Will you say something that you can't prove it?

You mean like "proof is purely a mathematical term" in response to the OP, Mr. Fox?
No, not at all like that, because I was addressing the OP topic while you are just offering salty nothing's that have only sidetracked the thread with stupidity.(a rabbit hole I'm not following you any deeper into)

In the context of 'proving' a statement, this is nonsensical. You can only offer 'proof' for maths.
 
I will sound gender biased but the emotional element runs higher on one side.
It expresses more openly, perhaps.

In reality, the emotional center of the brain is vital for decision-making. We actually pull the trigger on decisions with the emotional center, not with the rational part of our brain.
 
Yes, because we were talking about the legal system and not 'proving what you say'. My bad.
Actually, that was just a reasonable response to your statement that "proof" could only be used as a mathematical term, so only math can be proved. Which is not accurate, at all. It's a common legal term. It's also a term in common usage outside the law and math.
 
It expresses more openly, perhaps.

In reality, the emotional center of the brain is vital for decision-making. We actually pull the trigger on decisions with the emotional center, not with the rational part of our brain.
That is one of my quirky qualities. I find it quite easy to remove emotion from most decisions. It has, at times made me seem cold but that is not the intention. I think it is largely because I find it much easier to put variables in boxes and then process them separately. I can factor out the emotional element. Something that has gotten easier with age. I was fiercely competitive in my teens and twenties and learned how to push the emotional button of others pretty good.
Like most of us though, I certainly have my knee-jerk moments.
 
No, not at all like that, because I was addressing the OP topic while you are just offering salty nothing's that have only sidetracked the thread with stupidity.(a rabbit hole I'm not following you any deeper into)

In the context of 'proving' a statement, this is nonsensical. You can only offer 'proof' for maths.

Logic has a system of proof. Which would also be more applicable in this context.


Which was mabye what he was getting at or mabye not. He wasn't explaining himself very well.
 
That is one of my quirky qualities. I find it quite easy to remove emotion from most decisions. It has, at times made me seem cold but that is not the intention. I think it is largely because I find it much easier to put variables in boxes and then process them separately. I can factor out the emotional element. Something that has gotten easier with age. I was fiercely competitive in my teens and twenties and learned how to push the emotional button of others pretty good.
Like most of us though, I certainly have my knee-jerk moments.
By default (our brain wiring, so to speak) some of us are naturally more logical. If we were using DISC language, you'd probably be a High-C. You'll prove to actually be more logical (and may seem aloof and sometimes uncaring). But even for the logical folks, it appears that the emotional center is still in charge of the final decision. The difference seems to be that your rational brain has more input to the process than, say, mine. I've also been told there's some reasonable evidence a High-C (you) will actually experience less emotion than a High-I (me).
 
By default (our brain wiring, so to speak) some of us are naturally more logical. If we were using DISC language, you'd probably be a High-C. You'll prove to actually be more logical (and may seem aloof and sometimes uncaring). But even for the logical folks, it appears that the emotional center is still in charge of the final decision. The difference seems to be that your rational brain has more input to the process than, say, mine. I've also been told there's some reasonable evidence a High-C (you) will actually experience less emotion than a High-I (me).
Interesting. I don't remember ever doing this test. It gave a natural and adaptive score. D - 67/25, I-39/10, S - 46/46,
C- 88/88. I gives a lot of explanation about the results but seem rather neutral in the results. What is your take on these numbers?
 
Logic has a system of proof. Which would also be more applicable in this context.


Which was mabye what he was getting at or mabye not. He wasn't explaining himself very well.
Man, I forgot how circular that is. One of those classes I just wanted to forget but can't.
 
Interesting. I don't remember ever doing this test. It gave a natural and adaptive score. D - 67/25, I-39/10, S - 46/46,
C- 88/88. I gives a lot of explanation about the results but seem rather neutral in the results. What is your take on these numbers?
That tells me you're a High-C, backed by a situational D (meaning it shows strong, but only sometimes). Your S score is also in the "situational" range, while your I would be considered low. The adaptive score is how you act in some major area of life (for most folks, it's work), while the natural score is your "hard-wired" self. Significant deviation from natural behaviors is tiring and can be stressful. In your case, you've only got one area that's likely to be very stressful: that D. In fact, in some major area of life, you're suppressing your extroverted side (both D and I), which can cause a lot of stress over a long period of time.

There's more in there - here's a quick read off the top of my head. You're likely very fact-driven (both C and D) and tend to prefer to have all the information and make deliberate decisions most of the time (C) but not always (situational D). You aren't very expressive (both C and S), but probably do actually consider others more than people think (that situational S). You probably prefer a steady, not-too-fast pace in your work and life. And you probably plan. That's a rough reading from the straight numbers, without consulting any of my sources I'd normally look at. To give you a comparison, my natural numbers are usually around this: D60, I90, S80, C10.

A really good DISC report can be eerily descriptive.
 
There is a difference between saying something you can't prove and deceiving someone. Saying something you can't prove is normal...A scientist and their hypothesis.

And even if they have documented their procedure, and haven't fudged the numbers, how do you know that the procedure wasn't done with incorrect assumptions?
 
By default (our brain wiring, so to speak) some of us are naturally more logical. If we were using DISC language, you'd probably be a High-C. You'll prove to actually be more logical (and may seem aloof and sometimes uncaring). But even for the logical folks, it appears that the emotional center is still in charge of the final decision. The difference seems to be that your rational brain has more input to the process than, say, mine. I've also been told there's some reasonable evidence a High-C (you) will actually experience less emotion than a High-I (me).

Ah, playing the Frazier Crane role, ey? Okay, I'll bite...

I don't know what any of this crap means, nor how to read the damn thing, but I got A-41%, B - 39%, C-14%, D - 5%.

But the way I look at this stuff - if you're old and don't know who the hell you are by now, you better pray for a fricken' do over.

EDIT....P.S. just thinking...what might be a far more accurate take on all this is if your closest friend or significant other filled it out about you.
 
Ah, playing the Frazier Crane role, ey? Okay, I'll bite...

I don't know what any of this crap means, nor how to read the damn thing, but I got A-41%, B - 39%, C-14%, D - 5%.

But the way I look at this stuff - if you're old and don't know who the hell you are by now, you better pray for a fricken' do over.

EDIT....P.S. just thinking...what might be a far more accurate take on all this is if your closest friend or significant other filled it out about you.
It's more useful in figuring out why some things don't work for some people, and how that affects the folks around them. A detail-oriented, task-driven person has to function differently than a people-driven relationship builder. And a good report can actually help folks understand how others see them.

The science (which isn't fully proven, but then it's psych, so that's hard to do) shows the self-evaluations are the best version, as they can show both natural and adapted. Someone else doing the assessment can only respond about what you do, and there's no way to know if that's your natural response or an adapted one.

For my use, it's mostly a tool to keep things more objective. People are generally less sensitive about what an evaluation says about them than what a person says about them, so it's easier to discuss some topics that way.
 
It's more useful in figuring out why some things don't work for some people, and how that affects the folks around them. A detail-oriented, task-driven person has to function differently than a people-driven relationship builder. And a good report can actually help folks understand how others see them.

The science (which isn't fully proven, but then it's psych, so that's hard to do) shows the self-evaluations are the best version, as they can show both natural and adapted. Someone else doing the assessment can only respond about what you do, and there's no way to know if that's your natural response or an adapted one.

For my use, it's mostly a tool to keep things more objective. People are generally less sensitive about what an evaluation says about them than what a person says about them, so it's easier to discuss some topics that way.

My wife and her friends always say that men think three absolutes about themselves.

They’re good drivers, good lovers and have a great sense of humor.

They also say they are almost always wrong about at least one of those things....and usually two.
 
My wife and her friends always say that men think three absolutes about themselves.

They’re good drivers, good lovers and have a great sense of humor.

They also say they are almost always wrong about at least one of those things....and usually two.
Just remember "almost always" means it's not true for you. Or me, for that matter. :cool:
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top