- Type: SeTi
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Directive
Yes, it’s the majority view, but why is it a problem? It’s fine if someone doesn’t prefer this conception, but if you’re gonna go further and mock something like militant atheists do, you’d better do it on the basis of reason, not preference. I like vanilla better than strawberry doesn’t justify mocking strawberry. There’s no logical reason I can find to insist that God must be impersonal. An infinite mind with an absolute freedom, why exactly can’t it be interested in whether I have lice in my hair or not? It created the lice, the hair, and me, after all, and is utterly aware of all three at every instance of their existence.
@fae Preclude: 1.This might be an Se vs Te struggle, which case we could devil’s advocate for each other. 2. This might be a Pe’s undesired rediscoverings into timeless discussion, which case we could make distinctions based on what we know now.
This seems like a lot of appeal to reason. Yet there seem to be little to no appeal to application. From my years of life till today it seem like reason is better off serving application. Where as application would serve truth and meaning. Should you accept these thoughts and find them impactful I’d wonder how you would rephrase this quote. Now that I really think about it… I am extremely curious.
If any wishes: https://cognitivetype.com/forums/topic/reason-application-meaning-truth/