Reddit reviews A Treatise of Human Nature

Spot on. Most of the time I re-read is because I was distracted and knew I didn't read it properly. I don't like to lie to - or trick - myself.

Then I re-read very techy or detailed/important things over if I do not feel I understand them well enough the first time or for clarity if there is a new element added that interacts with or involves a previous concept.

Then in fiction most of the time I read on and even if I was distracted or didn't quite understand, I come across the answer soon enough. Sometimes I do the same with tech/academic material if I feel that there will not be any context or added detail later on, in which case I'll make an effort to research whatever it is myself.

>The whole informs the parts.

I definitely feel this is a very unique perspective...maybe not exclusively to INTPs, but very unique and a very good way to put it. I was trying to explain to a very good friend the other day why I went through the process of learning so many things and not just specializing in one thing concerning my CompSci education and goals, and she could not understand why I needed what she saw as seemingly useless knowledge. She thought it better that a person who specialized in only one branch could make any real progress in that area of study, and that maybe a diverse team of such people could do what I aim to do even better which is true. The only thing is that I am only one person and I feel that I require the perspective of several different people, and the main reason I do this is so that I may see the big picture or the "spectrum". If I can see all the color codes of a limited spectrum, I can see where the gradients don't meet and I can better imagine and/or create a part that would fit. If I was only limited to one perspective I would obviously not be capable of this, even when conversing with a varied group of experts. The big picture is most important, and so I must learn how the big picture is formed and form it for myself so that I can see how to better utilize it and/or improve it, and those missing parts or grey areas will be "informed" by the whole.

I always used to use the example I had read in this book many years ago that was something along the lines of: If a man could see in front of him all the colors he has learned but one or two, he could see where they were not instead and imagine them himself using the rest of the colors and gradients as a reference. I believe it was used to show the difference between imagination being an innate ability that "spawned" things, and that you can't just flat out imagine things you did not previously know about except for in certain instances (such as the example above) but it was so long ago I read it that I'm not too sure about that. Anyway my point was that's always how I thought about my obsession with learning every fact and detail and practice and whatever about something I am very interested in even if it seemed impractical or inefficient to others. I'm trying to learn all the colors so I can fill the colors I don't know (the colors that aren't given) in by myself with my imagination. To be blunt, I suppose it's just "exploring limitations" crossed with my love for knowledge. That brings up more questions, but I've ranted enough.