Hey all,
1) I feel horrible about the lack of females thingy. I think it may have a
lot to do with our social conditioning.
There IS a distinction between gender differences and T/F. But there is a
correlation, too: 60% of females are F's while 60% of guys are T's. I'd like
to know the acutally numbers and what population was being tested before I
come to any actual conclusion.
2) I always felt alone when I was a kid. I used to just go to school and
then come home and play video games. I had no friends. It's nice to know
that there are people like me out there.
I've also been told that everything I think about is useless. I've been told
that I should "get in the real world" and "but THAT's not the way it's
DONE", so many times. It's nuts, really.
Right now, I have a theory that combines gravity and anti-matter. My mom
(SJ) tells me to get a job.
This is why being 1% of the population sucks.
3) T and F don't correlate directly with Romantic and Classical. You need to
have the N in there because, by definition, it's in our heads and we think
about it:
Classical is a part of T.
Romantic is a part of F.
I wonder what ST and SF are called...
4) Pirsig is definitely an INTP. Except, we have to remember that as
somebody ages, they get all of their "tools" back, so to speak. They learn
how to use all types effectively and they become more "balanced".
Right now, I'm actually an XNXP.
Also, When I read ZAMM again, I noticed that the Narrator (the person there
before Phaedrus reinhabited his body) had SJ tendencies. Is it possible that
shock treatment alters temperment types? This would give evidence to the
theory that temperment is like software riding on the hardware.
5) Are I and E connected to Social SQ? I would think so.
6) We've already gone over this "what if I'm the only one who actually
exists and you are all just hallucinations given to me by an evil genius"
theory. Let me ask you guys: is this useful? Does it get you anywhere?
Meaning: The test for Truth (ISQ) is whether or not you can see a difference
in the universe if you test your theory out. A.K.A. Believe you are
invincible, go jump of a bridge and see if you don't die.
Then I'll give that theory some credit.
Until then, the answer of that question is Mu.
A theory is a tool. Kind of like a hammer or a screwgun or a blender. I
understand that there are lots of different tools to use. I'm just trying to
find the BEST one. To do this, I'm trying to find as many new options as
possible.
7) Yes, there is a difference between Chaos (DQ) and Chaos Theory. I just
don't have a better word. Let me hypothesize: If we did come to fully
"understand" Chaos theory, would we then "know" everything? No, of course
not. Diagram:
"The Box of Knowledge"
________
/\
|
|
?A
?A
?A
?A
?A
|
|
|
\/
--------
I theorize that we will ALWAYS have to stay within this box if we continue
to use ISQ. Even if we answer all of the questions in the universe (set),
there will still be "something" that is not within this box. "Something"
that we cannot perceive. "Something" that is outside of intellectual
inquiry. This "something" is another word for DQ.
Remember folks, science only answers "How?" It never touches, "Why?"
Why? Mu.
8) The limit to intellectual inquiry is defined as: "Everything is possible,
including the possibility that this statement is wrong."
9) There is possibly something outside of this box.
10) The concrete of the universe is contradictions.
11) Free will/Determinism is NOT the same thing. I meant to say: Free
will/Determinism = Mu. Doesn't matter one way or the other. I'm going to do
whatever the hell I want regardless. So is everything else. It's a flawed
question.
12) I would like to see the Enneagram. Pass it around, will ya? At first
thought, though, I'm trying to see how it would fit with all of this.
13) My girlfriend is an NF. Her father and mother are NT/NF. Her brother and
her girlfriend are NT/NF. It's nuts.
14) P/J as DQ/SQ. I would have to say that "Pure" P is DQ. Just like "Pure"
J is SQ. This would lead to the idea that DQ/SQ is a sliding scale, too.
15) Very good point about Dusenberry. Where is he in ZAMM? (Although, I do
admit that people are oceans and you can only fit so much within the cup of
a book.)
16) The reason why I am a nut is thus:
I'm not attacking Science and Logic from the top. I don't think there is a
flaw in the branches, but in the root.
We have to understand that Science is as moody as my girlfriend around THAT
time of the month. This is because all of it is built on sand.
LOOK at the base assumptions in logic. That's where I'm getting all of this
from.
NUMBER ONE LAW IN SCIENCE: ASSUME NOTHING.
NUMBER TWO LAW IN SCIENCE: CONTRADICTIONS ARE INVALID.
We just keep building bigger and better hammers and we don't understand how
we do it.
17) I don't want flames running high. That would suck rocks.
Sincerely,
Matt Coughlan
P.S. Everybody treat yourselves to some ice cream, we're doing what we're
supposed to: think about s***.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:40 BST