Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 72 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
754 Posts
I don't see why it wouldn't help. It requires analytical thinking and theorizing, traits common to Ti. Many philosophers were Ti users. But it's not the only way. The goal of Ti is to create a single coherent theory in which everything corresponds and wants to compare the compatibility of already working systems. But I suppose you could do this within philosophy alone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
754 Posts
:dry:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
I would agree that reading philosophers typed as Ti users might be best, even INFJs and ISFJs. When you're trying to make sense of a theory in a certain context or foresee it's impact you're flexing the Ti and Ni muscles as an ISTP.
 

·
私を愛して
ESTJ; LSE; 3w4; Sp/Sx
Joined
·
14,683 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: BigApplePi

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,209 Posts
Maybe at first, but being able to make sense of writing that isn't Ti dominant in nature will ultimately strengthen Ti more than if it were easy to make sense of using Ti.
Uhm, OK sure. But why do you think that Ti dominant writing is easier to make sense of?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,042 Posts
Yes, but avoid Hume.

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to take Hegel and translate it to your average person in the most simplest terms possible.
He said he wants to develop Ti, not kill himself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
593 Posts
I would agree that reading philosophers typed as Ti users might be best, even INFJs and ISFJs. When you're trying to make sense of a theory in a certain context or foresee it's impact you're flexing the Ti and Ni muscles as an ISTP.
I think that depends on what you mean by "foresee" it's impact. If someone uses Ti heavily in philosophy I doubt you'd be able to see their Ni at all since it is simply logical steps. You could MAYBE AND I MEAN A VERY LOOSE MABYE see the Ni in where their brain is going, but it will be nearly entirely comprised of Ti linear logical steps and the "foreseeing" from Ti is often just simply logical conclusions disguised as foresight
 

·
私を愛して
ESTJ; LSE; 3w4; Sp/Sx
Joined
·
14,683 Posts

Not even close to being correct.
Learning philosophy from what I'm aware of is looking at different perspectives that have their own set of principles to determine how they should live their life.
Looking at the principle area will shed light into different principles (Ti) however unless you're actively using those principles for yourself then you are essentially looking at different perspectives which could be related to Ni, more generally intuition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Not even close to being correct.
Learning philosophy from what I'm aware of is looking at different perspectives that have their own set of principles to determine how they should live their life.
Looking at the principle area will shed light into different principles (Ti) however unless you're actively using those principles for yourself then you are essentially looking at different perspectives which could be related to Ni, more generally intuition.
I see
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts
It's not clear what you mean by 'strengthen Ti', so I couldn't tell you whether studying philosophy would achieve this result.

Yes, but avoid Hume.
I don't think that this is right. The Scottish Enlightenment was extremely important to philosophy. Hume was unquestionably a genius, and his ideas remain very influential to this day.

You should avoid most post-Kantian philosophy, such as Hegel, Nietzsche, and various French and German charlatans (French Postmodernism; The Frankfurt School). Some of these people (a minority) made some interesting observations, but they pretty much never provide a logical argument to justify what they're saying. The latter is what you're after, which is why you shouldn't read them.

I recommend studying Philosophy of Language. There's a good introduction by Alex Miller that also covers some of the basic logics used in contemporary philosophy (propositional; predicate), which will be useful.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,042 Posts
I don't think that this is right. The Scottish Enlightenment was extremely important to philosophy. Hume was unquestionably a genius, and his ideas remain very influential to this day.
I didn't mean it in that way. Hume is one of my favorites. It's just that he's not the one you should be looking for to develop your Ti. In fact, once you read Hume you'd start to think philosophy is a waste of time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts
I didn't mean it in that way. Hume is one of my favorites. It's just that he's not the one you should be looking for to develop your Ti. In fact, once you read Hume you'd start to think philosophy is a waste of time.
Firstly, why would Hume be bad for developing one's Ti?

Secondly, why would reading Hume make one think that philosophy is a waste of time?
 
1 - 20 of 72 Posts
Top