User Tag List

First 11192021222331 Last

Results 201 to 210 of 650

  1. #201
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FineLine View Post
    Oh well, agree to disagree as always.

    Congrats on the book, by the way.
    Another interesting thought. Claims of pure mathematics would indeed be useless if they describe nothing of reality.

    Take the principle of mathematics concerning addition. We know that this is a true principle because we can confirm that 2 plus 2 make 4 in real life by adding 2 sets of objects together.

    Hence, applied mathematics gives us a reason to believe that a principle of pure mathematics is true. However, the principle of pure mathematics is a prerequisite for the work in applied mathematics because if we are to do any empirical testing, we must first have a clear idea of what it is that we are testing.

    Thus, before we go on to look for Fi or Ti in people, we must first have an idea of what Fi or Ti is. This justifies the precedence of pure typology over applied typology.

    How would this work? Suppose I make a hypothesis that there is a Thinking function, and such a function is responsible for logical reasoning and it contraposes with subjective value judgments. We go on to do empirical testing. We study the works of philosophers, writers and scientists to see if we observe such tendencies. If we do, than we can conclude that we have discovered a typological principle.
    "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/

  2. #202
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    Why are you soooo predictable?

    ---

    What's interesting in Fineline's pots, is the notion of "getting out of touch" or not. Your narcissism seem so disproportionate that you don't even seem aware of it, and how it contaminates every reasoning you make.
    It's a question of balance, maybe.

    Extreme Ti user are always prone to severe logical fallacies, since their arguments are not really grounded, since they lack this "broad view"; the context for instance, or being aware of their own limits.
    Narcissism?
    Logical fallacies?

    Where?

    Could it simply be the case that you only have imagined there is narcissism and logical fallacies, but there truly are not? As you, my dear sir, have a vigorous imagination after all!
    "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/

  3. #203
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Narcissism?
    Logical fallacies?

    Where?

    Could it simply be the case that you only have imagined there is narcissism and logical fallacies, but there truly are not? As you, my dear sir, have a vigorous imagination after all!
    When you'll be able not to comply to Bluewing's laws, then I'll recognize I may have "imagined" something. Prove me I'm wrong!

    ---

    What you don't seem to realize, is that a perfect reasoning doesn't necessarily lead to objectivity. To reach that goal, one must firstly be self-aware of our own subjectivity, a basic step you have never done yet (unless you are a prankster, an eventuality I do not push aside since you are quite caricatural, so far). And alas, subjectivity doesn't mean irrationality: you can be very subjective, and very rational in the same time: you're a shining example of that.

    You can use your reason any time you like, if you lack context and balance, then it's pointless. Ti is never more accurate than when we are able to figure out our current emotional state, our own hidden goals, our own unconscious side.

    I think you should read a bit of Husserl, sometimes, it can't do any harm. Try some epoche... :rolli:
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  4. #204
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    ---

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    What you don't seem to realize, is that a perfect reasoning doesn't necessarily leads to objectivity..
    It leads to objectivity. As perfect reasoning means perfect compliance with laws of logic, or a deductively valid argument. It certainly does not guarantee the knowledge of the truth or a sound argument. This does require more than reasoning, it also requires that you have accurate information to start with. However, as aforementioned, good reasoning should inspire you to search for accurate information because inaccurate information will manifest in your thinking in a form of contradictions which you will have an urge to correct if you are a devoted logician.

    In short, good reasoning does not guarantee the truth, but it is the most reliable guide to the truth we have. The offer it makes is good enough.

    It is not helpful to think of yourself as subjective if you are interested in the truth. That is not relevant. If you want the truth you should make an earnest effort to abide by the laws of logical reasoning.
    "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. #205
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Perfect objectivity is impossible because no conclusions could be drawn from gathered information alone, the information must be subjectively processed to make conclusions.

  6. #206
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    Perfect objectivity is impossible because no conclusions could be drawn from gathered information alone, the information must be subjectively processed to make conclusions.
    Exactly.
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  7. #207
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    Perfect objectivity is impossible because no conclusions could be drawn from gathered information alone, the information must be subjectively processed to make conclusions.
    That is true. However, as close of an adherence to logic or laws of reasoning as possible will bring us as close to complete objectivity as possible.

    I never maintained that complete objectivity was possible.
    "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/

  8. #208
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    That is true. However, as close of an adherence to logic or laws of reasoning as possible will bring us as close to complete objectivity as possible.
    Is Objectivity caused by adherence to logic and laws of reasoning.

    Or are logic and laws of reasoning caused by Objectivity?

  9. #209
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    Is Objectivity caused by adherence to logic and laws of reasoning.

    Or are logic and laws of reasoning caused by Objectivity?
    Oh, depth + paradox = insight, me likey!!!

    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  10. #210
    lab rat extraordinaire CrystalViolet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    XNFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FineLine View Post
    Here's my own thinking on the subject. Everything's relative, so Fi has to be examined in the context of Ti, and even in the context of Te and Fe.

    Everyone's usually pretty clear on what Te and Fe are. In my own shorthand, Te is short-term analysis and rationalizing for organizational purposes. Fe is short-term emotional bonding and relationship-building for organizational purposes. (I know those definitions will be challenged, but I'll go with them for now and you can judge for yourself subsequently whether those definitions are critically flawed for purposes of this exposition.)

    Ti and Fi, then, are the same things as above, but introspected into the form of a system: Ti types analyze and rationalize in order to build logical systems. Fi types study emotions and relationships in order to build value systems.

    What's the difference between the extraverted and introverted versions of T and F? Fe and Te place a high value on the social contract as a means of dealing with life. I'll hypothesize that Te and Fe types were valued as caretakers and contributors when they were children; they were rewarded for participating in the community (the family) and taught not to value solitary accomplishments. By comparison, Ti and Fi types place a high value on the solipsist self as the best tool for dealing with life. Frankly, all the Ps (Dominant and Auxiliary Ti and Fi types) are kind of whiny and selfish by comparison to the average J.

    What's the difference between Fi and Ti under this scheme? Again, I'll hypothesize some formative childhood influences, just to create a paradigm--a fun little tool for understanding the differences in type. Ti types often seem to have been raised in chaotic environments in some key ways--a demanding parent, a suffocating parent, squeezed by strong or simply too many siblings, etc. Unable to compete on an emotional (bonding) level, they strive to win their fair share of the family pie by relying on rules and logic. Thus, let's say that T is motivated by a need for fairness in order to deal with emotional chaos. Fi types, on the other hand, seem to carry old wounds from abandonment or lack of attention. Let's say Fi is about building emotional bonds in order to address fears of abandonment or lack of attention.

    Is Ti more grounded in reality than Fi? Not at all. Both types get their original inputs from the world around them. In the process of introspecting systems from those inputs, both types may remain connected with the outer world or may become increasingly cut off from the outer world. If both are connected with the outer world, they can probably offer sound reasons for the introspected systems that they create. If both are cut off from the outer world, they may have trouble justifying their systems, rationales, and behaviors in the real world. Fi types may become new agers, believing in things because they "feel right"; Ti types may spend their lives studying and becoming proficient in Klingon or archiving libraries of old train schedules, apparently for no better reason than because it gives them a bit of notoriety in a tiny subset of cultish types who share that interest sprinkled around the nation, even as they become totally estranged from the family members who live in the same house with them.

    Even when they can offer reasons for their systems, are the base beliefs of a Ti any more reasonable than those of an Fi? Many's the time I've asked a Ti why he treats a spouse or a family member in some strange fashion. "Because it's fair." But is fair really the issue here?--that person should hold an honored place in your life, and you're treating them like the family dog. "I treat people fairly. I can't explain it any clearer than that. It's just who I am. If I gave my wife or my kid better treatment than the family dog, I wouldn't be me anymore."

    Frankly, it's the same ridiculous answer an Fi might give when pushed on why he won't accept the precepts of basic math or science. The Ti person is no more in touch with real life than the Fi person. They're just two sides of the same coin. The Ti person can't simply choose to ignore the rules of emotions and human interactions any more than the Fi person can simply choose to ignore the rules of logic and science. To do so is to prove how badly one is out of touch with reality. IOW, the Ti function offers no more protection against falling completely out of touch with reality than the Fi function.

    Both types will survive and even prosper, but if they persist in their one-sided development their lives and their introspected systems will be severely and obviously (to an outside observer) deficient in key respects.

    So what's Fi? Pretty much the same thing as Ti. Emotional systems and hierarchies will be mulled and constructed pretty much the same as logical systems and hierarchies. Raw material will be taken from the world. If the Fi or Ti person believes strongly in God, then God is going to appear in both systems. If the Fi and Ti persons are both well-educated and in good contact with the world, then they'll both be able to argue their systems coherently and exhaustively; for example, if the subject is the death penalty, then perhaps the Ti person will tend to pull out a lot of law books and the Fi person will tend to pull out a lot of philosophy books on the subject of the value of life. Neither argument will automatically or intrinsically be stronger than the other. Law and philosophy ultimately draw their water from the same well--real life.

    And if the Fi and Ti persons are grossly solipsist and out of touch with the real world, then the Fi person is going to belong to some new age cult or live in a world of bunny-rabbit and butterfly and rainbow stickers on their windows and wonder why they never seem to find true love; the Ti person is going to belong to some Heavens Gate cult or live in a one-room studio with bare walls and spend their lives prowling the internet pushing some conspiracy theory and wonder why they never seem to find true love.

    Big difference. :rolli:
    Fine Line,
    This post described everything to me beautifully.

    Yeah, I've had gut reactions to things as well. I particularly remember this one time when someone was introducing me to a new manager (at a shitty job I held while still in high school), and I became completely overwhelmed by this random sinister feeling about the guy. I don't know what it was, and it certainly had no reasons attached to it, but it made me avoid him like the plague from there on out. Would that be Fi?
    I thought that was what Fi was too...but it could be intuition base as was stated later on.

    I'm going to relate a circumstance, which I think is Fi related...bare with me, I'm trying to work out the Fi/Ti thing, although I think it's all the Ti in this thread that makes my head hurt.
    Forgive me if I seem to meander through the example...I'm hoping it will be indicative of the thought processes involved.

    In my work, I have to be able to make quick decisions, which theoretically should be based on logic, but for me as my intuition is perhaps my strongest "function", a fair amount of my decisions are based on "gut feelings". I have to concentrate intensely, and if I'm getting distracted by phone calls, and personal inquiries, I get a little flustered. One of the machines that is analyzing the data breaks downs, and one of my co-workers goes off to find maintenance, while the other stays twiddling her finger, instead of starting up the back-up analyzer. I start to worry that the work is backing up and I have stay back and finish it, and then I wonder why my co-worker isn't starting up the back machine. Instead she is is wasting time talking to another co-worker . I start to get angry, because she makes no move, and it's been over 15 mins, and I know I will have to deal with lots of phone calls from people who wonder where the data is. Then the phone calls start, and I have no time to go over and ask her to start up the back up machine, so I'm seething by now. Can't my co-worker see the work backing up....she shows absolutely no concern for any one else around her. I start to think to myself, she always does this, she never thinks about doing her work. She is such a bad and lazy worker...god, I hate it when I have to think for her. The mantainace team arrive, and I get a break in between phone calls. Looking back, she had no idea what was going on in my head, as she wasn't expecting my reaction, which was " You so don't have any work ethic what so ever! I need you to start up the second machine now."
    Looking back, I should have explained to her, what was required and why, instead of getting angry and acting irrationally.
    Instead, I acted upon my anger, misconstrued what I was feeling for a violation of one of my deeply held values - to be seen working hard = good work ethic.
    It's probably not the best example, but if I have interpreted things correctly, it is an example of Fi in use (?though possibly not high functioning Fi).
    Currently submerged under an avalanche of books and paper work. I may come back up for air from time to time.
    Real life awaits and she is a demanding mistress.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Similar Threads

  1. "It's only people's games you got to dodge" -Dylan
    By rfossr in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-28-2014, 02:09 PM
  2. A re-introduction even though it is said you only get one.
    By Serendipity in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-18-2014, 08:51 PM
  3. If you don't get, then you don't get it
    By proteanmix in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-03-2009, 11:21 PM
  4. Organization, how do you get it done? (Ps welcome)
    By raz in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 02-02-2009, 02:46 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