Dissonant Opinions and the IM Elements
The following is a list of the ways that the eight IM elements are interpreted differently by individuals depending on their function 7 orientations.
The orientations themselves composit four dyads of opinion, which are measurable on two polar axes. These axes are bodies vs fields and kinetics vs pontentials. There are four possible combinations, being potentials of bodies and potentials of fields, and kinetics of bodies and kinetics of fields. These correspond in the macro to four strategies: adaptism, universalism, specialism, and traditionalism.
The Adaptist Dyad:
- consensism builders attempt to craft new cultural norms by which to live. They are focused on creating harmony and bringing people
and forces together into a cohesive whole. ("life")
- individualists are most focused on using their respective talents to survive; they dislike rules and believe individuals must make
their own way by their own strength and cunning. ("evolution")
The Traditionalist Dyad:
- empiricists defend an existing consensus. They desire concrete empirical data and strive to be as empirically grounded as possible. They
leave little to chance, and try to follow the "rules" whenever neccessary. They are most comfortable in institutions. (Collectivism is another term often used.)
- vassals/libertarians live by existing cultural norms. They are the soul, you might say, of regional lifestyles
The Universalist Dyad (usually correlates to social liberalism):
- progressives seeks a better understanding of objective phenomenon, by which means a higher universal standard of living may be achieved.
They are always trying to model phenomenon a bit better than before, believing these models of use to society.
- liberals focus on enjoying the experience of individual life. They desire as many rights as they deem reasonable to have, and are always
pushing for those rights they think they should have. They believe that everyone has rights and that those rights must be defended.
The Specialist Dyad (correlates to social conservatism; I don't have names yet, so I'll use the Eight Ways ones):
- "neoconservatives" defend a localized perception of reality. The Weekly Standard expresses their viewpoint very aptly. They are concerned with
defending nations from external attacks, in particular.
- theoconservatives defend existing experiences of self and living. (which are usually respective to individual states)
One can correlate the frameworks to specific philosophies. Ayn Rand's objectivism lends well to progressivism; Kant's philosophy lends to consensism; relativism lends to
adaptist: the will to change environmental conditions, to remove personal threats, and to acquire that which is necessary to survive.
traditionalist: the capacity to repress or regulate environmental change
universalist: the will to despecialize an environment's content
specialist: the will to specialize environmental content, the ability to repress universal forces
adaptist: the history of humanity's adaptational response to human-independent changes; the future requirements of successful adaptation to non-human conditions
traditionalist: histories of process, culture, and institutions; plans for the safeguarding of existing social developments
universalist: the history of universalist observations (history of human development in the macro); where universalism is headed
specialist: localized histories of thought; finding a place in the future for existing paradigms of thought
I think you're misunderstanding. A person's psychic domain colors their perception of what a given information element is or isn't, but it is not itself related to type.
Originally Posted by dee