User Tag List

First 4567816 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 332

  1. #51
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    I stand by my original belief that the OP wanted a division on the basis of Functional probability as a determinant for rational pattern creation.

    That said, the Ti is the well-sharpened choice.
    Well, of course it is. Your definition was burdened with the term "rational," which pre-selects for Ti at the outset. It's a tautology.

    A solid consensus on the meanings of "objectivity" and "subjectivity" are in order, I think, if we're to get any further.

  2. #52
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    A solid consensus on the meanings of "objectivity" and "subjectivity" are in order, I think, if we're to get any further.
    Good call. Are we talking about objectivity here, or rationalism? Is anyone equating the two? (cos I don't)
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  3. #53
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    Well, of course it is. Your definition was burdened with the term "rational," which pre-selects for Ti at the outset. It's a tautology.
    In terms of tautology, I'm afraid you may have slipped on the interchangeability of "rational" as an MBTI delineation against a (common) synonym for logical.

    To be quite honest, I'd be curious to hear how my use of "rational" contextually changed the direction of my point?

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    A solid consensus on the meanings of "objectivity" and "subjectivity" are in order, I think, if we're to get any further.
    Agreed.

    On a fun side-note, Midsummer is a great play.

  4. #54
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Aha, so now we have three terms: rational, logical and objective. They seem to have been equated by some, whilst others are drawing distinctions. Can we agree on what these words mean, how they're different and if/where they overlap?
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  5. #55
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute View Post
    Aha, so now we have three terms: rational, logical and objective. They seem to have been equated by some, whilst others are drawing distinctions. Can we agree on what these words mean, how they're different and if/where they overlap?
    Thank you, substitute.

  6. #56
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Haha, so it took only us 55 posts to begin to create a proper framework for the discussion to be constructive. Yay for us!

    (now this is ENTP style debate - the first hour is just everyone throwing their thoughts onto the table, the next hour is sifting through which ones are relevant and finding pertinent questions to ask, and only by the third hour does it begin to actually emerge with theories and conclusions... if the ENTP's haven't got bored/distracted by something else by then and started talking about Star Wars or something...)
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  7. #57
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute View Post
    Aha, so now we have three terms: rational, logical and objective. They seem to have been equated by some, whilst others are drawing distinctions. Can we agree on what these words mean, how they're different and if/where they overlap?
    Here's my take:

    Logical -- To form a philosophy/argument that consists of/with, and is constrained by the nature of logic. Meaning it must not contradict itself, and follow a consistent set of rules that are applied uniformly.

    Objective -- To look at/see something as it actually is, without bias or interpretation. Note that this is technically impossible, because reality for people is filtered first through their limited senses, their mental system for representing that information, and often even through their memories and experience before it becomes conscious. The question is what is closest to this, because nothing actually is such.

    Rational -- To base one's decisions on what would be considered by most people to be acceptable criteria for a long-term decision, especially one that affects/involves more than one person. A society or business might be good example.

  8. #58
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    You know I love your lists Athenian

    I agree with logical, and kinda with the others too, but maybe I'd say about objectivity that since I agree with how you say it's technically not possible in its purest form, then the closest equivalent we can get to it, or what the NT tends to usually have as an ideal for it, is to look at things and judge them without any deliberate or conscious personal bias (excepting obviously those things we can't help such as sensory perceptions - if we see something as blue because our eyes work that way, then even if it's not truly blue, if it's a 'fact' that everyone concerned can agree on then we can regard it as objective for this purpose). I suppose it's a form of non-prejudice, not letting what we previously think or feel about something to influence our current considerations of it.

    I might say that 'rational' is seen by NT's generally as being a method of decision making that utilizes objective logic, as much as possible, as an ideal.

    edit - but the OP'er needs to clarify whether we're talking about NT ideals here, or actual objective facts. Cos the kind of rationalism I just described is, I think, an NT ideal and one that's not shared by everyone. I can see why Proteanmix got cross about equating Thinking with Objectivity, but I think in a way what the OP is addressing and wanting to discuss is a sorta 'internal affair', in as much as NF's might debate what's 'good' or moral or whatever - there can be two ways of doing it, depending what you're hoping to achieve by it. Would they prefer non-idealists to come in and question the assumptions their ideals are built on every time? Or is it like some religious debates, where you just want to talk about the internal logic/rightness of something, not currently interested in how it relates to the external bigger picture?

    Not sure if I put that right - I'm in a hurry again, maybe someone else could rephrase it better for me!
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  9. #59
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute View Post
    You know I love your lists Athenian

    I agree with logical, and kinda with the others too, but maybe I'd say about objectivity that since I agree with how you say it's technically not possible in its purest form, then the closest equivalent we can get to it, or what the NT tends to usually have as an ideal for it, is to look at things and judge them without any deliberate or conscious personal bias (excepting obviously those things we can't help such as sensory perceptions - if we see something as blue because our eyes work that way, then even if it's not truly blue, if it's a 'fact' that everyone concerned can agree on then we can regard it as objective for this purpose). I suppose it's a form of non-prejudice, not letting what we previously think or feel about something to influence our current considerations of it.

    I might say that 'rational' is seen by NT's generally as being a method of decision making that utilizes objective logic, as much as possible, as an ideal.
    Would you say that a "rational" statement is one comprised of many "objective" fibers?

    If so, the difference appears to be an issue of constituency - "rational" seems an application reserved to describe a system of thought, whereas "objective" seems the basic elemental spices that cooperate within a "rational" process.

  10. #60
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Nifty -- it only took 39 posts for a non ENTP/INTP/INTJ to enter the lion's den.

    *applause*
    What's Night, then - chopped liver?!

    (I must say, if my ESFJ mother conversed like this, we'd get on a hell of a lot better...)
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] INTP vs ENTP
    By Doctorjuice in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 03-01-2013, 12:24 PM
  2. INTP vs ENTP
    By Doctorjuice in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-31-2012, 06:43 PM
  3. INTP vs ENTP
    By Mr. Sherlock Holmes in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 11-04-2010, 02:22 PM
  4. INTP vs ENTP
    By Amargith in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 08-27-2009, 12:56 PM
  5. [NT] INTP vs. ENTP
    By Synarch in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 105
    Last Post: 01-05-2009, 08:47 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