Sigh. I sat down to finally, properly type the annoying fucker. He keeps popping up on my timeline and haunts me in my dear dreams so I figured I — JUST DO IT BEFORE HE KEEPS MAKING ME MAD AS HELL!!!
Verdict:Brainwashed by Conservative Christianity and white male supremacy. Just kidding: INTj. Your typical social 5w6, 1w2, 2w1.
Suggestive and dependent on the response of the audience,
, as he explains in the interview, and vulnerable to "onslaught" (
). The only trace of ethics being his conception of good and evil, but again in an analytical
format that he hardly applies to anyone and just uses to elaborate on something abstract. 1D
, he has minimal deliberate mimicry and emotional statements, but anticipates input.
Key sentences for how he uses the NT elements, particularly
and 4D
:
"I can't sleep at night because I'm thinking about something, what I'll do is go write it down. I'll try making videos and telling people what I'm thinking about to see if that performs the same function as writing. Butthe fundamental purpose for me is to clarify my thoughts. So that I know, if something is disturbing you what that means is that it needs to be articulated, it's the emergence of unexplored territory. That's the right way to think about it. It's like a vista of threat and possibility and you need to articulate a path through it. I was thinking well this [...] seems to be why, this is what I think is going on... [But] It's never obvious what's going on, because things go on on multiple levels. They go on on a theological level, familiar etc... You have to pick a level of analysis that is most suitable to the problem."
"Making the video was probably illegal under the pending legislation. The university helpfully delivered me a letter certainly informed by legal advice that what I had feared about actually doing was actually the case. I was violating the university's principles of inclusion and diversity and also likely violating the provincial guidelines. I thought thank you very much, you proved my point. [...] you should take both sides of the argument into account, present both sides, and then say you decided you needed to discipline me but don't omit half the story!"
ILI is the only other type I considered but here he values
over
,
ignoring doesn't work:
"It's the power of speech to transform reality. But more importantly, more fundamentally, it's the power of truthful speech to transform reality into a positive direction. We have this magic ability to change the future. And we do that through action obviously. But action is oriented by thought! And thought is mediated by dialogue. It's speech that's particularly critically important to this logos process. The logos is symbolically represented in the figure of Christ who's the word that was there at the beginning of time. So... that's a very complicated topic. But what it essentially means is that that the west has formulated a symbol for the ideal human being. There is emphasis in other belief systems [he goes on analyzing and creating categories]. What happens if you aggregate enough hero myths and extract out the central theme you end up with the logos. It's the thing that's common to all heroes, that's a good way of thinking about it. It's articulation and dissemination into society as a whole. Imagine that these ideas are implicit."
His exact opposite would be type Napoleon: utterly and confidently grounded in his or her surroundings, completely partial and attached instead of rule-bound, volatile moods and disregard for making sense and breaking down things in an abstract way.
Originally Posted by Myst
Reply With Quote
seeking.
