Not worth studying if you don't understand that the descriptions of the 4 letter type templates and cognitive function descriptions are not static.
Not worth studying if you're incapable or too lazy to lay out all the details and make connections with real life observations.
Most people that call it bullshit, hardly do any research.
I kind of find it funny that it indirectly explains why someone that has educated themselves on the subject , would still call it BS.... As it gives explanations for the way we cognition... But it does so in a very annoying way.
Using words like "Introverted Intuition" and "Extroverted Thinking" confuses a lot of people because they try to extrapolate meaning from the term name rather than actually studying the term. "Drrr I know what Introverted and Intuition means! Da answers am clear now." The names are not to be taken literally...
I'd like to study it academically. The unwise have tainted Google search with their inaccuracies.
Ok but youre not really disputing my argument.
No, really, I am. Trust me on this one pal.
But it doesnt cease to be true. It just ceases to be true because youve changed the labels.
You seem confused. So i'll connect the dots for you.
You said:It doesn't cease to be true.
Then in the subsequent sentence:It just ceases to be true.
Is it still true or is it no longer true?
as what is the accepted definition of that term to 99% of people) plus 2 = 4 (as what is the accepted definition of that term to 99% of people). Nobody agrees 5 = 4.
Argumentum ad populum.
And for 2 plus 2 to = 5 you would have to explicitly tell who youre speaking to that for the sake of your argument that 5 = 4
What's your point? That for it to be true I have to state it? So you agree with the philosophy , that simply stating something makes it true.
Which means that it's a matter of we want to be true, because we choose what we want to believe. What we believe is based on personal feelings
Therefore the truth is subjective.
And if you do that then youre essentially agreeing that 2 plus 2 = 4. Because 2 plus 2 does equal 4.
Begging the question.
Sure but one must be incorrect. Saying "its true for me" is a bullshit phrase.
Sure but the truth must be on personal feelings. It's what you choose to accept. "Truth is objective", is a bullshit phrase.
Something is either true or its not.
Anything can be true.
If i have 2 apples in my hands i say there are 2 apples. If someone then says "well i believe there are 3 apples and that is what is true to me". Then theyre just wrong. I am correct, they are incorrect. End of story.
If there are 2 piglets nestled in a poptart and my friend Ronnie steps up and says , "Yo homie. Can I wrestle with one of those 3 nestled piglets?", I'll know he's talking about the 2 nestled piglets. Who am I to tell him how to say it?
Just because it's the norm? Do you know what the norm is over in sand nigger land? Fucking goats. Are you a goat fucker, AveSatanas?
Take for example colorblind people. I say the sky is blue (on a clear day). And someone who is color blind may say that the sky is gray. Who is right? Well to him the sky is gray. He sees it as gray through his own eyes. However the sky is not gray, the sky is blue to a correctly functioning eye.
Once again...Appeal to popularity.
Things can only be true as far as the things being discussed have concrete definitions. Such as with mathematics
No definitions are concrete.
Thats a fine interpretation. However it essentially agrees with my point that accuracy is subjective. So i guess we agree on that point
Wrong. It does not agree with your point.
Accuracy is defined as "exactness". My point is that it is objectively exact.
I will reiterate a portion to emphasize the evident....
"then it's a factthat you were accurate, regardless of what anyone says and even if you arbitrarily decide that it wasn't..."
2+2=4 is just your choice of symbols used to express the quantity.
2+2=5 , while still expressing the same quantity, is my choice of expressing those quantities.
Accuracy is different because different people can consider things to be accurate.
Truth is the same because different people can consider things to be true.
For instance, if im throwing darts at a dartboard and i get it within 5 inches of the bullseye i would think that was pretty accurate. But a pro dart player may only consider being within 1 inch of the bullseye as accurate. Because he is more skilled at darts his standard for accuracy is much higher than what mine might be as an amateur.
Both would be wrong because to be accurate, you only have to hit exactly where you are aiming.
The standard for accuracy is determined by where you decide to aim. If your goal is to stick the dart into "that big ass wall over there" and you stick it there, then it's a fact that you were accurate, regardless of what anyone says and even if you arbitrarily decide that it wasn't...The standard was already set.
If your goal is to hit within 1 inch of the bullseye or dead center, and you do so, then it is a fact that you were accurate.
