Socionics and Basic Questions of Philosophy

Basic questions of philosophy

Years go by and I catch myself thinking that more and more often “damn” questions come to my head, badly compatible with everyday fuss. I think that the circle of these questions, which constantly pops up philosophy in world history, is not so great - no more than four. These are the eternal questions:
  • what are we living for?
  • Is the world knowable?
  • What comes first: matter or idea?
  • Is there free will?


The first question concerns the mission of man . He is also asked in this form: what is the meaning of life? I think that it reflects in the worldview of humanity the basic socionic polarity "Extraversion - introversion". To this (as well as to all subsequent questions) there are two cardinally opposite answers that set the benchmarks for assessing and correcting behavior. An extrovert answer - for implementation in society. The one who was realized in a society, that also took place as the successful person. This is the answer of the West, oriented to external attributes. The opposite answer is for inner cultivation, finding harmony with oneself. Success outdoor is unimportant. This is the answer of the introverted East.
The answer to the question about the knowability of the world reflects the choice between the poles "rationality - irrationality". A rational response states that the world is knowable, since it has a systematic nature, a pattern. Irrational answer: the world is unknowable, because everything is situational, chaotic and unpredictable in it. Knowledge (and not a simple description) implies proof and justification. In this it is the opposite of faith. I believe it is absurd, ”said Tertullian.
The issue of trans vonachale . This is the argument of Plato and Aristotle at the fresco "The School of Athens". Apparently, the “intuition - sensory” polarity is hidden here. The innate answer gives rise to the idealistic position, and the sensory one to the materialistic one. In modern socionics, this dilemma transformed into a dispute about energy and information. Supporters of information socionics are closer to the idealistic worldview, and the followers of our energy paradigm are closer to materialism.
And the last question is about free will . Is there free will or is everything determined? The answer is from the pole of logic: everything is predetermined by objective laws, including our choice. We can’t violate them at will. The world and man - albeit complex, but mechanisms. Over time, they will be measured quantitatively. The answer from the pole of ethics: man and the world are animate beings endowed with a subjective soul and free will. At will, they change the course of laws, create their life and history. Qualitative knowledge (through empathy, playing, etc.) is more important than quantitative.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Psychosophy Clubs and Sextas

Four types, combined by common strong and weak functions form a club . Representatives of one club, as a rule, have common interests, a similar life position and often occupation. In communication, we can subconsciously feel the representative of our club, we are drawn to it. In this case, you should pay particular attention to the fact that the club is not a quadra, and if the values ​​of the club partner’s quadra do not match yours (pseudophilia or half-pseudophilia relations), then with prolonged communication or friendships / love relationships there may be serious misunderstanding, for example, in the case of ELFV and LEVF. In any case, the club always has a place for joint activities, especially self-expression of strong functions and their useful and adequate criticism of these actions. EF Club Strong Emotion and Physics, Weak Will and Logic Representatives: Pushkin (EFVL), Bukharin (EFLV), Borgia (FELV), Dumas (FEVL) Motto: "Masters of seduction" The mos
Read more

SHS Subtypes Reference 2022

Previously I wrote an article on Dual Subtypes which spurred a lot of thought, but it is out of date and our conception of Complex Subtypes has grown a lot since then. There is a lot of material about this which is private and even more in-depth than what I will share here, but I want to share the basics so that people can build on it as they please and in a more up-to-date way. ... First, some basic subtype descriptions, just for the sake of reminder: Dominant subtype: Terminating, Contacting, Connecting -Formula: PF(E) -Role: Ambitious Hastening Leader -Temperament: Linear-Assertive The dominant subtype is distinguished by the following behaviors in the group: -set to compete -often recognized by others as a leader -sets clear goals and is well focused on them -ambitious, although sometimes claims the opposite -agrees only to temporary compromises -needs victory above all else -behaves decisively in difficult situations, shows high performance, indicates what to do and who is going
Read more

My General Understanding of Psychosophy

WORK IN PROGRESS!!! Possible Function Properties: Functions 1 & 4: Result, Effective, Coarse-Grained, Unconscious, Stable, Monologue Functions 2 & 3: Process, Assiduous, Fine-Grained, Conscious, Fussy, Dialogue Functions 1 & 3: Dominant, Motivated, Introverted, Self-Centered Functions 2 & 4: Adaptable, Flexible, Extroverted, Other-Centered Functions 1 & 2: Fearless, Liberated, Natural Functions 3 & 4: Doubting, Conditional, Maturing 1st Function: Result, Effective, Coarse-Grained, Unconscious, Stable, Monologue, Dominant, Motivated, Introverted, Self-Centered, Fearless, Liberated, Natural 2nd Function: Process, Assiduous, Fine-Grained, Conscious, Fussy, Dialogue, Adaptable, Flexible, Extroverted, Other-Centered, Fearless, Liberated, Natural 3rd Function: Process, Assiduous, Fine-Grained, Conscious, Fussy, Dialogue, Dominant, Motivated, Introverted, Self-Centered, Doubting, Conditional, Maturing 4th Function: Result, Effective, Coarse-Grained, Un
Read more