasis on absorbing that which is useful to me in my life is influenced by the Te perspective, while I (via Ti) seek truth in the pure, absolute sense, independent of any external variables.

Ni very much seeks the same truth.

That's really the root of the variance.

Ni just handles it differently than Ti...

(As your friend stated: "you guys just go about it all wrong")

 

[simulatedworld]

This is very true.

In that case, it would seem a fruitless endeavor to search for absolute truth. We should instead search for relative truths that seem useful and applicable to our lives as humans.

I don't understand how these can be termed "absolute", though.

 

[Zarathustra]

But Te probably then does say, "Let's take what Ni intuits, and go do something in the fucking world."

 

[Zarathustra]

Philosophy is best applied to answering questions about the human mind and its place in the known universe; not absolute questions that nobody can even begin constructing answers for.

This is very true.

It would be very true, if not for the fact that the human mind and its position in the universe are inherently and inevitably related to those questions...

 

[SillySapienne]

"deceiving us"

Say what?

Nature doesn't give a fuck about human beings.

It just is.

However, human beings, which exist within and as part of nature, and the natural world do such things as engage in acts of deception.

I'm too rusty on my science to really engage in this.

We are nature-products who have the opportunity to see/perceive/manipulate the nature within which we're composed of, and encompassed in.

 

[simulatedworld]

But Te probably then does say, "Let's take what Ni intuits, and go do something in the fucking world."

Haha, and that is something I wish I had, sometimes.

For me, Ne+Ti says, "Let's push as many buttons as we can and then condense all the resultant information into a convenient internal model!"

Getting something useful done is...often beside the point. =/

 

[Zarathustra]

In that case, it would seem a fruitless endeavor to search for absolute truth. We should instead search for relative truths that seem useful and applicable to our lives as humans.

I don't understand how these can be termed "absolute", though.

See my post above.