Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Dual-type theory: IEE EM

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Dual-type theory: IEE EM

    While I believe behavioral cognition to be a combination of Ni and Ne, a review of the thoughts and work of Tolman, an IEE, has lead me to believe that learning and conditioning are primarily delta NF affairs.

    As such, it seems to me that an IEE EM type disposes a person to interest in the process of learning. Learning, as defined in An Introduction to Theories of Learning (Hergenhahn & Olson), is the intake of stimulie for the purpose of enhancing ability. Ability falls under delta Ne, therefore the prioritization of ability enhancement reflects delta Ne in a valued position. As far as it is selected as a fixation of attention, ability reflects delta Ne in the dominant EM position (movement from a state of null ability to one of having ability)

  2. #2
    you can go to where your heart is Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,459
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    huh

  3. #3
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I sort of see what you mean and agree with you maybe

    being around IEEs, it's kind of really interesting, this huge flow of new thoughts and ideas. Definitely learning > implementation, or even maybe retention to some degree. Learning > application.

    I've never been so encourage to learn as when around delta NFs.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm thinking both Kenneth Tolman and Clark Hull were IEEs.

    That would explain why Hull was able to lead learning theorists into a dead end for 30 years... >_<

  5. #5
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't know what the significance of that post. I'm sure it's there, I just don't know it.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The significance seems to be that producing subtype IEE EMs take a strong interest in understanding how people and things learn. Accepting subtype IEE EMs seem to be motivators, in my experience.

    Edit: Oh you meant the significance of your own post. My bad.

    I think typing the eminent psychologists would be a good start to arousing the interest of psychologists in general to socionics.

  7. #7
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    no i meant the significance of your post. I didn't know who you were talking about or what the context for anything you were saying or trying to mean was.


    I'm thinking randomX and randomY were XXX
    That explains why randomY did ultravaguestatement

  8. #8
    you can go to where your heart is Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,459
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    I'm thinking both Kenneth Tolman and Clark Hull were IEEs.

    That would explain why Hull was able to lead learning theorists into a dead end for 30 years... >_<

Posting Permissions

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