We live in a world where everything began life as a concept which then multiplied into a series of concepts. A theory forms then another, then another and finally a working theorem is produced. On the basis of observation and testing, new facts are established by the person or people who understood the theorems most. To everyone else it represents trivia.

Duality, the most paradoxical concept of them all in my view.

The idea that two people from “two ends of the earth” so to speak are right for each other in the long-term is remarkable. The trouble always is this… people are not perfect. They can be so screwed up from their societal conditioning through politics and religion which have a joint aim of dictating your reality for their benefit.

Philosophy on the other hand is the attempt to identify reality without distortion but like everything subject to that chaotic variable known as “human nature” it will eventually “fall into the wrong hands” so to speak.

Essentially it was Carl Jung, an INTj who made the key contribution to Socionics, the identifying of the eight cognitive processes. A. Augusta, an ENTp and “restructurer” essentially took these raw jigsaw puzzles and integrated them into a new theorem.

Another example, Ayn Rand, an ENTp who “restructured” and put together her philosophy of objectivism again made an integration that was very significant. Unfortunately the subjectivist world still hasn’t “woken up” so to speak to the importance of it.

I have experienced time and time again the phenomenon that Napolean Hill identified in his classic motivational book Think and Grow Rich where most people you meet in society have a dreadful fear of “superior attitudes” thus fostering in them an inferiority complex.

What is the opposite of education? Entertainment obviously. How do you keep a population dumbed down and subdued? Keep them entertained of course.

Philosophers get knocked for “thinking too much” or acting “cold and unemotional” but its them who will eventually turn all negatives into positives. Of course why would society care when its duped into believing that things are fine as they are whilst they benefit “the elite”.

The worst thing about knowing “the naked truth” with how society works from a strong introverted logic perspective is that everyone you meet thinks you’re a lunatic.

The worst thing about societal norms is how the freedom of democracy is abused by the stupid subjectivists.

If you’re an introvert you can easily understand the motivations and needs of an extrovert because they are all external and observable. From the reverse perspective “lazy minds” would simply have poor understanding with little patience.

If you’re an intuitive you can easily understand the lifestyle of sensors because they all live daily sequential lives which is super easy to SEE and understand. From the reverse perspective they have little or no idea what it means to interpret the world from A to F to T to Z.

If you’re logical (from the head) then you can easily understand the emotional distortions that come through pseudo-logical ethics (from the heart). From the reverse perspective they will always moan that you shouldn’t be so impersonal in your judgement of others.

If you’ve been following then you’ll realise I’ve just given my biased account of why LII types usually end up as outcasts in their own communities and society in general. Can also be known as the most detached from reality type thus giving the unique ability to see reality objectively which will make some or no sense to others.

This whole reflection tonight was stimulated by the fact that I met another ESE (dual) representative and whilst we had the most predictable course of events i.e. talking about everything and anything we eventually tired of each other and I slipped up with a foul remark.

What drove me completely nuts also was the conversation from this ESE subjectivists (knowledge based on personal experience) perspective talking about loving someone from the heart and not to scientifically explain relationships even though she childishly and selfishly wanted my philosophical explanations.

This experience teaches me to never again discuss my understandings of reality with a dual since she we’ll constantly act in accordance with it, in this case trying to tell me what’s best for me i.e. stop philosophising.

In this duality paradox I then wonder who’s philosophizing with who except from her point of view its called “advice” based on personal experience not “scientific observation” from my impartial outlook toward society.

I feel better now.

Peace out.