Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Cognitive Styles Survey

  1. #1
    Punk
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    1,659
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Cognitive Styles Survey

    I want to know if you identity with one cognitive style mostly, or two equally, or three equally, or four equally. Try to forget about your type and only tell me what styles strikes into your mind without too much after-thought.

    If you've already read the following and know, then you don't have to read the following, of course: http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...e_Styles(wiki)

    I have a hypothesis I want to check. I hope you wouldn't intentionally misdirect the results in light of that. Maybe this is really off, but I have (or would like) to check it.
    Last edited by DividedsGhost; 08-06-2011 at 01:12 AM.

  2. #2
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Dialectical Algorithmic describes my thinking tendencies perfectly.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  3. #3
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,625
    Mentioned
    156 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Vortex cognition fits perfectly, with a tinge of logical-deterministic when I'm forced to (i.e. academic setting).
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  4. #4
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,905
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Causal-Deterministic a good deal of the time, with bursts of Vortical-Synergistic in places, and sometimes Dialectical-Algorithmic when I can really devote myself to it

  5. #5
    not a bumblebee octo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    TIM
    IEI 4-6-9 apparently
    Posts
    2,744
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Vortical-Synergetic Cognition is a pretty good fit, e.g. I instinctively read things in no particular order (forum threads, newspaper articles ). But as FDG mentioned, in certain circumstances I find it necessary to reframe my thoughts into some other form for communication to others (Vortical-Synergetic seems like the worst one to explain to other people).
    Quote Originally Posted by Agee The Great View Post
    Nobody here...besides me, seems to know what SLE is except for maybe Maritsa.

  6. #6
    when you see the booty Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    everywhere at once
    Posts
    8,449
    Mentioned
    203 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I connect with Holographic-Panoramic pretty well, and I'm especially fond of the notion of Vortical-Synergistic in conjunction.
    "And above all, watch with glittering eyes the whole world around you because the greatest secrets are always hidden in the most unlikely places. Those who don't believe in magic will never find it." -Roald Dahl

    http://forum.socionix.com/
    It's pretty cool

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    0
    Mentioned
    Post(s)
    Tagged
    Thread(s)

    Default

    I have still not succeeded in positively identifying either Vortical or Dialetical cognition in myself.

  8. #8
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It also just feels like he's going into more depth about the reinin dichotomies that make up those types, which I relate to every single one for EII.

    I read each one as unbiased as I could and relate much more to Causal-Determinist.

  9. #9
    when you see the booty Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    everywhere at once
    Posts
    8,449
    Mentioned
    203 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by poli View Post
    I read each one as unbiased as I could and relate much more to Causal-Determinist.
    Interesting, from what I've seen a lot of INFjs on here don't identify with CD at all. What about it do you connect with?
    "And above all, watch with glittering eyes the whole world around you because the greatest secrets are always hidden in the most unlikely places. Those who don't believe in magic will never find it." -Roald Dahl

    http://forum.socionix.com/
    It's pretty cool

  10. #10
    Punk
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    1,659
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So far my hypothesis is correct, but I need more of a sample size to be sure. My sample size is only two right now :/

    boo

    :/

  11. #11
    wants to be a writer. silverchris9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,107
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ummmmmmm it looks like that page of ws has disappeared?
    Not a rule, just a trend.

    IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.

    Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...

    I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    0
    Mentioned
    Post(s)
    Tagged
    Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silverchris9 View Post
    ummmmmmm it looks like that page of ws has disappeared?
    The url is missing a ")" at the end.

  13. #13
    silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    TIM
    Ni-IEI sx/sp
    Posts
    3,778
    Mentioned
    317 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nil View Post
    I have still not succeeded in positively identifying either Vortical or Dialetical cognition in myself.
    Try Holographical-Panoramic one. It states in the description of HP that holographers will "shift perspective" on the image. I think this leads LIIs to mis-identify themselves as Ni-leading since perspective shifting is often mentioned in descriptions of introverted intuition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magna View Post
    I want to know if you identity with one cognitive style mostly, or two equally, or three equally, or four equally.
    Vortical-Synergetic. It's funny cuz it shows up whenever I draw. I just make a few random strokes not having any image in mind and the image just realizes itself at some point. Sometimes Holographical-Panoramic. I can't really pin it down, but I identify with using "or-or", "either-or", "on the one hand", "alternatively" constructions.

  14. #14
    Fuck-up NewBorn STAR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    TIM
    me>> Augusta whore
    Posts
    998
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    DA

  15. #15
    silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    TIM
    Ni-IEI sx/sp
    Posts
    3,778
    Mentioned
    317 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NewBorn STAR View Post
    DA
    i hate DA ....

  16. #16
    Fuck-up NewBorn STAR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    TIM
    me>> Augusta whore
    Posts
    998
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siuntal View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NewBorn STAR View Post
    DA
    i hate DA ....
    But DA loves you =(

  17. #17
    silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    TIM
    Ni-IEI sx/sp
    Posts
    3,778
    Mentioned
    317 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NewBorn STAR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by siuntal View Post
    i hate DA ....
    But DA loves you =(
    then why does it keep telling me that I don't have free will

  18. #18
    Fuck-up NewBorn STAR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    TIM
    me>> Augusta whore
    Posts
    998
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siuntal View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NewBorn STAR View Post
    But DA loves you =(
    then why does it keep telling me that I don't have free will
    You do and you dont, as you have the vortical cognition where you can escape into cuddly pleasant imaginary pictures of being a demigod. Ignoring the fact you are being pulled by god like you pulled out the legs of ants when you were a little kid.

    GREAT MOTHER GAIA IS HORNY NOW and i have learned to love what she does unto me

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    88
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I haven't yet seen much good proof for cognitive styles. The socionix article describes how they follow from pro/res, pos/neg and stat/dyn, but don't understand why, say, having a + element as your base function gives someone the traits of a process type, or why static processors are positivists while dynamic ones are negativists. I guess i'm looking for an explanation of how the three cognitive style dichotomies interact -- they just don't make much sense at the moment.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    0
    Mentioned
    Post(s)
    Tagged
    Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siuntal View Post
    Try Holographical-Panoramic one. It states in the description of HP that holographers will "shift perspective" on the image. I think this leads LIIs to mis-identify themselves as Ni-leading since perspective shifting is often mentioned in descriptions of introverted intuition.
    I have considered all of the cognitive styles at some point or another. I can't go with LII because I highly doubt I am Ti leading, and I can't go with Holographical because I don't make static "snapshots" of reality that I examine extensively (metaphorically of course). I do identify with perspective shifting but this seems to be covered by negativism at large and not specifically either HP or DA. Going by the dichotomies, I can positively relate to negativism and dynamic. That would most readily indicate DA. My problem is in the descriptions of the styles themselves. They don't actually describe forms of cognition, just schools of thought which Gulenko says is associated with them, some of which are not even mutually exclusive. To be honest, it seems to me that Gulenko took random philosophies about how the world operates and threw them into the descriptions. That is why I have such a hard time determining it for myself, because I think in different ways at different times. Sometimes I can relate to the deterministic worldview of CD, sometimes I relate more to the probabilistic worldview of DA, and then other times I relate to whatever the hell VS is supposed to represent. "Synergy" and chaos theory, I suppose. Self-organization of chaotic systems (even though I believe that such concepts as "chaos" and "order" are absent in objective reality).

  21. #21
    Punk
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    1,659
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Igxfl View Post
    I haven't yet seen much good proof for cognitive styles. The socionix article describes how they follow from pro/res, pos/neg and stat/dyn, but don't understand why, say, having a + element as your base function gives someone the traits of a process type, or why static processors are positivists while dynamic ones are negativists. I guess i'm looking for an explanation of how the three cognitive style dichotomies interact -- they just don't make much sense at the moment.
    I can give you a quick breakdown of it's logical framework. Maybe this might help you.

    4 styles - 4 supervision rings
    2 groups
    • causal-determinists & dialectical-algorithmics
    • Holographical-Panoramic & vortical-synergetic


    Depending on the group you fall into, your ID will be representative of the other style in that group. So a causal-determinist (SEE - ILE - LSI - EII) will all have an unconscious observing/limiting ID of the style dialectical-algorithmic.

    So one style is static, while the other is dynamic; one style is inductive, while the other is deductive; one style is negative, while the other is positive.

    One group recognizes two philosophies: one of individual empowerment, choice, and free will and the other of causal relationships with people and/or with objects.

    You might be wondering then what do these two have in common? A dialectical-algorithmic thinker can't determine an approach to a problem without having a pretense of causal relationships to work from. Similarly, a causal-determinist can't decide on causal influences without knowing the approaches they can take that form those causal relationships.

    The other group recognizes two philosophies: one that seeks to be aware of as much information about the world as possible and to organize it (holographic-panoramic) and the other that sees the world as a set of important short-lived pivotal events (where how you decide and act during these events will have a drastic effect on the outcome) with the periods of downtime in between (vortical-synergetic).

    You might also be wondering what these two have in common? Well how can a vortical-synergist determine important pivotal events or occurrences without being able to compare them to what isn't pivotal? The holographic-panoramic style provides this for them. Similarly, a holographic-panoramic thinker can not distinguish what is what without also making a distinction of pivotal events or occurrences.

    Also, your dual will share the other style of the group you are in. Your benefactor will have the cognitive style of your ID and you will have the cognitive style of your beneficiary's ID (you also somewhat understand your beneficiary due to the HA and your unconscious sharing the same cognitive style of your beneficiary).

    So basically a cognitive style implies the other style in the group it's in. I know that's a lot to consider, but if you try to attribute that to behavior and distinguish between the philosophies of other people, it might help type make a lot more sense. It does for me anyway. This seems to be the most reliable aspect of socionics for me.

  22. #22
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Igxfl View Post
    I haven't yet seen much good proof for cognitive styles. The socionix article describes how they follow from pro/res, pos/neg and stat/dyn, but don't understand why, say, having a + element as your base function gives someone the traits of a process type, or why static processors are positivists while dynamic ones are negativists. I guess i'm looking for an explanation of how the three cognitive style dichotomies interact -- they just don't make much sense at the moment.
    I think everyone who actually want to make sense of them - in contrast with taking them for granted - is in the same situation.
    ---

    It should be noted that the theory behind them is in some places misguided. The author appears to have no understanding in some concepts of the theory of knowledge, I am confident an academician could confirm. For instance, he claims that the Holographic-Panoramic cognition is analytic, this is unequivocally wrong, that is synthetic. I recommend not taking these styles seriously, not how they correspond to certain types at least.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

Posting Permissions

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