Results 1 to 39 of 39

Thread: The Confusion of Evil

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default The Confusion of Evil

    Until today a Model-B based solution to the problem of destructive, as opposed to merely violatory, mentality remained elusive. However, I was just thinking today about Sephiroth from FFVII, when I noticed that one of the lyrics to his theme song, One Winged Angel, didn't make sense....

    "Burning inside with violent anger"? Doesn't sound INFp to me, yet we know that Sephiroth was an INFp. How to account for the descrepancy?

    What was Sephiroth angry about? The betrayal of his "race", the Cetra, by humans. This makes sense given his +Te PoLR, against which practical matters of economy are an all-too-potent threat. (of course Sephiroth was never a Cetra, but there again, the -Te thing.) What is significant, is that Sephiroth has adopted this erroneous -Te for personal truth: +Te is processing -Te.

    Wait, what's that? Elements processing the aspects of their antithesi? What's going on here?

    Let's look a little closer. Sephiroth believed himself worth of becoming a god. He would do this by leveraging the lifestream of the planet (+Fe) toward a single point (-Fe) and receiving it there (-Fe) to elevate his own spirit (+Fe) -- what's that, using +Fe to support -Fe, -Fe to support +Fe? Whoa....

    What does one do with +Fe corrupted by -Fe? Obviously it must be eliminated, because it is an obstacle to processing from the point of view of the mind.... Thus the evil type seeks to corrupt their elements' aspects by confronting them with their antithesi; by this corruption the antithesis is thus empowered, and the cycle begins again from the point of view of the antithesis. A quote from Neon Genesis Evangelion captures the situation adequately: "the fate of destruction is also the joy of rebirth."

    These types are the world's serial killers, the torture (thus the West's intolerance of torture as a method of interrogation), and a significant portion of the criminally insane. They may also account for some of the world's dictatorial cast as well, but most of these are extremists and shadow types. Most people do not have direct experience with them, however portrayals of such types in fiction have created uniquely compelling characters. (Sephiroth among them) The nature of these characters, which command forces far beyond the comprehension of most, illuminates their purpose as an evolutionary phenomenon; for there are indeed such processes at work in the world, the forces of destruction which bring . Seeing as how we do not not usually process these forces in our minds, we are ignorant of them to the extent that we engage in them ourselves. Over time, these unknown aspects of reality accumulate, coalescing into an unconscious compensation, to which only the evil pay adequate heed. The evil type thinks in terms of these compensations, and is thus aware of him. What is man to think of something that represents his own unconscious, the evil in himself, no less? Certainly those who bear witness to the ways of evil and practice its methods (via an exertion type similarly misaligned) may serve as vessels for the projections of the evil in man: a leader of this type may themselves be thought of as an avatar or personificition of a greater evil which is beyond man's knowledge. So it is that the evil type personifies the ominous threat to humanity, and victory over the person bearing it, who has manipulated this threat to their own ends, corresponds to a greater salvation versus the threat itself.


    Phemenological Breakdown:

    A given Model-B element processes the aspects of its antithesis. The antithetical aspects contradict the aspects belonging to the element, reducing its content level. (for example, claiming +Te subjective truth over -Te objective truth; in one's own mind, this diminishes -Te.) On the turn of the element's antithesis, the antithesis processes the aspects belonging to the element, thus reducing its own content level. The paradox is that either element is psychologically empowered when its antithesis' content level is reduced, even though the empowered element will itself be disintegrated further on its turn. (thus the "truth" of the phrase "the fate of destruction is also the joy of rebirth", where the "fate of destruction" is the disintegration of an element's content, and the "joy of rebirth" is the resurgence of its antithesis.)
    Last edited by tcaudilllg; 05-05-2008 at 05:50 AM.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,848
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    clarify what you mean by notations like +Te and -Te

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I mean them the same way Hitta does.

    +Te as an aspect: subjective fact or truth
    +Te as an element: the imposition of subjective fact/truth against objective fact/truth

    -Te as an aspect: objective fact or truth
    -Te as an element: the imposition of objective fact/truth from without against subjective fact/truth

    +Te processing -Te is effectively attempting to misinterpret objective truth as subjective truth. It thus confuses one's sense of self, by leading to misidentification of oneself to that which is outside oneself. One loses sense of what they really are, and what truth really is.

    -Te processing +Te masquerades subjective truth as objective truth: in the face of conflict between what one believes and apparent empirical reality, one loses sight of reality in favor of what one believes. One's own viewpoint alone becomes reality.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So, in essence, the whole system, which tcaudilllg and hitta are defending, is logically incoherent. Both tcaudilllg and hitta also openly admit -- in posts and videos -- that they are self-refuting relativists, and they are proud of being relativists. How many people here realize the logical implications of such a stance?

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    Are you sure about that... correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation. If they really are relativists, which may or may not necessarily be true, that still doesn't automatically invalidate the possibility that in the process of being relativistic one of their relativistic observations has contained within it the absolutely correct objective truth, if even only in part. ie. how do you know their system is logically incoherent without examining it first?
    When they talk about the system they are making logical errors in the form of stating logical contradictions as truths. If there is another way of understanding the system than through tcaudilllg's and hitta's own words, maybe you can explain how we shall understand it. But until then it is natural to assume that they don't know what they are talking about, because if they were, and the system itself was logically coherent, they wouldn't have to contradict themselves. The only point of contradicting yourself is to hide the fact that you have nothing substantial to say or that your views are false.

    And is the system itself so wonderful that it is worth the time and effort to indulge in it? I have seen no indication of that yet. There are better ways to talk about the types than seeing them through tcaudilllg's and hitta's theoretically clouded and ideologically infected eyes.

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes
    Also, don't you care to examine the process by which they came to their conclusion? Since even though their conclusion was relativistic, as you say, the mechanism by which they came to that conclusion is very much possible to study objectively in some form or other.
    Yes, that might be both interesting and worthwile, but should it be done? Do you have any ideas on how to proceed in order to get a better objective understanding of that mechanism?

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes
    But more importantly, don't you care about the content of what they are examining? Maybe they're onto something of empirical substance despite being hampered by "relativistic" thoughts.
    I care about the truth, but the problem is that they can't express their ideas in a logically coherent way. So where to begin? How to determine which parts of their logical contradictions are true?

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes
    I'm not trying to be hostile to you or anything.
    I don't suspect that either.

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes
    I'm just genuinely curious about your thoughts, since you are one of the more prolific posters here.
    I am mostly trying to correct people's mistakes when it comes to understanding some types, especially the difference between leading and creative types, since that seems to be a major cause of mistypings. Even prominent socionists make these mistakes, and that is a cause of concern.

    These incorrect understandings of the types must be corrected before we can move on, and that's why I have been repeating the same truths over and over again on this forum. There are disgustingly many mistyped people here, and they are polluding everybody's correct understanding of the real types with their presence. I wish that it was simple, and that we could just wipe those mistypings out. But people here are not interested in the objective truth but prefer to stick to their prejudices and the consensus of the group, despite the fact that the group is wrong in this case.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Phaedrus
    If you are speaking of the topic of this thread as being expressed as a contradiction... then I don't see what the problem really is. Contradiction is a mental phenomenon that transpires in human thought; the problem of evil, examined theologically, is just one such case in point. If we can indeed express human contradiction through model B, then why not? Certainly a person more inclined to observe their own contradictions as a plague upon the world, would seek to destroy it as a means of purifying it from its "innate" corruption. Why else would people self-mutilate themselves as a form of worship, epecially when they have other options?

    ...More to the point, perhaps, is the case of politicians who indulge themselves in corruption, and think it natural. The protagonist governor of "All the King's Men" comes to mind. I'd go so far as to suspect that Moses himself was afflicted of such mentality, and probably many of the Hebrew prophets, that they would claim the hearts of the people as filled with wickedness.

    Perhaps this is the greatest failure of Christianity as a religion, especially thanks to Paul, that church services have come to see the world as so corrupt and needing of purfication. (I would count the call for Jihad, explicitly stated as a duty to carry out one's "inner struggles", as Islam's most prominent).

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,848
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    I mean them the same way Hitta does.

    +Te as an aspect: subjective fact or truth
    +Te as an element: the imposition of subjective fact/truth against objective fact/truth

    -Te as an aspect: objective fact or truth
    -Te as an element: the imposition of objective fact/truth from without against subjective fact/truth

    +Te processing -Te is effectively attempting to misinterpret objective truth as subjective truth. It thus confuses one's sense of self, by leading to misidentification of oneself to that which is outside oneself. One loses sense of what they really are, and what truth really is.

    -Te processing +Te masquerades subjective truth as objective truth: in the face of conflict between what one believes and apparent empirical reality, one loses sight of reality in favor of what one believes. One's own viewpoint alone becomes reality.
    .. I typed out that whole reply, then I reread this... now I may have to backtrack.
    What is objectively true? How is that different from what is subjectively true?
    How is it you are imagining the seperation of objective & subjective? That is not possible

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,848
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Using this model... in the observation of any duality, the observers I.M. type will experience coherence (the lack of a repression type, among other things [something happens to the cross type also]) ... this will be a duality contingent on external objects. ...The duality will have an otherly feel to it.
    This explains why you can watch a love story, and experience the feeling of love.. yet the dual pair being observed is of a different type from yourself.
    Cross type is the ego of dual type, repression type is the superid of dual type

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    Using this model... in the observation of any duality, the observers I.M. type will experience coherence (the lack of a repression type, among other things [something happens to the cross type also]) ... this will be a duality contingent on external objects. ...The duality will have an otherly feel to it.
    This explains why you can watch a love story, and experience the feeling of love.. yet the dual pair being observed is of a different type from yourself.
    Cross type is the ego of dual type, repression type is the superid of dual type
    Now the repression type is a reverse-signed version of the type, right?

    Crosstype is ego of dual-type... not sure what that means. Oh you're referring to crosstype as the exertion type, aren't you? The exertion type is the content which the I.M. type relates. (still working the details on how the content relates to itself).

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,848
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Now the repression type is a reverse-signed version of the type, right?

    Crosstype is ego of dual-type... not sure what that means. Oh you're referring to crosstype as the exertion type, aren't you? The exertion type is the content which the I.M. type relates. (still working the details on how the content relates to itself).
    yeah.. well, thinking of exertion type as the ego allows you to think of the exertion type having a superid, a superego, & an id. That is all that was saying.
    Content relates to itself- The object (The I.M. type) relates to itself- the object is defined by things outside itself, & these things together create a coherent array of relevances to one another. (this is simultaneously objective & relative)

    On the specific notations (& furthermore, function workings) of repression type this I am still not sure about. There are instances where repression type dissolves (for example, when interacting w/ your dual) ... so yeah, it needs to be thought through first. (& something I am thinking of along the lines of maintenance and destruction type.. still not sure what to call them. superego & id, basically.. & how they are expressed toward the world, given a particular I.M. dual type)

    an INTj-ENFj would have a minutely different exertion type then an INTp-ENFj.
    Last edited by crazedrat; 05-24-2008 at 05:10 PM.

Posting Permissions

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