Richard Feynman - LIE?

[jason_m]

I own the book "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out." Here is something I read that blew my mind:

“Western civilization, it seems to me, stands by two great heritages. One is the scientific spirit of adventure — the adventure into the unknown, an unknown that must be recognized as unknown in order to be explored, the demand that the unanswerable mysteries of the universe remain unanswered, the attitude that all is uncertain. To summarize it: humility of the intellect.
The other great heritage is Christian ethics — the basis of action on love, the brotherhood of all men, the value of the individual, the humility of the spirit. These two heritages are logically, thoroughly consistent. But logic is not all. One needs one’s heart to follow an idea. If people are going back to religion, what are they going back to? Is the modern church a place to give comfort to a man who doubts God? More, one who disbelieves in God? Is the modern church the place to give comfort and encouragement to the value of such doubts? So far, haven’t we drawn strength and comfort to maintain the one or the other of these consistent heritages in a way which attacks the values of the other? Is this unavoidable? How can we draw inspiration to support these two pillars of Western civilization so that they may stand together in full vigor, mutually unafraid? That, I don’t know. But that, I think, is the best I can do on the relationship of science and religion, the religion which has been in the past and still is, therefore, a source of moral code as well as inspiration to follow that code.”

“I therefore consider the Encyclical of Pope John XXIII, which I have read, to be one of the most remarkable occurrences of our time and a great step to the future. I can find no better expression of my beliefs of morality, of the duties and responsibilities of mankind, people to other people, than is in that encyclical. I do not agree with some of the machinery which supports some of the ideas, that they spring from God, perhaps, I don’t personally believe, or that some of these ideas are the natural consequence of ideas of earlier popes, in a natural and perfectly sensible way. I don’t agree, and I will not ridicule it, and I won’t argue it. I agree with the responsibilities and with the duties that the Pope represents as the responsibilities and the duties of people. And I recognize this encyclical as the beginning, possibly, of a new future where we forget, perhaps, about the theories of why we believe things as long as we ultimately in the end, as far as action is concerned, believe the same thing.”

Could Feynman have been LIE or even IEE instead of ILE? To me he seems ILE as hell, but that is something Fi and it would be something someone Fi-PoLR would have an incredibly hard time saying... I still admire Feynman either way - it makes no difference to me, but what's going on here WRT socionics?

[xerx]

we had a Feynman question on a physics exam. only I got the right answer because I realized it was a trick question because Feynman was a jerk.

[jason_m]

we had a Feynman question on a physics exam. only I got the right answer because I realized it was a trick question because Feynman was a jerk.

Yeah I sat down with the Feynman Lectures. My first impression: 'Man this is way too hard! Maybe it's just this way because it's a Cal Tech course.' That explains that...

[Tallmo]

I own the book "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out." Here is something I read that blew my mind:

You asked about his Fi and being ILE:

ILEs can talk alot "about Fi stuff". It doesnt mean that they have strong Fi. Rather, they translate it into NeTi language. Talk about Politics, ethics etc. They take it intellectually. Dont look at the thematics, look at what function people actually are using. Ive seen countless examples of this with ILEs I know.

Comparing ILE and ESI, the ILEs are the ones who "talk Fi " while ESIs are mostly concerned with standing firm with their attitude, not talking about it.

I dont have any opinion on Feynmans type though

[The Reality Denialist]

You asked about his Fi and being ILE:

ILEs can talk alot "about Fi stuff". It doesnt mean that they have strong Fi. Rather, they translate it into NeTi language. Talk about Politics, ethics etc. They take it intellectually. Dont look at the thematics, look at what function people actually are using. Ive seen countless examples of this with ILEs I know.

Comparing ILE and ESI, the ILEs are the ones who "talk Fi " while ESIs are mostly concerned with standing firm with their attitude, not talking about it.

I dont have any opinion on Feynmans type though

Alpha is the least political quadra and tends to abandon everything related to it and treat politics with extreme skepticism.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

I think he's an LIE. it's very interesting how he answers the "why" question.

https://youtu.be/36GT2zI8lVA

it's basically a Te answer to a Ti question

[Tallmo]

Alpha is the least political quadra and tends to abandon everything related to it and treat politics with extreme skepticism.

That could be true. My point here was just that ILEs often bring up topics that could be labeled as "Fi". And that this is not a sign of strong Fi.

[The Reality Denialist]

I have read Feyman's autobiography kind of thing. He clearly had Si related problems regarding paying attention to surroundings. He was also very inventive besides of physics (and mathematics).

Probably lends itself to LIE creative subtype.

[Investigator]

I have always typed him as a ILE-Ti. His way of thinking is very close to Albert Einstein’s (who I also type to be an ILE). Let me keep things simple (my choice of words is no coincidence).

”If you can’t explain it simply, then you don’t understand it well enough”-Einstein

Feynman’s whole approach to learning is centered around this one quote. So much so, that the Feynman study technique is just this one quote exactly. I have always observed that ILEs love explaining complex material in a simple fashion that still somehow still gives you the big picture. Another example of an ILE who loved to do this is Socrates.

I wouldn’t be surprised if someone typed ILE-Ti’s as LIE-Ni as they are quite similar in terms of what functions they value.

[The Reality Denialist]

Usually synethesia is found among dynamic types and I think there are claims that Feynman had synesthesia.

[Investigator]

Usually synethesia is found among dynamic types and I think there are claims that Feynman had synesthesia.

Hmm, I know synesthesia is heavily correlated with autism. Mental disorders distort cognitive abilities which imply they distort cognitive functions which makes it nearly impossible to analyze synesthesia from the standpoint of socionics (a cognitive functioning theory) without the help of neurological evidence to back us up.

Maybe there is said correlation, but I don't think as of right now we are able to give validity to such a conclusion as synesthesia being a sign of being a dynamic type.