Paths vs Connections

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Connections integrate intellectual concepts at once, they're good for storytelling, rehearsing, teaching, and mitigating 'behind the scenes' activity to debate the best course of action. Paths are good for actually executing decisions and making destinies happen. They see what needs to be done more clearly. If you have a dominant path, you will dual-seek a connection; if you have a dominant connection, you will dual-seek a path.

It might seem like Ne would be a Connection, but ime it's a path because all the ideas the Ne-type gives off tend to be very useful if actually accomplished. Connections are more ideal and comforting. Connections tend to be intuitive, paths counter-intuitive. A good psychologist gives their patient direct orders all the time.

If you have connections w/o paths, you get lost, ultimately nothing changes or gets done. If you have paths w/o connections, you get lonely and won't be able to feel your humanity or overcome the opposition. Think of an extreme connection as a bunch of people locked together, they enjoy one another but can't do anything or go anywhere. An extreme path is one person walking alone down a dark forest road, without the support/connections of people they would eventually get mauled alive. Without the path, the extreme connection would backfire, people would get tired of each other and turn on one another.


- Logical Connections
- Logical Paths
- Physical Paths
- Physical Connections
- Emotional Connections
- Emotional Paths
- Possibility Paths
- Possibility Connections

[ZTCrawcrustle]

Then what about there being plenty of Delta humanitarian writers, or writing being an aspiration of many Delta humanitarians?

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

They show more with actions and counseling than with writing. Every socionics site I've been to says that about them. I think the 'writer idealist' type isn't quadra-specific either.

For alphas, it is the ILE. For betas, the IEI. For gammas, the ILI, and deltas the EII.

Also 'humanitarian' is so vague. Who *doesn't* think of themselves as a humanitarian? Society functions on how well it can get people to grow.

[ZTCrawcrustle]

I meant humanitarian in the socionics sense, as in NFs. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "show more," but there is a tendency for them to want to be writers.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

You probably already know this, but:

Even in writing you're supposed to show as opposed to tell. When you're too vague it makes people feel judged and angry with you, plus they can't really understand what you mean or the realistic ambiance of the situation.

The idealism nature of writing is going to occur no matter WHAT you write about, so when you avoid too many concrete nouns and verbs you alienate people from your work. Also, it's just plain laziness.

So that's what I mean by 'show more.' Also they (as in Deltas) like to brag to others that they volunteered in habitat for humanity, worked in group homes, community events etc. A Beta would be the type of person to ask the question 'who is really the bad guy here.'

[ZTCrawcrustle]

Sorry. I do not get how what you said relates to Deltas not being writers. But you are correct: as someone who aspires to write, I did already know that.

[DirectorAbbie]

You've got the and mixed up.

[krieger]

It seems to me that path and connection are almost synonymous. A path is simply a connection that is also accessible. If A is accessibly connected to B, we consider a path to exist between the two.

IMO:
Path/connections (also: dividing lines, sepparations, comparisons, verb phrases) == Judging
Places/objects/things these connect/sepparate == Perceiving

[crazedrat]

.. a path is a linear progression through a system of connections. What you're making is a distinguishment between linear and parallel awareness; and this can be found in the functions, although you have it wrong up there. But you might as well just use these words, because they're more accessible; and many MBTI authors discuss linear vs. parallel awareness in detail when discussing the functions, as these are terms which loosely define the characteristics of our brain hemispheres; and seem to be foundational to logic as well.

[krieger]

a path is a linear progression through a system of connections.

Under that interpretation I'd say that the "shortcut" formed by any path (a connection between two nodes that are mutually reachable through a series of existing connections) constitutes Static Judgment (Ji), whereas the connections themselves are Dynamic Judgment (Je).

Dynamic Judgment is Limiting when Accepting: registered directly upon observation. Static Judgment is Limiting when Creating: requires integration of many observations to get finalized...

The association with paralel processing is something I have thought about before. I'm sure I have written about that in "abstract function descriptions" using those exact words.

Associating perceiving functions with connections or paths is just wrong, though.