View Poll Results: The most fundamental dichotomy IYO?

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Extroversion/Introversion

    9 28.13%
  • Intuition/Sensing

    4 12.50%
  • Thinking/Feeling

    2 6.25%
  • Irrationality/Rationality

    17 53.13%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 71

Thread: the most fundamental dichotomy

  1. #1
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,860
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default the most fundamental dichotomy

    vote please

  2. #2
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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 ..
    INTp

  3. #3
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,860
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    we dont have a word for it
    static vs dynamic

  4. #4
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ah
    INTp

  5. #5
    Danielle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    193
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.
    EII
    4w5, sp/sx

  6. #6
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,938
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.

  7. #7
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  8. #8
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Introversion/Extraversion. The other three are all related to functions.

  9. #9
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Introversion/Extraversion. The other three are all related to functions.
    So is introversion/extroversion...
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  10. #10
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  11. #11
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  12. #12
    The Looks stanprollyright's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    In your pants
    TIM
    IEE-Ne cp 6w7 sx/so
    Posts
    555
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.

  13. #13
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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
    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    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.

  14. #14
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  15. #15
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Danielle View Post
    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 have a hard time with examples. Although one gives a clear exact view of the difference, I have a hard time using that example to detect other instances. Where as using the description I am able to detect many instances. Just try to picture the difference in one field, say in terms of ethics, to get a clearer understanding. Perhaps how its described here

    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:

    Static Sensing
    Dynamic Intuition
    Static Ethics
    Dynamic Logic

    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.

  16. #16
    Let's go to fairyland Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,078
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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

  17. #17
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    I have a hard time with examples. Although one gives a clear exact view of the difference, I have a hard time using that example to detect other instances. Where as using the description I am able to detect many instances. Just try to picture the difference in one field, say in terms of ethics, to get a clearer understanding. Perhaps how its described here

    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:

    Static Sensing
    Dynamic Intuition
    Static Ethics
    Dynamic Logic

    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.
    yes, but not like that. because the words you're using like 'intuition', etc. need to be defined better. the distinction between Ni and Ne is more than one level of static vs. dynamic
    for example:
    Ne: static statics of dynamics
    Ni: dynamic dynamics of dynamics
    Last edited by crazedrat; 08-15-2009 at 11:56 PM.
    INTp

  18. #18
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    So is introversion/extroversion...
    with functions I meant the basic functions, sensing intuition thinking feeling.
    Not the si se ni ne ti te fi fe

  19. #19
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedratXII View Post
    Ne: static statics of dynamics
    Ni: dynamic dynamics of dynamics
    I have no idea what that means, but I know how to identify the field of intuition.

  20. #20
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.
    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.

  21. #21
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    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.
    This sounds much closer to irrationality and rationality and not my understanding of static and dynamic. Also, I don't think this answers Danielle's question either way.

  22. #22
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    I have no idea what that means, but I know how to identify the field of intuition.
    You are not acknowledging there is a distinction between one field of intuition and another, prior to your distinction of static vs. dynamic
    INTp

  23. #23
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This sounds much closer to irrationality and rationality and not my understanding of static and dynamic.
    I assume you associate Rationals with autonomy and Irrationals with synergy then. However:

    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.

  24. #24
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    rationality/irrationality for sure
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  25. #25
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedratXII View Post
    You are not acknowledging there is a distinction between one field of intuition and another, prior to your distinction of static vs. dynamic
    I don't know what you mean by intuition. In socionics, there is obviously the field of intuition. Static/extroverted Intuition, and Dynamic/introverted intuition. I'm aware of the difference, but I wouldn't call the difference static statics of dynamics and dynamic dynamics of dynamics. That makes little sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    I assume you associate Rationals with autonomy and Irrationals with synergy then.
    No actually how you define static sounds like irrationality, and your idea of dynamic sounds like rationality.

  26. #26
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.

  27. #27
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    I don't know what you mean by intuition. In socionics, there is obviously the field of intuition. Static/extroverted Intuition, and Dynamic/introverted intuition. I'm aware of the difference, but I wouldn't call the difference static statics of dynamics and dynamic dynamics of dynamics. That makes little sense.
    if intuition = intuition, introverted intuition does not = dynamic intuition, &
    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
    Understood?
    Last edited by crazedrat; 08-16-2009 at 01:53 AM.
    INTp

  28. #28
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    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.
    Yep, that sounds pretty close to what I believe. Being an irrational, even the definition of irrationality, constitutes that.

    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).

  29. #29
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't see how Rick's quotes are relevant to the issue.

    This quote, however, is definitely relevant:

    Quote Originally Posted by socioniko.net INTp description
    4."First and foremost, he is kind". In spite of all his "negativism", he is really a very kindly person in nature. The above phrase about Honoré de Balzac belongs to George Sand who knew him very well. He likes strong people who know their way in life, who demand concessions: such people release him from the necessity to invent goals, while using methods invented by him (he is a master of inventing methods.) He is capable of pouring a bucket of cold water out on the head of an enthusiast. But on the other hand, he is likewise capable of easing one's despair, when they are unlucky, when things go the wrong way, when destiny seems to be hostile.
    It describes INTps as having difficulty making goals for themselves: lacking personal autonomy.

  30. #30
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    It describes INTps as having difficulty making goals for themselves: lacking personal autonomy.
    Has nothing to do with lacking personal autonomy, and this briefly put would explain why something like difficulty making goals would be said about INTps:

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    Rationals act according to the expectation of a situation; form an expectation or plan, then act.

  31. #31
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Has nothing to do with lacking personal autonomy
    How can a person be autonomous if s/he can not even decide what s/he wants?

    and this briefly put would explain why something like difficulty making goals would be said about INTps:
    The description assumes the ESFp to provide the goal. That is also an irrational type, but a Static one. So there you go.

  32. #32
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    How can a person be autonomous if s/he can not even decide what s/he wants?

    The description assumes the ESFp to provide the goal. That is also an irrational type, but a Static one. So there you go.
    Yeah that makes sense now. I can see how thats true of static and dynamic types, how its true of me, and was a little confused about the terms used, and how this pairs with the originating explanation of the dichotomy (frames per second). What kind of sources are available for these types of descriptions you gave?

  33. #33
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.

  34. #34
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    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.
    Any good sources on the four temperaments? Even though I know of some, wondering if you have a preference.

  35. #35
    The Looks stanprollyright's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    In your pants
    TIM
    IEE-Ne cp 6w7 sx/so
    Posts
    555
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinocchio View Post
    This is exactly why I said they are somehow the same level. But I don't have any idea why you consider Rationality more important, as long as your dual has strictly the opposite: Extroversion, Dynamicity, Externality.
    I consider rationality slightly more important because there is a larger disconnect between rationals and irrationals than introverts and extroverts. Take any mirror pair with the same ego functions and you will always have a better relationship with the one who has the same rationality. The same cannot be said about heteroversion.

    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.

  36. #36
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Joy wrote some decent descriptions of them a while ago:

    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ment-test.html

    There should be another thread with descriptions buried in the Gamma quadra board somewhere, but I'm not sure how to find it back.

  37. #37

  38. #38
    Poster Nutbag The Exception's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    my own personal bubble
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    4,108
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanprollyright View Post
    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, u prolly right
    LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP



  39. #39
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ty, labcoat

    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.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  40. #40
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    Every time I doubt my type (thinking maybe I'm ILI after all) because IJ's are just too perfect for me.
    Every time you think you're an ILI, you should remember what you think about SEEs.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •