Structuring reality and creating correct systems of thought

[UDP]

See my thread in GD.


Now, for LIIs, in structuring your system, you must live it, and as such reality is the crucible for the correctness.
Following that process leads to well being.




comments?

[krieger]

That's how our hidden agenda works.

[UDP]

Popsicles float upside down at noon?


In other words,
why don't you expand upon that. What do you mean

[Subteigh]

For INTjs, following 'the process' is the entirety of one's existence - 'the process' determines how you live, and your experiences of life as a result of your actions lead on from that, continuing 'the process' still further. In a way, the path of a INTj is already predetermined, because they always follow the most logical path (or the most plausible path) - their ultimate goal in life is an extension of how they follow their life, 'the process' in principle.

INTjs implement their 'correct systems of thought' simply by living their lives healthily - the 'structuring reality' is a two-way process - they map out their internal 'reality' (the correct systems of thought) into external reality (to a INTj, the external + internal must be one and the same to be logically consistent) - to live healthily, the INTj explores both 'worlds' for contradictions and makes logical decisions (they live as they mean to go on) - doing this gives them more complete + more fulfilled etc. in both worlds.

[UDP]

I agree, that is what I was going to say at some point

[krieger]

Popsicles float upside down at noon?


In other words,
why don't you expand upon that. What do you mean

Yeah, sorry for being brief, it was something I intuited on the spot there.

You've got the INTj ego block transitions on one hand:
Ne -> Ti - fueling the 'thought system' with more insights
Ti -> Ne - explaining the thought system, or ruminating on it's implications
And the conjunction with the Se function, which is less prefered:
Ti -> Se - making firm assertions based on the thought system
Se -> Ti - importing firm principles from reality into the system
The creative art combo:
Ni -> Ti - adding mathematical insight to the system
Ti -> Ni - ruminate on dynamic implications, or envisioning the system in motion
And, finally, the hidden agenda combinations:
Ti -> Si - linking the system directly into an established dynamic (like 'life' or a social convention) and governing that dynamic with it
Si -> Ti - refurnishing the system with what was learned from the established dynamics.

It seemed to me that your statement was the embodiment of the Ti->Si and Si->Ti transitions... (I'm using unconventional reasoning here, though).

[Subteigh]

I think at some point in a INTjs life, they realise that their internal rules controlling their system cannot be developed for the external world - being too vast and changing to follow a INTj's plan. But, to stay in their internal world would cause them to stagnate - to stay healthy, a INTj must follow their 'systems of thought' in both worlds, because this is the only way they can have a sense of a structured reality - in their own mind, and through following these principles in both worlds.

Not every INTj is a Robespierre (if he even was a INTj) - it's more important to have internal control for a INTj than external order - (though both would be nice...)

[UDP]

The best way to really put forth the principles of validity and correct thought structure/reality is to live it.


I came across this quotation today:

They [the clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion.

-Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin Rush, Sept. 23, 1800

Very LII, and I am finding that is ultimately the way for me.
The only thing someone has to worry about from me is lying and contrivance, of tainting the truth.

This is why it is hard for me to select what exactly I am to do with my life, because that certain objectivity I cannot honestly avoid.

[UDP]

--- and it would seem like the more unhealthy an LII becomes, the further away from that he strays....

[Subteigh]

Very LII, and I am finding that is ultimately the way for me.
The only thing someone has to worry about from me is lying and contrivance, of tainting the truth.

This is why it is hard for me to select what exactly I am to do with my life, because that certain objectivity I cannot honestly avoid.

I certainly agree with this - I feel that my job is my life in general - it seems too contrived to have a ready-made job. INTjs can't all be Robespierres (not enough countries :wink: ). I do wonder how a INTj would feel near the end of their life though, if they hadn't achieved some universal truth - I suppose the establishing of a democracy, or preserving the environment for future generations, or helping on the road to these goals, would give them a sense of immortality.

Apparently, Jefferson frequently said he faced death without either hope or fear, which sounds like 'I mean to live my live as I mean to go on' - this way, you can't fail by your own expectations of your life - everything else follows on from that.

[UDP]

That's why it is a matter of living it.
Contributing to some sort of institution that would promote those qualities would also be rewarding, I would imagine.

The bottom line is putting energy towards those principles and virtues in some way.

I don't think you have to be true Robispieere or true LII to take over a country... but approaching these matters with that same kind of enthusiasm is not a bad thing. Being involved in governmental systems or whatever to ensure the truth, or at least work towards it, is a good thing.

"Sincerity and Truthfulness"

[Subteigh]

Yes, I agree, but INTjs tend to believe they are acting in everyone's best interest by being logically consistent (though obviously in their eyes ) - a INTj quest (their whole life) is an example by which everyone else should follow ('the quest for the validity'). I think INTjs, compared to ISTjs have trouble imposing their will on other people - it clashes with their and their social (in)capabilities etc.

[UDP]

Yes...

You've got the INTj ego block transitions on one hand:
Ne -> Ti - fueling the 'thought system' with more insights
Ti -> Ne - explaining the thought system, or ruminating on it's implications
And the conjunction with the Se function, which is less prefered:
Ti -> Se - making firm assertions based on the thought system
Se -> Ti - importing firm principles from reality into the system
The creative art combo:
Ni -> Ti - adding mathematical insight to the system
Ti -> Ni - ruminate on dynamic implications, or envisioning the system in motion
And, finally, the hidden agenda combinations:
Ti -> Si - linking the system directly into an established dynamic (like 'life' or a social convention) and governing that dynamic with it
Si -> Ti - refurnishing the system with what was learned from the established dynamics.

I don't think you necessarily have to "impose your will" on other people, but if you firmly represent your principles yourself, and make them in that regard, then that is just as effective.

Imposing your beliefs on others generally does not spread them, it just creates yielding, and gradually (or suddenly) builds resentment. Imposing beliefs cannot work, so there must be other ways. But they are not easy.


.......


And this is where social handicaps come in, disadvantaging the INTj. However, I believe that overcoming those handicaps, in regard to what has been mentioned in this thread and especially directly above, is a major gateway to success as an LII. Being social in your own means - not ESE social mind you - but social enough to figure out how to communicate your beliefs in a manner that is more effective than imposing them.

That requires a study of human interaction, social customs, understanding of empathy and empathetic listening, and a sincere desire to know the condition of the other person. These things are not LII's natural inclination of course, yet I believe they are more a complete part of their entire existence... (and also a valuable connection to duality with an ESE).

I think it is easy to see how, in this way, the ESE and LII could benefit greatly from a relationship together.

[UDP]

Consider how the ESE deals with the LII..........

this is a good example of how to go about things without imposing your will. If the ESE imposed its will on the LII, there would be little ground for a relationship.

- Asking for help or advice
- Doing something yourself and starting, modeling. (and then being open to others inputs/improvements)


These things are different from "imposing"

[Subteigh]

I think it is easy to see how, in this way, the ESE and LII could benefit greatly from a relationship together.

Rick's site has typed Nicole Kidman LII and Tom Cruise ESE. Mwahaha.

[Logos]

Rick's site has typed Nicole Kidman LII and Tom Cruise ESE. Mwahaha.

I can see that. After the split, Cruise became especially Scientologically crazy and Kidman still wishes that the relationship held, and there are some statements I have read that Kidman still greatly cares for Cruise.

[Subteigh]

I can see it too, now . I think INTj for Kidman would be one of the last types I would have considered, but it makes sense. (I trust Rick's typings somewhat too).

[UDP]

Both of you should have your LII cards & licenses suspended for 4 months because you are so into celebrity gossip.

[FDG]

Hey INTjs,

what's your take on anarchy?

[tcaudilllg]

INTjs on anarchy:
We think it lets the pathological types get in control... widespread death and destruction follow.

Of course, the only real reason we have law is probably due to the pathological types.... Even Cain could be perceived as pathological, in that he did not understand that God appreciated Abel's offerings in love, not in ritualistic pseudo-think. (which pathological types tend to embrace because they estimate their reality....)

UDP:
Read Descartes. Now.

[vigilante]

Please comment on how you manifest your preference of over .

[Logos]

Hey INTjs,

what's your take on anarchy?

It's amusing to think about.

Please comment on how you manifest your preference of over .

Well when someone presents an idea or statement, the factuality or practicality of the idea is not as important as the logical integrity or potential of the idea itself.