Ti - what are external field statics?

[tcaudilllg]

When we say that something is static, we mean that it does not change. When we say that something is a field, we mean it as a group of objects that have something in common with each other. When we say that a property is external, we mean that it only appears in relations to that which is outside of the object.

Putting all of these together, Ti is the attribute of fields that is unchanging in its relationship to other fields. If you were to put a group of fields side by side, then Ti is that part of them that is not changing, but is staying constant. And yet, there is a relationship: the fields are sharing something between themselves by means of this stasis.

This something is so fundamental to our experience that we often consider it without really thinking about it, because it is in substance thought itself. It is structure, the very fact that the fields are persistently interconnnected. That they are interconnected means that they share a common attribute between them, an attribute shared also by all of their objects. (or else the object set would not be a field.) This attribute relates their defining characteristics and creates effect. Thus we say, upon observation, that the attribute of the fields' relation combines their respective properties into one synthesized property, thus establishing "cause" and "effect".

[Logos]

This something is so fundamental to our experience that we often consider it without really thinking about it, because it is in substance thought itself.

True, but the fact that it is so fundamental and common place may be why Te-valuing types deem it as being trivial or not as important.

[Joy]

When we say that something is static, we mean that it does not change.

Not really. Static means state, but you can't really say it does or doesn't change. Past or future change is irrelevant to whatever it's state is right now.

When we say that something is a field, we mean it as a group of objects that have something in common with each other.

They don't necessarily have to have something in common, exactly. They just have to have some relation to each other.

When we say that a property is external, we mean that it only appears in relations to that which is outside of the object.

I don't follow?

External just means that it's immediately apparent, readily observable, measurable, etc. (Internal, by comparison, means that it's beneath the surface, unseen, abstract, etc.)

[tcaudilllg]

Not really. Static means state, but you can't really say it does or doesn't change. Past or future change is irrelevant to whatever it's state is right now.

Right, that's what I meant, although I didn't explicitly state it.

They don't necessarily have to have something in common, exactly. They just have to have some relation to each other.

That's a better way of putting it. I was thinking in terms of, say, objects that are susceptible to gravity as consistuting a gravitational field. And if you look closer at the concept of gravity, we know that it is the objects themselves which have the property of gravity, that create the field. (though it's more complex than just that, clearly.)

I don't follow?

External just means that it's immediately apparent, readily observable, measurable, etc. (Internal, by comparison, means that it's beneath the surface, unseen, abstract, etc.)

By object, I meant "field considered as an object", in this case.

As for external/internal, I think you're kinda drowning in fact without realizing the bigger picture.... Something can only be apparent by means of a medium transmitting information between yourself and that which you perceive. That medium is the substance of relation between yourself and the perceived.

Interrelation implies external, but external does not immediately imply interrelation, because it makes no mention of the medium. Interrelation says that there is absolutely a medium of relation, because there is relation and therefore, a medium is required.

[Joy]

There being a relation means that it's a field. (There are external objects and internal fields.)

[Joy]

Also, I think it's important to keep in mind that something may have been lost in translation when we're talking about fields (and all Socionics terminology, really).

[Logos]

Also it is important to keep in mind not to try and make things overcomplicated in your understanding of them.

[tcaudilllg]

Also it is important to keep in mind not to try and make things overcomplicated in your understanding of them.

Was that aimed at me, or Joy? I hope it wasn't aimed at me, because well, if it were...

[Logos]

Was that aimed at me, or Joy? I hope it wasn't aimed at me, because well, if it were...

It was aimed at you. And it was more a warning of precaution.

[tcaudilllg]

It was aimed at you. And it was more a warning of precaution.

Excuse me, but I had been thinking about Ti off and on for over a year, and I just today had the insight that I herein described. The point is, it works. It makes sense. There you have it. It doesn't describe everything, but it captures the nature of the element itself.

[Logos]

Excuse me, but I had been thinking about Ti off and on for over a year, and I just today had the insight that I herein described. The point is, it works. It makes sense. There you have it. It doesn't describe everything, but it captures the nature of the element itself.

I'm happy for you then.