Greetings.

To put labels. Ignorance is inefficient. It ties up to many resources. Corporate, money + time, as
well as human resources. For everything I do not understand, there is a reason. In combating,
& overriding ignorance I grow. That is I grow wiser & more efficient. To go off tangent.
Oh, by the way, you asked how & why earlier? You stimulate thought.
To move from communication to philosophy and cognitive science. Unless the body is being
directly affected or impacted, if one experiences a negative emotion, there is an internal
disturbance. Do you know of cognitive science & therapy principles? The point is (1). I experience
a negative emotion, in say communicating. Is it that (2). I am being attacked, (3). A trigger of
a fear (4). a sense of loss of self esteem? It is ignorance in the truest sense of not understanding
self or the other. This is how we can grow to be more rational,and compassionate human beings.
The emotion alerted us to an internal disturbance. We correct the internal disturbance. Grow.
Ignorance was meant to propel us to understand.

Indeed I didn't.

In as far as banter beïng whatever is without pragmatic purpose to the audiënce, then it is an affliction on all types, but more common amongst some than others.

T'was not an accusation but an observation. And intuïtiveness is something I have yet to appreciate.

lightsun wrote:

To put labels. Ignorance is inefficient. It ties up to many resources. Corporate, money + time, as
well as human resources. For everything I do not understand, there is a reason. In combating,
& overriding ignorance I grow. That is I grow wiser & more efficient. To go off tangent.
Oh, by the way, you asked how & why earlier? You stimulate thought.
To move from communication to philosophy and cognitive science. Unless the body is being
directly affected or impacted, if one experiences a negative emotion, there is an internal
disturbance. Do you know of cognitive science & therapy principles? The point is (1). I experience
a negative emotion, in say communicating. Is it that (2). I am being attacked, (3). A trigger of
a fear (4). a sense of loss of self esteem? It is ignorance in the truest sense of not understanding
self or the other. This is how we can grow to be more rational,and compassionate human beings.
The emotion alerted us to an internal disturbance. We correct the internal disturbance. Grow.
Ignorance was meant to propel us to understand.

I'm afraid you do seem to want to destroy the human. Irrationality and a lack of compassion can lead to desirable results. I'm afraid that you might lead yourself to received wisdom.

Disappropriated wrote:

lightsun wrote:

To put labels. Ignorance is inefficient. It ties up to many resources. Corporate, money + time, as
well as human resources. For everything I do not understand, there is a reason. In combating,
& overriding ignorance I grow. That is I grow wiser & more efficient. To go off tangent.
Oh, by the way, you asked how & why earlier? You stimulate thought.
To move from communication to philosophy and cognitive science. Unless the body is being
directly affected or impacted, if one experiences a negative emotion, there is an internal
disturbance. Do you know of cognitive science & therapy principles? The point is (1). I experience
a negative emotion, in say communicating. Is it that (2). I am being attacked, (3). A trigger of
a fear (4). a sense of loss of self esteem? It is ignorance in the truest sense of not understanding
self or the other. This is how we can grow to be more rational,and compassionate human beings.
The emotion alerted us to an internal disturbance. We correct the internal disturbance. Grow.
Ignorance was meant to propel us to understand.

I'm afraid you do seem to want to destroy the human. Irrationality and a lack of compassion can lead to desirable results. I'm afraid that you might lead yourself to received wisdom.

Irrationality doesn't bother me too much. I kinda like Chaos and all, but praytell what does a lack of compassion offer you? AS an off-note, you do not lack compassion. It's kind of intuitively obvious.

Feeling Good, David D. Burns, (1980).
A New Guide to Rational Living, Albert Ellis, (1975).

Books on the subject. I go with intentionality. You are not being malicious. You are not intentionally
trying to hurt someone. These should be obvious. You do come across as insensitive. You don't
come across as a listener. You are short, curt, & to the point. To a feeler. One can get offended.
Hurt. And possibly defensive. I say these as observations. I know you take it, process. It is
either correct or not. I can not say these things to a feeler. To a thinker, these are observational
facts. Or not. To a feeler, these comments would be rude. Even style of writing. When I write to
you, it is short, or shorter and to the point. When I write my natural style. Sentences are longer.
More descriptive. Use of metaphors.

To me, a lack of compassion offers clarity and an absence of influence from the non-empirical.

As an off note, I don't, no. But I'm trying to fix that .

lightsun wrote:

Feeling Good, David D. Burns, (1980).
A New Guide to Rational Living, Albert Ellis, (1975).

Books on the subject. I go with intentionality. You are not being malicious. You are not intentionally
trying to hurt someone. These should be obvious. You do come across as insensitive. You don't
come across as a listener. You are short, curt, & to the point. To a feeler. One can get offended.
Hurt. And possibly defensive. I say these as observations. I know you take it, process. It is
either correct or not. I can not say these things to a feeler. To a thinker, these are observational
facts. Or not. To a feeler, these comments would be rude. Even style of writing. When I write to
you, it is short, or shorter and to the point. When I write my natural style. Sentences are longer.
More descriptive. Use of metaphors.

It might be more efficient to speak to me as the INFP? you are, then what gets lost in translation is more apparent: as opposed to providing a translation beforehand.

The biggest problem I have with your communication at current is that it appears to unnecessarily split ideas into separate sentences. e.g:

lightsun wrote:

When I write to
you, it is short, or shorter and to the point. When I write my natural style. Sentences are longer.
More descriptive. Use of metaphors.

Which I would write as:

lightsun wrote:

When I write to you it is short or shorter, and to the point. When I write in my natural style, sentences are longer, and more descriptivei.e. the use of metaphors.

One flowing idea per sentence hits harder than one chopped up idea per paragraph.

Disappropriated wrote:

To me, a lack of compassion offers clarity and an absence of influence from the non-empirical.

As an off note, I don't, no. But I'm trying to fix that .

What you may call "Empirical" is no thing but temporary subjective assessments of subjective minds doing subjective experiments and observations. I am not so sure how that offers you any more "clarity" than someone thinking that the Earth is flat and the rest of the Universe revolves around it.

Noted. Thank you. I will now go back to back to being my old INFP self. As a side note, your
own style, strikes me as being choppy and even jarring at times. I had to get used to it,
at first. Also, as an INFP, my writing can go all over the place. It is not the precision and
conciseness of an NT. Later i'll go and take some quotes from the communication room,
on how an intuitor writes, speaks and perceives the world. Any interest yet in the cognitive
stuff I showed you? Another thing about INFP's, is that we harmonize and blend into our
enviroments. I am susceptible to external stimuli. That means, you may rub off on me., and
I may pick up some of your mannerisms. It generally is unconscious.

I swear I've already posted a response :S That's twice it's happened now.

What I call Empirical is that which I can sense, and use reason to form knowledge with.

And where does the subjectivity come from?

@ Lightsun:

I may do. However, I don't respond well to being spoken to in a prestige dialect. Speak as you will, and if I don't understand I shall somehow.

And what cognitive stuff? I have probably seen a link to it, it's just not stuck. I probably should use a GPS to locate everything not in sight :S

Sorry for the mix up about the cognitive stuff. I as referring to the two books as a start. I wrote both a
cognitive and a behaviorism thread on another site. I'll have to get around to writing it here.
There is something else called cognitive styles. I am a mercy. Again, i'll have to get around posting the sites
and information.

Please do, I'm intrigued.

lightsun wrote:

As an INFP, your communication can feel offensive. I know, I think I know that , that is obviously not your intention. Getting to know you, I try to communicate with reason. To blame
and castigate accomplishes nothing. There are 3 billion thinkers and 3 billion feelers. I want
to know how to communicate with both sides. With reason for the thinking side.
With respect, decorum, finesse for the feeling side.

But everyone deserves respect, and even feelers can appreciate reason. Decorum and finesse are as much suggested by the situation as by the individuals with whom you are speaking.

Disappropriated has a point in suggesting we may do best by speaking in our own preferred "language", and learning to interpret the preferred languages of others. If I try to speak a foreign language, it will be with considerably less facility and I am more likely to misstate my meaning.

As for ignorance, I see it as neither right nor wrong, but as something that simply is. Our approach to it is what can be right or wrong. Ignorance is often undesirable, and I try to dispel it as much as possible.

Compassion is subjective and can cloud one's good judgment. Objective analysis thus does proceed best when kept independent of compassion, prejudice, fear, or other such attitudes. Once the objective conclusion has been reached, then compassion can be employed in applying the results if one wishes. In a practical sense, it often helps in achieving preferred outcomes.