Which video represents the amount of detail you are aware of in real life?
Static - http://youtube.com/watch?v=acFRQbIjx_E
Dynamic - http://youtube.com/watch?v=RVbzzkqCZgI
State your type as well.
Work out whether you are static or dynamic
Which video represents the amount of detail you are aware of in real life?
Static - http://youtube.com/watch?v=acFRQbIjx_E
Dynamic - http://youtube.com/watch?v=RVbzzkqCZgI
State your type as well.
Re: Work out whether you are static or dynamic
INFjOriginally Posted by Elzo
how in hell is this related to static/dynamic?
I had this same question as well. Seems like it's more of an N vs. S thing. I'm the first video. INFp.
IEI-Fe 4w3
how in hell is this related to N/S?I had this same question as well. Seems like it's more of an N vs. S thing. I'm the first video. INFp.
Well I should have said Ni vs. Si. Sorry. Ni--details being more of a blur. Si being more aware of the here and now details.how in hell is this related to N/S?I had this same question as well. Seems like it's more of an N vs. S thing. I'm the first video. INFp.
IEI-Fe 4w3
that concept is a tad different from the speed at which something is perceived.Well I should have said Ni vs. Si. Sorry. Ni--details being more of a blur. Si being more aware of the here and now details.how in hell is this related to N/S?I had this same question as well. Seems like it's more of an N vs. S thing. I'm the first video. INFp.
But the question was "the amount of detail you are aware of in real life". So I didn't see it as a speed question but rather that the speed was used to show greater or lesser detail.that concept is a tad different from the speed at which something is perceived.Well I should have said Ni vs. Si. Sorry. Ni--details being more of a blur. Si being more aware of the here and now details.how in hell is this related to N/S?I had this same question as well. Seems like it's more of an N vs. S thing. I'm the first video. INFp.
IEI-Fe 4w3
I would be Dynamic out of those two, and I'm a INxj.
I think these videos may be the wrong way round - if something has a higher fps, the action appears to be happening quicker. Being filmed with a 1000 fps camera is not the same as the film being played at 1000 fps, is it?
no. essentially its a video filmed at 1000 fps and played at 30<x<60 fps, so it appears much slower than it is.
I see...
Well, Dynamics are supposed to see things at many frames a second, and Statics at fewer frames a second -so are these videos the right way round?
it would be more accurate to say that statics view things via fps and dynamics do not, if anything. but since things like infinite fps are not measurable, this kind of definition is meaningless as far as pure perception is concerned.I see...
Well, Dynamics are supposed to see things at many frames a second, and Statics at fewer frames a second -
I wondered the same thing.I see...
Well, Dynamics are supposed to see things at many frames a second, and Statics at fewer frames a second -
IEI-Fe 4w3
Yes, and the awareness a person has of those details.
It's not the speed that the videos are playing at but the awareness of detail.I see...
Well, Dynamics are supposed to see things at many frames a second, and Statics at fewer frames a second -
I would say that statics are aware of details to the extent of what can be observed in the high speed video.
ditto for dynamics and the slow speed video
Statics view reality as sets of episodes, scenes, pictures. The consciousness of statics is oriented towards perceiving these separate, individual states, and not as continuous flows of changes.For dynamics current events are viewed as a sequence which is not decomposed into separate episodes. The consciousness of dynamics is oriented towards perceiving continuous flows of changes as oppose to discrete states.It is possible to draw another, but this time technical, analogy: modern digital cameras can save their contents in two different ways: they can either save them as segments or a write a digital video. In a similar way the surrounding reality is fixed in the human mind as either separate packets (Pictures) or as a continuous "video".
What do you say about these?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gGllN-7iry8
http://youtube.com/watch?v=E2COMeTL2r4
http://youtube.com/watch?v=a3YH5C_yH7Y
Do these videos adequately represent Statics?
What do you want me to say, Elzo?
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.
It's up to you. Your views on the original post.
Whether it's type-related or not, of the ones you posted this is the one I relate to most:
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=acFRQbIjx_E[/youtube]
Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.
I pity your souls
Gah.. I honestly don't know on this one. My first instinct was the first video, but I don't really know what level of detail I register in real life. If this is to do with static/dynamic, I'd imagine a lot of details are registered subconsciously rather than consciously. If it makes any difference, I felt like I took a lot more detail in with the first video (the one you labelled static). I think the speed influenced my thinking, I felt like I was "absorbing" the detail with the first video, like when the person was driving and you could see the trees racing towards the front of the camera and then beyond, I felt like I was absorbing the motion. I don't know, I found this a difficult one to answer to be honest.
ILI (Indescribable Lovemaking Inc.)
5w4 so/sx
"IP temperament! Because today's concerns are tomorrow's indifferences!"
Lord Fnorgle's Domain - A slowly growing collection of music, poetry and literature.
Stickam music performances
n/a
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 these videos might be Static:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=LSX88PgjtLs
http://youtube.com/watch?v=0PQAoC5ghrs
Re: Work out whether you are static or dynamic
I think you may have these backwards?Which video represents the amount of detail you are aware of in real life?
Static - http://youtube.com/watch?v=acFRQbIjx_E
Dynamic - http://youtube.com/watch?v=RVbzzkqCZgI
State your type as well.
In any case, static should be more like... a slide show?
Wow, I want to trip acid in a dynamic's brain
I wouldn't take acid. I loved shrooms, but I don't trust my brain to not do some crazy and very unpleasant things if I took acid.
Okay... so in the first video things appear to be happening very fast... we're also missing a lot of in-between frames about what is happening... changes in reality then may appear to come up upon "us" in the moving car without much prior warning. The span of this video covers a lot of time in very little time, and is disjointed (due to the missing frames).
In the second video we are in a small span of time that has been slowed down. It is so slow that it is a flowing continuity... It isn't just that at one moment water was in a glass and the next moment it's on the ground and the person is dripping wet... no, we can see everything in between as well, quite clearly.
The first video is supposed to go with static because of all the missing frames. However, because it seems to show reality in a constant state of flux, it appears that it is representing dynamic rather than static with the emphasis being on change in the long run rather than on short term change (such as that portrayed in the second video).
Although the second video shows time in a clear and continuous way (there are no missing frames) and thus is supposed to go with dynamic, the fact that it only covers that brief moment in time (not depicting reality in a state of flux, but rather depicting a moment sort of suspended in reality or time) then it appears to depict a static perception of reality rather than a dynamic one.
In any case, because of the constant state of motion or flux of reality through time, I related more with the first vid than the second one in terms of how I perceive reality. However part of me has sometimes wished that reality were not this way... because in watching the flow, perhaps one misses out on experiencing particular moments (or spaces in life) as fully as they could be experienced... there is no pause button.
good video choices to demonstrate a thing or two about perception of detail. i'd hafta say i relate to the first one more. everything is a blur kind of. i only remember the broad strokes of things.
but whoever said they want to be in a dynamic's brain, i'll second that. that's some cool shit if that's really the way they see things for sure.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Neither would I, with that mindset.
Umm, I don't think that description of Statics/Dynamics is meant to be taken literally...
I fully admit to having watched too much TV, but this randomly has reminded me of the first episode or two of Deep Space Nine, so I feel so compelled to grace you all with my ramblings. Sorry. >:-P
My favorite line from the opening of DS9 (and really the only line I remember since it's been a while) is "you reside here." This is because Cisco's character having lost his wife in that terrible war with the Borg, hasn't been able to actually let go of her. Of course, this is quite simply, grief. Cisco does not exist in normal time. He doesn't live in the present. He lives in past states of reality--in a reality where his wife still exists. Although he left her physically when she died, the rest of him never did leave. So when he's communicating with the 'worm hole aliens' (as I call them), they keep going back to the place and time where his wife died, and the aliens note "you reside here." They also travel to other places and times in Cisco's mind when he and his wife were together. Anyway, I thought this was a good example of a state of reality. It is a place in time... a constant place in reality (of ones own creation). In this episode Cisco exists in static states of reality--states that are of the past, granted, but that do not change. He lives in these states in his way of fighting against the pull of time--against the flow of reality. If he allows himself to flow with reality, to let go, then he will have to accept that his wife is dead (he would have to, in other words, let go of her). I think that all people tend to do this, especially when in grief.
If we view reality in states, then a drastic change in the state of reality might be especially traumatic. For instance if I think of my reality as consisting of certain elements that I expect not to change in an unconscious way then change could be hard to deal with when dramatic changes occur. Because if I saw it that way I might get comfortable in reality during periods of time where my life changes very little (from my pov)... so a sudden large change would jar me out of the state of comfort I had settled into. If I view reality as ever-changing, and don't view reality in unchanging states, then it can also be unsettling because of the conscious awareness that there are no constants... no comfortable spaces in time that aren't illusory... that reality is impermanent... that everything will change and there is nothing to hold on to. On a more simple level, however, the constant change can be nice to fend away boredom.
These thoughts aren't very well formed yet. I'm not making many direct links here... this is just something that momentarily came to mind.
static perception of reality?
or at least one of the closest things to it?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FW-6A6ahISs
not sure about static but i always loved that song. and the dancin in the video is hot hot hot.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
I don't see what this has to do with statics.
About statics and how they see the world: they don't integrate anything they record into their understanding until they have some sort of indication that what they saw lasts beyond a single moment's impression. Whatever results as the understanding needs to be not just a recording, a sequence or a prediction, but a full-blown structure.
Dynamics are the functions of flat, face-value recordings. Noumena: language, pictures, techniques.
Statics are the functions of depth-sensitive, perspective independent constructions. Phenomena: objects, concepts, structures.
Re: static perception of reality?
nothing to do with socionics whatsoever, afaic
Reply With Quote
