Just as there are blocks for concrete, abstract, vague, and believed traits of concepts, so do we distinguish between kinds of concepts on basis of the blocks. The ego block only deals with concrete conceptualizations; the superego block deals with abstract conceptualizations (especially, mathematical forumula and phenomenological models such as Model A); the super-id block deals with vague conceptualizations (especially religious concepts which can never be fully apprehended, such as God); and the belief block deals with concepts that are purely subjective in nature, biased interpretations of conceptualizations by the other blocks. Of these, only concrete conceptualizations are wholly accurate, because the concrete conceptualizations are themselves coherent unifications of the other three with immediate experience.

Suffice to say, that that which we notice about conceptualizations is dependent both on the concept kind and on the information elements we use to process them as a result of the kind. It's important to note though, that what to any one of us is only understandable through an abstract model, is understood much, much better by a person who apprehends the same aspects of a concept with their ego block, because they see the entire picture at the abstract, infinite, and belief levels all. I believe that the problem on this forum of some people arguing that socionics is just a model (a minority of abstract Ti users who insist on the supremacy of Ti as an abstraction alone), and others arguing that it is representative of something immediately real and observable (concrete Ti users), stems from the attribution of the same aspects to concepts that are of dissimilar kind.