JuliusCaesar

Indeed Yes! You get it! True INSANITY is absolutely impossible because all states of consciousness are ultimately the mind of the Infinite Creator, who is perfect in all of our/their ways. Thus, Insanity cannot occur, for much the same reason that death can never occur. As the Infinite Creator is Immortal and Perfect always.

To be fair to @Asayake I have an INFP cousin who loves nothing more than to smoke weed and play video games. I am not criticizing him mind you, I'm just saying that he values these things very highly that's obviously a fact. However, he also frames houses and is thus a productive member of society. All because his ENTJ father my uncle who owns a roofing company hired and trained him (Se child/Ni Parent of ENTJ in synchronicity with the Si child/ Ne Parent of the INFP). So, in the example of my cousin, you could criticize him for his creature habits, which of course is something I do not personally do. Or you could praise him for contributing to society. So, both of you are right in some sense I would I say.

Not that I necessarily disagree with you. But when others say "insanity", they're referring to any state of consciousness which is unusual, or extraordinary. Normally it refers to human entities perceived to be mentally unstable or unusually inept with respect to an ordinary human. And of course, the above doesn't really make sense. For instance, Clinical Bipolar humans are considered mentally ill because they're different. They are medicated so that they become normal. But if we lived in a world where 90% of people were Bipolar, it would probably be the other way around. Likewise, if were lived in a world where most humans have schizophrenia, they'd probably give the non-schizophrenics drugs to correct their deficiency.

How is that not obvious to you? What use is there in distinguishing between Generality and Specificity of phrases? Fine, the point I'm making is that these are silly distinctions you need not bother to make. Well yeah, I mean CSJ would agree especially when it comes to INFJ's and even INTJ's to some extent, though the Ti critic/Te Parent of the INTJ might allow more room for accepting the ideas/logic of others than the INFJ's Te trickster/Ti Child. Just as the Fe Parent/Fi Critic of the INFJ would allow for more use of ethics in their judgment. Again, the only validity I see in your thoughts stems from your partial application of CSJ's definitions. Of course, an ENTP or ENFP will tend to behave like this, that's just the nature of high Ne. Heck, even their introverted counterparts do it just maybe not so aggressively. You still haven't explained why you reject CSJ's definitions. He literally uses Extraversion vs Introversion the same way every psychologist has for like a century. Whereas you're using your own contrived definitions, and the value in them I have yet to see.

Okay so it is in fact correct that you're using different definitions to CSJ. These are superfluous differences. You might as well just use one Intuition function and forget about Extraverted vs Intraverted. Extraverted means aimed towards others, whereas intraverted means aimed at the self. CSJ's definitions make sense, yours do not, as they have no meaning whatsoever. To clarify, there isn't any meaningful difference between the specifics and non specifics here. Furthermore, these minor differences have nothing to do with the definitons of Extraverted and Intraverted anyway. If you wanted to use these concepts, it would make more sense to call it General Intuition and Specific Intuition. I find that hard to believe. Which videos specifically have you "seen"? I don't know how much Carl is paid. But okay. That means you have a career elsewhere that takes up more of your time right? Perhaps you don't accept his definitions of Ne and Ni. But you do seem to accept his understanding of Se vs Si.

Mental autocorrect I guess. Yes, that's what I meant. So? Atheists take Christian ideas literally, does that make Atheists Christians? If in fact CSJ's understanding of his own mind is correct, then his Fe child would obviously inherit the moral values of Christian upbringing. Okay, so it is indeed a semantical difference. Under CSJ's definitions. "we will" is always Ne, because Ni deals with the future of the self, whereas Ne deals with the collective future or in other words what others want to/are going to do. However, there is some overlap between your concept of Ni/Ne and his. In that, under CSJ's definitions, Ne deals with all possible futures, whereas Ni only deals with the one way forward for the self. With that being said, I fail to see any actual difference between your definitions and CSJ's, other than you seem to think that there is such a difference. This could be interpreted many different ways. But it would seem you're trying to say the same things CSJ is without admitting that you agree with him. I say this because, if CSJ were evaluating let's say how an INTJ (Ni hero) looks at this vs how an ENTP(Ne Hero, INTJ's unconscious counterpart) looks at it, he would probably agree on that specific basis. Yeah, this just looks like more of CSJ's understanding of Se users, especially high Se users such as ESTPs and ESFPs. And an Si user like an ISTJ, or ESFJ would seem to be the one most likely to say yes. Though other Se users can of course agree to go surfing because they have Si in their unconscious. And yet by your own admission you're largely unaware of CSJ's material. When many pay him to teach them Jungian Analytical Psychology. Of which I happen not to be in case you were curious about that. Well, at least someone tries to take on the "MBTI consultant of the forum". No offense intended, but I mean really, are you getting paid to do this? The way you speak about yourself makes me feel like you do. I assume you did that not as a career but as something on the side. I recall from long ago I saw a CSJ video where he responds to exactly the video you're referencing. So, I've already watched at least part of it, but it was a long time ago and of course CSJ didn't play the whole thing but only the parts he thought he needed to rebut.

I'm fairly certain that CSJ accuses them of making errors. So, it might be interesting to summarize videos of that lol.

CSJ has a highly metaphorical nonliteral understanding of Jesus. Which is something that to some extent even he doesn't know about himself. And could you define "evolution". I would assume you're referring to Darwinian Macroevolution or Abiogenesis, but I don't want to put my foot in my mouth there. Isn't that exactly what CSJ claims to be? Or does he say he has an ISFJ subconscious focus? Also, I'm surprised you didn't correct my mistake earlier when I said ENTP's have an ISFJ Superego, ENTP's have an ESFP superego. I see we have a contradiction in semantics. CSJ is using different definitions for the same terms than you it would seem. Or maybe not. Could you give some examples of how these very vague concepts apply? For instance, can you provide an example of Reduction in Ni, and expansion in Ne? Also, many of your definitions are actually the same as CSJ's. For example, "The one vs the many" essentially sums up how CSJ thinks of Ni hero vs Ne Nemesis. Then the reality of what I am in your understanding is impossible. Also I didn't transcribe much of anything, I merely summarized what he said in my own words. That is to say if you read what I've written, and also watched his video. You'd find that you learn 100% the same things but reading my article was faster. Lol, that's perfectly consistent with everything CSJ says. Well, CSJ might imagine ESFP's as being the surfer dude. Whereas the ESTP is the badass alpha male loudmouth whose probably your local mechanic, or someone like Becker. ESTP's would probably like to surf also though. The two types are very similar since they share half of the same cognitive priorities. Are you sure you're not CSJoseph yourself? I fail to see any difference between this and his understanding of Se vs Si. Where did you learn MBTI?

What is insanity? Define it.

If you have watched "many" of his videos. Then I assume you're aware of the four sides of the mind? If he is an ENTP, then his INTJ shadow and ISFJ Superego have all the capabilities you've mentioned. Furthermore, you seem to have all of these qualities yourself at least to some degree. Why do you think that? What? lol. Creationists would cringe listening to him. I fail to understand what makes you think this. What in your understanding is Extraverted Intuition? You obviously haven't actually watched his video. Otherwise, it would be apparent that my original post was just a summary of it. Which makes me doubt your claim that you have watched "many" of his videos. Calling into question the notion that you understand anything he claims fairly well at all. Also, where did I claim Te users are dumb? I just said in my summary that CSJ said that Te users want to feel valid. Which seems to be consistent with your own understanding as you've before mentioned the Te-Fi axis. Si would be direct experience under CSJ's definitions, and Se awareness of others' experiences collectively in the third person. So Ti also learns through experience because it thinks in terms of true/false about those experiences. Fi does the same in the good/bad domain. That would seem to include useful/not useful as well, since after all what is utilitarianism but another moral philosophy?

Correct. What makes you think that?

So what you're saying is that in your experience, visuals are associated with confusion. When your mind increases in clarity, you consequently experience a loss in visuals. And 5 MeO was especially potent in devisualizing your psychedelia adventures. Which I believe is something Leo has likely also experienced.

Perhaps I didn't make it obvious, but I use CSJoseph's system. Though I might apply it in slightly a different manner than he personally does as I'm an INFJ and he's an ENTP. Due to the whole difference in thought processes that exist between Ti Child and Ti Parent. In the future, I'll be posting summaries of CSJ's how to type videos.

Greetings all, I'd like to write to you a somewhat brief summary of Cs Joseph's What Is Introverted Thinking? (Ti) | Cognitive Functions | CS Joseph. Please tell me what you think of it. And, thank you for your input. Whereas in extroverted thinking, the majority believes something is true or false on the basis of statistics or other data such as advice from the intelligentsia, in introverted thinking the individual believes something is true or false on their own. Imagine a table with many thoughts standing on either side and the majority rules, that's how it is under extroverted thinking. Now imagine instead a single table with many more thoughts all stacked linearly and moving swiftly, this is how it is under introverted thinking. Introverted thinking is under logic, which is a simple process of boolean decision-making, E.g. if this is true then this other thing is true also, or if this is false then this other thing is true et cetera. An individual using logic can arrive at the truth. Ad hominem is an instance of not introverted thinking, but extroverted feeling. The two are linked in an axis, I think therefore you feel is how human sentences work. Rationale, that is extroverted thinking exists to keep logic in check. Ethics, that is extroverted feeling also keeps logic in check by showing the deleterious consequences upon living beings via certain thoughts. Highly logical people often come off as arrogant, because to them it's also undeniable that Absolute Truth exists. From their perspective, what's the truth is the truth, how people feel is irrelevant. They should grow up and learn and grow thusly improving themselves through learning.

You seem to be implying that visuals are somehow undesirable. Nonetheless, 5 MeO seems to be more potent than LSD in general anyway, at least with respect to Leo doing these substances.

I'd say I'm always working on improving myself. Even if I'm doing something pedestrian like spectating a ballgame from the stands.

So, you'll be reporting back to us either when you feel you've concluded your experiments, or at least when you feel that you have material to discuss?

That's not particularly relevant, India is inferior to China in terms of English proficiency, that doesn't mean learning Chinese will help you to learn English any better than Hindi lol. Somewhat yes. English is oftentimes not called a Romance language because it has some rather heavy Germanic influence. But frankly, it's still obvious that the majority of the English language has arisen directly out of Latin. And since Italian is even more Latin based well, you see why knowing Latin is helpful if you want to learn English. Especially the Legal variant because as I've mentioned before, literally all legal maxims are in Latin. However, to be specific, what I'm stating is that since Italian is basically Modern Day Vulgar Latin, fluency in Italian is very useful with respect to attaining any degree of comprehension of the ancient language. And since fluency in Latin is very useful in learning English because the majority of English is Latin, that also means that learning Italian is useful in exactly this way via the common roots it shares with Current English in the Roman Empire of Antiquity. See, Latin lives on today in many different forms, English is just an example of somewhat Germanicized Vulgar Latin. Whereas the more notoriously Latin based languages such as the various dialects of Italian, the Spanish tongue, the Portuguese Tongue, French, Romanian etc are all just blatant examples of Modern Latin. As such, learning what's effectively the Grandfather of all these other tongues will aid in acquiring any related language. And surprise you as it may, that even includes Russian to some extent and those tongues close to Russian that is to say that are at least somewhat mutually intelligible with Russian such as Belarusian, Ukrainian, Rusyn etc etc. Heck, even the name of the ruler of the Russian Empire цар(Romanized as Tsar) is short for Цезарь(Tsezar) the Russian translation of Caesar. Of course, the Prussian(German) Empire did the same thing with their ruler calling him Kaizer, which ironically is almost identical to how the ancients pronounce the name of CAESAR. The only two serious differences being, CAESAR's s sounds like the s in salad, and the A sounds like the a in father, not like e in Kaizer. Other than that, the Germans got it 100% correct, they even trill the R lol.

@Egodeathrow This may sound obvious, but because every human entity is a one of a kind, you can only answer this question yourself via personal experimentation. The results of your experiments may or may not be comparable to effects other humans experience under the same substance/dosage.

Duolingo? Lol, you'll find loads of criticism of them on Youtube if you look for it. In the first two minutes, he already makes the false claim that Pimsleur is audio only, it is not, perhaps it was in the past, but today they teach you how to read/write also. Furthermore, Pimsleur has been utilized successfully by agents of the US Government to acquire(that is become like a native speaker) in foreign languages. And I'm pretty sure it makes more sense to listen to Gov'T agents whose life depends on this than some random old guy on YT lol.

But are you insane enough in everyday life to do Datura? After all, she must be love because everything even your worst nightmares are love right?

@Ethan1 Yes.

I recommend you learn at least modern Italian and become fluent in it before you attempt to learn Latin. Trust me, fluency in the modern vulgar language will make learning the ancient tongue much easier. To do so, I would recommend Pimsleur, do some research on them before you buy anything, but they've done free trials in the past and I believe those may still be ongoing. And if you find after a free trial or whatever that you don't like Pimsleur, then check out the Michel Thomas Method. It's similar to Pimsleur, but more engaging and possibly fun lol. And yes, French is useful, in fact if you want, I'd advise you learn French and Italian before Latin, heck even through Spanish fluency in there for good measure lol. If you're feeling especially ambitious, you might want to go for fluency in Romanian also. It has some Latin that other Romance languages don't, though of course the same is true of Russian actually, But because Russian is so heavily Slavic in it's origins in general it's not going to help as much as learning a proper Romance Language such as Portuguese or especially Italian. There are 170,000+ words in use in the English language today. The majority of those words are either literally just straight up Latin, or rooted directly in Latin. You're never going to absorb such information using left brain processes.

I haven't actually typed Leo yet, but I suspect rather strongly that if I do I'd find him to be an INTP as well.

Practically everything made me feel good as a child lol. But if I had to say what made me feel love the most, it was probably when playing Baseball with my Dad. Knowing that I was better than all the other kids because I trained harder and longer than them.