Page 6 of 6 [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Mike1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jul 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 710

13 Apr 2013, 7:19 pm

Verdandi wrote:
Mike1 wrote:
They don't really have no logic, just less logic.


A popular belief, but I am not sure it is entirely accurate. I've noticed that people in general tend to exclude data they do not care to accept as accurate and include data that - regardless of accuracy - they believe to be true. I don't see any more or less of this on Wrong Planet than I do on other forums, and I think that picking and choosing data points to suit one's beliefs is not very logical.

I guess you're right. There are both Aspies and NTs who are more ambivalent and eclectic like me, and others who aren't. If there is a lot of data that goes against my own views, than that usually leads me to believe that my views are either wrong, incomplete, or too polarized. It's a lot of work trying to process all the data together to figure out what the big picture really looks like, but I don't really feel like I have the ability to completely discredit credible data that is presented to me. In most debates, I eventually end up developing a complex, abstract view that is difficult to argue with. In other debates, my views are more connected to my personal experiences, so they are easier to argue with. I can't discredit my own experiences though. It's still data, and to me it's pretty credible. If I didn't think that I was a credible source, that would probably mean that I was insane.



Verdandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,275
Location: University of California Sunnydale (fictional location - Real location Olympia, WA)

13 Apr 2013, 7:47 pm

Mike1 wrote:
I guess you're right. There are both Aspies and NTs who are more ambivalent and eclectic like me, and others who aren't. If there is a lot of data that goes against my own views, than that usually leads me to believe that my views are either wrong, incomplete, or too polarized. It's a lot of work trying to process all the data together to figure out what the big picture really looks like, but I don't really feel like I have the ability to completely discredit credible data that is presented to me. In most debates, I eventually end up developing a complex, abstract view that is difficult to argue with. In other debates, my views are more connected to my personal experiences, so they are easier to argue with. I can't discredit my own experiences though. It's still data, and to me it's pretty credible. If I didn't think that I was a credible source, that would probably mean that I was insane.


All excellent points.

I try to do these things but I cannot deny that at times my personal bias can influence my perceptions.



ezbzbfcg2
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,977
Location: New Jersey, USA

15 Apr 2013, 5:27 am

Verdandi wrote:
Mike1 wrote:
They don't really have no logic, just less logic.


A popular belief, but I am not sure it is entirely accurate. I've noticed that people in general tend to exclude data they do not care to accept as accurate and include data that - regardless of accuracy - they believe to be true. I don't see any more or less of this on Wrong Planet than I do on other forums, and I think that picking and choosing data points to suit one's beliefs is not very logical.


I'll re-post a portion of what I wrote a few posts before this, responding to you Verdandi, which you conveniently ignored.

ezbzbfcg2 wrote:
I think while some people might try to play Mr. Spock and claim to be "totally logical," there is a second group that jumps anytime someone mentions the need for more logic and less emotion. They scream, "but we NEED emotion! It is illogical to say anything else! Oh!" when that's NOT the argument. The argument is that while we all have emotions, the scales are often tipped way too far in favor of such emotion at the expense of logic. Not that the scales should be tipped fully in favor of logic.

It's an odd agenda.


I'm offended you deliberately ignored this on an emotional level. But that probably doesn't concern you, does it? Yet, your behavior actually helps to prove the point.



chlov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 851
Location: My house

15 Apr 2013, 7:17 am

I believe in no "mythes".
I never generalize.
Generalizing is stupid.
I hate it when people say "aspies are..." or "NTs are...", etc, because they're generalizing.
When people speak on my behalf I hate it, because they never say what I actually think.
This is why I never want people to speak on my behalf.

I have no stereotypes about NTs, because stereotypes are stupid.
I decide what my opinion about a person is after I've known that person well, not because they're NTs or not.