Search results

Hmm... societies of millions of workers serving an elite... Sure, why not.

Game theory defines rationality in a sense of selfishness, but there are other ways to define it. For example, let's take a look at the prisoner's dilemma: Person A and Person B are being interrogated. If A rats out B, but B doesn't rat out A, A serves no time, and B serves 10 years. If A rats...

So... Decisions can only be based on what is experienced/known - the subjective. The impetus to action is a quality which cannot be objectified. Goodness is within us, not without us. -or- Anything which can be factored into a decision could be relevant. Subjects are connected in reality...

Need it to be true? I don't need it to be true any more than I would need the laws of motion to be true if I were a physicist. Because I've put so much effort into understanding typology, and I've seen it manifesting all over the place, it would be a bit strange if it turned out to not be true...

Yeah so I don't know if that's my Ni or Ti or both or what (I'm INFJ).

What do you mean by saying what is "correct"? Isn't it correct to do what is good? I get that in terms of Jungian functions, Thinking is associated with what is correct, and Feeling is associated with what is good, but when it comes down to a sense of goodness that transcends the cognitive...

There's an interesting debate to this, because there's reason to think that both intuition and thinking are similar in nature to introversion, but while Pod'lair puts both introversion and intuition as yin qualities, it says that thinking has a yang quality, so that feeling goes with...

The term "first principles" makes me think of Ti but anyway... What I do with Jungian typology is generally to just look at what each of the 8 functions mean/what each of the dichotomies mean and just and gain as much insight into things from that ground level. - As opposed to when people make...

Is the patterns vs details dichotomy relevant here?

The magic has been taken out of life, so we take both the life and the magic and put them into a machine, but then the life and the magic will be taken out of the machine and we will all be machines and that really grinds my gears.

Above average explanation, I relate fairly well to it, B+

Well, yeah.

I might not have recognised precisely what sort of communication difficulties were being referred to, but do you acknowledge that extroverted judgement functions are the primary ones involved in generating speech?

Introverted rational types (IxxP) often have problems with communication, since articulation is associated with extroverted judgement which is their inferior.

Ok, so it's not that you think Utilitarianism is entirely wrong per se, it's that you think it's not morality. So, we can discuss its merits as a system of justice, but not as an explanation of morality. Indeed, you mentioned that morality is an occult quality, so that nothing much can be said...

And the cycle continues, The ebb and flow of life, As matter collides, coalesces, And breaks apart once more, Only to be, that which once was, Never to see, that which now is, And the riddle's solution, is it.

I have some thoughts on the relation between unity and multiplicity and the cognitive functions which I want to record here in case I lose track of it. It's incomplete so far, just notes: So, in my above post I basically showed 2 paradoxes which happen to be representative of the relation...

Apologies if I'm not understanding you, because your rejection of Utilitarianism sounds to me to be an advocating of instant gratification, but you explicitly claimed not to be advocating that, but anyway... We can understand the situation you described by transforming the situation to one of...

When you started your journey, You wanted to catch all the pokemons. But when you catch all the pokemons, Then what will you do?

If life is meaningless and empty then it's perfectly fine to do absolutely anything but there's no point.

Here's a thought, I don't know if there's anything to it, but what if... What if, if we're being totally honest about it, like judging in line what is absolutely true, that the things which make us feel the best in the moment are precisely those things which are the best for the greater good...

I've probably changed a great deal over the past few years, so it changes me in a sense, but I lose most of what was going through my head when the episode ends. Life returns to "normal" which is rather boring. And then another episode kicks in and it all comes back to me. I've tried to find a...

By the way, having said what I said, I do think you're most likely correct that philosophy is in a horrendous state and that its division into sub-disciplines is highly related to this. I took some philosophy at university and I found that the lectures and the articles were rather horrendous. I...

Can you please expand on this? What's the relation between Ni and "should"?

I'll just add a bit to this: Both Ni and Si can be focused on both the past and the future. The difference between them is patterns versus details. So since we know the details of the past, but for the most part only have a general idea of the future, Si gets associated with the past, and Ni...

I think that if we can agree on something like, "what are the universal laws behind what one ought to do?" then it's worth pursuing that question, without needing to know what the full foundation of philosophy is (if I'm understanding you correctly) - i.e. we do not need to know the full extent...

As I see it, the division of philosophy into sub-disciplines is at least partly warranted. I believe that there are a certain set of fundamental ideals, such as the True, the Good, the Beautiful, and others. Philosophy at its core would outline what these ideals are and what sort of questions...

I'm getting advice on important spiritual matters but not following it. I don't know what I've lost out on so far but I have something on the to-do list now that I have to do when I feel that the time is right for it, but I fear I'll neglect it like I do so many other things. I don't know if...

I provided you with valuable input. I guess it's your right to dismiss it.

Err... I possibly get what you mean, and the answer is that just because there is an absolute truth, it's still the case that any attempt to grasp that truth is going to be shaded by our own biases and incomplete knowledge. Subjectivity is almost inevitable, but I don't get this view that we...

I think I mentioned it before, but I don't know if what I experience actually even is psychosis, so I might be going about this all wrong. What I do know is: I have some kind of episodes that are distinct from ordinary life These episodes have been diagnosed as psychotic I generally like these...

Don't worry about labels for the types, or descriptions, or those sort of thing. Learn the functions. INTP = Ti Ne Si Fe Te Ni Se Fi INTJ = Ni Te Fi Se Ne Ti Fe Si Everyone have all 8 functions but they go in a different order for each type. The 5th-8th functions are unconscious. The order...

I don't know of specific laws, although I'll give it some thought, but where I am coming from is: Morality basically says that when confronted with a choice, there are ways that are more good or less good when compared with each other of dealing with that choice. So my idea of what is moral is...

I didn't say "truth is based on morality", I don't even really know what that would mean. But I am saying that there are moral truths. If morality is based on truth, then how exactly is it relative, unless truth is relative? Actually, whether or not you agree with morality, it does apply to...

A lot of content streams to the mind via the unconscious during an altered state such as psychosis, As such, it is not something under voluntary control, If it were, I would be psychotic right now, although I can activate it to some degree. There needs to be something that the mind is...

How? If morality is relative, then surely truth is relative. To be consistent you would have to accept both forms of relativism. Right? edit: maybe I'm missing something, but this idea of "moral relativism" sounds ridiculous to me

The point I made was actually good though. So it seemed to acknowledge the point even if grudgingly.

and then what are you gonna do what are you gonna do then, huh are you gonna cast a spell? do it. cast a spell. I dare you.

I don't know if that's an insult or a compliment but I'm gonna assume it's one of those in between sort of things.

Yeah. The terminology and all. The arguments in favour of it sound pretty solid but there's all kinds of rationalising going on. Synomnia. The zh sound of Xai/Xyy versus the z sound of Zai/Zyy to correspond to the soft versus hard nature of Feeling versus Thinking. It gives all kinds of red...

It's good to keep your virginity.

Maybe so, but the physics textbook is far from useless in that case. It is perhaps necessary. I think the egoist claim does actually say something, like there would be situations where you are confronted with 2 choices, and a particular interpretation of the egoist philosophy could say that...

.

I don't think this paragraph is accurate. Regardless, treat any shakier claims as me speculating out loud.

Maybe, but once we've derived the laws through observation, or perhaps even introspection if that's how they came about, or some other means, then we're able to use these laws to create things such as technology that represent a physical process that has not before been present in nature. We are...

Saying "less ethical" means "worse" is pretty much just a tautology, it doesn't really say anything. I see no problem with oughts. Are laws of physics petrified physics, and it's the actual physical processes that count? Because laws of physics are still useful.

Wouldn't it be closer to say of hedonism that "people should get what they want"? Or in other words "do what makes you happy" [with "happy" being interpreted to mean experiences that are subjectively and absolutely deemed better than other alternative experiences] You've probably mentioned it...

@The Grey Man what do you think of hedonism, i.e. the philosophy which shares the "pleasure vs suffering" aspect of utilitarianism but applies it to only the self, rather than to everyone?