Positivists focus on the presence, and Negativists focus on the absence.
Positivists are optimisers, and Negativists are problem solvers.
Positivists focus on the presence, and Negativists focus on the absence.
Positivists are optimisers, and Negativists are problem solvers.
i agree with the first part, not necessarily the second part.Originally Posted by machintruc
I agree with this.Originally Posted by heath
have you noticed differences in patient's communication styles? such as
Patient #1: I'm improving. It's healing. It's getting worse.
Patient #2: It's not causing me any more problems. At least it's not getting any worse. It doesn't seem to be healing.
adding further to the thread topic:
Positivists can be very negative, they're more than willing to tell you what problems are THERE. This WILL happen, that WILL happen, she hates me, he IS doing that for such-and-such motivation, etc.
Negativists can be positive, like when they point out the problems that AREN'T there. At least this other event isn't happening, I don't think she's mad at you (absence of anger), hears the claimed motivation and notices what hasn't been done that would suggest that motivation, and/or notices other possible motivations that aren't being included. (i know, i know, that last part is a little more on the N side than S)
It's not even a matter of one time communications, but a trend in positivist/negativist communication style.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
optimism vs. pessimism works... also a tendancy to take more risks and to be more gravely impacted by negative experiences.
like when you say "an optimist sees that glass half-full and a pessimist half-empty"Originally Posted by labcoat
I don't really understand how can a glass be half empty. Empty is not a measurement. If you say something is "half empty" you never get a precise measurement because in many instances a container does not have "tags" up till its upper end; so it's even a matter of practicalness to say that a glass is always full.
This is an example of bullshit argument I use to make people be more optimistic
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I agree FDG, "empty" is a state, whereas "full" is a degree; you determine a state, degrees are measured, therefore the glass is half full
I'd consider myself a negativist, but I tend to see when I do things right as normal, but when I do something wrong, I need to improve.
INTP/ILI(Ni) /5w4
"When my time comes, forget the wrong that I've done.
Help me leave behind some reasons to be missed."
I'll explain negativist behaviour like this :
When a negativist manages to solve a problem, he doesn't perceive it anymore.
A better example :
1. A negativist which has started successfully his computer hundreds of times. He's very cautious and does backups daily.
2. But this time he realises that his operating system can't run because of filesystem failure.
3. He gets very angry, and strives to solve that problem. He solves it by reinstaling the operating system, and copying backups to hard drive.
4. He doesn't percieve that problem anymore. You see how negativists percieves world... even if that example is more relavant to Negativist Judging types, which percieves world as what it should be, rather than as is.
Positivists sees things, Negativists sees lack of things.
A positivist believes this world is the best possible....a negativist also believes this is true .
A positivist enjoys sex. So does a negativist.Originally Posted by Subterranean
It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.
Sex is basically a physiological thing that anybody can sense as "agreeable". If it wasn't agreeable, it wouldn't be subject to concupiscent addiction.Originally Posted by Rick
I agree with language being a clue here. I've been teased because if someone asks me if I like something, I almost always will say, "It's not bad" instead of "It's good". I don't even notice it unless someone says something. But my daughter has started picking that up and she says "not bad" all the time for "good" too. I did notice when she started that because it is weird when your kids start parroting what you say. I also say, "That didn't take long" instead of saying how quickly something happened. And "I didn't have any trouble with that at all" instead of "that was easy for me". I think of myself as a positive person and it took a while for me to see how I could be a negativist, but if you look at language it seems pretty clear that I use the negative as the norm. I'm pretty optimistic I think but when I talk about something I phrase it around the negative. And my husband is the opposite - he'll say "that went well" or "I got that done quickly" or "that's pretty good". It fits for us anyway.
This is something I've had to work around since I've been a mom because kids react very differently to "it isn't your turn yet" than they do to "It'll be your turn in a minute". And "You can't have a cookie now" sounds worse than "you can have a cookie after dinner". Phrasing things in a positive way saves a lot of headaches with kids but I've had to consciously do that.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
I tend towards more optimistic phrasing especially when Im trying to convince someone to do something. I know that in reality things take longer or are more effort than I may communicate but I also realize that action is better than doing nothing. Im not sure if this is learned behavior.
Topaz
The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.
'IJ tricks' - to right the ship when you are going the wrong direction --- I would like some feedback, and if I do not get them, I will start a new thread:
Simple things, like...
[/list:u:912f404304]
- When you feel like you are hurt and in need of love or consideration -- give it to someone else. This feels incredibly empowering, and can neutralize any negative states. Give what you need, or find someone and do something nice for them. No matter what happened to you, there is power in this. It makes you stop focusing so much on your problem, and realize there is more going on in the world -- which you are a part of, and just made a positive contribution to.
[list:912f404304]A great song to help keep this in mind:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA3PfC7s8vU[/youtube] Just remember that you have that power, always. You can focus on your own hurt, dwell on it, or let it flow like water off a ducks back. Just know what to focus on, and who you are.
more later
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
I think perhaps another interesting question is how positivism/negativism manifests itselfs between types.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
As the negative elements on the Model would... mainly the 1st and 3rd functions.Originally Posted by Logos
I like UDP's advice. When i strengthen/maintain consistency with my relationships I usually feel better.
asd
The matter of "acceptable inefficiency" is a huge problem. When there are rewards for wasting and hording, there is not complete sincerity.
Like a cancer, that feeds off of its own body. It must feel great for that cancer cell, when it grows and becomes bigger and stronger. And yet... it destroys its very means of existence.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Smilingeyes's mottos are a good place to start.Originally Posted by Logos
I remember reading a post that said that Negativists are likely to word things like "I wouldn't want to not do that" (instead of "I would want to do that"). I'm not sure how well this fits into my understanding of this dichotomy. It seems to me that it's more likely that there isn't such a direct correlation. It would matter more what they're actually saying and why.
I notice that instead of "That's good!" I tend to say "That's not bad!"
Also
"That didn't take long at all!" for "That was quick!"
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
That's exactly the type of thing I'm talking about. I'm wondering how much it's related to this specific dichotomy.Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
I kind of do that too.Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
Positivism has nothing to do with positive thinking.
...the human race will disappear. Other races will appear and disappear in turn. The sky will become icy and void, pierced by the feeble light of half-dead stars. Which will also disappear. Everything will disappear. And what human beings do is just as free of sense as the free motion of elementary particles. Good, evil, morality, feelings? Pure 'Victorian fictions'.
INTp
Nor does this thread.
I use both.
?
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
I think everyone does, but some people use one more than the other.
No but this thread has nothing to do with positivism eitherOriginally Posted by Joy
Roughly Positivism means that every statement has to be proved to be valid.
And negativism is same as pessimism.
...the human race will disappear. Other races will appear and disappear in turn. The sky will become icy and void, pierced by the feeble light of half-dead stars. Which will also disappear. Everything will disappear. And what human beings do is just as free of sense as the free motion of elementary particles. Good, evil, morality, feelings? Pure 'Victorian fictions'.
INTp
I would tend to agree.
Someone interpreted examples from the description as such though, so I wanted to discuss it a bit.
.
.
.
Well those definitions are just wrong to begin with.
Positivist = follower of Positivism => Positivism = Comte's ideology
Negativist = follower of Negativism => Negativism = Pessimism
Thinking in positives and negatives aren't -isms.
...the human race will disappear. Other races will appear and disappear in turn. The sky will become icy and void, pierced by the feeble light of half-dead stars. Which will also disappear. Everything will disappear. And what human beings do is just as free of sense as the free motion of elementary particles. Good, evil, morality, feelings? Pure 'Victorian fictions'.
INTp
.
.
It's not question that I don't understand. But that Gulenko shouldn't have named them -isms in the first place.
...the human race will disappear. Other races will appear and disappear in turn. The sky will become icy and void, pierced by the feeble light of half-dead stars. Which will also disappear. Everything will disappear. And what human beings do is just as free of sense as the free motion of elementary particles. Good, evil, morality, feelings? Pure 'Victorian fictions'.
INTp
.
it's due partially to machine translations
Positivism: concrete empowering, abstract limiting
Negativism: concrete limiting, abstract empowering
Empowering: accepting static, creating dynamic OR judging introvert, perceiving extrovert
Limiting: accepting dynamic, creating static OR judging extrovert, perceiving introvert
The interpretation I am currently testing:
Empowering: a function of choice, freedom. Multiple options, each suggested by the limiting dual complement function.
Limiting: a function of restriction, duty, circumstance. A single option, bounded by the empowering dual complement function.
Concrete: the known reality. Fact. The thing you need to figure out first. That without which you are incapable of orienting.
Abstract: implications. Theories. The result of your deliberations. What you communicate to others, but hessistate to trust yourself.
Positivism/negativism is a small cycle dichotomy. It concerns the relation between the concrete and abstract function. It tells about the way information is taken in, not about how it is employed. It has an effect on action by indirect means.
Final interpretation:
A positivist is at liberty to interpret the current situation in accordance with his/her goals. A negativist restricts himself/herself to a single interpretation of reality.
I'll have to expand on this later.
perfectOriginally Posted by labcoat
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit