IEIs/INFps: How do you behave in a college classroom setting?

[JWC3]

IEIs how would you describe your behavior in a college classroom setting? How likely are you to participate, where would you likely sit, what classroom stereotype are you likely to fill, that sorta stuff.

[Wynch]

Joe wants to figure out which of his classmates is IEI so he can bang them

[Gilly]

Depends on the class. If it's English or philosophy, I'll be the kid answering every question If it's math or science, I'm probably in the back of class talking to a friend/taking notes/doodling.

[JWC3]

Joe is going to figure out which of his classmates is IEI so he can bang them

Fixed

But srsly... IEIs I will find you...

Also If any non-IEIs have any insight into IEI behavior in a classroom setting feel free to share. I'm all ears.

Depends on the class. If it's English or philosophy, I'll be the kid answering every question If it's math or science, I'm probably in the back of class talking to a friend/taking notes/doodling.

How about in a Psychology or Theatre class?

[ArchonAlarion]

lol

yeah I need to get on this with the SEI's.

IME IEI's gravitate to writing, psychology, and I actually know a good deal of biology interested Beta NF's, but that may just be because I went to an aquabiology school.

I think its less of which class you need to worry about, and more of how they act socially as in what social roles.

[Gilly]

How about in a Psychology or Theatre class?

Depends on what branch of psychology.

With theatre I'm not sure; just getting ready to take my first theatre class this coming semester

[strrrng]

Depends on the class. If it's English or philosophy, I'll be the kid answering every question If it's math or science, I'm probably in the back of class talking to a friend/taking notes/doodling.

lol. I always got annoyed with the people answering every question. They reminded me of little toys you wind up, and would never shut their stupid mouths.


I don't consider myself participative; I am highly averse to any sort of group discussion that exceeds around five or so people, and takes place in a classroom or coffee shop or any other generically "intellectual" setting. I don't have much on-campus college experience, but have been around the environment enough to glean a pretty solid understanding of my disposition. It's pretty much AP English x10, where the young minds of tomorrow come for their grand learning, take notes like mental suppositories, belch out pointless inquiries for the sake of rhetoric, and more or less get in the way. It's why I opted for online classes, but it seems even there the collective inculcation is unavoidable (mandatory forum discussions and shit). The accumulation of experience I have had in academia has led me to pretty much hate it. While real learning is something I'm a huge proponent of, it seems that too often it is the case that this never occurs, even in self-proclaimed elite. I don't bother to participate in things under a veil, so you can find me in the back of the class, doodling or reading some random shit unconcernedly.

[redbaron]

I went to a smaller college where almost all of my classes were under 50. Some were even around 30. If it was one of those huge science classes that you just have to take to graduate, I'd sit wherever (with my friends) and doodle or gaze off, engrossed in my own thoughts. But if it was literature, art or philosophy, you'd definitely find me paying attention. I never sat directly in the front of the class, but usually off to the side or 3/4 of the way back. I wasn't one to raise my hand a lot but I loved being in that setting and hearing what everyone else had to say.

@ strrrng, you are so jaded! It makes me sad sometimes.

[strrrng]

@ strrrng, you are so jaded! It makes me sad sometimes.

lol. Well fwiw, I only posted in this thread upon someone else's request; lamenting isn't exactly my thing, but honesty of opinion is.

[redbaron]

lol. Well fwiw, I only posted in this thread upon someone else's request; lamenting isn't exactly my thing, but honesty of opinion is.

I do respect your honesty.

[07490]

I've only taken a couple college courses.

the literature class I had was a fucking bullshit waste of time. the professor was the stupid but well-meaning sort. I would just sit as far back as I could and pay attention to anyone and anything but the "lecture". I remember the people and personalities I took the class with much better than I remember anything the professor ever said, or anything that was actually talked about in class.

the ancient history class I took was much different; the professor, besides being an interesting character on his own, knew his stuff and I liked listening to him go on about the topic. I would sit watching him, taking in what he was saying. I sat in the back whenever I could, though I often came in late to that class and had to end up sitting in the front, which I didn't like. with this class I remember the professor much better than the other students (with the exception of an SLE girl who went out of her way to talk to and befriend me.)

in both classes I was generally quiet, sat in the back, and kept to myself, the (rare) exceptions being when I got over some shyness and there was a discussion going on that got me motivated enough to contribute something, or when I knew the answer to a question and for whatever reason felt like answering. I quietly observed people and fantasized about talking to the ones that captured my attention most.

I didn't enjoy the actual classroom setting all that much, because it felt like high school... I didn't like high school.

I agree so much of these sometimes, It really does depends on the professor and not the subject of interest itself, the on who can tell a story that captivates me the most on the other hand, I as well as other also tend to do better in that class.

[pluie]

IEIs how would you describe your behavior in a college classroom setting? How likely are you to participate, where would you likely sit, what classroom stereotype are you likely to fill, that sorta stuff.

Well, i haven't started college yet, but i can probably imagine what i'd be like.

it would probably depend on several several things.

If it's a subject I'm more interested in and more informed in, then I will be rather inclined to make a good impression on the teacher; I would want others to see that I'm informed about the subject. I would probably often challenge the teacher in a respectful and inconspicuous manner to where I come off diplomatic, but be careful to not over-do it to piss them off, or create the impression that I am cocky. It's very difficult for me not to try to make these impressions, but I'll try to be modest and I'll try to focus on the task at hand, and not get ahead of myself. Basically, anyway. Classes with these topics are the ones I'd be like this in: logic, animal behavior, psychology, philosophy, anthropology, music theory (not as much), literature, sociology (not as much)

if it's one of those classes listed above, I'd probably sit anywhere, because it doesn't really matter because my focus would be really good anyway since i care a lot about it. i tend to forget about most of my concerns in classes i'm really into like that... of course unless i have romance on my mind and its not going so good for me romantically. that sort of thing to tends to get dibs on taking over my brain. all though i don't care that much where i sit, i have a tendency to gravitate to the front, because it's a bit easier to listen and get engaged that way. (by the way i tend to like getting engaged with the teacher on a conversation-basis, and also with other students but if the teacher seems dumb or annoying to me i'll probably avoid interaction most of the time. generally, engagement is great unless i'm just not in the mood that day; then i'll just kind of relax unless i feel an opportunity for me to say something insightful or missed in the discussion has arisen in which it would be easy for me to speak up. in subjects i'm not so confident in, i usually don't speak up because of course i'm afraid i'll say something stupid. )

now for classes i'm don't particularly feel a need to make any good impression in, i'll usually always try to get a seat near the front because it is easier to focus that way. usually in class i'll be pretty quiet, because i tend to absorb information best by listening to a lecture. however, if i'm interested in someone in the room i'll probably make eye contact if possible. i guess i'll give them a sort of "look" but mostly i'll be trying to see how they might react to me based on the impression their movements and face expression and just i guess, "vibe" gives off. if i'm especially interested in someone, i'll wait til a good opportunity to make a witty comment arises; i'll try to make them exclusively laugh or smile if possible. i love doing that.

its not uncommon for me to take the role of a class-clown; when its a teacher that isn't so tolerant of fooling around i'm usually really good at making them belief i'm on the same page and can show them the respect they desire; then i can sort of make jokes and such, but i have to be very careful not to disrespect them. i often enjoy taking the place of class clown very much. however, this may not be exactly the same in college considering the technically more "mature" atmosphere (since people are older, studies more advanced). so usually i am either the one who thinks of things no one else does and asks questions that challenge the teacher... or am the one who gets the teacher to hold them in fairly high esteem; either way though, i usually use my position to get in some humor and laughs from the class; i make an effort not to make exclusive jokes with the teacher; that's just awkward and it makes the class think i'm a suck-up.

i use my humor to get comfortable in the environment (especially when its my first time in the class) so from there i adapt to everyone as a "group"; i get to know them as the "group" they are and i get to know the "feel" the emanate. when i have fully gripped this group personality, my true mood and such becomes more obvious to those around me. i'm not worrying so much about my impression and become for comfortable, and focus more easily than before. what this means is that in effect, my mood controls more of my behavior yet i am also still more focused. what this means is that i may be joking one day almost constantly, and then another day i may just be quiet and sometimes just chuckle if i think of something funny, but i'll be mostly rather serene. in other words the comfort i have gained will allow me to more openly present my mood and just be more myself.

i'm often a pretty slow tester as i look too deep into things, and overanalyse them leading to a confusion of what a question is really asking. i don't take many notes; i hate taking notes and the process of trying to take notes only distracts me and detracts from my overall consumption of the lecture. i usually never back-talk as i believe it doesn't fit well with the school setting; it should be purely academic and getting personal with a teacher (especially in this setting) seems strange and awkward to me,-- and it also distracts from the class as a whole. i like to be friends with anyone around me but prefer those that seem least judgemental to me, and the most apt to dry wit as a preference for sense of humor. this dry wit tends to pull me in to a conversation; with acquaintances i'm not very serious most of the time.

so... yeah. i'm not even completely sure of my IEI typing, but i was requested to respond as i'm sure some others were as well. and i am glad to anyway. :] as i said, i havent started college but i have been in a college setting and i've watched several college lectures and it isn't difficult to imagine what i would be like. i've also taken college-level courses which adds another dimension to my imagined behavior/tendencies in a college class room setting.

kay. done.

[redbaron]

In maths classes I'd do all my work in the first five minutes, then gossip; if the tutor tried to catch me out by asking me to write the answer up, I'd do it perfectly and be left alone for the rest of semester.

haha that was me in high school!

[Gilly]

lol. I always got annoyed with the people answering every question. They reminded me of little toys you wind up, and would never shut their stupid mouths.

*shrug* I only talk about the things I'm interested in. Sometimes when I'm not, if I think I can get some pull with the professor; teachers' good graces have saved me from a well-deserved F due to a missed class/late paper on multiple occasions. But I tend to ingratiate myself with authority figures naturally as long as they aren't total cocksuckers, so if it's a huge ego-blow for you to do a little sucking up, then it's probably not worth it.

It's pretty much AP English x10, where the young minds of tomorrow come for their grand learning, take notes like mental suppositories, belch out pointless inquiries for the sake of rhetoric, and more or less get in the way. It's why I opted for online classes, but it seems even there the collective inculcation is unavoidable (mandatory forum discussions and shit). The accumulation of experience I have had in academia has led me to pretty much hate it. While real learning is something I'm a huge proponent of, it seems that too often it is the case that this never occurs, even in self-proclaimed elite. I don't bother to participate in things under a veil, so you can find me in the back of the class, doodling or reading some random shit unconcernedly.

You' might be missing out on meeting some reasonably intelligent people; there are at least some smart people wherever you go, whether it be an Ivy League or a community college. And yeah, the pretension is annoying, but getting over it is worth what you might learn from other people and their perspectives, or at least what they might get you to think about.

But, more importantly, if you can do better, if you see why they are stupid, why not point them out simply for the sake of clarity? That's what got me participating in philosophy; I wasn't even interested in the subject originally, but when the professor started spouting off some existential bullshit, I couldn't help myself, so I stepped up and was just like, "Ok, look..." and it was uphill from there

[Gilly]

lol. Well fwiw, I only posted in this thread upon someone else's request; lamenting isn't exactly my thing, but honesty of opinion is.

So why don't you start calling those pretentious college kids out? :wink:

[Gilly]

For me it's because the world is full of stupid people, and I can only correct a few, so the return's not worth the effort. :tongue:

Edit: Dear lord I sound like such a terrible person. I'm usually a ray of sunshine, it's just that undergrads started this week and I had to deal with a million stupid questions today. Fear not, my warm beams will return yet! They're just temporarily quenched by the thick stormclouds of DUMB.

lol no it's ok, I get where you're coming from. I just hate it when people believe obviously fallacious things, like Tom's talk about anarcho-capitalism or religion; that one really bugs me. But I usually take a lot of flack when I talk smack about religion, so I save that for people who I think will actually listen and not just try to turn a debate into a verbal slugfest (I save that for nick ). But things like ontological views and politics typically aren't as sensitive, so I don't resist the urge to confront them usually

But yeah, I mean I guess if you don't feel compelled to quash stupidity, no reason to go out of your way; not exactly an endeavor that gives quick return But when you do change someone's mind, get them to take a more open perspective, to me, that's worth the times that people are retarded and don't listen. I've learned how to spot people who will "bend," so to speak, and I don't really waste time on people who seem bent on rationalizing their beliefs with circular logic. Unless I REALLY get my hackles up

[redbaron]

You' might be missing out on meeting some reasonably intelligent people; there are at least some smart people wherever you go, whether it be an Ivy League or a community college. And yeah, the pretension is annoying, but getting over it is worth what you might learn from other people and their perspectives, or at least what they might get you to think about.

But, more importantly, if you can do better, if you see why they are stupid, why not point them out simply for the sake of clarity? That's what got me participating in philosophy; I wasn't even interested in the subject originally, but when the professor started spouting off some existential bullshit, I couldn't help myself, so I stepped up and was just like, "Ok, look..." and it was uphill from there

I totally agree with this perspective.

[strrrng]

*shrug* I only talk about the things I'm interested in. Sometimes when I'm not, if I think I can get some pull with the professor; teachers' good graces have saved me from a well-deserved F due to a missed class/late paper on multiple occasions. But I tend to ingratiate myself with authority figures naturally as long as they aren't total cocksuckers, so if it's a huge ego-blow for you to do a little sucking up, then it's probably not worth it.

I can understand talking about things you're interested in. I recall one or two books we read that I cared about discussing, because I wanted the correct answer to be known, and not have time wasted on intellectual meandering. I guess I was referring to the people who answer the questions for the sake of it.

I agree about the teachers' favor thing, but I'm not sure to what degree I could pull that off. Some teachers just naturally liked me, the others I didn't extend myself to win over.

You' might be missing out on meeting some reasonably intelligent people; there are at least some smart people wherever you go, whether it be an Ivy League or a community college. And yeah, the pretension is annoying, but getting over it is worth what you might learn from other people and their perspectives, or at least what they might get you to think about.

That's true. And maybe it is worth it. Ultimately, I can't make a decision based on other people, anyway.

But, more importantly, if you can do better, if you see why they are stupid, why not point them out simply for the sake of clarity? That's what got me participating in philosophy; I wasn't even interested in the subject originally, but when the professor started spouting off some existential bullshit, I couldn't help myself, so I stepped up and was just like, "Ok, look..." and it was uphill from there

It depends. If the subject is significant enough, and I feel it will affect the discussion, then sure. But I'm not just going to one-up some kid for the sake of intellectual rat race shit. I suppose it could be interesting to "discuss" existentialism with some philosophy professor, though

So why don't you start calling those pretentious college kids out? :wink:

Depends!

[Gilly]

I can understand talking about things you're interested in. I recall one or two books we read that I cared about discussing, because I wanted the correct answer to be known, and not have time wasted on intellectual meandering. I guess I was referring to the people who answer the questions for the sake of it.

I agree about the teachers' favor thing, but I'm not sure to what degree I could pull that off. Some teachers just naturally liked me, the others I didn't extend myself to win over.

You'd be surprised by how far a little effort will take you. Especially in the classes like Spanish, the ones where nobody really wants to be there...it's easy to curry favor just by being willing to raise a hand when everyone else is sitting there, looking blase or disinterested; you have to remember that people become teachers because they love the subject, and if you show interest when everyone else is sitting there looking negligent, it's a big +1 in their book, even if only because they think you have at least some superficial interest in their topic of choice. I basically cruised my sophomore Spanish class, barely doing any free-time-consuming homework, and just by being the one who would answer questions when nobody else would and expressing some mild enthusiasm for the subject. I missed a few classes to trip/get high/hang out, to the point that the teacher could have kicked me out of the class and negated my credits (ugh, small schools), but because she liked me she refused to report me to the school.

My mentality is, when you're in a class, you're there, and there's really nothing better to do, so why not take advantage of the fact that everyone else is too anxious about looking like a know-it-all in front of their friends to raise a hand and score some points?

That's true. And maybe it is worth it. Ultimately, I can't make a decision based on other people, anyway.

Yeah; if nothing else, you can think of it as a little mental jogging.

It depends. If the subject is significant enough, and I feel it will affect the discussion, then sure. But I'm not just going to one-up some kid for the sake of intellectual rat race shit.

Mostly I did it just to break other kids down and show them that they hadn't dug far enough yet, hadn't subjected all of their underlying assumptions to analysis. I have to admit, it was kind of a rush to fuck with some kid's worldview and just see him wind up totally out of sorts with the world

I suppose it could be interesting to "discuss" existentialism with some philosophy professor, though

Heheh, yeah, it was fun; that's all, though. I thought I would like being a philosophy major for a while, maybe take it to law school (they love to see the logic training, especially for he LSATs), but I realized after a while that it was a dead end, really no more to me than "fun."

[strrrng]

You'd be surprised by how far a little effort will take you. Especially in the classes like Spanish, the ones where nobody really wants to be there...it's easy to curry favor just by being willing to raise a hand when everyone else is sitting there, looking blase or disinterested; you have to remember that people become teachers because they love the subject, and if you show interest when everyone else is sitting there looking negligent, it's a big +1 in their book, even if only because they think you have at least some superficial interest in their topic of choice. I basically cruised my sophomore Spanish class, barely doing any free-time-consuming homework, and just by being the one who would answer questions when nobody else would and expressing some mild enthusiasm for the subject. I missed a few classes to trip/get high/hang out, to the point that the teacher could have kicked me out of the class and negated my credits (ugh, small schools), but because she liked me she refused to report me to the school.

My mentality is, when you're in a class, you're there, and there's really nothing better to do, so why not take advantage of the fact that everyone else is too anxious about looking like a know-it-all in front of their friends to raise a hand and score some points?

I suppose that's true. A stagnant environment in some mandatory class could probably provide a mindless sense of stimulation, if from nothing else than just knowing that you know and can fuck around by discussing something you don't care much for. I agree that most professors want to see the same passion in others, and can probably take offense if it isn't present, to a degree; that doesn't mean I'd fake enthusiasm, but could at least appreciate their attitude and reciprocate for personal respect (but bland professors who are just there on some ego-trip or whatever, get nothing). Lastly, it's probably inversely entertaining to mockingly appear as the "know-it-all" when you couldn't care less, as others sit vexedly, wondering what they're doing there.

Yeah; if nothing else, you can think of it as a little mental jogging.

That's pretty much what it would be lol. Although I just learned that placement tests are available, and can catalyze the class enrollment if you do well enough... so that's the route I'm taking.

Mostly I did it just to break other kids down and show them that they hadn't dug far enough yet, hadn't subjected all of their underlying assumptions to analysis. I have to admit, it was kind of a rush to fuck with some kid's worldview and just see him wind up totally out of sorts with the world

It could go both ways for me here. If I see a kid is genuinely trying to understand, but doesn't possess what I consider a substantial depth of it, I will not drive him into the ground; if anything, I'll talk to him, because he actually cares. But of course, the douche bags who come in with a "Liberty or Death" shirt on, an iPod halfway postured on them, carrying some unused Kierkegaard, who proceed to annoy the class and professor with vacuous inquiries into nothing, deserve nothing less than complete ass rape

But then again, if I was in a shitty mood, I could so easily see myself just begin to mock someone for the sheer fuck of it. So whatever.

Heheh, yeah, it was fun; that's all, though. I thought I would like being a philosophy major for a while, maybe take it to law school (they love to see the logic training, especially for he LSATs), but I realized after a while that it was a dead end, really no more to me than "fun."

That's probably how it will end up for me, too. Philosophy has always been important for me because I think it lays a strong ground for one's thinking style, methodology and general attitude towards belief. I couldn't simply allow myself to go about learning new things, without subjecting my very disposition and the things I was learning to a sort of deconstructive analysis; you're pretty much walking through a funnel at that point. It just reaches a point though, where you know how you know, and don't need to subject yourself to such things much longer, since the underlying thinking styles have been solidified and utilized. I think that's when you can actually begin to specialize in a field substantially.

[ArchonAlarion]

lol no it's ok, I get where you're coming from. I just hate it when people believe obviously fallacious things, like Tom's talk about anarcho-capitalism or religion; that one really bugs me.

Yes and people who know zero about simple economic principles and who have obviously not spent the time Tom and I have researching such a theory is annoying to me, so shove it up you pretentious anus.

[Gilly]

I suppose that's true. A stagnant environment in some mandatory class could probably provide a mindless sense of stimulation, if from nothing else than just knowing that you know and can fuck around by discussing something you don't care much for.

Yeah, up until my junior year I really didn't give a shit, I jsut sat in the back and fucked around. But then I had a couple of teachers, one math and one english, who I really respected and liked, and I learned from being in their classes that it really can be fun and sometimes even informative to engage the teacher or other students in a debate, even if the subject matter is of marginal importance; granted, in their classes, I was usually interested in what was being discussed, or at least felt eager to learn, but I found that applying the same strategy in other classes through college made my grades go up and helped time go by faster.

(but bland professors who are just there on some ego-trip or whatever, get nothing).

Oh god, one of my english teachers in college was one of those people who obviously wanted to be in a classroom just to make himself sound smart and say some passive-aggressive condescending shit, and I took so much pleasure in debating him and making him look bad in front of the whole class. Although after that whenever I would see him in the halls, he always kind of looked at me sheepishly, and I actually kind of pitied him

Lastly, it's probably inversely entertaining to mockingly appear as the "know-it-all" when you couldn't care less, as others sit vexedly, wondering what they're doing there.

Bahahaha, god, see for me it was actually MEETING the philosophy majors that made me realize that I wasn't of their stripe; they all seemed like these confused kids who were using their degree trying to weed out how the world worked, and when I would confront them, most of them would either crumble or just go quiet The sense of superiority made me wonder if it might not be the perfect thing for me, but, like I said, eventually I realized that it was a dead-end subject, the study of which only offered limited personal growth up to a certain point.

That's pretty much what it would be lol. Although I just learned that placement tests are available, and can catalyze the class enrollment if you do well enough... so that's the route I'm taking.

Sounds like a good plan. Is this for online courses? *curiosity piqued*

It could go both ways for me here. If I see a kid is genuinely trying to understand, but doesn't possess what I consider a substantial depth of it, I will not drive him into the ground; if anything, I'll talk to him, because he actually cares.

Yeah...I tried to help some fellow students, but mostly I found myself feeling alternately pedantic and disdainful of them for teaching people who I felt should be my equals, at least on some level.

But of course, the douche bags who come in with a "Liberty or Death" shirt on, an iPod halfway postured on them, carrying some unused Kierkegaard, who proceed to annoy the class and professor with vacuous inquiries into nothing, deserve nothing less than complete ass rape

But then again, if I was in a shitty mood, I could so easily see myself just begin to mock someone for the sheer fuck of it. So whatever.

The one kid who sticks in my mind was a math major who was taking 200 level philosophy with me. He came in thinking he was all superior because he was a junior who had taken some class on boolean logic or whatever, of course not accounting for the fact that he might have a classmate that was younger than him who had devoted a year of his life to studying symbolic logic I would tear this kid a new ontological asshole pretty much ever class I deigned to attend; the professor actualy accused me once of waiting until the end of class to go on a tirade ten-minute long tirade against the kid so that he wouldn't get a chance to respond, when in reality I was just so livid at his pompous superiority that I couldn't help carrying on dissecting his futile attempts at logic until we ran out of time

That's probably how it will end up for me, too. Philosophy has always been important for me because I think it lays a strong ground for one's thinking style, methodology and general attitude towards belief. I couldn't simply allow myself to go about learning new things, without subjecting my very disposition and the things I was learning to a sort of deconstructive analysis; you're pretty much walking through a funnel at that point. It just reaches a point though, where you know how you know, and don't need to subject yourself to such things much longer, since the underlying thinking styles have been solidified and utilized. I think that's when you can actually begin to specialize in a field substantially.

I'm the same. See, for me, when I started taking actual CLASSES in philosophy, reading philosophers like Descartes and Kant and Hume, I felt like it was the most inane bullshit ever because I had already built a framework around ALL of that kind of shit, and had already either debunked or at least wrestled with almost every issue presented before I even enrolled Since I was in high school, I've seen the idea of personal ontology as something that's very necessary simply for understanding the world and ourselves; I consider most people who don't naturally think about that kind of shit to be intellectually shallow. To live for 20 years and NOT question those kinds of things, I mean, come on, how much time have you spent actually THINKING about the world and yourself?

[Gilly]

Yes and people who know zero about simple economic principles and who have obviously not spent the time Tom and I have researching such a theory is annoying to me, so shove it up you pretentious anus.

Did you read that thread? I spent my entire junior year studying alternative economic and political theories on my own time. You're not even a snack for my intellectual appetite.

[strrrng]

Yeah, up until my junior year I really didn't give a shit, I jsut sat in the back and fucked around. But then I had a couple of teachers, one math and one english, who I really respected and liked, and I learned from being in their classes that it really can be fun and sometimes even informative to engage the teacher or other students in a debate, even if the subject matter is of marginal importance; granted, in their classes, I was usually interested in what was being discussed, or at least felt eager to learn, but I found that applying the same strategy in other classes through college made my grades go up and helped time go by faster.

Hm, I was generally the same. Junior year English had some decent discussions, which I found fulfilling because I could suggest ideas without feeling like I was being sucked into a social fish bowl. I guess the teacher sort of facilitated that, or wasn't as rhetoric-based as others.

Oh god, one of my english teachers in college was one of those people who obviously wanted to be in a classroom just to make himself sound smart and say some passive-aggressive condescending shit, and I took so much pleasure in debating him and making him look bad in front of the whole class. Although after that whenever I would see him in the halls, he always kind of looked at me sheepishly, and I actually kind of pitied him

haha... I guess I would feel somewhat bad seeing him like that, too. I don't make it a personal vendetta to undermine teachers, even if they deserve it, so would probably only intellectually assault them occasionally Because ultimately, the guy is there for personal enjoyment, and I don't exactly want to ruin the high point of his day, unless he encroaches on mine or something.

Bahahaha, god, see for me it was actually MEETING the philosophy majors that made me realize that I wasn't of their stripe; they all seemed like these confused kids who were using their degree trying to weed out how the world worked, and when I would confront them, most of them would either crumble or just go quiet The sense of superiority made me wonder if it might not be the perfect thing for me, but, like I said, eventually I realized that it was a dead-end subject, the study of which only offered limited personal growth up to a certain point.

That's true, and I think most philosophy majors are like that, to a degree. I don't view philosophy as a pursuit, in and of itself; I think the essential quality is something to manifest within each individual, as a groundwork for their own experiential disposition – not exactly something to be taught in a class. Which is probably why the people who do seek to learn it in college are so misguided lol, and why the ones who really care, do it on their own (at least internally). It's nice to banter about shit with like-minded people at times, but eventually you have to move, or something.

Sounds like a good plan. Is this for online courses? *curiosity piqued*

Mostly. It's primarily an online program for a bachelor's degree via the UMD system, but it seems like there's a solid variety in the class types and schedules. I figure most of the work should just be done by myself, but they have hybrid classes, you can go to lectures, study groups, etc. More than anything else, I'm just curious to see how long I can keep myself interested in something that requires commitment

Yeah...I tried to help some fellow students, but mostly I found myself feeling alternately pedantic and disdainful of them for teaching people who I felt should be my equals, at least on some level.

That's true. I guess it would depend on their attitude and the subject. I don't want to feel like some dog is humping my leg every time they avidly inquire about a new idea to me, lol. I'd much prefer to interact with those more knowledgeable than me, because I wouldn't be obsequiously devouring their every word, since I think a natural intellectual disposition would allow me to pick up on what they said and consider it fully.

The one kid who sticks in my mind was a math major who was taking 200 level philosophy with me. He came in thinking he was all superior because he was a junior who had taken some class on boolean logic or whatever, of course not accounting for the fact that he might have a classmate that was younger than him who had devoted a year of his life to studying symbolic logic I would tear this kid a new ontological asshole pretty much ever class I deigned to attend; the professor actualy accused me once of waiting until the end of class to go on a tirade ten-minute long tirade against the kid so that he wouldn't get a chance to respond, when in reality I was just so livid at his pompous superiority that I couldn't help carrying on dissecting his futile attempts at logic until we ran out of time

lmao... yeah, that's pretty much the perfect context to maul somebody in.


*relishes the though of encountering anyone like that in an existential/ontological discussion*

I'm the same. See, for me, when I started taking actual CLASSES in philosophy, reading philosophers like Descartes and Kant and Hume, I felt like it was the most inane bullshit ever because I had already built a framework around ALL of that kind of shit, and had already either debunked or at least wrestled with almost every issue presented before I even enrolled Since I was in high school, I've seen the idea of personal ontology as something that's very necessary simply for understanding the world and ourselves; I consider most people who don't naturally think about that kind of shit to be intellectually shallow. To live for 20 years and NOT question those kinds of things, I mean, come on, how much time have you spent actually THINKING about the world and yourself?

I feel exactly the same. And I do believe that most philosophy classes would feel banal to me, only because the essential qualities would be stretched out unnecessarily, and I wouldn't be able to fully concentrate in the all-or-nothing, sporadic and diverse manner that I do. I mean, a course curriculum for philosophy? Check yourself lol.

Did you read that thread? I spent my entire junior year studying alternative economic and political theories on my own time. You're not even a snack for my intellectual appetite.

bahahahah... classic

[ArchonAlarion]

oh shut up with your college kid bullshit.

I didnt have to even be in highschool to learn about that shit and I did so out of my own intellectual appetite. The fact that you still don't get it and I do is kinda sad.

Lol dude I've shown up a Yale professor of constitutional history, if we are gonna talk about our achievments. He was sputtering like a fool. I seriously got him to admit in under thirty seconds that the constitution and the entire US government has absolutely no legitimate contractual status. That was in my junior year of highschool.

[Gilly]

oh shut up with your college kid bullshit.

I'm not in college, broski. Pay attention.

I didnt have to even be in highschool to learn about that shit and I did so out of my own intellectual appetite. The fact that you still don't get it and I do is kinda sad.

Lol dude I've shown up a Yale professor of constitutional history, if we are gonna talk about our achievments. He was sputtering like a fool. I seriously got him to admit in under thirty seconds that the constitution and the entire US government has absolutely no legitimate contractual status. That was in my junior year of highschool.

I never even mentioned my achievements to you; as far as I can recall, you butted in on account of wanting to stick a condom between my intellectual phallus and your buddy Tom's rather vulnerable derriere (it's funny because the French are pathetically idealistic too! ).

You can lie all you like; if you want to lay out an argument, and show me that you actually understand this shit, then start another thread, I will be more than happy to embarrass you, and show you exactly why your self-centered claim to promoting "anarcho-capitalism" is a bunch of useless intellectual masturbation that has no place in the world today.

[discojoe]

No legitimate contractual status? According to what? Laws inferior to the Constitution?

[Gilly]

[strrrng]

oh shut up with your college kid bullshit.

I didnt have to even be in highschool to learn about that shit and I did so out of my own intellectual appetite. The fact that you still don't get it and I do is kinda sad.

Lol dude I've shown up a Yale professor of constitutional history, if we are gonna talk about our achievments. He was sputtering like a fool. I seriously got him to admit in under thirty seconds that the constitution and the entire US government has absolutely no legitimate contractual status. That was in my junior year of highschool.

Shut up. Examine what you just said, and you'll realize not only the foolishness of making an assertion in the first place, but also the nature of the assertion itself. Maybe it will serve as a lesson – potentially for both you and Tom – of what it means to create an argument, undermine the argument, and prove something entirely different than what the initial argument purported, at the same time!

You can lie all you like; if you want to lay out an argument, and show me that you actually understand this shit, then start another thread, I will be more than happy to embarrass you, and show you exactly why your self-centered claim to promoting "anarcho-capitalism" is a bunch of useless intellectual masturbation that has no place in the world today.

I honestly don't get how someone can think they understand something so deeply, yet merely go around touting their flag of knowledge, as if by doing so they are actually proving anything. Tom did it, and now Jake is doing it. At least be subtle, lol.

[Gilly]

haha... I guess I would feel somewhat bad seeing him like that, too. I don't make it a personal vendetta to undermine teachers, even if they deserve it, so would probably only intellectually assault them occasionally Because ultimately, the guy is there for personal enjoyment, and I don't exactly want to ruin the high point of his day, unless he encroaches on mine or something.

Yeah, I mean the thing is, he put up such a cool front in class, so it was hard for me to feel bad about it in the moment, but I guess it was all an act because he was always a little sheepish when he saw me otherwise.

That's true, and I think most philosophy majors are like that, to a degree. I don't view philosophy as a pursuit, in and of itself; I think the essential quality is something to manifest within each individual, as a groundwork for their own experiential disposition – not exactly something to be taught in a class.

Precisely why I recommend people learn logic over philosophy

Which is probably why the people who do seek to learn it in college are so misguided lol, and why the ones who really care, do it on their own (at least internally). It's nice to banter about shit with like-minded people at times, but eventually you have to move, or something.

Yeah. I mean, for one the employment opportunities are minimal, but the real thing is, to me, there's only so much "world" to understand with philosophy, before you get into the territory of the hard sciences, which pares any sort of improvement down to grunt work, as opposed to the literary world where all improvement has to be personal, internal, and essentially the sky's the limit.

Mostly. It's primarily an online program for a bachelor's degree via the UMD system, but it seems like there's a solid variety in the class types and schedules. I figure most of the work should just be done by myself, but they have hybrid classes, you can go to lectures, study groups, etc. More than anything else, I'm just curious to see how long I can keep myself interested in something that requires commitment

Eugh, study groups, nothing but an excuse to get distracted, eat cookies and flirt harmlessly.

Good that you have options, though.

That's true. I guess it would depend on their attitude and the subject. I don't want to feel like some dog is humping my leg every time they avidly inquire about a new idea to me, lol. I'd much prefer to interact with those more knowledgeable than me, because I wouldn't be obsequiously devouring their every word, since I think a natural intellectual disposition would allow me to pick up on what they said and consider it fully.

*relishes the though of encountering anyone like that in an existential/ontological discussion*

Yeah, it was great, I didn't have any violent impulses outside of class for months

I feel exactly the same. And I do believe that most philosophy classes would feel banal to me, only because the essential qualities would be stretched out unnecessarily, and I wouldn't be able to fully concentrate in the all-or-nothing, sporadic and diverse manner that I do. I mean, a course curriculum for philosophy? Check yourself lol.

The big thing that got to me was that it was just too boring to focus on the little details; they broke everything into little manageable "chunks" based who addressed what ideas, or what concepts were supposedly more "related" than others, without every trying to bring the whole thing into scope and address things on the level of actual ontology; to me, everything was related on the level of a cohesive worldview, and it felt trite to talk about one little thing at a time without discussing their broader implications.

bahahahah... classic

Least I could do

[olduser]

this is all much better than the intp terrorist in class. sort of shrowded, unhappy looking kid who snidely responds to other student's slips in technicality! hahaha.

[Gilly]

I honestly don't get how someone can think they understand something so deeply, yet merely go around touting their flag of knowledge, as if by doing so they are actually proving anything. Tom did it, and now Jake is doing it. At least be subtle, lol.

Right? And refuse to rise to any challenge after making such ludicrous claims?

[strrrng]

Precisely why I recommend people learn logic over philosophy

Yeah. Given that logic is much more objective, things like interpersonal discussions or textual examination can hone the ability much more than they would for a personal, philosophical outlook. Even then though, I still rely a lot on myself to "teach" various thinking styles, as I just don't see the relevancy of dealing with others whom I perceive as unqualified to challenge or teach; this forum provides a nice outlet for debate practice, though Aside from that, I'm always up to meet a new and interesting person; but I'm not exactly hunting out clubs and shit.

Yeah. I mean, for one the employment opportunities are minimal, but the real thing is, to me, there's only so much "world" to understand with philosophy, before you get into the territory of the hard sciences, which pares any sort of improvement down to grunt work, as opposed to the literary world where all improvement has to be personal, internal, and essentially the sky's the limit.

That's true (I guess the introspective inclination is what makes me go literature > science, most of the time), and I do think philosophy gets quite menial after a while – unless you really are figuring something out, which is rare. Also, getting too engulfed in that stuff can hamper workability, simply due to what you're focusing on every day.

Eugh, study groups, nothing but an excuse to get distracted, eat cookies and flirt harmlessly.

True

Good that you have options, though.

Yeah... even with the "unlimited opportunity" in the Navy, I still feel that a person has more 'real' options in the civilian world, if for no other reason than maneuverability.

Yeah, it was great, I didn't have any violent impulses outside of class for months

lol... the ultimate alleviation

The big thing that got to me was that it was just too boring to focus on the little details; they broke everything into little manageable "chunks" based who addressed what ideas, or what concepts were supposedly more "related" than others, without every trying to bring the whole thing into scope and address things on the level of actual ontology; to me, everything was related on the level of a cohesive worldview, and it felt trite to talk about one little thing at a time without discussing their broader implications.

Yeah. I really resent that kind of attitude, and have never bothered with much philosophical stuff outside of the existential/phenomenological realm for that very reason. It seems the majority of these "thinkers" are content molding various concepts and forms into some self-contained maze that gives them a feeling of consummation; the really interesting stuff, to me, is to be found in those momentary flashes of awareness that require no book or systematization, just the stuff you sense, see and know – for whatever it may be worth.

Least I could do

True. Not that much more couldn't have been done

[strrrng]

Right? And refuse to rise to any challenge after making such ludicrous claims?

Precisely, lol. I mean, at least when we used to attack each others' character and intellect, there was some sort of debate about something. Jake and Tom just come in like feminist petitioners, hoist a few signs, belch out some ideological fervor, then upon being questioned as to their position, retreat while waving the same signs and screaming the same things.

[Gilly]

Yeah. Given that logic is much more objective, things like interpersonal discussions or textual examination can hone the ability much more than they would for a personal, philosophical outlook. Even then though, I still rely a lot on myself to "teach" various thinking styles, as I just don't see the relevancy of dealing with others whom I perceive as unqualified to challenge or teach; this forum provides a nice outlet for debate practice, though Aside from that, I'm always up to meet a new and interesting person; but I'm not exactly hunting out clubs and shit.

Yeah...I've thought about joining book clubs or debate teams, but I'm not sure I'd be able to look at myself in the mirror any more

That's true (I guess the introspective inclination is what makes me go literature > science, most of the time), and I do think philosophy gets quite menial after a while – unless you really are figuring something out, which is rare. Also, getting too engulfed in that stuff can hamper workability, simply due to what you're focusing on every day.

You can definitely think yourself into a corner...I had a friend in college who spent his late high school and early college years flitting between identities because he wasn't even sure of his own existence. Kind of pathetic, but to see it in action, in someone you know and have some level of respect fore, its just sad.

Yeah... even with the "unlimited opportunity" in the Navy, I still feel that a person has more 'real' options in the civilian world, if for no other reason than maneuverability.

*shudder*

lol... the ultimate alleviation

Better than bong hits, let me tell you...

Yeah. I really resent that kind of attitude, and have never bothered with much philosophical stuff outside of the existential/phenomenological realm for that very reason. It seems the majority of these "thinkers" are content molding various concepts and forms into some self-contained maze that gives them a feeling of consummation; the really interesting stuff, to me, is to be found in those momentary flashes of awareness that require no book or systematization, just the stuff you sense, see and know – for whatever it may be worth.

YES! It's those beautiful moments when you sense that you've tapped into something that can't be described...that is my fucking holy grail, that is why I analyze everything: to find the one thing that cannot be broken down.

Also on my list of top 10 excellent reasons to be an English major instead of philo

True. Not that much more couldn't have been done

Well, when he proves himself worth the effort...

[Gilly]

Precisely, lol. I mean, at least when we used to attack each others' character and intellect, there was some sort of debate about something. Jake and Tom just come in like feminist petitioners, hoist a few signs, belch out some ideological fervor, then upon being questioned as to their position, retreat while waving the same signs and screaming the same things.

lmfao

Yeah, well, they'll learn the harder way...never changing.

[Gilly]

No legitimate contractual status? According to what? Laws inferior to the Constitution?

bump

[strrrng]

Yeah...I've thought about joining book clubs or debate teams, but I'm not sure I'd be able to look at myself in the mirror any more

lol yes... I can't imagine myself coming home, all intellectually exercised from the masturbation session, tossing my books on the bed in some lazy sense of elitism... and look in the mirror like I was the shit or something.

You can definitely think yourself into a corner...I had a friend in college who spent his late high school and early college years flitting between identities because he wasn't even sure of his own existence. Kind of pathetic, but to see it in action, in someone you know and have some level of respect fore, its just sad.

That's pretty crazy... I've felt at times like a fleeting shadow though, or like I'm being chased by a bunch of them, not necessarily voices or anything lol... but it's like when all the internal states overlap and disfigure themselves into some lurid mixture of whatever you want to call it (I'm sure you know what I mean lol).

*shudder*

Yeah. Asking a Master Chief if I can sign up for a philosophy class, isn't exactly what I would hope for (not to mention the things they could have me do for their "approval"...)

Better than bong hits, let me tell you...

Of course

YES! It's those beautiful moments when you sense that you've tapped into something that can't be described...that is my fucking holy grail, that is why I analyze everything: to find the one thing that cannot be broken down.

Yeah. I really dislike breaking things down much; when I find something, I always try to intuitively streamline it to glean what I need, and potentially correlate it with other situations for the sake of abstraction, but never pedantically deconstruct it into some meaningless reduction.

Also on my list of top 10 excellent reasons to be an English major instead of philo

Yeah. As far as "truths" go, I'm much more concerned with the human experience and all the powerful emotions associated with it; I'll leave the science and such to others. I would never want to become some Dean Koontz-esque nutjob, lost in my own imaginational self-fellatio, but you know ...

Well, when he proves himself worth the effort...

Yeah. Either of them.

lmfao

Yeah, well, they'll learn the harder way...never changing.

How do feminists learn?

[Steve]

God reading this thread makes me weep inside wistfully at my missed opportunities for intellectual masturbatory sessions to connect with people in college. I went to an undergraduate business college where we got to learn about how to do fucking accounting costing, do statistical financial analysis and some boring notation-filled theoretical and context-less microeconomic bullshit. And I couldn't relate with hardly any of the other people in the classes. I fortunately found some cool people who were worldly, artistic and can appreciate interesting musings, and also was able to take some management classes which touched on psychology related stuff which was much better. But I felt so deprived, which ultimately led me onto internet forums 2 years ago trying to figure myself out. I just wish though that I had the kind of awareness and willingness to engage back when I was in college,that I have now, because I probably would've taken some philosophy electives (I took some theoretical physics/astronomy electives which were much better than my business courses and required little effort on my part and no research papers). I probably would've gotten to connect with more like minded people and join clubs and stuff. I guess at the time I didn't want to have to write long papers and do library research, so I avoided the classes that would involve it.

*sigh*

But I guess I did finally get to experience the equivalent of a full fledged philosophy experience my senior year thanks to online/phone contact

@ the comment about experiencing the truth yourself: I totally agree. I may consider some formal theorem someone wrote, but I would always relate it to truth in my own experience and come at it from the subjective perspective and not lose myself in trying to mold things to fit some accepted structure.

How do feminists learn?

I think you know

[Gilly]

That's pretty crazy... I've felt at times like a fleeting shadow though, or like I'm being chased by a bunch of them, not necessarily voices or anything lol... but it's like when all the internal states overlap and disfigure themselves into some lurid mixture of whatever you want to call it (I'm sure you know what I mean lol).

Hmmmm, I mean I have had experiences that I think could be analogous, but for once I'm not entirely certain. Some of my most desperate times have been when the overriding feeling is one of basically complete confusion, which is not even a "feeling" in and of itself, but merely the overall effect produced, where I feel almost overstimulated, as if multitudes of emphases are vying for precedence or dominance.

Yeah. I really dislike breaking things down much; when I find something, I always try to intuitively streamline it to glean what I need, and potentially correlate it with other situations for the sake of abstraction, but never pedantically deconstruct it into some meaningless reduction.

See, my whole shtick is, let nothing be sacred, subject everything to the most rigorous analysis, because if it can't withstand that upon an initial trial, even if I try to put it on a pedestal and bask in it and find its allegorical significance and all of its abstractions and applications, I will eventually debunk it, or someone else will, or something will happen to make me realize that I've been deluding myself, and I'll go through a sort of jading phase. So only the most inexplicable manifestations and themes truly become meaningful, enabling me to apply them naturally, without pondering what might be "behind the veil," so to speak.

Yeah. As far as "truths" go, I'm much more concerned with the human experience and all the powerful emotions associated with it; I'll leave the science and such to others.

Science doesn't really interest me. I need to be in an area where I'm making breakthroughs that have personal meaning; I mean, I'm sure if I pigeonholed myself into some branch of science and worked my way up, I would find some sense of reward in "being on the cutting edge," but it just wouldn't be the same. The range and varying intensities of internal states is vastly more navigable given my disposition Psychonauts till death.

I would never want to become some Dean Koontz-esque nutjob, lost in my own imaginational self-fellatio, but you know ...

Hmmm...never deigned to read any Koontz; I generally avoid anyone who puts their own name in raised lettering on a trade sized paperback

How do feminists learn?

*gets the belt*