User Tag List

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: God: The ultimate object of INTP analysis

  1. #21
    right on the left wing Array Philosorapteuse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012


    Tbh, I actually find the existence or otherwise of a deity to be a pretty boring question in comparison to the rest of philosophy. In the end there's nothing to get hold of, just the same tired old arguments going back and forth, and eventually someone takes it personally and it all goes downhill. Really hard to get people to divorce their personal convictions from that debate, which is something that drives me nuts. I'd be more inclined to say that the nature of logic, language and reality is a better candidate for an ultimate object of analysis. It's all so gloriously recursive and totally abstract. Om nom nom nom metaphysics. <3
    "A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices." --William James

    I'd be a card-carrying sensotard, but I can't find the goddamn card.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Array Ism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008


    I always felt guilty for not pondering the great cosmos and whether or not there was a higher being. And if there was, what it would be like. Even before I discovered typology and other INTPs who were more interested in the matter, I never gave it much thought, but always felt as if I should.

    I do think it is important to at least dedicate a full few hours of brain-storming/researching. It's such a hazy orb of uncertainty, I feel like ignoring it is just because I'm being intellectually lazy. 0-0

    But I'll get around to it eventually . . . eventually . . .

  3. #23
    ⒺⓉⒷ Array Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    548 sp/sx


    I was raised on one hand being taught about God from the adults of my grandparent's generation, but my parents had thrown off religion, and when they saw how it was being used to teach me stuff like not defending myself, then my father stepped in more to teach me evolutionary naturalism, through the nature shows on PBS, and such.

    I then saw religion as a primitive control too, especially in the 80's, where evangelicalism suddenly thrust itself into the core of political debate (and by people who often seemed to be opposed to racial progress and economic equality, along with the moral issues where they wanted to control everyone else's behavior).

    Totally frustrated with life in general by my 20's, I ironically try it out, especially when I find variations of it that seemed to make some sense, such as a focus on how prophecy seemed to be being fulfilled, and also, a suggestion from one group that not as many people would be "lost" as mainstream Christianity insisted.

    Still, what I found, was that it was incredibly difficult to get this "faith" to rise beyond the level of hypothesis, as in any other metaphysical belief about the universe. (science, etc). My wife (now a fairly ardent charismatic) had been pointing this out for years). This is natural from a TiNe perspective. It's hypothetically "possible" (Ne), but does not always seem to fit the way the universe is known to work (Ti). When it begins demanding things of me (such as devotion, or "positive attitudes towards pain in life" (below), then I feel double-bound, and Trickster Se demands hard tangible evidence).
    Faith is often fed to us as the basis of a coping strategy, where we use it to weather the storms of life, because we are looking for a "new world" after this one. This is the basis of much of televangelism today, which is only a small part of a massive teaching industry via the other media (books, speaking engagements, etc). "Life is but a vapor" (James 4:14), and "So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal." (2 Cor. 4:18) are often tossed about, and from this, a fairly popular old hymn says "Fix your eyes upon Jesus; look full in His wonderful face, and the things of earth will grow strangely dim...". This is seriously fed to the flock in the face of suffering, and if people still don't change their attitude, then their "faith" is questioned! (and it certainly doesn't help how the leaders often amass a lot of the good things of the world, and have loudly voiced their fears of "the godless" taking it all away from them!)

    So while holding onto it, I really struggle with it. Much of the evangelical argument for man's culpability in unbelief is the first two chapters of Romans, which talks about God "showing" people Himself presumably through "nature". But ironically, nature is the very thing science has used too challenge the idea of God in the first place. This is then chalked up to "holding the truth in unrighteousness". They know the truth, but deliberately interpret the evidence wrong. "Intelligent Design" and "conscience" are these absolute evidences (known as "general revelation") that should prove God infallibly, like proving gravity by walking aout a window. But then, they all admit "faith is hard" because it's in the "unseen". Still, man has a duty to "respond".
    From the context of Romans (and much of the rest of the New Testament), the people God had "shown" things to, were the Israelites in the Temple system, through special revelation (supernatural events and His presence before the nation).

    NT is said to be the most skeptical regarding faith, and it comes out for me this way. When first studying temperament, I also remember hearing that Choleric in Control has the hardest time "submitting" to God, and this is a direct correspondence.
    While both INT's often seem to be skeptical, I find that INTJ's tend to be harder on it and more skeptical than INTP's. Seems to stem from a "directive" and closure-seeking NiTe perspective in contrast to an "informative" and open TiNe. If an NTJ does believe in it, it tends to play out in "dominating" in different ways.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  4. #24
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Array Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012


    If I cant meet him or her, it spoils it for me. I have a hard time believing in things, (of this nature), that I cant see, possibly why I struggle so much with MBTI.
    "An upsidedown wire heart
    Being sucked into a periscope
    Still the mind is dull
    Like you need another excuse"

    … a theory is primarily a form of insight, i.e. a way of looking
    at the world, and not a form of knowledge of how the world is….
    .. all our different ways of thinking are to be considered as
    different ways of looking at the one reality, each with some
    domain in which it is clear and adequate….
    - David Bohm

  5. #25
    Senior Member Array The Outsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    5w4 sx


    I don't think God is that complex of a subject. What makes it seemingly complex is the vast and contradictory mental landscape surrounding it, produced by imaginative people. Any God that I could rationally conceive of as actually existing, however, would essentially be a simple one.
    I wouldn't mistake fantasizing or speculation for analysis.

Similar Threads

  1. [INTP] The artistic side of INTPs
    By Aleria in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-06-2014, 12:34 PM
  2. The low percentage of INTPs in Western Fantasy and Science Fiction
    By nightwatcher in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 08-11-2012, 07:03 PM
  3. The starting point of mbti analysis
    By entropie in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-25-2011, 10:44 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