Can someone tell me - introverted intuition Ni

[717495]

Object vs field is a lot more significant to the contrast in elements. Dynamic and static aren't terms I would directly associate with the information elements. Properties like logic or intuition are less trivial.

[Azeroffs]

Dynamic and static aren't terms I would directly associate with the information elements.

Why? They're crucial to foundation of the element.

Properties like logic or intuition are less trivial.

I disagree

[717495]

The terms of dynamic vs static, and internal vs external only explain certain aspects of the elements. Where from my experience, these aren't at all conclusive of any of the elements. It's the same sort of thing as Reinin dichotomies. There is no actual information there, so people are free to interpret all of this cross categorization differently. All of these loose terms are something I hesitate to try interpreting, and most of the opinions derived from these categories that go around don't seem all that sensible to me, when I look at the info element as a whole.

[Azeroffs]

The terms of dynamic vs static, and internal vs external only explain certain aspects of the elements. Where from my experience, these aren't at all conclusive of a typing.

I find that it helps understand the elements better which in turn helps understand speech patterns and such. Though it is highly speculative.

[717495]

I don't agree to the suggestion that people are divided into usage of 8 symmetrically delineated powers, and would find myself weary to apply them since they reflect something more final stage. These categorizations were made by the same person who created Socionics, but I doubt she meant for descriptions to be delineated from the categorizations, which is nonsense, it is rather the other way around. The terms are too abstract, it's like blurring out a picture to see the overall colors, but then sharpening the resolution in hope to recapture the actuality of it. I consider myself more attuned to the commonly observed associations of types rather than these hypathetical manifestations. And I don't agree to seeing each of these as equal. Object and field is definitely the most relevant.

[Azeroffs]

I don't agree to the suggestion that people are divided into usage of 8 symmetrically delineated powers, and would find myself weary to clarify such nonsense categories.

Well, it is the foundation for the explanation of type-relations.

These categorizations were made by the same person who created Socionics, but I doubt she meant for descriptions to be delineated from the categorizations, which is nonsense, it is rather the other way around. The terms are too abstract, it's like blurring out a picture to see the overall colors, but then sharpening the resolution in hope to recapture the actuality of it. I consider myself more attuned to the commonly observed associations of types rather than these hypathetical manifestations.

statc/internal/fields etc just give a clear structure that at least gives uniformity to IE descriptions. Without them, the range of speculation would be even wider.

[717495]

It's not a range of speculation, it's being open to observation, since facets of psychological typology are typically correlative. I am also in doubt that the intertype relations are symmetrically delineated, especially that every person fits directly into a form, proposing solid descriptions. Quadra values are the main differentiation.