User Tag List

First 4567 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 64

  1. #51
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    Every individual has an essence. Form/function? To be is to do, and I learn about your essence based on what you do. The essence of a thing is the set of qualities that thing, and only that thing, always has. Sets of things can also have an essence: the desiderata being the set of qualities that all members and only members always have. We may not have sufficient data to determine what a thing is, and we'll never know everything about anything, but that doesn't mean we can't know something about some things--based on what they do.

    :confused: I don't see the problem.
    Unfortunately, I'm quite a nominalist (not strong, but still)... I fear that talk of essences tends to project mental categories (NOT in the Kantian sense) onto the world outside, as opposed to acknowledging talk of 'essence' as being just, in my thinking, a way of seeing something, not as a concrete element of what it is. So at this point, we're at a bit of an impasse.
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

  2. #52
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    Unfortunately, I'm quite a nominalist (not strong, but still)... I fear that talk of essences tends to project mental categories (NOT in the Kantian sense) onto the world outside, as opposed to acknowledging talk of 'essence' as being just, in my thinking, a way of seeing something, not as a concrete element of what it is. So at this point, we're at a bit of an impasse.
    Perhaps.

    But, it seems, you do find it permissible to speak as if something is. If we are capable of making this distinction, (between being and non-being) then what's to keep us from making more distinctions about what is?

  3. #53
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    Perhaps.

    But, it seems, you do find it permissible to speak as if something is. If we are capable of making this distinction, (between being and non-being) then what's to keep us from making more distinctions about what is?
    Unless I go all Gayatri Spivak and put the copula "is" under erasure... but yes, I do feel we must assert that things are...

    I agree that we are capable of making the distinction between being and non-being... though I'm starting to get scared... what is "non-being" aside from not-being being? Anyway... onwards...

    We can make distinctions about what-is more easily than asserting exactly 'what'/'why'/'how' what-is... for instance, this thing presents these sorts of impressions to me... I can attribute certain qualities to it... for instance... this orange object has small, let's call them seeds which when planted in soil tend to grow into trees... there is a yellow object which does not have seeds which are viable, sometimes do not have seeds at all... both the yellow and orange objects share the qualities of having sweet-to-us fleshy insides which we can eat and benefit from nutritionally and come from trees... lets call both of them fruits...

    yellow fruit and orange fruit.... banana and orange... modern store-bought bananas often have no viable seeds, orange has seeds... yet both are fruits...

    what are the essences of bananas and oranges? Particularly between newer varieties of bananas versus regular oranges? Do they share essences? Or are they all their own, banana-essence and orange-essence... in which case, why are they both called fruits? Are their essences to be possessed of fruitness?

    Have we made a mistake?

    So... I guess what I'm saying is that.... there could be essences, but I've had no luck finding a really solid proof that essences are what we say they are, or that even one particular object or thing or person has had a properly-described essence... if I can't be shown analytically that even one particular object has an essence, how can I believe that there are essences?

    In other words, I just have to have some faith that things have essences...

    So, I do distinguish between being and non-being... another long discussion which will take me back to Heidegger, whom I don't understand. But I can't yet accept the notion of essences... which doesn't mean I can't joyfully accept "specific difference"... I am a big fan of "specific difference"...

    So, I weakly reject the notion that we can wholly describe the essence of something, but I strongly accept the notion that we can differentiate between existing things.

    I hope that made sense.... how would you justify essence?

    Edit: P.S. I realize that these posts, particularly the dialogue between Owl and me, are veering quickly off-topic... but they may be instructive... as to the apparently prevalent opinion that NTs are logic-monsters... but I'm getting impatient with this discussion, because I realize that logic's only going to get me so far... and impatience is a sort of feeling, n'est-ce pas?
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

  4. #54
    The Black Knight Domino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    eNFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx/so
    Socionics
    eNFJ Ni
    Posts
    11,443

    Default

    People, please. There's no pertinent question here.

    Everyone knows that NTs are robots. I mean, seriously. How do you think those puddles of oil and tranny fluid wind up in parking lots? You might say "cars", but you'd be wrong. It's robots. NT robots. And Canadians.
    eNFJ 4w3 sx/so 468 tritype
    Neutral Good
    EII-Fi subtype, Ethical/Empath, Delta/Beta
    RLUEI, Choleric/Melancholic
    Inquistive/Limbic
    AIS Holland code
    Researcher: VDI-P
    Dramatic>Sensitive>Serious

  5. #55
    Senior Member sriv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    JIxT
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PinkPiranha View Post
    People, please. There's no pertinent question here.

    Everyone knows that NTs are robots. I mean, seriously. How do you think those puddles of oil and tranny fluid wind up in parking lots? You might say "cars", but you'd be wrong. It's robots. NT robots. And Canadians.
    I'd rather be made of metal than semi-solid fluid.

    To answer the question - I care about things outside of logic, but not as much as much.
    Reyson: ...If you were to change your ways, I'm sure we could rebuild the relationship the two of us once shared.

    Naesala: Oh no, that I could never do. You see, humans are essential to the fulfillment of my ambitions.

    Reyson: You've changed, Naesala. If this is the path you've chosen, I've nothing left to say.

  6. #56
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PinkPiranha View Post
    People, please. There's no pertinent question here.

    Everyone knows that NTs are robots. I mean, seriously. How do you think those puddles of oil and tranny fluid wind up in parking lots? You might say "cars", but you'd be wrong. It's robots. NT robots. And Canadians.
    "tranny fluid" ...
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

  7. #57
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    Unless I go all Gayatri Spivak and put the copula "is" under erasure... but yes, I do feel we must assert that things are...

    I agree that we are capable of making the distinction between being and non-being... though I'm starting to get scared... what is "non-being" aside from not-being being? Anyway... onwards...

    We can make distinctions about what-is more easily than asserting exactly 'what'/'why'/'how' what-is... for instance, this thing presents these sorts of impressions to me... I can attribute certain qualities to it... for instance... this orange object has small, let's call them seeds which when planted in soil tend to grow into trees... there is a yellow object which does not have seeds which are viable, sometimes do not have seeds at all... both the yellow and orange objects share the qualities of having sweet-to-us fleshy insides which we can eat and benefit from nutritionally and come from trees... lets call both of them fruits...

    yellow fruit and orange fruit.... banana and orange... modern store-bought bananas often have no viable seeds, orange has seeds... yet both are fruits...

    what are the essences of bananas and oranges? Particularly between newer varieties of bananas versus regular oranges? Do they share essences? Or are they all their own, banana-essence and orange-essence... in which case, why are they both called fruits? Are their essences to be possessed of fruitness?

    Have we made a mistake?

    So... I guess what I'm saying is that.... there could be essences, but I've had no luck finding a really solid proof that essences are what we say they are, or that even one particular object or thing or person has had a properly-described essence... if I can't be shown analytically that even one particular object has an essence, how can I believe that there are essences?

    In other words, I just have to have some faith that things have essences...

    So, I do distinguish between being and non-being... another long discussion which will take me back to Heidegger, whom I don't understand. But I can't yet accept the notion of essences... which doesn't mean I can't joyfully accept "specific difference"... I am a big fan of "specific difference"...

    So, I weakly reject the notion that we can wholly describe the essence of something, but I strongly accept the notion that we can differentiate between existing things.

    I hope that made sense.... how would you justify essence?

    Edit: P.S. I realize that these posts, particularly the dialogue between Owl and me, are veering quickly off-topic... but they may be instructive... as to the apparently prevalent opinion that NTs are logic-monsters... but I'm getting impatient with this discussion, because I realize that logic's only going to get me so far... and impatience is a sort of feeling, n'est-ce pas?
    I think you and I are going to get on splendidly!

    How do I justify essences?

    The essence of a thing just is what that thing is particularly. If you'd like, we could substitute talk of essences for what a thing is particularly, based on its specific differences.

    But differences are based on what thing is and what it isn

  8. #58
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    The essence of a thing just is what that thing is particularly. If you'd like, we could substitute talk of essences for what a thing is particularly, based on its specific differences.
    I would love to xD

    Havent read more so far, but I guess the answer is no
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  9. #59
    Guerilla Urbanist Brendan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    911

    Default

    I think "do NTs care about anything independently of logic" would be a bit of a better question.
    There is no such thing as separation from God.

  10. #60
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    I just noticed that not all of my last post posted. Lame.

    Anyway, I hope you find the answers you seek.

    Quote Originally Posted by entropie View Post
    I would love to xD

    Havent read more so far, but I guess the answer is no
    What was the question?

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] As an NT, do you care about logic?
    By danseen in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 02-13-2015, 03:03 PM
  2. Do you care about the "Death of Privacy"?
    By Salomé in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 10-26-2010, 04:54 PM
  3. [NF] Do NFs care about anything outside of ethics/emotions?
    By Kiddo in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 12-05-2008, 10:55 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