You will see more multimedia in Wikipedia. Not that we’re going to become a video site or anything. It’s still very much predominantly text and photos, and that’s good for us.

I.e. fuck you Hollywood, live sports, many perforances and events. Go back to your cave!!! Fucking troglodyte! Go back to your 3rd century!
Go scam Asia more!!! European shiteaters are insane or don't even read that wikiwikiwikicuntwathiteiggerguru

Three rules before you start questioning about the very last PS2 exclusive:

1. The game needs to be released after 2008, either 2009-2010.
2. The game had to be only on the PS2, and no other platforms, like the PSP and Wii, etc.
3. The game needs to be a third-party title.
4. The game needs to be specifically to run on the PS2.
5. The game needs to released first for the PS2 only.

If you want to find more info regarding the last PS2 exclusive, check these three links.
Tell me about it the comments below!

Born out of a personal desire to have these unseen characters make physical appearances in the main storyline one day (maybe by having the ones who are sealed away break out of their confines...?), I decided to go out of my way to list, in particular, all currently known gods & mythological figures in the series, along with their currently known statuses. ^{I pray heavily for the day that the gods finally come into play in the series... personally, I'd really like to see what Chernobog looks like...}

• Rasetsu, The Goddess of Destruction and Ruin (ORIGIN: Hinduism/Buddhism) - STATUS: Sealed)
• Durga, The Warrior Goddess (ORIGIN: Hinduism - STATUS: Unknown; Accessory of her namesake only contains the sealed sound of her conch shell)
• Agni, The God Who Controls All Flame (ORIGIN: Hinduism - STATUS: Unknown; Weapon of his namesake only contains some of his Spiritual Energy)
• Rakshasa, a Demon God (ORIGIN: Hinduism/Buddhism - STATUS: Sealed)
• Shiva, The Indian Goddess of Destruction (ORIGIN: Hinduism - STATUS: Unknown)
• Gozu, The Raging Bull God (ORIGIN: Japanese Mythos - STATUS: Unknown)
• Takemikazuchi, The God of Thunder (ORIGIN: Japanese Mythos - STATUS: Unknown; Rodin only took his hammer, though he likely had to defeat Takemikazuchi to do so)
• Chernobog, The God of Death (ORIGIN: Slavic Mythos - STATUS: Unknown, was expelled to the farthest depths of Inferno)
• Rusalka, The Lonely Water Spirits (ORIGIN: Slavic Mythos - STATUS: Sealed)
• Musso Koroni, The African Goddess of Discord (ORIGIN: African Mythos#:~:text=Nyale%2C%20also%20known%20as%20Musukoroni,be%20the%20goddess%20of%20chaos) - STATUS: Sealed)
• Balder, The Norse God of Light (ORIGIN: Norse Mythos - STATUS: Unknown)
• Talos, The Defender of Crete (ORIGIN: Greek Mythos - STATUS: Defeated by the witch Medea)
• Undine (ORIGIN: European Folklore - STATUS: Sealed)

Johann Gottlieb Fichte

19 May 1762 – 29 January 1814
J. G. Fichte and a priori Providentialism
Part of a Series on the Philosophy of History
Sunday 19 May 2024 is the 262nd anniversary of the birth of Johann Gottlieb Fichte (19 May 1762 – 29 January 1814), who was born in Rammenau, Saxony, then part of the Holy Roman Empire, on this day in 1762.
Fichte is often remembered in histories of philosophy as an immediate successor to Kant in the German idealist tradition. While still a young man Fichte wrote and anonymously published Attempt at a Critique of All Revelation. This was in 1792 when Fichte was 30 years old. Many believed that Kant had written this work, given Kant’s earlier critiques of pure reason, practical reason, and judgment, so when Kant denied authorship and identified Fichte as the actual author, Fichte experienced the philosophical equivalent of being an overnight sensation.
But Fichte’s life was an unsheltered as Kant’s life was sheltered. He was a born trouble-maker and was willing to touch the third rail of Enlightenment politics by writing and speaking openly about matters of religion, as revealed by his work on revelation. Fichte is sometimes called inflexible and rigid, though we could also say (a little more charitably) that he was principled and not inclined to compromise. Partly as a result of this temperament, Fichte became embroiled in a controversy in German intellectual life remembered as the Atheismusstriet, or Atheism Controversy.
During this controversy Friedrich Jacobi published an open letter against Fichte in which Jacobi coined the term “nihilism” to describe what he took to be Fichte’s position:

“Truly, my dear Fichte, I would not be vexed if you, or anyone else, were to call Chimerism the view I oppose to the Idealism that I chide for Nihilism. I have paraded my not-knowing in all my writings; in my non-knowledge I have prided myself so to be with knowledge, so perfectly and completely, that I am certainly allowed to be contemptuous of the mere doubter.—I have wrestled for truth with zeal and fervour since childhood as few others; as few others have I experienced my powerlessness—and my heart has grown tender for that—yea, very tender, my dear Fichte—and my voice so gentle! Just as I have deep compassion for myself, as human being, so I have it for others. I am patient without effort; but that I am truly patient without effort costs me a lot. The earth will be light above me—it won’t be long.”

Nihilism was to go on to have quite a career as an idea after Jacobi’s letter. While for Jacobi, the nihilism he attributed to Fichte was the inevitable outcome of reason, nihilism did not remain centered on Jacobi’s critique of Kantian philosophy, but came to signify belief in nothing at all.
Fichte’s controversial stance created a problem for the authorities at the University of Jena, where Fichte was employed at the time. Fichte wouldn’t budge, and this was one of the episodes responsible for his reputation for inflexibility, so the University of Jena dismissed him in 1799. At this point, with little to his name and few prospects, Fichte walked from Jena to Berlin—Google Maps says it takes 55 hours to complete this walk—and eventually he became part of the philosophical scene in Berlin.
Fichte attempted, semi-successfully, to support himself with popular books and lectures. For a philosopher coming from a background of Kantian philosophy—the most technical philosophy of its day—this was a bold project, but he gamely attempted to bring his interpretation of Kantianism to the masses. One of the outcomes of this effort was Fichte’s short book The Vocation of Man (1800). Fichte’s academic work was riddled with jargon, but The Vocation of Man is written in plain language and was intended for a popular audience. However, it’s still a demanding philosophical argument. In it, Fichte articulated a conception of human destiny that is universalistic, rationalistic, teleological, and even infinitistic:

“Let us not ask of history if man, on the whole, have yet become purely moral. To a more extended, comprehensive, energetic freedom he has certainly attained; but hitherto it has been an almost necessary result of his position, that this freedom has been applied chiefly to evil purposes. Neither let us ask whether the aesthetic and intellectual culture of the ancient world, concentrated on a few points, may not have excelled in degree that of modern times! It might happen that we should receive a humiliating answer, and that in this respect the human race has not advanced, but rather seemed to retrograde, in its riper years. But let us ask of history at what period the existing culture has been most widely diffused, and distributed among the greatest number of individuals; and we shall doubtless find that from the beginning of history down to our own day, the few light-points of Civilization have spread themselves abroad from their centre, that one individual after another, and one nation after another, has been embraced within their circle, and that this wider outspread of culture is proceeding under our own eyes. And this is the first point to be attained in the endless path on which humanity must advance.”

Notice that Fichte implies a distinction between two kinds of progress: there is progress toward the highest degree of excellence, and here humanity may have backslid, but there is also progress toward broadly distributed high culture, and here Fichte thinks that his time definitely surpassed previous history. Fichte also says that progress, by which he means moral progress, is an endless path, and we have already seen that it is possible for humanity to experience retrograde moral progress, so the pathway to man becoming purely moral, as Fichte sees it, is endless, it can incorporate reversals, and it can be striving to new heights or to wider diffusion.
This and many other passages point to the infinite perfectibility of man, which shows us the extent to which Fichte had imbibed the ideals of the French Revolution—or, we might say, he had imbibed the ideals of the French philosophers who were instrumental in laying the foundations of the French revolution, and were later arguably co-opted by the revolution, as in the case of Condorcet, who wrote this paean to the infinite perfectibility of man while on the run from the revolutionary gendarme. But the infinite perfectibility of man as Fichte imagines it is a teleology with a real history: things can go wrong, we can get sidetracked, we might pursue one form of moral excellence or another, and so on.
And Fichte also transmuted the French concept of the infinite perfectibility of man in the image of German idealism, producing a kind of philosophical spiritualism. Part of this transmutation of ideals came about because of the direction that Fichte saw the French revolution take as it developed. Many philosophers at the time initially supported the ideals of the French Revolution, but came to see it in a different light after the Terror and the Napoleonic Wars. Fichte as well.
Seeking to rally his countrymen after defeats inflicted by Napoleon, Fichte gave a series of public lectures later published as Addresses to the German Nation. This was more than a half century before the unification of Germany as a nation-state. In the twentieth century this work was savaged by George Santayana in his book Egotism in German Philosophy, which I mentioned in my episode on Wars and Rumors of Wars. Santayana called Fichte “an uncompromising puritan” and in Santayana’s fever dream of German expansionism he imagined Fichte as the source of it all:

“…Fichte gives us prophetic glimpses of an idealistic Germany conquering the world. The state does not aim at self-preservation, still less is it concerned to come to the aid of those members of the human family that lag behind the movement of the day. The dominion of unorganised physical force must be abolished by a force obedient to reason and spirit. True life consists in refashioning human relations after a model innate in the mind. The glorious destiny of Germany is to bring forth and establish the world anew. Natural freedom is a disgraceful thing, a mere medley of sensual and intellectual impulses without any principle of order. It is for the Germans to decide whether a providential progress exists by becoming themselves the providence that shall bring progress about, or whether on the contrary every higher thought is folly. If they should fail, history would never blame them, for in that case there would be no more history.”

Many others also have seen Fichte’s work through the lens of the wars of their time, which were the world wars of the twentieth century, rather than through the lens of the wars of Fichte’s time, which were the Napoleonic Wars.
Fichte knew that he was putting his life on the line by publicly speaking out against the French, as he at one time referenced the fate of Johann Philipp Palm. Palm, a book seller, was connected to a pamphlet, Germany in Its Deep Humiliation (Deutschland in seiner tiefsten Erniedrigung), that angered Napoleon. Napoleon ordered his subordinates to try and execute Palm within twenty-four hours. Palm was tried on 26 August 1806 by a French military tribunal, found guilty, and shot within hours of the verdict. Four other book sellers also were tried were not executed. Fichte knew that the same thing could happen to him in publicly speaking out on behalf of the German people. We can see from incidents such as this that Fichte was in the thick of the history of his own time, sometimes riding the wave and sometimes making waves.
Roberta Picardi notes both the derivation and dependence of Fichte’s views from Kant, as well as Fichte’s divergence from Kant:

“Fichte explores the epistemic status and method of history with an aim which is clearly taken from Kant: the purpose of introducing a systematic and scientific method in the infinite field of the empiricism, of which history is a part, together with experimental physics. As we can read in The Characteristics of the Present Age he wants to obtain ‘a sure progress according to rule instead of an uncertain groping in the dark’ from history, i. e., instead of the ‘Herumptappen’ (this is the German word for ‘groping’) that in the second Preface to the Critique of Pure Reason Kant contrasts with the ‘secure path of a science’.”

But the secure path of science isn’t always all that secure, given that there are multiple scientific pathways, and not all pathways lead to the same end. This is the distinction within Fichte’s philosophy of history noted by Angelica Nuzzo:

“Fichte builds his idea of a philosophy of history upon a paradoxical argument. He pushes to the extreme the claim of the bare factual nature of history as a realm of irrational, not-conceptual, and thoroughly contingent reality. Yet he also maintains that philosophical knowledge of history is possible—although neither as deductive, nor conceptual, nor genetic knowledge. Against the fictitious notion of historical Wahrscheinlichkeit (plausibility, probability), Fichte holds on to the notion of ‘historical truth’ and to its ‘logic.’ Despite its radically empirical character, history can be construed a priori.”

Some of the flavor of Fichte’s a priori approach to history can be gained from his primary work on the philosophy of history Characteristics of the Present Age (Der Grundzüge des gegewärtigen Zeitalters, 1806), in which he decomposes history into Five Principal Epochs, based not on historical contingencies, but rather upon human destiny and moral development:

“…we endeavoured to pre-figure the whole Earthly Life of Man by a comprehension of its purpose;— to perceive why our Race had to begin its Existence here, and by this means to describe the whole present Life of humankind:—this is what we wished to do,—it was our first task. There are, according to this view, Five Principal Epochs of Earthly Life, each of which, although taking its rise in the life of the individual, must yet, in order to become an Epoch in the Life of the Race, gradually lay hold of and interpenetrate all Men; and to that end must endure throughout long periods of time, so that the great Whole of Life is spread out into Ages, which sometimes seem to cross, sometimes to run parallel with each other:—1st, The Epoch of the unlimited dominion of Reason as Instinct: —the State of Innocence of the Human Race. 2nd, The Epoch in which Reason as Instinct is changed into an external ruling Authority;—the Age of positive Systems of life and doctrine, which never go back to their ultimate foundations, and hence have no power to convince but on the contrary merely desire to compel, and which demand blind faith and unconditional obedience:—the State of progressive Sin. 3rd, The Epoch of Liberation,—directly from the external ruling Authority—indirectly from the power of Reason as Instinct, and generally from Reason in any form;—the Age of absolute indifference towards all truth, and of entire and unrestrained licentiousness:—the State of completed Sinfulness. 4th, The Epoch of Reason as Knowledge;—the Age in which Truth is looked upon as the highest, and loved before all other things:—the State of progressive Justification. 5th, The Epoch of Reason as Art;—the Age in which Humanity with more sure and unerring hand builds itself up into a fitting image and representative of Reason:—the State of completed Justification and Sanctification. Thus, the whole progress which, upon this view, Humanity makes here below, is only a retrogression to the point on which it stood at first, and has nothing in view save that return to its original condition. But Humanity must make this journey on its own feet; by its own strength it must bring itself back to that state in which it was once before without its own coöperation, and which, for that very purpose, it must first of all leave.”

We can call Fichte’s Five Principal Epochs a “stadial” philosophy of history, since “stadial” refers to stages. In this passage we gain an appreciation of the necessity of the five stages of history as a developmental process that cannot be gotten around: there is no royal road to the end of the history.
In the Second Lecture from Fichte’s Some Lectures Concerning the Scholar’s Vocation, he makes explicit both the a priori developmental history of humanity and the utopian picture of the ultimate end of human development:

“…a very great man has said, life in the state is not one of man’s absolute aims. The state is, instead, only a means for establishing a perfect society, a means which exists only under specific circumstances. Like all those human institutions which are mere means, the state aims at abolishing itself. The goal of all government is to make government superfluous. Though the time has certainly not yet come, nor do I know how many myriads or myriads of myriads of years it may take (here we are not at all concerned with applicability in life, but only with justifying a speculative proposition), there will certainly be a point in the a priori foreordained career of the human species when all civic bonds will become superfluous.”

The editor says in a footnote that the “great man” mentioned was probably an allusion to Kant’s Idea of History from a Cosmopolitan Point of View. We saw in my episode on Kant how Kant saw the teleology of humanity as establishing the perfect civil constitution, though I also speculated that, if we take Kant’s later writings on history in the context of his early pre-critical work on natural history, this Kantian teleology for humanity is nested within a larger cosmological teleology. By my reading, then, Kant is actually the more naturalistic position, while Fichte is the more anthropocentric, and his ideal is a purely spiritual ideal, even an a priori idea. For example, Fichte isn’t in the least interested to even give an estimate of the period of time that will be required for humanity to abolish all government, but he only points out that this is the ultimate end.
Marx also predicted the withering away of the state after communism had been achieved, and Marx, too, emphasized definite stages in human development that would lead to this outcome. With Kant, Fichte, and Marx all predicting the end of formal human governments we might take this prediction as a distinctive feature of a certain class of philosophies of history. Toynbee, too, saw not exactly the end of the state, but the end of universal civilizations, which would cede their place to universal churches, which sounds to me a lot like Kant, Fichte, and Marx anticipating the ultimate abolition of government in a perfect society.
This we can understand as a kind of inverse teleology, in which it is not (or not only) the advent of some future eventuality that is foreseen, but the abolition of some present state-of-affairs in the future as the goal of human development. For Kant, Fichte, Marx, and Toynbee, there is a dual teleological movement, in which some novel state-of-affairs is to unfold, while a present state of affairs is to give way and disappear as the new order comes to replace it. We could call this a stadial philosophy of history, but it is as much a substitutional philosophy of history: one social order is substituted for another; familiar institutions are to be replaced by novel institutions that take their place.
As far as the new institutions are expected to be an improvement over the old, this is also a melioristic philosophy of history. All progressivist philosophies of history are also melioristic, but we can distinguish between gradualistic meliorism, in which iterated reform eventually converges on a perfect society, which could be a finite or an infinitistic process, and stadial meliorism, in which there is a replacement rather than reform of a social order, and this replacement is an improvement.
For a non-stadial, non-teleological philosophy of history, we can turn to Leopold von Ranke, who was critical of Fichte’s five epochs:

“One of the ideas with which philosophy again and again confronts history as an irrefutable claim is that mankind is on an uninterrupted road to progress, in a steady development toward perfection. Fichte, one of the foremost philosophers in this field, assumes five epochs, a world plan as he says – reason ruling through instinct, reason ruling through law, emancipation from the authority of reason, reason as science, and reason as art. If this or a similar scheme were to any extent true, then general history would have to follow the road of progress which the human race followed in the indicated direction from one age to the next. The sole subject matter of history would then be the development of such concepts as they appear and manifest themselves in the world of phenomena. But this is by no means the case. For one thing, the philosophers themselves have extraordinarily varied opinions about the nature and selection of these supposedly ruling ideas. But they very wisely focus only on a few peoples in world history while considering the lives of all the rest as nothing, as a mere supplement. Otherwise it could not be hidden for a moment that from the beginning to this day the peoples of the world have been in the most varied conditions.”

We saw earlier that Fichte by no means argued for an uninterrupted road to progress, but we can set that aside as being of secondary importance. The antagonism between Fichte and Ranke runs deeper. Ranke is often associated with the emergence of historicism, and sometimes he is identified as the source of historicism. Ranke even was willing to express his historicism in theological terms when we said that all ages are equidistant from God. With this view of history as consisting of co-equal periods each with their own integrity it would be difficult, though not impossible, to argue for progress. In Characteristics of the Present Age Fichte rejects the view that an age can be assessed on its own terms:

“Should our view of the Present Age prove to have been a view taken from the standing-point of this Age itself, should the eye which has taken this view have been itself a product of the Age which it has surveyed, then has the Age borne witness to itself and such testimony must be set aside.”

Fichte, then, needs some criterion for his view of the present age other than the present age itself, and he finds it in religion:

“…what has been the nature of this theory, considered in its essential elements, and to what chief department of human thought it has belonged? I answer:—It was a Religious Theory; all our contemplations were Religious contemplations, and our view of things, and the eye which embraced that view, were Religious.”

Fichte goes one better and actually gives a definition of religion in the next paragraph:

“RELIGION consists in regarding and recognising all Earthly Life as a necessary development of the one, original, perfectly good and perfectly blessed Divine Life.”

Both Ranke and Fichte, then, invoke theological sanction for their conception of history, though this conception is starkly different, with Ranke taking each age to be sufficient unto itself, and no less related to the divine than any other age, while Fichte took each age to be dependent upon a larger framework for its meaning. While Ranke the historian insists on the individual uniqueness of each age, while Fichte the philosopher sees each age in relation to the whole of which it is a part. It is the task of Fichte’s Characteristics of the Present Age to provide for his contemporaries this larger framework so that they can understand their place in history, which for Fichte means understanding their place in the moral development of humanity.
Even Fichte’s conception of religion and moral development is strikingly abstract, as we find a little further on in the last chapter of Characteristics of the Present Age: “…Religion is nothing external,—it never clothes itself in any outward manifestation.” And, “…True Religion does not manifest itself outwardly, and does not impel man to any course of external conduct which he would not otherwise have adopted, but that it only completes his true Inward Being and dignity.” This is not necessary an orthodox position, and we’ve already seen how Fichte got himself in trouble with authorities with his views on religion.
It would seem strange to call Fichte’s philosophy of history a providential philosophy of history, as it seems to have little in common with, say, St. Augustine, but by Fichte’s own account, his is a pervasively religious perspective, and his philosophy of history is an account of humanity’s progress toward moral perfection. This progress is a purely inward fulfillment, without any observational consequences, again, by Fichte’s own account. I’ve run into this view in one other thinker, and that is Simone Weil. In my episode on Weil I quoted her criticism of providentialism of a kind that I called vulgar providentialism:

“Divine Providence is not a disturbing influence, an anomaly in the ordering of the world; it is itself the order of the world; or rather it is the regulating principle of this universe. It is eternal Wisdom, unique, spread across the whole universe in a sovereign network of relations.”

I think Fichte would have agreed with this, and with the examples of both Fichte and Weil we can see that there is a place within the conceptual space of philosophy of history for what we could call a pure providential philosophy of history, or, if you like, an a priori providentialism.
Ranke’s criticism of Fichte is predicated upon the necessity of a vulgar providentialism that is reflected in the empirical world. But if, as Fichte said, religion is nothing external, and it does not impel man to any course of external conduct, neither should it impel any course of external conduct on the world. This also resolves the paradoxical argument that Angelica Nuzzo found at the heart of Fichte’s philosophy of history, since the bare factual nature of history can be distinguished from the providentialism that can be construed a priori.

Video Presentation

https://youtu.be/T8eIxZi0LrM
https://www.instagram.com/p/C7LPoSKNdPB/
https://odysee.com/@Geopolicraticus:7/j.-g.-fichte-and-a-priori:6

Podcast Edition

https://spotifyanchor-web.app.link/e/73G2BY64JJb
https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/a31b8276-53cd-4723-b6ad-a39c8faa4572/episodes/306a6446-d4d7-4e24-a447-c89fd310d7a2/today-in-philosophy-of-history-j-g-fichte-and-a-priori-providentialism
https://www.iheart.com/podcast/269-today-in-philosophy-of-his-146507578/episode/j-g-fichte-and-a-priori-177816272/
​

/LonghornNation Daily Off Topic Free Talk Thread

Today: 5/20/2024

Last Thread

Current Austin Weather: 79° and Clear

Seven Day Forecast:

5/19	5/20	5/21	5/22	5/23	5/24	5/25
93°, Clouds	93°, Clouds	96°, Clouds	95°, Clouds	94°, Rain	98°, Rain	99°, Rain

Your go-to place to talk about whatever you want. From the dumb shit aggies do on a near daily basis, to the latest whatever happening wherever. What ya got?

Here's a look at upcoming Longhorn Sporting Event(s):

1. 5/20 University of Texas Women's Golf vs NCAA Championship Stroke Play
2. 5/20 University of Texas Men's Tennis vs NCAA Singles and Doubles Championships
3. 5/20 University of Texas Women's Tennis vs NCAA Singles and Doubles Championships
4. 5/21 University of Texas Women's Golf vs NCAA Championship Match Play
5. 5/21 7:30 PM University of Texas Baseball vs Texas Tech
6. 5/22 University of Texas Track & Field / Cross Country at NCAA West Preliminaries
7. 5/22 University of Texas Women's Golf vs NCAA Championship Match Play

Trending on Reddit

/All

1. THE DENVER NUGGETS HAVE BEEN ELIMINATED FROM CHAMPIONSHIP CONTENTION
2. This restaurant covered up the "No Tip" option with a sticker to force tipping
3. 'No sign of life' at crash site of helicopter carrying Iran's president, others
4. TIL a number of people, including a group of Swedish researchers, tried to replicate the experiment shown in the documentary Super Size Me(2004). None of them were able to get the same results as the documentary creator.
5. 'No sign of life' at crash site of helicopter carrying Iran's president, others

/CFB

1. /CFB Donates $18,000.00 to Toys For Tots & Children's Hospitals, thanks to the 8th annual Holiday Drive!
2. [Brian Stultz] SOURCE: (Auburn RB) Brian Battie is still in the ICU. He’s able to move his hands but doctors are unable to figure out much brain functionality he will have at this moment.
3. [Dellenger] "On the brink of a historic settlement, discord exists. Big East commissioner Val Ackerman “strongly objects” to a $70M tab her league may owe in damages & seeks a new plan to the one NCAA/P5 “orchestrated,” she writes in letter obtained by @YahooSports."
4. Georgia WR Sacovie White arrested for reckless driving
5. What place in the US has the most potential to host a FBS football program?
6. NIL-related lawsuit: Fanatics sues Marvin Harrison Jr. for breach of contract from his final year at Ohio State, claiming his failure to fulfill his contractual obligations caused potential damages in the “millions of dollars.”

/LonghornNation

1. [5/19/2024] Sunday's Sports Talk Thread
2. [5/19/2024] Sunday's Free Talk Thread
3. #1 Texas Rowing 🚣‍♀️ sweeps the Big 12 Championship for the 9th year in a row! 🤘
4. Texas Men’s Tennis Defeats Wake Forest 4-2 To Advance To NCAA Championship
5. [Post Series Thread] ⚾ #25 Texas sweeps Kansas, 3-0, in its final regular season series as a member of the Big 12.
6. Softball Regional LHN Stream
7. Longhorn College fantasy league on Fantrax

LonghornBot: you can get a list of commands you can give for the bot by commenting ".help". You will receive a private message with the commands.
This thread was programmatically generated and posted on 5/20/2024 12:00 AM. If you have any questions or comments, please contact brihoang or chrislabeard

Do you want a place to talk about the current situation in Iran?

Do you have crazy theories?
Did your post get removed for being Low Effort, and you still want a place to talk?
Well now you have it!
All rules still apply. Obviously.
​

Ebrahim Raisi (President of Iran) and foreign minister have died, state TV says – live updates

^{https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/may/20/iran-helicopter-crash-live-updates-ebrahim-raisi-iranian-president-search-and-rescue-middle-east-crisis-latest-news}

Wikipedia has changed IS to WAS. It is Official!!!

Some of the commenters during Sunday's Stream mentioned the global campaign to bring federal lawsuits and petitions against videogame publishers who intentionally sabotage the functionality of videogames when the servers shut down. They wanted Ludwig to do a Mogul Mail about it. I wasn't 1 of those commenters, nor am I a representative spearheading this initiative, but I am somewhat familiar with what's going on and wanted to explain it here to see if others are interested. So what is going on?

The Crew

The videogame "The Crew", published by Ubisoft, was recently destroyed for all players and had a playerbase of at least 12 million people. Due to the game's size and France's strong consumer protection laws, this represents one of the best opportunities to hold a publisher accountable for this action. If we are successful in charges being pressed against Ubisoft, this can have a ripple effect on the videogames industry to prevent publishers from destroying more games.

Source
More about "The Crew" Specifically
This includes both physical and digital versions of the game, by the way, as the game cannot function without pinging to the now offline servers, making it completely nonfunctional.

The Petition

Official government petitions have been introduced to prohibit the practice of intentionally rendering commercial videogames inoperable when support ends. Currently, petitions for the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia have been launched and will soon be open for signing. Plans are also underway for the European Union, but will unfortunately be delayed due to processing times. Further government petitions may be started later with enough assistance.

You can go to the website https://www.stopkillinggames.com and click "take action here" to sign a petition for your country. Depending on the country you're in, you may have to have actually owned the game "the crew" in order to sign, but regardless it's important to understand this increasingly prevalent issue and bring awareness to it.
Here's a video about the initiative from its founder
Here's Accursed Farms's latest update.

Erasing Videogames and History

This ties into another videogame-related issue. Most videogames cannot be legally obtained anymore.

Only 13 percent of classic video games published in the United States are currently in release (n = 1500, ±2.5%, 95% CI). These low numbers are consistent across platform ecosystems and time periods. Troublingly, the reissue rate drops below 3 percent for games released prior to 1985—the foundational era of video games—indicating that the interests of the marketplace may not align with the needs of video game researchers. Our experiences gathering data for this study suggest that these problems will intensify over time due to a low diversity of reissue sources and the long-term volatility of digital game storefronts.

Video about the study.
But Nintendo has like 20 N64 games available on Nintendo Online so....

A Symptom of a Wider Problem

Videogame companies are doing what all companies have been trying to do for years now: stop you from owning anything, and requiring you to rent everything.
Ubisoft’s Director of Subscriptions Phillippe Tremblay said: “...gamers are used to, a little bit like DVD, having and owning their games. That’s the consumer shift that needs to happen. They got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVD collection. That’s a transformation that’s been a bit slower to happen in games.” Source. Video talking about it
They don't want you to own your games. They want to be able to take away the thing you "purchased", destroy it so it no longer works, and force you to buy something new.
GamePass
Gamepass is literally exactly what the corporate overlords are trying to push the entire industry toward: rentiership of all videogames. "Games as a Service" is a fraud.
It's not just videogames
Whenever you "buy" an ebook or movie from, say, Apple, Amazon, Google, etc., or a videogame from Steam, Sony, etc., you don't actually own that piece of digital media. You are renting the product and getting a perpetual license. That license can be revoked at any time for any reason by the company and you will have the thing you "bought" revoked.
This has happened a lot over the years. For example: Telstra.

...[Telstra] announced it would shut down the service in June. Customers were told that unless they moved over to another service, Fetch, they would no longer be able to access the films and TV shows they had bought.
This isn’t simply a case of Netflix removing Friends from the service when a content agreement runs out. These were films and shows people had bought with the expectation they could watch them whenever they wanted – indefinitely.
Vicki Russell posted on X last week saying she was being asked by Telstra to pay $200 for Fetch to retain access to what she said was $2,500-worth of purchases.

Source, fantastic video talking about article
Microsoft Book Store
In 2019, Microsoft shut down their ebook store, erasing all customers' books from their devices. Fortunately, Microsoft offered a refund for the books purchased. Something they did to not raise customer ire, not because they were legally required to do so.
They are able to completely erase the books the customers "bought" because of Digital Rights Management (DRM)

"One of the things that I think people don't realize that's crucially important is that DRM and related software tools are embedded in all sorts of devices that we buy," Aaron Perzanowski, the author of The End of Ownership: Personal Property in the Digital Economy, tells NPR's Lulu Garcia-Navarro.
"Your car, your smart home appliances, your home security system – all of these systems have software that allows for this kind of control over how the devices are used, and I think we're going to see these same sorts of situations crop up in the context of physical devices that are being used in people's homes."
"As this technology has been deployed what we've seen is that the big beneficiaries of DRM have not been copyright holders. They have been technology companies like Amazon, like Microsoft, who are able to control these ecosystems to make it harder for consumers to switch over to new platforms."

Source
Sony
TV Shows "purchased" through the Play Station store were slated to be erased according to an announcement in December 2023. However, do to the immense and justified backlash, they reneged for now.
Apple
Apple can remove a movie from the App Store and, in some cases, make it impossible for you to access your "purchased" version if you don't have it downloaded. Source
Amazon
In 2020, a Class Action Lawsuit was filed against Amazon for this very reason. "Caudel v Amazon"

The plaintiff claimed that Amazon misleads customers about the reality of what it means to “purchase” a video through the site. Allegedly, the company is aware that customers will believe that purchasing a video gives them unlimited access to it because that is the usual understanding of the word “buy.”

The case was dismissed out of the California Federal Court due to lack of standing). Source.

These Terms of Use expressly state that purchasers obtain only a limited license to view video content and that purchased content may become unavailable due to provider license restriction or other reasons.

AKA: You don't own anything.
Source
More on the lawsuit. The legal filing. Dismissal
This phenomenon is part of what is known as "rentism", "rentier capitalism" or "techno-economic rentiership". It goes far beyond just movies and videogames, but this is getting a bit far afield from what one might expect from a standard Mogul Mail, so I won't dive deeper into that aspect of the subject, but you can google those terms and phrases to find some fun reading.

I forgot to tie this into the "Right to Repair" but this post is getting too long.

Can't even fix the stuff you own. Do you even really own it?
Tractors.
Ludwig, if you're reading this, please do a Mogul Mail about this topic; at least the videogame stuff. You can use all of these sources I've compiled and you don't need to credit me for the compilation. I don't care. This is important and more people should know.

Jeanne Calment the world’s oldest documented living human who died @ 122 years, 164 days real name was Yvonne Calment (Jeanne’s daughter) and died @ 99 yrs old.
A peer-reviewed published paper debunking the lies of Yvonne Calment > https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/rej.2018.2167
Edit: Adding section below from a previous post to really ramp up the conspiracy angle on this deception >>>
Solid evidence for a creator god found in Genesis 6:3/Deuteronomy 34:7?
Genesis 6:3
3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” (NIV)
Deuteronomy 34:7
7 Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone. (NIV)
Throwing out the ridiculous claims of outlier Jeanne Calment, a criminal, charlatan & rotten, stinky liar who died @ 99 years.
Top 10 verified oldest humans (Wikipedia)

1. Kane Tanaka: 2 January 1903 19 April 2022, 119 years, 107 days, Japan
   
2. Sarah Knauss: 24 September 1880 30 December 1999, 119 years, 97 days, United States
   
3. Lucile Randon: 11 February 1904 17 January 2023, 118 years, 340 days , France
   
4. Nabi Tajima: 4 August 1900 21 April 2018, 117 years, 260 days, Japan
   
5. Marie-Louise Meilleur: 29 August 1880 16 April 1998, 117 years, 230 days, Canada
   
6. Violet Brown: 10 March 1900 15 September 2017, 117 years, 189 days, Jamaica
   
7. Emma Morano: 29 November 1899 15 April 2017, 117 years, 137 days, Italy
   
8. Chiyo Miyako: 2 May 1901 22 July 2018, 117 years, 81 days, Japan
   
9. Delphia Welford: 9 September 1875 14 November 1992, 117 years, 66 days, United States
   
10. Misao Okawa: 5 March 1898 1 April 2015, 117 years, 27 days, Japan
    

Hello! I've seen that a lot of people are confused about ENFJs and how exactly we work, and considering that there are many websites with different —even contradictory— concepts and definitions of ENFJ, I wanted to provide one closer to what Carl Jung first described in Psychological Types in 1921. I hope this will help people gain a wider perspective of our type, and clear up some associated misconceptions.
But, before we begin, there are some concepts and questions that need to be addressed first:
❓ Are websites like 16 Personalities reliable? What about tests?
📣 No, they aren't. 16 Personalities has wildly different concepts about types, and most importantly: while it's not outright stated, their personality model isn't based on jungian functions or the types Myers-Briggs described in Gifts Differing in 1980. Their test and type description is based on the Big Five personality model, which is something else on its own. You can check this in more detail on their FAQ page. If you used 16p to discover your type, there's a high chance it may not be the same type as what Jung or Myers-Briggs describe in their respective books. Other websites and tests may also handle different concepts, so take their results with a grain of salt.
❓ If tests and websites are unreliable, how can I be sure of my type?
📣 By reading! I'm afraid that there isn't a quick shortcut to instantly know yourself and what type best fits you. Knowing your type is a journey in itself, full of self-reflection and doubt. It's hard, but very rewarding. However, if you are doing this just for fun, feel free to take any popular tests floating around.
❓ I am friendly and outgoing, but sometimes I need space. Am I INFJ or ENFJ?
📣 Social extraversion/introversion and cognitive extraversion/introversion are two different things. Jung managed his concepts and descriptions of different psychological phenomena and gave them different meanings from what we're familiar with. I know, it's confusing. But I'll do my best to clear up what he actually meant later on, so don't worry!
❓ Where are you getting all this information?
📣 Psychological Types, by Carl Jung. I also have Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type by Isabel Briggs Myers with Peter B. Myer, however, I am not fond of Myers-Briggs' interpretation of Jung's writings. In my opinion, it's an oversimplified version of types and functions, and she displayed an obvious intuitive bias in her book. Another book that's popular is Lectures on Jung's Typology by Marie-Louise von Franz, who also worked together with Jung to describe types and functions. However, be warned: by her own admission, she dislikes Fe-dom types and her description of ExFJ is rather insulting, so expect some bias as well.
Before we begin talking about what is ENFJ, we have to understand Jung's word salad and what he meant with all these concepts and descriptions. It takes a lot of patience and effort to understand Psychological Types, because as you may know (or not!), psychology is a relatively new science, and many of its roots come from philosophy, anthropology, and even religion. Jung refers to a lot of other authors, philosophers, and other literary figures to describe what he believed were "personality types".
What was the goal with all this? Well, Carl Jung was a Swiss psychoanalyst, and by associating certain patterns of behavior with different mental illnesses, he aimed to make their diagnosis easier for other psychiatrists. So, understandably, Psychological Types is full of technical language that may be hard to understand for anyone who isn't already familiar with the field of psychology. This is why a lot of other websites and other authors, while relying on Jung to describe types, tend to water down concepts and inevitably miss some important context that can't be properly explained until you take the effort to read the entire thing. That's why we have like 10 different descriptions of the same type or functions floating around.
Jung associated Fe-types like ENFJ or ESFJ with hysteria. Of course, this was back in the 19th century, and the target of this diagnosis was almost always women. Thankfully, it's no longer an official mental illness.
⚠️ An important consideration: most of the original texts that laid the foundation for MBTI to exist are from the early 19th century. Expect a lot of sexism and traditional gender roles.

"It may seem superfluous to the reader if I add a special chapter on definitions of terms to the text of my study. However, I have had ample experience of the fact that it is precisely in psychological works that one cannot be careful enough with terms and expressions, since it is precisely in the field of psychology, as nowhere else, that the greatest variations of terms occur, which often give rise to the most stubborn misunderstandings." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (p. 476).

I will not be listing every single concept, because it'd take the entirety of this post and even more to explain what everything means. I'll list the most common ones that show up when describing types.
🫂 Extravertion and Intravertion:

"If we look at the course of a human life, we see how the destinies of one person are more conditioned by the objects of his interests, while the destinies of another are more conditioned by his own inner being, by his subject. As we all deviate somewhat more to one side or the other, we are naturally inclined to understand everything in terms of our own type." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (p. 4)

As I said before, extraversion and introversion have different meanings in this area, so when we talk about an extraverted type, we mean to say that it's a type whose dominant function is an extraverted one. To understand better what is an extraverted function, we need to have two vital concepts in mind: subject and object.
🌎 The object, in this concept, is anything that exists outside your mind: it may be the world, it may be people, it may be experiences, it may be sensations, anything that is not inherently part of you. It may be what's happening in your environment, or the environment in itself. It's the external, that which exists without needing any additional interpretation or guessing.
👤 The subject is you. Your mind, your feelings, your values, your logic, your impressions, your subjective interpretation of ideas or people or what's happening around you. Anything that is purely personal, be it your inner understanding of how things fit together, your interpretation of a painting, your like or dislike of a song, etc. Your subjective experiences or thoughts, that's the subject.
In a way, it's you, the subject vs. the world, the object. Of course, there's much more to this, but this is the easiest way I can explain it. You'll see these two concepts popping around because they're the very foundation of functions.

"But every human being possesses both mechanisms, extraversion and introversion, and only the relative predominance of one or the other determines the type." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (p. 5).

Extraversion and Introversion, as I was saying before, are defined by what's your disposition towards the external world vs. the inner self. If your decisions are mostly influenced by what's happening outside your mind, then we are talking about an extrovert. If your decisions are influenced by your own inner world, regardless of what's happening outside of it, then we talk about an introvert.

"If the orientation towards the object and the objectively given prevails in such a way that the most frequent and most important decisions and actions are not conditioned by subjective views but by objective conditions, we speak of an extraverted attitude. If this is habitual, we speak of an extraverted type. If someone thinks, feels and acts, in a word, lives in a way that directly corresponds to objective circumstances and their requirements, in both a good and a bad sense, then they are extraverted. He lives in such a way that it is obvious that the object as a determining factor plays a greater role in his consciousness than his subjective view. Certainly he has subjective views, but their determining power is less than that of external objective conditions." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (pp. 384-385).

It's important to know that Jung initially described only four functions: Feeling, Thinking, Intuition, and Sensing. These functions would be either extraverted or introverted depending on how they relate to the external, objective world vs. the inner, subjective world. For example, Extraverted Feeling (Fe) is an extraverted feeling function because it favors the external feeling environment over more personal, subjective feelings that only belong to the subject.
In contrast, the introvert prefers to make decisions based on their inner self, on their personal views and convictions, regardless of what's happening around them. Someone whose function is introverted will not value the outside world a lot, and feels like is a threat to them:

"The introvert has an abstract attitude towards the object; basically, he is always anxious to withdraw his libido from the object, as if he had to prevent the object from overpowering him." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (p. 380).

Now that we have some basic concepts cleared out, I hope understanding the Extraverted Feeling type is a bit easier. I want to start by how Jung described Fe:

"Feeling in the extraverted attitude is oriented towards the objectively given, i.e. the object is the indispensable determinant of the way of feeling. It is in accordance with objective values. Whoever knows feeling only as a subjective fact will not readily understand the nature of extraverted feeling, because extraverted feeling has freed itself as far as possible from the subjective factor and has instead subjected itself entirely to the influence of the object." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (p. 411).

❗️We have to understand here that feelings are not emotions. Under this context, feeling is what we either accept or reject, what we value or not, how do we feel about something. An emotion, in this context, is something that causes a bodily response: if you feel angry, your heartbeat increases, your arms shake, and your face turns red. If you feel sad, you'll start crying and shaking. If you feel happy, your heartbeat increases and you smile. In contrast, just liking or disliking something may or may not make you react in any way. For example, let's say that you have an intense dislike of a celebrity. You don't start shaking and crying just because you dislike that celebrity. But what if you're a fan of a certain band? If you listen to one of their songs, you may start feeling happy. In both of these cases, we have two concepts floating around: a "feeling" (disliking a celebrity or liking a band) and an "emotion" that may be a reaction to that feeling (feeling happy when listening to your favorite band).
Feeling types usually have this misconception going around that we're emotional wrecks and can't think logically. This misunderstanding comes from the confusion that Feeling means being emotional. And while a feeling can give rise to an emotion, it's not emotion in itself, these are two different things. To put it simply: Feelings are values, and emotions are reactions to those values.
Now, to continue on how Jung described Fe, he gave a great example of how this type of Feeling is influenced by the outside world:

"I can feel compelled to use the predicate "beautiful" or "good", not because I find the object "beautiful" or "good" out of subjective feeling, but because it is appropriate to call it "beautiful" or "good"; and appropriate insofar as a judgment to the contrary would somehow disturb the general emotional situation. Such an appropriate emotional judgment is by no means a simulation or even a lie, but an act of fitting in. Thus, for example, a painting may be called "beautiful" because a painting hung in a salon and signed with a well-known name is generally assumed to be "beautiful", or because the predicate "ugly" could offend the family of the happy owner, or because the intention on the part of the visitor is to create a pleasant emotional atmosphere, for which it is necessary that everything is felt to be pleasant. Such feelings are directed according to objective determinants. As such, they are genuine and represent the entire visible feeling function." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (pp. 411-412).

A common misunderstanding surrounding Fe, and by extension Fe types, is that Fe is by nature insincere and fake, and that we're double-faced and superficial. But I think of it differently: if your friend got a bad haircut and they look terrible, is it dishonest to say that it isn't that bad if it comes from an honest intention of not wanting to hurt their feelings over something they can't change? Do you always need to tell people what you think, regardless of how it may affect them? I think honesty without kindness is just cruelty.
But, moving on!

"The evaluations made through the act of feeling correspond either directly to objective values or at least to certain traditional and generally accepted standards of value. It is largely due to this kind of feeling that so many people go to the theater or to a concert or to church with properly measured positive feelings. It is also to thank for the fashions, and what is far more valuable, the positive and widespread support of social, philanthropic and other cultural endeavors. In these things, extraverted feeling proves to be a creative factor. Without this feeling, for example, beautiful and harmonious sociability is unthinkable. In this respect, extraverted feeling is just as beneficial and rational a power as extraverted thinking." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (p. 412)

To me, Fe represents that desire for human connection, to feel community, to think about others. We live in an age where hyperindividualism is encouraged everywhere, to care about yourself only, to isolate and disregard anyone who doesn't make you feel good. If that kind of mindset is pushed constantly by corporations and influencers, a lot of people will have a hard time understanding something like Fe, since it opposes everything hyperindividualism stands for. It's frustrating, but I think it's also not surprising to see a lot of people in the MBTI community having an intense dislike of Fe types, especially Fe-dom types, because of this. The idea that only you, as an individual, matter, is so prevalent that for some people, caring about something other than yourself is just dumb.
⚠️ Another thing to take in mind is that Jung determines the dominant function by what we value the most. By this, it means that your intention is what matters, not the results. For example, a socially awkward person can be an ENFJ as long as they value the outside feeling environment over everything else, no matter how clumsy they may be at it. We tend to think of ENFJ as mind-readers, masters of socialization, or community leaders, and it certainly can be the case! But, just as the ENFJ can be a well-loved, charismatic therapist, it can also be the nervous shrinking violet who awkwardly tries to please people around them. We often make the mistake of measuring someone's preference of a function by how "skilled" they are at it, by how much positive results come from them using that function, when in reality, you can be an absolute dimwit and still be a Ti-dom. Your dominant function is always the one that dictates your decisions, regardless of the results of those decisions.
Now, as with all functions, Extraverted Feeling has its dark side.

"However, this beneficial effect is lost as soon as the object gains excessive influence. In this case, the overly extraverted feeling draws the personality too much into the object, i.e. the object assimilates the person, whereby the personal character of the feeling, which is its main stimulus, is lost. This makes the feeling cold, objective and untrustworthy. It betrays a secret intention, or at least arouses such suspicions in the unbiased observer. It no longer makes that pleasant and refreshing impression which always accompanies a genuine feeling, but one senses posturing or acting, when perhaps the egocentric intention is still quite unconscious." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (pp. 412-413).

It's possible to care too much. When Fe gains excessive influence over the psyche, it places so much value on harmonious relationships that it comes at the detriment of the subject. Unhealthy Fe demands that you adapt to every single social environment, to make sure to please everyone, and to sacrifice your personhood in favor of the external feeling world. This is why the unhealthy Fe user comes across as fake and dishonest: it's impossible to be a different person to fit in with different social settings without sacrificing your integrity.

"Since situations in life constantly alternate with one another, triggering different or even contrasting emotional tones, the personality dissolves into just as many different feelings. One time you are one thing, the next time something completely different - apparently, because in reality such a diversity of personality is impossible." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (p. 415).

When we talk about types turning unhealthy or acting in erratic or destructive ways, we also have to talk about their inferior function. After all, is your inferior function that keeps your dominant function in check, so to speak. Your inferior function is a sensible counterpart that, while it opposes your dominant function, it provides a different perspective, like another voice that says "yes, but..." to anything you say. This is the role of Introverted Thinking (Ti).
❗️Contrary to popular belief, inferior Ti is not when you lack intelligence, logic, or intellect. To begin with, Thinking isn't related to intelligence. It can lead to it, but just like Feeling can lead to emotions, it ultimately isn't emotions in itself. In the same way, Thinking can lead to intelligence, but it isn't intelligence in itself. It's a process of thought, not the result of that thought. For example, you can think about a math problem, but that thinking may not necessarily lead to a correct answer.
The relationship between the dominant function and the inferior function is the most important one. If the balance between the two functions is disturbed, it leads to destructive or toxic behaviors, or as how Jung called it, neurosis. So what is the relationship between Ti and Fe?

"You can only feel "right" if nothing else disturbs your feelings. But nothing disturbs feeling as much as thinking. It is therefore easy to understand why thinking is suppressed as much as possible in this type of person. This is by no means to say that such a woman does not think at all; on the contrary, she may think a great deal and very intelligently, but her thinking is never sui generis, but an epimetheic appendage of her feeling. As far as feeling permits, she can think very well, but any conclusion, however logical, which might lead to a result disturbing to feeling, is rejected a limine. It is simply not thought." Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (p. 414)

Thinking is the opposing force to Feeling. And for a type that values Feeling the most, it's only to be expected that it tries to suppress Thinking the most. If a logical thought has the power to disturb the social harmony, the average or unhealthy ENFJ will do their best to pretend it isn't there. But it's impossible to completely suppress a part of your mind. The thoughts that you're desperately trying to push away, will always come back in different forms:

"Unconscious thinking reaches the surface in the form of ideas, often of an obsessive nature, whose general character is always negative and devaluing. There are therefore moments in women of this type when the worst thoughts attach themselves to the very objects that the feeling values most highly. Negative thinking makes use of all infantile prejudices or comparisons that are suitable for casting doubt on the value of feelings, and it draws on all primitive instincts in order to be able to explain feelings as "nothing but". Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (p. 417).

By this, Jung means that the suppressed Ti will leak out in the form of harsh criticism, prejudice, or comparing people according to unreasonable expectations of them, destroying the previously positive feelings about them. Basically, Ti will turn destructive, making the usually pleasant ENFJ assume the worst out of someone.
All of the above paints a picture of a dishonest, paranoid, and troubled ENFJ. They're desperate to win people over, to make everyone happy, but they have lost themselves in this desire and sacrificed their integrity to the point they sound hollow, they lack substance, and the more they try, the less convincing they are. At the same time, their inferior Ti makes them think all sorts of terrible things about the people around them, and they start doubting their relationships and the sincerity of the people they love.
🫂 I will be making a part two later describing Ni from Jung's perspective and how to tell ENFJ and INFJ apart. Ni is kind of tricky to describe, especially as an auxiliary function, but I'm sure it'll help a lot of people who may be confused about their type! Also, the majority of what I described above can be applied to the ENFJ's sensor counterpart, ESFJ. And as I said before, Jung only described four functions and eight personality types, which later expanded to 16 personality types under Myers-Briggs system, therefore there isn't a "function stack" to speak of right now, but I can do my best to describe the closest thing we have to it from Psychological Types.
I hope this was helpful. Thank you for reading! 💖

Jeanne Calment the world’s oldest documented living human who died @ 122 years, 164 days real name was Yvonne Calment (Jeanne’s daughter) and died @ 99 yrs old.
A peer-reviewed published paper debunking the lies of Yvonne Calment > https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/rej.2018.2167
Edit: Adding section below from a previous post to really ramp up the conspiracy angle on this deception >>>
Solid evidence for a creator god found in Genesis 6:3/Deuteronomy 34:7?
Genesis 6:3
3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” (NIV)
Deuteronomy 34:7
7 Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone. (NIV)
Throwing out the ridiculous claims of outlier Jeanne Calment, a criminal, charlatan & rotten, stinky liar who died @ 99 years.
Top 10 verified oldest humans (Wikipedia)

1. Kane Tanaka: 2 January 1903 19 April 2022, 119 years, 107 days, Japan
   
2. Sarah Knauss: 24 September 1880 30 December 1999, 119 years, 97 days, United States
   
3. Lucile Randon: 11 February 1904 17 January 2023, 118 years, 340 days , France
   
4. Nabi Tajima: 4 August 1900 21 April 2018, 117 years, 260 days, Japan
   
5. Marie-Louise Meilleur: 29 August 1880 16 April 1998, 117 years, 230 days, Canada
   
6. Violet Brown: 10 March 1900 15 September 2017, 117 years, 189 days, Jamaica
   
7. Emma Morano: 29 November 1899 15 April 2017, 117 years, 137 days, Italy
   
8. Chiyo Miyako: 2 May 1901 22 July 2018, 117 years, 81 days, Japan
   
9. Delphia Welford: 9 September 1875 14 November 1992, 117 years, 66 days, United States
   
10. Misao Okawa: 5 March 1898 1 April 2015, 117 years, 27 days, Japan
    

Jeanne Calment the world’s oldest documented living human who died @ 122 years, 164 days real name was Yvonne Calment (Jeanne’s daughter) and died @ 99 yrs old.
A peer-reviewed published paper debunking the lies of Yvonne Calment > https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/rej.2018.2167
Edit: Adding section below from a previous post to really ramp up the conspiracy angle on this deception >>>
Solid evidence for a creator god found in Genesis 6:3/Deuteronomy 34:7?
Genesis 6:3
3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” (NIV)
Deuteronomy 34:7
7 Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone. (NIV)
Throwing out the ridiculous claims of outlier Jeanne Calment, a criminal, charlatan & rotten, stinky liar who died @ 99 years.
Top 10 verified oldest humans (Wikipedia)

1. Kane Tanaka: 2 January 1903 19 April 2022, 119 years, 107 days, Japan
   
2. Sarah Knauss: 24 September 1880 30 December 1999, 119 years, 97 days, United States
   
3. Lucile Randon: 11 February 1904 17 January 2023, 118 years, 340 days , France
   
4. Nabi Tajima: 4 August 1900 21 April 2018, 117 years, 260 days, Japan
   
5. Marie-Louise Meilleur: 29 August 1880 16 April 1998, 117 years, 230 days, Canada
   
6. Violet Brown: 10 March 1900 15 September 2017, 117 years, 189 days, Jamaica
   
7. Emma Morano: 29 November 1899 15 April 2017, 117 years, 137 days, Italy
   
8. Chiyo Miyako: 2 May 1901 22 July 2018, 117 years, 81 days, Japan
   
9. Delphia Welford: 9 September 1875 14 November 1992, 117 years, 66 days, United States
   
10. Misao Okawa: 5 March 1898 1 April 2015, 117 years, 27 days, Japan
    

Posting here since I’m shadow-banned on Why Files official.
Jeanne Calment the world’s oldest documented living human who died @ 122 years, 164 days real name was Yvonne Calment (Jeanne’s daughter) and died @ 99 yrs old.
A peer-reviewed published paper debunking the lies of Yvonne Calment > https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/rej.2018.2167
Edit: Adding section below from a previous post to really ramp up the conspiracy angle on this deception >>>
Solid evidence for a creator god found in Genesis 6:3/Deuteronomy 34:7?
Genesis 6:3
3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” (NIV)
Deuteronomy 34:7
7 Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone. (NIV)
Throwing out the ridiculous claims of outlier Jeanne Calment, a criminal, charlatan & rotten, stinky liar who died @ 99 years.
Top 10 verified oldest humans (Wikipedia)

1. Kane Tanaka: 2 January 1903 19 April 2022, 119 years, 107 days, Japan
   
2. Sarah Knauss: 24 September 1880 30 December 1999, 119 years, 97 days, United States
   
3. Lucile Randon: 11 February 1904 17 January 2023, 118 years, 340 days , France
   
4. Nabi Tajima: 4 August 1900 21 April 2018, 117 years, 260 days, Japan
   
5. Marie-Louise Meilleur: 29 August 1880 16 April 1998, 117 years, 230 days, Canada
   
6. Violet Brown: 10 March 1900 15 September 2017, 117 years, 189 days, Jamaica
   
7. Emma Morano: 29 November 1899 15 April 2017, 117 years, 137 days, Italy
   
8. Chiyo Miyako: 2 May 1901 22 July 2018, 117 years, 81 days, Japan
   
9. Delphia Welford: 9 September 1875 14 November 1992, 117 years, 66 days, United States
   
10. Misao Okawa: 5 March 1898 1 April 2015, 117 years, 27 days, Japan
    

Does anyone know anything about Scarabiasis and Canthariasis? I may possibly be suffering with both and as I am in the USA I'm having hell finding a doctor who will take me seriously. I find it an interesting topic to research though so anything anyone can tell me about it I'll be interested in. Thanks! Link to Scarabiasis Wikipedia here- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarabiasis

This post is geared towards anyone questioning or doubting Bryson swing. Be it the longevity or the robotic nature I have ventured down this rabbit hole and have explored every nook and cranny so AMA you want to know further bc odds are I can probably answer it.
I'm not in his camp or on his team I'm just a fan of his and for better or worse I have been from the get go. 1st time I remember seeing him was low am in Butler's Cabin and Nantz spoke very highly of him somewhere around this time The Golfing Machine by Homer Kelley was mention by Bryson.
This is essentially the "science" behind the golf swing that we all see today, same club lengthen etc. Now I think it's important to understand who Homer Kelley was and why this is all so important as he is/was a pretty divisive person in his day not unlike Bryson in the present.
Homer Kelley worked for Boeing and was known as a "problem solver" he had no formal education in aerospace, or any mathematics, physics, geometry ect. He was a legend there for his ability to find solutions that were deemed impossible.
A side note here I think that's worth pointing out is the story of the wright brothers as it pertains to fight. Again the wright brothers no formal education but were known to "tinker" as inventors and it's ultimately this trail and error of trying the unconventional that allowed them to break through and achieve the first fight.
Coming back to Homer Kelley he became obsessed with golf during the great depression and became upset with the lack of a universal golf language. He would ask club pros swing questions that they couldn't answer. I don't know exactly when he started writing but the book was first published in 1969. Many, many, many of the terms that are used to describe the golf swing can be found in this book only time has butchered them and they are bit off from his original definitions. Outside-in/inside-out aiming point are two that come to mind
Anyhow the book is polarizing itself and can be a very challenging read to say the least. He doesn't repeat anything so there's no emphasis on any one thing. It reads like a choose your own adventure and it's quite 'scientific-y'. It can also be hard to obtain a copy of the book bc he didn't want anyone revising it so he published it himself and a single copy can sell for over $100 easily.
The Internet is filled with a hodge podge of websites, gurus, and TGM experts. I'm not claiming to be one of those but having visiting countless sites there's a lot of misinformation out there which further complicates any attempts at extracting the wealth of knowledge that the book contains.
So one day I'm kinda explaining this to my wife and how I cant seem to find a copy for sale... Well lo and behold that Christmas I unwrap my very own copy. This was Christmas 2018. Like a coal power train it took a while to get things moving but I was constantly reading it forwards and backwards. All in all I think I'm somewhere around 80-85% full comprehension. I read it all the time still.
It's like learning a whole new and language, think Chinese or Russian. However once you start to decifer it the concept and ideas are really somewhat simple and frankly they work Its based on geometry and physics he calls golf
Geometrically. Oriented. Linear. Force.
It's a complete catalog of all things golf swing and as such is very efficient and I believe the longevity of a golfers swing will only increase by use of this book.
10-7-A is what Bryson used to say he was doing in interviews. He still is and he will most likely continue to improve. The robotic swing people like to bring up is called "the flying wedge" there a video of tour player Brian Gay (he's TGM) working with Lynn Blake (calls himself Yoda) where you can really see the flying wedge. It looks just like Bryson swing and I think it's from 2005ish.
I wish I had student to teach this stuff too as it works. The book is confusing I would even know where to point to say start here. But check out Homer Kelley's wiki page
I will forever be grateful for Bryson as my 40+ years of having a golf club in my hand can really be divided into a preTGM and post TGM and seeing him display pure joy today makes me all me grateful.
It is certainly my hope and intentions for this post to hopefully pay the knowledge forward as Bryson did for me, so if your reading this and learning about this for the first time and your have any questions I would be more than happy to help/assist/elaborate in any way I can. Godspeed and hit'em well.
Lastly, I love golf and before I get chastised I just want to point that out. I also know all as in ALL of the major criticism of the book it's why I included the little part about the wright brothers to get those of you wanting to point out whatever it is you may want to point that Unconventional doesn't have to mean wrong. Commit and Trust

i am fascinated your amazing esit guys. especially the wikipedia edit are so cool.
can you pls tell me how do you guys edit the wikipedia page or do this. i am new to this and would love to make my alternate history and pist it here.