Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 280 of 446

Thread: great paragraphs from what you're reading

  1. #241
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    a Swiss political party formed in 2011 with a policy to ban PowerPoint. Contingency plans, including holding all meetings over the French border in the Prévessin site of CERN or (clearly very popular) enforcing a strict LaTeX-only policy, were discussed extensively.
    .
    LOL. Well, LaTeX beamer slides enforces some sort of quality. You have to think when you make beamer slides (95 % of population gets panicked).
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  2. #242

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Lightbulb

    Social Foundations of Thought and Action, by Albert Bandura (the most cited psychologist alive) (1986)

    1. Models of Human Nature and Causality

    PSYCHODYNAMIC THEORY


    Human behavior is commonly viewed as motivated from within by various needs, drives, impulses, and instincts. In psychodynamic theory, for example, human behavior is the manifestation of the dynamic interplay of inner forces, most of which operate below the level of consciousness (Freud 1917, 1933). Since the proponents of this school of thought consider the principal causes of behavior to be drives within an individual, that is where they look for the explanations of why people behave as they do. Although this theory has gained widespread acceptance and is deeply entrenched in the public view of human behavior, it has not gone unchallenged.


    Theories of this sort are criticized on both conceptual and empirical grounds. The inner determinants are often inferred from the very behavior they supposedly caused, creating interpretive circularities in which the description becomes the causal explanation. A hostile impulse, for example is deduced from a person's irascible behavior, which is then attributed to the action of an underlying hostile impulse.


    Similarly, the existence of achievement motives is deduced from achievement behavior; dependency motives from dependent behavior; curiosity motives from inquisitive behavior; power motives from domineering behavior, and so on. There is no limit to the number of drives one can find by inferring them from behavior. Indeed, different theories propose diverse lists of motivators, some containing a few all-purpose drives, others encompassing an assortment of specific drives. If causal propositions concerning drives are to be empirically testable, then drives must be specified by the antecedent conditions that activate them and govern their strength, rather than being inferred from the behavior they supposedly produce.
    Last edited by Singu; 11-11-2017 at 05:05 PM.

  3. #243
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    the theory of the collective unconscious actually unwinds that, but it would require actually researching and understanding what they're critiquing for them to see that

  4. #244

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Part 2.

    1. Models of Human Nature and Causality

    PSYCHODYNAMIC THEORY Part 2.

    The conceptual structure of theories that invoke drives or impulses as the principal motivators of behavior has been further criticized for disregarding the complex and changeable patterning of human action. An internal motivator cannot adequately account for marked shifts in a given behavior under differing situational circumstances. When varying social conditions produce predictable changes in behavior, the postulated cause cannot reside mainly in a drive in the organism, nor can the cause be less complex than its diverse effects.

    Psychodynamic theory assumes a thorough psychic determinism, but it does not as a rule, postulate definite relationships between the unconscious inner life and human thought and action. In fact, the inner dynamics are said to produce any variety of effects, even opposite forms of behavior. Such formulations are, therefore, not easily testable nor refutable by empirical evidence. While the conceptual adequacy of psychodynamic drive theories could be debated at length, their empirical limitations cannot be ignored indefinitely. They provide ready interpretations of behavior that has already happened, but, as we shall see shortly, they are deficient in predicting future behavior. Almost any theory can explain things after the fact. Findings from research conducted from other perspectives have underscored the need to shift the focus of causal analysis from internal dynamics to reciprocal causation between personal and environmental factors. Behavior patterns commonly attributed to unconscious inner causes can be instated, eliminated, and reinstated by varying appropriate social influences and by altering people's ways of thinking. Such findings indicate that the major determinants of behavior arise from transactional dynamics, rather than flow unidirectionally from inner dynamics of unconscious mental functions.

    The explanatory power of a psychological theory is gauged in several ways. First, theories must demonstrate predictive power. Second, the methods the theories yield must be capable of effecting significant changes in human affect, thought, and action. Weaknesses in theories become readily apparent when they are put to work and can be judged by the results they produce. One can predict and change events without knowing the basis for the successes. So third, theories must identify the determinants of human behavior and the intervening mechanisms by which they produce their effects. But explanations that have no predictive value will be pseudo-explanations. The adequacy of explanation is, therefore, judged largely in terms of predictive accuracy. Psychodynamic formulations have been found wanting on all these counts.
    Basically the shit I've been saying.
    Last edited by Singu; 11-11-2017 at 04:04 PM.

  5. #245
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    you realize the existence of the outer planets was inferred based off behavior, as was the validity of certain calculations when they were later discovered via direct observation, right?

    the problem is the predictive power of "inner dynamic" theory is so pervasive that people take it for granted, as if its not there, because we use it so frequently. "inner dynamics" account for more successful and reliable predictions every day according to the own criteria given. its just ignored because you can't write a paper about what everyone already knows, unless you're a real genius. this is just the bleating of the mediocre trying to spin their means by which the uncreative can be creative (this is a Maslow quote--why don't you look that one up?, since we're on about great paragraphs, not some rando no name), and try to elevate it above their betters. amusingly, such an attempt does seem right up your alley, so I can see why this passage appeals to you

  6. #246
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    16,229
    Mentioned
    1553 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    you realize the existence of the outer planets was inferred based off behavior, as was the validity of certain calculations when they were later discovered via direct observation, right?
    Actually, the existence of Uranus was predicted by perturbations in the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn, and after Uranus was discovered, a further prediction was made for the position of an additional planet, Neptune. Weirdly enough, Neptune was found fairly far from where it was predicted to be. When the calculations were checked, it was found that gross errors had been made in the gravitational calculations. The errors were large enough to basically negate any validity they may have had and reduced the predictions to garbage, but they gave the impetus to look, and a planet was found.

  7. #247
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    thanks for the autismo but it in no way contradicts my point, only supports it

    you had the unexplained behavior of saturn and jupiter, and the question became what could be true in order for this to be the case, and the underlying mechanics were inferred (there were multiple competing models, not all of which posited other planets). though the calculations ended up not being perfect, that they needed to be made, and that additional planets must exist is precisely how inner dynamic theory works, which is to say it posits an underlying scheme to an outter manifestation that is later proven true by its predictions. that it is not %100 accurate is no mark against it because that is not the standard, the standard is "wow we predicted planets existing before we could observe them--not x planet will be at y location down the exact coordinates"-- it is enough that the planet be predicted to be there, that allows the theory sufficient acceptance to be later refined. it is precisely through this imaginative process that new knowledge is created, the idea that you can only proceed linearly from observation in developing theory cuts an entire half off of the development of human knowledge. it would essentially limit all potential knowledge to the currently accepted paradigm, which is stupid
    Last edited by Bertrand; 11-11-2017 at 04:35 PM.

  8. #248

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    the problem is the predictive power of "inner dynamic" theory is so pervasive that people take it for granted, as if its not there, because we use it so frequently. "inner dynamics" account for more successful and reliable predictions every day according to the own criteria given. its just ignored because you can't write a paper about what everyone already knows, unless you're a real genius. this is just the bleating of the mediocre trying to spin their means by which the uncreative can be creative (this is a Maslow quote--why don't you look that one up?, since we're on about great paragraphs, not some rando no name), and try to elevate it above their betters. amusingly, such an attempt does seem right up your alley, so I can see why this passage appeals to you
    Er, did you just call Albert Bandura a random no-name? He's the most cited psychologist alive, fool. Way more important and influential than Maslow. Sorry, but Maslow is more pop-psychology. Why don't you look THAT up.

    Also, you haven't read or understood anything. It says that other factors like external and environmental factors must be considered, since internal unconscious causes can easily be altered by outside factors. The so-called "inner dynamics" (I assume you're talking about psychodynamics) can't be considered to be the only factor if we were to predict behaviors.

    though the calculations ended up not being perfect, that they needed to be made, and that additional planets must exist is precisely how inner dynamic theory works, which is to say it posits an underlying scheme to an outter manifestation that is later proven true by its predictions.


    ...No it doesn't. Like it says, psychodynamics works by observing the behavior first, and then deducing the motivation from the behavior, which is circular. This is more like Aristotles saying that there is gravity because objects are "attracted to each other".

    it is precisely through this imaginative process that new knowledge is created, the idea that you can only proceed linearly from observation in developing theory cuts an entire half off of the development of human knowledge.
    I don't disagree, but that's not how psychodynamics work.

  9. #249
    back for the time being Chae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    europe
    TIM
    ExFx 3 sx
    Posts
    9,183
    Mentioned
    720 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Bandura is in the same league of Zimbardo and Milgram, by no means insignificant

  10. #250
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is more like Aristotles saying that there is gravity because objects are "attracted to each other".
    first of all, this conversation is set in the context of socionics. it doesn't deduce motivation. it deduces cognitive function in terms of structure. motivation is inferred only when there is no possible other explanation, then it can be properly "deduced" and this happens. also aristotle conveys 4 different types of causes, because causality is a function of how to organize information across axes, particularly the time axis, and it can be done different ways. what Jung added was the 5th axis "the collective unconscious" its actually the most sophisticated model of causality there is. and aristotle's insight was that people understand causality differently, which was later articulated into how they organize their "grid" across functions of time/space and now the unconscious. each priveledges their own understanding and views the world in those terms. all of the above fails to acknowledge that and falls back on more basic modes of understanding, and I can understand the attraction to reduce things to the lowest common denominator, but that is the criterion of "truth" for only certain types, namely low res Ti valuers

    Bandura is in the same league of Zimbardo and Milgram, by no means insignificant
    significant to who? I already take for granted singu represents the voice of psychology in the sense that is antithetical to jung. the problem is we're on a board inspired by jung. its not news that jung is in the small minority, so if the Fe criterion for truth is motion for its own sake in its own respective echo chamber, then yes, super significant. in light of history, no more significant than any random scholastic who time has totally forgotten

    the fact that people are dazzled by academia as if it this must be significant is just Ti seeking to the max, based on who says the most words. its a total Fe perspective on Ti

  11. #251

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Stop BSing Bertrand, you have no idea what you're talking about.

    For someone who supposedly likes "creative thinking", you sure don't do a whole lot of thinking. I know that you have a boner for Jung and Jordan Peterson, but that doesn't mean that they were right. Even just a little bit of thinking can expose the problems that psychodynamics faces.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    all of the above fails to acknowledge that and falls back on more basic modes of understanding, and I can understand the attraction to reduce things to the lowest common denominator,
    Psychology is NOT the "lowest common denominator", or low-level complexity like physics. Psychology is more high-level "emergent phenomena". And yes, such phenomena can have both a predictive and explanatory model. However, the whole point of this is deeper level of understanding, now shallower. There is nothing wrong with simplicity and elegance, which is what pretty much all great theories will eventually fall back to.

    significant to who? I already take for granted singu represents the voice of psychology in the sense that is antithetical to jung. the problem is we're on a board inspired by jung. its not news that jung is in the small minority, so if the Fe criterion for truth is motion for its own sake in its own respective echo chamber, then yes, super significant. in light of history, no more significant than any random scholastic who time has totally forgotten

    the fact that people are dazzled by academia as if it this must be significant is just Ti seeking to the max, based on who says the most words. its a total Fe perspective on Ti
    You are an idiot, and you have no idea what you're talking about. How about you do some study for once, or how about you come up with an actual predictive and explanatory model that can predict and explain anything in real life, fool, instead of making lame Socionics ad hominems over and over again like a clueless fool.

    FOOL! You are worthless and pointless.

  12. #252
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    its fine, I understand why you're the way you are

  13. #253

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Look, Jung was influential or whatever, don't know, not a huge fan. But does it kill you to know that perhaps he was wrong about things?

    And can you really blame him? He was basically just observing a bunch people and saying a whole bunch of shit. He has never done any research or tests. He hated statistics. Those are the tools that you would absolutely NEED if you were to keep yourself honest. It turns out that you CAN'T know people by just observing them, no matter how closely and astutely you observe them. At least certainly, you can't know their inner workings. You also can't know yourself via introspection alone, since at least 95% of your inner workings are unconscious, and you have no access to your unconscious. And that's a conservative estimate.

    It is simply time to put people like Jung and Freud into rest. They may have been influential, but they have been spectacularly wrong about so many things. It's like worshiping Aristotles when he was wrong about so many things. We now have better ideas and theories that can explain things so much better and so much more accurately. They are simply outdated.

  14. #254
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I actually love Aristotle and have been mocked for my praise of him as well, so... its not a big deal because opinions differ, if people want to push the academic social psych angle more power to them, I'm just here because I like jung and socionics. I believe good work can be done on both sides in the same way all honest work is good work

  15. #255
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    4,162
    Mentioned
    305 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Put jung to rest...

    I see it the opposite way. He is for the future. A psychological genius before his time. I've lived long enough to see that things like individuation actually exist. Or that symbols are not just signs.

    Jung will be misunderstood for a long time. Maybe at some point in the far future he will get more recognition.

    Right now jung is mostly for neurotic people who are struggling with themselves but are becoming aware of themselves because of this.

    Jung is also good psycho-education. Learning some basics about yourself and your own unconsciousness
    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)

  16. #256

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well I'm going to be blaming Freud and Jung, because they have spread so much wrong ideas about psychology to the masses.

    Jung had indirectly created Socionics, which is something people do when they're bored at work, which is the biggest time-waster ever.

    What they have done is make us run around in circles with their irrefutable theories, trying to get out of the quicksand.

  17. #257

  18. #258
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Jung on psychology:

    "Its concepts are lacking, facts are not; on the contrary, we are surrounded—almost buried—by facts."

    and on how he developed his theory of types:

    "I have often been asked, almost accusingly, why I speak of four functions and not of more of fewer. That there were exactly four was a result I arrived at on purely empirical grounds."

  19. #259
    c esi-se 6w7 spsx ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    the center of the universe
    Posts
    15,833
    Mentioned
    912 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    Im laughing because why is Fart capitalized?

  20. #260

  21. #261

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    Jung on psychology:

    and on how he developed his theory of types:

    "I have often been asked, almost accusingly, why I speak of four functions and not of more of fewer. That there were exactly four was a result I arrived at on purely empirical grounds."
    Yeah purely empirical grounds... Like his amazing personal observations and interpretation of personal anecdotes.

    No controlled studies, no statistics, no nothing (he said, he "probably would have done them" if he had had the means).

    This is how he arrived at a conclusion, using his powerful intuition:

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Jung
    “Thinking, roughly speaking, tells you what [something] is. Feeling tells you whether it is agreeable or not, to be accepted or rejected. Sensation tells you that there is something....And intuition--now there is a difficulty....There is something funny about intuition”
    And the reason why he arrived at 16 types and not some other arbitrary number? It has something to do with dividing a circle by 4, apparently:

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Jung
    I came to the conclusion that there must be as many different ways of viewing the world [as there are psychological types]. The aspect of the world is not one, it is many--at least 16, and you can just as well say 360. You can increase the number of principles, but I found the most simple way is the way I told you, the division by four, the simple and natural division of a circle. I didn't know the symbolism then of this particular classification. Only when I studied the archetypes did I become aware that this is a very important archetypal pattern that plays an enormous role.

    Jung had a psychotic breakdown from 1913-1917, and he came up with some wacky, crazy shit:

    According to psychiatrist and author, Anthony Storr, Jung went through a period of mental illness during which he thought he was a prophet with "special insight." Jung referred to his "creative illness" (between 1913-1917) as a voluntary confrontation with the unconscious. His great "insight" was that he thought all his patients over 35 suffered from "loss of religion" and he had just the thing to fill up their empty, aimless, senseless lives: his own metaphysical system of archetypes and the collective unconscious.

  22. #262
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    pack it up guys, Jung was a loony

  23. #263
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,347
    Mentioned
    1005 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default


    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung
     
    YWIMW

  24. #264
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,347
    Mentioned
    1005 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    After speaking with this man for awhile, the girl had an epiphany.

    She told her friends that this stranger had awakened her in some way. She swore that she had never before acknowledged anything of what that man had told her.

    He opened a portal for her.

    She experienced intense awakening—crying loudly when she reached the plane. She’d been sleeping for years and now she’d woken up.

    As they both departed from the gate, the girl thanked the man.

    He looked at her and said: “Don’t thank me, we met for a reason. I came either to free you or you to free me.”
    .

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung
     
    YWIMW

  25. #265

  26. #266

  27. #267
    LϺαο Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    After the ceremonies were ended, Elizabeth, in full regalia and wearing a smaller crown - perhaps that made for Anne Boleyn in 1533 - and carrying the orb and sceptre, walked in procession back the way she had come, smiling broadly and shouting greetings to the enthusiastic crowds lining her way. 'In my opinion', sniffed the Mantuan ambassador, 'she exceeded the bounds of gravity and decorum.'
    .

  28. #268

  29. #269
    LϺαο Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    The quarrelsome libertarian Ayn Rand, who rarely met Hayek in person, and when she did dismissed him as a “compromiser,” was enraged by the book. In the margins of her copy she scribbled abusive comments, calling Hayek a “God damn fool,” an “abysmal fool,” an “ass,” and a “total, complete, vicious bastard.”
    .

  30. #270

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    TIM
    ILI - C
    Posts
    1,810
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Correct and accurate conclusions may be arrived at if we carefully observe the relation of the spheres of concepts, and only conclude that one sphere is contained in a third sphere, when we have clearly seen that this first sphere is contained in a second, which in its turn is contained in the third. On the other hand, the art of sophistry lies in casting only a superficial glance at the relations of the spheres of the concepts, and then manipulating these relations to suit our purposes, generally in the following way: — When the sphere of an observed concept lies partly within that of another concept, and partly within a third altogether different sphere, we treat it as if it lay entirely within the one or the other, as may suit our purpose.

  31. #271
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,347
    Mentioned
    1005 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default


    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung
     
    YWIMW

  32. #272
    LϺαο Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    In 1746 French abbé Jean-Antoine Nollet linked two hundred monks with twenty-five foot iron bars. He stretched them over a mile, then administered electrical shocks to the first monk in the line.
    .

  33. #273
    LϺαο Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Al-Warraq was Muslim, but Muslim sources call him a Manichaean. He was certainly a doubter. Al-Warraq often referred to God as an idiot, because “He who orders his slave to do things that he knows him to be incapable of doing, then punishes him, is a fool.”
    .

  34. #274
    LϺαο Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thales held that ‘all things are full of gods’. Aristotle also explained that Thales believed a magnet had a soul since it can move iron, and Aristotle supposed that this was what Thales had meant when he said that ‘soul is diffused throughout the whole universe’, meaning that that the forces that were gods were very much like the magnetic force.”
    .

  35. #275
    LϺαο Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Erica Chenoweth (born April 22, 1980) is an American political scientist as well as a faculty member and Ph.D. program co-director at the University of Denver's Josef Korbel School of International Studies. Chenoweth is also the Director of the university's Program on Terrorism and Insurgency Research and a researcher at the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO). Within the international relations community, she is known for her work on civil resistance movements and political violence.
    [...]
    Together with Maria J. Stephan of the U.S. Department of State, Chenoweth co-wrote the book, Why Civil Resistance Works. Chenoweth and Stephan organized an international team of scholars in identifying all the major violent and nonviolent governmental change efforts of the twentieth century. They translated the results into a theory of civil resistance and its success rate for political change compared to violent resistance.

    Their team identified over 200 violent revolutions and over 100 nonviolent campaigns. Twenty-six percent of the violent revolutions were successful, while 53 percent of the nonviolent campaigns succeeded. Moreover, looking at change in democracy (Polity IV scores) indicates that nonviolence promotes democracy while violence promotes tyranny.

    In addition every campaign that got active participation from at least 3.5 percent of the population succeeded, and many succeeded with less. All the campaigns that achieved that threshold were nonviolent; no violent campaign achieved that threshold.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erica_Chenoweth

  36. #276
    24.7% THC bgbg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    33.5840249,-111.916986
    Posts
    834
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "What is 'Man'?"
    "I am a man, you are a man, Larry is a man."
    "But Anne is not a man?"
    "Uh... Anne is a man, a female man. A woman."
    ("Thanks, Jubal."-"Shut up, Anne.")

  37. #277

    Default

    Once you go below 10 breaths a minute you start to engage the parasympathetic nervous system. Slow breathing activates the vagus nerve, the primary cranial nerve, which is associated with a recuperative state. Studies have also demonstrated that slow breathing increases alpha waves in the brain, calming mid-range waves that foster a relaxed yet alert state of mind.

  38. #278
    LϺαο Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Gentlemen: I received your letter to-day by post, in regard to the ransom you ask for the return of my son. I think you are a little high in your demands, and I hereby make you a counter-proposition, which I am inclined to believe you will accept. You bring Johnny home and pay me two hundred and fifty dollars in cash, and I agree to take him off your hands. You had better come at night, for the neighbours believe he is lost, and I couldn't be responsible for what they would do to anybody they saw bringing him back.

    Very respectfully,

    Ebenezer Dorset.
    .

  39. #279

    Default

    is an understanding of difference (or a consensus on it) important for socionics?

    ''Deleuze describes how Hegel took contradiction—pure opposition—to be the principle underlying all difference and consequently to be the explanatory principle of all the world's texture. He accuses this conception of having a theological and metaphysical slant.

    Deleuze proposes (citing Leibniz) that difference is better understood through the use of dx, the differential. A derivative, dy/dx, determines the structure of a curve while nonetheless existing just outside the curve itself; that is, by describing a virtual tangent (46). Deleuze argues that difference should fundamentally be the object of affirmation and not negation. As per Nietzsche, negation becomes secondary and epiphenomenal in relation to this primary force.''

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Difference_and_Repetition

  40. #280
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,347
    Mentioned
    1005 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    "The Void

    But yet creation's neither crammed nor blocked
    About by body: there's in things a void-
    Which to have known will serve thee many a turn,
    Nor will not leave thee wandering in doubt,
    Forever searching in the sum of all,
    And losing faith in these pronouncements mine.
    There's place intangible, a void and room.
    For were it not, things could in nowise move;
    Since body's property to block and check
    Would work on all and at an times the same.
    Thus naught could evermore push forth and go,
    Since naught elsewhere would yield a starting place.
    But now through oceans, lands, and heights of heaven
    By divers causes and in divers modes,
    Before our eyes we mark how much may move,
    Which, finding not a void, would fail deprived
    Of stir and motion; nay, would then have been
    Nowise begot at all, since matter, then,
    Had staid at rest, its parts together crammed.
    Then too, however solid objects seem,
    They yet are formed of matter mixed with void:
    In rocks and caves the watery moisture seeps,
    And beady drops stand out like plenteous tears;
    And food finds way through every frame that lives;
    The trees increase and yield the season's fruit
    Because their food throughout the whole is poured,
    Even from the deepest roots, through trunks and boughs;
    And voices pass the solid walls and fly
    Reverberant through shut doorways of a house;
    And stiffening frost seeps inward to our bones.
    Which but for voids for bodies to go through
    'Tis clear could happen in nowise at all.
    Again, why see we among objects some
    Of heavier weight, but of no bulkier size:
    Indeed, if in a ball of wool there be
    As much of body as in lump of lead,
    The two should weigh alike, since body tends
    To load things downward, while the void abides,
    By contrary nature, the imponderable.
    Therefore, an object just as large but lighter
    Declares infallibly its more of void;
    Even as the heavier more of matter shows,
    And how much less of vacant room inside.
    That which we're seeking with sagacious quest
    Exists, infallibly, commixed with things-
    The void, the invisible inane.
    Right here

    I am compelled a question to expound,
    Forestalling something certain folk suppose,
    Lest it avail to lead thee off from truth:
    Waters (they say) before the shining breed
    Of the swift scaly creatures somehow give,
    And straightway open sudden liquid paths,
    Because the fishes leave behind them room
    To which at once the yielding billows stream.
    Thus things among themselves can yet be moved,
    And change their place, however full the Sum-
    Received opinion, wholly false forsooth.
    For where can scaly creatures forward dart,
    Save where the waters give them room? Again,
    Where can the billows yield a way, so long
    As ever the fish are powerless to go?
    Thus either all bodies of motion are deprived,
    Or things contain admixture of a void
    Where each thing gets its start in moving on.
    Lastly, where after impact two broad bodies
    Suddenly spring apart, the air must crowd
    The whole new void between those bodies formed;
    But air, however it stream with hastening gusts,
    Can yet not fill the gap at once- for first
    It makes for one place, ere diffused through all.
    And then, if haply any think this comes,
    When bodies spring apart, because the air
    Somehow condenses, wander they from truth:
    For then a void is formed, where none before;
    And, too, a void is filled which was before.
    Nor can air be condensed in such a wise;
    Nor, granting it could, without a void, I hold,
    It still could not contract upon itself
    And draw its parts together into one.
    Wherefore, despite demur and counter-speech,
    Confess thou must there is a void in things.

    And still I might by many an argument
    Here scrape together credence for my words.
    But for the keen eye these mere footprints serve,
    Whereby thou mayest know the rest thyself.
    As dogs full oft with noses on the ground,
    Find out the silent lairs, though hid in brush,
    Of beasts, the mountain-rangers, when but once
    They scent the certain footsteps of the way,
    Thus thou thyself in themes like these alone
    Can hunt from thought to thought, and keenly wind
    Along even onward to the secret places
    And drag out truth. But, if thou loiter loth
    Or veer, however little, from the point,
    This I can promise, Memmius, for a fact:
    Such copious drafts my singing tongue shall pour
    From the large well-springs of my plenished breast
    That much I dread slow age will steal and coil
    Along our members, and unloose the gates
    Of life within us, ere for thee my verse
    Hath put within thine ears the stores of proofs
    At hand for one soever question broached.

    Nothing Exists Per Se Except Atoms and the Void"

    Excerpt from "On the Nature of Things" By Lucretius

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung
     
    YWIMW

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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