• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[MBTI General] Getting to conclusions

Rex

New member
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
600
MBTI Type
INTJ
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Is it so that some forms teories before they know all the data?

And some does not form it untill they got a lot of data?

Does anyone have a link on this that is not MBTI related?

ofc MBTI related links are ok but im not needing it.
 

DonCoryon

New member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
22
MBTI Type
INTP
Is it so that some forms teories before they know all the data?

And some does not form it untill they got a lot of data?

Your two choices are nearly the same. The only question you seem to pose is how much data is necessary before a hypothesis can be made. I think the answer to that would be it is relative to the scope of the question.

I would assume that NTs (and most others whether they realize it or not) in generally would use the scientific method.

  1. Observation
  2. Question
  3. Research
  4. Hypothesis
  5. Experimentation
  6. Conclusion
 

Rex

New member
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
600
MBTI Type
INTJ
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
How about forming a teory before you go looking for proof vs finding evidence for something and then forming a teory.
 

DonCoryon

New member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
22
MBTI Type
INTP
[MENTION=10686]MatsNorway[/MENTION] I think your confusing hypothesis and theory.

Theory: a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity. Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine.

Hypothesis: a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation (working hypothesis) or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts.
 

Rex

New member
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
600
MBTI Type
INTJ
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I guess i just make hypothesises easier than most.
 

thisGuy

New member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,187
MBTI Type
entp
I guess i just make hypothesises easier than most.


I think that depends on your experience in the context of the field you are talking about.

Or pure dumb luck works too.


People that jump over little data are called impulsive; people that wait for too much data, conservative. Which stereotype do you wanna be?
 

Rex

New member
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
600
MBTI Type
INTJ
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Its not that simple. It depends on risks and the size/importance of the matters.

I guess im confident in my evaluations.

I don`t like the wording you use btw. impulsive might be the word but conservative is definitely not the opposite.
 

Froody Blue Gem

Necromancing Scapelamb
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
1,141
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
954
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I piece things together, makes connections, and think of the what if. My brain may jump from one idea to another, and there is a connection between these ideas but so an outsider, it's hard to see how that conclusion was found. It's not completely random, there is a lot of thought that goes behind it. I also struggle to explain when asked.

A lot of possibilities flood my mind, it takes me a little while to narrow down which one is the most possible conclusion. The answer may not be as straightforward as one may think depending on the situation. It could be based on the situation, or other things that I know about said problem/topic. Even when I come to a conclusion, I have an alternate possibility in mind.
 

Maou

Mythos
Joined
Jun 20, 2018
Messages
6,117
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I form a theory with whatever data I have, and as I gain more data, I transform the theory all at the same time. So you can say that my reality is in constant flux. I also am skilled good at filling in holes within the data myself, so I can expand my understanding of something beyond, just to see what is there.
 

Doctor Cringelord

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
20,567
MBTI Type
I
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
How about forming a teory before you go looking for proof vs finding evidence for something and then forming a teory.

Are you using "theory" in the informal sense or are you referring to scientific theory?

If you are using it in the informal sense, then I think what you are referring to here is the distinction between inductive and deductive reasoning.

Reasoning and Inference | Boundless Psychology
 

Yuurei

Noncompliant
Joined
Sep 29, 2016
Messages
4,509
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w7
Huh. Never really thought about it. I just sort of...'do'.
 
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Messages
775
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
-
Is it so that some forms teories before they know all the data?
In math, mathematicians do not seek for any external empirical data to arrive at new theory, CMIIW.
And some does not form it until they got a lot of data?

In a lot of scientific disciplines, as the teacher say, scientist are supposed to only draw conclusion after data gathering. But the problem with this is that empirical data could never be completely collected for many reasons. One of the reason why is that our senses capabilities that we use for data gathering is by itself is limited. A good example when conclusion was false. There used to exist a belief that the earth was flat, which turned out to be false: earth is never flat. It is always round. It was their conclusion that was a mistake.

When we use our eyes for data gathering for example, the range of observations is limited. If you want to observe farther, you'll need telescope, binoculars. When you need to observe substance that is very small in measurement, you'll need microscope. Some may not be able to observe using their senses nature capability in data gathering so that they could reach a scientific conclusion, since the supporting observation tool may not have been available or invented for them.
Some scientist have found that human ear, has a range of audible frequency of sound: 20-20000hz. Less than 20Hz, is an infrasonic, more than 20000Hz is ultrasonic, which is just out of range of our hearing sense.
Imagine that we put too much rely on using five senses in perceiving things, what would our conclusion be like?
When you hear nothing,you could just draw a conclusion there was no sound, while there could be an infrasonic sound that is out of range of our hearing sense.
And anyone could reach the same conclusion as medieval society that believed that earth was flat before they are shown the photograph. The medieval society may not have had the chance to observe from outer space and taken picture of the earth so that it was clear for them the earth was not flat.
Not to mention that the ability to reach a place where data can be founded. When an empirical evidence is not at the same place as the observer, they need to go to the place. But going to a place, means the observer need to spend money at least for transportation and accommodations. An archaeologist, who visit some "excavation site "to find whether they can gather an artifact, etc, and induce something from it. They may not have the financial support to perform this.
In a market research company, some even have to pay a lot of interviewers just to search for them many respondents for their research to fill some questionnaire. This is an endeavor that simply can't feasibly be executed by an individual.
I am inclined to say that many at least psychologically will reach to a conclusion anyway, although they have no sufficient supporting data. Remember, it is just a scientific teaching anyway; and some may not hold the scientific virtue.

Even if scientist do their best to try to conform to the virtue, The lessons I learnt is Scientific knowledge subject to constantly changing when there founded a new evidence from observation, experiement, that human weren't able perform in the past, because there were no invention of observational device that enables themselves to perform their observation yet.
But I found mathematical knowledge don't share the the same characteristics as scientific ones. You may find that many of them have been discovered for thousand of years yet still unchanged.
 
Last edited:
Top