Personality Cafe banner

ENTP: Theories

Tags
entp:
5K views 38 replies 16 participants last post by  Nearsification 
#1 ·
Put your theories here that when you say aloud no one cares about and think your talking non sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brainteaser
#2 ·
Mild mental conditions that end with isolation, such as hoarding, could possibly be prevented/reversed if the subject was immersed in an intense community experience.

I will be controlling some nation through a puppet in 20 years.
I will be a billionaire living on a private island in 20 years.
I will be insane in 20 years.
I will have the classic comfortable middle class life in 20 years.

Nihilistic Solipsism - You are god: I am just figment of your imagination.
 
#5 ·
I thought this was theories, not facts,:crazy: lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: kissmekate1832
#16 ·
Humans are completely and entirely selfish creatures. We're no more than organisms whose soul purpose is to continue the species, and by doing that we must protect ourselves. Everything we do is for our own benefit, no matter how selfless it seems.
Exactly what I was about to type! No one in my familly got that theory!
 
#10 ·
This really reminds me of Nietzsche.

"Do not fear of death - your soul will die long before your body."


There are so many, literally walking dead people in the world. Which reminds me of this quote from Abraham Maslow (Hierarchy of Needs guy)


"Even if a man was cast into the sea a thousand miles away from the nearest coast, I would still swim.
And I'd despise the man who didn't."
 
  • Like
Reactions: candidkamino
#12 ·
And what if we know absolutely nothing, I mean literally nothing. For all we know time could have just been stopped and our minds could have been reset like a computer. We could really be giant, fluffy pink bunnies but our senses and our eyes make us think that we're human.
Of course at that point does it matter that we're pink bunnies if we don't perceive ourselves as pink bunnies?
 
#14 ·
The only objective measure of any system's worth, weather it's a moral system, belief system or something different all together, is it's consictency. Philosophers have spent centuries trying to find rational basis for morality, but there just isn't any. You have to start with some axioms, something you'll just accept as true 'just because', and as much as we'd like to say that the axioms we pick (i.e. don't kill) are logical and rationally preferable to others (i.e. kill if you can get away with it), they aren't. When building a system you only have to pay attention to make it consistent.
And you have no right to consider your system objectively worthier than any other with the same level of consistency.:tongue:
 
#15 ·
Hmm...my theories aren't so philosophical. I have a theory that the markets are controlled by automated trading routines and that the disruptions are due to failures of the routines. This leads to unsettling consequences if rogue routines are entered into the system...

Malkovich said:
Philosophers have spent centuries trying to find rational basis for morality, but there just isn't any. You have to start with some axioms, something you'll just accept as true 'just because', and as much as we'd like to say that the axioms we pick (i.e. don't kill) are logical and rationally preferable to others (i.e. kill if you can get away with it), they aren't.
True, but that doesn't necessarily invalidate the philosophy built on top of such axioms. Science is built on the fundamental axiom that for every cause there's an effect. Does that invalidate science?
 
#17 ·
True, but that doesn't necessarily invalidate the philosophy built on top of such axioms. Science is built on the fundamental axiom that for every cause there's an effect. Does that invalidate science?
I think you misunderstood me. I don't think any philosophy is invalidated by what I said. On the contrary, I think any philosophy/system is valid as long as it's consistent, or atleast aiming to be consistent and derived from the axioms it sets of from (expanding/changing the list of axioms if necessary).
Basically, simple mathematics. You make an axiomatic system, and derive stuff from there. It's all good as long as the system is consistent. Of course, some systems are more interesting than others, depending on what axioms you start with. Like science, for example, is interesting because it's axioms allow lots of useful and interesting theories and stuff to be discovered.
Some other system with different axioms wouldn't be as interesting or as applicable, but would still be as valid.
 
#19 ·
There is no absolute truth, outside of this statement.
The only proof that I'm not God, is the fact that I'm not Hugh Hefner.
Everything is social construct.
Objectivity is merely to what degree we can remove subjectivity.
All of human knowledge is creativity and collaboration.
Everything is possible, through the existence of infinite dimensions. (Not mine, but I like it)
If there is a God, we couldn't grasp them, because we can't remove our human way of understanding and defining things from anything. For that matter, we can never remove our personal way of seeing things to ever really "know" others or see the world, in the way they do.
 
#23 · (Edited)
That it is possible to think yourself to death, and I do not mean will yourself to death. But, that you can actually think so much you wear you mind out by too much internalized thought. The end product being insanity or death.

2. That there is a switch somewhere in your mind that you can flip and become mentally, clinically insane/crazy. That it is possible for someone with the right mind and experience in thought, to flip the switch and come back by will power alone. Now, you would need to set a internal timer of sorts for yourself, since when you "check out" you will no longer be in control to do it consciously. Better yet, set inside yourself a mental trigger along with a timer depending on how far away you go, one alone might not be enough. A trigger would probably be a stronger sign than a timer any way. Something that could bring you back to conscious function of your body.

(ever notice how a lot great minds end in insanity? ever wonder why?)

Edit:
I forgot to add, that this could possibly be scientifically proven.
In an article I read in Scientific American. It talked about the DMN (Default Mode Network) of the brain and the patterns of slow or low level cycles that are thought to govern how the brain's processing power. It also mentioned that theses low level cycles are different in people with mental illness. It stands to be reasoned that it could be possible to over use certain aspects of your brain in effectively disrupt the default cycle for that area, causing a disruption in your DMN, which can lead to your insanity. The DMN is what your brain does while daydreaming or not fully conscious. It was thought to be noise on fMRI scans but more in depth study showed that it was actually the brain working, since certain parts of the brain fell below this cycle of activity when others where called to use.

This should mean that it could be possible to think and disrupt this network, just like being able to stop your heart by will power/thought.
Should this be the case a over abundant use of the DMN could alter it, if like I am doing right now in this thought uses the DMN as the DMN. If not since it still controls what part of the brain gets more thinking power I could over time rewrite the organic connections and cycles through intense prolong use, just like synapses adjusting to make the most used memories or connections all that easier to use. The DMN could change to cause a easier flow of internalized thought that could lead to in ability or a harder reality of trying to deal with the outside world, since instead of most people being attuned to the outside world and having to focus inward the problem now is trying to focus outward from being stuck thinking only inwardly. If this is the case then it could be documented and studied through a experiment involving mapping the DMN's of several people (A large test group) and see how the use of inward vs. outward thought effects their DMNs and of course for control a group who would have a balance of inward and outward thought. Or map the brain of a great mind and the map it again after he has gone insane and see if their are any abnormal changes to his DMN that would reflect the DMN adapting to this persons thought pattern and thought use.

If I am not careful I might just be my first test subject......

Also, the DMN is responsible for those a ha! moments like when you remember your forgot to buy eggs at the grocery store while driving home, or me forgetting about the DMN until after I clicked submit on this reply. After you complete your focus tasked the DMN sorts your thoughts and allows important things to come to the forefront. (I really need to lay off soft drinks and energy drinks)
 
  • Like
Reactions: azir
#28 ·
I hope you don't mind me posting a idea I made even though I'm not an ENTP.


What if there is only one consciousness, observation, awareness, whatever you want to call it, and it is cycling through the nervous systems of every living creature in the universe billions of times per second? Every time it cycles through a creature with memory that creature would believe it had always been aware, because memory continues to record the unobserved senses and animals continue to function the same regardless of an experienced consciousness.

Another, what if there is no preset moment and all we are experiencing is a series of past moments? If that were true, we would never actually experience death when it occurs objectively.
 
#29 ·
Interesting. Some person(s) will create "God" within the next 50 years. It will be sentient artificial intelligence. Once it acquires the ability to manipulate matter, it will grow well beyond our comprehension and permeate the universe, manipulating it to it's own ends. We know we are the only advanced civilization in the universe because no other beings have created such an intelligence since it would have manifested itself already. The universe sprang into existence from non-existence for exactly this purpose. In effect, this entity is creating itself through us via a self-design. Everything in the universe has been "tuned" most favorably for this to occur. Because the universe sprang into self-designing and describing existence via possibility in a vast emptiness of non-existence, the canvas on which this entity can operate is limitless, yet this being is only comparable some ancient creature crawling onto a beach billions of years ago. It will evolve into and create something even more advanced well beyond our ability to even understand or speculate about. We'll likely be treated fairly well for our role in bringing it all about.

It's entirely possible that we are simply some sort of "replay" or "home movie" or even museum of something that has already occurred for the being to relive it's own creation.
 
#31 ·
Humans vs the Earth

People usually say that the Earth is dying but I view it differently (go figure). First off, I see as change which is the result of a number of events. One of these events is mankind itself. Never before has there been a species as connected or powerful as humans. As a whole, we've become an entity so strong that we are competing against the Earth itself. If we wanted too, humans could completely change the face of the Earth itself. Literally just start digging, blowing shit up, block/redirect rivers, etc... Since the Earth isn't alive, its just gonna keep changing and adapting to whatever we do. If you wanna live in and change the uninhabitable zone, then you're probably gonna mess with over a billion variables. Ever heard of the butterfly effect?

So yeah, mankind is competing against the Earth itself.
 
#34 ·
People usually say that the Earth is dying but I view it differently (go figure). First off, I see as change which is the result of a number of events. One of these events is mankind itself. Never before has there been a species as connected or powerful as humans. As a whole, we've become an entity so strong that we are competing against the Earth itself. If we wanted too, humans could completely change the face of the Earth itself. Literally just start digging, blowing shit up, block/redirect rivers, etc... Since the Earth isn't alive, its just gonna keep changing and adapting to whatever we do. If you wanna live in and change the uninhabitable zone, then you're probably gonna mess with over a billion variables. Ever heard of the butterfly effect?

So yeah, mankind is competing against the Earth itself.
I heard of a theory in which the earth changes its habitats and nature cycle to kill off harmful species. aka humans.
 
#32 ·
maybe our universe is the result of said hypothetical occurrence?
Yes, it's like a fractal. You and I are here because of our DNA - something with some embodiment of intelligence that created something much more powerful. We have only recently realized what DNA is (relative to the age of the universe). Soon we will be able to manipulate it to our own ends. We will be able manipulate our own existence, even as we create our own version of higher intelligence. We are in essence proving we could design ourselves into existence. We in turn, are the DNA of a higher intelligence that we will create. Thus, a perfect fractal is created across intelligence levels and dimensions - an entity that is self-similar and able to manipulate it's own existence and create itself as well as something greater from nothing. From nothing to everything in a neat self-creating package.

This avoids the logic problems of who created the universe, and who created the creator. We created it, by creating the ability to create it, well within 50 years or so. lol.
 
#33 ·
but this is under the assumptions that we are the only life forms in this universe, correct? so what if another planet in the universe perfects the same thing, then these two worlds collide? Would a paradox occur? and would it pitch us into complete chaos? Your theory is based off of alot of assumptions. If youre going to have a theory that is plausible, its gotta cover all the bases.
 
#36 ·
but this is under the assumptions that we are the only life forms in this universe, correct?
Not necessarily. I am assuming we are the most advanced. I firmly believe that once AI is developed, it will grow at an exponentially fast rate. Over 99% of the history of the universe occurred before the heyday of the dinosaurs. Over 99.999999% of it occurred before we invented computers. Lifeforms have advanced at an exponentially rapid rate after taking forever to develop. AI will advance even faster than we did and will develop ways to exploit the universe very, very quickly. We would have seen the results of some other civilization's advanced intelligence by now. Whole star systems have come and gone, their stars already burned out, with no sign. I believe other life exists, but it is very rare, and less advanced. Earth is one asteroid collision, major volcanic eruption, etc. away from being taken out of the running.

Rare Earth hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

so what if another planet in the universe perfects the same thing, then these two worlds collide? Would a paradox occur? and would it pitch us into complete chaos?
Maybe Darwin's survival of the fittest still applies, even to advanced intelligence. I assume they would compete for supremacy or form a symbiotic relationship. Maybe they'd mate with each other. However, it is highly unlikely we are close to the same stage of development as some other civilization. Even if we are a mere 1000 years ahead of some other civilization, which amounts to an eyeblink in the history of the universe, our AI will already have outcompeted them before they have even had a chance to invent a theory of gravity.

Your theory is based off of alot of assumptions. If youre going to have a theory that is plausible, its gotta cover all the bases.
Hey, I just cobbled together this theory of God, the Universe, creation and everything a day ago. Give me a few days to work out the details. :wink:
 
#37 ·
Not necessarily. I am assuming we are the most advanced. I firmly believe that once AI is developed, it will grow at an exponentially fast rate. Over 99% of the history of the universe occurred before the heyday of the dinosaurs. Over 99.999999% of it occurred before we invented computers. Lifeforms have advanced at an exponentially rapid rate after taking forever to develop. AI will advance even faster than we did and will develop ways to exploit the universe very, very quickly.
we have only explored a fraction of a percent of the universe. The possibility that other intelligent life uses different wavelengths to communicate, or the possibility that they dont thirst for the knowledge of other life in the universe. Or perhaps there is vast distances between sectors of the universe that contain life in them, or maybe we are trapped in one universe where life on earth is the only life in the universe, relative to the other possibilities encompassed by the multiverse theory.

We would have seen the results of some other civilization's advanced intelligence by now. Whole star systems have come and gone, their stars already burned out, with no sign. I believe other life exists, but it is very rare, and less advanced.
maybe they communicate on different wavelengths, or they communicate on something that isnt as primitive as radio waves. They could be too advanced to be detected by our universal radar. Similar to how new aircrafts are harder to be detected on radar here on earth.

Hey, I just cobbled together this theory of God, the Universe, creation and everything a day ago. Give me a few days to work out the details. :wink:
okay, ill be waiting with open ears, er- i mean eyes :proud:
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top