Rationals (NTs)

When someone misunderstands this thread and is mean will they-

  • A, claim all NTs are evil because of a single bad experience or

    Votes: 7 19.4%

  • B, argue that NTs are the master race

    Votes: 5 13.9%

  • C, inevitable joke answer: Xylophone

    Votes: 16 44.4%

  • D, use their unlimited power to edit this poll. Xx, Lady Palpatine

    Votes: 8 22.2%
  • Total voters
    36
James said:
http://www.shakespeare-online.com/quickquotes/quickquotehamletdreamt.html
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
- Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio
your philosophy ] i.e., philosophy (or learning) in general.

The emphasis here should be on "dreamt of", as Hamlet is pointing out how little even the most educated people can explain.

Shakespeare does not expand on the specific nature of Horatio's philosophy, and in the First Folio (1623), the text actually reads "our philosophy." Some editors, such as Dyce, White and Rowe, choose to use "our" instead of "your", believing Hamlet is speaking in general terms about the limitations of human thought.

Have you ever looked at the "anomalous expansion of water" ? It's a curious thing.
Click to expand...
I have looked at the expansion of water, although briefly, I needed an A in chemistry.
 
Have you ever looked at the "anomalous expansion of water" ? It's a curious thing.
Click to expand...

No but it already sounds interesting. I'm a big fan of U of Nottingham's Periodic Table channel :)

And yes astrology describes things at a metaphorical level rather than in concrete, precise terms which is why it may seem to be "wrong" to some people. However it is also true that the metaphorical explanation of what it predicts about a certain period of time for a certain person will transpire even if this is not tracked by a specifically identifiable set of events. A bit like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, we can only get so much detail before things become infinity-unpredictable.
 
James said:
http://www.shakespeare-online.com/quickquotes/quickquotehamletdreamt.html

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
- Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio
your philosophy ] i.e., philosophy (or learning) in general.

The emphasis here should be on "dreamt of", as Hamlet is pointing out how little even the most educated people can explain.

Shakespeare does not expand on the specific nature of Horatio's philosophy, and in the First Folio (1623), the text actually reads "our philosophy." Some editors, such as Dyce, White and Rowe, choose to use "our" instead of "your", believing Hamlet is speaking in general terms about the limitations of human thought.
Click to expand...
Thank-you. I learn better with short-cuts.
 
jkxx said:
No but it already sounds interesting. I'm a big fan of U of Nottingham's Periodic Table channel :)

And yes astrology describes things at a metaphorical level rather than in concrete, precise terms which is why it may seem to be "wrong" to some people. However it is also true that the metaphorical explanation of what it predicts about a certain period of time for a certain person will transpire even if this is not tracked by a specifically identifiable set of events. A bit like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, we can only get so much detail before things become infinity-unpredictable.
Click to expand...
As long as you concede that astrology is metaphorical, I can rest my case.
 
Oh it is 100%. That is the point that tricks people beginning to study it in the beginning too - they think it will reliably predict concrete events but it does not.

When Fs evolve beyond T logic
Click to expand...

 
jkxx said:
Yup.. I am a lover of the original Cosmos series and Sagan specifically (have read most of his books.) Btw he is the one who got me into astrology by being so vehemently against it - just had to check it out for myself. Maybe a clever ploy (he was a really smart guy) to get people to look it up, in disguise. ;)
Click to expand...
Ha. Yeah... I don't doubt that. Of course he'd want you to think for yourself. That's the whole point.
I present to you, Carl Sagan's Famous Fine Art of Baloney Detection:
http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/lehre/pmo/eng/Sagan-Baloney.pdf
He'd want you to apply the baloney toolkit to see where/if it holds up to scrutiny.

AUM said:
I think you may have triggered all T types by saying this lol
Click to expand...
LOL. Nah. We don't get triggered. We just start laughing. ;)
 
@Lady Jolanda, that Bacon quote is hard core and I'm loving it. Will definitely read through this.

Reminded me of this Khalil Gibran quote

Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.


You may give them your love but not your thoughts,
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,
which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them,
but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.


You are the bows from which your children
as living arrows are sent forth.
The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,
and He bends you with His might
that His arrows may go swift and far.
Let your bending in the archer's hand be for gladness;
For even as He loves the arrow that flies,
so He loves also the bow that is stable.
 
One other fact relevant here - the original Cosmos series was released in 1979, err 1980 and developed over the two years before that year, whilst planetoid Chiron was discovered around the same time in November of 1977. [link]
 
We are in the NT thread here so I don't feel as inclined to play nice as anywhere else on the forum.

jkxx said:
The original Cosmos series was released in 1979, err 1980 and developed over the two years before that year, whilst planetoid Chiron was discovered around the same time in November of 1977.
Click to expand...
Cool. Here's another fact. 1977 was also the year the rings of Uranus were discovered.

Your point being?
 
Cosmos was a Chiron-inspired documentary especially evidenced in episode 13, "Who speaks for Earth"

Wow interesting.. because in the discovery chart the sun is conjunct uranus (I did not know that.)
 
jkxx said:
Cosmos was a Chiron-inspired documentary especially evidenced in episode 13, "Who speaks for Earth"
Click to expand...
Oh, awesome! :blush: It's been years since I've seen it, so I forgot about that.

As for the other statement. I have no idea what that means, sorry.
 
Likewise, I just had Chiron transits which reminded me of it in a more meaningful way. Though I still have the collector's edition DVDs so can indulge maybe this weekend... it never really lost its magic.

Hmm it means something like Chiron would lead the way to discovering something new about Uranus (being the rings) but I don't want to bore you with all that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top