Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 41 to 80 of 80

Thread: Do you think socionics proves the existence of God and intelligent design?

  1. #41
    Ding dong your opinion is wrong Teslobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    TIM
    LSI
    Posts
    57
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    I don't care. I do have the evidence. If someone has an inability to detect the existing patterns, that's the subject's problem, not the problem of the ones that can spot the patterns. The fact that someone chooses to ignore an aspect of reality doesn't negate its existence.

    Also, I'm sure socionics, or rather the phenomena that people have types, can be proven with a machine. It probably has been done already, just that maybe, it has not been released to the public. Each socionics function is an aspect of reality that is manipulated/monitored by a specific area of the brain. Again, I know this and I have no need of "proving" it to you (or anyone).
    Alternative possibility: you have misinterpreted these "existing patterns" and assigned a value to them which isn't real.
    The fact that you're leaning on a conspiracy theory that socionics has been "proven" but is hidden from us should be ringing a massive red flag in your head that you need to re-evaluate your confidence in this.
    Entertain the idea that it is fundamentally incompatible with being definitively proven, in the same way you cannot prove the existence of any old adjective that can be used to describe a person's disposition. Even if you don't accept it as true personally, you can't reject it as an impossibility.

  2. #42
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,363
    Mentioned
    445 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    God =/= Religion . I'm not claiming that Brahma, Xenu, or YHWH created Socionics, only that it seems designed intelligently, presumely by some entity. And I have proof.
    Are holes perfectly designed for puddles?

  3. #43
    AWellArmedCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Location
    Northern Japan
    TIM
    IEI-(C?) 4w3 so/sx
    Posts
    924
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    Why do you think it is not a divinely perfect system? Where is the flaw? Also, how can you assume what I'm saying isn't true, when you don't actually know? Why are you so categorical with something you haven't checked?
    Grand claims about the nature of reality are to be presumed false until proven otherwise, not the other way around. There's plenty of reason to believe any number of untrue things, and when people don't actively seek out reasons to falsify them there is a tendency to justify their belief in them with the positive evidence they do have without even searching for evidence to the contrary. As for the flaws in Socionics, there are quite a lot of grey areas and contradictions embedded into many of its concepts resulting in it being somewhat difficult to articulate clearly. Even good typists struggle to come to consensus over things, and the struggle lies primarily in the plurality of interpretations I think. I feel like these flaws are fairly evident so I'm more curious as to how you are able to conclude that it is somehow divinely perfect. How are you so sure your interpretation is sound?
    “Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
    — James Russell Lowell
    猫が生き甲斐

  4. #44
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,041
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AWellArmedCat View Post
    Grand claims about the nature of reality are to be presumed false until proven otherwise, not the other way around. There's plenty of reason to believe any number of untrue things, and when people don't actively seek out reasons to falsify them there is a tendency to justify their belief in them with the positive evidence they do have without even searching for evidence to the contrary. As for the flaws in Socionics, there are quite a lot of grey areas and contradictions embedded into many of its concepts resulting in it being somewhat difficult to articulate clearly. Even good typists struggle to come to consensus over things, and the struggle lies primarily in the plurality of interpretations I think. I feel like these flaws are fairly evident so I'm more curious as to how you are able to conclude that it is somehow divinely perfect. How are you so sure your interpretation is sound?
    The underlying phenomena is not the same as theories/models created to explain it. Regardless, model A (and B) is pretty sound and there's sufficient consensus. The problem I think is this: If you cannot effectively operate this theory, why the neccessity to stick around and/or self-type? Why complain that it isn't true, when the real reason for doing so is that you are not able to operate it and/or observe it in action? And saying that the phenomena underlying socionics seems intelligently designed, is not the same as for example claiming that Xenu dropped our souls in a volcano in a proto-earth. There are levels of plausibility of statements, and there's a thing called common sense. If you do not trust your own perception and/or judgment, how can you even operate in society? Heh, rather, it's probably the opposite... (Just noticed)

  5. #45
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,363
    Mentioned
    445 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    The underlying phenomena is not the same as theories/models created to explain it. Regardless, model A (and B) is pretty sound and there's sufficient consensus. The problem I think is this: If you cannot effectively operate this theory, why the neccessity to stick around and/or self-type? Why complain that it isn't true, when the real reason for doing so is that you are not able to operate it and/or observe it in action? And saying that the phenomena underlying socionics seems intelligently designed, is not the same as for example claiming that Xenu dropped our souls in a volcano in a proto-earth. There are levels of plausibility of statements, and there's a thing called common sense. If you do not trust your own perception and/or judgment, how can you even operate in society? Heh, rather, it's probably the opposite... (Just noticed)
    It's exactly the same.

  6. #46
    adage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2021
    Posts
    712
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If you think that God is an inteliglent design of the universe in all its movement and that socionics hints at an intelligent design of people's mind and their interactions or something along those lines, yes.

    If not, no.

  7. #47
    DogOfDanger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Posts
    184
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Regardless of whether you believe in God + intelligent design I don't understand how socionics could possibly be thought to prove this.
    Besides how absurd the claim is, Model-A isn't even metaphysically sound... it's built on rationalism and dualism, it's actually very easy to criticize model-A - and socionics in general.
    Last edited by DogOfDanger; 08-02-2022 at 04:29 AM.

  8. #48
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,674
    Mentioned
    275 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coeruleum Blue View Post
    You put God in quotes and you think the collective unconscious is something you would consider a Christian idea. I don't think you believe in God, I think you believe in racial consciousness and historically-inaccurate notions of European and white supremacy. How about you take your own witch test? Jesus is the Christ and God has risen him from the dead. Take it.
    Hahahaha! Oh I had a sneaking suspicion but now I'm sadly certain. Those last parts are textbook death cultist. I've already passed said test loudly and proudly so I'll do so once more. Jesus is the Christ and God has risen him from the dead. This is the truth. If you're truly devoted to pure logic and reason you'll come around to that fact eventually. Aquinas laid it all out in autistic detail after all.

    You can also go the route of the author (and former ardent Atheist) John C. Wright and pray directly to God a simple yet heartfelt and earnest prayer. Demand he reveal himself to you. Why? Well, there's only two potential outcomes. Either God does not exist and thus he will not reveal himself to you. Or, he does exist but he does not give a fuck about the salvation or damnnation of your eternal soul in the grand scheme of things. This means he is not an omnibenevolent God, which means he is no true God at all. Warning: This later path is dangerous as God has a sense of humor. Wright suffered a Heart Attack shortly after issuing this demand upon the almighty during which God did as demanded. He's now a devout Catholic.

    Now for the reason behind my sadness if I'm right about you. The Death Cult is a near perfect inversion of Christianity. What's worse, that "near" perfect inversion is truly horrible for this reason. It proposes equivalent concepts of "Original Sin" and the like yet critically offers no hope of salvation or forgiveness. Rationally speaking, only a hysterically insane person would ever hold to it. Pretty much any and all other religions offer some hope for those who fail to live up to its precepts. Once you "sin" in the eyes of the death cult, however, literally nothing you do can absolve you.

    At least if you sacrificed a human from an enemy tribe to the evil pagan gods you'd gain their favor somehow no matter what. Sacrificing your own unborn child only gets you a transient like from fellow death cultists. Fail to use the proper pronouns and no amount of abortions will absolve you of that sin amongst the death cultists.

    You have a God. All of us do. At least I can loudly and proudly name mine. What's yours? If you say "reason" than time will prove if this is true as, like I said, reason inexorably leads one to Christ...

  9. #49
    AWellArmedCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Location
    Northern Japan
    TIM
    IEI-(C?) 4w3 so/sx
    Posts
    924
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    You have a God. All of us do.
    Oh? I wasn't aware of this. I'd love to know who mine is
    “Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
    — James Russell Lowell
    猫が生き甲斐

  10. #50
    May look like an LSI, but Te. Metaphor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Location
    SEA
    TIM
    NH-ILI-Te
    Posts
    466
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Alright so, these quotes below are hardly relevant, but might give some shrewd perceptions about typological system as the proof of the God's existence and intelligent design. As for me, personally, despite I don't doubt the existence of God, intelligent design is something more than imaginable according to him, the Holy Omniscience himself, and I do think it might be the case as for the purpose. He, the God, didn't really tell the way humans were created but this question might lead to a conspiracy theory as for whether we were being codified during the birth or rather, being cloned as one and another to make the neat process of human digitalization on this occasion, but I wouldn't go that far to theorize since it might not be purposeful. And instead of this fruitless question, we have to ask the purpose for us being exist as humans instead.

    Carl Jung on "Gnostic", "Gnosticism", and "Gnosis
    ":

    "And where would God’s wholeness be if he could not be the “wholly other”? Accordingly it is with some psychological justification, so it seems to me, that when the Gnostic Nous fell into the power of Physis he assumed the dark chthonic form of the serpent, and the Manichaean “Original Man” in the same situation actually took on the qualities of the Evil One. In Tibetan Buddhism all gods without exception have a peaceful and a wrathful aspect, for they reign over all the realms of being. The dichotomy of God into divinity and humanity and his return to himself in the sacrificial act hold out the comforting doctrine that in man’s own darkness there is hidden a light that shall once again return to its source, and that this light actually wanted to descend into the darkness in order to deliver the Enchained One who languishes there, and lead him to light everlasting. All this belongs to the stock of pre-Christian ideas, being none other than the doctrine of the “Man of Light,” the Anthropos or Original Man, which the sayings of Christ the gospels assume to be common knowledge." ~Carl Jung, CW 11, Para 380

    "If mankind is the guilty party, logic surely demands that mankind should be punished. But if God takes the punishment on himself, he exculpates mankind, and we must then conjecture that it is not mankind that is guilty, but God (which would logically explain why he took the guilt on himself). For reasons that can readily be understood, a satisfactory answer is not to be expected from orthodox Christianity. But such an answer may be found in the Old Testament, in Gnosticism, and in late Catholic speculation. From the Old Testament we know that though Yahweh was a guardian of the law he was not just, and that he suffered from fits of rage which he had every occasion to regret." ~Carl Jung, CW 11, Para 408

    "The doctrine that all evil thoughts come from the heart and that the human soul is a sink of iniquity must lie deep in the marrow of their bones. Were it so, then God had made a sorry job of creation, and it were high time for us to go over to Marcion the Gnostic and depose the incompetent demiurge. Ethically, of course, it is infinitely more convenient to leave God the sole responsibility for such a Home for Idiot Children, where no one is capable of putting a spoon into his own mouth. But it is worth man’s while to take pains with himself, and he has something in his own soul that can grow. It is rewarding to watch patiently the silent happenings in the soul, and the most and the best happens when it is not regulated from outside and from above." ~Carl Jung, CW 12, Para 126

    "But science cannot possibly establish that, or to what extent, this unknowable substrate is in both cases God. This can be decided only by dogmatics or faith, as for instance in Islamic philosophy ( Al-Ghazzali), which explained gravitation as the will of Allah. This is Gnosticism with its characteristic overstepping of epistemological barriers." ~Carl Jung, Letters Vol. II, Page 54

    "You overlook the facts and then think that the name is the fact, and thus you reach the nonsensical conclusion that I hypostatize ideas and am therefore a “Gnostic.” ~Carl Jung, Letters Vol. II, Page 245.

    "Since the Apocalypse we now know again that God is not only to be loved, but also to be feared. He fills us with evil as well as with good, otherwise he would not need to be feared; and because he wants to become man, the uniting of his antinomy must take place in man. This involves man in a new responsibility.  He can no longer wriggle out of it on the plea of his littleness and nothingness, for the dark God has slipped the atom bomb and chemical weapons into his hands and given him the power to empty out the apocalyptic vials of wrath on his fellow creatures. Since he has been granted an almost godlike power, he can no longer remain blind and unconscious. He must know something of God’s nature and of metaphysical processes if he is to understand himself and thereby achieve gnosis of the Divine." ~Carl Jung, CW 11, Para 747
    Last edited by Metaphor; 08-02-2022 at 07:01 AM.
    Arthur Schopenhauer (ILI-Ni):

    • “A man can be himself only so long as he is alone; and if he does not love solitude, he will not love freedom; for it is only when he is alone that he is really free.”


    Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (ILI-Te):


    • "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."



  11. #51
    May look like an LSI, but Te. Metaphor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Location
    SEA
    TIM
    NH-ILI-Te
    Posts
    466
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Apologize if I might sound obtrusive here, but the natural process doesn't necessarily imply that everything changes without considering enormous patterns behind it. And despite I don't doubt that the evolution needs time to be determined according to the said process, it's not really sensible to say that such process can't be explicated by the reasoning since the changes, no matter how small and detailed, they are apparent and therefore can be observed throughout a long period of time on earth since the evolution has the causality on it.
    Arthur Schopenhauer (ILI-Ni):

    • “A man can be himself only so long as he is alone; and if he does not love solitude, he will not love freedom; for it is only when he is alone that he is really free.”


    Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (ILI-Te):


    • "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."



  12. #52

    Join Date
    Jun 2022
    Posts
    116
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Unless you gonna write a new phantasy novel, any theory about god existing is just a way of entertaining your mind with a Ti - Ni loop hole.

  13. #53

    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    TIM
    IEI-Ni H946
    Posts
    1,409
    Mentioned
    103 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Before I knew about socionics I questioned whether God existed (although I was an atheist as a teen). Looking back it was IEIs/EIEs that convinced me God was maybe real. It felt like God could be real because I felt such a strong connection to artists and it felt like there was a powerful connection between all humans throughout history. So much hope and wonder. It’s humans ability to process and share information which makes them connect. I think socionics explains why people are capable of feeling things like awe and love. It explains why people are able to form bonds with each other and why they like being alive- their curiosity to interact with the world around them, to take it all in, and talk about it with each other. It explains how humans learn- we can learn to act like all the types- we can have more fun and share happiness. Whether or not God is real, it shows the power of humans to change, the influence that one’s environment has on their psyche. If you’re exposed to the correct information you can feel a lot better- more at peace, more hopeful, more reasons to be happy.
    Last edited by Bethany; 08-02-2022 at 06:09 PM.

  14. #54
    Shazaam's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lamp
    TIM
    AB-IEI-Ni
    Posts
    13,779
    Mentioned
    596 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    "God exists because how else can something be created from nothing?"

    this is just how nature works - it always needs to have an opposite for balance. And in REALITY it took such a long time, people have a fantasy that 'something' can be created from nothing- like a miracle where time and evolution doesn't play out organically - its like Delta Ne vs Beta Ni I think. It doesn't respect how much time that 'something' actually occured. It really goofishly absorbs the positive and not the negatives. Yeah something came out of nothing but at first it was just a grimdark one-celled atom that screamed in eternal anguish at the confusing torment of the inter galatic colusions collapsed upon it's not yet lungs and neck. Christians just want to Ne zap past to when it was able to combine and for a brief moment become a White Gerber Heterosexual Christian Baby deserving of all the world's love and Joy. Fauxtians tend to love people at their best but hate and discriminate against ppl at their worst- the exact opposite Jesus called to do. That quote of liking Christ but not liking Christians because they are so unlike Christ is pretty relateable.

    At Starr once this Christian lady was gushing naively at all the life around her. The flowers and bees etc. It seemed like she was sociopathically not caring that bees sting and I know a guy who just died from a bee sting allergy (Debbie Downer face) - flowers have thorns and give people rashes and wilt and look ugly in the winter and often need a lot of annoying manintenace and upkeep. People say how cute and innocent kids are, but kids are also cruel and vile and poop a lot and sadistically bully those they view as weaker or inferior or more gay. At least in the 80s and 90s they did before the Te IEE SJW Overlords made it okay to bully str8 male rednecks or whatever.

    "all this life- it's so beautiful and exciting and God must have made it" = I'm too much of a pussy to look at the realistic negatives of life. But being too negative and jaded and dark isn't good either I guess but the #1 proof there isn't a God: The Charmed Reboot!

  15. #55
    Cataclysm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Sweden
    TIM
    Gulenko said EIE
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I wouldn't call it intelligent....

  16. #56

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,469
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    Hahahaha! Oh I had a sneaking suspicion but now I'm sadly certain. Those last parts are textbook death cultist. I've already passed said test loudly and proudly so I'll do so once more. Jesus is the Christ and God has risen him from the dead. This is the truth. If you're truly devoted to pure logic and reason you'll come around to that fact eventually. Aquinas laid it all out in autistic detail after all.

    You can also go the route of the author (and former ardent Atheist) John C. Wright and pray directly to God a simple yet heartfelt and earnest prayer. Demand he reveal himself to you. Why? Well, there's only two potential outcomes. Either God does not exist and thus he will not reveal himself to you. Or, he does exist but he does not give a fuck about the salvation or damnnation of your eternal soul in the grand scheme of things. This means he is not an omnibenevolent God, which means he is no true God at all. Warning: This later path is dangerous as God has a sense of humor. Wright suffered a Heart Attack shortly after issuing this demand upon the almighty during which God did as demanded. He's now a devout Catholic.

    Now for the reason behind my sadness if I'm right about you. The Death Cult is a near perfect inversion of Christianity. What's worse, that "near" perfect inversion is truly horrible for this reason. It proposes equivalent concepts of "Original Sin" and the like yet critically offers no hope of salvation or forgiveness. Rationally speaking, only a hysterically insane person would ever hold to it. Pretty much any and all other religions offer some hope for those who fail to live up to its precepts. Once you "sin" in the eyes of the death cult, however, literally nothing you do can absolve you.

    At least if you sacrificed a human from an enemy tribe to the evil pagan gods you'd gain their favor somehow no matter what. Sacrificing your own unborn child only gets you a transient like from fellow death cultists. Fail to use the proper pronouns and no amount of abortions will absolve you of that sin amongst the death cultists.

    You have a God. All of us do. At least I can loudly and proudly name mine. What's yours? If you say "reason" than time will prove if this is true as, like I said, reason inexorably leads one to Christ...
    You call me a death cultist for not pledging my allegiance to "Western civilization?" I would like to have a discussion over that. I don't like the "woke" crowd either, but I have real evidence that Europe really was burning people for doing science and plunging Europe into complete backwardness in the Middle Ages and it seems to have been mostly to do with church institutions and false doctrines. I don't think that's unique to Europe either, it seems to me like a mirror image of Hinduism in India. Hindus seem to have believed in one God and then they were advanced with all sorts of science and mathematics and philosophy, but then they started believing in their trinity and bowing before their statues and this led them to so much backwardness that now people in India can only make sort of gallows humor jokes about other people in India relieving themselves on the streets.

    My God is not reason, my God is God, the Most High, the Creator of the Universe, a person and not merely some abstraction, force, or "Spirit." However, God is Love and Truth and Beauty and Goodness and many other things and not just metaphorically. But reason alone will never get you things. It is necessary, but it is not sufficient. However, it is necessary. And that is why I cannot accept doctrines like the trinity, I don't rule out that they're completely and utterly impossible based on what I know now, but I am strongly inclined against them based on the evidence I have.

    I don't believe in the death cult that way. I simply don't believe committing sins or not committing sins matters in the way you do, which ironically seems more death cult-y to me. You always just flagellate yourself, but flagellating yourself is not really moving past any sins you think you might have committed even if you talk like there's absolution. Ultimately, I think the self is an obstacle, and religion should not be "I I I me me me," that is the death cult, but "God God God love love love." Or to paraphrase C. S. Lewis, it is best not to think of yourself at all.

    Additionally: I pray every day and get replies that God personally loves me etc., not like physically hearing it through the ears, but still what I would identify as very specific replies. So being horribly off-base about anything would feel like Descartes Evil Genius tier stuff, which is yet another reason I tend to simply view the self as an obstacle. Yes, I could be infinitely deceived by some demon despite any philosophy or outward piety on my part, so I just try to get lost in Love, Love cannot be deceived.
    Last edited by Coeruleum Blue; 08-09-2022 at 04:19 AM.

  17. #57
    mbti INFJ born2simp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Location
    xoxo
    TIM
    school shooter one
    Posts
    657
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    The underlying phenomena is not the same as theories/models created to explain it. Regardless, model A (and B) is pretty sound and there's sufficient consensus. The problem I think is this: If you cannot effectively operate this theory, why the neccessity to stick around and/or self-type? Why complain that it isn't true, when the real reason for doing so is that you are not able to operate it and/or observe it in action? And saying that the phenomena underlying socionics seems intelligently designed, is not the same as for example claiming that Xenu dropped our souls in a volcano in a proto-earth. There are levels of plausibility of statements, and there's a thing called common sense. If you do not trust your own perception and/or judgment, how can you even operate in society? Heh, rather, it's probably the opposite... (Just noticed)
    A lot of ppl can’t effectively live their own lives and get whatever they want, so why don’t they just KILL THEMSELVES? Same logic.
    how to enlarge your dragon, click here

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    get ready to get cucked
    Quote Originally Posted by roger557 View Post
    got this Socionics stuff caught by the balls

  18. #58
    mbti INFJ born2simp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Location
    xoxo
    TIM
    school shooter one
    Posts
    657
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also there are a lot of things you could use like this to “prove” intelligent design. Why would you pick Socionics?

    I am actually curious if you want to answer that @lavos .
    how to enlarge your dragon, click here

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    get ready to get cucked
    Quote Originally Posted by roger557 View Post
    got this Socionics stuff caught by the balls

  19. #59
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,041
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mysteryofdungeon View Post
    Also there are a lot of things you could use like this to “prove” intelligent design. Why would you pick Socionics?

    I am actually curious if you want to answer that @lavos .
    Depends what you want to take as "proof". Socionics in itself is not definite proof, unless like you say you take everything as proof of intelligent design. But I'm talking about another, heavier, kind of proof, which I have (it's an intuitive proof that you have to be able to perceive, which not everyone might be capable, but it's solid proof).

  20. #60
    Shazaam's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lamp
    TIM
    AB-IEI-Ni
    Posts
    13,779
    Mentioned
    596 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    God is non-dualistic energy, socionics worships duality. God sees all his children as one and truly loves all ppl equally, Socionicsts puts people into categories based on their perceived value and worth.

    Most people don't understand the real God, and are caught up in religion- they also misinterpret and cherry pick the Bible. Most people cannot read the Bible in its entirety and wholesomeness, and read it as though a knife cutting a baby deer. ((while not realizing that's exactly what they are doing, and instead - thinking themselves as being righteous.)) That's why Jesus weeps.

  21. #61
    mbti INFJ born2simp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Location
    xoxo
    TIM
    school shooter one
    Posts
    657
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    Depends what you want to take as "proof". Socionics in itself is not definite proof, unless like you say you take everything as proof of intelligent design. But I'm talking about another, heavier, kind of proof, which I have (it's an intuitive proof that you have to be able to perceive, which not everyone might be capable, but it's solid proof).
    Okay Sherlock
    how to enlarge your dragon, click here

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    get ready to get cucked
    Quote Originally Posted by roger557 View Post
    got this Socionics stuff caught by the balls

  22. #62
    mbti INFJ born2simp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Location
    xoxo
    TIM
    school shooter one
    Posts
    657
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Can you actually describe it though @lavos ? Sounds interesting.
    how to enlarge your dragon, click here

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    get ready to get cucked
    Quote Originally Posted by roger557 View Post
    got this Socionics stuff caught by the balls

  23. #63

    Join Date
    Jun 2022
    Posts
    116
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I readed some Gamma fantasy. The way they treat gods or gods power are quite funny.

    A priest successfully summon the Holy Light power by his strong faith to a random god.

    LIE: Great, let's train ALOT of these priests and we may invent a who new technology based on this new found power! Think about Holy light armor, Holy Light Warship, or even Holy Nuclear All-life Purify Boom! We'll be rich!

    ILI: Nice idea, but more researchs are needed to make sure this kind of power is safe to use.

    SEE: Let's do this! I want a fucking Holy Mech so I could show everybody how cool it is!!! (how cool I am)

    ESI: =.=... You guys are moron...

  24. #64
    Ding dong your opinion is wrong Teslobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    TIM
    LSI
    Posts
    57
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    Depends what you want to take as "proof". Socionics in itself is not definite proof, unless like you say you take everything as proof of intelligent design. But I'm talking about another, heavier, kind of proof, which I have (it's an intuitive proof that you have to be able to perceive, which not everyone might be capable, but it's solid proof).
    I can not overstate how much this is not "solid proof". Proof entails you can prove it to other people. I can state that this website is actually bright green, or pink, and add the caveat that you need a special kind of vision to see it for what it truly is and that naysayers simply can't comprehend it. You would think I'm fucking crazy, and rightly so.

    Just because your brain has formulated a pattern does not make the pattern true. Your brain is not a trustworthy instrument - it can be tricked, malfunction, or otherwise act against your own desires. This is why when we discuss things like this we request and provide actual proof. And I know you have said you don't care about convincing anybody so proof is irrelevant to your internal goings on, but do not say you have proof when the polar opposite is true.

  25. #65
    twiggewed dewusional entitwed snowfwake VewyScawwyNawcissist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Location
    uNdeR yOur SkIn
    TIM
    bNF 6w541 sx/sp VELF
    Posts
    2,333
    Mentioned
    106 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i mean human cognition is proof of intelligent design but socionics is a system based on what already is there, ofc different people will have different ways of using their brains and u can easily box them in 16 types that are defined as relative to each other
    Your face makes your brain and sociotype – how muscle use shapes personality
    I want to care
    if I was better I’d help you
    if I was better you’d be better
    HELLO??? COME BACK!!!!
    i'm afraid it will hurt like hell, i am afraid of screaming and i am afraid of crying, i am afraid of forgetting but i'm not afraid of dying.



  26. #66
    Rune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    TIM
    ILI-Ni CN 964 sx/so
    Posts
    605
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @End I believe Freud's idea of the unconscious mind and Jung's idea of the collective unconscious contradict Christian teaching.

    Freud's idea of the unconscious mind posits that there are aspects of ourselves we are unconscious of and therefore out of our control. Consequently, it implicitly "absolves" us of moral responsibility by undercutting free will.

    Moreover, Jung posits that the collective unconscious is infinite and that it originates in the structure of the brain. Therefore, Jung implicitly attributes the cause of existence itself to the brain, denying God as the original creator. Jung's idea is closely in line with Feuerbach's notion that God is just a projection of ourselves. Furthermore, the idea of the collective unconscious solipsistically contradicts the notion that we are finite beings on the face of it.
    Just on the border of your waking mind,
    There lies another time
    Where darkness and light are one,
    And as you tread the halls of sanity
    You feel so glad to be unable to go beyond

    I have a message from another time.

  27. #67
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,041
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teslobo View Post
    I can not overstate how much this is not "solid proof". Proof entails you can prove it to other people. I can state that this website is actually bright green, or pink, and add the caveat that you need a special kind of vision to see it for what it truly is and that naysayers simply can't comprehend it. You would think I'm fucking crazy, and rightly so.

    Just because your brain has formulated a pattern does not make the pattern true. Your brain is not a trustworthy instrument - it can be tricked, malfunction, or otherwise act against your own desires. This is why when we discuss things like this we request and provide actual proof. And I know you have said you don't care about convincing anybody so proof is irrelevant to your internal goings on, but do not say you have proof when the polar opposite is true.
    But if other people with this quality can perceive the proof too, then it is proven for those people at least, no? If you see something with your own eyes that makes it true for you, correct?

  28. #68
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,041
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mysteryofdungeon View Post
    Can you actually describe it though @lavos ? Sounds interesting.
    There is a blueprint that the intelligent designer followed to craft these "types" that people have in socionics. These blueprints seem to have existed before the before time, that is, they're immanent and predate supposed scientific phenomena that gave rise to them. This means that either everything in the path of time of this creation has been planned or even is preordained (by some entity), or that some entity(s) affect this reality in real time guiding or monitoring it's development, or possibly both.

  29. #69
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,041
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If magic, demons, or souls surely existed, would that prove god?

    If heaven and hell existed, would that prove god?

  30. #70
    Rune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    TIM
    ILI-Ni CN 964 sx/so
    Posts
    605
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just on the border of your waking mind,
    There lies another time
    Where darkness and light are one,
    And as you tread the halls of sanity
    You feel so glad to be unable to go beyond

    I have a message from another time.

  31. #71
    AWellArmedCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Location
    Northern Japan
    TIM
    IEI-(C?) 4w3 so/sx
    Posts
    924
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    If magic, demons, or souls surely existed, would that prove god?

    If heaven and hell existed, would that prove god?
    No. Although if we confirmed that these things existed it wouldn't be terribly outlandish to postulate the existence of gods in the plural. Why should we assume there's only one if so many other supernatural beings exist?
    “Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
    — James Russell Lowell
    猫が生き甲斐

  32. #72
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,041
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AWellArmedCat View Post
    No. Although if we confirmed that these things existed it wouldn't be terribly outlandish to postulate the existence of gods in the plural. Why should we assume there's only one if so many other supernatural beings exist?
    Why would there be need for more than one? There might be more than one though. There's actually a God in the classical sense, a Devil, a Demiurge, and an Absolute (something sort of "over" God).

    I wonder if anybody here knows about Gnosticism.

  33. #73
    Rune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    TIM
    ILI-Ni CN 964 sx/so
    Posts
    605
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Proof is only perceived as proof if you believe already.

    Credo ut intelligam.
    Just on the border of your waking mind,
    There lies another time
    Where darkness and light are one,
    And as you tread the halls of sanity
    You feel so glad to be unable to go beyond

    I have a message from another time.

  34. #74
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,041
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think I have ascertained that there are these entities, with the help/according to Gnosticism :

    -The "overlord" (Sophia) who is also the "Holy Spirit".
    -God "The Father", who is actually two entities. This is the "good" part of the Godhead, and one of them is what is commonly understood as "God".
    -The Demiurge, who crafted the world of matter. Doesn't interfere directly after he performed his role, but...
    - ...He created the "Devil", as a counterpart to God the father.

    Types of these entities:
    1. ESI-Fi
    2. SLI-Te and SEE-Fi
    3. ILE-Ti
    4. EIE-Ni

    Note: There's another entity but I won't write about that one.

  35. #75
    The Crucified Space Sheriff godslave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Southern France
    TIM
    H 964 sp/sx
    Posts
    572
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rune View Post
    Proof is only perceived as proof if you believe already.

    Credo ut intelligam.
    Even before socionics, I thought that this was true but not universal. "Credo ut intelligam" is imho a trait of openness. Some of us "reject before they possibly accept" and some of us "Accept before they possibly reject". It's a state of mind and absolutely Type related imho. I'll give two examples of well known religious figures who were notoriously on the"rejecting" side of the spectrum :

    - Paul The Apostle
    - Umar Ibn Al-Khattab

  36. #76
    Ding dong your opinion is wrong Teslobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    TIM
    LSI
    Posts
    57
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    But if other people with this quality can perceive the proof too, then it is proven for those people at least, no? If you see something with your own eyes that makes it true for you, correct?
    No, absolutely not. Evidence and proof is founded on, among other things, the idea that simple sensory perception is fallible. Just because you believe what you see does not mean it is proven or true for you. You simply believe it to be so.

  37. #77
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,363
    Mentioned
    445 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    Why would there be need for more than one? There might be more than one though. There's actually a God in the classical sense, a Devil, a Demiurge, and an Absolute (something sort of "over" God).

    I wonder if anybody here knows about Gnosticism.
    Why would there be a need even for one?

    Do you believe that anthills were made by the ant God?

  38. #78
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    ref to ptr to self
    Posts
    2,934
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Socionics is a relatively late addition to my framework, so needs to be explained in terms of that, and was subsequently cannabalized to remove unexplainabilities and to keep the parts for study that seem correct in effect even if I can't immediately find a defensible cause, without deciding their truthiness, as all ideas should be.

    So to answer the question, I would not use socionics to go outward into crazier beliefs if it can't be justified and true itself.

  39. #79

    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    TIM
    XSI-Ji 146w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    673
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No.
    I'm not only psychologically disturbed, I'm also QueeferSutherlandJeffersonianSecessionist87@sucksd ick.com


  40. #80

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,469
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    Why would there be need for more than one? There might be more than one though. There's actually a God in the classical sense, a Devil, a Demiurge, and an Absolute (something sort of "over" God).

    I wonder if anybody here knows about Gnosticism.
    God in the classical sense is the Absolute. Look what Plato and Socrates said: they spoke of the Monad and denounced the fables of Homer. So what do you think of that? I think Plato seems a lot more authoritative than the gnostic cults. Plato gave us platonic solids and all sorts of mathematics and philosophy, but the gnostic cults just give me weird art of demons to accidentally stumble upon if I spend too long on Reddit and other sites.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

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