Reality

[tcaudilllg]

A review of the literature shows that physicalism isn't even taken seriously anymore. Rather, the belief now is that pan-psychism is the answer to the problems of such things as sensation, qualia, and the like.

[rat1]

It's called reconciling differences in ontological viewpoints, and between entertaining ideas and believing in their reality. That's something you won't understand.

No, I understand you. I just think you can say the same thing in a much simpler way. I'm wondering why you make it so complicated. I think you do it intentionally. So I think its just your nerd rage bearing down on people.

[Korpsy Knievel]

A review of the literature shows that physicalism isn't even taken seriously anymore. Rather, the belief now is that pan-psychism is the answer to the problems of such things as sensation, qualia, and the like.

Let's have a peek at this literature. Pan-psychism isn't necessarily dualistic either. See Spinoza as an example.

No, I understand you. I just think you can say the same thing in a much simpler way. I'm wondering why you make it so complicated. I think you do it intentionally. So I think its just your nerd rage bearing down on people.

Cognition is obviously complicated and understanding it entails a critical assessment of what is often abstruse and baffling (equally obvious is the fact that I'm still learning cogsci as a layman, so I make no claim to be an expert in this field). Assimilation and communication of topical ideas requires the development of a lexicon that conceptually encompasses the phenomena under examination. This allows dialogue to proceed without getting bogged down in misunderstandings caused by ambiguous language, colloquialism, or folk psychology. It also eliminates the necessity of repeatedly defining fundamental ideas in elementary detail.

Personally, I dislike walls of text that contain more noise than signal, or linger unnecessarily on minutiae. I employ "big words" instead because they concentrate information and denote succinctly. This forum contains enough intelligent members that I feel no need to dumb myself down to be understood. You don't like it? Fight, fuck, or flee.

[tcaudilllg]

Check out the Journal for Integrative Neuroscience.

[rat1]

We're discussing a complicated subject. I have to use big words to be understood. Otherwise people won't understand me, and I'll have to repeat myself.

I don't like big walls of text either, so I use big words to compact my sentences. I think you people are capable of understanding me. Don't like it? Fuck off.

Ah.. I see.

[Korpsy Knievel]

Check out the Journal for Integrative Neuroscience.

Thanks. Hunting through the JIN's list of articles was certainly stimulating and led me to look up several fascinating ideas along the way (I'm even considering the purchase of a very interesting-looking book in the $80-120 range). However I found only one mention of panpsychism and from the abstract it's unclear whether Vimal embraces that idea (which, assuming the cultural influence of Hinduism, would hardly be surprising for someone of recent Indian extraction) or merely entertains it for argument's sake. Likewise the abstracts of other papers. They concern themselves primarily with neurology, bio-imaging, and scientific research strategies. And though various philosophies of mind are mentioned I saw nothing indicating a general advocacy of panpsychism, nor dualism or immaterialism for that matter. Feel free to point out specific papers I may have missed.

I maintain that the symbolic and imaginary can be regarded metaphysically and without reification within physicalism and emergentism. They're also subsumable within the neutral monism of Spinoza's panpsychism. And so internalizing an ontological foundation of substance pluralism (e.g. Cartesian dualism) is unnecessary to the understanding or development of socionics.

[Creepy-male]

For... 7 years I have been enamored with socionics and personality psychology. As a reformer liberal, I spent most of my life to that point living in the belief that people were completely chaotic, unpredictable, and quite frankly scary. There was the image of what we wanted them to be to us and what they actually were, and too often the image did not match the reality. When I found socionics, it brought some -- I say some -- order to this chaos. It was not enough order for me, and so I endeavored to discover it for myself. I discovered the subelements and re-discovered the EM type, and upon the study of their relationships built the dual-type and supersocion theories.

Trying to understand more deeply the systems suggested in the broad outlines of subelement and dual-type relations has basically been my sole intellectual focus since 2004. I understand the world so much now that I also understand how difficult it is to actually change it, that we as people are basically enslaved to our motivations and all we can have is hope that we are on the receiving end of the energy others feel compelled to spend in help to others. Such is opportunity. I want everyone to have opportunity. I know that everyone adds something to the intellectual discourse around us -- even the most extreme and evil voices make substantial contributions from time to time, if only in cancellation of each the others' negative influences.

So what does a theory of attitudes -- that's what the dual-type, supersocion, and even classical socionics theories really constitute -- afford us? I suppose it is fruitless to try to impress upon you the importance of something you aren't convinced is important, so let's what you have to say and then I'll offer my thoughts on your views.

Here is my viewpoint in a nifty bulletpoint list!

• Mental Stimulation - Socionics provides an exercise to stimulate people's minds intellectually and engage their thinking processes.
• Self Understanding - Socionics provides a language for people to begin understanding themselves. For example one can begin thinking about their strengths and weaknesses, as well as having a language to express these.
• Organized Semantics - Socionics provides a language for people to discuss characteristics of people. It provides concepts embedded in it's system that would be hard to express in normal language. For example: something like Ni would be hard to explain solely in terms of the english language.
• Relationship Understanding - Socionics provides a method for understanding relationships between people. Similar to self-understanding this is more focused on interpersonal intellect instead of intrapersonal intellect. It allows one to begin thinking about the reasons for why some people don't get along, or why some people do.

I think all of these items are rather straightforward a big question though is the application of these, especially the self-understanding and relationship-understanding. I think these forms of intellect tie in directly with some emotional motivations.

Self-Understanding can lead to improvement of the self for example. Socionics can enable people to identify their weaknesses and therefore use that information to improve themselves.

Relationship-Understanding is similar. It allows people to use this information in order to better understand one's relations with other people. For example one can see potentially that sometimes problems between people may result in differences in cognitive values or strength.

[Korpsy Knievel]

Here is my viewpoint in a nifty bulletpoint list!

Tits. Quality post.

[tcaudilllg]

It's finally over. The paper is in.

I've been educating my professors at Ashford about socionics for the past 3 years. Now, I think it's about time to see what they think about it.

Bandura is pretty old. I don't think he'd want to get into it, though I will drop him a line.