Reinin Dichotomies: Static/Dynamic

[Slacker]

OK so if you have Fi in the ego block, you're static, right?

I've taken heavy drugs for a headache tonight and my head is really fuzzy.

If you have Te in the ego block you're dynamic, right?

So even if this is in part Fi/Te, that would work. What would be helpful would be to know how Fe/Ti quadras think about this.

[Not A Communist Shill]

from wikisocion:

Static: Perception of reality is more like 8 frames per second (Talanov)
Dynamic: Perception of reality is more like 64 frames per second (Talanov)

I think a Static type sees a scene in their mind in great detail (i.e. like a person studying a 'static' photograph), while a Dynamic type sees a moving 'dynamic' picture, like a film.

So, a Static type could flick through 20 photos in 100 seconds, taking in the detail of each photo, while a Dynamic type sees a 100 second film, paying little attention to the details in any one particular frame.

Well, that's what i think, anyway .

[Birds]

The best example of this IMO was given by Rocky. And it was this: If you give a certain amount of money to charity every year, and then one year your financial circumstances change and money is tighter, do you at least try to give the same amount of money because the charity's needs are the same (static), or do you give less because your circumstances have changed and you wouldn't expect you'd give the same amount if you don't have as much available (dynamic).

I really thought EVERYONE would try to give the same amount, but my husband (who id dynamic) thought I was crazy to think that way and said if we ever have financial problems not to expect that to happen. So far, it's the best example I've seen.

I think that would be the Altruistic/Financially responsible dichotomy.

[snegledmaca]

What would be helpful would be to know how Fe/Ti quadras think about this.

I wouldn't be giving money to charity in the first place. Not willingly anyway.

[Creepy-bg]

from wikisocion:

Static: Perception of reality is more like 8 frames per second (Talanov)
Dynamic: Perception of reality is more like 64 frames per second (Talanov)

I think a Static type sees a scene in their mind in great detail (i.e. like a person studying a 'static' photograph), while a Dynamic type sees a moving 'dynamic' picture, like a film.

So, a Static type could flick through 20 photos in 100 seconds, taking in the detail of each photo, while a Dynamic type sees a 100 second film, paying little attention to the details in any one particular frame.

Well, that's what i think, anyway .

what if I perceive 36 frames a second?

[Not A Communist Shill]

from wikisocion:

Static: Perception of reality is more like 8 frames per second (Talanov)
Dynamic: Perception of reality is more like 64 frames per second (Talanov)

I think a Static type sees a scene in their mind in great detail (i.e. like a person studying a 'static' photograph), while a Dynamic type sees a moving 'dynamic' picture, like a film.

So, a Static type could flick through 20 photos in 100 seconds, taking in the detail of each photo, while a Dynamic type sees a 100 second film, paying little attention to the details in any one particular frame.

Well, that's what i think, anyway .

what if I perceive 36 frames a second?

You would have to torrent some software in order to convert to the correct speed. Or, you could take the appropriate 'medicine'.

[Creepy-bg]

I object to this thread.

[Hugo]

should be the other way around.

Yes.

[Birds]

from wikisocion:

Static: Perception of reality is more like 8 frames per second (Talanov)
Dynamic: Perception of reality is more like 64 frames per second (Talanov)

I think a Static type sees a scene in their mind in great detail (i.e. like a person studying a 'static' photograph), while a Dynamic type sees a moving 'dynamic' picture, like a film.

So, a Static type could flick through 20 photos in 100 seconds, taking in the detail of each photo, while a Dynamic type sees a 100 second film, paying little attention to the details in any one particular frame.

Well, that's what i think, anyway .

Does that mean that Statics lag more, and Dynamics can easily pwn them, because they have higher FPS?

[Creepy-bg]

from wikisocion:

Static: Perception of reality is more like 8 frames per second (Talanov)
Dynamic: Perception of reality is more like 64 frames per second (Talanov)

I think a Static type sees a scene in their mind in great detail (i.e. like a person studying a 'static' photograph), while a Dynamic type sees a moving 'dynamic' picture, like a film.

So, a Static type could flick through 20 photos in 100 seconds, taking in the detail of each photo, while a Dynamic type sees a 100 second film, paying little attention to the details in any one particular frame.

Well, that's what i think, anyway .

Does that mean that Statics lag more, and Dynamics can easily pwn them, because they have higher FPS?

lol but statics can sometimes walk through map walls :wink:

[Mea]

from wikisocion:

Static: Perception of reality is more like 8 frames per second (Talanov)
Dynamic: Perception of reality is more like 64 frames per second (Talanov)

I think a Static type sees a scene in their mind in great detail (i.e. like a person studying a 'static' photograph), while a Dynamic type sees a moving 'dynamic' picture, like a film.

So, a Static type could flick through 20 photos in 100 seconds, taking in the detail of each photo, while a Dynamic type sees a 100 second film, paying little attention to the details in any one particular frame.

Well, that's what i think, anyway .

Does that mean that Statics lag more, and Dynamics can easily pwn them, because they have higher FPS?

[marooned]

Current thoughts on static vs. dynamic:

Static perception of reality: I find niches in space in time, where nothing changes, where reality is constant, unchanging, fixed. I go to work everyday. I come home to my family. We eat dinner at 5 pm. Every day. I either think that this is terribly comfortable, that I never want it to change... or I think this is terribly boring and that I need to make something change. When something happens that jars me out of my niche--like maybe one day the problems between my spouse and I escalate to the point where we decide to divorce, then suddenly a changing nature of reality becomes momentarily apparent to me. But after this change has passed I settle into a new niche in space and time, where nothing changes, where reality is fixed and unchanging, where everything remains the same. I exist in the niches I find.

Dynamic perception of reality: Reality is in a constant state of flux. It changes over time. It is constantly changing. I am not the same person I was a moment ago. The universe is not as it was a moment ago. There are no niches in space and time, and any time I think I've settled into one, it's an illusion. Although I go to work everyday and come home to my family afterwards and eat dinner at 5 pm, everything is always moving through time. I see how it is moving and changing, for instance I see that my spouse and I aren't getting along more each day and that if things continue in this direction (at this rate) we may divorce later in time. I am either frightened over the constant change of reality wanting to stop the change, or I am comforted by the change as it keeps life interesting. In either case, I move with it. I exist in the flux.

What would be the difference between how a dynamic N type and a dynamic S type view reality?

Thoughts are subject to change.

[krieger]

Dynamics speak to people; statics speak against people.

[redbaron]

According to most of these definitions, I am dynamic. I would definitely give less to the charity the following year if I couldn't afford it. I see life as constant change. I am not sure about the story telling though. I do sometimes tell stories from beginning to end. Usually what happens is, I'll think of the main part of the story I want to tell but then I'll remember the background info that will help make the story better and more complete so I'll back up (this happens quickly in my mind before I begin telling any part of it) and start the story from the beginning so the listener will understand and have a clearer picture of what I'm trying to say. There are times that I have to go back and fill in details of a story. When that happens, I always think to myself that I'm a horrible story teller and that it would have been better if I had remembered everything to begin with and started at the beginning with all of the details thrown in. On the other hand, not everyone is up for hearing all the details. Some listeners just want the main point. It helps to know what sort your audience is. Anyway, I'm rambling.

[Ezra]

I object to this thread.

HAHAHA

[Ezra]

from wikisocion:

Static: Perception of reality is more like 8 frames per second (Talanov)
Dynamic: Perception of reality is more like 64 frames per second (Talanov)

I think a Static type sees a scene in their mind in great detail (i.e. like a person studying a 'static' photograph), while a Dynamic type sees a moving 'dynamic' picture, like a film.

So, a Static type could flick through 20 photos in 100 seconds, taking in the detail of each photo, while a Dynamic type sees a 100 second film, paying little attention to the details in any one particular frame.

Well, that's what i think, anyway .

Does that mean that Statics lag more, and Dynamics can easily pwn them, because they have higher FPS?

lol but statics can sometimes walk through map walls :wink:

What, like when you type 'idpispopd' on Doom?

[Ezra]

Current thoughts on static vs. dynamic:

Static perception of reality: I find niches in space in time, where nothing changes, where reality is constant, unchanging, fixed. I go to work everyday. I come home to my family. We eat dinner at 5 pm. Every day. I either think that this is terribly comfortable, that I never want it to change... or I think this is terribly boring and that I need to make something change. When something happens that jars me out of my niche--like maybe one day the problems between my spouse and I escalate to the point where we decide to divorce, then suddenly a changing nature of reality becomes momentarily apparent to me. But after this change has passed I settle into a new niche in space and time, where nothing changes, where reality is fixed and unchanging, where everything remains the same. I exist in the niches I find.

Dynamic perception of reality: Reality is in a constant state of flux. It changes over time. It is constantly changing. I am not the same person I was a moment ago. The universe is not as it was a moment ago. There are no niches in space and time, and any time I think I've settled into one, it's an illusion. Although I go to work everyday and come home to my family afterwards and eat dinner at 5 pm, everything is always moving through time. I see how it is moving and changing, for instance I see that my spouse and I aren't getting along more each day and that if things continue in this direction (at this rate) we may divorce later in time. I am either frightened over the constant change of reality wanting to stop the change, or I am comforted by the change as it keeps life interesting. In either case, I move with it. I exist in the flux.

What would be the difference between how a dynamic N type and a dynamic S type view reality?

Thoughts are subject to change.

See, static there to me is foreign. Completely alien to me. And I'm apparently an SLE. In fact, if I didn't know better I'd think that if anyone took the static view of life, they'd be a complete retard.

[marooned]

See, static there to me is foreign. Completely alien to me. And I'm apparently an SLE. In fact, if I didn't know better I'd think that if anyone took the static view of life, they'd be a complete retard.

Well, I don't know if my current thoughts about that are correct, only that they are my current thoughts. :wink: And I don't know what type you are.

[Slacker]

Current thoughts on static vs. dynamic:

Static perception of reality: I find niches in space in time, where nothing changes, where reality is constant, unchanging, fixed. I go to work everyday. I come home to my family. We eat dinner at 5 pm. Every day. I either think that this is terribly comfortable, that I never want it to change... or I think this is terribly boring and that I need to make something change. When something happens that jars me out of my niche--like maybe one day the problems between my spouse and I escalate to the point where we decide to divorce, then suddenly a changing nature of reality becomes momentarily apparent to me. But after this change has passed I settle into a new niche in space and time, where nothing changes, where reality is fixed and unchanging, where everything remains the same. I exist in the niches I find.

Dynamic perception of reality: Reality is in a constant state of flux. It changes over time. It is constantly changing. I am not the same person I was a moment ago. The universe is not as it was a moment ago. There are no niches in space and time, and any time I think I've settled into one, it's an illusion. Although I go to work everyday and come home to my family afterwards and eat dinner at 5 pm, everything is always moving through time. I see how it is moving and changing, for instance I see that my spouse and I aren't getting along more each day and that if things continue in this direction (at this rate) we may divorce later in time. I am either frightened over the constant change of reality wanting to stop the change, or I am comforted by the change as it keeps life interesting. In either case, I move with it. I exist in the flux.

What would be the difference between how a dynamic N type and a dynamic S type view reality?

Thoughts are subject to change.

See, static there to me is foreign. Completely alien to me. And I'm apparently an SLE. In fact, if I didn't know better I'd think that if anyone took the static view of life, they'd be a complete retard.

Yes, but as you can see in this thread, no one has good definitions of these dichotomies. We have people arguing not just different definitions, but exact opposite definitions. "This is what static is and this is what dynamic is." "Actually, it's the exact opposite." Therein lies the problem with these dichotomies.

[Elro]

Can you describe the difference?

[Joy]

the state of a thing/connection vs. the activity of a thing/connection

[munenori2]

This is a very simple question and I think I already know the answer in asking it, but in thinking of dichotomies like this, in your opinion should they be viewed as being either one or the other, or more like a continuum where people show a preference of greater or lesser a degree?

EDIT: Sorry if it seems I'm diverting the thread's direction, but I'm thinking of this in relation to being static/dynamic. My own understanding of the two is limited enough that I don't think I can produce any sort of nuanced or informed definition or delineation.

[Elro]

the state of a thing/connection vs. the activity of a thing/connection

Can you be more specific?

[strrrng]

in thinking of dichotomies like this, in your opinion should they be viewed as being either one or the other, or more like a continuum where people show a preference of greater or lesser a degree?

that is exactly right. It is a continuum. My belief is that you naturally focus on one or the other, but need to have both for survival and happiness.

To answer the original question, Joy basically summed it up: statics tend to focus on the state of things, so they will describe the properties. Dynamics track the activity of things.

[Ezra]

Can you be more specific?

Static is just like. You know? Dynamic? Shit flows, man... You know, just like, here and there...

This page basically sums static and dynamic up in a very clear way. As it says, it is incomplete, but it's useful in helping one understanding what these two concepts are.

[Elro]

Clarification: I meant static functions and dynamic functions, not static and dynamic types.

[strrrng]

the dynamic functions are Te, Fe, Ni and Si. Te and Fe track the activity of objects and, to some degree, try to maintain control over them. The word 'activity' or 'causality' can well sum up the nature of these two functions. Si and Ni track the activity of fields and, to some degree, try to go with it. The word 'flow' sums up the nature of these two functions.

Static functions are Ne, Se, Ti and Fi. Ti and Fi look at the states of fields. They try to derive coherence from their perceptions, create a system to understand reality. Ne and Se look at the statics of objects, creating an array through which they view reality; they are looking at the state of the whole spectrum without necessarily confining it.

[marooned]

Not again. Will we ever be able to put this into words?

Fi and Ti are "static" because they're about systems of rules... whether these are ethical rules or logical rules... they tend to be fixed. They can be revised... but they generally apply to every situation no matter how dynamic the situation is.

I don't know why Se and Ne are static. Ne probably views reality in static pictures and then comes up with possibilities for those static pictures so as to improve them. I don't know why Se is static.

Ni, Si, Te, and Fe are dynamic because they are "flowy". They all perceive constantly changing aspects of reality... dynamic aspects of reality.

Oh that's why Ne and Se are static. They're about the internal and external statics of objects (respectively). The "statics of objects" aren't in flux (or the concept of them isn't)... they are fixed... with fixed properties.

I answered the definition with a crappy restating of the definition. It just goes round and round.

[Ezra]

Can someone give an example of a "field" and of an "object". In other words, give the definition of a dynamic or static field or object, and then e.g. it.

[Joy]

The state of something is it's characteristics.

The color and shape of my car are static.

The activities of my car would be like... if I was driving down the road right now, the actual movement of the car.

Obviously you can't have one without the other.

Can someone give an example of a "field" and of an "object". In other words, give the definition of a dynamic or static field or object, and then e.g. it.

That's a different thread.

[Joy]

First and foremost, I think it's important to note that all of one's conscious functions are either static or they are all dynamic. As a result, I think this dichotomy is perhaps the most difficult to grasp entirely. (I'm not sure it's even possible, to be honest.) I'll try not to describe static information aspects from a purely dynamic perspective though.

• Static types (EP, IJ) generally seem to view dynamic information aspects as being a state that changes.
• Dynamic types (EJ, IP) generally seem to view static information aspects as a snapshot of an event.

Neither of these is correct, of course, but I felt the need to make a note of this to aid in communication about statics and dynamics.




Static information aspects are about state. (States can change, of course. Everything changes. Change is, however, not relevant.) Augusta and Gulenko (and probably others that I'm not aware of) have related statics to being about space. From what I understand of a couple of the translated articles I've read, "space" can refer to one's surroundings, or more so what's in one's surroundings.

Dynamic information aspects are about events. Augusta and Gulenko have related dynamics to being about time. They contrast "space" to "time", which is important to understanding how space relates to statics and time relates to dynamics. Dynamic information aspects are not about changing states, but the changing itself: Activity.





Let's take a look at how these apply to each of the information aspects/elements. But again, it's impossible to use only one information element at a time, so try to look at the overall idea in each of the examples, particularly as opposed to the it's dynamic/static opposite (such as Ne and Fe).

Ne vs. Fe

• Fe is about the internal (or beneath the surface, underlying) activities or events in people/things/situations. An example would be "she's getting really pissed off".
• Ne is about the internal (or potential, hidden) states of being of people/things/situations. An example would be "maybe she's actually a man" or "maybe she's got PMS". (the Ne types can help me think of a better example if they want to, lol)

Se vs. Te

• Te is about the external (or readily observable, immediately apparent, explicit) activities or events of people/things/situations. An example would be "she's leaving the room".
• Se is about the external (or readily observable, immediately apparent, measurable) states of being of people/things/situations. An example would be "her face is really red".

Fi vs. Ni

• Ni is about the internal (or underlying, beneath the surface, abstract) connections of activities or events; past/future/underlying cause and effect relationships. An example would be "she's probably mad because that guy is ignoring her, he may be ignoring her because he's trying to make her jealous, and she's probably about to storm out, and if she storms out he'll probably try to find her in a little while"
• Fi is about the internal (or underlying, beneath the surface, implicit) states of connections/relationships; internal/underlying connections between states. An example would be "she doesn't want to date him anymore" or perhaps "she doesn't deserve to be with an asshole like him".

Ti vs. Si

• Si is about the external (or immediately apparent, surface) connections of activities or events; immediately apparent (such as physical) cause and effect relationships. An example would be "if she opens the door right now, the cat may escape from the house" or "if she storms out without her coat, she's going to be cold" or "I can't hear what my friend is saying because she's yelling so loudly".
• Ti is about the external (or readily observable, measurable) states of connections/relationships; external/measurable connections between states. An example would be "the temperature outside is lower than the temperature inside" or "she is older than he is".

Old post, back from before I stopped taking adderall and could hyper focus on this stuff long enough to write posts like that in one sitting.

[Joy]

Static: state
Dynamic: activity, what's happening

[Gilly]

(note: not to be viewed as "personal" qualities)

Static: persistent
Dynamic: changing

[strrrng]

joy's definitions are better. statics look at what is, i.e., properties (this is not to be confused with Se looking at what 'is' and Ne looking at possibilities). Dynamics track activity.

[Joy]

(note: not to be viewed as "personal" qualities)

Static: persistent
Dynamic: changing

Everything changes. Some things/relationships change more quickly than others, but they all change just the same.

Statics are snapshots. Whether the thing/relationship is changing quickly or slowly is irrelevant.

The dynamic aspect is the changing itself, no matter how quickly or slowly it's occurring.

[strrrng]

Statics are snapshots. Whether the thing/relationship is changing quickly or slowly is irrelevant.

The dynamic aspect is the changing itself, no matter how quickly or slowly it's occurring.

forrall

[Blaze]

static: snapshot

dynamic: videoclip

[kensi]

static: snapshot

dynamic: videoclip

Dynamics are amidst
Statics are aside

[Tricky]

Typical characteristics

Static types
Perceive events in an episodic manner – discrete states rather than continuous changes.
More inclined to say how stages A, B and C are.
Describe events in a general manner and by comparing them to other similar events.
More inclined to talk of properties and structures of reality.
The stories of statics usually involve one constant main character.

Dynamic types
Perceive events in a continuous sequence – continuous changes rather than discrete states.
More inclined to say how stage A leads to stage B, and how stage B leads to stage C.
Describe events in a specific and concrete manner.
More inclined to talk of movements and interactions of reality.
The stories of dynamics usually involve multiple main characters.

Can anyone explain it better for me?

[Krig the Viking]

I think of it as being similar to the difference between nouns and verbs. Static is focus on "what is", while dynamic is focused on "what is happening".

Rough examples:

Fi: What is the emotional relationship?
Fe: What is happening emotionally?

Ti: What is the logical category?
Te: What is happening, logically?

Se: What is the physical nature of this?
Si: What is happening physically?

Ne: What is the abstract nature of this?
Ni: What is happening in an abstract sense?