Oh, I agree! Mathematicians have the rep in general of not caring about... uh, people, and non-mathematics-related (music is semi-maths related to them) things. I only included 'mathematicians' 'cause they soooort of think they own logic, even though they don't (it's a philosophical concept, after all). And of course, physicists have the rep of being only slightly more charming than mathematicians, or at least more fun at parties. Still, uhhhh hot is hot, sort of like growly dogs that you imagine like you even though they don't. Ideally I'd like a logic-y person who has passion, humor & imagination, 'cause far be it from me to settle. Which brings me to.... Holmes & Doyle.
I agree! I knew that about Doyle, and of course Holmes' strengths lay in intuition and imagination as much as deduction; if anything, the strength of his deduction rested on the strength(s) of his intuitive observation abilities; he developed schematics and 'rules' for what he observed and how to observe it and what it meant, but was also intuitively drawn to *see* the right things. His mind was a beautiful marriage of creativity and logic, which I think any true scientist possesses. And it's also a beautiful demonstration of an NT (ie, the Rational Intuitive) type in Myers-Briggs/Jungian typology sense. :> I guess I take imagination a bit for granted, though. ^^;; hahaha. *cough* Also it's not impressive to me in the same way 'cause it's not like I have any severe lack of it. ^^;;; Of course I'm impressed by people who *harness* their intuition/imagination to produce replicable results, however. :>
I think it's Holmes' demeanor and the mental/logical structure he gave his imagination that I find hot, really. That was my dream/awed vision-- to give my own dreams such structure, which is the quality I so admire in others. Especially hotass skinny British angular sarcastic others. :D
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
zaluzianskya and ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
skylark_photos
no subject
Date: 2010-01-07 05:53 am (UTC)I agree! I knew that about Doyle, and of course Holmes' strengths lay in intuition and imagination as much as deduction; if anything, the strength of his deduction rested on the strength(s) of his intuitive observation abilities; he developed schematics and 'rules' for what he observed and how to observe it and what it meant, but was also intuitively drawn to *see* the right things. His mind was a beautiful marriage of creativity and logic, which I think any true scientist possesses. And it's also a beautiful demonstration of an NT (ie, the Rational Intuitive) type in Myers-Briggs/Jungian typology sense. :> I guess I take imagination a bit for granted, though. ^^;; hahaha. *cough* Also it's not impressive to me in the same way 'cause it's not like I have any severe lack of it. ^^;;; Of course I'm impressed by people who *harness* their intuition/imagination to produce replicable results, however. :>
I think it's Holmes' demeanor and the mental/logical structure he gave his imagination that I find hot, really. That was my dream/awed vision-- to give my own dreams such structure, which is the quality I so admire in others. Especially hotass skinny British angular sarcastic others. :D