How do you Learn/Problem-Solve?

[jason_m]

I am in dire need of money (approximately $30,000/year to be exact). I also have a need to be my own boss (so I can have a high degree of freedom as well). This has been a big problem for me - something I have been thinking about this for years. The issue is, I don't care how I solve this problem; if an equation would simply materialize on my bathroom mirror that instructs me how to make $30,000, I would take it! However, for me, learning something is the exact opposite; it is not simply enough to take an equation and plug values in it - I must understand every paramater of the eqauation in order to use it. Therefore, when learning something, only partially understanding something is simply not adequate (while, clearly, solving a problem is the exact opposite). I know exactly how I developed these traits; when I was studying computer science in university, if we learned something, it is absolutely important that we understand every facet of the concept; rarely were we ever just simply given an equation that we were instructed to plug values into - "if you are going to learn, you must learn from first principles!" Nonetheless, problem solving couldn't be any more different; fairly often, while were weren't instructed to learn an equation by rote, in an assignment we were often simply given an equation that we didn't fully understand and we had to write a program to solve it! And just like the scenario from my financial life, if a solution would simply show up on a blackboard in a lecture hall, we would graciously accept it...

Therefore, I'm wondering: how would you define these traits intellectually? That is, what is the correct categorization of these contrasting learning and problem-solving styles? I know exactly where they come from in my life history, but I don't know how to categorize them. Therefore, if someone has the answer to these questions, I would be grateful. Also, how does this interact with socionics types? I am interested in this correlation as well...

Jason

[Adam Strange]

I am in dire need of money (approximately $30,000/year to be exact). I also have a need to be my own boss (so I can have a high degree of freedom as well). This has been a big problem for me - something I have been thinking about this for years.

Have you tried inheriting money? That would seem to satisfy your desire for "getting money" with "not working for someone else".

The issue is, I don't care how I solve this problem; if an equation would simply materialize on my bathroom mirror that instructs me how to make $30,000, I would take it! However, for me, learning something is the exact opposite; it is not simply enough to take an equation and plug values in it - I must understand every paramater of the eqauation in order to use it. Therefore, when learning something, only partially understanding something is simply not adequate (while, clearly, solving a problem is the exact opposite). I know exactly how I developed these traits; when I was studying computer science in university, if we learned something, it is absolutely important that we understand every facet of the concept; rarely were we ever just simply given an equation that we were instructed to plug values into - "if you are going to learn, you must learn from first principles!"

This is Ti. Classification of external facts into an internally consistent system.

Nonetheless, problem solving couldn't be any more different; fairly often, while were weren't instructed to learn an equation by rote, in an assignment we were often simply given an equation that we didn't fully understand and we had to write a program to solve it! And just like the scenario from my financial life, if a solution would simply show up on a blackboard in a lecture hall, we would graciously accept it...

This is Te. Generating an efficient process for accomplishing a goal.

Therefore, I'm wondering: how would you define these traits intellectually? That is, what is the correct categorization of these contrasting learning and problem-solving styles? I know exactly where they come from in my life history, but I don't know how to categorize them. Therefore, if someone has the answer to these questions, I would be grateful. Also, how does this interact with socionics types? I am interested in this correlation as well...

Jason

Jason_m, you strike me as a Ti-thinker. IME, Ti types are the ones who are most likely to say "I want free money and I don't want to work hard for it." Not that that is bad. I'd like the same thing, but I don't want to wait around long enough for it to happen to me. I long ago figured out that most people become rich through inheritance, and while my parents are comfortable, they 1. Don't like me, and 2. Will probably exhaust their money in an end-of-life medical intervention. So, I expect to inherit nothing, and if I want $30k/year, I will probably have to work for it. Your situation is probably similar.

I don't know how you think of money, but the way I think of money is that it is a piece of paper that represents a claim on another person's future labor. Let's say there are two friends, and one needs his lawn mowed and the other needs his porch painted. If they exchange labor, they are even and don't need money. But let's say that the guy who needs his lawn mowed can't paint the other guy's porch today. He might give his friend some money for cutting his lawn. The money represents a promise to his friend that his friend can call his debt in the future and get the guy to paint his porch. So, for the most part, money in your pocket represents the amount of work that you have done for other people, and is valuable because you can use it to get them to work for you in the future.

There are other ways to get money, but they mostly involve some form or another of theft, and these methods are probably not available to you right now. So, take it from a Te-thinker: You will probably have to work for someone else, at least initially, to get $30k/year.

From what I have seen, people whose focus is on getting money rarely get money. It is better to focus on what other people want or need. For those who want to be their own boss (to the extent that that is possible when you are asking others for money), they often sell something that they have made. It might be jewelry, or hamburgers, or stories, but in each case, they are still working for someone else. The appeal of this work is that that fact is not always so obvious.

[Pookie]

It sounds like your using "Understanding yourself" as a way to side-step the greater issue of you needing 30k a year. One of your values has to bend. If the How of being Self-employed doesn't answer itself, you are not someone who will thrive as your own employer. Point blank period. Start filling out job applications. If you're nice and have good short term memory, you can net 30k as a waiter. Or you know, put your degree to use.

[ouronis]

Not the end all be all but somewhere to start
http://thepeakperformancecenter.com/...of-thinking-2/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles

[jason_m]

It sounds like your using "Understanding yourself" as a way to side-step the greater issue of you needing 30k a year. One of your values has to bend. If the How of being Self-employed doesn't answer itself, you are not someone who will thrive as your own employer. Point blank period. Start filling out job applications. If you're nice and have good short term memory, you can net 30k as a waiter. Or you know, put your degree to use.

I actually have an answer: I am going to try an online trading school so I can learn about day trading. In this case, input = $X,000; output = the knowledge and skills to be my own boss and make $Y0,000 per year. Problem solved...

EDIT: I absolutely hate the notion of "no free lunch." I want more out of something than what I put into it. That is exactly what socionics gives us: instead of having to spend years in empty relationships in order to find our dual, we just study it periodically, and pinpoint the right type, and out comes a happy relationship. This is exactly why it is an innovative theory. Therefore, for career I want the same thing; I want a career that I can apply leverage to so I can just put $X and Y years into it, and then I simply live happily ever after, just like with relationships... That's what makes what I'm doing 'innovative' (and all of us here as well). I guess then another possibility would be to simply try looking for an explicitly innovative job like 'video game programmer', but in my situation, I'll simply take what I can get either way if it's available...