Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: The stupidity of :Te:

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default The stupidity of :Te:...

    is shown when things like this are taken too seriously. Logical positivism seems to have been the version which rose to dominance in philosophy while empiricism (particularly as seen in the late 19th century) was the movement in the natural sciences. Has anyone else noted other examples?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    703
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was under the impression they had already decided on a plan that removed Pluto's planethood and dropped the number to 8.
    That faith makes blessed under certain circumstances, that blessedness does not make of a fixed idea a true idea, that faith moves no mountains but puts mountains where there are none: a quick walk through a madhouse enlightens one sufficiently about this. (A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.) - Friedrich Nietzsche

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    old article. your information is correct. whether or not charon, ceres, and xena are planets or not is still on the table (though in all likelihood xena will most definitely be accepted as such)

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ... Pedro, just admit that you're actually Te yourself, lol. Now stfu and stop blaming other people for things you don't believe in.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    am i?

    i blame myself for a lot of things as well

    did you mean like extj or both those types and the ixtps as possibilities? and what made you think that?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No, I don't really think that you're ExTJ or anything... that had more of a reference to Baby's thread and the irony if we all had the Js and Ps mixed up, hehe.

    As for the second thing I said, it's silly to connect certain beliefs to functions. That's like saying that all Ni types are Republicans, lol. Personally, I saw no real reason why they should have degraded Pluto to a dwarf planet or whatever.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    my point was that by taking the self-imposed definitions by which a thing is declared a planet overly seriously they are commiting the error of not recognizing the lack of significance that the definitions themselves have in the first place or rather the inability of definitions to contain a thought without becoming more burdensome than beneficial

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    my point was that by taking the self-imposed definitions by which a thing is declared a planet overly seriously they are commiting the error of not recognizing the lack of significance that the definitions themselves have in the first place or rather the inability of definitions to contain a thought without becoming more burdensome than beneficial
    If that's Te, then I'm not Te.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    funny, i thought you did it more than most.

    this is the sort of thing that i will dub "hugo Te" because it is the the Te equivalent to Hugo's Ti

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    funny, i thought you did it more than most.
    Then you don't know me very well. I've been like that my whole life, someone would say something, and my mind will start to wander in the direction of, "What do they really mean?" It even works if I'm watching T.V.... someone may say something, then I start to doubt whether or not something they said made sense, and I will twist around the meaning in my head. Or if someone gives me directions, I ask them why I should do it that way because I'm too neurotic that the first time they told me they made a mistake, and I don't want to be screwed over. Besides, according to your definition, a Te type could not come to any other conclusion about Pluto being a planet besides it NOT being one. And since that seemed stupid to me, I'm not Te.

    this is the sort of thing that i will dub "hugo Te" because it is the the Te equivalent to Hugo's Ti
    I know what you're talking about with Hugo, and his methods have bothered me for some time (which is why I said I can't be a similar type to him), but this makes little sense what you just wrote. If you're to follow what you just said, then Hugo would be Te.


    Fuck it, I'm going to be like Baby for a little while and change my signiture.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    Besides, according to your definition, a Te type could not come to any other conclusion about Pluto being a planet besides it NOT being one. And since that seemed stupid to me, I'm not Te.
    No. According to what I posited a type with an interest in the subject would foolishly argue over the validity of pluto's planethood (on any side potentially) without recognizing until afterward the foolishness of arguing the definitions being used due to their inability to retain the intent that created the word in the first place (a simple way to remember significant objects within our solar system).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    If you're to follow what you just said, then Hugo would be Te.
    No. Hugo rejected the notion that the definition was incorrect because he did not realize the conflicts that having such a definition of planets would imply.

    would recognize that having too simple a definition (round + orbits the sun) would not be in keeping with what planet is meant to describe. Stupid would try to solve this by creating an overly burdensome definition of what a planet is that would, if taken to an extreme, lead to assigning an infinite amount of definitions to delineate composites. recognizes that overcomplicating the definitions does not solve the original problem that was meant to be addressed but rather worsens it. Foolish tries to maintain the validity of the old definition that is not in keeping with the actual conception of planets.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    Besides, according to your definition, a Te type could not come to any other conclusion about Pluto being a planet besides it NOT being one. And since that seemed stupid to me, I'm not Te.
    No. According to what I posited a type with an interest in the subject would foolishly argue over the validity of pluto's planethood (on any side potentially) without recognizing until afterward the foolishness of arguing the definitions being used due to their inability to retain the intent that created the word in the first place (a simple way to remember significant objects within our solar system).
    And that's exactly what I meant. This definition of "Te" sounds disgusting to me, I wouldn't want to be apart of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    If you're to follow what you just said, then Hugo would be Te.
    No. Hugo rejected the notion that the definition was incorrect because he did not realize the conflicts that having such a definition of planets would imply.
    I wasn't talking about Hugo's views on Pluto. I was talking about the way Hugo handles everything else. Re-read the part of my post right before that.

    would recognize that having too simple a definition (round + orbits the sun) would not be in keeping with what planet is meant to describe. Stupid would try to solve this by creating an overly burdensome definition of what a planet is that would, if taken to an extreme, lead to assigning an infinite amount of definitions to delineate composites. recognizes that overcomplicating the definitions does not solve the original problem that was meant to be addressed but rather worsens it. Foolish tries to maintain the validity of the old definition that is not in keeping with the actual conception of planets.
    After staring at this paragraph for over 5 minutes, I'm still not sure how it relates to me. I neither want to create a bunch of formal laws to be able to define something, nor do I believe in simplifying things.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    funny, i thought you did it more than most.
    After thinking about this more, it baffles me how you can write such a thing, considering that pretty much all of my posts here have demonstrated the opposite thought-process. That, more then anything, has caused me to argue with people around here, and it drives my posts. Either you never read my posts, or you're just trying to yank my chain.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    And that's exactly what I meant. This definition of "Te" sounds disgusting to me, I wouldn't want to be apart of it.
    I am saying this is erroneous not . I think we all do it however without really realizing it. The problem is not that it occurs but learning to recognize it and change it. Again, I think you do this all the time. One instance that comes to mind is when you were advocating "brain types" in your early days on the forum.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    I wasn't talking about Hugo's views on Pluto. I was talking about the way Hugo handles everything else. Re-read the part of my post right before that.
    I understand. I was using this instance as a case in point for his overall style (imo).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    After staring at this paragraph for over 5 minutes, I'm still not sure how it relates to me. I neither want to create a bunch of formal laws to be able to define something, nor do I believe in simplifying things.
    It was not meant to capture all of the possible representations of the respective functions just as planets are not meant to capture all possible representations of respective orbiting bodies around loci with volume at variance. This is the precisely the sort of thing that I am referencing...

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    One instance that comes to mind is when you were advocating "brain types" in your early days on the forum.
    And I still do! Show to me how this is related at all.

    It was not meant to capture all of the possible representations of the respective functions just as planets are not meant to capture all possible representations of respective orbiting bodies around loci with volume at variance. This is the precisely the sort of thing that I am referencing...
    You mis-read what I wrote agian...
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  16. #16
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    rofl
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    122
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Rocky announced he won't read my post anymore, so now I can challenge him being ISTp without caring letting him begin to rant though this is almost only flame.

    I suspect he's more ESTp than ISTp, maybe outgoing (not necessary E) NT, possibly ESFj with over-compensational masculinity.
    At least > in a manner prevalent around here, having no in PoRL, and what he mentions about his ISTpishness is more likely for ESTp. I have only those three, and think it's enough, but he never agreed and at least put that nice ignore option on me. I at least wanted him to stop acting so determinately as if he's the perfect model of being ISTp as not so mislead people, but he took it just insult.

    ---end of outlines---

    I noticed some strange things here, which seem to make me more sure about he's ESTp or Alpha-NT. People both two of them are quick to show mistrust in the functions they don't have in ego block. INTp like Cone and most ISTps are reticent to talk about other types.

    There are four factors against this; most is INTj, it seems just a kind of bad majority rule, ESTps do far less than INTjs since they don't talk so much about Socionics, and every self-type decisions can be questioned here (so most of INTjs are not really so as much as Rocky doesn't look ISTp, literally).

    So....now what I mean is...you both funny not realizing to have far more gravity in this forum than Pluto does to the world. Show moderate confidence about what you mention about types/functions, please, or take more responsibility with people's reaction to things you said.



    PS: My mottoes are "Universale post rem" and "The universal is reduced to an emission of sound." But recently I've noticed put proper labels and/or names onto things is so important both for my life and our world.
    ex-nameless ixtp
    *** Warning - Risk of poor communication and late response.

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,158
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Te can be funny sometimes, they need everything to be classified and labeled and ordered, must be interesting how they view human race. I think every function has its problems though, i mean... take a look at Ne kabalists, they sit looking for patterns in the bible all day and need meaning for meaningless things, and drive themselves crazy of it.
    -Slava


    What a great replacement for a nany

  19. #19
    Dioklecian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    4,304
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    my point was that by taking the self-imposed definitions by which a thing is declared a planet overly seriously they are commiting the error of not recognizing the lack of significance that the definitions themselves have in the first place or rather the inability of definitions to contain a thought without becoming more burdensome than beneficial
    Definitions are Ti Pedro.
    Well I am back. How's everyone? Don't have as much time now, but glad to see some of the old gang are still here.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is something that I view to be pertinent.

    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1...ingtheory.html

    Do we go for something that is unproven and untestable but that also has great potential? ( take on ?) Or do we go for something that we know is fundamentally flawed? ( take on ) Should we divert our resources from research that we know has high potential for expenditure on an area that may never produce anything at all? ( take on )

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.09/stringtheory.html
    Hilarious. I wonder what your opinion is on this?
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    381
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.09/stringtheory.html
    i don't know if it was the same guy (probably) but i heard someone on npr with this exact argument a few weeks ago.

    this will be something to look forward to: "But other ideas about quantum gravity predict the speed of light has actually increased. And an experiment on the Gamma Ray Large Area Space Telescope, launching next year, will check this."
    lol

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    I wonder what your opinion is on this?
    i think string theory is probably a load of shit in large part but it is still better than the nonsensical carp that is the holy grail of a unified gauge field theory that is an elaboration on the standard model. i also think it is humanity's first real attempt at viewing the world in terms of infinite ontological plurality, the only art that will remain after we figure everything out.

Posting Permissions

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