If there is no real world application, I could care less.
Words are wind.
I'm on the fence. I get frustrated with people whose default mindset is one of skepticism, even when the argument is sound and there's a good basis in evidence, but some of the more advanced scientific theories and esoteric forms of understanding don't lend themselves to immediate application, if they lend themselves at all.
I can't imagine what practical, material application, say, Zen teachings or Kant's categories might have, for example, but they're enlightening ideas humanity is richer for having.
Knowledge is power, but only if put to use.
Man. These sum everything up.If there is no real world application, I could care less.
Words are wind.
zen teachings include meditation. meditation allows your brains to physically work in more balanced way(without sacrificing your stronger points), helps concentration etc. thus allowing your brains to work in more effective way. dont you see any practical application for your brains to work better?
not to mention the whole people living in better harmony and world working better..
True, I suppose it depends on how we define "applied".
Typically when people are talking about "applied theory" they're talking about how theory can be applied to produce material goods for sale, or to produce devices that can in turn produce material goods. Personal betterment is all fine and good, but you'd have to go through some contortions to show how Zen practice itself could be used to produce salable goods.
I have a very broad definition of "applied," myself--less about material goods, specifically, and more about being productive or enabling or enhancing productivity. Maybe (maybe!) my definition is off, but it's been usefulTrue, I suppose it depends on how we define "applied".
Typically when people are talking about "applied theory" they're talking about how theory can be applied to produce material goods for sale, or to produce devices that can in turn produce material goods. Personal betterment is all fine and good, but you'd have to go through some contortions to show how Zen practice itself could be used to produce salable goods.
[*]Stephen Covey and INTP both cover how effective "sharpening the saw" is--it's tackling a root problem (dealing with that rusted saw) in order better solve the problem at hand (crafting a chair or house, or something, which requires us to cut some wood).
True, I suppose it depends on how we define "applied".
Typically when people are talking about "applied theory" they're talking about how theory can be applied to produce material goods for sale, or to produce devices that can in turn produce material goods. Personal betterment is all fine and good, but you'd have to go through some contortions to show how Zen practice itself could be used to produce salable goods.
I have a very broad definition of "applied," myself--less about material goods, specifically, and more about being productive or enabling or enhancing productivity. Maybe (maybe!) my definition is off, but it's been useful
Here's a collection of thoughts that I'm going to vomit into this thread. We'll see what sticks.
- Stephen Covey and INTP both cover how effective "sharpening the saw" is--it's tackling a root problem (dealing with that rusted saw) in order better solve the problem at hand (crafting a chair or house, or something, which requires us to cut some wood).
- Another example: when I've studied typology, I've focused mostly on exploring my types--the biggest "bang for the buck." My focus on personal development has made me a more effective leader, which has in turn helped others to produce material goods.
- A case could (stress on "could") be made about meditation as well, but probably moreso about activities that help us center ourselves. Something along the lines of: centering oneself once in a while is important if we're ever going to be effective in our daily lives.
- In general, personal betterment (and other related activities) could very well be used to enhance productivity. On its surface, it's far removed from the problems that we're trying to solve or the goods that we're trying to make--but enhancing it has the potential to greatly enhance our problem-solving or.. good-creation; it regards the surface problems as symptoms and focuses on root problems.
Overall, my definition of "applied" tends to stop at "studying ideas for their own sake." As long as there's a somewhat practical goal in mind, then it's "applicable" in my book.
--
By the way, an example of very practical application of Kant's (and others') philosophical ideas is in the realm of machine ethics--one of my fields of study. It took us .. what, centuries to start applying very abstract philosophical ideas, but we're finally doing it!
If I were an adherent of JCF at all, I'd say that, from my perspective, self-described Ti-dominants can be pedantic and miss the forest for the trees--for example, correcting single words, as if the larger context or the underlying message didn't actually concern them at all.exactly, i think this is one of the biggest differences between INTPs(and i think other NPs, you seriously think you are an ENFJ ?) and INTJs, INTPs look for the root problem and modifying that, INTJs look at the surface of things and often miss the underlying problem, because its irrelevant to them, as it doesent have any direct consequences to external world.
its funny that there was a huge debate about this on some Ni thread, all INTJs went bunkers when i told that INTPs look at the root of things more than INTJs, while INTJs are concentrated on more superficial things. all i got to say to that is that ofc it looks to INTJs that they see the deepest root of things, if they cant see far enough, but yet see some roots, but thats the whole point, they see something and nothing past that, rational conclusion = they see it all, all they see is all there is to them.
i cba to explain myself in this thread(and i think other NPs, you seriously think you are an ENFJ ?)
I don't really know anything about Kant -- but Zen teachings and similar things can help people lead better lives, which in my opinion is a very, very important practical application.I can't imagine what practical, material application, say, Zen teachings or Kant's categories might have, for example, but they're enlightening ideas humanity is richer for having.
I guess I see that. The phrase "grand narrative" rubs me the wrong way, a little bit, but I know some INTJs who would probably relate to that word choice.I think it makes TJs feel safe to have a "grand narrative" about reality that they view as incontrovertible and unassailable.
I agree with this entire post!Before anything else, I view knowledge as power.
The most powerful knowledge, is knowledge that can have a bearing on ones day to day life.
That's why I care about what's going on in the world right now.
Most theories get replaced or change prior to application, so I don't care to waste mental horsepower on stuff that's going to change, and can't give me some advantage now.
I'll wait till it's implemented and then learn about it.
If I'm personally interested in the subject, I'm way more willing to get into esoterics, but even then my focus will remain on the real world application of the knowledge.
If I were an adherent of JCF at all, I'd say that, from my perspective, self-described Ti-dominants can be pedantic and miss the forest for the trees--for example, correcting single words, as if the larger context or the underlying message didn't actually concern them at all.
If I bought into JCF, I'd also mention that Covey is often typed ENTJ, and that many of the systems engineering researchers (the ones who study engineering problem formulation) I know who have any interest in the system have typed as TJs.
Not to say that TJs have a monopoly on identifying and fixing root cause. Anyone who's smart enough would see that root causes and underlying problems have a great effect on the external world--more of an effect than treating surface-level symptoms, for sure.
i cba to explain myself in this thread