Survey: Implications of the "Conscious Agenda"

[Phaedrus]

Faedrus, what is your type? I do not feel much of a critical thinking within you. How can you trust the writtten word like that?

I thought everyone knew by now that my type is clearly INTp. I never trust the written word. I always, only trust my own judgment, which is based on very often extremely critical thinking. I can assure you (or well, probably not ...) that there is much more critical thinking in me than there is in you (based primarily on what you have written about souls and colour preferences).

We do not have to assume what others say is true.

Of course not. We should not assume that just because someone says it. I have never said that. But we should assume, if not the evidence clearly indicates otherwise, that others believe that what they say is true.

We have to find our own truth.

No, definitely not. We should try to find the objective truth. We should always critically examine our own belief systems, and the fact that we want to believe in something is not a good argument for the truth of it. It is a widespread phenomenon nowadays that people think that they should earn respect for their opinion regardless of what they happen to believe in. The truth is that they shouldn't. We should criticize every belief that we find questionable, but in that process our critical arguments should, of course, also be criticized. Whether something is a good argument or not is not up to you, or me, or anyone else to decide. Arguments are good or bad objectively, and the conclusions we draw from our premises are objectively valid or invalid. But not all men are made equal when it comes to determine if an argument or a conclusion is objectively valid or not.

You can be a higly moral person without being religious and on the opposite.

I agree.

INTPs are devil's advocates, distance themselves from any point of view and throwing doubts everywhere - "shooting down" any bird that fly.
A true critical standpoint - we have to learn this from them.

Good characterization! Start learning from me, folks!

And I would like to discuss furhter the artical of Sergey Ganin about the difference about INTPs and INTJ: what is true and what is not? Does anybody wants to have a go? We could open a new topic for it.

Good! That could be very interesting.

[Phaedrus]

I'm highly suspicious of every "scientific evidence" for stereotypes.

Why are you suspicious of such evidence? This says more about yourself than about the evidence. The evidence has, of course much more (scientific) value than your feelings about it. My point is that you have no ground for doubt. You are uncritically sceptical, which is a bad thing to be. If you have no rational arguments to support your doubt, you should not have an opinion of any kind about it.

[Olga]

[quote="Phaedrus"]

Faedrus, what is your type? I do not feel much of a critical thinking within you. How can you trust the writtten word like that?

I thought everyone knew by now that my type is clearly INTp. I never trust the written word. I always, only trust my own judgment, which is based on very often extremely critical thinking. I can assure you (or well, probably not ...) that there is much more critical thinking in me than there is in you (based primarily on what you have written about souls and colour preferences).


I just love it!
Phaedrus, you are not colour blind, are you? Would you like to show us your true colours ?

[snegledmaca]

Why are you suspicious of such evidence? This says more about yourself than about the evidence. The evidence has, of course much more (scientific) value than your feelings about it. My point is that you have no ground for doubt. You are uncritically sceptical, which is a bad thing to be. If you have no rational arguments to support your doubt, you should not have an opinion of any kind about it.

I agree with you that my method of being skeptical is what matters.

But my point is that my motivation for being skeptical is irrelevant, I will doubt when ever I want and what ever I want. (I just have to do it correctly :wink



And regarding the topic. I sooo agree with mine.

[Olga]

Phaedrus said:

Why are you suspicious of such evidence? This says more about yourself than about the evidence. The evidence has, of course much more (scientific) value than your feelings about it. My point is that you have no ground for doubt.

Phaedrus, from the logical point of view you are right but not from the ethical. I have got my feelings as a ground for doubt. And if I doubt then I have to explore what I doubt.

[Phaedrus]

Phaedrus, from the logical point of view you are right but not from the ethical. I have got my feelings as a ground for doubt. And if I doubt then I have to explore what I doubt.

We probably agree here. I also use my feelings about something as an indication that something is probably right or wrong. But when we argue, we should take the logical point of view and state our (logical) arguments, our reasons, for believing what we believe. We will get nowhere if everyone only describes how they feel.

[Creepy-pokeball]

Where are we going? *beep* *beep*~

Please dont take me to the mall

[Expat]

I'm not sure if I understand this correctly.
Is this correct?: ISFjs want to be free of doubt, because they feel very bad when they are unsure of things. This is why ENTjs have to be very sure of themselves ("free of doubt"), to have the answers ISFjs need.

If this is true, then ENTjs and ISFjs are both trying to find out things (about world, theories, philosophy) and trying to be sure they are correct. Later in life ISFj will still be seeking for the truth while ENTj already knows where s/he stands. (Does this make sense or is there a flaw in that hypothesis?) How do you see the difference between a young ENTj and ISFj?

I don't know why the focus on the "young" - - I don't think age matters at all for that. It's irrelevant.

The way I see the ISFj/ISTj hidden agenda, it's heavily influenced by the PoLR. That is, they are eager to be free of doubt because they find uncertainty, the dealing with the possibility of several alternatives simultaneously, disturbing. So they crave believing in something that is "certain" in order to reassure themselves.

ENTjs do not seek "certainty" but better information. However, they will be less susceptible to feeling upset in uncertain situations, and that's when they can reassure the ISFj - not by providing "real" certainty, but by showing that it's no reason for panic.

Not sure how that works with ENFjs and ISTjs, though. If at all.

[aestrivex]

@Niffweed: I respect your view about the colour theory. It does not state that there is a direct correspondence of colour and type and it is in the process of development. I wonder what are your two favourite coloursby the way?

huh?

what did i ever say about color theory?


i have to assume that, unless you are confusing me with somebody else, that favorite colors have nothing to do with type. i don't remember this argument so i cant say much of anything else.

personally, my favorite colors are orange and green.

[Olga]

@Phaedrus: you are right, it's not enough to say how you feel you still need to use logic as well.

@niffweed: you actually said this:
i generally agree with statements like that, as i generally dont believe that types can be a catch-all for anything. however, i think that this about religion is probably something that might be determined by socionics type (whereas something like favorite color has nothing to do with type).

It is interesting that you are INTP whose colours are green and orange.
this is different from usually preffered black: you must be different from other's INTP. Green is usually associated with and orange with . These colours are more exraverted than blue and black shades. Could it be that blocks Id and Ego are more presented in your psychic structure?

[Joy]

okay I didn't read this thread, so I don't know if someone already said this or not... perhaps it's the base function that is the conscious will... so it would be "to love" for an ISFj and "to understand" for an INTj and whatnot

[aestrivex]

@niffweed: you actually said this:
i generally agree with statements like that, as i generally dont believe that types can be a catch-all for anything. however, i think that this about religion is probably something that might be determined by socionics type (whereas something like favorite color has nothing to do with type).

It is interesting that you are INTP whose colours are green and orange.
this is different from usually preffered black: you must be different from other's INTP. Green is usually associated with and orange with . These colours are more exraverted than blue and black shades. Could it be that blocks Id and Ego are more presented in your psychic structure?

ok, sorry about that reference. i forgot about it.

the fact that these colors have nothing to do with what my socionics type might indicate only supports my idea that colors are not influenced by type or persona. if i were to attempt to analyze this further, and the probable results would be that some of the predictions of favorite color would be accurate and some would not be. i, however, am extremely skeptical of this line of thinking and i don't think any benefit will come out of analysis of my favorite colors.

[FDG]

In response to the original question of the thread:

I find myself more attuned to "to know" and "to understand" than "to believe".

[Scrummy]

Thanks all... I guess a more thorough evaluation of these might be to ask you all to put them in order from least applicable... but that'd bee too much work, right?

[Olga]

@niffweed: you said

the fact that these colors have nothing to do with what my socionics type might indicate only supports my idea that colors are not influenced by type or persona. if i were to attempt to analyze this further, and the probable results would be that some of the predictions of favorite color would be accurate and some would not be. i, however, am extremely skeptical of this line of thinking and i don't think any benefit will come out of analysis of my favorite colors.
_________________

Sosionics suggest that people are influenced by their type because the type is inborn. Colour theory suggest that personlaity is influenced by colours which sumbolizethe irrational preference in colour and existence of unconsicous. Or if we shall go this root we shall say the conscious functions are at large are influenced by unconscsous (functions or genetic code).

The funny thing is that I am not an expert in genetics, electricity, physics and etc. But my thoughts are always bump into things like that and this is where I need help, because we need a wholistic approach which could be analysed and understood by many different scientists from different perspectives. I do believe that scientific discoveries cross with each ohter and can benenfit to our understanding in many different ways.

I have come recently to very interesting explanation about quadras but I need to find the way to put my drawings on line so that people could understand me better and could criticise me better too .

It is a shame that we do not hear for a while anything from the only official socionists we had on this forum: Dmitri and Rick. We are discussing colour theory and we are about to consider critically Model B
(I hope :wink:, when the majority of forum members will be able to understand it first) and there is no respond from them as if they do not know where do they stand? It would be nice to have them back though, I guess a few people on the forum would be happy to have clarifications instead of confusion.

I do not think that ordering will bring much sense because the agendas are too broad and include universal values. Ordering is a part of theory and structural knowledge but I guess we need to order something more sensible (my subjective opinion ) I think we have to take the root of analysing differences/details about types and within types if we want to progress in our understanding.

[aestrivex]

Sosionics suggest that people are influenced by their type because the type is inborn. Colour theory suggest that personlaity is influenced by colours which sumbolizethe irrational preference in colour and existence of unconsicous. Or if we shall go this root we shall say the conscious functions are at large are influenced by unconscsous (functions or genetic code).

perhaps.

but the fundamental problem with this is that something as ambiguous as one's favorite color may not really be related to the unconscious. it is important to understand that socionics is a very broad generalization of personality psychology, not a catch-all for the specific oddities of human thought. what i'm saying is that something as mundane and inexplicable as one's favorite color may transcend such simple and general explanations of personality like that which socionics uses.

[ConcreteButterfly]

I was talking with some random Russian guy the other day, and he brought up the concept of a "conscious agenda.

Hypothesis:
Your "conscious agenda" is basically your dual's hidden agenda:

ISFp, INFp => to be loved
ESFj, ESTj => to be healthy
INTj, INFj => to be perfect
ENTp, ESTp => to understand
ISTj, ISFj => to be wealthy
ENFj, ENTj => to believe
INTp, ISTp => to know
ESFp, ENFp => to love

How many people here identify with their conscious agenda? (I do.)

I identify with the ENFp one, "to love", although in my opinion this agenda is more about being totally open and vulnerable with another person in the hopes that they'll accept you, flaws and all, than simply showing affection. It's about emotional honesty.

The idea of a conscious agenda being the opposite of your dual's hidden agenda makes sense if you think of your dual as basically your inner self. Duals are inside-out versions of each other. What one dual does openly, the other dual does privately (and in a somewhat childish way, since it comes from the super id)

[Becca]

I was talking with some random Russian guy the other day, and he brought up the concept of a "conscious agenda.

Hypothesis:
Your "conscious agenda" is basically your dual's hidden agenda:

ISFp, INFp => to be loved
ESFj, ESTj => to be healthy
INTj, INFj => to be perfect
ENTp, ESTp => to understand
ISTj, ISFj => to be wealthy
ENFj, ENTj => to believe
INTp, ISTp => to know
ESFp, ENFp => to love

How many people here identify with their conscious agenda? (I do.)

It consequently should more or less correspond to your Creative (2nd) function and you may find yourself consciously striving to be "the loved one" (if you are an ISFp/INFp) or "the knowledgeable one" (INTp/ISFp) in the heirarchy of Socionics.

I do identify with it