DelusiveNinja
Falsifier of Reality
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ytLI7M4IC0
Elliot Hulse is telling people not to vigilantly judge ideas as good or bad. He is saying to let the ideas flow into your mind and let your body decide whether the idea is right or wrong based off how it reacts to the idea.
I am making the assumption that this video was made in an effort to describe his personal process of valuing or dismissing ideas. I am also going to assume that this process is different for every personality type. Elliot's type is unknown to me, but some of his ideas have merit in my mind.
Since I know neither my type or his, all I can do is explain my experience with this process and rise the questions that I have not answered. When I resonate with an idea such as this, I become excited and began pacing around rooms, explaining the derivative of whatever has caught my interest to an audience of no one in particular.
For whatever idea I subconsciously contribute to my worldview, there is this process that must be carried out. It is akin to the water cycle. The pot, lid, and fire are a representation of my mind, and the liquid represents the ideas I am fed (for the slow kids). The liquid is poured into to the pot and boiled. During the evaporation process, anything that is not oxygen is rejected from my body and exhaled. Ideas that are oxygen stay concealed within the pot in a gaseous state and are mulled over for long periods of time.
The input and output is different for everyone using this process because people take in different types of information, placing priority on what they think, believe, or feel to be important.
I would say that things resonate with me and they don't have to have an identifiable, logical consistency to them. Does that mean that I don't use introverted thinking?
What personality types naturally create lecture material with the ideas they find interesting?
Do people, who identify as Ti and Si users, go through a similar process when they are evaluating new ideas? Do they experience a sense of belonging or resonance with the ideas they are introduced to? Or do they pick apart ideas (Ti) to see if they make sense and then compare its arguments to the social standard (Fe) without resonance and without passion?
Elliot Hulse is telling people not to vigilantly judge ideas as good or bad. He is saying to let the ideas flow into your mind and let your body decide whether the idea is right or wrong based off how it reacts to the idea.
I am making the assumption that this video was made in an effort to describe his personal process of valuing or dismissing ideas. I am also going to assume that this process is different for every personality type. Elliot's type is unknown to me, but some of his ideas have merit in my mind.
Since I know neither my type or his, all I can do is explain my experience with this process and rise the questions that I have not answered. When I resonate with an idea such as this, I become excited and began pacing around rooms, explaining the derivative of whatever has caught my interest to an audience of no one in particular.
For whatever idea I subconsciously contribute to my worldview, there is this process that must be carried out. It is akin to the water cycle. The pot, lid, and fire are a representation of my mind, and the liquid represents the ideas I am fed (for the slow kids). The liquid is poured into to the pot and boiled. During the evaporation process, anything that is not oxygen is rejected from my body and exhaled. Ideas that are oxygen stay concealed within the pot in a gaseous state and are mulled over for long periods of time.
The input and output is different for everyone using this process because people take in different types of information, placing priority on what they think, believe, or feel to be important.
I would say that things resonate with me and they don't have to have an identifiable, logical consistency to them. Does that mean that I don't use introverted thinking?
What personality types naturally create lecture material with the ideas they find interesting?
Do people, who identify as Ti and Si users, go through a similar process when they are evaluating new ideas? Do they experience a sense of belonging or resonance with the ideas they are introduced to? Or do they pick apart ideas (Ti) to see if they make sense and then compare its arguments to the social standard (Fe) without resonance and without passion?
