# Thread: How to Tell if Static or Dyamic?

1. ## How to Tell if Static or Dyamic?

Pretty straightforward question. Static and dynamic is a dichotomy I just don't understand.

2. yup I wanna know too. It seems to have a very significant influence on how we perceive the world given that Dynamic and Static both determine whether our most conscious functions are all Ji/Pe or Pi /Je, so the dichotomy looks pretty legit and worth looking into.

3. Static: something that is relatively consistent and regular. Example: we all have moods of the moment, depending on what's going on in our lives. But some of our values stay relatively consistent and that we turn to over and over again, across situations.

Dynamic: something that changes or evolves. There's inputs and outputs that affect the system or situation. If you learn to control/influence these, you can effect the system towards the way you want it to go.

In regards to Socionics, static/dynamic applies best to field (Xi) elements. (Static Xi= Fi/Ti; Dynamic Xi=Ni/Si)

4. When you ask someone to write an essay is the best way

5. Originally Posted by Maritsa
When you ask someone to write an essay is the best way
Blah. But I don't want to write an essay. LOL.

6. One way of looking at this: irrational functioning reveals the more associative side of processing, and is less removed from the experiential states of the individual, so naturally the introverted aspect of this would be dynamic (not independent of time), as we'd be looking for the relation between two states -- time naturally creeps in there (Pi). Naturally the static aspect would concern the contents of the given state without any time-dependent association, so one would have to focus either on the absolute potential contained within it (I), or on one's capacity for direct involvement with it (which would involve influencing, or "moving", the contents)..(F)

One can formulate similar remarks for the rational IE. The easiest place to understand this is algorithmic vs structural logic, IMO.

Oh. So, then in short static's memories are like snapshots, a scrapbook of pictures and dynamic is like a home video more so, a recording?

8. Originally Posted by chemical
the easiest place to understand this is algorithmic vs structural logic, IMO.
I like that...structural logic vs algorithmic.

9. there is no such dichotomy in normal Socionics. so what you may know about this is bs, like all Reinin's dichotomies

10. Here's a simple test that I have devised. Pretend that you are in the car at the airport and you are looking for a certain plane to come in. You look up at the sky and a bright light appears what do you do?

11. Originally Posted by SheWolf
Oh. So, then in short static's memories are like snapshots, a scrapbook of pictures and dynamic is like a home video more so, a recording?
Yes, afaik.

Maybe it helps to think of it as water. Liquid water (dynamic) flows from one shape to the next, with no fixed point at which it becomes a particular shape, whereas ice (solid water) is at this point in time a specific shape, and changing it to a different shape will take active updating (carving/reshaping/melting).

This is why static (ice) can have some trouble with picking up trends (the process of reshaping) since it relies on knowing the shape of something *as a starting point* and will infer possible conversion processes between two shapes afterwards.

On the other hand dynamic (liquid) does not primarily pick out actual shapes, because it starts analysing something by its flow/direction/etc, and will infer the shapes it can take along the way afterwards. Thus it can have trouble coming up with precise shapes/"facts" instead of "that's a good direction, for now."

As per the thread I linked though, these are complementary processes: you loop from one to the other but privilege a particular side, like in complementary pairs of IEs (Ni-Se, Fi-Te, etc.)

(Description likely skewed towards NF vs ST, do elaborate O Reader.)

12. Originally Posted by Maritsa
Here's a simple test that I have devised. Pretend that you are in the car at the airport and you are looking for a certain plane to come in. You look up at the sky and a bright light appears what do you do?
Think oh shit what the hell is that?! LOL. Then, I might assume it's a plane. It... really depends though lol.

13. Originally Posted by SheWolf
Think oh shit what the hell is that?! LOL. Then, I might assume it's a plane. It... really depends though lol.
I think that is pretty static response. You didn't indicate that you would watch it move closer.

14. Originally Posted by Maritsa
I think that is pretty static response. You didn't indicate that you would watch it move closer.
Well, I might, but if I saw it coming toward me I would get the hell out of the way. Lol.

15. Originally Posted by SheWolf
Well, I might, but if I saw it coming toward me I would get the hell out of the way. Lol.
Aww the dark humor of Gamma lol

16. Originally Posted by Maritsa
Aww the dark humor of Gamma lol

Oops now I know what I'm supposed to respond with... I'll try to avoid thinking about it and just answer naturally.

Um.... I would probably, if this light were triggering my eyes, try to block out the annoying light and keep driving to where I need to be and then get the hell inside before it could attack me. o-o

Can I see a picture of this light so I know how to respond? Is this light just the sun coming into view after turning the corner or something???? Is this light like a UFO or is it just an airplane coming in?

17. Originally Posted by Chryssie
Oops now I know what I'm supposed to respond with... I'll try to avoid thinking about it and just answer naturally.

Um.... I would probably, if this light were triggering my eyes, try to block out the annoying light and keep driving to where I need to be and then get the hell inside before it could attack me. o-o

Can I see a picture of this light so I know how to respond? Is this light just the sun coming into view after turning the corner or something???? Is this light like a UFO or is it just an airplane coming in?
I think you guys misread my example but your response is Si (block uncomfortable light).

,you are waiting for a plane to arrive but there are many planes that come and go to the airport. You see one heading there what do you do?

18. Originally Posted by Maritsa
I think you guys misread my example but your response is Si (block uncomfortable light).

,you are waiting for a plane to arrive but there are many planes that come and go to the airport. You see one heading there what do you do?
i think oh thats just another plane coming because its coming planes constantly so what would be special about this one lol

19. Originally Posted by msnobody
i think oh thats just another plane coming because its coming planes constantly so what would be special about this one lol
If you are looking out for a specific plane do you watch it move or watch, turn away, rewatch

20. In a sense, algorithmic logic is still removed from the experiential side of information processing, as are all rational IE. So it's not *itself* involved in time-flow the way the Pi's are. However, it conveys algorithmic content -- think of the analogy of a program, which technically can be thought of as abstracted away from experience (one can run it on many different media, and still call it the "same" program), but which one ultimately aims to run in some medium -- hence dynamic. This point is important for distinguishing rational-dynamic from irrational-dynamic.
Structural logic is more the dimension of logic used for defining the frameworks in which to operate, so it is both abstracted from experience and conveying content that isn't supposed to be time-oriented.

21. Originally Posted by SheWolf
Oh. So, then in short static's memories are like snapshots, a scrapbook of pictures and dynamic is like a home video more so, a recording?
Yes. As a static, when pulling sth from memory you get singular informations and focus on them, when thinking you tend to build from points, kind of anchors of major significance or turning points. Though I am describing it from Ne perspective; it might be a bit different for Se ego types. Dynamics think with processes, with far less sharp edges.
It is one of the most intuitive of all dichotomies in socionics to me.

22. Originally Posted by malna
Yes. As a static, when pulling sth from memory you get singular informations and focus on them, when thinking you tend to build from points, kind of anchors of major significance or turning points. Though I am describing it from Ne perspective; it might be a bit different for Se ego types. Dynamics think with processes, with far less sharp edges.
It is one of the most intuitive of all dichotomies in socionics to me.
I know that I find it very hard to think in "flow" of things. For example, my acting teacher would do visualization exercising. One was imagining a black bird flying in motion in the sky and through trees, buildings, etc. I couldn't visualize this without a lot of concentration. Whereas it was just more black bird in the sky, then snap to black bird sitting in tree, etc.
And it was really more stressful than relaxing lol.

And I do have "snapshots" for memories. Images, certain feelings, etc. If asked to visualize something, it's more like a still photograph
@Maritsa

I would probably shield my eyes, too, but my main thoughts would be "What is that? UFO? Plane? " and I would try to look at it to make sense of it but then be like "OH SHIT IS IT COMING TOWARD ME!? GET OUT OF THE WAY!"

23. Originally Posted by SheWolf
I know that I find it very hard to think in "flow" of things. For example, my acting teacher would do visualization exercising. One was imagining a black bird flying in motion in the sky and through trees, buildings, etc. I couldn't visualize this without a lot of concentration. Whereas it was just more black bird in the sky, then snap to black bird sitting in tree, etc.
And it was really more stressful than relaxing lol.

And I do have "snapshots" for memories. Images, certain feelings, etc. If asked to visualize something, it's more like a still photograph
@Maritsa

I would probably shield my eyes, too, but my main thoughts would be "What is that? UFO? Plane? " and I would try to look at it to make sense of it but then be like "OH SHIT IS IT COMING TOWARD ME!? GET OUT OF THE WAY!"
lol you mobilize for action sounds Static all the way

24. Originally Posted by Gypsy
I know that I find it very hard to think in "flow" of things. For example, my acting teacher would do visualization exercising. One was imagining a black bird flying in motion in the sky and through trees, buildings, etc. I couldn't visualize this without a lot of concentration. Whereas it was just more black bird in the sky, then snap to black bird sitting in tree, etc.
And it was really more stressful than relaxing lol.

And I do have "snapshots" for memories. Images, certain feelings, etc. If asked to visualize something, it's more like a still photograph
Exact same for me. I'm Static af.

Don't think you are my Dual even though I do like you and get along with you quite well. Think our interactions fit Business relations (ESI-LSI with matching subtypes on top of all of it).

25. I find this type dichotomy highly dubious and difficult to observe. There is no observation that would prompt me to say "this person is Static [/Dynamic]" as an isolated conclusion, not nearly as much as something like valuing Ne/Si, being good at sensing, etc. More specific behaviors like storytelling I would link more to particular elements (Ni). But the type dichotomy relies on the mental/vital dichotomy which also seems highly disconnected from actual behavior. We use our vital functions, in particular the mobilizing and demonstrative functions, to such a degree that it doesn't make sense to say that they are used differently from the mental functions as a whole.

26. Static = deer in headlights situation presents itself constantly? At least I need some detachment to come over those things although I have had some excellent comebacks but those come from being little bit in the sidelines.

27. I can mentally process changing abstract landscapes (you might call them topological). It is not interactive with environment. I can sit still and remote forms appear and I can change them very randomly for example: house transforms itself into air plane for example just to PC side on things. Honestly if I said those things aloud I would end up in mental asylum. It is weird. Visualising something in detail is not going happen, though.

28. Originally Posted by thehotelambush
I find this type dichotomy highly dubious and difficult to observe. There is no observation that would prompt me to say "this person is Static [/Dynamic]" as an isolated conclusion, not nearly as much as something like valuing Ne/Si, being good at sensing, etc. More specific behaviors like storytelling I would link more to particular elements (Ni). But the type dichotomy relies on the mental/vital dichotomy which also seems highly disconnected from actual behavior. We use our vital functions, in particular the mobilizing and demonstrative functions, to such a degree that it doesn't make sense to say that they are used differently from the mental functions as a whole.
I do not ever try to determine static/dynamic just from writing/expression of someone. If they themselves see their consciousness clearly as either static or dynamic, that's what I can accept. So for example the post I responded to.

29. http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...tatic#Examples

ILE-Ti (static perception): "When I'm driving in the car, I don't, and I can't, have a running record in my mind of everything I've seen. When I'm in the mountains, for example, I'll see a scene with tall grass and flowers, next jumping to a scene of a mountain with a cloud hovering right above, then jumping to another scene and another, next to me, in front of me, on one side of the road, then maybe on the other. Each scene is separate from every other scene so I can never get a feel for the drive as a whole, only unseparated scenes. It gets as crazy as after having driven a 10-mile stretch of highway hundreds of times, I still don't grasp it as a whole, only as parts, and I don't know where the curves in the road will be, what specifically will be around the next curve, and what the relationship is of each scene to another. It means every drive is entirely different than the one before and the one after because each time I'm looking at different scenes a little differently in a different order, so I never get tired of the drive. My husband has the road memorized after one or two drives and is bored from then on out. If I write down the drive in words, I can memorize the words and from then on I'll know where things are located before I get to them, rather than having whatever is coming up be a mystery. I recognize the drive as a whole, as in I'm not lost, I just can't say what specifically will be coming up next. This also happens even if the drive is only a mile long and I've driven it hundreds of times. I also had trouble with organic chemistry because it's hard for me to grasp physical patterns and keep them in my mind.

(this is more applicable to D-A dynamic cognitive styles types than V-S)
EIE-Fe (dynamic perception): " I could always imagine the interconnected systems, what feeds into what, etc. When I drive roads enough I could probably do them with my eyes closed...lol. In fact if I think back on the road I used to take to work every day, I could probably make the whole drive appear in my head from the perspective of the driver like a played out fast-forward sequence. It's like for me I have to have a contiguous picture of everything. For example, there is this one intersection that, before I moved near the city, I had only been through a couple of times, and in my mind it had a certain feel based on how I saw it connecting to the other roads in the city. But when I started frequenting that area, and came to see all of the other roads around it, and actually knew and understood from a first person POV how everything was connected and where other things were in relation to that intersection, it took on this entirely different character in my mind... It's hard to explain, but yeah...everything in my head has to be connected to something else for me to make sense of it and have a real grasp of it. Like when I give people directions, I try to put myself in the shoes of the person who is driving, tell them what they will see and stuff, rather than just saying "do this do that and this and then you're there." In order to access the directions in my mind, I have to kind of do the drive in my mind; I can't just make it a list like "turn right then left then straight."

30. Originally Posted by silke
http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...tatic#Examples

ILE-Ti (static perception): "When I'm driving in the car, I don't, and I can't, have a running record in my mind of everything I've seen. When I'm in the mountains, for example, I'll see a scene with tall grass and flowers, next jumping to a scene of a mountain with a cloud hovering right above, then jumping to another scene and another, next to me, in front of me, on one side of the road, then maybe on the other. Each scene is separate from every other scene so I can never get a feel for the drive as a whole, only unseparated scenes. It gets as crazy as after having driven a 10-mile stretch of highway hundreds of times, I still don't grasp it as a whole, only as parts, and I don't know where the curves in the road will be, what specifically will be around the next curve, and what the relationship is of each scene to another. It means every drive is entirely different than the one before and the one after because each time I'm looking at different scenes a little differently in a different order, so I never get tired of the drive. My husband has the road memorized after one or two drives and is bored from then on out. If I write down the drive in words, I can memorize the words and from then on I'll know where things are located before I get to them, rather than having whatever is coming up be a mystery. I recognize the drive as a whole, as in I'm not lost, I just can't say what specifically will be coming up next. This also happens even if the drive is only a mile long and I've driven it hundreds of times. I also had trouble with organic chemistry because it's hard for me to grasp physical patterns and keep them in my mind.

(this is more applicable to D-A dynamic cognitive styles types than V-S)
EIE-Fe (dynamic perception): " I could always imagine the interconnected systems, what feeds into what, etc. When I drive roads enough I could probably do them with my eyes closed...lol. In fact if I think back on the road I used to take to work every day, I could probably make the whole drive appear in my head from the perspective of the driver like a played out fast-forward sequence. It's like for me I have to have a contiguous picture of everything. For example, there is this one intersection that, before I moved near the city, I had only been through a couple of times, and in my mind it had a certain feel based on how I saw it connecting to the other roads in the city. But when I started frequenting that area, and came to see all of the other roads around it, and actually knew and understood from a first person POV how everything was connected and where other things were in relation to that intersection, it took on this entirely different character in my mind... It's hard to explain, but yeah...everything in my head has to be connected to something else for me to make sense of it and have a real grasp of it. Like when I give people directions, I try to put myself in the shoes of the person who is driving, tell them what they will see and stuff, rather than just saying "do this do that and this and then you're there." In order to access the directions in my mind, I have to kind of do the drive in my mind; I can't just make it a list like "turn right then left then straight."
The ILE just seems 1D Si along with being Static.

The EIE seems 4D Ne but sure, it's shown along with some Dynamic stuff.

31. Originally Posted by thehotelambush
I find this type dichotomy highly dubious and difficult to observe. There is no observation that would prompt me to say "this person is Static [/Dynamic]" as an isolated conclusion, not nearly as much as something like valuing Ne/Si, being good at sensing, etc. More specific behaviors like storytelling I would link more to particular elements (Ni). But the type dichotomy relies on the mental/vital dichotomy which also seems highly disconnected from actual behavior. We use our vital functions, in particular the mobilizing and demonstrative functions, to such a degree that it doesn't make sense to say that they are used differently from the mental functions as a whole.
Static vs. dynamic is pretty easy to tell if you know what to look for. Static basically correlates with the concept of aspect and dynamic with tense. Mood is related to rational vs. irrational but that's a different topic entirely. Temperament is pretty useful in learning to understand what exactly static and dynamic are about (although I think the page I like better got deleted or something somehow).

32. Originally Posted by Myst
I do not ever try to determine static/dynamic just from writing/expression of someone. If they themselves see their consciousness clearly as either static or dynamic, that's what I can accept. So for example the post I responded to.
My comment wasn't specifically directed at you, I've seen a lot of people here make reference to the dichotomy (too much, IMO).