vi or type
Jacques Derrida
vi or type
Could you give us a little less info?
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Originally Posted by Gilly
[is this pic] less or more?
actually i had never seen a picture of him before and had thought the one i saw earlier tonight looked isfj or delta irrational.. but looking at pics from an image search he looks beta NF.....
what do you think? it would seem to make sense that a beta nf wrote about what i see as rhetoric
i got him as my answer to what french philosopher are you? app on the book of face.
Definitely an ethical type. Looks more IP. SEI or IEI, IMO.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Some of the pictures on the first page of google search for "derrida" remind me of a woman I have recently typed as SLE or ILE.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
His basic philosophical premises seem Ni in nature:
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
IEI is plausible, I think.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
yeah, i don't think it's bad at all. i remember watching a documentary on him ages ago and it was the most mindnumbingly boring thing i think i ever sat through. he seemed glaringly merry quadra from what i recall.
6w5 sx
model Φ: -+0
sloan - rcuei
is your hippo eating chocolate?
I've met Derrida in real life, but unfortunately I didn't know any Socioncs back then, and my memory of what he was like is rather vague.
playing with tetris blocks!
6w5 sx
model Φ: -+0
sloan - rcuei
Thread revival! He seems to have something against the American LIE-"Please elaborate/ready made"-attitude:
He is easy. LII - creative subtype
(he is interesting to watch. There is something special about him. Hard to put the finger on exactly what)
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Type is part of the fatal flaw of truth, however, it is not so much type that is part of the fatal flaw of truth, but rather the meaninglessness, and eventually the fatal flaw, of type. An abundance of opinion concerning not determinism, but typology may be found. Thus, the conceptual paradigm of consensus denotes the common ground between narrativity and identity, contextualised into a postcultural discourse that includes type as a totality.
LII. He does that characteristically Ti-dom thing (more so LII) of continually shifting context without sacrificing consistency.
4w3-5w6-8w7
LII ain't bad, let me think... the focus is merely on semantics with him. Notoriously hard to read bc convoluted Kantian manner. My ILE professor introduced me to himSeems he's popular in Alpha.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote