|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 16:36:08 GMT -5
Post by Roshan on Jun 5, 2020 16:36:08 GMT -5
The square of the hypotenuse of a right triangle is the sum of the squares of the lengths of the other two sides.I assume the Pythagorean Theorem is Ti > Te? Is it possible to distinguish and elucidate what would be Te about it?
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 17:44:14 GMT -5
Post by vincent on Jun 5, 2020 17:44:14 GMT -5
I'm not sure it's possible to measure that and disentangle it.
The formulation of the underlying equation might be mostly Ti
but the initial process that led to it was probably mostly Te. I don't think that, at the time it was first formulated, this theorem was a conclusion logically derived from a set of premises and axioms.
And if i recall correctly, the oldest proofs were quite heavily based on manipulating and interfacing with 2d objects to demonstrate it.
But i guess visual Ti could do that too...
Nowadays, i'm sure that very abstract Ti proofs have been given though.
Some of the mathematical objects involved might also be Ni related. If the (neo)platonician ontology of mathematics happens to be right.
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 17:57:16 GMT -5
vincent likes this
Post by Roshan on Jun 5, 2020 17:57:16 GMT -5
I don't think that, at the time it was first formulated, this theorem was a conclusion logically derived from a set of premises and axioms.
So if it had been it would have been more Ti. So that means the very heavy Ti user goes around articulating these premises and axioms to zerself and building on them until they feel they've reached a conclusion? These articulations are all perceived as specific discrete ideas connected to other ideas and the focus of the mind is largely upon them? 'Pure Ti' will have little to do with the outside world? '
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 17:58:48 GMT -5
vincent likes this
Post by Roshan on Jun 5, 2020 17:58:48 GMT -5
#2 That's why Ramana Maharshi turned inward to Nan Yar?
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 17:59:47 GMT -5
Roshan likes this
Post by vincent on Jun 5, 2020 17:59:47 GMT -5
I don't think that, at the time it was first formulated, this theorem was a conclusion logically derived from a set of premises and axioms.
So if it had been it would have been more Ti. So that means the very heavy Ti user goes around articulating these premises and axioms to zerself and building on them until they feel they've reached a conclusion? These articulations are all perceived as specific discrete ideas connected to other ideas and the focus of the mind is largely upon them? 'Pure Ti' will have little to do with the outside world?
That sounds right yes.
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 18:01:17 GMT -5
Roshan likes this
Post by vincent on Jun 5, 2020 18:01:17 GMT -5
#2 That's why Ramana Maharshi turned inward to Nan Yar? That sounds also right.
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 18:08:45 GMT -5
vincent likes this
Post by Roshan on Jun 5, 2020 18:08:45 GMT -5
Okay, but people 'like' him are going beyond forms, beyond the phenomenal So you would say Ti is itself not about forms, it about 'abstract concepts'? I'm not sure I understand what 'abstract' means. I think it has two uses. One is what exists before form, the other, what is extrapolated from form.
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 18:09:58 GMT -5
vincent likes this
Post by Roshan on Jun 5, 2020 18:09:58 GMT -5
#2 I guess they're two sides of the same coin though.
|
|
|
Post by vincent on Jun 5, 2020 18:16:11 GMT -5
I think both Ni and Ti deal with abstraction (or, say, the meta-physical realm), but in a different way.
I think forms are actually a perceiving axis thing. And i suspect mathematical entities like numbers, triangle, square, are largely intuitive notions. Ni things.
And i think Ti is basically the articulating function that builds models, theories and systems of higher complexity, linking those intuitive items together.
If that makes sense.
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 18:19:47 GMT -5
Roshan likes this
Post by vincent on Jun 5, 2020 18:19:47 GMT -5
btw, if we are right that Ramana Maharshi was INTP, he wouldn't just be Ti dom.
He would also have Ni 6th highly integrated.
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 18:22:48 GMT -5
Post by Roshan on Jun 5, 2020 18:22:48 GMT -5
So was he accessing intuitive forms in that cave of his vincent?
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 18:25:40 GMT -5
Roshan likes this
Post by vincent on Jun 5, 2020 18:25:40 GMT -5
So was he accessing intuitive forms in that cave of his vincent ? I think so yes. And that's the irony of it.
Plato thought we had to go out of it. But then he was probably not Ni 6th himself. Socrates probably was though.
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 18:29:27 GMT -5
vincent likes this
Post by Roshan on Jun 5, 2020 18:29:27 GMT -5
Okay, thank you vincent . I don't have any more questions for now. I need to think about this. If you have something to add though please do, but carefully.
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 18:33:42 GMT -5
Post by vincent on Jun 5, 2020 18:33:42 GMT -5
I'm gonna expand on Socrates and Plato types at some point, and the difficulty to discern between Socrates voice and Plato's dramaturgy in the texts, but that's for another time and another thread.
|
|
|
"T"
Jun 5, 2020 18:49:25 GMT -5
Post by Roshan on Jun 5, 2020 18:49:25 GMT -5
|
|