|
Post by vincent on Mar 27, 2021 13:02:02 GMT -5
Btw this
is also related to the difference between people and things i mentioned yesterday.
I need some time to articulate it, but i will come back to this soon.
tbcd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2021 13:21:39 GMT -5
It was about how frame slot demonstrates the fact it's a frame slot with some exceptional demonstrated(not slot just what the word means) "magic", that still remains implicit.
|
|
|
Post by vincent on Mar 27, 2021 13:41:45 GMT -5
It was about how frame slot demonstrates the fact it's a frame slot with some exceptional demonstrated(not slot just what the word means) "magic", that still remains implicit.
Thanks for reminding me the context @ash
Yes, it was slot specific indeed.
And about the way other people perceive Tx dom.
And while the first thing i said there that Tx dom "magic" was about grasping systems, i later made it about "complexity vs simplicity" indeed. Which is wrong. Even in that context.
So i can see how you got that idea. My bad.
Another thing is, i got pretty sloppy, generalizing too much, and the difference between Ti-Fe axis and Fe-Ti axis got lost in the process. And it really shouldn't.
|
|
|
Post by vincent on Mar 27, 2021 13:54:11 GMT -5
Well, i don't remember in which context i said that, nor in what terms i said it.
Probably in a conversation that was going way too fast and/or way too far.
In any case, it would have been wrong.
It seems to me that Tx is about systems and systematicity, while Fx is way more non-systematic in nature.
But it doesn't mean Tx is necessarily complex, let alone more complex than Fx.
Well, I'd go so far as to say that the differentiator for Ti and Te IS that Ti is about complexification and Te is about simplification of systems. Te just wants the systems to work, within alloted resources (which include time); Ti wants to know how and why a system works, what a system even is...and wants no stone unturned, the more stones, the more turning, the better. This dichotomy gets a little funky with TiSe because it's Ne PolR (which eschews the new) and Se has a forward thrust with, if not tunnel vision, a certain limitation on peripheral vision in order to just keep forging forward. And so the combination of the two can give TiSe a certain tunnel vision. But in its own mind, TiSe is still leaving no stone unturned--until/unless it finds the project to forge ahead with, and then it resembles (and can be mistyped for) Te lead. But to 'qua' things again, Ti qua Ti is, I think, complexification (for understanding, theory) and Te qua Te is its simplification (for application, praxis).
Yes, i completely agree with this.
The dichotomy also gets a little funky with TeSi, for symetric reasons. Ni polr won't collapse, Si aux will "accumulate", which can make the simplifying nature of their frame less obvious.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Mar 27, 2021 14:09:48 GMT -5
The dichotomy also gets a little funky with TeSi, for symetric reasons. Ni polr won't collapse, Si aux will "accumulate", which can make the simplifying nature of their frame less obvious.
Mmm...yah...as long as you let 'em just keep yakking...but once they have to put it 'on paper', not so much.
|
|
|
Post by vincent on Mar 27, 2021 14:14:15 GMT -5
Mmm...yah...as long as you let 'em just keep yakking...but once they have to put it 'on paper', not so much. Yes indeed. Exactly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2021 14:16:51 GMT -5
But FeSi is also Si aux and Ni PoLR.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2021 14:23:57 GMT -5
Also, there are still systems of humanity. That is a Tx of humans. Therefore, there must be an Fx of things.
|
|
|
Post by vincent on Mar 27, 2021 14:26:06 GMT -5
But FeSi is also Si aux and Ni PoLR.
Yeah, and they do quite a lot of yakking too.
But why "but" ?
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Mar 27, 2021 14:29:52 GMT -5
But FeSi is also Si aux and Ni PoLR. And FeSi at average levels ignores whatever it doesn't want to see, regardless of how it 'slots', and everything is great (especially the FeSi for telling you so), because God (this group/this relationship/this project/this planet, etc.) is Love.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Mar 27, 2021 14:34:42 GMT -5
Which^, interestingly, TeSi does too--the God is Love part (we're all born for a reason, there are no coincidences, etc.) but since they're also so interested in praxis, it tends to be more grounded at average levels.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Mar 27, 2021 14:42:10 GMT -5
In other words, both TeSi and FeSi at average levels become over-ebullient about Ne, and so their discourse can be very expansive (more so the FeSi's oc) but when you scratch the surface, you realize it's standing on very simple ground, and the quasi-mysticism that often comes with it is an avoidance of the PolR.
|
|
|
Post by vincent on Mar 27, 2021 14:43:04 GMT -5
Also, there are still systems of humanity. That is a Tx of humans. Therefore, there must be an Fx of things.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by that.
And depending on what you mean by that, i'm not sure i even agree that there is indeed "systems of humanity".
There might be some kind of "overlap" between functions based on their type (as in "interfacing is interfacing", and "deliberating is deliberating) But it doesn't mean the domains themselves overlap in the same way.
Anyway, give me some time to articulate my thought on this"people vs things" dichotomy, which is already not quite right btw.
Then will see about that.
|
|
|
Post by vincent on Mar 27, 2021 14:54:15 GMT -5
In other words, both TeSi and FeSi at average levels become over-ebullient about Ne, and so their discourse can be very expansive (more so the FeSi's oc) but when you scratch the surface, you realize it's standing on very simple ground, and the quasi-mysticism that often comes with it is an avoidance of the PolR.
Yes, i absolutely agree.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2021 18:30:18 GMT -5
But FeSi is also Si aux and Ni PoLR.
Yeah, and they do quite a lot of yakking too.
But why "but" ?
Maybe it pertained to the conversation of sensor Tx doms(which is already a fishy exclusion), but my emphasis was on the fact that it's not special to a particular type, just to the Nx PoLR ones, so why only include an example, if you can say the whole group.
|
|