I'm pretty sure this is my third type thread. Questions are being raised by Ephemeros and hkkmr about my type, so I feel they ought to have an opportunity to voice their opinion.
So, if anyone has questions about my type and wants to voice them, feel free! I'd rather discuss it and actually analyze the issue then arbitrarily toss around labels without a good case. That said, if you have impressions you'd like to share, don't be afraid to share them![]()


Reply With Quote

--> perhaps Normalizing 





, you might want to contextualize that notion with how any set of reasoning, however valid it may or may not be, MUST take into account how and where it in fact fits the empirical conditions from which you're applying whatever ruleset or deriving some underlying rule or law from, as well as all the possible data you're totally missing out on (any student of socionics I think would feel that last thing the most keenly). A lot's been tossed around lately by some people that confidence in one's intellectual opinions and beliefs implies or befits a kind of intellectual arrogance, while also insisting at the same time that their concerns are for the truth of the matter. How silly is that, maintaining that you care about what is true or is not true but tying your ego to the things you state, and closing oneself off from the avenues of thought opened up by realizing how evasive the truth actually is. It's all well and nice to be confident in what you think and why you think it, but the moment it removes from you the intellectual humility one might infer from their smallness in the universe, and as a tiny piece of everything that goes on around you, then I think you've traded the awe of seeing all the wonder that lies in discovering the enormity of things which we can only hope to know or comprehend for what's given merely by what's in front of your face and the self satisfaction of insisting on these as teh facts. 



