Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Extraversion/Introversion vs Static/Dynamic

  1. #1
    Stormy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Herts, UK
    Posts
    151
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Extraversion/Introversion vs Static/Dynamic

    Why is it that 'objects in motion' (extraverted, dynamic) are considered rational but 'fields in motion' (introverted, dynamic) are considered irrational (and vice versa for things at rest)? Why is the state of rest or motion reversed between extraversion and introversion in relation to rationality; what does 'motion' represent in this context?

    http://www.socionics.us/theory/information.shtml
    [Stormy] [LII]

  2. #2
    Stormy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Herts, UK
    Posts
    151
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Upon further investigation, it seems it would make more sense for 'objects at rest' and 'fields in motion' to be extraverted information-elements and 'fields at rest' and 'objects in motion' to be introverted information-elements:

    Extraverts
    • qualities of objects are taken for granted, while interrelationships between objects are seen as being malleable; change interaction of objects to better fit qualities of objects


    Introverts
    • interrelationships are taken for granted, while qualities of object are seen as being malleable; adapt qualities of objects to better fit their interrelationships

    (http://www.socionics.us/theory/ext_int.shtml)

    This produces the following (retaining all other dichotomous correspondences):

    = internal statics of objects
    = external statics of objects
    = external dynamics of objects
    = internal dynamics of objects
    = internal dynamics of fields
    = external dynamics of fields
    = external statics of fields
    = internal statics of fields

    In effect, this swaps the object/field dichotomy from extraversion/introversion to irrational/rational, which may align better with the descriptions:

    Irrational
    • attention focused on correct states of mind and body (intuition and sensing), which produce certain actions and emotions (logic and ethics)


    Rational
    • attention focused on correct actions and emotions (logic and ethics), which produce certain states of mind and body (intuition and sensing)

    (http://www.socionics.us/theory/rat_irr.shtml)

    That is to say, states of mind and body are objects (they stand alone) whereas actions and emotions are fields (relations between two objects).
    [Stormy] [LII]

  3. #3
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,631
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nobody really understands this static dynamic shit except smilingeyes here.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  4. #4
    Olga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,596
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't know why things need to be so complicated that you read and can not grasp the idea. I think what is importan - to understand what exactly the socionists mean by static and dynamic. it looks like they mean quite a lot without clear explanation why things happen they way they happen. As far as I knwo there si no clear explanation why some types belong to static or dynamic cathegory and different socionists identify it by different functions. Have anybody got simple and clear explanation?
    School of Associative socionics: http://socionics4you.com/

  5. #5
    Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Former USSR (global nomad)
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    2,050
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I expect to make notes on the section of Augusta's works where she talks about blocking the functions soon. Maybe that will help clear some things up.

  6. #6
    Stormy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Herts, UK
    Posts
    151
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick
    I expect to make notes on the section of Augusta's works where she talks about blocking the functions soon. Maybe that will help clear some things up.
    No rush, Rick...anytime before I learn Russian via osmosis frequenting socionics sites...
    -

    Seriously though, thanks for all your work.
    [Stormy] [LII]

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Extraverts
    • qualities of objects are taken for granted, while interrelationships between objects are seen as being malleable; change interaction of objects to better fit qualities of objects


    Introverts
    • interrelationships are taken for granted, while qualities of object are seen as being malleable; adapt qualities of objects to better fit their interrelationships



    I like this disinction between Extraversion/Introversion.

    I think the most applicable example I have used regarding people on this forum is the MBTI/socionics fued. Ti seems to see the functions and such, and are more likely to change the meaning of the actual types. Te people like me argue that the definitions of the functions are up for debate, but that the people who we are describing are the same. For example, when I brought up an MBTI description of Ti to MysticSonic, he immediately thought that it was crap, and that it didn't describe Ti at all. My point was that there were different ways that Ti could be defined. Oh well.

    The only thing is that I don't think that I'm "expending energy" when I'm reasoning these things... maybe judgment is just like that either way?


    BTW Stormy, you look ILI.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  8. #8
    Creepy-pokeball

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    Extraverts
    • qualities of objects are taken for granted, while interrelationships between objects are seen as being malleable; change interaction of objects to better fit qualities of objects


    Introverts
    • interrelationships are taken for granted, while qualities of object are seen as being malleable; adapt qualities of objects to better fit their interrelationships



    I like this disinction between Extraversion/Introversion.

    I think the most applicable example I have used regarding people on this forum is the MBTI/socionics fued. Ti seems to see the functions and such, and are more likely to change the meaning of the actual types. Te people like me argue that the definitions of the functions are up for debate, but that the people who we are describing are the same. For example, when I brought up an MBTI description of Ti to MysticSonic, he immediately thought that it was crap, and that it didn't describe Ti at all. My point was that there were different ways that Ti could be defined. Oh well.

    The only thing is that I don't think that I'm "expending energy" when I'm reasoning these things... maybe judgment is just like that either way?


    BTW Stormy, you look ILI.
    The Te side of that makes more sense to me. I'll have to think about your Extra/Intro example. Perhaps a real life example or scenario of each could help.

  9. #9
    Stormy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Herts, UK
    Posts
    151
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    Extraverts
    • qualities of objects are taken for granted, while interrelationships between objects are seen as being malleable; change interaction of objects to better fit qualities of objects


    Introverts
    • interrelationships are taken for granted, while qualities of object are seen as being malleable; adapt qualities of objects to better fit their interrelationships



    I like this disinction between Extraversion/Introversion.

    I think the most applicable example I have used regarding people on this forum is the MBTI/socionics fued. Ti seems to see the functions and such, and are more likely to change the meaning of the actual types. Te people like me argue that the definitions of the functions are up for debate, but that the people who we are describing are the same. For example, when I brought up an MBTI description of Ti to MysticSonic, he immediately thought that it was crap, and that it didn't describe Ti at all. My point was that there were different ways that Ti could be defined. Oh well.
    I'm not sure which camp I fall into - I'd say the information elements are up for debate until I find a conclusion with enough consistency to satisfy me. Then I'll start debating types, probably with reference to information elements that are suddenly set-in-stone.
    -

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    The only thing is that I don't think that I'm "expending energy" when I'm reasoning these things... maybe judgment is just like that either way?
    Why would you be 'expending energy'?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    BTW Stormy, you look ILI.
    Well, that's a relief. You look...SLI, like an s-fly. Nice ears.
    -
    [Stormy] [LII]

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stormy
    Why would you be 'expending energy'?
    GAH... nevermind that. For somereason I was thinking of Te, but in that case I would be using Ti. The only difference is that, for me, Te is the determining factor over what Ti has to say.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  11. #11
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jadae
    The Te side of that makes more sense to me.
    Another indication that you are INFj rather than ENFj, btw.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by Jadae
    The Te side of that makes more sense to me.
    Another indication that you are INFj rather than ENFj, btw.
    No no no.

    It's not really a Te thing, but rather a dynamic thing. It this case, ENFJ and ISTP would be closer than INFJ and ISTP.

    Here, I'd say Fe and Te count as the same thing, since they are both Extraverted Judgment, and by definition dynamic types choose Extraverted (objective) Judgment over Introverted (subjective) Judgment as the determining factor. INFJs would believe more in subjective Judgment.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  13. #13
    Creepy-pokeball

    Default

    Oh, here we go. This gives it a bit more context. http://www.socionics.us/theory/ext_int.shtml

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Te people like me argue that the definitions of the functions are up for debate, but that the people who we are describing are the same.
    That describes my view too.

    BTW Stormy, you look ILI.
    Yes, indeed.

  15. #15
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    No no no.

    It's not really a Te thing, but rather a dynamic thing. It this case, ENFJ and ISTP would be closer than INFJ and ISTP.

    Here, I'd say Fe and Te count as the same thing, since they are both Extraverted Judgment, and by definition dynamic types choose Extraverted (objective) Judgment over Introverted (subjective) Judgment as the determining factor. INFJs would believe more in subjective Judgment.
    How do you combine that with INFjs being Delta and preferring over ?

    As for and counting as the same thing -- they refer to dynamic flows of different kind of informations. An INFj may be static regarding they subjective judgement of ethics and their own feelings but not for the kind of judgement on MBTI etc which is what we were discussing.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Eh... maybe Jadae can clarify then. But for some reason he just doesn't seem INFJ to me... either that or the people I've thought were ENFJ might be INFJ.


    @Jadae, question: form>function, or function>form?
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  17. #17
    MysticSonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,993
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    An object's form can often be directly relaed to its function.
    "To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"

    "Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    OK smarty... then, do you focus more on the presentation of something, or the practical functionality of it? That's what I'm asking.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  19. #19
    Creepy-pokeball

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    Eh... maybe Jadae can clarify then. But for some reason he just doesn't seem INFJ to me... either that or the people I've thought were ENFJ might be INFJ.


    @Jadae, question: form>function, or function>form?

    Ahhh, I have to chose already? I went over that list several times last night :/ Let me think.

Posting Permissions

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