View Poll Results: ?

Voters
17. You may not vote on this poll
  • Causal-Determinist

    5 29.41%
  • Dialectical-Algorithmic

    4 23.53%
  • Holographical-Panoramic

    8 47.06%
  • Vortical-Synergetic

    5 29.41%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Gulenko Cognitive Styles poll

  1. #1
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,936
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default Gulenko Cognitive Styles poll

    I couldn't find a thread with an actual poll on this subject.

    Vote for which Cognitive Style\s fit you best, and perhaps post in which order.

    This article contains a lot of fluff although the cherry-picked examples beneath are probably helpful:
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-Gulenko

  2. #2
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,936
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Previously when I read the descriptions I got the impression I didn't relate to the dynamic forms, but with the examples, the picture is much confused.

  3. #3
    Contra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    TIM
    ILI-Ni
    Posts
    1,405
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    DA then maybe VS, HP, and CD.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    SLE/LSE sx/sp
    Posts
    2,489
    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    I couldn't find a thread with an actual poll on this subject.

    Vote for which Cognitive Style\s fit you best, and perhaps post in which order.

    This article contains a lot of fluff although the cherry-picked examples beneath are probably helpful:
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-Gulenko
    No

  5. #5
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,329
    Mentioned
    209 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Blast you subt, i spent a couple hours sorting through that as if it was all new info. I rewrote parts of it so that certain terms wouldn't trigger a bias. Just cuz i was curious about the rank order. HP first for sure. I use it all the time when I want to understand something I'm noticing, or studying. Then I think DA because I worry so much about 'what if [something bad] happens, what would I do'? Which leads to a DA type plan. I would say that CD and VS are probably tied as third. I do quite a bit of troubleshooting of problems which requires figuring out some of the things that may have led to the problem, which requires some CD thinking. And some of the VS made me think of the times when I learn by trial and error. Usually done for physical stuff like gardening, fermenting, etc. I don't want to spend the time developing a full blown plan, so I'll just jump in and do a couple of steps and then see what needs to be done after. Which might include starting over or going back a few steps because I decided to do something different.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  6. #6
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,936
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    eek oh I'm sorry (I basically gave up myself, although I have a few thoughts on the matter).

  7. #7
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,329
    Mentioned
    209 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Will you be sharing it?
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    557
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    My understanding is sociotype is its own system rather than exactly the Jungian dichotomies. If you use the latter independently, you're going to get potentially a bit different a result. However, I am increasingly warming up to how sociotype approaches certain things, and let me explain.

    The dichotomies approach each other on the principle of simultaneity: you cannot simultaneously go to opposite ends. However, does simultaneity of occurrence equal or exactly parallel one's psychological readiness to give priority to a process? Rather, it just means they cannot occur at once.

    What socionics information metabolism does is recognize the lack of simultaneity by saying that two such processes must be separated within the cycle. For instance, in the cycle of potential->arousal->force->work, work and arousal are always separated by irrationality (Se, which could also be seen as Ni from the dual point of view). It is viewing the Jungian dichotomies as not entirely about psychological opposition in theoretical relevance to the ego, but rather noting that their real always-existing opposition is to do with simultaneity which can manifest as a more psychological opposition, but needn't always.

    If you view the Jungian dichotomies as ends of a compass, this is saying how you go around in a circle on the compass, rather than how you travel between opposite sides in straight lines. In truth, the attractions and repulsions need not move you in successive linear movements one way or another.

    So this is an argument to consider the sociotype model, and not just the Jungian dichotomies in isolation.

    The forms of cognition, based on process/result and static/dynamic, simply cover which way you travel (clockwise/not) and also note that if you experience a situation as at rest, then your information cycle must reflect that - the experience of it changing is complementary, but you can infer the possible changes rather than directly processing them, into the static nature of the situation (for instance, how you might apply a force, rather than noting how this would affect the aspects of the potential which can be changed). The existence of Se reminds Ne that potential is not indeed entirely static, and that the difference in potential between two static points reflects an active force in between the points. As in, for instance, a ball traveling off a cliff to hit the ground in analogy perhaps with gravitational force. I could be messing this up slightly, but oh well. Note that this also explains the fallacy with viewing Se as about aggression - that is bringing in the subjective experience of the word "force" in rather than viewing it in terms of a type of information transformation.

    Sociotype relegates the more blatantly dichotomous Jungian psychological oppositions (like Ti/Fe, Ni/Se) to the theory of dualization, rather than to the theory of information type. The reason Ni/Se in sociotype is inherently psychological is it has to do with how you psychologically experience things rather than the precise objective nature of what things are - it's to do whether you see the force hitting the object at various points, or if you see merely a changing of potentialities. From the standpoint of pure objective description of transformation, apparently, it doesn't matter, but from how you psychologically react to that transformation, well it matters a whole lot.
    As a psychiatrist, Jung played up introversion/extraversion way more initially than anything else, and indeed because this is the most directly related to the flow of psychic energy, and hence the most clear from the standpoint of psychological opposition.
    The sociomodel bravely attempts to pair these oppositions with the theory of information transformation/cognition in one big model, where the introversion/extraversion comes in paramountly in the relation of ego to superid (the "conscious vs unconscious" so dear to Jung), whereas it also posits a more detailed theory of how all your conscious attempts at information metabolism occur, which Jung's theory really doesn't address (in particular, he ignores the question of conscious functioning for the question of psychological orientation, yet we do function using all the 4 functions even if we aren't oriented by them - how we do so was simply not something he chose to model).

  9. #9
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,936
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    In terms of speech and thought I often use phrases such as ""or-or", "either-or", "on the one hand, on the other hand", as with Holographical-Panoramic. But also identify somewhat with Dialectical-Algorithmic, with its "if-then-else"...and also, while I might say things like "I didn't like it before so I probably won't like it now", I'm still likely to have in mind that "you cannot enter the same river twice" view of the Dialectical-Algorithmic way of thinking (it is perhaps one way I often have doubt, although maybe this is not of primary significance to me and I'm actually more inclined to leave a previous opinion as it...and yet, maybe it is even more true that my opinions are directly proportionate to the subject at hand, so how then can I decide between these forms of thinking?!

    Also between Dialectical-Algorithmic and Holographical-Panoramic, it says HP are quick at making decisions in crisis situations. I don't consider myself the sort of person to do well in crisis situations, but I'm not convinced that I am incapable of making seemingly quick decisions - although my decisions are more likely to be the least-worst choice based on thoughts and experiences prior to the event (I think this seems to be described in the DA section)..

  10. #10
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Berlin
    TIM
    LSI 5w6 sx/so
    Posts
    5,421
    Mentioned
    144 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    As writing style and perspective on people - HP.

    As thinking style I would say DA first of all. I mean I have a fascination with paradoxes and contradictions (I even write about related subjects). However I relate rather to the cognitive style Gulenko described. Looking into dichotomies, I don't really identify as a dynamic. I would say midway between static and dynamic. Process definitely more than result.

  11. #11
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,329
    Mentioned
    209 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I woke up this morning realizing that I also do a lot of "this happened and then this happened and then this happened". I'm not sure what that belongs to, but I think it might be related to CD. It's not looking for a deterministic cause but is laying out a sequence of events. Hmm, but the focus on events would make it a dynamic style, so maybe it's more related to a static form of DA? Yeah, I think it's probably part of the algorithmic style. So, my order HP, DA, CD, VS stays the same I think.

    Off topic, I like these cognitive styles in that it shows me an area where I can practice and develop. Like deBono's thinking hats, we can put on an HP hat, a DA hat, a CD hat, and a VS hat. Conflicts might arise when one person is wearing their HP hat and another is wearing their CD hat, and yet another is wearing their VS hat, kind of thing. But if everyone put on their HP hat, the group could brainstorm the situation, seeing it from multiple angles. Then they can put on their CD hat to find the root causes of some of the problems brought up in the HP part of the session. Then they can put on their DA hats to figure out possible steps to take. Then what...have a VS review meeting where they review their efforts, change their understandings from the previous session and feedback, and restart the process with the new understandings? I'm not really sure I totally understand the VS style, though I have regularly witnessed it in IEI and ESE, and in one SLI and one LIE. But ai see it right after the "reset" point. So am not sure what happens prior and at that point.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  12. #12
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,329
    Mentioned
    209 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here's a very recent example: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1045946

    I think R's mom is primarily VS style, with some piss poor CD/DA, and zero interest in HP.
    While I wanted lots of info to satisfy my HP drive, and then since this is an emergency type health issue, CD and DA styles kicked in too.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  13. #13
    epheme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Japan
    TIM
    9w1 sx/sp
    Posts
    430
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise View Post
    Here's a very recent example: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1045946

    I think R's mom is primarily VS style, with some piss poor CD/DA, and zero interest in HP.
    While I wanted lots of info to satisfy my HP drive, and then since this is an emergency type health issue, CD and DA styles kicked in too.
    How is that story related to VS though? She just sounds awful (no offense). When my SO was going through military stuff I did WAY more research than him, telling him all the steps he needed to take, what things he needed to study, the kinds of physical fitness tests he needed to be ready for, etc so that he would have all the info to tackle it. I am supposed to be VS.

    Also, I hope that didn't sound pissy; it was a sincere question. I don't understand the thinking styles well.

  14. #14
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,329
    Mentioned
    209 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by epheme View Post
    How is that story related to VS though? She just sounds awful (no offense). When my SO was going through military stuff I did WAY more research than him, telling him all the steps he needed to take, what things he needed to study, the kinds of physical fitness tests he needed to be ready for, etc so that he would have all the info to tackle it. I am supposed to be VS.

    Also, I hope that didn't sound pissy; it was a sincere question. I don't understand the thinking styles well.
    Didn't sound pissy to me. Legit question.

    Sorry, I should have added in a previous post that I think most people are capable of all the cog styles, even if there might be a preference for 1 or 2 generally. Like how the OP asked us to rank our use of each of them.

    The example wasn't about her VS, but about what kind of info I was looking for, that she doesn't pay attention to.

    If I were to try to describe why I think she is VS, it would take a huge post because VS doesn't seem to be one that has an overt process as it's happening. I only seem to notice it after some time has passed after a disagreement with the person. Or when we're discussing something and they are trying to understand, and finally seem to, but after a day or more it's like they've reset to a previous view. 'That conver was a whole hour ago...a lot has changed since then.' And then a few months later they are saying what I had been trying to get them to understand, but as if that had always been their understanding and our conversation had never happened. The conver could have blown up into a fight, but they still won't remember what it was about.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  15. #15
    strangeling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think I don't identify with CD or VS much because I'm not much of an extrovert. CD seems to believe a particular outcome can be created for particular causes, whereas VS seems heavy in the nurture aspect of life, almost as if they believe nature is to be changed and molded by nurture for intended goals and outcomes. HP and DA always made a lot of sense to me though. I think I use HP when I have a lot of information and need to decide how to deal with or simplify it in some way; I don't know if it's all the schooling I've had that's caused me to think this way in order to understand the material or if I tend to think this way, but would prefer if I didn't have to. But DA seems more natural though; I'll figure out what seems to be a theme or reoccurs and then adjust my approach based on that. It's more of a - focusing my approach based on what seems to be the nature of everything around me.

  16. #16
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Berlin
    TIM
    LSI 5w6 sx/so
    Posts
    5,421
    Mentioned
    144 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've recently realized I actually use this so-called "HP style" more than I thought.

    This cognitive style has much in common with the holographic principle in physics. A hologram (optical) is a statistically recorded interference pattern made by two beams of light which are transmitted and reflected from a single source. Holographic technology allows us to obtain a three-dimensional image of an object. The hologram itself is an aggregation of stripes and spots exactly resembling the embedded object. The two beams of light are superimposed in such a way that every part of the hologram carries information about the whole.

    In this way, by mentally superimposing multiple projections of the same object, Holographists reach a holistic view. To do this, they look at the image and select a desired angle of examination. Holographic cognition often utilizes the grammatical conjunctives: "or-or", "either-or", "on the one hand, on the other hand". It actively uses the principle of perspective; unrestricted choice in point of view. The holographic approach is a progressive approximation towards the purpose, or away from it, accompanied by changes of perspective. The holographic process is carried out as if calibrating focus.

    Holographic cognition has a characteristic penetrating, skeletal-revealing, 'x-ray' nature. It unhesitatingly cuts away details and nuances, giving a coarsely generalized representation of the subject. Take for example the two orthogonal cross-sections of a cylinder: the horizontal section looks like a circle, and the vertical section looks like a rectangle. Two different perspectives of an indivisible whole which, when superimposed in the mind, produces transition to a higher level of understanding about the object.


    I wonder if people could have a natural type of cognition and some other style(s) they admire/aspire to or learned to use for one reason or another. Besides I used to identify with elements of both HP and DA ... and I noticed in Gulenko's theory HP--DA actually belong to members of the same Quadra who are "Activity partners". It could be some drive towards the fulfillment of the mobilizing function, too.


    ... ?
    Last edited by Amber; 12-09-2014 at 09:06 PM.

  17. #17
    Poster Nutbag The Exception's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    my own personal bubble
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    4,108
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise View Post
    Blast you subt, i spent a couple hours sorting through that as if it was all new info. I rewrote parts of it so that certain terms wouldn't trigger a bias. Just cuz i was curious about the rank order. HP first for sure. I use it all the time when I want to understand something I'm noticing, or studying. Then I think DA because I worry so much about 'what if [something bad] happens, what would I do'? Which leads to a DA type plan. I would say that CD and VS are probably tied as third. I do quite a bit of troubleshooting of problems which requires figuring out some of the things that may have led to the problem, which requires some CD thinking. And some of the VS made me think of the times when I learn by trial and error. Usually done for physical stuff like gardening, fermenting, etc. I don't want to spend the time developing a full blown plan, so I'll just jump in and do a couple of steps and then see what needs to be done after. Which might include starting over or going back a few steps because I decided to do something different.
    Same order here for me. I think I'm easily HP as my primary style- I constantly do "one one hand", "on the other hand" type of thing. I'll look at the things from many different angles and to try to reconcile all of the possible perspectives into one large whole. VS is probably the one I understand the least going from that description. I prefer not doing things by trial and error but having some understanding of what I'm getting into first.
    LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP



  18. #18
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,329
    Mentioned
    209 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LIIbrarian View Post
    Same order here for me. I think I'm easily HP as my primary style- I constantly do "one one hand", "on the other hand" type of thing. I'll look at the things from many different angles and to try to reconcile all of the possible perspectives into one large whole. VS is probably the one I understand the least going from that description. I prefer not doing things by trial and error but having some understanding of what I'm getting into first.
    I wouldn't trust my writing up there regarding VS. My iei bro can't do trial and error, he wants to understand what to expect before he will try it out himself. At least in the cases like our ice skating lessons.

    The only thing I'm pretty sure of is what i refer to as "the reset button" in which communicating with the VS person seems to continuously cycle back in on itself, as if starting the entire conver over again. Nothing feels resolved to me. And the places they can take it to!
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

Posting Permissions

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