Phenomenology

[Ok08Y567gA]

Can you elaborate on your personal feelings about this?

I personally would prefer for human cognition to be objective and without the influence of emotions, drives, and instincts, but that just doesn't seem true given my reflections on human history, study of human sciences like anthropology and neuroscience as well as philosophy.

How does your own awareness of this shape your own views.

My own views about what?

 

[Wyote]

I personally would prefer for human cognition to be objective and without the influence of emotions

My apologies for being a permenant headache for you

My own views about what?

I left it open for you to decide whatever feels pertinent.
Nothing or everything is fine.

 

[Ok08Y567gA]

My apologies for being a permenant headache for you

You're not a permanent headache. I have emotions too and all my long-term girlfriends have been feeling types: ISFJ, INFJ, ENFP, ENFJ, and ESFP, so I'm okay with emotions. Why I would prefer for human cognition to objective is because that would make science and philosophy easier and our thinking more reliable. Most of the methodology and technical apparatus that belong to both are checks and balances or measures for dealing with the reality that human cognition cannot be completely objective, but I personally value intuition and creativity more than objectivity, yet our lack of objectivity proves an issue for not doing things that don't completely revolve around intuitive and creative faculties like philosophy which I happen to value.

I left it open for you to decide whatever feels pertinent.
Nothing or everything is fine.

I see, I generally try to spend more time observing, exploring, and learning things than I do taking action, but this is because I value accuracy and efficiency in thought and action. Does this answer your question?

 

[aeon]

human cognition to be objective and without the influence of emotions, drives, and instincts

Let it be known, I choose death.

Hell to the No,
Ian

 

[Wyote]

You're not a permanent headache. I have emotions too and all my girlfriends have been feeling types: ISFJ, INFJ, ENFP, and ESFP, so I'm okay with emotions. Why I would prefer for human cognition to objective is because that would make science and philosophy easier and our thinking more reliable. Most of the methodology and technical apparatus that belongs to both are checks and balances or measures to dealing with the reality that human cognition cannot be completely objective, but I personally value intuition and creativity more than objectivity, yet our lack objectivity proves and issue for not doing things that don't completely revolve around intuitive and creative faculties.

I was being a little comical, I understand

Does this answer your question?

Yes you are INTJ after all, but also no because it doesn't say anything personal.
I could easily say the same about myself.

 

[Ok08Y567gA]

Let it be known, I choose death.

Hell to the No,
Ian

Well, I admire your conviction and aspire to emulate it.

 

[Ok08Y567gA]

Yes you are INTJ after all, but also no because it doesn't say anything personal.
I could easily say the same about myself.

Well, you have to ask me a more specific question to get something personal about me out of me given that's not where I start from in my thinking.

 

[Wyote]

Well, you have to ask me a more specific question to get something personal about me out of me given that's not where I start from in my thinking.

Noted

 

[aeon]

all my long-term girlfriends have been feeling types: ISFJ, INFJ, ENFP, ENFJ, and ESFP

That’s quite the sampler platter.

Lulz,
Ian

 

[Ok08Y567gA]

That’s quite the sampler platter.

Lulz,
Ian

It was a delicious platter at that .

 

[Rit4lin]

My apologies for being a permenant headache for you

all my long-term girlfriends have been feeling types: ISFJ, INFJ

 

[Wyote]

Based on a few degrees of separation, we may already have

 

[aeon]

When I was young and unrepentantly horny, I had a dalliance long-term relationship with an an ISTJ.

An ISTJ.

What was I thinking?

narrator: he wasn’t.

Care-Free Days,
Ian

 

[Ok08Y567gA]

When I was young and unrepentantly horny, I had a dalliance long-term relationship with an an ISTJ.

An ISTJ.

What was I thinking?

narrator: he wasn’t.

Care-Free Days,
Ian

What was that like? I have yet to date another thinking type and I don't anticipate I ever will. I've only have had some wild and short-lived flings here and there with ENTJ, INTP, ISTP, and ESTP women.

 

[aeon]

What was that like? I have yet to date another thinking type and I don't anticipate I ever will. I've only have had some wild and short-lived flings here and there with ENTJ, INTP, and ISTP, and ESTP women.

I’ll just say that at a certain point, I realized that for me, xNFx only.

Heh,
Ian

 

[Ok08Y567gA]

Here is a great lecture on the founder of Phenomenology Edmund Husserl, one of my favorite philosophers:

Note: I am not Platonist though I'm a mathematician

 

[Ok08Y567gA]

Another great lecture on Heidegger's Being and Time:

 

[Ok08Y567gA]

Being In the world with others is what our cognition is about to think of it outside this context is to misunderstand what it is for people to perceive.

 

[Ren]

Another great lecture on Heidegger's Being and Time:

I love Michael Sugrue -- I think I've literally watched all of his lectures and Darren Staloff's as well, lol.

That said, I wonder if he's not being uncharitable to Heidegger. To claim that Heidegger's Being is close to the Christian God, when for Heidegger Being is historical, temporal, and finite...
I thought God was supposed to be eternal and infinite and stuff xD

 

[Ren]

I tend to gravitate towards phenomenologists that depart from the subject/object distinction. Heidegger, and Merleau-Ponty as well (his phenomenology of embodiment is really intriguing).

Husserl and Sartre still feel too Cartesian to me, though I'd take Husserl over Sartre any day.