Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Islands or Trees?

  1. #1
    isptn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    102
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Islands or Trees?

    How should I understand socionics types and IEs? Are the information elements like islands, as in areas of information existing independently? Or are they more like trees, with the IEs stemming from necessary components and dichotomies that define them?

    If they are islands, then it doesn't matter how one processes information, but is more about what type of information one pays attention to, and how one relates to that type of information in terms of valuing or not and being strong or weak. Someone could be an Ne type if they are focused on expansion of possibilities and ideas regardless of whether they are actually Intuitive or utilizing Intuition to do so.

    If they are trees, it's about the roots, not the surface. One's focus would have to be placed in its full context and compared to all components of an IE, not merely the typical end result of the IE. Labels of the IEs such as 'work', 'possibilities', 'comfort', and 'relationships' by themselves would be meaningless, and only an indication of an IE if placed in the context of its parts (Logic, Intuition, Internal/External, Subjects/Fields, etc.). Thus a focus on the area of an IE might come from something else entirely.

  2. #2
    an object in motion woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    2,111
    Mentioned
    329 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default all styles

    try object (E) fxns as islands, field (I) fxns as trees

    -Ne most "island", +Ti most "tree"

    I use both "island" and "tree" -- dichotomies strongly implying the content (tree) with just a bit of a non-derivable special ingredient (island) to complete the unit
    p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
    trad metalz | (more coming)

  3. #3
    isptn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    102
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woofwoofl View Post
    try object (E) fxns as islands, field (I) fxns as trees

    -Ne most "island", +Ti most "tree"

    I use both "island" and "tree" -- dichotomies strongly implying the content (tree) with just a bit of a non-derivable special ingredient (island) to complete the unit
    Interesting, but if Ne is simply an island called "possibilities" that someone could choose to focus on, wouldn't that mean someone could be an Ne type without actually having Intuitive perception? Someone might perceive objects literally and concretely and have difficulty recognizing patterns and connecting the dots, but easily generate ideas and be open to possibilities because they choose to focus on that.

  4. #4
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I would say they're cities - they are connected by roads which are the element relations.

    It may be that you can define them in terms of dichotomies but I see no satisfactory way of doing this (yet).

  5. #5
    isptn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    102
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    I would say they're cities - they are connected by roads which are the element relations.

    It may be that you can define them in terms of dichotomies but I see no satisfactory way of doing this (yet).
    Is it that the IEs aren't something in the mind but are concepts that are related to each other in certain ways, like light and dark, but creating a more complex pattern of interrelations than simply either/or? Do they then have nothing to do with cognition but rather form a person's values?

  6. #6
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by isptn View Post
    Is it that the IEs aren't something in the mind but are concepts that are related to each other in certain ways, like light and dark, but creating a more complex pattern of interrelations than simply either/or? Do they then have nothing to do with cognition but rather form a person's values?
    They are all of these things.

  7. #7
    isptn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    102
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    They are all of these things.
    How? There should be a single way the concepts fit together, otherwise there's no consistency.

  8. #8
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by isptn View Post
    How? There should be a single way the concepts fit together, otherwise there's no consistency.
    There is no contradiction between these things. IM elements are 1) combinations of dichotomies 2) unified wholes 3) related to each other by relationships, 4) objective concepts 5) mental processes 6) ways of assessing value. What's the contradiction?

  9. #9
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    4,160
    Mentioned
    305 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by isptn View Post
    Do they then have nothing to do with cognition but rather form a person's values?
    They have everything to do with cognition. One could say that they ARE cognition. The personal values (may) follow from them
    The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.

    (Jung on Si)

Posting Permissions

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