Results 1 to 40 of 48

Thread: Dialectical-Algorithmic thinking

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Dialectical-Algorithmic thinking

    I have a good sort of visual-impressionistic metaphor for DA, but its kind of hard to translate. The best I can represent it as would be something like a scale that has weight being constantly poured onto it, and the EJ's role is to dictate where the weight falls in order to maintain proper balance. I think it makes a lot of sense for Aristocratic EJs: rational aristocracy is all about maintaining a social structure, so its fitting that the EJs have a style of thinking that supports their role, one focused on "keeping things together." The mental assumption of EJ temperament is that everything is in motion, and that it should be organized, and that energy needs to be exerted in order to maintain organization; the Democrat EJs, being the transition point to aristocratic quadras, take a more generative role with Vortex thinking, finding the right opportunity to promote cathectic action; once the shift is made into an extant collective, the Aristocratic EJs take on the role of holding everything together once the opportunity to organize has been capitalized upon.
    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...

  2. #2
    jughead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NC
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    899
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    These thinking styles allow me to see the the obvious leap between MBTI descriptions and socionics ones. In MBTI j is described as thinking in parts and p more holistically, requiring the forest to see the trees. They are not so alien, obviously the inter-type relations are a P holistic step forward!

    Wouldn't you say the learning styles of DA vs VS are totally opposites?
    VS would be very chaotic and haphazard, shooting for gold from the first try, why entj is stereotyped in a permanent steeple chase, and infp is caught forever dreaming up the best result. DA would be very linear step by step process controlled learning. VS is a more natural form that spontaneously seeks to reproduce the whole result and over time through natural ordering comes together. School learning is very much DA, step by step,very structured and ordered goals and homework, procedures etc etc. VS wants to start trying to produce the best result immediately, but the haphazardness makes DA think they are reckless and immature. Whereas VS thinks DA is overly structered, ineffective nitwits who are forever producing useless "progress". Does the duals thinking style back you up and support you in this manner or just acknowledge the validity of your style? It seems that if we are a dual nature type then the dual must provide very helpful data from the outside on your progress.

    I believe Malcom Gladwell pretty much decribed this mechanism ( not for the first time, hes just a pop psychologist/economist who states the obvious and repackages it with a Phd and makes $$) when he described how skill mastery is reached: not through any special procedures other than general practice.

  3. #3
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,009
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jughead View Post
    These thinking styles allow me to see the the obvious leap between MBTI descriptions and socionics ones. In MBTI j is described as thinking in parts and p more holistically, requiring the forest to see the trees. They are not so alien, obviously the inter-type relations are a P holistic step forward!

    Wouldn't you say the learning styles of DA vs VS are totally opposites?
    VS would be very chaotic and haphazard, shooting for gold from the first try, why entj is stereotyped in a permanent steeple chase, and infp is caught forever dreaming up the best result. DA would be very linear step by step process controlled learning. VS is a more natural form that spontaneously seeks to reproduce the whole result and over time through natural ordering comes together. School learning is very much DA, step by step,very structured and ordered goals and homework, procedures etc etc. VS wants to start trying to produce the best result immediately, but the haphazardness makes DA think they are reckless and immature. Whereas VS thinks DA is overly structered, ineffective nitwits who are forever producing useless "progress". Does the duals thinking style back you up and support you in this manner or just acknowledge the validity of your style? It seems that if we are a dual nature type then the dual must provide very helpful data from the outside on your progress.

    I believe Malcom Gladwell pretty much decribed this mechanism ( not for the first time, hes just a pop psychologist/economist who states the obvious and repackages it with a Phd and makes $$) when he described how skill mastery is reached: not through any special procedures other than general practice.
    *blink*

    Whatever makes you feel better about your awesome selfs, guys. I guess smart people will know bs when they see it, anyway.

  4. #4
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,009
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Dunno about Vortex, but here's my take on Dialectical-Algorithmic:

    It's spaghetti architecture. You have links here, and links there, and it doesn't make much sense and guess what - any single link doesn't really matter. No particular way matters. It's the clusters that matter, where they meet, where they lead... condensation points. But this point doesn't depend on any single link - so the breaking of that, holes in it, don't matter much, it's just one of many. If I were to define DA on my own, I'd say it's about the opposite of relying on any one way, on any line of thought. So there can be no right way, no step by step, no dependable procedure or proof whatsoever. It goes against its nature, which lies in interconnectedness - at the cost of not really creating any stable structure, thus leading to often accurate enough, but not "reliable" results. Or inaccurate, if all the links fail and the redundancy is merely misleading. That's what I think Ganin really describes when he talks about ILIs "circumstantial" or "unpredictable" approach to logic, by the way - Dialectical-Algorithmic style in NT type.

    IMO the static system crazedrat described represents Holographic more than any other style, and jughead's rant doesn't rely to any (unsurprisingly).

    I suppose Causal-Deterministic compliments it by focusing on building a more stable structure, one that doesn't suffer from DA's main drawback, "so that's more or less somewhere there" tendency. Not quite what jughead describes, anyway.

  5. #5
    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 Aiss View Post
    If I were to define DA on my own, I'd say it's about the opposite of relying on any one way, on any line of thought. So there can be no right way, no step by step, no dependable procedure or proof whatsoever. It goes against its nature, which lies in interconnectedness - at the cost of not really creating any stable structure, thus leading to often accurate enough, but not "reliable" results. Or inaccurate, if all the links fail and the redundancy is merely misleading. That's what I think Ganin really describes when he talks about ILIs "circumstantial" or "unpredictable" approach to logic, by the way - Dialectical-Algorithmic style in NT type.
    I've noticed this in my ISFp mom, where she'll have these little talks with me about how there is no such thing as a 'right way' or dependable course of action to take in any given situation. I more understood this as her catching on to my E6 ticks though.

  6. #6
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Post

    If: <condition>
    Then: <do action>
    Else If: <other condition>
    Then: <do other action>
    I think this approach is considered to be very clumsy approach in programming.

    ILI programmers make you suffer if you do this.

    Functional and object oriented approach?


    I tend to find pure object oriented very confusing.

    For example:
    PHP Code:
    poopPoop(phase=rectum)
    poop.defecate()
    poop.flush() 
    Why?

    This is straight forward:
    PHP Code:
    if rectum full:
      
    go(toilet)
    else:
      
    chill() 
    Goes towards goals linear way.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  7. #7
    Tearsofaclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    New York
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    449
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    I have a good sort of visual-impressionistic metaphor for DA, but its kind of hard to translate. The best I can represent it as would be something like a scale that has weight being constantly poured onto it, and the EJ's role is to dictate where the weight falls in order to maintain proper balance. I think it makes a lot of sense for Aristocratic EJs: rational aristocracy is all about maintaining a social structure, so its fitting that the EJs have a style of thinking that supports their role, one focused on "keeping things together." The mental assumption of EJ temperament is that everything is in motion, and that it should be organized, and that energy needs to be exerted in order to maintain organization; the Democrat EJs, being the transition point to aristocratic quadras, take a more generative role with Vortex thinking, finding the right opportunity to promote cathectic action; once the shift is made into an extant collective, the Aristocratic EJs take on the role of holding everything together once the opportunity to organize has been capitalized upon.
    This is a good description of me. If I see something is missing, I provide it. Like if everybody is on one side, I will become the side that is absent and fill the role. Even if I totally don't believe in what I am arguing. There is something missing and I pick it up. Even when it often means being the bad guy. Somebody has to be the bad guy, and the bad guy is bad for a reason. He is a product of something.

    And I am always changing. The person you were debating with no longer exists later. He was used and discarded for purpose.

    The movie on Facebook, The Social Network. This probably never happened but at the end of the movie somebody says to Zuckerberg, "You are not really an asshole, Mark. You just try so hard to be." I related to that a lot.

    “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — 'Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.' — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.”- Emerson

    "And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it, and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them."

  8. #8
    IQ over 150 vesstheastralsilky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    TIM
    ~°~
    Posts
    1,488
    Mentioned
    77 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tearsofaclown View Post
    This is a good description of me. If I see something is missing, I provide it. Like if everybody is on one side, I will become the side that is absent and fill the role. Even if I totally don't believe in what I am arguing. There is something missing and I pick it up. Even when it often means being the bad guy. Somebody has to be the bad guy, and the bad guy is bad for a reason. He is a product of something.

    And I am always changing. The person you were debating with no longer exists later. He was used and discarded for purpose.

    The movie on Facebook, The Social Network. This probably never happened but at the end of the movie somebody says to Zuckerberg, "You are not really an asshole, Mark. You just try so hard to be." I related to that a lot.

    “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — 'Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.' — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.”- Emerson
    fwiw you sound like an IEE much more than EIE, quite possibly the Fi subtype.
    ~* astralsilky



    Each essence is a separate glass,
    Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
    Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
    A thousand colors, but the Light is One.

    Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet


    Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...

  9. #9
    Tearsofaclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    New York
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    449
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vesstheastralsilky View Post
    fwiw you sound like an IEE much more than EIE, quite possibly the Fi subtype.
    I've heard that. You may be right.
    "And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it, and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them."

  10. #10
    Surreal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020
    TIM
    3w4
    Posts
    164
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't completely understand cognitive styles, but I feel like this might be a good example of DA cognition.


  11. #11
    * I’m special * flames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    TV
    TIM
    Sx/Sp 2w3
    Posts
    2,810
    Mentioned
    352 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    From what I’ve gathered, it seems to hold consensus as the most unhinged cognition style, at least to outside people when you don’t appropriately explain the conclusions you’ve reached through it (thankfully, I am more than happy to unless I’m purposely bringing up two seemingly opposing phenomena with absolutely no explanation out of the blue for humor or shock value purposes- works brilliantly, might I add ) I think it may be something of a double edged sword for EIEs because on one hand it can make you appear nothing short of brilliant and on the other hand it can make you appear crazy but not in a sexy way at all and, well... EIEs are usually creatures that put a lot of importance in their image. SEI might relate to that in a further distance from on their particularly sensitive days, but I doubt an ILI ever would unless they were put in a position where their prematurely described DA conclusions made others question their intelligence, and perhaps for an LSE, their authority but that one is just a theory because LSE seems the least stereotypically DA of the bunch to me. In between brilliant or crazy you may find a less intimidating perception from others as asinine- this is typically where the many ILEs who attempt to duplicate DA fall into (IEEs can more rarely be imitators, I think Ne as a function just has inherit qualities of DA cognition- not sure if I recall LIEs ever following the pack, but they are certainly one of the best non DA types in quickly deciphering it).

    On the bright side, it is easily the main culprit in EIEs and ILIs being absolute master manipulators but a major drawback is that (to me, at least) I am less confident in what I truly believe as an individual because my natural inclination is to avoid picking sides in matters, stay neutral when possible, or (the most satisfying route) be alone in believing whatever I managed to synthesize from two polars. When both of these quirks occur at once, it is essentially just the DA person manipulating themselves into some state of confusion or unrest. It is without a doubt the perfect cognition style for (verbal) arguments or mere debates but the thing is, it will cut the DA user even deeper themselves when they are solely internalizing it (take a look at the infamous self doubt of EIEs... messy ) than it will cut other people in an argument (and believe me it does that well, I have had to withhold my tongue in heated debates to not burn the opponent too hard- not that I’m implying you can never beat me in an argument ).

    Overall, I think it works best as a cognition style when it is applied 100% to external data, which it really is meant to be being a tool for nonstandard synthesis (for the purpose of fixing what very few others would ever see around you); when it is taken into isolation it often produces the most cynical or overdramatized people on the planet (and yes, that tends to be ILI and EIE respectively; on the flip side of the coin, SEI tend to be more cynical compared to LSE’s overdramatized: I think this explains the strange, faint attraction between ILIs/SEIs or EIEs/LSEs at times).

    I think walking a tightrope is an adequate way of describing the mental strain it can induce but someone’s gotta do it, right?
    Last edited by flames; 01-15-2021 at 01:22 PM.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    2,204
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have nothing to add, besides the fact that my brain parsed "Dialectical Materialism" when I saw this thread.

  13. #13
    May look like an LSI, but -Te. Metaphor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Location
    SEA
    TIM
    Te-LIE-NH
    Posts
    693
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    DA works like a russian roulette, VS works like a money printer.

  14. #14
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think DA types can become good specialists. Instead of trying to rumble forward (what CD types are about) DA perfects itself in cycles that can be made leaner. The crux of this approach is that return of the gains follows exponential decay model. CD types can introduce new plausible starting points in cooperation with them.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  15. #15
    The Morning Star EUDAEMONIUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    gone
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    3,130
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    As some had already pointed out, and Gulenko has said, DA is best illustrated by using the algorithmic nature of computer programming.

    In Computer Science there is a very DA style thesis-antitheseis-synthesis proof theory called the Curry-Howard Correspondence similar to what @CTzu was saying.

    The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.

    The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".

  16. #16
    Riley and Bunny together forever HicksHawking 14Raptor19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Location
    Macroverse MtBattle ScholarsGarden Halloween1993 SuperNexus InfinitiesUltimate AllSpectraEverywhere
    TIM
    RayquazaRaichuArceus
    Posts
    5,646
    Mentioned
    84 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Math patterns work in accordance with the real, tangible, physical world, so to be so catching of the moonlight silver, and bounding off for extravagant scenes of dress and rehearsal, Your must detach from determinism, and become a free jewel.
    Raptor had to lose in 2006 to become Revan, important errands of knighthood and valor to walk with Pokemon and charm the melodies of sweet channels to lush frenzy galloping solo yet swiftly into the sunrise for maximum presents and signed in deluxe oceans of fast trading cards bazooka cascading rumba of love Force constellations restoring last battle cardinal plants actively swirling for juice and petals to wishes
    https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...k-2024-edition

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Posts
    631
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It is kind of like a balancing act. For me, it's about weighing different facts before I draw conclusions. Enough facts get weighed and I have the impetus to act on them. I kind of visualize it as two ribbons that converge at a certain point, and the point of convergence is where the conclusion is drawn. The OP kind of helps me understand EIE better.

  18. #18
    The Morning Star EUDAEMONIUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    gone
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    3,130
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rune View Post
    It is kind of like a balancing act. For me, it's about weighing different facts before I draw conclusions. Enough facts get weighed and I have the impetus to act on them. I kind of visualize it as two ribbons that converge at a certain point, and the point of convergence is where the conclusion is drawn. The OP kind of helps me understand EIE better.

    This is really interesting that you say that, this is close to how I visualize it. I have said in the past that DA is like a Möbius strip. Two opposites linked together.

    The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.

    The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Posts
    631
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eudaemonia View Post
    This is really interesting that you say that, this is close to how I visualize it. I have said in the past that DA is like a Möbius strip. Two opposites linked together.

    The only difference is that a Mobius strip is one complete unit, while DA cognition stems from two units.

  20. #20
    The Morning Star EUDAEMONIUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    gone
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    3,130
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rune View Post
    The only difference is that a Mobius strip is one complete unit, while DA cognition stems from two units.

    A strip with two sides and a single boundary curve.
    The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.

    The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    161
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I would like to learn about 'cognitive styles' but when I hear words like 'Dialectical-Algorithmic' my brain goes 'ew' and shuts down. Dialectical-Algorithmic thinking, whatever it is- definitely doesn't need to be called that and can be explained in a way which satisfies my Ni. Can't wait until socionics becomes mainstream. Would make school so much better.

  22. #22
    Poptart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    2,790
    Mentioned
    188 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by None View Post
    I would like to learn about 'cognitive styles' but when I hear words like 'Dialectical-Algorithmic' my brain goes 'ew' and shuts down. Dialectical-Algorithmic thinking, whatever it is- definitely doesn't need to be called that and can be explained in a way which satisfies my Ni. Can't wait until socionics becomes mainstream. Would make school so much better.
    LOL I agree ‘dialectical algorithmic’ sounds wacky as hell. The cognitive styles could use a revamp

  23. #23
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,857
    Mentioned
    293 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rune View Post
    It is kind of like a balancing act. For me, it's about weighing different facts before I draw conclusions. Enough facts get weighed and I have the impetus to act on them. I kind of visualize it as two ribbons that converge at a certain point, and the point of convergence is where the conclusion is drawn. The OP kind of helps me understand EIE better.
    That's very similar to how I tend to make important decisions. Once enough data has been gathered the "choice" is essentially made for me. It all points towards the "correct" course of action and thus all that's left is to just do it.

    I may not like that conclusion and/or wish there was some other way to get the job done but the data doesn't lie and it says do X if you want to get Y with any reasonable degree of certainty. Thus, I can shall do X. Well, unless X is a categorically immoral act in my mind. is a hell of a drug and I'm a man of principles if nothing else...

  24. #24
    May look like an LSI, but -Te. Metaphor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Location
    SEA
    TIM
    Te-LIE-NH
    Posts
    693
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rune View Post
    It is kind of like a balancing act. For me, it's about weighing different facts before I draw conclusions. Enough facts get weighed and I have the impetus to act on them. I kind of visualize it as two ribbons that converge at a certain point, and the point of convergence is where the conclusion is drawn. The OP kind of helps me understand EIE better.
    Hm, wouldn't it more look like this or maybe no?

    Neraca-Ohaus.jpg
    Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."

  25. #25
    divine, too human WVBRY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    6,028
    Mentioned
    237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    'Algorithmic' is enough to understand what the cognitive style is about, if you know how an algorithm works, then this is what this style is about. 'If'-'then'-'else' statements are the basis of any algorithm. (Google what a Turing machine is if you do not know)


Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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