Log in

No account? Create an account
Eric 1stDiv, Triumphant


Posted on 2011.05.15 at 15:55
Current Location: 75409
Current Music: The Music of Bear McCreary, Vols 1-2
Tags: , ,

Prior to the IT crash my company herded groups of us new-hires to cabins in South Texas for a week at a time where they plied us with liquor and taught us how to interact with different types of people within the Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) along with those hokey team-building exercises which people in my specific area of the MBTI entirely disdain; Ironic, really. Regardless, while I knew then what I was, I never gave it much thought because my own filters were firmly in place and helped me adjust the information to fit my worldview. Its a wonderfully flawed built-in self-preservation system of checks and balances we employ.

Its also very flawed. Flawed in that the ways in which we automatically preserve our safety/sanity is often by suppressing our natural instincts. And while this is very, very good news for those of us who interact with the majority of the population who's basic default is often carnal destruction, those of us who operate less linearly begin to behave in a manner contrary to our own very edifying nature.

Where laxists require a roadmap to ethical answers, I simply alter the way the question is asked to nullify its riposte - not because I'm immoral and not because I disregard the basis of your morality as fallaciously fallible - but because you refuse to question it. There is no room in my life for your blind-faith close-mindedness. At all. Ever. That being said, my mate's Type is neither identical to mine, nor the polar opposite - More a complementary parallel. So its not like-mindedness I'm in pursuit of, rather more like...anti-dumb. And there's a lot of dumb out there.

Which leads me to my next new assumption. As my MBTI is only one to two percent of the population, there is truly no such thing as a "jury of my peers." Interestingly enough, while I would want to be judged by those identical to my MBTI, my wife would not. Rather than consider one superior over the other, I am fascinated that she understands her Myers-Briggs Type Indicator so very well.

Throughout all of this, I've learned why I question so all that I do. I "apply (often ruthlessly) the criterion "Does it work?" to everything from [my] own research efforts to the prevailing social norms. This in turn produces an unusual independence of mind, freeing [me] from the constraints of authority, convention, or sentiment for its own sake." And its very freeing. These days, while I sneer at morality for morality's sake (and often cause my poor wife to have to question her own motivations and level of comfort with new ideas), hers are the only ones I lend any credence to, for if I lose her in this discovery of self, I've lost the war. Thankfully, she's as bull-headed and open-minded as I am.

Nothing else matters.
For my type, anything is possible; everything is negotiable. Whatever the outer circumstances, I am ever perceiving inner pattern-forms and using real-world materials to operationalize them. Others may see what is and wonder why; I see what might be and say "Why not?!"


CeltManX, Devlin O' Coileáin
celtmanx at 2011-05-16 04:55 (UTC) (Link)

title or description

title or description

I got these tee shirts at Walmart and thought of you. I like the " Paddle Faster, I Hear Banjos best. It's in hunter green and Wendy thinks it fits my personality best. She said the people it referred to would not be smart enough to realize it referred to them. I don't watch Family Guy often but these were funny and inexpensive.

ehowton at 2011-05-17 00:40 (UTC) (Link)
When I was stationed in Korea there was a guy who had a Corona shirt what said, "Instant party, just add net." There was a picture of a beach, a volleyball, and a bottle of Corona.

The first time I saw this shirt, I was reading it aloud but a wrinkle had covered the last letter of the last word. and I interpreted it as, "Instant party, just add Ned." I was of course thinking "Ned Beatty" and indicated that was one fucked-up party, let alone advertising it on your shirt.
dentin at 2011-05-16 17:40 (UTC) (Link)
Reality is that which does not go away when we close our eyes. We observe that reality and we obtain data, and reliability estimates of that data.

Naturally, we can choose to ignore that data, or choose to reject it because it is too painful for us to bear, and a lot of stupidity is explained by this. But I think the real cause of of 'dumb' is more adequately explained by filter-feedback processes.

Consider this: the vast bulk of the neural processing that happens in your skull is 'internal' processing. Waves of activity that happen all the time, regardless of sensory input. The brain is a gigantic feedback machine, with limiters - something is always going on, regardless of input to the system. This couldn't happen without self-reinforcing feedback loops.

Now consider learning: We are presented with a huge amount of information. We grab a few key facts and integrate them into our model/understanding. This model now serves as a filter through which we obtain more facts, which then get integrated into the model. Lather, rinse, repeat.

The only thing that needs to go wrong in this process is for the model's filter to say "prefer things that confirm this model". Blammo, you've got the 700 club, scientology, fox news, or the crazy cat lady down the street. No real mental defect required. In fact, it's a natural part of how our brains are organized.

The key part to breaking this cycle is to limit the extent to which models can filter incoming data. It's fine to filter for things that pertain to the model; but it's just as important to filter for negative evidence as it is to filter for positive. This is where most people fall down, IMHO.
michelle1963 at 2011-05-16 18:15 (UTC) (Link)
I once had a conversation on your blog (http://ehowton.livejournal.com/360838.html) in which Dentin was hypothesizing that human civilization survives by having a greater percentage of "conservatives", those who fear change, and a small number of those who are innovative, embrace change, etc.

Perhaps this why INTJs like us make up such a small percentage of the population. Too many of us might not be good for long term survivability of the human race?

Either that, or we'd have FTL travel by now. ;-) (Yes, I'm a narcissist and I know it!)
ehowton at 2011-05-16 18:59 (UTC) (Link)
Yes - fascinating discussion (I just re-read the entire thing). And I've come to the conclusion that I'm likely to die :/
michelle1963 at 2011-05-16 19:03 (UTC) (Link)
Dentin could be wrong. ;-)
ehowton at 2011-05-16 19:39 (UTC) (Link)
He's a lot of things. In my experience, "wrong" is not one of them. Even if his hypothesis were inaccurate, they're closer to anyone else.

And yes I know you were being silly, but it provided me an opportunity to say that out loud :P
dentin at 2011-05-16 20:19 (UTC) (Link)
CeltManX, Devlin O' Coileáin
celtmanx at 2011-05-18 01:38 (UTC) (Link)
Rome was destroyed from within not by conservatives but by people with new and innovative ideas on how people should live life. Its' once proud, strong, and disciplined army wearing steel armor was reduced to a disorganized, undisciplined rabble wearing padded cloth armor by the time of the German barbarian invasions(Goths, Vandals etc.). These new ideas were about peace,love, and embracing change and they called it Christianity.
ehowton at 2011-05-16 19:37 (UTC) (Link)
I recently watched only part of a documentary entitled, "What tHe #$*! Ð⊕ wΣ (k)πow!?" which was either far too cerebral for me (more likely) or way to infantile in their explanation of new concepts (less likely) for me to even begin to understand what it was they were trying to get across.

Nonetheless, I found myself outright rejecting the few concepts I did pick up on, and even as I was doing it I had to ask myself if it was because I found their entire premise unrealistic, or if I surmised I wouldn't fall prey to the existential bullshit they were peddling.

Yes filter-feedback occurs, no, I don't meet many people who constantly assess and reassess that process regardless of whether or not they include the "negative evidence" (which, BTW is brilliantly stated! I must think on that further) but at this point in time, I'll take just a sliver of the former.

I need to watch that movie again, this time under circumstances more conducive to the subject matter.

Edited at 2011-05-16 07:40 pm (UTC)
dentin at 2011-05-16 20:19 (UTC) (Link)
If you're talking about the movie "What the bleep do we know", my opinion of it is pretty thoroughly bad. The first half seemed not ridiculous, standard pop-sci kinds of things but nothing really bogus. The second half was quite frankly, bogus. Bogus and wrong. Mostly wrong.

Wrong as in "so wrong it will only go away if we close our eyes, and even then it still won't make sense."
ehowton at 2011-05-17 00:18 (UTC) (Link)
I actually read up on it after I made my comment to you and what I read jives with your assessment. I HAD NO IDEA!
dentin at 2011-05-17 01:49 (UTC) (Link)
I actually watched it with fionna a couple years ago, and I was surprised to see her become more and more angry as the show progressed. I was expecting to have to explain why I had problems with it; rather, she would periodically smash the spacebar on the keyboard (to pause playback) and then angrily explain to me why something or other didn't make sense.

I was impressed.

My mom on the other hand... yeah. Whole different ball of wax.
ehowton at 2011-05-16 19:45 (UTC) (Link)
As an aside, the weekend we were in Texarkana I walked into the other room of the suite where my children were watching the television with rapt attention. I turned the corner just to see what they were watching and was shocked when I discovered it was the 700 Club! I asked why they were so fascinated with it, and they replied, "There's nothing else on."

I did find it ironic that we were there for Beltane and they were watching a dramatization of the pilgrim's bringing Christianity to the Americas.

But I'm funny that way.
catttitude at 2011-05-17 00:05 (UTC) (Link)
well, it is either the 700 club or The Satanic Verses.
michelle1963 at 2011-05-17 00:18 (UTC) (Link)
There's a difference? ;-)
catttitude at 2011-05-17 00:31 (UTC) (Link)
The 700 club will give you nightmares.
CeltManX, Devlin O' Coileáin
celtmanx at 2011-05-17 01:10 (UTC) (Link)
The 700 club is full of wonderful people that just want to save your Soul....for themselves.
michelle1963 at 2011-05-17 01:17 (UTC) (Link)
Souls are tasty!
Lelf Treperra
ubet_cha at 2011-05-17 21:56 (UTC) (Link)

Interesting line of questioning.

Depending on which way the wind blows and if I've had my coffee my results invariably fall under ESTP or ISTP.

I don't think I'd mind be judged by a jury of my peers, if they were the same type of folks.

On the other hand I would NOT to serve on a jury composed of 11 other ESTPs. We'd drive each other nuts.

Thankfully, she's as bull-headed and open-minded as I am.

That is a must it seems. I'm constantly amazed at where my wife is more open minded ( Outside of family.) then I am.
Previous Entry  Next Entry