Interesting differences in leadership styles, possibly between INFP vs INFJ I’ve either been placed in leadership positions for random reasons, sometimes specific reasons and other times I’d see a ‘need’ and think “well SOMEBODY has to get things started” and so I would gather people together work on the thing I think was needed. Things I think we have in common: We govern with a light touch, allowing people do what-what-they-do We know that people have natural/learned talents that they do best at / are happiest at / etc. We can see patterns in groups Differences may be: I suspect you see “they are good for a task and can be useful in a certain role” I see, “They seem to have a natural aptitude in this area and need to be placed in a proper position to allow for their growth in that area, if they choose to” While we both operate with certainties, what we are certain ABOUT is likely different. [INFPs _appear_ uncertain but really aren’t; it’s just the things they are certain about simply “are-what-they-are” and present as “INFP is just being stubborn / won’t listen” but that’s their certainty in action

Interesting differences in leadership … [read full article]

 

it was a weird situation though. Trump was testing out all kinds of weird designs for the wall. But it actually Kevin McAleenan that started the debacle with the zero tolerance and the separation of families and the human rights violations: “McAleenan advocated for the implementation of the Trump administration’s “Zero Tolerance” policy on immigration, including the prosecution of parents and the separation of children from their families. According to fifteen of his colleagues, he was one of the most vocal proponents of the policy within the administration. In April 2018, he issued a memorandum calling on Kirstjen Nielsen to begin enacting the policy, in spite of the fact that Nielsen believed that Border Patrol was not prepared to implement it.” That wasn’t Trump’s doing. He may have inspired it but it was a gung ho financially emboldened head of Homeland Security that jumped the gun and created the big mess.

 it was a weird
[read full article]
 

well, it’s something something I’ve thought about a lot. Like, what makes things salient? Why is “this” getting my attention and not “that”. But not just me; what makes something ‘important’ at all? And so, it ‘sticks out’. Not even as just an expression; it does in some way differentiating itself. How does a new physical dimension come from an existing dimension? Let’s say we’re in 2D? How do you get to 3D? This is the stuff I try to look up or figure out sometimes. So it seems it has to be at a 90 degree angle in a direction that doesn’t exist from the previous dimension in order to get into the next one – whatever is at a tangent, creating new space as it does so that did not exist before. Or thinking about outlines; how is it that we know what objects are being represented when we draw outlines of them? What’s the minimum necessary amount of information for something to make itself known as it is in some minimal way? that kind of thing.

well, it’s something something
[read full article]
 

Based on the analysis in your document, counterarguments to Borges’ “The Library of Babel” could include: 1. **Optimism in Information and Knowledge:** Contrary to the portrayal of information overload leading to uncertainty and despair, one could argue that the vastness of information and knowledge actually empowers humanity. This perspective sees the library not as a curse but as a testament to human intellectual achievement and the endless possibilities for discovery and understanding. 2. **The Value of Searching:** Borges emphasizes the futility of searching for meaning in an infinite library, but an opposing view could highlight the intrinsic value of the search itself. This argument suggests that the act of searching, regardless of the outcome, enriches the human experience, fostering learning, growth, and the pursuit of curiosity. 3. **Linear Progress and Historical Optimism:** The document mentions Borges’ challenge to linear progress and historical optimism. A counterargument could assert the importance and validity of viewing history as a narrative of progress and enlightenment. This view would argue that, despite setbacks, humanity has steadily advanced in terms of knowledge, ethics, and societal structures. 4. **The Constructiveness of Identity:** While Borges explores the dissolution of identity in the infinite reflections of the library, a counterargument could emphasize the constructive aspects of identity formation. This perspective would argue that identity, even if multifaceted and evolving, provides a sense of continuity, purpose, and belonging that is essential for individual and collective well-being. 5. **The Role of Definitive Answers:** Borges might seem to dismiss the importance of definitive answers, but a counterargument could underline their significance in certain contexts. In science, for example, definitive answers to specific questions have led to technological advancements and improved quality of life. This argument suggests that while philosophical exploration is valuable, concrete answers remain crucial for practical progress. These counterarguments engage with the themes presented in your analysis, offering alternative viewpoints that celebrate the human capacity for understanding, the value of pursuit, the importance of progress and identity, and the role of definitive knowledge.

Based on the analysis
[read full article]