we dont have a word for it, i just call it absolute vs. relative. the common thread between Ij and Ep is absolute, for Ip and Ej is relative. Can't pick either i/e or j/p ..
static vs dynamicwe dont have a word for it
I still don't get the whole static/dynamic thing. I can't find explanations of it that offer concrete examples. Since it's such a fundamental dichotomy, it should be easy to find examples right? In the things people say, their postings, etc.
In terms of the field of psychology, and out of those four options, I would say Extroversion/Introversion. It's the one that sets people apart...the people who are often found in groups from the ones who are removed from groups...the outdoor people from the indoor people and so on! (loosely speaking). The others are not such significant dividers.
Now the Socionics answer..."Extroversion/Introversion" isn't "Extroversion/Introversion", so in that sense, none of these four dichotomies are fundamental.
Removed at User Request
Introversion/Extraversion. The other three are all related to functions.
i'll go w the majority here...it's rational/irrational. but extraversion/introversion is a pretty close second.....so i'd have to say temperament is fundamental.
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Removed at User Request
I say rationality/irrationality because it is the only dichotomy that needs to be the same between duals. Within any quadra, the types with the same rationality as you are always the ones with whom you have a better relationship.
Stan is not my real name.
The p/j switch is, in my eyes, the most important one. Most of the people I hang out with are irrationals, and in spite of we don't belong to the same quadra, we still can interact...somehow
DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
Removed at User Request
Static and dynamic - Wikisocion
Anyway, on that note, don't you think it might be easier to define types in terms of their dynamic or static values (only if the difference truly comes as more important than extroversion/introversion or any other dichotomy.) Gamma quadra values for instance being:
If not, then the system we have now is just fine. I think a new system of looking at things might open up new doors to theory though.
I might venture judging vs perceiving, in terms of functions - not to be confused with rational/irrational temperaments, though it is connected, of course. It's all interconnected. And, yes, I realize my answer isn't on the poll. But I think it is the most, or perhaps just a, foundational concept/dichotomy. More than the others listed, anyway.
INFj / EII / FiNe
"Fairy Tales are more than true; not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten." - G.K. Chesterton
"Have courage and be kind." - Cinderella's mom
Last edited by crazedrat; 08-15-2009 at 10:56 PM.
The general trend is that the two Static temperaments are more autonomous in the sense that they have a stronger sense of personal direction and easily act apart from anything going on in the environment, whereas the two Dynamic temperaments are more synergetic with the environment; better able to respond naturally to events, better able to make do with what the world offers them.I still don't get the whole static/dynamic thing. I can't find explanations of it that offer concrete examples. Since it's such a fundamental dichotomy, it should be easy to find examples right? In the things people say, their postings, etc.
I assume you associate Rationals with autonomy and Irrationals with synergy then. However:This sounds much closer to irrationality and rationality and not my understanding of static and dynamic.
Eps are all about following their own ideas and impulses. The environment is in large part ignorned. It only serves a cue to them; a trigger for them to spring to action. This is not a mindset in which synergy with the environment is the aim or the focus.
Ejs on the other hand are all about decisively working with oppurtunities and materials that are provided by the environment. They don't judge what they find, they don't assess the value of things subjectively; they just work with what they get. Most of the time they let the availability of tools and materials determine for them what their goals are. They always adjust the latter to the former rather than the other way around. This is not a primarily autonomous mindset, but a synergetic one.
rationality/irrationality for sure
You think Ij types are synergetic with their environment and capable of naturally responding to the world, and Ip types have strong personal direction? This goes against just about everything that has ever been written on socionics.
extraverted intuition does not = static intuition.
introverted does not = dynamic, extraverted does not = static.
introverted intuition - introverted does not = dynamic intuition - dynamic.
assuming introverted intuition is dynamic intuition, and extraverted intuition is static intuition:
static intuition - static does not = dynamic intuition - dynamic. intuition does not = intuition
Last edited by crazedrat; 08-16-2009 at 12:53 AM.
From Rick's site for example:
Rationals act according to the expectation of a situation; form an expectation or plan, then act.
Irrationals act according to their current state of mind (impulsiveness).
I don't see how Rick's quotes are relevant to the issue.
This quote, however, is definitely relevant:
It describes INTps as having difficulty making goals for themselves: lacking personal autonomy.Originally Posted by socioniko.net INTp description
How can a person be autonomous if s/he can not even decide what s/he wants?Has nothing to do with lacking personal autonomy
The description assumes the ESFp to provide the goal. That is also an irrational type, but a Static one. So there you go.and this briefly put would explain why something like difficulty making goals would be said about INTps:
It's importance is about on par with that of Rational/Irrational, but it's not nearly as well documented. It's best to just focus on the 4 temperaments.
Switching the I/E dichotomy will change the aspect of every function (from introverted to extroverted), but not the functions themselves (an ENFp and INFp both lead with intuition). Switching the rationality changes not only aspect of every function, but the order as well (an ESTp and ESTj: not only is one Se and Ti and the other is Si and Te, but one leads with thinking and the other with sensing).
Stan is not my real name.
Joy wrote some decent descriptions of them a while ago:
There should be another thread with descriptions buried in the Gamma quadra board somewhere, but I'm not sure how to find it back.
I say rationality/irrationality because I'd rather be with an EII than an SEE. Apparently (based on my history) I'd rather be with LII's and LSI's than SEE's too, though I wouldn't attempt a relationship with either of these types again. EP's are just too... not IJ... for me.
Every time I doubt my type (thinking maybe I'm ILI after all) because IJ's are just too perfect for me.