Writing a philosophy of my own.

[BurnedOut]

Alright, try deducing my personality

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[gps]

Seriously? Graphology is pseudoscience

Oh, yeah?
If you think graphology IS pseudoscience you ought to use the search option to find the guy in this group who is trying to convince people that space is made out of tetrahedra of no specified MATTER and Time IS some sort of metaphysical belly button lint.

Perhaps we could use some diagnostic criteria to differentiate co-called, would-be pseudoscience from philosophical bullshit lacking either the aspirations or the legs to `become' science.
What do you think?
Got any duck tests for either pseudoscience or `non-faux science'?

 

[BurnedOut]

Oh, yeah?
If you think graphology IS pseudoscience you ought to use the search option to find the guy in this group who is trying to convince people that space is made out of tetrahedra of no specified MATTER and Time IS some sort of metaphysical belly button lint.

Perhaps we could use some diagnostic criteria to differentiate co-called, would-be pseudoscience from philosophical bullshit lacking either the aspirations or the legs to `become' science.
What do you think?
Got any duck tests for either pseudoscience or `non-faux science'?

Read a few research papers regarding the scientific validity. Meh, zero to non significant correlation

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[gps]

^-- Have you read a few research papers regarding the scientific validity of the MBTI which THIS group upon which this very group is based ... or ill-founded?

Or how about asking a a few `academic' psychology students weened on, say, The Big Five Personality Traits ?

One guy's as-if `valid' system can-be and routinely IS dismissed, discounted, minimized, poo-pooed, or hand-waved away by another guy with his own more-valid -- if not sacred, if not orthodox -- body of `research' (EG clap trap `validating' the overarching paradigms whose proponents claim the research validates their Worldview/PoV/political_ideology/etc_ad_nauseum

Having provided visual stimuli of a manu -- hand crafted -- Script and someone -- me -- suggesting an empirical method of evaluating hand-written script, YOU attempt to discount, dismiss, trivialize, or `invalidate' THIS -- or might it be ANY -- method for assessing YOU as author?
Reminds me of Trump's -- now Republicans as a political party gang ? -- propensity to dismiss facts not in evidence as Fake News.

 

[Black Rose]

Math is used practically everywhere in science.
E8 should not be dismissed as it is just a way to use math in physics.

E8 Shelling by Seven-Spheres

 

[gps]

Hello fellow intps.
My decision to take up philosophy was quite abrupt.

Apparently my shrink had told me that philosophy would suit my analytical thinking style and now I feel it truly does.

Apparently told you?
Apparently `alluded' perhaps.
When people TELL each other something or other it's generally in less vague ways.

Its only been 1 week as such and I'm already latched on to 'Critique of pure reason'.
However, one day, I suddenly decided to write some of my own.

Given the satisfaction with what you've written so far by way of producing a `philosophy' paper revealing your very own `philosophy' AND the comments you've received here via YOUR thread ... have alternatives come to mind for what your shrink suggested?
For instance, by `reading' philosophical tracts, or enacting philosophical acts -- sitting Zazen, meditating, auditing isocronic tones which induce alpha waves, or other activities which calm your mind, improve cognition, memory, and such -- qualify as BETTER forms of `doing' philosophy than generating your very own `philosophy' which might get OTHERS to regard your thusly transformed persona and public identity A Philosopher?
Isn't what this has been all about?
Getting attention and transforming the PUBLIC, consensus Image others have of you?
Then using the image Others have of you to transform the image YOU yourself have of you?

As I read 'Thinking Fast and Slow', i slowly realised the uselessness of using intuition in daily activities except split second decisions.

Realised in the sense of `made real' ... as if an abstraction were REALLY concrete and extant ...
like tetrahedra as perhaps-massless-yet-some-how-space-filling figures?

I don't consider iNtuition useless except in the overly narrow circumstances you mention.
Intuition has served me well for meta-pattern matching and meta-pattern recognition, for instances.

So, here is how my journey began.
I decided to write an essay on 'The critique on usage of intuition'.
As I kept on writing, I slowly veered off track after writing the first chapter and decided to follow the tangent of 'The prevalence of patterns'.

I'm sure if Rorschach were still alive he'd be happy to help you discover which patterns ARE prevalent for/to you then perhaps pass along a report to your shrink so your philosophizing might allow a double dipping of value to you.

That's when I introduced the concept of 'binary cognition'

So now that you've tried it on for size, how to you feel about it?

So I based off almost 30 pages and counting on the concept of usage of binary logic in the age old debate of 'randomness vs determinism'

As contrasted with unpredictable vs predictable, open-ended vs closure-inducing, Chaos vs Cosmos, uncertainty vs deterministic faux-certainty as a form of soothing mental masturbation?

Till now, I'm going okay, able to derive ...

Derive? Realy? As in the case of derivative works?
It's a same you didn't eschew intuition as a source of perhaps-original work.

... theories and ideas and thinking of transcribing it digitally ( I'm comfortable with pen and paper more than keyboards).

As I can type faster and more legibly than generate a stream of script I find that my thoughts flow better when typing.

I'm 17 and I wish to base off a book on this.
Will I be able to do it ?
Apparently I'm quite insecure about my own work always thinking that its stupid.

As well you should if it's `work'; INTPs are supposed to manifest a `play' ethic more than a `work' ethic.
I was self-conscious about what others would think of my anthropogenic artifacts to be presented at the first `art show' to which I was invited and subsequently participated.
After much speculation of the `What if THEY ____?' sort I came to the position that I don't create or exhibit `art' -- like `real' artists -- rather, believing that `art', like beauty, IS in the eye/mind of the beholder, -- I create and exhibit mere anthropogenic artifacts; it's not my job to convince people that what I produce is `art' or of any value-to-THEM at all ... it's THEIR job as per THEIR aesthetics as per THEIR values, as per THEIR deeply-personal, deeply-subjective processes.

Don't quit seeing the shrink until you lose the a priori stupidness you attribute to your creations -- be they resulting from play or that J-term `work'.
In most cases others will project whatever they will onto what you DO anyway ... regardless of any value assessments you had at the outset, along the way, or even years later.

 

[BurnedOut]

Apparently told you?
Apparently `alluded' perhaps.
When people TELL each other something or other it's generally in less vague ways.



Given the satisfaction with what you've written so far by way of producing a `philosophy' paper revealing your very own `philosophy' AND the comments you've received here via YOUR thread ... have alternatives come to mind for what your shrink suggested?
For instance, by `reading' philosophical tracts, or enacting philosophical acts -- sitting Zazen, meditating, auditing isocronic tones which induce alpha waves, or other activities which calm your mind, improve cognition, memory, and such -- qualify as BETTER forms of `doing' philosophy than generating your very own `philosophy' which might get OTHERS to regard your thusly transformed persona and public identity A Philosopher?
Isn't what this has been all about?
Getting attention and transforming the PUBLIC, consensus Image others have of you?
Then using the image Others have of you to transform the image YOU yourself have of you?



Realised in the sense of `made real' ... as if an abstraction were REALLY concrete and extant ...
like tetrahedra as perhaps-massless-yet-some-how-space-filling figures?

I don't consider iNtuition useless except in the overly narrow circumstances you mention.
Intuition has served me well for meta-pattern matching and meta-pattern recognition, for instances.



I'm sure if Rorschach were still alive he'd be happy to help you discover which patterns ARE prevalent for/to you then perhaps pass along a report to your shrink so your philosophizing might allow a double dipping of value to you.



So now that you've tried it on for size, how to you feel about it?



As contrasted with unpredictable vs predictable, open-ended vs closure-inducing, Chaos vs Cosmos, uncertainty vs deterministic faux-certainty as a form of soothing mental masturbation?



Derive? Realy? As in the case of derivative works?
It's a same you didn't eschew intuition as a source of perhaps-original work.



As I can type faster and more legibly than generate a stream of script I find that my thoughts flow better when typing.



As well you should if it's `work'; INTPs are supposed to manifest a `play' ethic more than a `work' ethic.
I was self-conscious about what others would think of my anthropogenic artifacts to be presented at the first `art show' to which I was invited and subsequently participated.
After much speculation of the `What if THEY ____?' sort I came to the position that I don't create or exhibit `art' -- like `real' artists -- rather, believing that `art', like beauty, IS in the eye/mind of the beholder, -- I create and exhibit mere anthropogenic artifacts; it's not my job to convince people that what I produce is `art' or of any value-to-THEM at all ... it's THEIR job as per THEIR aesthetics as per THEIR values, as per THEIR deeply-personal, deeply-subjective processes.

Don't quit seeing the shrink until you lose the a priori stupidness you attribute to your creations -- be they resulting from play or that J-term `work'.
In most cases others will project whatever they will onto what you DO anyway ... regardless of any value assessments you had at the outset, along the way, or even years later.

Holy shit dude, you are starting it again, it was an introduction, the main motive was to seek opinions on the theory not on my personality. Are you trying to be quasi-sherlock or a psycho-nihil-analyst?

Your ego is too fragile tbh, it's okay to receive corrections. You aren't God.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[BurnedOut]

Moreover you are missing the point of gestalt, analysing singular entities which in this case, sentences is a stupid thing per se as analysing singular variables will derive their own singular meanings as compared to the ensemble. Moreover, being polite or civil in introducing yourself and mentioning the things that led you to do a particular thing is not a crime per se. Analysing my motives and being a supercilious deductionist is going to far with your pessimistic tendencies. Either you are trying to seem ultraliterate or you have developed this intj tendency of arguing purely for ego's sake. The sole fact that you targeted the introduction shows your daftness. I posted an excerpt, no, you couldn't critique on that but carry on with your bombastic tangential theories and harangues laced with minimal to no coherency. Next time if you want to critique, make sure you are critiquing what needs to be critiqued.

Roasting imbeciles is fun but someone who can derive a polemic equivalent to yours

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[BurnedOut]

Is a bad idea.


Sorry for the additional post.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

Hello fellow intps. My decision to take up philosophy was quite abrupt. Apparently my shrink had told me that philosophy would suit my analytical thinking style and now I feel it truly does. Its only been 1 week as such and I'm already latched on to 'Critique of pure reason'. However, one day, I suddenly decided to write some of my own. As I read 'Thinking Fast and Slow', i slowly realised the uselessness of using intuition in daily activities except split second decisions. So, here is how my journey began. I decided to write an essay on 'The critique on usage of intuition'.

Intuition is about connections and pattern as you mention. It is a silent happening and is as if the new pattern simply congealed like jello. Going by Jung we could say the information in Extroverts congeals outside the self and the information in introverts congeals inside the self.

Depending if you are still interested in including Intuition in your book you may need to look into neuroscience. New patterns that just seen to happen form information in the head is a fascinating subject since we know so little about it. The metaphor of new patterns being congealed jello is amusing to me.

 

[BurnedOut]

Intuition is about connections and pattern as you mention. It is a silent happening and is as if the new pattern simply congealed like jello. Going by Jung we could say the information in Extroverts congeals outside the self and the information in introverts congeals inside the self.

Depending if you are still interested in including Intuition in your book you may need to look into neuroscience. New patterns that just seen to happen form information in the head is a fascinating subject since we know so little about it. The metaphor of new patterns being congealed jello is amusing to me.

I'm thinking on connecting it to my existing theory

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[gps]

Either you are trying to seem ultraliterate or you have developed this intj tendency of arguing purely for ego's sake.

Nope.
I was attempting to use theatre of the absurd via binary numbering of `factors' one could consider via n-factorial analysis, design, or experimentation.

By transforming your list into a ramifying cluster fuck I was ATTEMPTING to goad you into re-thinking and/or re-framing your original introduction ... and perhaps update it as per what you've discovered since your point of departure.

Wasn't intending to `argue' at any point in that.

 

[BurnedOut]

Update : got finished with the thesis. 70 pages

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

 

[gps]

Update : got finished with the thesis. 70 pages

And ... as members of your sounding board do we get to read it?
How do we KNOW how many of OUR ideas you plagiarized and submitted AS IF your original work?

 

[BurnedOut]

And ... as members of your sounding board do we get to read it?
How do we KNOW how many of OUR ideas you plagiarized and submitted AS IF your original work?

I'll post the text transcript soon. First I need to get over with my exams, revise the whole thing and then textually transcribe it. Might take a lot of time. I'm very busy nowadays.

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

 

[gps]

I'll post the text transcript soon.

Meaning you submitted the handwritten form and have yet to transcribe to text?
Meaning you used a word processor app which, by default, saves in some proprietary file format you can't simply copy-then-paste into a BBcode text box?

First I need to get over with my exams, revise the whole thing and then textually transcribe it.

First things first ... priorities and consequences and all.

Personally I'm downloading Kali linux intending to add it to my multiBoot USB volume along with Puppy linux and Mint.
Its nice to have a gamut of boot options.

Might take a lot of time.
I'm very busy nowadays.

Go cram for exams!
We'll see you when we see you.