I want no bias here...

[Poki]

Interesting. I just need to logically reason against it.

I can logically reason anything. That doesn't provide anything other then an alternative logical path. I still have to prove one thing or another as truth. Logic is not truth, it is true/false. It scares me when people just logically reason shit and ignore truth.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

I find it pretty natural, tbh




Yes, that one was definitely coincidence, the example you gave.

In other cases it may have been real depending on what situation it was, but in that example it was your own mind fooling you. Simply having a sense of certainty does not mean it's a true intuition and not just your mind thinking erroneously.

What do you think intuition is?

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

MDP2525, Poki as ISTPs, do you find your Ti works like this:

"They are inclined to hold a form of pragmatic, logical relativism, thinking that in some cases this might be true, but in other scenarios, a largely different position may be equally as valid. They may be inclined on occasion to detract any process away from a set order to a steady tinkering with different influences and available methodologies, finding ways that feel right to the occasion and adapting to changes, rather than resisting them" ?

Yes. I am scionics SLI, fwiw.

 

[existence]

I can logically reason anything. That doesn't provide anything other then an alternative logical path. I still have to prove one thing or another as truth. Logic is not truth, it is true/false. It scares me when people just logically reason shit and ignore truth.

What truth would be ignored by logically reasoning in the correct way?

Yes you can reason for anything if you are willing to change your axioms around randomly. I don't do that.

I got curious now, give me some anecdote on where someone "logically reasoned shit and ignored truth" in your view

- - - Updated - - -

Yes. I am scionics SLI, fwiw.

Waow, ok that makes sense.

What I quoted is Ti, but Ti used in a different way than the Ti I use.

(I'm still interested tho' about how you relate to what I posted earlier when you get the time - just making it clear that I'm still interested )

What do you think intuition is?

Far reaching associations made by your mind, they may align with reality or they may not. By far reaching I mean it's not obvious from the concrete as it goes significantly further.

 

[Poki]

What truth would be ignored by logically reasoning in the correct way?

Yes you can reason for anything if you are willing to change your axioms around randomly. I don't do that.

I got curious now, give me some anecdote on where someone "logically reasoned shit and ignored truth" in your view

- - - Updated - - -



Waow, ok that makes sense.

What I quoted is Ti, but Ti used in a different way than the Ti I use.

(I'm still interested tho' about how you relate to what I posted earlier when you get the time - just making it clear that I'm still interested )



Far reaching associations made by your mind, they may align with reality or they may not. By far reaching I mean it's not obvious from the concrete as it goes significantly further.

Define axiom?

Truth is truth whether or not we are able to logically reason it or not. Not matter how far fetched something maybe if it really happened it is truth, doesn't mean we have a valid logical reason that aligns with the truth of it all. But we sure as hell can create some complicated over arching logical system that is fool proof...lie conspiracy theories, but things that "seem" reasonable.

 

[existence]

Define axiom?

Truth is truth whether or not we are able to logically reason it or not. Not matter how far fetched something maybe if it really happened it is truth, doesn't mean we have a valid logical reason that aligns with the truth of it all. But we sure as hell can create some complicated over arching logical system that is fool proof...lie conspiracy theories, but things that "seem" reasonable.

The axioms are the foundation of a logical system. In my case, I prefer them to be rooted in objective reality out there as detected-sensed by us.

No, a so called complicated over arching logical system != conspiracy theory. Heh.

A big problem with conspiracy theories is that they don't try to follow logical causality closely enough. There's far too many logical jumps achieved through certain assumptions.

And then when you weed those out, if you can prove their incorrectness during that process, you will end up refuting the conspiracy theory but overall at least you will show that the theory is lacking too much proof to be taken seriously right now.

 

[Poki]

The axioms are the foundation of a logical system. In my case, I prefer them to be rooted in objective reality out there as detected-sensed by us.

No, a so called complicated over arching logical system != conspiracy theory. Heh.

A big problem with conspiracy theories is that they don't try to follow logical causality closely enough. There's far too many logical jumps achieved through certain assumptions.

And then when you weed those out, if you can prove their incorrectness during that process, you will end up refuting the conspiracy theory but overall at least you will show that the theory is lacking too much proof to be taken seriously right now.

Example of an axiom?

 

[Poki]

The axioms are the foundation of a logical system. In my case, I prefer them to be rooted in objective reality out there as detected-sensed by us.

No, a so called complicated over arching logical system != conspiracy theory. Heh.

A big problem with conspiracy theories is that they don't try to follow logical causality closely enough. There's far too many logical jumps achieved through certain assumptions.

And then when you weed those out, if you can prove their incorrectness during that process, you will end up refuting the conspiracy theory but overall at least you will show that the theory is lacking too much proof to be taken seriously right now.

So scientific conspiracy theories...got it. You can't just not dot the T and cross the I. If you do you may screw something up.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

Yes this makes sense, thanks. I relate to the house analogy, I do improve my understanding further over time. The raw data may be reinterpreted though this does not constantly happen for me. When it happens it's like I jumped a level up, transcending the previous understanding into a much better framework. Until then I just add pieces to it and just keep seeing how it adds up together. Do you relate to that?

Do I relate? Not to the bolded. It is automatic for me to assimilate that data. You say it does not constantly happen for you. That is false for myself. It is automatic. Second nature.

When something complex is entirely new to me, this takes time. There is a lot of concrete data that's to be experienced to pull thoughts, realizations, principles out of them and build some understanding over time. I become more flexible as my understanding improves and transcends to new levels. I become more able to apply it so flexibly that others can't even follow where I'm going. I may look entirely unpredictable in my actions at that point

But yes at the core there is still those logical links to me. And those don't actually change while I'm flexibly applying all of it. What I would say is changing is the situations I apply my understanding to. Your house frame does not have such an internal structure?

Yes. This is what I described as Ti with the house analogy but it is explained in a really different way. It is like you are translating it into another dialect. Still understandable but it took a lot of effort. That is not a judgement. Not bad or good. Just an observation that I had while reading and really thinking about what you said.

As for the part where you say all pieces are equal - that's true in a sense and not in another sense. It's true in the sense that it may be relevant to the situation or not, like you say. But overall I prefer to have some hierarchy, main ideas that can sum up it all and from which other things follow. What you called the center piece, that to me is such a core idea. You don't relate to that?

I don't know if I do. Maybe I do, but in not the way you are explaining it. I think all pieces (information, facts) are equal. How you use those vary. So, when you use them in different ways there will naturally be a hierarchy with the pieces you choose in regards to what you are using them for.
When you say the information is not judged... can we leave the MBTI context here too please. Can you rephrase "judged" in some other way that has nothing to do with MBTI?

I wasn't using that word in an MBTI context. If you re-read that may answer your question.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

So [MENTION=26684]existence[/MENTION] do you feel comfortable to talk about your processes and where you are now in your self-discovery? I'm curious as to what you have grabbed from this thread so far and what you have rejected for yourself?

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

Tertiary Ti (IXFJ): I am interested in learning how to make things run more smoothly and efficiently. Please be as clear and concise in your explanation as possible, so the message isn’t lost in theatricality. I’m sorry, but I see a logical inconsistency in the statement you just made; may I point it out to you so we can talk about it? I really love thinking about my ideas (Ni) and experiences (Si), and analyzing them to see what meaning they hold for me, and why. I’m good at putting a name to what is happening around me.

This above seems very much like [MENTION=26684]existence[/MENTION] to me.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

Ok. I'm posting to hold my place. I'll come back in a week or so. Busy with work. But I would be willing to place bets that existence is an INFJ. Not an ISTP, not an ISTJ. Not a T at all. The more I think about it, re-read posts, etc. The more I am solid in that observation and I will lay my case when I come back.

Please don't take offense [MENTION=26684]existence[/MENTION] that I'm making assumptions about you - ultimately you know you but I think after my next post here maybe you will be able to see where I'm coming from.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

Ok. I'm posting to hold my place. I'll come back in a week or so. Busy with work. But I would be willing to place bets that existence is an INFJ. Not an ISTP, not an ISTJ. Not a T at all. The more I think about it, re-read posts, etc. The more I am solid in that observation and I will lay my case when I come back.

Please don't take offense [MENTION=26684]existence[/MENTION] that I'm making assumptions about you - ultimately you know you but I think after my next post here maybe you will be able to see where I'm coming from.

I suggested that in my first post on the thread, #15.....

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

I suggested that in my first post on the thread, #15.....

I have been going down a rabbit hole of Ti these last few pages and it is only by putting hers against mine can I see things more clearly to a point of solidity. Measure twice (or many times in this thread!); cut once. I'm ready to cut.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

I have been going down a rabbit hole of Ti these last few pages and it is only by putting hers against mine can I see things more clearly to a point of solidity. Measure twice (or many times in this thread!); cut once. I'm ready to cut.

It is easy to feel the group (NFJ /STP) but the endless search for understanding is such a NFJ thing to do, unfortunately..... And we even think we are really logical when we do it.....

 

[Tilt]

I have been going down a rabbit hole of Ti these last few pages and it is only by putting hers against mine can I see things more clearly to a point of solidity. Measure twice (or many times in this thread!); cut once. I'm ready to cut.

It is easy to feel the group (NFJ /STP) but the endless search for understanding is such a NFJ thing to do, unfortunately..... And we even think we are really logical when we do it.....

hahaha, strong Ni use can seem like you are . There is a urge to make sure every little nuance gets explained properly. If you don't understand the first time around, you might hear a NJ esp. NFJ explain themselves in 2 or more different ways from the VERY beginning for what seems like eternity sometimes.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

hahaha, strong Ni use can seem like you are . There is a urge to make sure every little nuance gets explained properly. If you don't understand the first time around, you might hear a NJ esp. NFJ explain themselves in 2 or more different ways from the VERY beginning for what seems like eternity sometimes.

We just see things extremely quickly and wonder why others don't, and so we often try over and over again...... NFJs need to develop patience.....And so do those that are around them a lot

 

[Poki]

hahaha, strong Ni use can seem like you are . There is a urge to make sure every little nuance gets explained properly. If you don't understand the first time around, you might hear a NJ esp. NFJ explain themselves in 2 or more different ways from the VERY beginning for what seems like eternity sometimes.

Yeah...I find myself saying...I understood you the first time...no matter how you word it your still wrong, usually if you agree they stop....so smile and nod usually works.

 

[Tilt]

We just see things extremely quickly and wonder why others don't, and so we often try over and over again...... NFJs need to develop patience.....And so do those that are around them a lot

I know. I am ENFJ too. My good friend is one too... Sometimes I will ask him to clarify one or two details on something... and before I know it, an hour or two has passed. Love the guy like crazy but oh my...


But then he says, I go on too many tangents... basically the same thing he does. LOL

 

[Poki]

I know. I am ENFJ too. My good friend is one too... Sometimes I will ask him to clarify one or two details on something... and before I know it, an hour or two has passed. Love the guy like crazy but oh my...


But then he says, I go on too many tangents... basically the same thing he does. LOL

Yeah, my ex used to hold here hand up and make that talking symbol when she talked to her mom and I was like...you do the same thing, just talk and talk...lol