OT: NYT article on, among other things, the limits of our ability to acknowledge what we don’t know

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Ash Housewares][quote=CBad]Interesting. I’ve taken it several times and always get INTJ as well.[/quote]

Me too. This site is like catnip for analytical introverts.[/quote]

I’ve always been INTP. Having revealed that, I’m starting to feel like Tessie in “The Lottery”.

[Rich Toscano]

I think it’s “N” and “T” in the middle that are probably common amongst analytical pigg types. The outside letters (E/I and P/J) can be found in any combination in analytical people. If memory serves, those with “NT” in the middle are called “Rationals.”

[Rich Toscano]

I think it’s “N” and “T” in the middle that are probably common amongst analytical pigg types. The outside letters (E/I and P/J) can be found in any combination in analytical people. If memory serves, those with “NT” in the middle are called “Rationals.”

[Rich Toscano]

I think it’s “N” and “T” in the middle that are probably common amongst analytical pigg types. The outside letters (E/I and P/J) can be found in any combination in analytical people. If memory serves, those with “NT” in the middle are called “Rationals.”

[Rich Toscano]

I think it’s “N” and “T” in the middle that are probably common amongst analytical pigg types. The outside letters (E/I and P/J) can be found in any combination in analytical people. If memory serves, those with “NT” in the middle are called “Rationals.”

[Rich Toscano]

I think it’s “N” and “T” in the middle that are probably common amongst analytical pigg types. The outside letters (E/I and P/J) can be found in any combination in analytical people. If memory serves, those with “NT” in the middle are called “Rationals.”

[scaredyclassic]

http://www.slate.com/id/2258484/pagenum/3

good article from slate referencign the ny times blog and describing the “new agnosticism” (my new religious position)….

[scaredyclassic]

http://www.slate.com/id/2258484/pagenum/3

good article from slate referencign the ny times blog and describing the “new agnosticism” (my new religious position)….

[scaredyclassic]

http://www.slate.com/id/2258484/pagenum/3

good article from slate referencign the ny times blog and describing the “new agnosticism” (my new religious position)….

[scaredyclassic]

http://www.slate.com/id/2258484/pagenum/3

good article from slate referencign the ny times blog and describing the “new agnosticism” (my new religious position)….

[scaredyclassic]

http://www.slate.com/id/2258484/pagenum/3

good article from slate referencign the ny times blog and describing the “new agnosticism” (my new religious position)….

[CA renter]

That was a great article, davelj; thanks for posting it.

My guess would be that this “defect” is actually what enables us to survive. If we could honestly know and understand all of the risks out there, we would be paralyzed by our fears, and would probably accomplish very little…maybe even refraining from reproducing because we wouldn’t want to suject our offspring to the potential threats we see.

When thinking about all the people I know, it’s the ones who are most ignorant about their ignorance who accomplish the most. They just dive into their next venture without any thought about the risks or obstacles they will likely face. What’s interesting, is that they very often succeed, often due to blind luck or being in the right place at the right time.

Like Cardiff and Scaredy, I’m too analytical and quickly see the risks of any given action, so I tend to do nothing…and regret it later when I see how the bolder (and more ignorant???) folk succeeded and greatly benefited from taking those risks (which they largely weren’t aware of in many cases).

It would seem to me that evolution would favor both types of personalities (more analytical and more ignorant) because each type has a trait that would make them succeed when others fail. I would say these personalities complement each other.

[CA renter]

That was a great article, davelj; thanks for posting it.

My guess would be that this “defect” is actually what enables us to survive. If we could honestly know and understand all of the risks out there, we would be paralyzed by our fears, and would probably accomplish very little…maybe even refraining from reproducing because we wouldn’t want to suject our offspring to the potential threats we see.

When thinking about all the people I know, it’s the ones who are most ignorant about their ignorance who accomplish the most. They just dive into their next venture without any thought about the risks or obstacles they will likely face. What’s interesting, is that they very often succeed, often due to blind luck or being in the right place at the right time.

Like Cardiff and Scaredy, I’m too analytical and quickly see the risks of any given action, so I tend to do nothing…and regret it later when I see how the bolder (and more ignorant???) folk succeeded and greatly benefited from taking those risks (which they largely weren’t aware of in many cases).

It would seem to me that evolution would favor both types of personalities (more analytical and more ignorant) because each type has a trait that would make them succeed when others fail. I would say these personalities complement each other.

[CA renter]

That was a great article, davelj; thanks for posting it.

My guess would be that this “defect” is actually what enables us to survive. If we could honestly know and understand all of the risks out there, we would be paralyzed by our fears, and would probably accomplish very little…maybe even refraining from reproducing because we wouldn’t want to suject our offspring to the potential threats we see.

When thinking about all the people I know, it’s the ones who are most ignorant about their ignorance who accomplish the most. They just dive into their next venture without any thought about the risks or obstacles they will likely face. What’s interesting, is that they very often succeed, often due to blind luck or being in the right place at the right time.

Like Cardiff and Scaredy, I’m too analytical and quickly see the risks of any given action, so I tend to do nothing…and regret it later when I see how the bolder (and more ignorant???) folk succeeded and greatly benefited from taking those risks (which they largely weren’t aware of in many cases).

It would seem to me that evolution would favor both types of personalities (more analytical and more ignorant) because each type has a trait that would make them succeed when others fail. I would say these personalities complement each other.

[CA renter]

That was a great article, davelj; thanks for posting it.

My guess would be that this “defect” is actually what enables us to survive. If we could honestly know and understand all of the risks out there, we would be paralyzed by our fears, and would probably accomplish very little…maybe even refraining from reproducing because we wouldn’t want to suject our offspring to the potential threats we see.

When thinking about all the people I know, it’s the ones who are most ignorant about their ignorance who accomplish the most. They just dive into their next venture without any thought about the risks or obstacles they will likely face. What’s interesting, is that they very often succeed, often due to blind luck or being in the right place at the right time.

Like Cardiff and Scaredy, I’m too analytical and quickly see the risks of any given action, so I tend to do nothing…and regret it later when I see how the bolder (and more ignorant???) folk succeeded and greatly benefited from taking those risks (which they largely weren’t aware of in many cases).

It would seem to me that evolution would favor both types of personalities (more analytical and more ignorant) because each type has a trait that would make them succeed when others fail. I would say these personalities complement each other.

[Author]

Posts