Is the following related to a dichotomy?
Phrase 1: Things were better in the past.
Phrase 2: Things are better now.
dichotomy relation?
Is the following related to a dichotomy?
Phrase 1: Things were better in the past.
Phrase 2: Things are better now.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Maybe. It is related to Zimbardio time inventory for, specifically past negative vs past positive. http://www.thetimeparadox.com/2008/0...pective-types/
We had a thread in it in the psych sub forum. The article mentions future-oriented ppl using if-then reasoning, which in socionics is associated w/ DA cog style (LSE, ILI, SEI, EIE). Probabilistic honking too, which is also associated w/ DA cog, esp probabilistic reasoning was mentioned in relation to ILI in the article about philosophy of types.
Also related to the communicator character, which you can read about in reichandlowentherapy.org ... A part of their personal narrative is to recreate a lost utopia/golden age. Plato is mentioned as a communicator... IDK what he is in socionics, LII, EIE?
Finally, ppl who score higher in dynamism are more approving of changes... It correlates to higher offbeat scores in MOTIV (also in similarminds). The orientation opposite of offbeat often wishes for a simpler life. It has some correlation to low openness to experience in big 5.
http://similarminds.com/rdrive/dynamism.html
Maybe N type. No concrete things, very big generalization.Originally Posted by Maritsa
The person who said the first thing used a lot of specific examples. I generalized because I didn't focus on the specific
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote