sprinkles
Mojibake
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 2,959
- MBTI Type
- INFJ
Yes, and that's ok.Well I don't know how to explain my opinion any more clearly, and you've explained yours well, so I guess we'll just have to disagree.
Yes, and that's ok.Well I don't know how to explain my opinion any more clearly, and you've explained yours well, so I guess we'll just have to disagree.
[MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION]
It only appears to go both ways because if somebody is typed completely wrong, you contest it or correct it.
This is why it would be absurd to have an INTJ that has never acted like an INTJ.
Typology does not address causes at all. It categorizes observed results - period. Being an NF or whatever is not a material cause of anything. It's an arbitrary category. It's a handle. It's not like there's some kind of typology genes or typology synapses, and overall it doesn't matter because it cares how you act, not how you got that way.
Saying that one is an NF for example doesn't explain anything about how one even came to have that function or why they have it. There could be hundreds of physical ways to arrive at a similar function.
I know people believe otherwise but those people are wrong.
End of.
Edit:
Typology is like taxonomy without being able to actually see the animals, and only going by what they eat, how they sound, their footprints, etc etc. This is why there are behaviors and classes that don't fit. You might think you're following a jaguar but it could actually be a leopard - you don't really know what it actually is.
Are you suggesting that monotheism makes more sense than polytheism? Pardon me if the answer lies earlier in the thread.
I could ping pong the two stances back and forth all day. To me, though, it's like asking if dog shit or cat shit smells better. One factor I particularly enjoy of polytheisism is dualism, but I do not necessarily believe that must be attributed to polytheistic systems.
I also think I completely overshot your line of questioning. What I meant in my original statement was that I have noticed some types of people reject monotheistic gods on grounds that it is illogical but then accept astrology as an influential factor of the universe. The only correlative thought I have been able to compile is perhaps that planetary's gravitational effects have some sort of influence over the physics involved during the initial stages of contraception.... or something equally far-fetched. Like seasonal temperature. Who knows.
Do you have anything relatively scientific on the subject?
One last try. I edited my post, I don't know if you saw. Does this make any sense to you?Yes, and that's ok.
Edit: Ok, I'll have another go at it. How's this: categories and the things they describe create each other. You can't really have one without the other and have a deep understanding of things. Arguably you can create order out of chaos, but if you are only seeing chaos, you are not seeing the organizing principles behind it, and the categories are used to describe them. It's like a filing cabinet. You can either get one and label the drawers before you have anything to put in it, or you can have a huge pile of papers, put them into smaller piles, and then decide you need a filing cabinet. The drawers exist for the purpose of having papers, but they can also be used to decide where a paper goes if you are confused. And within the drawers are folders and subfolders, divided into sections. The larger and more general the category, the more explanatory power it has because it's describing an underlying more general principle. Like Ti and Te are subcategories of thinking. We use these concepts to describe certain cognitive processes which produce behavior. We all think and we all feel, we all sense and intuit, and this system of organization is true independent of specific behavior.
Maybe at this point we are debating semantics, but there is a two directional process to it.
It makes sense to me.One last try. I edited my post, I don't know if you saw. Does this make any sense to you?
Actually, I was curious if Ni types might be fascinated with it more than others. There are NTJ posters who come to mind who talk about it, for example.
I think it's worth entertaining, but I don't make much of it myself. The "portraits" for my reading (Cancer sun/Scorpio moon/Virgo rising) are kind of neat, but I barely glance at predictions.
I am a Virgo/Libra with AQR moon, Leo Rising, most of my planets are in the 2nd house, I have scorpio on mars, leo on venus, and I've read my whole birth chart over and over and felt it totally described me. I also grew up with a ex hippy mom that regularly read tarot cards and tea leaves to the neighbor ladies.
I DO NOT believe in astrolgoy any longer. AT ALL. I went 15 yrs of studying it like crazy, doing others birth charts, and had ALOT of crazy Random coincidences occur. I will tell you what changed my mind. An astrologer did a 30 yr study on it. He took over 200 babys all born on the same day, at the same time, in the same area. All babys had the EXACT same birth chart, right down to the rising. He followed the babies on and off for 30 yrs. He analyzed growth, personality, appearance, intelligence, hobbies, etc.. he checked in with the babys and parents twice a year for 30 yrs. At the end of the study he found less than a 3% consistency in charactoristics. They all had very different personalities, life experiences, hobbies, intelligence, totally random. This was a guy who had followed astrology his whole life, he had written books, and he came out and admitted that his study revealed no connection at all. I can't remember his name or the name of the study because as soon as I realized what a bunch of crap it was I vowed to not waste another minute looking into it.
I voted NF - believes in astrology but then realized WTF I thought I was talking about NFs having bogus beleifs in astrology NOT ACTUALLY SAYING I AM ONE WHICH OF COURSE I AM NOT!
Astronomy has shown astrology to be untrue, to be false. So astrology is a false belief.
I remember addressing a small group of astronomers and asked an astrology question, and they just laughed. And the astonomers laughed because astrology is laughable.
And yet hundreds of millions believe the false belief of astrology. Why, go to the back of any women's magazine, and we will discover pages of astrology but not one page of astronomy.
And still, astrology is the Ur-religion, the religion that is template for all the other religions.
So astrology is a form of psychological manipulation, a time honoured form of trance induction, followed by other religions right down to the present day, even to mbti. So mbti is simply astrology for the college educated.
I can definitely see the logic of this assumption. For myself personally, I am 100% turned off by it. It may be because I've already been hoodwinked once into believing crazy stuff when growing up, so i may be a bit more rationalistic and Ti oriented than many Ni people.
I think it appeals to people who trust established systems, desire to have resolution and conclusion about subjective, intangible aspects of reality. There is also a strong social bonding that happens in astrology environments. I am surrounded by hippie artists who assume belief in astrology when chatting. It is almost like sports or the weather. I find it alienating and disappointing because I am a bit repulsed by the arbitrary nature of it. I see irrational belief as a potential threat to survival, well being, and good choices.
I've decided I truly don't care anymore what anyone on here thinks about me and my opinions, because I don't hang out with any of you irl, and none of you affects my future academic career. So if people want to think I'm just a crazy hippie I'm not going to get upset about it or spend much time trying to change their minds. I'll express my opinions as clearly as I can, and that's all I can do. And then I'll get back to studying philosophy and Japanese.
Edit: (Not that I'm assuming you think this about me Sprinkles. Just a general declaration.)
I don't think the presence of the belief itself is type related. I do feel that how people explain/rationalize that belief will be type-contingent, tho.
Let's see how ol' Carl the corpse explained his interest:
"My evenings are taken up very largely with astrology. I make horoscopic calculations in order to find a clue to the psychological truth."
— C.G. Jung (In a letter to Sigmund Freud.)
"One can expect with considerable assurance, that a given well-defined psychological situation will be accompanied by an analogous astrological configuration."
— C.G. Jung
"While studying astrology I have applied it to concrete cases many times. The experiment is most suggestive to a versatile mind, unreliable in the hands of the unimaginative, and dangerous in the hands of a fool, as those intuitive methods always are. If intelligently used the experiment is useful in cases where it is a matter of an opaque structure. It often provides surprising insights. The most definite limit of the experiment is lack of intelligence and literal-mindedness of the observer.
Undoubtedly astrology today is flourishing as never before in the past, but it is still most unsatisfactorily explored despite very frequent use. It is an apt tool
only when used intelligently. It is not at all foolproof and when used by a rationalistic and narrow mind it is a definite nuisance. "
— C. G. Jung: Letters, volume 2, 1951-1961, pages 463-464, letter to Robert L. Kroon, 15 November 1958.
If he used astrology, who would be dumb enough to buy into any of his psychological type crap. Right?
Let's see how ol' Carl the corpse explained his interest:
"My evenings are taken up very largely with astrology. I make horoscopic calculations in order to find a clue to the psychological truth."
— C.G. Jung (In a letter to Sigmund Freud.)
"One can expect with considerable assurance, that a given well-defined psychological situation will be accompanied by an analogous astrological configuration."
— C.G. Jung
"While studying astrology I have applied it to concrete cases many times. The experiment is most suggestive to a versatile mind, unreliable in the hands of the unimaginative, and dangerous in the hands of a fool, as those intuitive methods always are. If intelligently used the experiment is useful in cases where it is a matter of an opaque structure. It often provides surprising insights. The most definite limit of the experiment is lack of intelligence and literal-mindedness of the observer.
Undoubtedly astrology today is flourishing as never before in the past, but it is still most unsatisfactorily explored despite very frequent use. It is an apt tool
only when used intelligently. It is not at all foolproof and when used by a rationalistic and narrow mind it is a definite nuisance. "
— C. G. Jung: Letters, volume 2, 1951-1961, pages 463-464, letter to Robert L. Kroon, 15 November 1958.
If he used astrology, who would be dumb enough to buy into any of his psychological type crap. Right?
I don't think you're a crazy hippie
I didn't think of astology as a religion template. I get the other stuff your talking about and the overall picture how it relates. But my family is super religious...they think astrology is the devil...pure evil. So how can it be the template for all other religions?
Let's see how ol' Carl the corpse explained his interest:
"My evenings are taken up very largely with astrology. I make horoscopic calculations in order to find a clue to the psychological truth."
— C.G. Jung (In a letter to Sigmund Freud.)
"One can expect with considerable assurance, that a given well-defined psychological situation will be accompanied by an analogous astrological configuration."
— C.G. Jung
"While studying astrology I have applied it to concrete cases many times. The experiment is most suggestive to a versatile mind, unreliable in the hands of the unimaginative, and dangerous in the hands of a fool, as those intuitive methods always are. If intelligently used the experiment is useful in cases where it is a matter of an opaque structure. It often provides surprising insights. The most definite limit of the experiment is lack of intelligence and literal-mindedness of the observer.
Undoubtedly astrology today is flourishing as never before in the past, but it is still most unsatisfactorily explored despite very frequent use. It is an apt tool
only when used intelligently. It is not at all foolproof and when used by a rationalistic and narrow mind it is a definite nuisance. "
— C. G. Jung: Letters, volume 2, 1951-1961, pages 463-464, letter to Robert L. Kroon, 15 November 1958.
If he used astrology, who would be dumb enough to buy into any of his psychological type crap. Right?
If he used astrology, who would be dumb enough to buy into any of his psychological type crap. Right?
Some times people come up with something that makes a little bit of sense even though they are 'out there' otherwise. I mean shit, just look at Freud and cocaine.
Astronomy has shown astrology to be untrue, to be false. So astrology is a false belief.
I remember addressing a small group of astronomers and asked an astrology question, and they just laughed. And the astonomers laughed because astrology is laughable.
And yet hundreds of millions believe the false belief of astrology. Why, go to the back of any women's magazine, and we will discover pages of astrology but not one page of astronomy.
And still, astrology is the Ur-religion, the religion that is template for all the other religions.
So astrology is a form of psychological manipulation, a time honoured form of trance induction, followed by other religions right down to the present day, even to mbti. So mbti is simply astrology for the college educated.
For all we know, Jung snorted it with Freud and they danced around the office together in women's clothing.