Thursday, 29 September 2011

A description of the INTP Personality Type by Peter James

A description of the INTP Personality Type
by Peter James

The INTP is above all a thinker and his inner (private) world is a place governed by a strong sense of logical structure. Every experience is to be rigorously analysed, the task of the INTP's mind is to fit each encountered idea or experience into a larger structure defined by logic. For here is the central goal of the INTP: to understand and seek truth.

INTPs are collectors, but they are collecters for whom the objects themselves are only important in so far as they evoke a connection to past events, in so far as they yield a nostalgic mood. The curious problem with any collection of an INTP is that he typically fails to enjoy it in the here and now. Items are stored away so that they can evoke this time at some point in the future, but such a point often never occurs. It may never occur because INTPs are always so mentally active that they continually delve into new interests, and continue to hoard items relating to these, so that they rarely allow themselves enough time to reflect on the ever expanding library of their past. The interests of an INTP would be enough to occupy him for several lifetimes if that were possible.

Monday, 19 September 2011

Social Cognitive Theory

Social cognitive theory, used in psychology, education, and communication, posits that portions of an individual's knowledge acquisition can be directly related to observing others within the context of social interactions, experiences, and outside media influences.

Perseus System calls this the Wolf Theory.

Moral competencies include:
what an individual is capable of
what an individual knows
what an individual's skills are
an individual's awareness of moral rules and regulations
an individual's cognitive ability to construct behaviours

As far as an individual's development is concerned, moral competence is the growth of cognitive-sensory processes; simply put, being aware of what is considered right and wrong. By comparison, moral performance is influenced by the possible rewards and incentives to act a certain way. For example, a person's moral competence might tell them that stealing is wrong and frowned upon by society; however, if the reward for stealing is a substantial sum, their moral performance might indicate a different line of thought. Therein lies the core of social cognitive theory.

Persues system is that the different cognitive methods employed by different personalities influence how they sense the world which is reflected in their behaviour and their moral competencies.

Saturday, 17 September 2011

The Absurd

In philosophy, "The Absurd" refers to the conflict between the human tendency to seek value and meaning in life and the human inability to find any. In this context absurd does not mean "logically impossible," but rather "humanly impossible."[1] The universe and the human mind do not each separately cause the Absurd, but rather, the Absurd arises by the contradictory nature of the two existing simultaneously.
Absurdism, therefore, is a philosophical school of thought stating that the efforts of humanity to find inherent meaning will ultimately fail (and hence are absurd) because the sheer amount of information, including the vast unknown, makes certainty impossible. As a philosophy, absurdism also explores the fundamental nature of the Absurd and how individuals, once becoming conscious of the Absurd, should react to it.

Hasty Generalization

Hasty generalization is a logical fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence — essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables. In statistics, it may involve basing broad conclusions regarding the statistics of a survey from a small sample group that fails to sufficiently represent an entire population. Its opposite fallacy is called slothful induction, or denying the logical conclusion of an inductive argument (i.e. "it was just a coincidence").

Monday, 12 September 2011


Fallacy of composition
The fallacy of composition arises when one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole (or even of every proper part). For example: "This fragment of metal cannot be broken with a hammer, therefore the machine of which it is a part cannot be broken with a hammer." This is clearly fallacious, because many machines can be broken into their constituent parts without any of those parts being breakable.

This fallacy is often confused with the fallacy of hasty generalization, in which an unwarranted inference is made from a statement about a sample to a statement about the population from which it is drawn.

The fallacy of composition is the converse of the fallacy of division.

Thursday, 8 September 2011

Wolves and Dogs (Learning)

Dogs tend to be poorer than Wolves at observational learning, being more responsive to instrumental conditioning

Observational learning (also known as vicarious learning, social learning, or modelling) is a type of learning that occurs as a function of observing, retaining and replicating novel behaviour executed by others. It is argued that reinforcement has the effect of influencing which responses one will partake in, more than it influences the actual acquisition of the new response.

Operant conditioning is a form of psychological learning where an individual modifies the occurrence and form of its own behavior due to the association of the behaviour with a stimulus. Operant conditioning is distinguished from classical conditioning (also called respondent conditioning) in that operant conditioning deals with the modification of "voluntary behaviour" or operant behavior. Operant behaviour "operates" on the environment and is maintained by its consequences, while classical conditioning deals with the conditioning of reflexive (reflex) behaviours which are elicited by antecedent conditions. Behaviours conditioned via a classical conditioning procedure are not maintained by consequences

Learning theory (education)

Sunday, 4 September 2011


In the last decades of the 20th century, the word "stakeholder" has become more commonly used to mean a person or organization that has a legitimate interest in a project or entity. In discussing the decision-making process for institutions—including large business corporations, government agencies, and non-profit organizations -- the concept has been broadened to include everyone with an interest (or "stake") in what the entity does. This includes not only its vendors, employees, and customers, but even members of a community where its offices or factory may affect the local economy or environment. In this context, "stakeholder" includes not only the directors or trustees on its governing board (who are stakeholders in the traditional sense of the word) but also all persons who "paid in" the figurative stake and the persons to whom it may be "paid out" (in the sense of a "payoff" in game theory, meaning the outcome of the transaction).

Idealism (attitudes to)

Idealism is not necessarily condemned. However, the Guardians in Society (45% of people) follow the dictates of authority and idealists are often counter to the establishment. Rationals (5%) do not like ideals either because they work within the system. Even Idealists are selective as well and may not like the ideals of a rival group. The Crazies (5%) do not like ideals because they are two idiotic to understand.But it still leaves a % of the population that will follow ideals. However, some of these people are flighty and their support will not be sustained. Artisans (25%) are too busy on their own projects to bother about the Ideals of another. So the thinking of other personalities do not fit in.

It gets worse as even the most sensible people, or probably the sensible people, just suspect a vested interest. An agenda and an ulterior motive. This does communicate very well.;_ylc=X3oDMTZtMTU0ZzdjBElfYWd1aWQDVFlBU1lIRUJLNktNNEFNTTZLRDMzVlZWMkEESV9jZ3VpZAMESV9jcHJvcAMxMDEESV9sdHMDMTMxNDk4MzE3OARJX3VjbnR4AwRJX3VzcmMDeS51ay5hbnN3ZXJzBElfdXN1aWQDMjAxMTA5MDIwODEyNTNBQVNsczdYXzU2YjAxMTM4MWE5YWFhOTBkM2Q1ODZkNWMxZDVmY2I4YWEESV91dHlwZQNhbnN3ZXIEX1MDMjAyMzQzNTI2MQRleHBJRAMxMDAEeGZvcm1JRAM-?qid=20110902081253AASls7X&answerer=56b011381a9aaa90d3d586d5c1d5fcb8aa&hash=0b4c4c3a2e5c3b7e1db7753d43fbed60cca1b07133e2802f578d860298153351

A Personal Contract

Personal contract is a contract that binds a person but does not include such person's heirs or assignees since the contract requires a personal performance that does not have an adequate substitute


Coercion (pronounced /koʊˈɜrʃən/) is the practice of forcing another party to behave in an involuntary manner (whether through action or inaction) by use of threats, rewards, or intimidation or some other form of pressure or force. In law, coercion is codified as the duress crime. Such actions are used as leverage, to force the victim to act in the desired way. Coercion may involve the actual infliction of physical pain/injury or psychological harm in order to enhance the credibility of a threat. The threat of further harm may lead to the cooperation or obedience of the person being coerced. Torture is one of the most extreme examples of coercion i.e. severe pain is inflicted until the victim provides the desired information.

Social Contract Theory

The social contract is an intellectual device intended to explain the appropriate relationship between individuals and their governments. Social contract arguments assert that individuals unite into political societies by a process of mutual consent, agreeing to abide by common rules and accept corresponding duties to protect themselves and one another from violence and other kinds of harm.

Social contract theory played an important historical role in the emergence of the idea that political authority must be derived from the consent of the governed. The starting point for most social contract theories is a heuristic examination of the human condition absent from any political order, usually termed the “state of nature”. In this condition, individuals' actions are bound only by their personal power and conscience. From this shared starting point, social contract theorists seek to demonstrate, in different ways, why a rational individual would voluntarily give up his or her natural freedom to obtain the benefits of political order.

Personal Contracts

The most fundamental social right is to refuse a personal contract. Manipulation requires to hide a part of that contract, therefore to deprive one's right to refuse that part (by ignorance). The fact that most of us manipulate others is an irrevelant ad populum, and good intentions are not justice, obviously. Novels manipulate readers, but it's a visible part of the tacit contract.. it's self-manipulation. About childs (and adults), there's not such a contract as long as they can't understand its nature. But manipulating them can eventually impede their moral development, thus violating the (disputable) right to develop their natural potential.

Written by "IDontThinkSo"