Disassociative Logic: Alpha Ti gone bad

[tcaudilllg]

Disassociative logic is the state of believing two antithetical premises at once. Internally, it is experienced as having two incompatible truth tables in conceptual memory, creating a logical inconsistency or impasse. We believe in a thing as true because unless it were true other things would be untrue that we believe to be true. Thus our minds consist of truth tables which can require drastic revision if there is even a single error. To an extent, we accord a belief system that seems to have consistency a legitimacy all its own. However our mental energy also seems to play a role: scientists are finding that mental functions have limited energy per "burst" of activity. Once a burst's energy is expended, whatever arguments are resolved during the session are accepted as fact. We then refer back to these with our Ti function in various capacities. Particularly when a truth table seems to indicate something negative about ourselves -- especially something we feel we cannot change -- there is a tendency to give our emotions priority and tolerate the existence of false beliefs as indicated by our truth table. This is the beginning of self-delusion, for good or ill.

[DividedsGhost]

Disassociative logic is the state of believing two antithetical premises at once. Internally, it is experienced as having two incompatible truth tables in conceptual memory, creating a logical inconsistency or impasse.

Someone named Ni wanted me to give you a notice. It seems he's suing you for copyright infringement.

[tcaudilllg]

Well then I file suit, because I can't turn on the news anymore without being faced with a storm of disassociated logic. You know what they say about copyright: if you don't use it, you lose it.

[krieger]

people on this forum do it full time. weak Ti at it's most naive.

[tcaudilllg]

It's the Enneagram defined.

[DividedsGhost]

Well then I file suit, because I can't turn on the news anymore without being faced with a storm of disassociated logic. You know what they say about copyright: if you don't use it, you lose it.

Good point. That's why I hate listening to politics on the news channels. I know how you feel about that.

[MisterNi]

Truly terrible. In the real sciences, dissociative states exist and coexist successfully with the most notable example being Newtonian and Quantum Physics.

[Ozz]

Well then I file suit, because I can't turn on the news anymore without being faced with a storm of disassociated logic. You know what they say about copyright: if you don't use it, you lose it.

Good point. That's why I hate listening to politics on the news channels. I know how you feel about that.

I am thinking that the best way to deal with those is by learning how to write those statements myself. Anyone know any material that teaches someone to writing these (misleading) speeches and statements?

[tcaudilllg]

It's quite simple: just write unrealistically, thinking in terms of unattainable majesties and paridisios.

This lady can give you pointers:


"The world is already perfect by design, and the only reason it doesn't seem that way is because some people insist on complaining about it!" -- random Teabagger

[tcaudilllg]

Although Ts generally detest disassociative logic, seeing it as an excuse to escape from reality and/or justify unrealistic hatreds, their set is internally split due to differences of personal values. Positivist Ts are like to ignore a set of facts which seems to contain disassociative aspects. This creates a divide between them and negativists, who are willing to keep disassociative claims in mind with an eye to eventually disproving them by providing an alternative explanation. Positivist Ts have little motivation for disproving disassociative claims -- if nothing else, it might cost them friends among positivist Fs.

However this only in a general sense -- it applies chiefly to far negativists (social liberals) and far positivists (social conservatives). About half the population -- half of negativists and half of positivists -- has, on an individual basis, a preference for one side or the other, but is willing to listen to arguments to the contrary on a case-by-case basis. Thus they are called "moderates". Still this only carries for T; if it carried for F, Nazi Germany would never have happened because racism wouldn't exist apart from religious edict (and even then it would be hard to dress up a reason to hate others).

So now you understanding why the Iraq war happened and why it went to hell in a hand basket, and why it improved after the moderates took over. However the struggle for moderate minds by either side is in many senses never ending, and requires a lot of in depth knowledge and experience to influence.

[Beautiful sky]

people on this forum do it full time. weak Ti at it's most naive.

This