Ludwig Wittgenstein ~ Sakinorva Databank

The Sakinorva Databank

Ludwig Wittgenstein

in Philosophy, Psychology, and Social Sciences

Ludwig Wittgenstein ~ Sakinorva Databank

Ludwig Wittgenstein

Philosophy, Psychology, and Social Sciences

e

i

n

s

f

t

p

j

function

ennea

variant

socio

psyche

INFJ 8

INTJ 1

5w4 6

1w9 1

sx/sp 4

sp/sx 1

sp/so 1

LII 7

LSI 5

VLEF 3

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1

h

e

x

a

c

o

total votes 45

8

9

7

6

3

12

3

Click to toggle markup guide.

bold	bold
italic	italic
hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"	[hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"](https://sakinorva.net/library/contextualizing_functions)
	(i){https://i.imgur.com/g0oL9CB.png}

	Tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sx/Sp ILI 2020/10/11 (Sun) 19:22:13 #8496
	Betas tend to try and sort social interactions into a clearly understandable set of rules. This fits with Wittgenstein's original approach to language, trying to divide pretty much all statements into "nonsense" and "not nonsense." Also, Betas tend to value bold, dramatic displaces of rhetoric. So for example, waving around a fire poker in a philosophy debate in order to make a point. So now I turn the question back to you. Why do you suspect he's a Delta?

Editing post #8496 by Tman Betas tend to try and sort social interactions into a clearly understandable set of rules. This fits with Wittgenstein's original approach to language, trying to divide pretty much all statements into "nonsense" and "not nonsense." Also, Betas tend to value bold, dramatic displaces of rhetoric. So for example, waving around a fire poker in a philosophy debate in order to make a point. So now I turn the question back to you. Why do you suspect he's a Delta?
Replying to post #8496 by Tman

	Tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sx/Sp ILI 2020/10/09 (Fri) 13:57:43 #8493
	In response to post #8492. First of, he didn't really seem to value politeness, or maintaining an emotionally positive atmosphere, which is an Alpha trait. Second of, Ne is associated with being able to recognize values in the thoughts of those who are very different from them, trying to include all different schools of thought. Contrast this to Wittgenstein, who tended to believe strongly in one ideal, and claim that anyone who digressed with him just didn't get it. But above all else, if you think he's LII, why not vote LII?!

Editing post #8493 by Tman First of, he didn't really seem to value politeness, or maintaining an emotionally positive atmosphere, which is an Alpha trait. Second of, Ne is associated with being able to recognize values in the thoughts of those who are very different from them, trying to include all different schools of thought. Contrast this to Wittgenstein, who tended to believe strongly in one ideal, and claim that anyone who digressed with him just didn't get it.<br><br>But above all else, if you think he's LII, why not vote LII?!
Replying to post #8493 by Tman

	Jacobus INFJ 4w5 EIE 2019/11/10 (Sun) 12:57:14 #7383
	Wittgenstein and Russell show the differences between VLEF and LVEF rather clearly, but Witty was the VLEF and Russell the LVEF. Wittgenstein could be a tyrant, he demanded a lot out of his associates and his students. In an argument with Popper he brandished a poker at him and when he was a teacher in an Austrian village he beat a student unconscious. In matters of religion, he was basically an agnostic theist, claiming that he was unable to "bend the knee" to religion (which Afanasyev says is typical of 1st V). Russell, on the other hand, had a much more democratic character and worldview. He claimed that he would refuse to die for his beliefs, as he wasn't sure if he was right (L>V). His relationship with Wittgenstein became more and more constrained as the latter moved further away from the logic of the Tractatus toward what Russell saw as mysticism.

Editing post #7383 by Jacobus <p>Wittgenstein and Russell show the differences between VLEF and LVEF rather clearly, but Witty was the VLEF and Russell the LVEF. Wittgenstein could be a tyrant, he demanded a lot out of his associates and his students. In an argument with Popper he brandished a poker at him and when he was a teacher in an Austrian village he beat a student unconscious. In matters of religion, he was basically an agnostic theist, claiming that he was unable to "bend the knee" to religion (which Afanasyev says is typical of 1st V).</p> <p>Russell, on the other hand, had a much more democratic character and worldview. He claimed that he would refuse to die for his beliefs, as he wasn't sure if he was right (L>V). His relationship with Wittgenstein became more and more constrained as the latter moved further away from the logic of the Tractatus toward what Russell saw as mysticism.</p>
Replying to post #7383 by Jacobus

Crescens 2019/10/03 (Thu) 00:05:19 #7189
I think by "of that which one cannot speak, one must remain silent" Wittgenstein is saying that there are things of the world that cannot be reduced to logic and empiricism. To try and speak of these things you will always miss the mark and be caught in a language game, therefore you must remain silent about them. Then idea is then that you don't talk about them, but you show them, somehow. All the things that can be reduced to logic are mere tautologies and everything else, all the things we cannot speak about, are the truly valuable and meaninful things in the world. This certainly does not seem Te to me, however the logical positivists of the Vienna Circle took from the Tractatus that the only meaningful statements were those that could be expressed in language, which was appalling to Wittgenstein. As for remaining silent about one's own important meaningful experiences, which I believe Wittgenstein would consider to be something you cannot speak about - and it does sound like Fi on the surface, perhaps - the point isn't that you must simply keep it to yourself, but show it by some means that doesn't get caught up in the limitations of language. This keeps reminding me of a Zen koan, where the 'solution' or 'expression' of the koan - I use those terms very awkwardly - is not about the language at all but about moving beyond language into pure experience. Rather aspirational Se I suppose. Anyway, those are just some of my thoughts on the matter.

Editing post #7189 by Crescens <p>I think by "of that which one cannot speak, one must remain silent" Wittgenstein is saying that there are things of the world that cannot be reduced to logic and empiricism. To try and speak of these things you will always miss the mark and be caught in a language game, therefore you must remain silent about them. Then idea is then that you don't talk about them, but you show them, somehow. All the things that can be reduced to logic are mere tautologies and everything else, all the things we cannot speak about, are the truly valuable and meaninful things in the world. This certainly does not seem Te to me, however the logical positivists of the Vienna Circle took from the Tractatus that the only meaningful statements were those that could be expressed in language, which was appalling to Wittgenstein. As for remaining silent about one's own important meaningful experiences, which I believe Wittgenstein would consider to be something you cannot speak about - and it does sound like Fi on the surface, perhaps - the point isn't that you must simply keep it to yourself, but show it by some means that doesn't get caught up in the limitations of language. This keeps reminding me of a Zen koan, where the 'solution' or 'expression' of the koan - I use those terms very awkwardly - is not about the language at all but about moving beyond language into pure experience. Rather aspirational Se I suppose. Anyway, those are just some of my thoughts on the matter.</p>
Replying to post #7189 by Crescens

	Tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sx/Sp ILI 2019/09/05 (Thu) 22:37:32 #7053
	Your foucsing on Wiginstine the mystic. But what of Wigienstine the empericsit and logicain? "Of that which one can not speak, one must remain silent." An emphases on being able to tell show your ideas empericly and logicly. Dose that sound like someone whos Te blind? And what about this, that one must remaine silent about ones most important meanfull peronsal experinces? Dose that sound like Fe to you? Or Fi?

Editing post #7053 by Tman <p>Your foucsing on Wiginstine the mystic. But what of Wigienstine the empericsit and logicain? "Of that which one can not speak, one must remain silent." An emphases on being able to tell show your ideas empericly and logicly. Dose that sound like someone whos Te blind? And what about this, that one must remaine silent about ones most important meanfull peronsal experinces? Dose that sound like Fe to you? Or Fi? </p>
Replying to post #7053 by Tman

	Jacobus INFJ 4w5 EIE 2018/12/13 (Thu) 14:29:23 #4217
	MBTI-wise there's nothing Te or Fi (or Ne or Si, for that matter) about him. Look at what he wrote in his journals, in correspondences, etc. "The World and Life are one. Physiological life is of course not "Life". And neither is psychological life. Life is the world. Ethics does not treat of the world. Ethics must be a condition of the world, like logic. Ethics and Aesthetics are one." "It is true: Man is the microcosm: I am my world." "Frazer's account of the magical and religious views of mankind is unsatisfactory; it makes these views look like errors." The thinkers he admired most were NF types (in both MBTI and Socionics): Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, Augustine, and so on.

Editing post #4217 by Jacobus <p>MBTI-wise there's nothing Te or Fi (or Ne or Si, for that matter) about him. Look at what he wrote in his journals, in correspondences, etc.</p> <p>"The World and Life are one. Physiological life is of course not "Life". And neither is psychological life. Life is the world.<br /> Ethics does not treat of the world. Ethics must be a condition of the world, like logic.<br /> Ethics and Aesthetics are one."<br /> "It is true: Man is the microcosm:<br /> I am my world."<br /> "Frazer's account of the magical and religious views of mankind is unsatisfactory; it makes these views look like errors."</p> <p>The thinkers he admired most were NF types (in both MBTI and Socionics): Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, Augustine, and so on.</p>
Replying to post #4217 by Jacobus

diobono int 5w4 ili 2018/07/10 (Tue) 12:21:32 #2016
I don't see why lii> Ili. I am not super familiar with his work but it's is less about constructing a system and more about deconstructing things almost like it would be a "car engine " in a way. This seems very creative Te to me. There is not necessarily a Ti framework of Laws from which a system is created but more of Ni first mental imagery which seems strong to me from what i have read of him. He did rely strongly on mental imagery if i recall and was not overly schematic. He changed his mind too often to be a lii and after the tractatus he sort of steered direction in his work in a way a socionics Ti dominant is not likely to do . For Example Noam Chomsky and Plato who are clear LIIs. Even if their work was shifting in the course of their lives they never really just completely changed direction. Of course this is super hypothethical given i am not too familiar with him.

Editing post #2016 by diobono <p>I don't see why lii> Ili. I am not super familiar with his work but it's is less about constructing a system and more about deconstructing things almost like it would be a "car engine " in a way. This seems very creative Te to me.</p> <p>There is not necessarily a Ti framework of Laws from which a system is created but more of Ni first mental imagery which seems strong to me from what i have read of him. He did rely strongly on mental imagery if i recall and was not overly schematic. He changed his mind too often to be a lii and after the tractatus he sort of steered direction in his work in a way a socionics Ti dominant is not likely to do . For Example Noam Chomsky and Plato who are clear LIIs. Even if their work was shifting in the course of their lives they never really just completely changed direction. Of course this is super hypothethical given i am not too familiar with him.</p>
Replying to post #2016 by diobono

date	username	vote
21/03/18 22:10	Darkstar	INTJ
20/05/31 15:01	bibliology	INTJ
21/03/18 17:47	Tman	INTJ
19/05/12 22:23	Jacobus	INxJ
18/11/10 18:07	tch	INTJ
18/07/08 02:13	Zethmal	INTJ
18/06/24 07:38	LVNA	INTJ
19/03/22 07:45	Diobono	INTJ

date	username	vote
22/03/02 00:04	Woll Smoth	INFJ
21/03/18 22:10	Darkstar	INFJ
20/07/05 07:41	Flower-like	INFJ
20/01/15 15:19	Lol	INFJ
19/05/12 21:41	Jacobus	INFJ
19/03/23 21:15	tman	INTJ
19/01/02 23:19	tch	INFJ
18/07/10 04:44	fg	INFJ
18/06/24 10:55	Diobono	INFJ

date	username	vote
21/03/18 22:10	Darkstar	5w4
20/01/18 11:41	bibliology	5w4
19/03/23 21:15	tman	5w4
19/05/12 22:17	Jacobus	1w9
18/07/08 02:13	Zethmal	5w4
18/06/24 07:38	LVNA	5w4
18/06/24 10:56	Diobono	5w4

date	username	vote
21/03/18 22:10	Darkstar	sx/sp
20/01/18 11:41	bibliology	sx/sp
19/10/07 11:08	Tman	sx/sp
18/12/28 23:17	Jacobus	sx/sp
18/06/24 07:38	LVNA	sp/so

date	username	vote
21/03/18 22:10	Darkstar	514
20/01/18 11:41	bibliology	514
19/03/26 13:30	tman	514

date	username	vote
23/08/11 00:04	Woll Smoth	LII
21/03/18 22:10	Darkstar	LSI
20/10/31 05:15	Diobono	LII
20/10/30 18:22	Flower-like	LSI
20/02/03 22:45	bibliology	LII
20/01/25 12:28	zazu	LII
19/10/21 00:36	tch	LII
19/05/07 08:49	Avalonia	LSI
20/07/04 22:01	Tman	LSI
19/01/09 21:12	Jacobus	LSI
18/07/10 04:44	fg	LII
18/06/24 07:38	LVNA	LII

date	username	vote
20/10/13 21:37	Flower-like	VLEF
19/11/10 20:07	Tman	VLEF
19/10/15 20:42	Jacobus	VLEF