It takes into account only the facts, such a thing as their understanding is completely ignored. Because of this, his knowledge can be very good, but too superficial to deep their understanding. This means that to create something based on them new it is difficult. If he is to explain something, sooner or later, he says, "Understandable" and interrupts you.
Dislikes new hypotheses, theories, concepts, since they have not yet checked. It accepts only something that we can safely refer. Generally does not accept long lengthy discussion of the category of "Is there life on Mars?", Immediately called all windbags. If you tell him that "it is believed that ..." then he'll tear off in mid-sentence, not even giving the finish, "which means there is an opinion? And on what it is based on what evidence? ", Instead of a little think about it. In general, I never get into the theory that he did not need right now in practice. But if you can out of this is something to remove, then yes, a useful thing. He needs to know the "in fact", and everything else is not interested. This feature means certain narrow-mindedness of thinking, inability to look at the situation from a different perspective. His logic - not very flexible standard. It can be difficult to understand, say, Castaneda and other philosophers, expanding their horizons of thinking concepts. After all, it's simple and clear: The earth revolves around the sun, and it is - only one of the possible truths on this subject, to understand can be very difficult. It was known that between two points can be carried out only one line, but came Lobachevsky created their geometry and it becomes clear that this is - also a certain convention. So, no "really" can be all in principle. However, when he defends his knowledge or can not ensure the normal operation of the first function, it may be better to try to understand something, make it easier to "fight" to defend the first function. In life, it also ignores such a thing as mutual understanding with people around them, as if trying not to bother with it, such as to adapt to other people. Also, it does not differ curiously, if it is not practical knowledge, so it can "sin" a "die-hard".
Originally Posted by Sol
"So those forum members that would keep slandering me with personal remarks and distorted baseless claims about me"As prerviously he have lied when compared my assertion about his heretic approaches to the typology with the baseless claim. Though it's not my priority here to think about the person he is. It's enough that in the typology he's evident heretic due to the lack of understanding and low quality of the sources he uses, what is seen in many places in his wrong and sometimes rather strange opinions.
Reply With Quote
Rather clearly there is some bias or such on your part, or otherwise how likely is it that it's exactly your dual and the opposite sex at that that you cannot find anywhere on these forums?
