-
-
Last edited by Dee; 02-26-2009 at 02:03 AM.
No.
LII
that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.
I think understanding is too vague. Understand how or in what way? Internal workings? Functioning independently? Interacting with other objects? What?
type #33
but maybe LSE, and maybe E3w4(p)
Originally Posted by BulletsAndDoves
Ti is about understanding in contrast to Te knowledge seeking.
Oh, but for rational systems with focuses of different kinds! Therein lies the difference, that you shall strive for what is true and I shall for what is important (though in their overlap we shall approach one another again).
I think that Fi views as the pinnacle of understanding the human being in isolation, the unceasing internal process of belief, action, and feeling (most of all). Then once one has furnished unto their own comprehension what they themselves are like, what those around them are like, this is when we move towards a society of individuals, the interaction of so many variegated minds. What does not strike keenly to the hearts and souls of human experience strikes not at all (though these other things may prove themselves highly useful).
So to each his or her own, for as you strive to understand the world we inhabit so too shall I attempt the same upon us who inhabit the world.
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
^ what a masterpiece
those are bad...like 99% of short, abstract phrases
I have to agree. They don't really help that much.
type #33
but maybe LSE, and maybe E3w4(p)
.
Just to clarify... did you just say I don't think?
Of course. What was I thinking? Oh, wait. I wasn't.
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
as a socially retarded (slow) T type yes I prefer to think of feeling types as preoccupied with people. Morality involves people in most cases. Feelings are exclusive to people right.. and maybe animals which people anthropomorphize. I don't think that Fi is about understanding in the traditional sense. Understanding sort of implies things that are mental to me. "sensing" something, "getting" something, even moral evaluation is not really understanding to me. Moral evaluation can involve rules but to me I don't think of it as utilizing the mind. i think Ti is about understanding in this sense.
Last edited by Ms. Kensington; 02-03-2008 at 10:17 PM.
To the OP: It's a good start, I think.
VERY good point. I like that. I know some snobs will try to fanwank it and further add to it, but I like that.I think that Fi views as the pinnacle of understanding the human being in isolation,
I like that word... but don't really know what it means.
lol, I was wondering the same thing. Found a small blurb about all that fanwankery on wikipedia.
"The use of fan fiction to fill gaps or continuity errors in a canon is derisively called "fanwanking," or "fanwank." (The terms "fanon" and "fanwank" can apply to officially-licensed works, as well.)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_(fiction)
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
Perhaps you're looking in the wrong type of dictionary
edit: ah munenori got there before me
Now that I know it actually exists, it lost all humor to me.
I just like how it sounds.
As they are "called"? What do you mean?
I hardly can regard many of my principles as abstract any more than the people to whom I apply them. They might not be susceptible to a closed set of definitions, but I'd would be hesitant to call them that.
Then again, what you posted below that made no sense to me at all, so maybe I'm missing the integral piece of what you have to say here.
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote