Speaking in absolute truths is fucking...hard

[flow]

Anyone else notice this? I'm always trying to say things that are absolutely true, that aren't even slightly off from any degree of truth regardless of looking at the statement in the bigger picture or taking it for what it is.. in context. I think this brings a lot of fatigue in interacting with others, because I have to think so hard to say something out loud that is absolutely true.. and if it isn't I instantly feel like an idiot and that I have failed myself.. in which case I get to spend the rest of the night replaying said statement in my head and finding a million better ways to have said it. Damn INTPness!

 

[ktp]

You are absolutely right about absolute truths. My conversations seem to always consist me trying to define and state the bigger picture and most of the time I succeed. But because I replay conversations in my head, sometimes I find a contradiction to my statements and I feel like a total failure.

 

[Moocow]

Why are you trying to speak in absolute truths? Don't you know that's impossible? I can only think of one thing that I know is absolutely true, and even then words don't do justice to the real meaning of it.

 

[Jennywocky]

Why are you trying to speak in absolute truths? Don't you know that's impossible? I can only think of one thing that I know is absolutely true, and even then words don't do justice to the real meaning of it.

I think he means that he uses extreme precision in his language, to catch all the nuances of truth as he can.

Anyone else notice this? I'm always trying to say things that are absolutely true, that aren't even slightly off from any degree of truth regardless of looking at the statement in the bigger picture or taking it for what it is.. in context. I think this brings a lot of fatigue in interacting with others, because I have to think so hard to say something out loud that is absolutely true.. and if it isn't I instantly feel like an idiot and that I have failed myself.. in which case I get to spend the rest of the night replaying said statement in my head and finding a million better ways to have said it. Damn INTPness!

Totally get it. It's one reason why I avoided much communication with people when I was younger, it was too tedious. Even now, when I tell someone what I am thinking during our conversations (spinning everything around in my head, etc. before committing to anything), they just bug-eye me and say, "You must be exhausted!"

A few ideas:
- As I get older, I let myself speak in truthful generalities more rather than trying to be explicit and precise. I play around more and interact via N or F style functionality, rather than "T"ing everything to death.
- It's a conversation, not a treatise. it's okay to be casual and vague and say some frivolous things at times. It's supposed to be fun, not work.
- You don't have to get it right either, all the time, up front, for people to perceive you as smart and thoughtful. If you say something casually and later realize you were wrong, just correct it! ("I thought more about what I said, and oops, I forgot about <whatever>")

I think people use their strongest functions in how they present themselves to others -- it is how they want to be recognized -- and I think this drives the inappropriate use of certain functions, in contexts they do not work well in.

Ti is a great rational function, but it's not usually what people want to deal with OR expect in the average everyday conversation. Still, if it's your strongest function and you identify with it, to not use it is scary... but you would quickly develop other ways to interact if you go with it...

 

[Zero]

I don't try to speak in absolute truth. I'm just very literal. On several occasions I've informed people not to joke with me, as I may not realize it's a joke. Chances are if the content is clearly and consistently joking I'll pick it up. If the content is mostly serious and jokes are being added, I probably won't understand that.

When I write I mean what I write. I tend to mean it in the most literal, dictionary defined sense, unless I state otherwise or am using a particularly common phrase (that is understood within context).

In the past I've had issues with people understanding me (and me understanding them) and I've come to realize that the clarity of my communication is extremely important.

My immediate family are all STs. In communicating with them it's beneficial to the conversation to explain abstract concepts in metaphors and examples.

One time, when I was talking to my bro, we were discussing the idea of our galaxy being a little marble like how they show it in Men In Black. I thought, well then, what if there was a giant lizard out there and we didn't see it until light was shone upon it. My brother didn't understand my illustration so I had to explain it in a different way. It's like if you're in the dark and someone in front of you has a flashlight. When they turn on the flashlight on, you can see what the light illuminates.

So if a star exploded and illuminated a part of space more brilliantly than before we might be able to see something there, like the giant lizard, that we hadn't seen before.

The importance of an argument/discussion is not necessarily that they AGREE with you, but that they understand you, so they can make their own decision in an informed manner.

Speaking in absolute truths is somewhat subjective. If you're going to attempt to communicate you have to consider what or who you're communicating with. For me, this is where MBTI is extremely valuable. People will respond to information presented to them in a manner that sympathizes with their functions.

STs and SFs are going to want to fix the problem. STs are going to want to fix practical problems, SFs are going to want to fix personal problems. Ns are more likely to speculate. NTs are going to want to speculate about something fairly practical and NFs are gong to want to speculate about something fairly personal. This should be the consistent pattern, for the most part, if people reflect the functions of their MBTI type.

I've found it important to understand that an S is more likely to assume something is a problem when an N may be speaking theoretically. I think it also depends on how much an S has been exposed to an N. I can have theoretical conversations with my brother and he can understand when I'm talking about something theoretically, because we've grown up together. My parents have a harder time, if something sounds wrong they're more likely to want to correct it, because it seems like the problem is my misunderstanding of the topic.

(NT) Theoretical premise = (ST) The problem. At least that's been the issue with my family.

 

[Starfruit M.E.]

I think he means that he uses extreme precision in his language, to catch all the nuances of truth as he can.

I strive to do this... In arguments, I do my best to make statements that nobody can really deny that also defend my view. I think that doing so adds strength to the argument. In other contexts, however, doing this is just tiresome and unhelpful, generally. I think it really depends on how you have been using this ability.

"Why are you trying to speak in absolute truths? Don't you know that's impossible?" -Moocow
Like someone said, I think that this is simply an effort to say exactly what is meant, and to say things that nobody can really argue against. For example, I can say that I am, and using logic, I cannot prove it. Despite this, however, nobody I have met has disagreed.

 

[Adamastor]

Totally get it. It's one reason why I avoided much communication with people when I was younger, it was too tedious.

I get the feeling this is exactly what happens to me now. May I ask if the reason the general conversation was tedious because of this need for o catch all the nuances of truth?

I simply feel really uncomfortable when I talk about meaningless things...

and if it isn't I instantly feel like an idiot and that I have failed myself.. in which case I get to spend the rest of the night replaying said statement in my head and finding a million better ways to have said it. Damn INTPness!

I do that too and I always think that this drains important hours of sleep =/

 

[snowqueen]

I also tend to take what people say too literally or more literally than intended. Today my mother was talking about the stuff I'd brought (or not) on her behalf from her apartment in Jordan. She asked if I had brought her box of envelopes so I told her it wasn't worth bringing because we could buy more. She said that it was a shame, they were quite expensive to which I responded that it would have been more expensive to ship them. She then told me that she didn't mean it so seriously and I shouldn't take it so seriously!

I said, "I am a serious person and I take what people say seriously because I take people seriously. Are you telling me that I should be thinking, Mum talks a load of rubbish so I should disregard most of what she says?" She said, "I never thought of it that way"

Wha'???????????????

 

[checkplus]

I've been having the same problem lately now that I'm becoming part of a larger social group that requires a lot of complicated interpersonal relationships.

The problem I tend to have with this is that when I speak seriously, I always try to structure my words in the form of an argument or better yet, a mathematical proof. Before I say anything of any real meaning, I have to make my assumption clear, provide supporting facts, make initial conclusions and explain my logic before I make any real point at all. The problem is that I can speak for a couple minutes without saying anything, and by that point the people I'm talking to have already given up on listening to me.

What I'm realizing is that often, in fact most of the time, I have to just drop back into my library of socially acceptable responses which are getting better and better all the time. In fact, I'm starting to develop a charismatic, confident, and easy-to-talk-to pseudo-personality that I can count on to not only keep a conversation going, but also to make friends, start conversations, and even convince people through emotion rather than logic.

I really do long for someone that I can talk to seriously though. It seeps like ages since I've been able to talk to someone concisely.

 

[Dormouse]

The only time I speak in absolute truths is while I'm debating, and typically that involves ignoring the half of my mind which is dedicated to rooting out inconsistancies. I just hope the other party will ignore all the seemingly obvious counterpoints to my arguments...

Yeah, in ordinary speech practically everything I say is accompanied by an 'I think' or 'I believe' or 'it seems to me that'...
Generally I'm just afraid of being wrong. I figure if I lack enough concreteness nobody can accuse me of misinforming them.

 

[citrusbreath95]

This happens to me all the time. Especially during discussions or seminars. I may say something that is so general that there has to be some truth in it (even if I dont have all the details of the topic) and may seem quite logical, but afterwards I will find some flaw with it and think I am a total loser for missing this, and that others will soon discover my mistake... I dont speak much in class! ha ha. Although I do like being able to come up with a general idea... it's easy and sometimes if it makes sense and I have no second thoughts you can expand off of it and form a new idea backed up with details... I have yet to come up with some great discoverey like that!

 

[Keads]

Humans are forever cursed with limited perspective. No matter how hard I try to speak in absolute truths, my perspective can be flawed.

 

[BigApplePi]

In the 1st place there are no absolute truths. If you think there are, name one. Just one and I'll take you on.

I try to think of a truth with an intuitive central guideline. Then there is a natural deviation from that center. Like so:

http://www.comfsm.fm/~dleeling/statistics/normal_curve.gif

 

[Dormouse]

In the 1st place there are no absolute truths. If you think there are, name one. Just one and I'll take you on.

There are no absolute truths.

Oh, wait...

 

[BigApplePi]

Dormouse, you want to claim "There are no absolute truths" as an absolute truth? We are in trouble right away cuz "truth" and "absolute" need meaning. Else we are stuck with intuition which is okay.

Anyway suppose instead you claimed, "There are no unicorns." That would be difficult to prove without searching the entire universe and then some. Same with absolute truths. I can't prove there aren't any, but maybe there are. Still there is no proof one way or the other.

I think we need another try.

 

[Dormouse]

Hmm, that was meant as a paradoxical joke.

I'm tempted to say 1 + 1 = 2, but I heard somewhere that can apparently be disproven...

Well, if I said something like: ''Hydrogen is the most common element in the known universe, according to our knowledge.'' Would that be absolutely true? Seeing as the according to our knowledge part means we don't have to search the entire cosmos...

 

[BigApplePi]

Hmm, that was meant as a paradoxical joke.

I'm tempted to say 1 + 1 = 2, but I heard somewhere that can apparently be disproven...

Well, if I said something like: ''Hydrogen is the most common element in the known universe, ackording to our knowledge.'' Would that be absolutely true? Seeing as the according to our knowledge part means we don't have to search the entire cosmos...

Dormouse. No. INTPs are serious. I take it as a good example, not a joke. "1 + 1 = 2" is a great example. I'd like to try for "2 + 2 = 4" as not being an absolute truth when I get time ..... unless someone beats me to it, lol. Hopefully in the next 48 hours .....
The Hydrogen thing? Hadn't thought of that one.

 

[jachian]

In the 1st place there are no absolute truths. If you think there are, name one. Just one and I'll take you on.

I try to think of a truth with an intuitive central guideline. Then there is a natural deviation from that center. Like so:

Intuitively I know that there are absolute truths........... For the universe to exists there must be.......... for the laws of physics to be such that we can actually be around to have such a conversation implies that there are some absolute truths.


The thing is.... I doubt there has ever been, or ever will be a human who could actually comprehend it or even articulate in a way that the rest of us could unambiguously understand.

........ and then How can one prove whether something is an absolute truth?............

 

[BigApplePi]

Intuitively I know that there are absolute truths........... For the universe to exists there must be.......... for the laws of physics to be such that we can actually be around to have such a conversation implies that there are some absolute truths.


The thing is.... I doubt there has ever been, or ever will be a human who could actually comprehend it or even articulate in a way that the rest of us could unambiguously understand.

........ and then How can one prove whether something is an absolute truth?............

Sounds right. Perhaps existence is an absolute truth. ("I think therefore I am.") But that is subjective. What I experience is different from yours. And how would one prove existence to a doorknob?

 

[BigApplePi]

Dormouse. No. INTPs are serious. I take it as a good example, not a joke. "1 + 1 = 2" is a great example. I'd like to try for "2 + 2 = 4" as not being an absolute truth when I get time ..... unless someone beats me to it, lol. Hopefully in the next 48 hours .....
The Hydrogen thing? Hadn't thought of that one.

"2 + 2 = 4" is not absolutely true.
Proof. One has to define plus as well as those numbers. Take ripples on a pond. You count two on the left, look over and see two on the right. Put them together and they not only have interfered with each other, but their respective sizes are such that you can't tell if you should count them or not. There could be 3 or 5.

Hydrogen is the most common element? Why wouldn't one have to search the entire universe? Isn't is possible Helium is? What if there were pockets of Helium somewhere?

 

[merzbau]

no absolute truths? know you nothing of sod's law, "what can go wrong, will"..?

or, how about "and this, too, shall pass..."?

 

[Chronomar]

Anyone else notice this? I'm always trying to say things that are absolutely true, that aren't even slightly off from any degree of truth regardless of looking at the statement in the bigger picture or taking it for what it is.. in context. I think this brings a lot of fatigue in interacting with others, because I have to think so hard to say something out loud that is absolutely true.. and if it isn't I instantly feel like an idiot and that I have failed myself.. in which case I get to spend the rest of the night replaying said statement in my head and finding a million better ways to have said it. Damn INTPness!

Yes, that happens to me all the time.

It is the primary cause of my hatred of English papers. My teachers now are okay, but just a few years ago I was told, "You have to pick a side and stick to it, or you get an F". That was because I always ended up writing a 10 page paper explaining how the novel could be interpreted in so many different ways, and then proceeding to evalutate which one was the most likely given the evidence in the text.

They said that wasn't good writing (or good thinking, for that matter).
They said that good writing and good thinking was to always pretend to be absolute and objective about a subjective decision.
To always "fake it" and project confidance.

I can see where people's annoyance with this comes from, though. I sure wouldn't read my own papers. Too long, too boring, too pedantic.

 

[BigApplePi]

Yes, that happens to me all the time.

My teachers now are okay, but just a few years ago I was told, "You have to pick a side and stick to it, or you get an F". That was because I always ended up writing a 10 page paper explaining how the novel could be interpreted in so many different ways, and then proceeding to evalutate which one was the most likely given the evidence in the text.

I have good news for you Asylum. You HAVE taken a side. That would be not to take a side. I would give those teachers F's.

 

[NothingTodo]

I tell the truth no matter how mean it is. Thats why some people like me and some people hate me. I honestly do not care about how they feel if they cannot identify i am helping them is their fault.

 

[kantor1003]

Original statement from, hmm, don't remember the name: ''Hydrogen is the most common element in the known universe, according to our knowledge.''

Hydrogen is the most common element? Why wouldn't one have to search the entire universe? Isn't is possible Helium is? What if there were pockets of Helium somewhere?

Your reply does not disprove that the statement is an absolute truth imo. You don't have to search the entire universe as the statement clearly said "common element in the KNOWN universe". In addition, he/she added according to our KNOWLEDGE as an additional safety measure

I fail to see how this couldn't be an absolute truth.. but it can't be.. I don't believe in them hmm.. anyways, it is a really arbitrary (in a broader sense), useless piece of an absolute truth. I want to see an absolute objective truth. Not a truth defined to suit our current accepted knowledge this point in time. Within the framework created though, it is valid.

But in that regard you can say many "absolute truths" if you only add "according to our generally accepted knowledge this point in time" at the end of your statement.. can't you?

But yeah, then I disprove that this is an absolute truth as an absolute truth indicate an absolute objective truth.. Or else, it would just be "truth", only that it apply to more than 1 piece of human, wouldn't it?
Yay! I made it. Can I have a cookie now?

Maybe we can define it like this:
truth - in the eye of a few, or several beholders.
absolute truth - in the eye of most of the human population
absolute objective truth - in the eye of "everything" "the universe" no matter if we puny humans agree with it or not... or wait.. if we don't agree, it isn't absolute? Damn shit don't completely agree with my self in the last statement. That was obviously just thrown in for good measure.

*end rambling, finally*