Quote Originally Posted by thistle View Post
There may be something to that - if 3L were to flit between sources that contradict each other, for example.
Poor understanding of what is inconsistent, and what could be discarded

3L is hungry for knowledge but so scattered going about it. Dialogue with 2L or 1L (who confidently verify sources and structure their reasoning) brings assurance.
By theory a dialogue between 1L and 3L is not going to go well for the 3L. I have similar experiences with 1E ppl.. can't get away fast enough. 1Ls are kinda like "I know better than you do, its pointless to even argue!" :

"As you know, the owners of productive logics do not tend to enter into long discussions and prove anything (by the way, for this reason, one productive logic can be easily mistaken for another - in particular, 1L may seem like 4L). Since the carriers of these logics are valuable not in thought itself, but in knowledge, they no longer rely on their own conclusions, but on information obtained on the basis of their experience or provided by some professional in their field.

In our case, for the carrier of 1L in any dispute, the typical answer will be that he does not have his own opinion on the issue under consideration, since he is incompetent in the area concerned. If the owner of the First Logic believes that he is sufficiently versed in the topic, then he will present his opinion not as a subjective vision, but as an indisputable fact that does not require special evidence. As a result, any dispute with 1L is doomed to never start, or, once it has begun, it ends immediately."

Source: https://bestsocionics.com/psychosophy/first-logics/

q_q where is the fun in that tho?