In the computer modeling world, they say that “all models are wrong but some are useful”. That seems to apply (maybe even more so) to our world view as well. There’s really no way for our tiny little brains to grasp all the nuances of what makes our world “go”. So we do the best we can with what we have.
It's interesting though, don't you think Clarissa, that "libraries" exist? In this way, for example, I do not need to learn how to code all of my database connectivity needs, I just use the pre-built library Node.js and voila - I'm connecting to databases using Javascript. The library itself is written in Javascript, so it is nothing I do not already understand, however some other coders have taken the time to piece all of the necessary bits together and I benefit from their prior work and add it to my knowledge of the (Javascript) world. I wonder if you would agree that stereotypes, traditions, "cultural wisdoms" etc. are all like libraries - they allow our tiny brains to use what we already know personally and extend that out to cover many more (novel) real world situations without needing prior personal experience to "handle" them. Of course, that is where bias and bigotry also come from, so .. there is always a price for convenience ;)
Thank you for your insight, Nick. Yes, I agree. The big thing is that if we don't take our own beliefs of how things work too seriously, then it is a bit easier to actually learn from life instead of arguing with it. It took a lot of varied experiences for me to start to see this in certain areas of my life and I'm sure there will be plenty of other ways that my world view will continue to change.
I needed this. For years I’ve been caught in a cycle of self-destructive thoughts, and even though I am aware of the cycle, I’m unmotivated to change it because it allows me to be a victim and wait for someone to sympathize with and validate me. Nope, not anymore. From now on, I’ll tell myself this: you are enjoying feeling bad for yourself. That doesn’t mean you’re a bad person, but it’s time to switch the script or relive this day for the rest of your life.
Trying to find that objective truth is my biggest obsession. I hope it stays that way and I hope will keep getting closer to the truth, if that's posible. It's so interesting to hear you two talk about this. I would love to see more video's about the Ni-finding that you both made that pointed to truth. I really treasure these video's.
I love that you included "if that's possible." It shows that you understand how impossibly difficult it is to find any kind of objective truth instead of just doing what most people do and blindly believing x y z is true. Hope restored.
This is true. Without the turbulent life I had in my teens-30s, I'd probably be stuck in an illusion of what reality is, and who I am "supposed" to be. Still working on me, but it is life-long endeavor.🙃😊👍
this is what i am going through right now and over the past year. a recent conflict led me to investigate personality and mbti after years of not paying much attention to it. ive known since much younger years that i most consistently test as intj, but this past year, ive learned so much more about both myself and others. one example is that i have taken my Ni for granted, thinking it was something everyone can do. i only recently learned the full extent of what Ni is and why it is my main function. i now realize that ive been very biased against others who do not see things conceptually and are not able to put together patterns to predict, plan, and foresee potential outcomes. i also learned, although very difficult for me, how lead Sensors observe things and i am humbled by how crappy my sensory is. anyway, i could write a book on the many recent changes in my worldview (and it continues to evolve) but all the personality channels have been so helpful beyond words
I cannot pass by the fact that this video is a bit ironic. Objective personality itself is a decently biased solution to people's need to understand themselves from a psychological point of view. There are infinite ways to understand yourself, why would we need objective personality and its specific jargon? Developmental psychology shows that the higher levels of consciousness are not bogged down by groups/tribes/religions/ideologies/ w/e. They just do what they're supposed to do, with as little bias as possible. In my opinion, compared to most things in life, objective personality is a positive influence (it helped me develop my consciousness in fact). All I'm saying is: be aware that you're not extremely objective. True objectivism is the one that goes unnoticed and that gathers all subjective views in a holistic manner.
To the point of "get your own worldview" this doesn't singularly solve the problem of becoming more objective. What matters about your worldview is: 1. Is it coherent to reality 2. Is it true 3. Does it cause harm or good to others. (There could easily be more points, nonetheless) You can go inward and ditch everything you learned from childhood and still come out an idiot with a worse view of reality. The more crucial factor is "what are you comparing your worldview to?" "Where are you developing those ideas from?" If we singularly look inward...it then becomes "the self" is guiding. And this is where it falls apart because the point is to be objective but being "self guiding" by definition is actually subjective.
Also, if someone dives too far into themselves as an approach to finding the truth and determines that their own view of reality is superior to all external input for what the truth might be, this can put them on the fast track to falling towards full-fledged solipsism.
@@aprilhelm518 agreed. There is certainly good from self observation and understanding one self better. (That's what personality assessment aims at, self growth) Although I think a worldview is outside the self. In this, a worldview view is a lense to see the world. The self is simply the self. The worldview certainly should be assessed of its accuracy. And in many ways a worldview has very little to do with the person themselves. The world view is about the external. And the more someone doubles down on "getting my own worldview" it actually becomes more skewed. The name of the OPS game is to be objective and in order to do that the answer isn't within oneself but understanding universal truth better.
The hardest thing about deconstructing my religion and my world view is by far the emotional attachment locking me to it. You can be totally detached from it logically speaking, but find yourself going back to it subconsciously all the fucking time.
Imo, there's no real need to try to force yourself to detach if all you're trying to do is understand, because the fact that you are attached is a part of reality.
@@aprilhelm518 your understanding is intrinsically tied to your emotional state, no real contemplation or deconstruction can happen through the lens of an emotional attachment
@@v3g499 Imo, when you take yourself out of yourself in order to *look at* yourself and how your emotions might be affecting you (or try to), it makes you less emotional (hopefully).
2 things: restructuring world view is way easier said than done, and you are NEVER done with the construction process, or you shouldn't be, because no one finds perfection, ever, and if there is imperfection, there is room for improvement, things still worthy of reconsideration and modification.
I wonder if there's even a way to tell when you are done deconstructing. Once everything is gone it also seems a bit weird to reconstruct anything. Why would you?
@@sleipney That is the nature of our human perception process. The mind requires acceptance of some truths, in order to make conclusions higher up. The most basic requirement of the mind is an acceptance that the senses are providing a valid impression of reality. What you "see" is what the mind says is there, based on the mind having foundational assumptions. Going up the chain of cognition is the same basic idea of structure on top of foundation. This is why it is so difficult to change world views. The "error" is at the bottom. Take that bottom away without first dismantling all the overlying structure, and you have a catastrophic collapse. And that is a very scary thing for a human to experience. Life-shattering events sometimes.
No, it doesn't take years. Big breakthroughs are always quick because a moment of insight triggers a 100% gut-level commitment to question treasured beliefs and attachments. You turn around and see that you are clinging to an anchor of fool's gold.
Here's your formula: 6 to 8 hours + classical music + blindfold + 4-5 grams of psilocybin = radically transformative worldview. You still have to put in the effort to actualize it, but more than anything it gives you assurance in knowing that your worldview is constructed on arbitrary and amenable principles and ideas. We cant aim at something that we cant see. Well, at least my IxxJ brain cant.
I love how their acknowledgment of not being able to find the objective truth also states that all of their findings, the whole system including this video too can't be claimed objective reality but their own observation, but still closer to reality due to the fact that they are trying to keep a check on their own blind spots and patterns.
03:45 - "whatever worldview that you've accepted... because it's easy" I found a recent Jordan Peterson video that alludes to something similar: th-cam.com/video/I4xZUQmmMuI/w-d-xo.html 45:08 - 45:45 I think this video is well worth checking out because personality is discussed a lot and there are many great insights.
Maybe we *can* see objective reality, but our saviors and demons cloud our perspective and perception. When we get there we realize we have got so little control over the outside world and even ourselves.
Likely thinking about her experiences seeing these people be trapped by their own world views and how they got out, essentially what the video is about
We all live in our own carnival funhouse of mirrors. We have to question every mirror. Hopefully one day we can climb out. But I once heard this= anything that can change is not the truth.
I was thinking Si was kind of the opposite, like it looks for a groove to get stuck into. Ne conversely looks for alternatives. If I had to guess, Ne would be more comfortable exploring different paths than Si. I feel like Si would have the hardest time updating their worldview out of all the functions.
@@NovakiSalem Si is in view of what *is*, whereas Ne is about all the possibilities of what can be -- at least as I understand. I do believe Si doesn't so much like having to take in new info or possibilities ALL the time, but part it's because of their need to... uh... properly integrate and make sense of it with every other bit of experience they have inside themselves (that they remember and have access to). I.e., the program has to be updated again. Yeah, I think we are seeking consistency and stability and redundancy. But imo it's from needing to process each bit of info so thoroughly, and make sure it is ALL consistent, that we really try to limit the intake of things that can shake and upset what we have established to that point. BUT, imo, taking in and considering too much can cause instability and uncertainty and lack of a good foundation. On the other hand, maybe that's my bias and I'm wrong. And this is just my personal impression or understanding, perception, whatnot. Other Si types be free to disagree. But that's just what I think and have heard from others about Si as well (the part about constantly processing and updating each little bit of reality, and thus spending a lot time to integrate or organize it to where and how it seems to belong).
ISTJ here, I honestly don't really have these kinds of problems listed in the video, I always come to a point where I say "ok, I have seen enough going this direction, why not go that direction for a bit". I don't really feel like I get stuck in a worldview so to speak, I simply learn as much as I can and then move on to something else after I have exhausted the material. My weaker Fi-Ne eventually stands up and says "alright, times up, lets move on" and I do. I don't really attach my Fi to a worldview its more like I adopt it for a bit and see if it matches reality, when I am done and ready to move on I take what I learned from it and just continue on.
@@Maya_Ruinz I had someone I know say something along the lines of that everyone should reassess their whole entire worldview every so often, to which I thought, A) why would you not be constantly updating your worldview... literally all the time? And B) Literally what is the value in shaking up and reassessing your ENTIRE worldview all at once? Like, what? I doubt it's even possible. Although I've heard that that is actually just how Si functions; it has already updated the program because it does that when it processes new... I guess sensory data. Therefore, there's no need or benefit for the programmer to scrap that whole program and start over from scratch -- but also I'm pretty sure you can't anyway. I don't know what people even mean when they say that, I guess. As for Ne, until the concept of possibilities have been added via direct experience (Si), they can't be integrated into the program or searched for since, to Si, up until experience shows otherwise, possibilities don't exist.
@@aprilhelm518 That sounds right to me, Ne for me is something that comes when I challenge myself and essentially start fresh. I usually do this by literally moving, finding a new job and moving away to a different city. It helps put the pressure on and give me something new to dive into and learn.
@@oscarl.3563 I'm kind of joking, but 'you' would be the subject, so if you see everything from an objective view, that should mean that you can also see yourself.
@@aprilhelm518 This is some inception-level stuff. I'm afraid it's too complex for me. Maybe I ought to clarify that I recognize no person, hence no subject - all of that is just imagination in our minds. So the whole objective-subjective thing that people play at falls apart!
@@oscarl.3563 Well, the subject exists, therefore the objective view, in order to see *everything*, must be able to see the self. Personally, I think of it as the difference between 1st person perspective in writing versus... probably omniscient (since 3rd person is often glorified 1st person anyway). In omniscient view, the narrator can see everyone, everything they do, and everything that happens and draw from that to tell the story; that is very objective, but the more objective (breadth oriented), I would say the less it can be oriented to understand and really see through a single person's eyes. In MBTI, each function as an orientation: extroverted or introverted. The extroverted orientation is more objective, more oriented to breadth. The subjective orientation is necessarily deeper, but not as wide.
Ni, Ti, Fi, Si allow us to change worldview. Te and Ne changes are when tribal paradigm changes. Se (cash and prizes) is the best way to transform society. This all responds from an Ne leading the change. Maybe Se.
Fascinating. I'm glad that I found you guys talking about/like this as I've never heard anyone express these thoughts this coherently. I'm sure you get hundreds of people saying the same thing but: this is how I've come to understand the world too. And it "works" for me, and I too am amazed/disappointed that so few other people see things like this. QUESTION: Do you think this perspective/approach/mindset is something that the majority of people could adopt, under appropriate world/education circumstances? Or is that not realistic/achievable for some underlying reason?
literally my goal is to bring OPS and this perspective to the educational field. but right now I'm still figuring it out for myself and the people close to me :)
You can only prepare your mind to change and start paying attention. That in itself is just an intellectual exercise. Once prepared it's takes a tragedy or some other type of emotional collapse to actually change. This was the message of the man Jesus in the parable of the foolish vergins.
Hi, Interesting thesis to your vid. I don’t come from the business world, and I am not familiar with most of the people referenced. Is it possible to include a summary with some of the names typed out? They are dropped so fast as references, I am not understanding them.
I like the computer/software analogy. Stock worldviews are probably supposed to keep people from wallowing in subjective perspective. But it seems like we actually come back to seeing that the closest we get to objective truth is still subjective? I guess with higher consciousness we accept the limitations to what we "know" and stop attacking and learn to work cohesively with the real world, once we figure out what that is.
3:32 DAMN: Windows 11 just screwed me into thinking of switching to Chrome OS (unless I hold on to Windows 10 until October, 2025). If only I can keep a Desktop PC, because I have no use for a touchpad on laptops.
I don't think that's what he meant with objective truth. I think he meant as to purpose and reason to things we do- from his ti, his need to KNOW WHAT AND WHY is the world. But he can't, no one can, THEREFORE, we should follow what produces a positive reaction, because that would be the reasonable things to do. But yes, we can get CLOSER to objective reality. Only objective reality is an infinite concept therefore we will never get anywhere near it. Just closer. And the only reason we should even try, is if it produces these positive reactions when we do so.
Sometimes it's fate.. multicultural and multi religious society could help shaped and tolerance worldview.. and before it is a law you need the process of guiding people through acceptable guidelines.. with avoidance of extremities in mind.. Sometimes, history shapes it too.. as does the reaction or acceptance.. sometimes you need a leader to do that, some times your need an organization for that.. sometimes you need to introduce a new identity.. sometime you need to promote peaceful transition.. sometimes you need to invent a concept for that.. All in all, a good worldview uses cooperation as protocol.. the absence of accountability to hypocrisy is the opposite of that..
One of the nice parts about being sleep last, Ni demon… I don’t really value my subjective world a whole lot. I’m an idiot in other ways, but thankfully not in this one 😆
All Im taking from this video, and this channel, is that these people are incredibly prejudiced against feeling and, for inexplicable reasons, think Ti is a feeling function. It makes no sense. Also their personality test is the worst I've ever taken, tied with CS Josephs abortion of a test. Watch out for these two folks, they're trying to turn you into Te and/or Ni users and seem too mentally handicapped to realize typology isnt a choice. Also, the obsession with Fi: ENTP and INTP do what they love and they have Fe soooo....yeah this channel's operating thesis is....suspect. At best. They trollin'
In the computer modeling world, they say that “all models are wrong but some are useful”. That seems to apply (maybe even more so) to our world view as well. There’s really no way for our tiny little brains to grasp all the nuances of what makes our world “go”. So we do the best we can with what we have.
Very well said!
@@camellia3679 thank you :)
amazing, thank you
It's interesting though, don't you think Clarissa, that "libraries" exist? In this way, for example, I do not need to learn how to code all of my database connectivity needs, I just use the pre-built library Node.js and voila - I'm connecting to databases using Javascript. The library itself is written in Javascript, so it is nothing I do not already understand, however some other coders have taken the time to piece all of the necessary bits together and I benefit from their prior work and add it to my knowledge of the (Javascript) world. I wonder if you would agree that stereotypes, traditions, "cultural wisdoms" etc. are all like libraries - they allow our tiny brains to use what we already know personally and extend that out to cover many more (novel) real world situations without needing prior personal experience to "handle" them. Of course, that is where bias and bigotry also come from, so .. there is always a price for convenience ;)
Thank you for your insight, Nick. Yes, I agree. The big thing is that if we don't take our own beliefs of how things work too seriously, then it is a bit easier to actually learn from life instead of arguing with it. It took a lot of varied experiences for me to start to see this in certain areas of my life and I'm sure there will be plenty of other ways that my world view will continue to change.
Very glad you guys release these on Mondays. It's a great way to recalibrate at the beginning of the week
I needed this. For years I’ve been caught in a cycle of self-destructive thoughts, and even though I am aware of the cycle, I’m unmotivated to change it because it allows me to be a victim and wait for someone to sympathize with and validate me. Nope, not anymore.
From now on, I’ll tell myself this: you are enjoying feeling bad for yourself. That doesn’t mean you’re a bad person, but it’s time to switch the script or relive this day for the rest of your life.
Trying to find that objective truth is my biggest obsession. I hope it stays that way and I hope will keep getting closer to the truth, if that's posible. It's so interesting to hear you two talk about this. I would love to see more video's about the Ni-finding that you both made that pointed to truth. I really treasure these video's.
I love that you included "if that's possible." It shows that you understand how impossibly difficult it is to find any kind of objective truth instead of just doing what most people do and blindly believing x y z is true. Hope restored.
I love this comment :)) if you have an idea, what do you think your OP type is?
@@erika89765 Glad to hear!! My MBTI type is ENFJ if that is what you mean. ;)
@@RuthDoingVoices have you been Typed by Objective Personality? Most likely will be different from MBTI.
6:09 there is no way to overcome the iceberg ahead of you but to descend into the depths of the ocean, so deep you start seeing demon like creatures.
This is true. Without the turbulent life I had in my teens-30s, I'd probably be stuck in an illusion of what reality is, and who I am "supposed" to be. Still working on me, but it is life-long endeavor.🙃😊👍
Byron Katie's method is a worldview about how to analyze your worldview.
this is what i am going through right now and over the past year. a recent conflict led me to investigate personality and mbti after years of not paying much attention to it. ive known since much younger years that i most consistently test as intj, but this past year, ive learned so much more about both myself and others. one example is that i have taken my Ni for granted, thinking it was something everyone can do. i only recently learned the full extent of what Ni is and why it is my main function. i now realize that ive been very biased against others who do not see things conceptually and are not able to put together patterns to predict, plan, and foresee potential outcomes. i also learned, although very difficult for me, how lead Sensors observe things and i am humbled by how crappy my sensory is. anyway, i could write a book on the many recent changes in my worldview (and it continues to evolve) but all the personality channels have been so helpful beyond words
go write the book!! we'll be the first ones to read and benefit from it :)
I cannot pass by the fact that this video is a bit ironic. Objective personality itself is a decently biased solution to people's need to understand themselves from a psychological point of view. There are infinite ways to understand yourself, why would we need objective personality and its specific jargon? Developmental psychology shows that the higher levels of consciousness are not bogged down by groups/tribes/religions/ideologies/ w/e. They just do what they're supposed to do, with as little bias as possible.
In my opinion, compared to most things in life, objective personality is a positive influence (it helped me develop my consciousness in fact). All I'm saying is: be aware that you're not extremely objective. True objectivism is the one that goes unnoticed and that gathers all subjective views in a holistic manner.
To the point of "get your own worldview" this doesn't singularly solve the problem of becoming more objective. What matters about your worldview is: 1. Is it coherent to reality 2. Is it true 3. Does it cause harm or good to others. (There could easily be more points, nonetheless) You can go inward and ditch everything you learned from childhood and still come out an idiot with a worse view of reality. The more crucial factor is "what are you comparing your worldview to?" "Where are you developing those ideas from?" If we singularly look inward...it then becomes "the self" is guiding. And this is where it falls apart because the point is to be objective but being "self guiding" by definition is actually subjective.
Ooh! Yes! Looking in the self is not perceiving reality for what it is unless the bit of reality you want to understand is you.
Also, if someone dives too far into themselves as an approach to finding the truth and determines that their own view of reality is superior to all external input for what the truth might be, this can put them on the fast track to falling towards full-fledged solipsism.
@@aprilhelm518 agreed. There is certainly good from self observation and understanding one self better. (That's what personality assessment aims at, self growth) Although I think a worldview is outside the self. In this, a worldview view is a lense to see the world. The self is simply the self. The worldview certainly should be assessed of its accuracy. And in many ways a worldview has very little to do with the person themselves. The world view is about the external. And the more someone doubles down on "getting my own worldview" it actually becomes more skewed. The name of the OPS game is to be objective and in order to do that the answer isn't within oneself but understanding universal truth better.
The hardest thing about deconstructing my religion and my world view is by far the emotional attachment locking me to it. You can be totally detached from it logically speaking, but find yourself going back to it subconsciously all the fucking time.
Imo, there's no real need to try to force yourself to detach if all you're trying to do is understand, because the fact that you are attached is a part of reality.
@@aprilhelm518 your understanding is intrinsically tied to your emotional state, no real contemplation or deconstruction can happen through the lens of an emotional attachment
@@v3g499 Imo, when you take yourself out of yourself in order to *look at* yourself and how your emotions might be affecting you (or try to), it makes you less emotional (hopefully).
2 things: restructuring world view is way easier said than done, and you are NEVER done with the construction process, or you shouldn't be, because no one finds perfection, ever, and if there is imperfection, there is room for improvement, things still worthy of reconsideration and modification.
I wonder if there's even a way to tell when you are done deconstructing. Once everything is gone it also seems a bit weird to reconstruct anything. Why would you?
@@sleipney That is the nature of our human perception process. The mind requires acceptance of some truths, in order to make conclusions higher up. The most basic requirement of the mind is an acceptance that the senses are providing a valid impression of reality. What you "see" is what the mind says is there, based on the mind having foundational assumptions. Going up the chain of cognition is the same basic idea of structure on top of foundation.
This is why it is so difficult to change world views. The "error" is at the bottom. Take that bottom away without first dismantling all the overlying structure, and you have a catastrophic collapse. And that is a very scary thing for a human to experience. Life-shattering events sometimes.
No, it doesn't take years. Big breakthroughs are always quick because a moment of insight triggers a 100% gut-level commitment to question treasured beliefs and attachments. You turn around and see that you are clinging to an anchor of fool's gold.
I very much relate to this, having had that “world crashing moment” a few years ago and building back up from it.
Here's your formula: 6 to 8 hours + classical music + blindfold + 4-5 grams of psilocybin = radically transformative worldview. You still have to put in the effort to actualize it, but more than anything it gives you assurance in knowing that your worldview is constructed on arbitrary and amenable principles and ideas. We cant aim at something that we cant see. Well, at least my IxxJ brain cant.
I'm coming to your place to process~!
Forever NAILING IT. But particularly this one. NAILED. Love you two.
I love how their acknowledgment of not being able to find the objective truth also states that all of their findings, the whole system including this video too can't be claimed objective reality but their own observation, but still closer to reality due to the fact that they are trying to keep a check on their own blind spots and patterns.
03:45 - "whatever worldview that you've accepted... because it's easy"
I found a recent Jordan Peterson video that alludes to something similar: th-cam.com/video/I4xZUQmmMuI/w-d-xo.html 45:08 - 45:45
I think this video is well worth checking out because personality is discussed a lot and there are many great insights.
thank you!!
Maybe we *can* see objective reality, but our saviors and demons cloud our perspective and perception.
When we get there we realize we have got so little control over the outside world and even ourselves.
I wonder what Shan has on her mind. It’s something. 🤔
Agreed. Everything about her feels different here.
Likely thinking about her experiences seeing these people be trapped by their own world views and how they got out, essentially what the video is about
The analogies are on point on this one.
We all live in our own carnival funhouse of mirrors. We have to question every mirror. Hopefully one day we can climb out. But I once heard this= anything that can change is not the truth.
...Seriously, from what I understand of Si, rewriting the program every single time is literally what they do all day.
I was thinking Si was kind of the opposite, like it looks for a groove to get stuck into. Ne conversely looks for alternatives. If I had to guess, Ne would be more comfortable exploring different paths than Si. I feel like Si would have the hardest time updating their worldview out of all the functions.
@@NovakiSalem Si is in view of what *is*, whereas Ne is about all the possibilities of what can be -- at least as I understand. I do believe Si doesn't so much like having to take in new info or possibilities ALL the time, but part it's because of their need to... uh... properly integrate and make sense of it with every other bit of experience they have inside themselves (that they remember and have access to). I.e., the program has to be updated again.
Yeah, I think we are seeking consistency and stability and redundancy. But imo it's from needing to process each bit of info so thoroughly, and make sure it is ALL consistent, that we really try to limit the intake of things that can shake and upset what we have established to that point. BUT, imo, taking in and considering too much can cause instability and uncertainty and lack of a good foundation. On the other hand, maybe that's my bias and I'm wrong.
And this is just my personal impression or understanding, perception, whatnot. Other Si types be free to disagree. But that's just what I think and have heard from others about Si as well (the part about constantly processing and updating each little bit of reality, and thus spending a lot time to integrate or organize it to where and how it seems to belong).
ISTJ here, I honestly don't really have these kinds of problems listed in the video, I always come to a point where I say "ok, I have seen enough going this direction, why not go that direction for a bit". I don't really feel like I get stuck in a worldview so to speak, I simply learn as much as I can and then move on to something else after I have exhausted the material. My weaker Fi-Ne eventually stands up and says "alright, times up, lets move on" and I do. I don't really attach my Fi to a worldview its more like I adopt it for a bit and see if it matches reality, when I am done and ready to move on I take what I learned from it and just continue on.
@@Maya_Ruinz I had someone I know say something along the lines of that everyone should reassess their whole entire worldview every so often, to which I thought, A) why would you not be constantly updating your worldview... literally all the time? And B) Literally what is the value in shaking up and reassessing your ENTIRE worldview all at once? Like, what? I doubt it's even possible. Although I've heard that that is actually just how Si functions; it has already updated the program because it does that when it processes new... I guess sensory data. Therefore, there's no need or benefit for the programmer to scrap that whole program and start over from scratch -- but also I'm pretty sure you can't anyway. I don't know what people even mean when they say that, I guess.
As for Ne, until the concept of possibilities have been added via direct experience (Si), they can't be integrated into the program or searched for since, to Si, up until experience shows otherwise, possibilities don't exist.
@@aprilhelm518 That sounds right to me, Ne for me is something that comes when I challenge myself and essentially start fresh. I usually do this by literally moving, finding a new job and moving away to a different city. It helps put the pressure on and give me something new to dive into and learn.
If there's no subject then what you see is objective. 'You,' a piece of reality manifested, observing reality.
Plot twist: If you don't see yourself, you are in yourself, i.e. seeing things *sub*jectively. But that's okay at times too, I would guess.
@@aprilhelm518 I don't get it🤷♂️
@@oscarl.3563 I'm kind of joking, but 'you' would be the subject, so if you see everything from an objective view, that should mean that you can also see yourself.
@@aprilhelm518 This is some inception-level stuff. I'm afraid it's too complex for me.
Maybe I ought to clarify that I recognize no person, hence no subject - all of that is just imagination in our minds. So the whole objective-subjective thing that people play at falls apart!
@@oscarl.3563 Well, the subject exists, therefore the objective view, in order to see *everything*, must be able to see the self. Personally, I think of it as the difference between 1st person perspective in writing versus... probably omniscient (since 3rd person is often glorified 1st person anyway). In omniscient view, the narrator can see everyone, everything they do, and everything that happens and draw from that to tell the story; that is very objective, but the more objective (breadth oriented), I would say the less it can be oriented to understand and really see through a single person's eyes.
In MBTI, each function as an orientation: extroverted or introverted. The extroverted orientation is more objective, more oriented to breadth. The subjective orientation is necessarily deeper, but not as wide.
Ni empowers self. Ne empowers the tribe.
Ni, Ti, Fi, Si allow us to change worldview. Te and Ne changes are when tribal paradigm changes. Se (cash and prizes) is the best way to transform society.
This all responds from an Ne leading the change. Maybe Se.
Fascinating. I'm glad that I found you guys talking about/like this as I've never heard anyone express these thoughts this coherently. I'm sure you get hundreds of people saying the same thing but: this is how I've come to understand the world too. And it "works" for me, and I too am amazed/disappointed that so few other people see things like this. QUESTION: Do you think this perspective/approach/mindset is something that the majority of people could adopt, under appropriate world/education circumstances? Or is that not realistic/achievable for some underlying reason?
literally my goal is to bring OPS and this perspective to the educational field. but right now I'm still figuring it out for myself and the people close to me :)
Thanks so much for this.
This is so timely for me. I'm currently negotiating a career change and a drop in salary which is violating a long held identity
You can only prepare your mind to change and start paying attention. That in itself is just an intellectual exercise. Once prepared it's takes a tragedy or some other type of emotional collapse to actually change. This was the message of the man Jesus in the parable of the foolish vergins.
Hi, Interesting thesis to your vid. I don’t come from the business world, and I am not familiar with most of the people referenced. Is it possible to include a summary with some of the names typed out? They are dropped so fast as references, I am not understanding them.
>video about tearing down and building
>9:11 long
uhhh
You don't need any worldview. Just tear them all down.
Then that is your worldview.
@@TheLategates No. I've never had a worldview, maybe if you travel to the moon though you see quite a lot from a bird-watchtower.
@@oscarl.3563 “Tear down worldviews” is a worldview👍
@@TheLategates It isn't, but clearly you don't get it because you think you understand something.
Would love to see Dave make some solo videos like back in the day.
I like the computer/software analogy. Stock worldviews are probably supposed to keep people from wallowing in subjective perspective. But it seems like we actually come back to seeing that the closest we get to objective truth is still subjective? I guess with higher consciousness we accept the limitations to what we "know" and stop attacking and learn to work cohesively with the real world, once we figure out what that is.
Love you guys.
Take a shot each time Dave says Tom Tom...
3:32
DAMN: Windows 11 just screwed me into thinking of switching to Chrome OS (unless I hold on to Windows 10 until October, 2025). If only I can keep a Desktop PC, because I have no use for a touchpad on laptops.
Here's MY truth:
It seems you lot have the nature side covered and Teal Swan/Others have the nurture side down.
That's what I'm processing anymore.
The 1st Epistle of Paul the Apostle (Try saying that 10 times fast). And Silas.
"You can't know objective reality" is a claim to know objective reality.
This is gold
Tom Tom is a GPS.
I don't think that's what he meant with objective truth. I think he meant as to purpose and reason to things we do- from his ti, his need to KNOW WHAT AND WHY is the world. But he can't, no one can, THEREFORE, we should follow what produces a positive reaction, because that would be the reasonable things to do.
But yes, we can get CLOSER to objective reality. Only objective reality is an infinite concept therefore we will never get anywhere near it. Just closer. And the only reason we should even try, is if it produces these positive reactions when we do so.
I thought he was a Ti/Si INTP
This info is badass!!!! 💪🏻
What is Tom Bilyeu's OP?
ISTP
MF-Ti/Se-CP/B(S)
Sauce?
Sometimes it's fate.. multicultural and multi religious society could help shaped and tolerance worldview.. and before it is a law you need the process of guiding people through acceptable guidelines.. with avoidance of extremities in mind..
Sometimes, history shapes it too.. as does the reaction or acceptance.. sometimes you need a leader to do that, some times your need an organization for that.. sometimes you need to introduce a new identity.. sometime you need to promote peaceful transition.. sometimes you need to invent a concept for that..
All in all, a good worldview uses cooperation as protocol.. the absence of accountability to hypocrisy is the opposite of that..
💜
Morning!
One of the nice parts about being sleep last, Ni demon… I don’t really value my subjective world a whole lot. I’m an idiot in other ways, but thankfully not in this one 😆
Here's some blast: Just give up.
This needs a better thumbnail 😘
The only truth is that there is no Truth.
Is that true?
@@deterpinklage4406 it's self-negating. It is both true and false. It is neither true nor false.
All Im taking from this video, and this channel, is that these people are incredibly prejudiced against feeling and, for inexplicable reasons, think Ti is a feeling function. It makes no sense. Also their personality test is the worst I've ever taken, tied with CS Josephs abortion of a test. Watch out for these two folks, they're trying to turn you into Te and/or Ni users and seem too mentally handicapped to realize typology isnt a choice. Also, the obsession with Fi: ENTP and INTP do what they love and they have Fe soooo....yeah this channel's operating thesis is....suspect. At best. They trollin'