Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Textbooks

  1. #1
    Ritella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    at your feet
    Posts
    2,092
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Textbooks

    Is it just me, or are textbooks a Ti > Te medium? My reasons are: stuff is usually presented categorically/causally and with a slant toward a certain opinion, even though both are often not really true and subject to debate/interpretation. I always use my textbooks as frisbees because I think the info in them is BS. Like, is that really true according to present research? I bet every other line that is said definitively is actually a topic of controversy.
    I prefer primary sources and Wikipedia.

    For VI purposes:
    EII; E6(w5)

    i am flakey

  2. #2
    dbmmama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritella View Post
    Is it just me, or are textbooks a Ti > Te medium? My reasons are: stuff is usually presented categorically/causally and with a slant toward a certain opinion, even though both are often not really true and subject to debate/interpretation. I always use my textbooks as frisbees because I think the info in them is BS. Like, is that really true according to present research? I bet every other line that is said definitively is actually a topic of controversy.
    I prefer primary sources and Wikipedia.

    For VI purposes:
    i haven't read a textbook in years. i like to read a WIDE variety of resources and then make my own mind up about what makes sense to me and my intuition.

  3. #3
    Elro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    2,796
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritella View Post
    Is it just me, or are textbooks a Ti > Te medium? My reasons are: stuff is usually presented categorically/causally and with a slant toward a certain opinion, even though both are often not really true and subject to debate/interpretation. I always use my textbooks as frisbees because I think the info in them is BS. Like, is that really true according to present research? I bet every other line that is said definitively is actually a topic of controversy.
    I prefer primary sources and Wikipedia.
    Lol.

    I dunno, textbooks aren't that bad (depending on the subject and individual authors). Generally speaking it's probably a bad idea to take anyone's word as set in stone. They're good for quickly gaining the basic understanding, and from there you can look stuff up on your own. I also like finding them for ridiculously cheap prices at the used bookstore. That's one good way to learn new subjects.
    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Holy mud-wrestling bipolar donkeys, Batman!

    Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.


    I pity your souls

  4. #4
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,950
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think with some subject areas, such as History, the interpretations of a subject can be very biased and varied from author to author. This is unlikely to be the case with geology.

  5. #5
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beyond the blue horizon
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    13,088
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    lol, what about eBooks?
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  6. #6
    Board philosopher or bored philosopher? jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    884
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    With a Ti approach, I don't care if the information comes from a textbook, Wikipedia, or someone else's mouth. I only care that the source gives the reasons as to why a particular position should be considered true or false, and that those reasons make sense to me. In other words, claims behind which I do not understand the underlying logic are not interesting to me, even if those claims are considered to be facts.

    It also doesn't matter to me if the claims are categorical. In my opinion, it would be foolish to expect almost any claim to be unquestionably true, so I can tolerate claims that could be wrong, as long as the reasoning behind them makes decent sense.

    Jason
    LII

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •