Self-Knowledge, Self-Governance, & Life Purpose for P-Types

[Architect]

Self-Knowledge, Self-Governance, & Life Purpose for P-Types

For P-types, by contrast, finding a favorable set of rules is not so easy (especially for NP types). Rather than importing laws from without, P-types feel they must decide for themselves what their governing rules should be. Before doing so, however, they see it necessary to understand and define the self. They consider self-knowledge a prerequisite for self-governance. While many have noted the desire of P-types to understand themselves, they often overlook the fact that, especially for IPs, this is not the end of the story. P-types want to understand themselves in order to more effectively govern and direct themselves; self-understanding is a means to that end. If they are successful in chartering a coherent set of inner rules and precepts, they can act with a similar degree of conviction and dutifulness as J-types.

This is another angle on the INTP procrastination and laziness issue. It's difficult for the INTP to know themselves, or at least it takes time. Once they do that discovery and find a life purpose it's much easier to become productive.

Personal example, some here think of me as an INTJ because of self direction and some success I've shown, which I have no issue with because you can't know a person from an anonymous online presence. The key to that however is that I've always known that when I have a purpose I'm very much motivated and directed. So I've always worked to make sure I had a purpose.

Of course this led to many shipwrecks and burned bridges. I've changed careers, goals and life paths many times, it not being until my 40's before I finally figured it out.

 

[Cognisant]

It's difficult for the INTP to know themselves, or at least it takes time. Once they do that discovery and find a life purpose it's much easier to become productive.

Personally I came to the conclusion that there is no inherent self, a void to in which stepped my online alter ego, Cognisant, so that now a lot of my motivational drive comes from living up my self consciously entirely contrived concept, or should I say character, of self.

 

[Moocow]

Personally I came to the conclusion that there is no inherent self, a void to in which stepped my online alter ego, Cognisant, so that now a lot of my motivational drive comes from living up my self consciously entirely contrived concept, or should I say character, of self.

But you only do it on the internet?

 

[Architect]

Personally I came to the conclusion that there is no inherent self, a void to in which stepped my online alter ego, Cognisant, so that now a lot of my motivational drive comes from living up my self consciously entirely contrived concept, or should I say character, of self.

Eastern Philosophy or self derived?

I took a foray into Buddhism once, realized it was bull. The full abdication of the self, just to avoid the occasional pain which accompanies life is an inappropriate response. In small doses however Buddhism has something to offer. Also I spent some time around Buddhist temples in Japan and found that the version we get in the West is highly sanitized.

 

[Etheri]

you can't know a person from an anonymous online presence.

I beg to differ. I don't disagree per se, I only question if you'd know people inherently better in real life. While it's real life and anonymous online presence are obviously diffrent, I think 'knowing people' is typically an illusion. (exclusing ESFJs, if you know one, you know all of them.)

Back to the topic : I think you're right. We've all had our moments of epiphanies. I've also had moments where I truly worked hard, sometimes for extended periods of time. The only real problem is that I typically learn to adapt to the pace and expectations I have of myself (and others have of me), and I end up walking the line and being lazy again. I don't mind working, and I don't mind doing lots of stuff that is interesting, but i'll rarely work alot more than I have to on things that I do not like doing. (menial exercises, for example)

 

[Architect]

I beg to differ. I don't disagree per se, I only question if you'd know people inherently better in real life. While it's real life and anonymous online presence are obviously diffrent, I think 'knowing people' is typically an illusion. (exclusing ESFJs, if you know one, you know all of them.)

Possibly, but I'd just point out that misunderstandings seem to be more common on the internet than they are in real life. The communication bandwidth is much lower.

Back to the topic : I think you're right. We've all had our moments of epiphanies. I've also had moments where I truly worked hard, sometimes for extended periods of time. The only real problem is that I typically learn to adapt to the pace and expectations I have of myself (and others have of me), and I end up walking the line and being lazy again. I don't mind working, and I don't mind doing lots of stuff that is interesting, but i'll rarely work alot more than I have to on things that I do not like doing. (menial exercises, for example)

Agree but I'd place epiphany as being different from purpose. Different time scales for starters.

 

[Cognisant]

But you only do it on the internet?

No, well I guess I'm not as ostentatious irl as I am here but that's just adapting to context, I can get away with a lot more here, or rather it doesn't matter as much, anyway if I were to stop being Cognisant in everyday life I'd be passively fatalistic and apathetic, suffice to say I just wouldn't give a shit, it's nothing profound really, I'm just well aware of my brain's mechanistic contrivances, so without Cognisant I have no reason to care, at all, about anything, which is perfectly sane, so you see Cog is my ego, my insanity, my soul if you want to be poetic.

Without that spark of madness I'm the living dead, a puppet that can only hang despairingly on it's strings, whereas with Cog I have reason beyond reason, that is to say Cog is because Cog does, as opposed to Cogito ergo sum.

However with all things this comes at a price, I'm a bit of a mercurial sociopath for really no better reason than because it feels good and I have no particular reason to refrain, this is mainly an online thing, mainly because online there's so many people and so little to lose, I mean if I piss someone off here it's not like I can't go talk to someone else and from experience I know to have anything more than the most fleeting emotional attachment is foolish, with perhaps the exception of Gopher and Proxy for all it matters you people are no more real to me than characters in a book, or NPCs in a video game.

In this way I think my psychology reflects my state of being, when I feel bad I do bad, when I feel good I'm more inclined to be good, indeed I can see the appeal of being the kindest/nicest person I can possibly be 24/7, I honestly can, but I don't feel kind or nice, it's a strain to smile warmly when there's no warmth inside, so I do what feels go to me, to which I offer no excuse and have no shame.

Except when I feel like it

 

[snafupants]

Personal example, some here think of me as an INTJ because of self direction and some success I've shown

That's actually not why I think you're the embodiment of an INTJ but these links are nifty.

So if P-types create laws to the same extent as J-types, we are caused to wonder if P-types might not also be equally dutiful and responsible. After all, why would they create laws for themselves if they did not have the intention of following them?

That's poor logic because it presupposes that the laws of P-types conform to J-types' standards of "dutiful and responsible." The internal diktats of an INTP, for instance, might be outwardly wanton, impertinent, or silly while remaining inwardly consistent. That neither makes the laws of the P-types dutiful nor responsible. It makes them consistent. Two different things.

 

[Architect]

That's actually not why I think you're the embodiment of an INTJ but these links are nifty.

Ok I'm curious then, why?

That's poor logic because it presupposes that the laws of P-types conform to J-types' standards of "dutiful and responsible." The internal diktats of an INTP, for instance, might be outwardly wanton, impertinent, or silly while remaining inwardly consistent. That neither makes the laws of the P-types dutiful nor responsible. It makes them consistent. Two different things.

I think his choice of words, dutiful etc is poor

 

[Auburn]

with perhaps the exception of Gopher and Proxy for all it matters you people are no more real to me than characters in a book, or NPCs in a video game.

@Cognisant - D":

coggie you hurt mah feewlingz.. )':

 

[BigApplePi]

Self-Knowledge, Self-Governance, & Life Purpose 4 P Types

For me, rules for living unlike a J type who would have a firm purpose, mine are like riding a bicycle ... a delicate balance with many twists and turns. I have guidance. I try to make sure I have a broad area to select from. If we are to think INTP = Ti Ne Si Fe, these all contribute.

I can do many things others would do but don't ... among them not being like other types. My Si tell me what pleases me or is pleasantly satisfactory, but I don't think on that too much. I just use Ti to provide the roads make sure many things are there. Ne and Fe let me know what will be okay with others so I don't tip too far left or right, fall off or stray onto dangerous paths.

As examples I like to post on the internet. I love yard work. I am fond of loner sporting activities. I call those Si because they have a hedonistic aspect. I don't think on justifying those things except if they gain social approval (good Fe) they are supported in continuance. Listening to others can provide fresh directions. These do not appear in a vacuum. I have to make sure everything is alright constantly checking with Ti and Ne.

Now what about the missing CF's? Te Ni Se Fi? They must be there too somehow. Te I can check out with Si. Ni with Ti. Se with Ti. Fi with Si & Ti & Ne. ... Well maybe this last paragraph is written without much thought just to put out the idea. Maybe you can do better.

Nice topic Architect.

 

[Duxwing]

Personally I came to the conclusion that there is no inherent self, a void to in which stepped my online alter ego, Cognisant, so that now a lot of my motivational drive comes from living up my self consciously entirely contrived concept, or should I say character, of self.

Cog, does this give you pain? Do you feel fulfilled? I ask not in jest.

-Duxwing

 

[koan]

Eastern Philosophy or self derived?

I took a foray into Buddhism once, realized it was bull. The full abdication of the self, just to avoid the occasional pain which accompanies life is an inappropriate response. In small doses however Buddhism has something to offer. Also I spent some time around Buddhist temples in Japan and found that the version we get in the West is highly sanitized.

What did you find to be bull about it?
I've investigated and admire certain aspects but can't put my finger on why I think it's impractical or... misleading.

I have a lot of criticism towards the Dalai Lama. Perhaps that's a different thread.

 

[IdeasNotTheProblem]

Of course this led to many shipwrecks and burned bridges. I've changed careers, goals and life paths many times, it not being until my 40's before I finally figured it out.

That sounds familiar, only I'm nearly 30 and have not figured it out. I've found I'm good at many things but struggle finding something to be great at. I believe this is a common distinction between INTP's and INTJ's.

 

[Cognisant]

coggie you hurt mah feewlingz.. )':

@Auburn have I ever been mean to you?
Perhaps you're a character I like.

To be fair I consider myself no more real than a NPC or a character in a book.

Cog, does this give you pain? Do you feel fulfilled? I ask not in jest.

No, and no, being human gives me pain, having no inherent self is just factual.

 

[Architect]

What did you find to be bull about it?
I've investigated and admire certain aspects but can't put my finger on why I think it's impractical or... misleading.

As I mention what we get in the West is sanitized. In reality it is messy and filled with human deception and fraud like any other activities. One of the famous leaders (I don't recall but I think it might have been Chögyam Trungpa) was also famous for his drinking and womanizing, often with married fans, for example. There are many different sects and some of them are outright hostile to each other, and many others are contradictory. Approaching it fresh as a Westerner you have to bring a shopping cart to decide what you like.

Taking the core teachings - however you define that - you get a good idea that is horrible when taken to extreme. The Ego can take a person over, in periods of extreme emotional distress Buddhism can be extremely helpful to help you step away from yourself. Pema Chodrun famously did this, she became a leader in the cult after her husband cheated on her. She relates that the experience was so horrible (she is clearly an XSTJ type that could not stand the betrayal) that the only comfort was practicing abnegation of the self. Of course she still frequently blows her stack we find out. But where easing off the clutch a little bit can be helpful, it makes no sense to then go on and deny all of the world around you. Throwing out the baby with the bath water, to put it mildly.

For four billion years we've evolved and developed our technology, reason and emotional life to the point where we are now, and Buddhism says we need to abnegate all of it because reality isn't that. Of course reality isn't music, physics, credit cards, clowns, sorrow and love, that's why we invented those things.

Basically, Buddhism blows.

I have a lot of criticism towards the Dalai Lama. Perhaps that's a different thread.

 

[Cognisant]

Indeed, fuck homeostasis, but if you think it through doesn't this mean that we're inevitably heading for a simulated meta-reality like the matrix?

Of course reality isn't music, physics, credit cards, clowns, sorrow and love, that's why we invented those things.

It's not like people don't already spend a lot of their time "socializing" in games, forums, or at very least over the phone. On a more sentimental note few people have the time and money to go off exploring the countryside in distant lands, but a lot of us can play the Elder Scrolls games, and if the improvements of the past ten years can be projected into the next ten I wager when the time comes the choice between living in an overpopulated real world and a virtual paradise will be an easy one to make.

 

[Words]

On a more sentimental note few people have the time and money to go off exploring the countryside in distant lands, but a lot of us can play the Elder Scrolls games, and if the improvements of the past ten years can be projected into the next ten I wager when the time comes the choice between living in an overpopulated real world and a virtual paradise will be an easy one to make.

Except economic development, which is being experienced all over the world, means depopulation. Look at Japan and many developed western countries. Look at patterns of 1 child per family. If all countries become developed, we are looking at a global depopulation. It's interesting, it's like expansion because of development and then compression because of development. From 1 to many to 1.

 

[koan]

I've done alright because of my adaptability (I can come up with plan B and C in a crisis) but have definitely noticed that commitment to plan A has made all the difference with traditional ideas of "success." For example, I can want a better job for years but I get a better job when I make a decision to leave. I've given notice without another job lined up on multiple occasions and freaked people out... actually enraged them... and it always works out because I've made a choice. I worked at Starbucks after getting my film training until, after three months I realised I'd be a coffee slinger who wanted to work in film or be a film tech who used to work at Starbucks. I quit and got my first film job three days later. It is a recurring time frame. If I make a decision and ground it with action, about three days later I get results. The trick is to "know it" not just believe it. It doesn't work if I don't commit.

eta: yup, it was Chogyam Trungpa. He was a frisky little bastard and wrote one of my favourite books "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism"

 

[BigApplePi]

To be fair I consider myself no more real than a NPC or a character in a book.

No, and no, being human gives me pain, having no inherent self is just factual.

@Cognisant

If you want to know who you are, ask a Te or Se person. If you get the answer and don't like it, ask where you want to be instead. Both are who you are.

 

[Cognisant]

Let alone advise me on discovering myself.

 

[BigApplePi]

Let alone advise me on discovering myself.

If you are unable to at least outline the relevance of, "The World as Will and Idea", then you probably don't understand it adequately to outline its applicability to this situation.

 

[Cognisant]

*sigh* Okay for your edification in what was arguably his magnum opus Arthur Schopenhauer suggested that, to be succinct, there is a will before will, and that former will is the true nature of things, or in other words you have want but from whence is your want derived? You want to be alive, but why do you want to be alive, hunger compels you to eat but if you did not eat you would starve and once dead you would suffer hunger no more, so you see the absurdity of eating to relieve oneself of hunger. All of human nature is like this, a state of self sustaining insanity and it is that self sustainment that is the will inherent to reality, the will that comes prior to our own conscious will.

We eat, drink, sleep and poop to sustain ourselves, we work to sustain society, we breed to sustain our species, and so it is our happiness, however temporary and ultimately self defeating as that happiness may be, to serve the will of the world, to eat, drink, sleep, poop, work and breed.

That is our nature, but what of the mind, what of our self conscious will, as I've just explained to us as self conscious entities our nature is an absurd self-sustaining cycle of insanity, an insanity of which we are the representatives, we are people as they appear to be, if though not as they actually are. By this I mean I may appear to you as more than some allegorical mechanical doll that goes about the actions of life, eating, drinking, pooping, sleeping, working, fucking, but that is my nature, that is what I am, aware of my artifice as I may yet be an artifice it remains, because ultimately I am nothing more than a puppet to the will of the world, to that will before will.

I could kill myself in protest, but on the grand scheme of things taking myself out of the equation only serves to support the system, so here I remain, defiantly self aware and THAT is who I am.

My name is Cognisant, look it up.
Although of course as Cognisant I remain a puppet tied held captive by the strings of my own subjectivity.

Edit: There's more to it than that, seriously read the book!