oops! necessarily*Originally Posted by idiotmanattacks
oops! necessarily*Originally Posted by idiotmanattacks
I really hate signatures.
I use math quite a bit
How many times did your parents drop you as a kid? Consider that 99.9% of all buildings you see and or enter were created using matematics. I'd say thats useful, unless you want to go live in a sodhouse or something. Bridges, what the heck, we'll call this an art form, You go and build a 10 mile long bridge without anything but parts and we'll see it carry over a thousand cars. If you can, I'll shut up.Originally Posted by idiotmanattacks
it's called engineering
exactly!Originally Posted by Joy
I really hate signatures.
en·gi·neer·ing P Pronunciation Key (nj-nīrng)Originally Posted by idiotmanattacks
n.
The application of scientific and mathematical principles to practical ends such as the design, manufacture, and operation of efficient and economical structures, machines, processes, and systems.
I'm hoping your reading isnt as bad as your logic.
Yes yes yes... I made a grave mistake. I wrote "necassary" instead of "necessarily", and I'm sorry.
A) Math is useful.
B) I never meant to say it isn't. I only did by about two letters.
C) Math is not math for usefulness's sake. This is the point I've been trying to make.
D) 'Hope this clarifies my view.
I really hate signatures.
Originally Posted by Zeia
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
The application of previously discovered/invented (I am not sure about which term is the right one) systems of almost purely theoretical math to real-life problems has always been the standard in math history.Originally Posted by idiotmanattacks
Very rarely occured facts like the invention of infinitesimal calculus ,geared exactly towards an application of it. Usually, first came the theoretical model, not bound to any application, then came the application of it.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I think that almost all NT types have the same problems.Originally Posted by xiuxiu
Usually, I am good with the math that normal people don't get, bad with the so-called-"easy" math (basic matrix theory is my PoLR).
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
As an INTj, at high school I just ignored math flat out, I only studied some geometry by myself later when (in my view) it could serve being a practical tool at that time being. So at least for an INTj it seems to me 'we INTj's' can be good at something only if we pretty much see a reason to become really good at something in the first place. To me it seems to require seeing beauty, reason or (potential) alignment to their worldview.
Compared to other NT types, I don't think an INTj would be specifically better or worse at math, their choice of how and when to learn might however actually obstruct any ex-histing potential. Sometimes this seems simply to be INTj naivety and their own worldview obstructing.
I also think an INTj would rather see the beauty in math, this could even be distracting for them. Some INTj might quickly get distracted by the beauty of any overall system (at least I do). When it comes to math and dedication, an INTj seems mostly only dedicated when he/she sees a clear purpose or reason to persue an interest or study. When there is that dedication, an INTj could be very disciplined and practised at it (which does not have to mean exceptionally good). Practice makes perfect goes for any type I'd say. Talent or ability are beyond my understanding of math and the types. Personally, I think math is simply an abstract logical tool, math is not about intuition.
The previous guest post was by me. Must have timed out or something....
Logical-Intuitive Extravert (ENTj)
TeNi
Me: yes.
Jason
it has its uses, and I use it a lot, but I don't really like it.
The saddest ESFj
...
Me: There is nothing particularly interesting about logic applied to quantities in itself, but my brain automatically uses math-like reductions anyways. Basically, it is not a given that I will find math interesting.
The end is nigh
I've always loved maths, but particularly when I was a toddler.
I always enjoyed math. I was actually just talking today about the fact that if I ever went back to school to get a second degree I would probably do something like physics or chemisty. There's something relaxing and satisfying about doing math for me.
ILE
7w8 so/sp
Very busy with work. Only kind of around.
I've always found math to be extremely boring and uninteresting, and yet, paradoxically, I occassionally enjoy sitting down and figuring out a complex math problem. I enjoy doing my income taxes for the same reason.
Quaero Veritas.
Yeah, I kind of get that. Learning math was always so easy that it was not all that engaging as a school study. That said, I entered a few competitions because the problems were complex and I enjoyed the process of solving the problem.
I think that's why I loved physics so much. It was less about just doing math and more about solving problems. Find the related elements, create a process for finding a solution, solve.
ILE
7w8 so/sp
Very busy with work. Only kind of around.
I think that may be one reason why I don't like math as much as other Alpha NTs -- the way math was taught in my school, by and large, was memorization and rote question-answering. There was little emphasis on problem solving and discovering our own solutions. Took all the fun out of it.
Quaero Veritas.
Let's see, I made a list once... here it is:
History: ancient Egyptian, ancient Babylonian, ancient Levantine, medieval Europe, modern -- pretty much everything except, for some reason, Oriental. Also: philosophy, theology, politics, fantasy and science fiction, pen and paper role playing games, Norse mythology, linguistics and etymology, invented languages, the ancient Hebrew and Greek languages, Biblical exegesis, the Old English and Old Norse languages, other foreign languages, information theory, the martial arts, musical composition, classical painting and sculpture, photographic and general artistic composition, fictional worldbuilding, climatological meteorology, some geology, paleontology, anthropology, archaeology, quantum physics, et cetera ad nauseum.
Quaero Veritas.
Not in the least. A means to an end only.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree entirely. There's something beautiful to me about the degree of abstractness, elegance and logic of mathematics. Of course, there are plenty of other interesting subjects to study for those who wish to seek them - i.e., there is nothing particularly special about math.
Jason
Some of those fields are very interesting. How much math have you studied, by the way? (I'm only asking because what you'll find is that high school math and university math are very different. High school math is more focused on dealing with figures - mechanical stuff. University math is a little bit more abstract and logical; maybe you have not been exposed to both...)
Jason
I agree with this sentiment. I found maths to be boring as a child. It was not my subject of interest, and yet I had a certain intuitive knack for applying maths to other fields of my interest. And while I generally do not like maths too much, I do tend to think mathematically in an almost formulaic way.
This list has an almost downright freaky similarity to my interests, studies, and hobbies either in past or present. Add zoology, biology and evolution to the bold and then this would be much closer to my list. (Incidentally, art also bores me.)
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
Originally Posted by Richard Philips FeynmanRichard Feynman...ENTp?Originally Posted by Richard Philips Feynman
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
I enjoy spontaneously deriving math formulas and equations while working on projects without any knowledge of them thru education...
But no... I don't enjoy math typically. At least not the abstract notational side, I can only understand math when I can visualize it in my head.
No. I only like certain things it enables me to do.
I've read a bit here and there about advanced math, but I've never got into the details of it. Too many other interesting things in the world.
Haha, awesome. Zoology, biology and evolution are also things I've studied -- the posted list is far from complete.
My main problem at this point is that I have too many interests, and none of them are enough more interesting than the others to focus on just that one as a career.
Quaero Veritas.
Math (or any subject) as it is taught in college, with lectures and strict homework and test deadlines, not really no.
I skipped class most of this semester so I can study Galois theory and read history books instead of the math classes I signed up for. One class, linear optimization, was so simplistic and boring that I just couldn't open the book and study the algorithms.
Now I'm not really ready for the finals in two days. I'll probably fail hooray!
I can't help it. I hate being force fed a subject. Having to sit in a lecture hall for a whole hour feels like physical torture. I'm not exaggerating. It feels like someone is sticking pins and needles in your head. I think that's the strongest reason I'm an Ne/Si valuing irrational.
I agree with you. I like studying math on my own time. The structure of a university environment can be quite irritating. If you want to learn math on your own terms and you're up for a challenge, I suggest the book "The Road to Reality." An extremely difficult but also extremely rewarding journey into the highest levels of math and theoretical physics.
Jason
Thanks dude. I'll totally check this out.
I want to take time off university and just study whatever I want for like 20 years, like an Alpha NT living the medieval ages. I can get a job working with computers or something like that to make ends meat.
ETA: Penrose is LII.
I agree with everything you said here (especially about Penrose - those were exactly my thoughts.) Be forewarned: even for people with a high degree of mathematical knowledge, this book is extremely difficult. You might even have to go back a few times and relearn some of the previous concepts. You are essentially being given a Ph.D.s worth of mathematics and physics in 1000 pages, so take your time and be ready for a challenge!
Jason