Reinin Dichotomies: Static/Dynamic

[anndelise]

I am working through Reinin's Dichotomies to see how much I can come to understand of it. My goal is one thread per Dichotomy.

Ok, this is information taken from the following two sites:
http://the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3398
http://www.socioniko.net/en/articles/gulenko-mbti.html



Static
“IJ & EP” = Ne, Se, Ti, Fi = Pe, Ji
Extraverted Perceiving Functions
Introverted Judging Functions

Perceptions:
* separate states, instances
* events fixed in the consciousness as “photographs” (scenes, pictures, snapshots)
* object oriented

Vocabulary:
* sentences: object = description
* modal verbs (want, can, could, might, may, should, perhaps, possible, usually, generally, etc.)
* “to be” connective verb (is, was, seems to be, etc)
* impersonal pronouns
* simple time; indefinite verbs


Dynamic
IP & EJ = Ni, Si, Te, Fe = Pi, Je
Introverted Perceiving Functions
Extraverted Judging Functions

Perceptions:
* continuous flow of changes
* events fixed in consciousness as “videos”
* subject oriented

Vocabulary:
* sentences: subject verbs
* active verbs (went, made, brought, sat, enjoyed, cried, etc)
* action without a direct object
* prolonged time; continuous verbs


Question:
* What is it about Pe and Ji being Static?
* What is it about Pi and Je being Dynamic?

[Creepy-]

Question:
* What is it about Pe and Ji being Static?
* What is it about Pi and Je being Dynamic?

It's all in the definitions. I'll start with the dynamics...

Ni and Si are dynamic because they are concerned with the processes of the object. By its nature, a process is a moving, changing, thing.

Te and Fe are dynamic because they constantly adjust to the object. Using Fe as an example, a socially appropriate response to a situation might change over time, and the Fe type will adjust their response accordingly.

I dont' really feel qualified to tell you much about the static functions, but they effectively make up the non-moving aspects of the dynamic functions.

A static can come and tell you more :wink:

[Olga]

As far as I remember they do not know why some people are static or dynamic. Dynamics associated with -(uncontrollable fire, vulcano?). For example I like slow motion films (static), my husband like speedmoving actionfilms.

[Rocky]

Along the lines of what Ishy said. But it also has to do with the Judging functions. If you have Te or Fe showing, you are more likely to be "aroused" by conflict so to speak. Te and Fe feel the need to jump out and react. If you have Ti or Fi on the other hand, you are more likely to tip-toe into conflict and you're not as easily "set-off" by things that happen. So, to me, Dynamic types simply seem more reactionary.

[schrödinger's cat]

*slams head against wall* Could someone give a few examples of static vs. dynamic behaviour? I can understand the theory (i.e. why Pe and Ji are static), but I can't imagine what this would be like IRL. So, please, take pity and post a few anecdotes.

[anndelise]

*slams head against wall* Could someone give a few examples of static vs. dynamic behaviour? I can understand the theory (i.e. why Pe and Ji are static), but I can't imagine what this would be like IRL. So, please, take pity and post a few anecdotes.

I'll see what I can work up....exampling static will be easier for me than dynamic. Hopefully though, others will post on this too.

[Slacker]

I'm pretty moody and have a bad temper so I don't see dynamic = moody as a reference from my own personal experience.

I agree that I have my memories (particularly from a long time ago like childhood) stored in my head as snapshots rather than videos.

Also, while I flare up from time to time, I generally try to avoid conflict. Maybe dynamic people enjoy drama? I know my mom (ENTj) and my dad (ENFj) do. The constant drama they have going makes me anxious but they seem to like it in some weird way.

One other thing - do dynamic types like adreneline rush type activites more? My husband definitely does (he drag races after all) and he's ISTp, and my dad does as well. I'm not sure about my mom. I hate that kind of thing, as do my sister (INFj) and my brother (ISFj). So my own very limited experience points that way anyway. And are dynamic types more into athletics? My husband is athletic, and my dad was quite the baseball player in his day - he was even scouted by pro teams until he had an arm injury. Again, the static types I know aren't athletic. Is this just my family or is this part of it?

[Creepy-]

I'm pretty moody and have a bad temper so I don't see dynamic = moody as a reference from my own personal experience.

Was that in response to Rocky? Reactionary is different to moody.

[Slacker]

Ok. Can you define reactionary then because I don't understand what he means.

Thanks

[Creepy-]

Basically get worked up about peoples opinions and arguements and will unashamedly fight to the death about it (or at least until they get bored).

[schrödinger's cat]

One other thing - do dynamic types like adreneline rush type activites more? My husband definitely does (he drag races after all) and he's ISTp, and my dad does as well.

You'd be surprised if I told you what image came to my mind when I read "drag race", before I knew what it meant. I looked it up now.

[Slacker]

Ah well that certainly isn't me then

SC: ROFL! Too funny

[Creepy-]

One other thing - do dynamic types like adreneline rush type activites more? My husband definitely does (he drag races after all) and he's ISTp, and my dad does as well.

You'd be surprised if I told you what image came to my mind when I read "drag race", before I knew what it meant. I looked it up now.

I you thought what I think you thought - that would be so cool!

[anndelise]

*suddenly imagining various forms of "drag racing"*

*wraps arms around her head and runs away chanting "no, no nonononononononnoon"*

[anndelise]

*slams head against wall* Could someone give a few examples of static vs. dynamic behaviour? I can understand the theory (i.e. why Pe and Ji are static), but I can't imagine what this would be like IRL. So, please, take pity and post a few anecdotes.

The best I can do regarding anecdotes:

Notes and Thoughts:
Static = photographs, scenes, instances, videos made up of quickly linked frames, sees the dots, Which frames should I describe?

Dynamic = sees the curve, What if there weren’t frames? How would you separate the pieces? How would you know which pieces to separate?

There is at least once instance on this forum in which dots and curves were discussed. Statics see the dots, and from there may see the curve. A Dynamic sees the curve and stressed when asked to make a dot because a dot isn’t a representative of the curve at all. Even if asked to make several dots, they get agitated. They’d rather just give you the curve’s formula.

Examples if not quite anecdotes:
When talking with a Static, they’ll mention bits and parts. A little here, a little there, leaving it up to you to connect the dots. When a Static asks questions, they focus on some individual piece. A Static’s story will include a descriptive set up which uses a lot of “is”. As if they are describing a picture in their head. Another Static may actually get into the story, as if they were seeing/hearing/touching/smelling it with the speaker. A Dynamic hears a Static’s story, and wonders when the Static will get to the point...the action of the story.
“He is standing next to the car, wearing a white shirt, one hand on his hip, and a coffee mug in his other hand. She’s coming out of the building, in a rush to get to her car. Her car door is right next to his elbow...” (Note: He IS standing next to the car. He IS wearing a white shirt. His hand IS on his hip. A coffee mug IS in his other hand. She IS coming out of the building. She IS in a rush to get to her car.)

When talking with a Dynamic, they’re usually not sure where to begin, nor end. A Dynamics story will include an action setup which brings up a lot of previous actions which lead up to the main action and then subsequent actions. Another Dynamic may actually get into the story, as if they are there, going through it all with the speaker. The Static hears the Dynamic’s story, and wonders what the point of the story is, what instance is the story supposed to be describing?
“She went to the store to buy some toilet paper. Her mother was sitting on the toilet unable to get up because they had ran out of toilet paper. (Her mother used it to clean the window because those crows kept doing flyby’s on it.). She ran to the car and doesn’t notice a guy standing in her way.....” (Note: Usually there is a much lengthier set up than the one in parenthesis which I wrote, sometimes the set up can go up to hours or days prior to the intended story. However, notice all the active verbs used...especially in comparison with the Static’s story.)

Statics and Dynamics arguing:
When a Static and a Dynamic argue, the Dynamic often accuses the Static of doing some deliberate action, as if it’s happening at the moment it’s being said. “You say this, then you say that. You are the one who keeps doing X.” A Static will describe it as if it already happened. “This happened, and this happened. Usually when that happens it seems like the other thing happens.” During the argument, and at the end of the argument, the Static is left bewildered as to why the Dynamic is attacking them. The Dynamic is left bewildered as to why the Static isn’t accepting responsibility for their actions.

[anndelise]

Basically get worked up about peoples opinions and arguements and will unashamedly fight to the death about it (or at least until they get bored).

oy, i dislike fighting with dynamics...it feels as if they want it to go on and on and on....the process isn't over for them...where as for me, it's like..it happened, the instance is over, let's move on to something else

I also have noticed that dynamics fill up with adrenaline really quickly. To me, it seems as if the more they react to the adrenaline, the more gets produced. It actually looks (and sounds) like a spiral going out of control. Is that how it feels?


How DOES a Dynamic determine when to end the argument?
How can a Static help the Dynamic get to that point of not arguing anymore?

I wonder, are the Dynamic types the one's who tend to hold long term grudges?

[schrödinger's cat]

Transigent, thanks for posting that. I think I understand it all a little better now. Just to make sure I'm getting it right:

"Aware of their directed thoughts / actions" = statics extemporise their actions and sort of improvise their way along, dynamics extemporise their words and see where it takes them?

Thinking in isolation and away from the environment: does that mean that dynamics leave the melée and sort of lock themselves in the toilet so they can have a good think in peace and quiet?

And if you or anyone else could help me out: what is meant by "implicit action", "implication", "synthesizing" and "apprehending"? Thanks!

[schrödinger's cat]

Anndelise, thanks for your examples. My husband is probably a Dynamic and we sort of recognized ourselves. We had to laugh because it summed up some communication hiccups we sometimes have. It's helpful to finally have a name for all this.

[Rocky]

Basically get worked up about peoples opinions and arguements and will unashamedly fight to the death about it (or at least until they get bored).

oy, i dislike fighting with dynamics...it feels as if they want it to go on and on and on....the process isn't over for them...where as for me, it's like..it happened, the instance is over, let's move on to something else

I also have noticed that dynamics fill up with adrenaline really quickly. To me, it seems as if the more they react to the adrenaline, the more gets produced. It actually looks (and sounds) like a spiral going out of control. Is that how it feels?


How DOES a Dynamic determine when to end the argument?
How can a Static help the Dynamic get to that point of not arguing anymore?

I wonder, are the Dynamic types the one's who tend to hold long term grudges?

Yes... I like this very, very, very much.

I always feel uncomfortable arguing with statics, like MysticSonic, because they always seem like they are already tacking a step backwards. I'm like, "Nooo... please continue! I learn from arguing and it's fun!" .

And if you asked me, an argument would never, ever end, because the argument itself is a learning experience.

Grudges may be related to Dynamics, but I'm not sure of it.

[anndelise]

Basically get worked up about peoples opinions and arguements and will unashamedly fight to the death about it (or at least until they get bored).

oy, i dislike fighting with dynamics...it feels as if they want it to go on and on and on....the process isn't over for them...where as for me, it's like..it happened, the instance is over, let's move on to something else

I also have noticed that dynamics fill up with adrenaline really quickly. To me, it seems as if the more they react to the adrenaline, the more gets produced. It actually looks (and sounds) like a spiral going out of control. Is that how it feels?


How DOES a Dynamic determine when to end the argument?
How can a Static help the Dynamic get to that point of not arguing anymore?

I wonder, are the Dynamic types the one's who tend to hold long term grudges?

Yes... I like this very, very, very much.

I always feel uncomfortable arguing with statics, like MysticSonic, because they always seem like they are already tacking a step backwards. I'm like, "Nooo... please continue! I learn from arguing and it's fun!" .

And if you asked me, an argument would never, ever end, because the argument itself is a learning experience.

Grudges may be related to Dynamics, but I'm not sure of it.

My INFp friend says similiar about me because I don't show him anything about what I'm thinking. It seems to make him get even more hyped up as if he's trying to get me hyped up with him. Which in turn has me stepping back in my attempts to "calm" him down....which makes him get even more hyped up. Until finally one of us breaks off communication...he goes off for a while to calm down or such while I either try to figure out where things went wrong and attempt to refocus the communications, or he's had sufficient time (sometimes weeks) to get it out of his system...at which point any further discussion of the matter is completely off limits.

Egads, I am getting an idea of just how much I must be annoying him.

As well as one possible area in which I messed up the relationship I had with an ISTp. He'd get excited about some project he was working on, and I'd relish in watching him be all excited, but I think that because I wasn't showing any kind of response, he stopped sharing his excitement with me.

[FDG]

How DOES a Dynamic determine when to end the argument?

When you leave me the last word.

P.S. I don't hold grudges.

[Kristiina]

Basically get worked up about peoples opinions and arguements and will unashamedly fight to the death about it (or at least until they get bored).

oy, i dislike fighting with dynamics...it feels as if they want it to go on and on and on....the process isn't over for them...where as for me, it's like..it happened, the instance is over, let's move on to something else

I also have noticed that dynamics fill up with adrenaline really quickly. To me, it seems as if the more they react to the adrenaline, the more gets produced. It actually looks (and sounds) like a spiral going out of control. Is that how it feels?


How DOES a Dynamic determine when to end the argument?
How can a Static help the Dynamic get to that point of not arguing anymore?

I wonder, are the Dynamic types the one's who tend to hold long term grudges?

I read the examples and truly saw myself in the Dynamic description. It's just so true. And I have a hard time telling stories because everything is related to everything which is related to even more things... I often end up telling another story in stead, because I remembered something and then I forget what I was trying to say. My BF Erkki says that my ENFj sister is ever worse. :wink: And it's funny/confusing to see us talking together. We jump from story to story. Erkki doesn't like it at all.

The spiral is pretty much exactly how it feels. And it's rather difficult to stop it when it's already moving. Therefore, I have a slight temper. ISTps always keep me at half-way up the spiral.

The argument ends when a decision has been reached. And I don't even have to win, but I will only accept loss when the evidence against me is clear. But I still love to win, and to be honest, I love to argue. Just like Rocky said, it's a learning experience. It's wonderful stimulation for the brain. But there are two types of arguments that rather give me a headache:
1) when the other person is constantly bringing up things that have been settled already, things that are water under the bridge for me.
2) when the other person is using bad logic. Then they think it's so logical and I know it's not... bad.

How to reach the decision quicker... I think it's different for different types, but with me, all you have to do is hear me out, compliment on the parts that make sense, but if there is an inconsistency, just point it out. Don't even suggest anything at first. I will need time to see over my thought anyway. And by the time I've got my inner logical system working again, I will have forgot about the will to argue about it.

Grudge, yeah! If negative feelings are the last impression of a person, I will dislike them even years later. But there is a simple trick. I just need new memories that associate with that person. :wink:

[Rocky]

For what its worth, I believe that the Si and Ni functions are related to (emotional) memory.

[Rocky]

I'm bringing this topic up again because it interests me, it is not well understood yet, and I think there is something to it.

What are qualities of 'Statics' and 'Dynamics'?

I think one of the main differences is dealing with change, and a changing status quo.

I like this example. The Jewish story about a man who gave a begger money every day on his way to work, but did not give any change one day.

"I had a bad week," the man said. "I'm sorry."
And the beggar answered: "So? You had a bad week, and I should suffer?"

Basically it seems like the Dynamic type would change with changing circumstances, placing a value on objective judgment. They say, "Well, I was helping you out of choice, and the premise has change, so now I'm changing my principles." The Static type would probably continue to give the begger money, thinking more along the lines of the act being a moral principle or value. The Static type may even enjoy taking care of priorities? I guess they do what's right for the sake of doing what's right, even though their circumstances have changed.


Another difference between the types types is that, supposively, Dyanamics are generally more aroused by what's happening (especially the Extraverted ones), and Statics don't get as excited (especially the Introverts) [I don't know how true this is]. Dynamics have a habit of feeling more tense, being emotional, or reactive (if they don't learn to control their tensions).


As for the Introverted/Extravered Perceiving and Introverted/Extraverted Judging qualities, I think it has something to do more with "beliefs" and such. Introverted Perceivers (Dynamics) can seem somewhat more "opinionated" (for lack of a better word), or possibally "religious", in the way they do things, because they already know the best way for them to do it. I think Introverted Judgers (Statics) enjoy deluding themselves (meaning that they will re-interpret matters in a sense to create their own reality even if it doesn't neccesarily match with the outside world).


Eh... I never claimed to know everything about this quality, but their isn't really any information out there about it either. I was hoping other people had their own ideas about this.

[cracka]

I like this example. The Jewish story about a man who gave a begger money every day on his way to work, but did not give any change one day.

"I had a bad week," the man said. "I'm sorry."
And the beggar answered: "So? You had a bad week, and I should suffer?"

I woulda probably kicked him in the elbow and told him that I'm not gonna give him any more money, ever. Then about a week or so would go by when he would ask again and I'd probably give him some change and ask if he learned anything.

[Park]

I have no knowledge of this matter, but from what you described in your post the Static fits me much better.

[Rocky]

Eh... does no one know about this stuff? Smillingeyes?

[Expat]

I basically agree with your examples.

I think Dynamics take for granted that things and circumstances not only can change but are continuously changing, all the time, however slightly and slowly. This may lead them to perceive actual changes with exaggerated speed.

Statics know that things and circumstances can and do change, of course, but their perception of reality is that things aren't changing continuously and perhaps that they "shouldn't" change. This may help them "calm down" the dynamics but also means that they are more likely not to notice, nor to expect, change when it does come.

[Slacker]

Hmm I don't remember which I am, but based on that example I'm a static. When I was struggling financially, I tried to still give away as much money as I had when things were easier because I was afraid the organizations I gave money too might be struggling too.

[Expat]

ENFps are indeed static

[Rocky]

I basically agree with your examples.

I think Dynamics take for granted that things and circumstances not only can change but are continuously changing, all the time, however slightly and slowly. This may lead them to perceive actual changes with exaggerated speed.

Statics know that things and circumstances can and do change, of course, but their perception of reality is that things aren't changing continuously and perhaps that they "shouldn't" change. This may help them "calm down" the dynamics but also means that they are more likely not to notice, nor to expect, change when it does come.

This makes sense. It also seems why IxxP types are often like--> to ExxPs who get themselves into trouble without thinking first, and we're just like, um , yeah, that looks like it could be dangerous. I assume ExxJ and IxxJ relations are the same.

(ExxP/IxxJ= static, ExxJ/IxxP= dynamic).

[Rocky]

Hmm I don't remember which I am, but based on that example I'm a static. When I was struggling financially, I tried to still give away as much money as I had when things were easier because I was afraid the organizations I gave money too might be struggling too.

Sounds just like the example I gave in my first post!

[Rocky]

...errhmmm...

Smilex for some reason posted about Statics/Dynamics in the Delta Quadra. I'm just going to quote his post and put it here for convinence (unless he objects to it).

There have been a couple of interesting discussions on the site lately...

One was about "What is the dynamic/static cathegory?"
The answer must be very fundamental and as such, very abstract. I believe the current descriptions of this dichotomy difference must be somewhat distant of the true nature of the dichotomy... so I'll start by discussing the known properties...

1) Communication is more direct within the same group.
2) There is less "mysterious social" attraction within the same group.
3) The dynamic-static cathegory does not seem to have any reason to change in any situation.
4) The dichotomy group has characteristic functions.

Discussion on previous:

1) Establishes a space of understanding of each other's roles and aims in society. Eases the giving of friendly advice. Eases the approximation of ability within the same cathegory. Eases the approximation of the "who is friendly and who is not" -factor, thus causing ...
2) Rivalries form easier within the same dichotomy cathegory. Whereas alliances tend to be related to direct benefit.
3) There seems to be no environmental pressure that could cause a person to change in the static-dynamic cathegory. Thus the importance of the static-dynamic cathegory can not be overestimated. It is probably the most important dichotomy of all.
4) While it is said that both the INTj and the ENTp share functions, the Ne of the INTj is not the same Ne as that of the ENTp. These two groups have significant differences in how they use this function. Yet the communication between an ENTp's Ne and an INTj's Ne is very direct and from the outside they can at first glance seem similar.

Yet... theory goes that the dichotomies are defined by functions, so let's look at how this must happen. A reasonable point of observation would be four individuals who form a socion, share the same quadra level but each possessing a different function. We note that when statics are extrovert, their optimally collaborating dynamic partners are introvert and and contrarywise.

Further on, we note that statics are defined by being extrovert when perceptive and introvert when judging whereas dynamics are defined by being extrovert when judging and introvert when perceptive and this is the simplest, clearest explanation of what is the dynamic-static difference, yet it might not seem very clear... for this distinction obviously causes an enormous number of other effects...

It all goes back to the other basic questions of what is perceptive and what is judging? What is introvert and what is extrovert? Depending on the definitions of these characteristics we can arrive with very different results.

One of the distinctions I prefer to make is to claim that the judging functions are responsible of the social rules (on account of being related to ethics, emotions and status hierarchies, and on the other hand the creation of powerfully cohesive group mentalities). Therefore we can claim that statics are people who have an internalized (introvert) understanding of what rules must be used to function in a group. They can see themselves as using these rules as masters (thinking) or being bound by them as followers (feeling) yet they do not change these rules or observe changes in them easily.

On the other hand the dynamics only see social rules and emotions when there is concrete evidence of them. For them, the social field is a free-for-all, do and accomplish whatever you are able to, in whatever way you can, using whatever tools you like. It's not part of them, at most it can cause external facts to appear.

The relation to perceptive functions is the opposite.

...

Extra... I'm slightly bothered about the association between terminology extrovert/introvert, dynamic/static, rational/irrational, judging/perceptive...

I'll make a case that judging-perceptive and extrovert/introvert should refer directly to the functions. Thus Ne would be called an extrovert and a perceptive function, and a person who is using it as a dominant function should be called an extrovert and a perceptive person whether he is INTj or ENTp. On the other hand I'd like to reserve the dynamic/static and rational/irrational characteristics to refer to the dichotomies that do not seem to ever change the characteristics that are also referred to by the first and the last letters of the four-letter type code... Thus irrational = Exxp & Ixxp whether they are using their perceptive or their judging function at the moment and contrarywise rational = Exxj & Ixxj.

Use the distinction if you want. I'm going to (and I'll try to remember to do it consistently).

Some people may find other useful stuff in here.

[Hugo]

When you explain something that happened, do you:

- tell it like a story (one things leads to another)
- state the crucial information (in a "bullet point" fashion)



^
First option - Static (Exxp, Ixxj)
Second option - Dynamic (Exxj, Ixxp)

Is this an accurate and useful explanation?

[Expat]

I don't think so. The first behavior is very typical of ESFjs, who are dynamic.

That split may be related to Ni, or to many things, or to nothing. But I don't think that static/dynamic is it.

[aestrivex]

When you explain something that happened, do you:

- tell it like a story (one things leads to another)
- state the crucial information (in a "bullet point" fashion)



^
First option - Static (Exxp, Ixxj)
Second option - Dynamic (Exxj, Ixxp)

Is this an accurate and useful explanation?

i do both, depending on the situation. this categorization is trash.

[Birds]

Well I never tell it like a story. And is that the only thing that distinguishes between Statics and Dynamics...

[Slacker]

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.

[aestrivex]

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.

that sounds more to do with Fi/Te than static/dynamic.

[Slacker]

Yeah? Could be. I haven't tested the question out on anyone else I know. I should ask my INFj sister and ISFj brother. If I remember.

Edited to add that I just realized they're static too. I'll have to keep thinking.