Originally Posted by
Expat
Originally Posted by
hitta
Everything is belief. All things that you see is just belief in them. All facts you think you know, you do not. Nothing can and will every be truly proven unless we can prove an absolute context, which is most probably impossible.
+
PoLR
I think this could be
PoLR as well, the question is what conclusion he draws from this. From what I can see it is a negative one. This is a freshman philosophy argument, but one I think most people contend with, which is why it's a freshman philosophy one.
I think one can acquire this idea regardless of one's "Type".
Originally Posted by
Hitta's ISFP description
ISFps tend to be very experimental with their bodily sensations. ISFps love to feel complete euphoria. This often leads them to experiment with drugs or some other substance that causes their bodies to feel euphoric. ISFps love to be on the move. They never want to slow down with anything they are doing. They hate the concept of fatigue. ISFps naturally are very aggressive people. They tend to start many different tasks. ISFps can and will be rebellious at times. They do not like someone telling them what to do. They usually like to take charge in most situations. This can often lead people to think of them as being erratic.
Here is what I think a example of why I think Hitta is
valuing. Look at what he concentrates on in his description of ISFp, he describes the
and
of the subject in question.
Hitta's type descriptions are not very good, but they are a good indicator of his own type.
Love euphoria...
, Do drugs...
Don't like being told what to do....
Take charge...
The use of dynamic activity pertaining to static emotion is what is leading me to believe he is
valuing.
And could we lay off the ethical types... Ethics types can be very smart, even genius. It is no barrier to understanding of socionics or any subject. Half the reason people mistype themselves T is because of the bias against ethical types.