Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 46

Thread: INTps identifying with Dynamist description

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default INTps identifying with Dynamist description

    To begin with, how many INTps on this forum do not identify with this paragraph?

    INTP-XXXx

    The Dynamist

    Function Order:
    Ni -> Te -> Si -> Fe -> Se -> Fi -> Ne -> Ti
    Fe -> Si -> Te -> Ni -> Ti -> Ne -> Fi -> Se


    The Dynamist relies on the currents of their times as the guiding forces
    of their relationships. They seek a role which allows them to engage
    external dynamics between fields. The relations between these
    fields govern the relational characters of the objects within them.
    These relational dynamics produce a coherent subjective perception,
    which in turn dictates the evolution of time. This evolution is never
    wholly acceptable. To change the undesired state of affairs, the Dynamist
    requests suggestive content as to the strengths of the powers that be.
    The balances of these strengths imply the dominant forces underlying
    the undesirable status quo. The feelings produced by the adoption of
    the most reasonable suggestion create in the self a potential for
    change. This potential is drawn upon as personal knowledge; its acceptance
    brings about a change in internal field statics. So adamant is this field
    static that nothing can penetrate it: external field statics are
    shifted, and with them the strength levels of the powers that be. The
    external field statics produce new directions in time, each of which
    implies a subjective experience. The selection of the most subjectively
    favorable direction implies the emergence of the relational dynamics
    it affords. The relations of these dynamics to each other in turn evoke
    polarizations and collectivized field relationships. In the context
    of these relationships a range of applicable relational dynamics may
    be observed, the suitability of which invokes a new cycle.
    One thing that has not yet been settled in socionics, is why we make the decisions we do. If all *normal* INTps were "XXXxs", then they would always be accepting information based on its relevance to the state of another function.


    EDIT:
    I'm preparing a VI resource... starting with the XXXxs because (for now) they've got a lot of my interest. I've done some research on the subject though, and if that research is correct I'll be interested in them for some time to come....


    Anyway....

    INTp:
    Notice the soft ESFj features and emotionally expressive eyes.

    INFj:
    Rugged features, focus on guiding humanity.

    The women seem very, very attractive. The guys, ...I could see them being handsome... they seem to have the "median" traits associated with handsomeness. It seems to me likely that given these individuals are the masters of the socion -- given their desire to organize/guide people on a large scale -- that it is evolutionary advantageous to pay attention to them, and that's exactly what their personalities demand: attention. It is not required that they be in objective positions of power, only that we give them the attention we need to in order to understand the relationships between our environment and our culture/ways/means/etc.. It is required that they be revered and respected, in other words. It is more than anything else the relationship of their agendas (hidden and apparent) with their personal knowledge functions that allows them to reach across partisan lines in pursuit of common national/cultural destinies.

    Please comment and critique.

  2. #2
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Help me understand... Would it be accurate to say that an XXXx is a person who lives with two autonomous complexes in his/her head, the two of which are duals to eachother in terms of functions..?

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    Help me understand... Would it be accurate to say that an XXXx is a person who lives with two autonomous complexes in his/her head, the two of which are duals to eachother in terms of functions..?
    Not autonomous... the master complex is the observer of information and therefore the holder of power. The master controls what the slave produces simply by choosing to acknowledge one thing over another.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    25
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I accept it as "ILI-language"... but I am not sure that the experience as a whole is uniquely ILI ...
    ILI

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've concluded that the United States Declaration of Independence, as written by INTj-ESFp Thomas Jefferson, is an exemplary demonstration of INTj-XXXx belief. The following is a functional analysis of the Declaration and of the cognitive process that created it.


    http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

    When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands
    which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
    We see that Jefferson begins the construction of the declaration with an assertion that it was necessary to dissolve bonds between the colonies and Britain on the basis of instinctual preservation, their logical consequence being the creation of an autonomous people, an externally apprehended field with its own unique dynamics. Naturally the creation of this field allows it the capacity to be an independent internal dynamic in the field of earthly nations, subject to the laws of reason that are imposed by the powerful forces of nature. It is clear that Jefferson believes that nations are created as alliances of reasonable counteraction against inhospital natural forces. When these alliances are distanced from each other by natural forces, then there is sufficient cause for the dissolution of these alliances to the extent that one party does not face the same conditions as the other. Jefferson indevors to inform the reader of the Decleration with regard to the opinions that, arising from the internal dynamics of the field of British colonies, led to the perception of America as a external field static, a nation that exists not only as a people, but as a constant of perception that must be considered in its own right.


    Note on the transcription: This was not the first draft of the Declaration. Revisions suggested by John Adams and Benjamin Franklin moderated and in some cases obfusticated Jefferson's original text. Indeed, the original text even more strikingly demonstrates INTj-ESFp mentality and its profound insight into the nature of reality.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've updated with some VI links.

  7. #7
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am amazed to find this topic on this board, because I am INTp and, I am from what I gather "XXXx" in the way you are using the term; that is I have experienced ego death and can speak directly from the unconscious. So my "Ni" is more of a running dialogue at times then an actual thought, filter, output process. Moreso I had the strange perception recently INTps are the only type capable of real ego death, of truly unleashing their unconscious... the other types all become infixed into a certain form which prevents them from accepting the whole truth. Only Ni, Te is truly detached from the world.
    I believe other types are also capable of releasing themselves from their mental traps. But this issue may force for theory a compromise with reality. Reality directs INTps back toward their full opposite naturally. From this, the INTp experiences the full plight of life, and if he is to fully survive must walk the path of Christ.
    I can tell you Jung, William Blake and Jim Morrison are three INTps who have experienced ego death
    William Blake wrote alot about this topic, but everything he says is in the form of art.
    Jungs psychotic episodes were the same thing.
    Jim Morrison... watch videos of him, watch him speak poetry
    I know very little about socionics.. but would like to learn. You all seem extremely intelligent, but perhaps too absorbed in non-reality. I probably seem quite ignorant. I hope to change that, but cannot read russian.
    I am wondering: could any of you kind men direct me to any series of most relevent articles for learning socionics from only a strong knowledge of MBTI and the fundamental nature of the functions?
    INTp

  8. #8
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    Tcaud will not be a fan if you're talking about ego-death the way I think you're talking about ego death :wink:




    to learn socionics try either the wikisocion link in my sig or www.socionics.us

  9. #9
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, by ego-death I mean the dissolution of consciousness, in a way.
    The merging of the unconscious with consciousness. Or the flooding fourth of the unconscious.
    I can try to describe what I am trying to say more specificly with a situation.
    Something which comes to mind is playing pool.
    In playing pool, if you allow your unconscious to merge with consciousness, you become keenly aware of multiple perspectives on how to aim and handle the ball; how the ball will behave. You have a heightened sense of physics, geometry, body... you can mix, and unify seemingly irrelevent perspectives simultaneously. They are one.
    From this you are a much better pool player
    When this concept is applied to personality, particularly as it pertains to life and reality, you have a person who self-actualized; who is capable of performing, achieving, learning, who has merged good and evil within themselves
    And if there is another definition of ego-death then disregard my ignorance.
    Because I do not read irrelevent languages.
    If what I am saying conflicts with what you believe, it is possible we have a linguistic mix-up.
    This is why I added I do not know much about socionics, particularly in the way you are using it
    INTp

  10. #10
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat
    Well, by ego-death I mean the dissolution of consciousness, in a way.
    The merging of the unconscious with consciousness. Or the flooding fourth of the unconscious.
    I can try to describe what I am trying to say more specificly with a situation.
    Something which comes to mind is playing pool.
    In playing pool, if you allow your unconscious to merge with consciousness, you become keenly aware of multiple perspectives on how to aim and handle the ball; how the ball will bounce. You have a heightened sense of physics, geometry, body... simultaneously. Because they are one.
    From this you are a much better pool player
    And if there is another definition of ego-death then disregard my ignorance.
    Because I do not read irrelevent languages.
    If what I am saying conflicts with what you believe, it is possible we have a linguistic mix-up.
    This is why I added I do not know much about socionics, particularly in the way you are using it
    what I was insuating was that you were talking about ego death as in LSD ego-death... Your reference to Morrison made me assume that. sorry if that's not how you meant it. (if it was... yeah, I've been there. good stuff )

  11. #11
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I do think I may also be insinuating that, but am not certain. Only because I identify with Morrison, and most of Morrisons ideas on how to live, are in agreement with Jungs ideas on the undiscovered self; and these are strong ideas. Moreso, the hippie culture as a whole seems to be ideologically similar to what I am thinking of; because I also experienced a merging of cognition and sexuality, beast and mind, when I first experienced what I am talking about (and it is a long story how this came to happen which I will not embark on as of yet but actually does involve drugs) However, I have never tried LSD to my knowledge (and I say that with emphasis), though I do plan on it
    INTp

  12. #12
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat
    I do think I may also be insinuating that, but am not certain. Only because I identify with Morrison. However, I have never tried LSD, though I do plan on it
    do it with good people you trust and in a safe enviornment... everything will be great then. Have fun

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat
    I am amazed to find this topic on this board, because I am INTp and, I am from what I gather "XXXx" in the way you are using the term; that is I have experienced ego death and can speak directly from the unconscious. So my "Ni" is more of a running dialogue at times then an actual thought, filter, output process. Moreso I had the strange perception recently INTps are the only type capable of real ego death, of truly unleashing their unconscious... the other types all become infixed into a certain form which prevents them from accepting the whole truth. Only Ni, Te is truly detached from the world.
    I believe other types are also capable of releasing themselves from their mental traps. But this issue may force for theory a compromise with reality. Reality directs INTps back toward their full opposite naturally. From this, the INTp experiences the full plight of life, and if he is to fully survive must walk the path of Christ.
    I can tell you Jung, William Blake and Jim Morrison are three INTps who have experienced ego death
    William Blake wrote alot about this topic, but everything he says is in the form of art.
    Jungs psychotic episodes were the same thing.
    Jim Morrison... watch videos of him, watch him speak poetry
    I know very little about socionics.. but would like to learn. You all seem extremely intelligent, but perhaps too absorbed in non-reality. I probably seem quite ignorant. I hope to change that, but cannot read russian.
    I am wondering: could any of you kind men direct me to any series of most relevent articles for learning socionics from only a strong knowledge of MBTI and the fundamental nature of the functions?
    Ego death... well what you speak of is something that I discern also, that there are multiple sides to every issue and that only by finding a reconciliation between all the sides can you really understand the whole picture. This is easy to acknowledge but more difficult to practice. The original crosstype theory has been superseded, replaced with more specific theories of the same phenomena. The ability to reconcile subconscious information with conscious information successfully is "the will to power" (Neitzsche), the trait of independence from the "flow" of events. The phenomenon most correspondent to the XXXx type is that of the conflictor dual-type combination, paired with will to power. However, also the person can technically perform as the XXXx is described, they have confidence in only half of that functionality.

    Just for future reference, the term that best describes a "will to power"-ed person is "opinion leader".

  14. #14
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It feels good to be understood.
    Opinion Leader is a good term, it effectively describes what I have been experiencing recently. When an argument breaks out, I dismiss and equalize the conflict quickly; and I gained this tendency after I experienced the life changing event where my psyche broke through my veil of lies and transformed into XXXx.
    What I find most interesting is after I experienced this transformation, I could not sleep and had to be admited to a mental hospital, and perscribed antipsychotic medication. When I take the medication, I can feel my ability to perceive multiple forms slipping away.. and I return to my old self; INTp-XNXx (I am not sure I am doing that right..). But when I stop taking the medicine, I return to XXXx. It suggests to me, and I realize this is subjective, psychotic illness and the XXXx type are linked in some way, though I am unsure of specifics; and suspect a statement like this must be qualified to a greater degree then I am qualified to do so.
    and as far as V.I. is concerned, I look similar to Morrison
    By conflictor-dual type combination, do you mean INTp/ESFj?
    Because my mother is a strong ESFj personality, and raised me solo.
    Or do you mean INTp/ESFp
    My father is ISTp (don't know him too well)... and I am INTp/XNXx... My mother is ESFj.. and after I am self-actualized I am INTp/XXXx
    Do you see the pattern?
    Is it too far out there speculate your father archetype dictates where you are fixated, your mother archetype dictates which fixations you must supersede
    I am wondering more about Freud now
    INTp

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat
    It feels good to be understood.
    Opinion Leader is a good term, it effectively describes what I have been experiencing recently. When an argument breaks out, I dismiss and equalize the conflict quickly; and I gained this tendency after I experienced the life changing event where my psyche broke through my veil of lies and transformed into XXXx.
    What I find most interesting is after I experienced this transformation, I could not sleep and had to be admited to a mental hospital, and perscribed antipsychotic medication. When I take the medication, I can feel my ability to perceive multiple forms slipping away.. and I return to my old self; INTp-XNXx (I am not sure I am doing that right..). But when I stop taking the medicine, I return to XXXx. It suggests to me, and I realize this is subjective, psychotic illness and the XXXx type are linked in some way, though I am unsure of specifics; and suspect a statement like this must be qualified to a greater degree then I am qualified to do so.
    and as far as V.I. is concerned, I look similar to Morrison
    By conflictor-dual type combination, do you mean INTp/ESFj?
    Because my mother is a strong ESFj personality, and raised me solo.
    Or do you mean INTp/ESFp
    My father is ISTp (don't know him too well)... and I am INTp/XNXx... My mother is ESFj.. and after I am self-actualized I am INTp/XXXx
    Do you see the pattern?
    Is it too far out there speculate your father archetype dictates where you are fixated, your mother archetype dictates which fixations you must supersede
    I am wondering more about Freud now
    Yeah I do the same thing. For me, it's being aware of people's potential to work with me at all, which I can trace to their reaction to my body language. If it's positive, then there is potential. If indifferent, there may or may not be potential depending on the situation. If they look away or otherwise distance themselves, then it's a cue to avoid them.

    By conflictor-dual type combination, do you mean INTp/ESFj?
    Yes. They are in the same socion, a state of acute neuroticism with regard to their work. On the one hand they recognize that their work can produce benefits for themselves and others; on the other they object to its content.

  16. #16
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: XXXx: An Enduring Mystery.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    To begin with, how many INTps on this forum do not identify with this paragraph?

    INTP-XXXx

    The Dynamist

    Function Order:
    Ni -> Te -> Si -> Fe -> Se -> Fi -> Ne -> Ti
    Fe -> Si -> Te -> Ni -> Ti -> Ne -> Fi -> Se


    The Dynamist relies on the currents of their times as the guiding forces
    of their relationships. They seek a role which allows them to engage
    external dynamics between fields. The relations between these
    fields govern the relational characters of the objects within them.
    These relational dynamics produce a coherent subjective perception,
    which in turn dictates the evolution of time. This evolution is never
    wholly acceptable. To change the undesired state of affairs, the Dynamist
    requests suggestive content as to the strengths of the powers that be.
    The balances of these strengths imply the dominant forces underlying
    the undesirable status quo. The feelings produced by the adoption of
    the most reasonable suggestion create in the self a potential for
    change. This potential is drawn upon as personal knowledge; its acceptance
    brings about a change in internal field statics. So adamant is this field
    static that nothing can penetrate it: external field statics are
    shifted, and with them the strength levels of the powers that be. The
    external field statics produce new directions in time, each of which
    implies a subjective experience. The selection of the most subjectively
    favorable direction implies the emergence of the relational dynamics
    it affords. The relations of these dynamics to each other in turn evoke
    polarizations and collectivized field relationships. In the context
    of these relationships a range of applicable relational dynamics may
    be observed, the suitability of which invokes a new cycle.
    One thing that has not yet been settled in socionics, is why we make the decisions we do. If all *normal* INTps were "XXXxs", then they would always be accepting information based on its relevance to the state of another function.

    Please comment and critique.
    This I think is a matter of the extent to which the dominant function is archaic
    INTp

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What do you mean by archaic in this sense?

  18. #18
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have figured out this problem.
    It takes a bit of explaining...
    As that description stands, the function order goes like this:
    the producing line: Si>Te/Fe>Ni/Se>Ti/Fi>Ne
    the reviewing line: Ne>Fi/Ti>Se/Ni>Fe/Te>Si
    And this is an XXXX process, where information can always be interpreted to relation to another function; and requires no complex of thoughts for interpreting a foreign function into a dominant function.. etc. but accepts information in an immediate fashion, and transforms it in an immediate fashion.

    There is the illusion this is an INTp thought process. This occurs because the INTP-Ni process is formally the same as the first half of both the producing line, and the reviewing line, of the XXXX process.
    The INTp-Ni process is like this:
    Si>Te/Fe>Ni
    Ne>Fi/Ti>Se
    where relations between Si abstractions are established as Te statements; and an array of these statements creates a coherent Fe impression, which fixes a Ni potential for change in the name of existential balance.
    This information is reviewed in terms of its Ne potential of freedom, which informs a Fi impression of constraint. This Fi impression consists of the workings of Ti, the coherence of which determines the integrity of the circumstance Se.
    The other four blocks are the superego and id blocks... I have to share the computer and Ill say more later if you care to hear it
    INTp

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    I have figured out this problem.
    It takes a bit of explaining...
    As that description stands, the function order goes like this:
    the producing line: Si>Te/Fe>Ni/Se>Ti/Fi>Ne
    the reviewing line: Ne>Fi/Ti>Se/Ni>Fe/Te>Si
    And this is an XXXX process, where information can always be interpreted to relation to another function; and requires no complex of thoughts for interpreting a foreign function into a dominant function.. etc. but accepts information in an immediate fashion, and transforms it in an immediate fashion.

    There is the illusion this is an INTp thought process. This occurs because the INTP-Ni process is formally the same as the first half of both the producing line, and the reviewing line, of the XXXX process.
    The INTp-Ni process is like this:
    Si>Te/Fe>Ni
    Ne>Fi/Ti>Se
    where relations between Si abstractions are established as Te statements; and an array of these statements creates a coherent Fe impression, which fixes a Ni potential for change in the name of existential balance.
    This information is reviewed in terms of its Ne potential of freedom, which informs a Fi impression of constraint. This Fi impression consists of the workings of Ti, the coherence of which determines the integrity of the circumstance Se.
    The other four blocks are the superego and id blocks... I have to share the computer and Ill say more later if you care to hear it
    I can see where you're going with this. Go into more detail, please.

  20. #20
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This issue is worthy of four or five well written essays. I do not feel like doing this; ... it is such a word game. and I think you (the only one who cares) can fill in the blanks.
    The ways inwhich we've been thinking about socionics thus far have pertained to informations form, and have not directly examined the relevence of content. Socionics is an analysis of transformations in the form of information, among other things. The assumption is the existence of information. In order to understand what holds us back from a faith process (XXXx) we must begin thinking of what it is which fixes us into our dominant mode of processing; and that is what I think should be called a construct, which is a web of logic.., or content, or a web of information, which pre-exists for transformation.. the form of this construct predetermining its preceding possibilities for transformation, and the possibilities of future information which may be processed into the construct. Thus, as the scale of our construct expands in the name of coherence, we compartmentalize into a dominant information form; a sociotype...

    I will give an example of how a construct breaks down into a sociotype, using INTp-Ni (and the distinction is relevent.. there is a clear difference between the subtypes using this system)

    I said a construct is like a web.. in order to appreciate this, you might want to think in terms of Wittgenstein, or some post modernist ideology. I am not verbally capable of wording what I am trying to say minus the condition you have an acute awareness of these things. We are imagining a web together.. If you do not understand post modernism then you will end up asking me questions like "what differentiates the dot from the big collection of dots seen as a whole".. etc. The answer is, there is no difference... they are the same thing; and a dot can be looked at, in itself, as another connection of dots relative to one another, and defining it. It is all a matter of perspective shifting

    There are different forms of relations of objects, in a construct. We are imagining a web consisting of dots and lines.
    1: The elemental parts, and their relations to one another (dots, and lines between the dots) is the first block (for INTp-Ni above, it is Si>Te.. where Si is the dot, and Te is the line).
    2: There is then the whole construct. Viewed alone, (as a dot itself), and then viewed in terms of its possibility for interaction outside itself (a complex process which i have yet to explain clearly. The construct has no external awareness, but does have an awareness of internal tension which creates a tendency to return to existential balance). For INTp-Ni, this is Fe>Ni, where the construct as a whole is Fe, and the awareness of this constructs existential balance potential is Ni.

    Those were what I am thinking of as the producing functions... which start from the atomic part of the construct, and work upward toward the final relevence of the construct (existential balance tendency). This is what we call the ego block; and it motivated toward the development of the integrity of the construct.

    I will write the other three blocks tomorrow.. superego, id, superid. This is probably enough for now

    Alot of work still needs to be done describing the processes.. defining the terms. Once it is done though, the system can be used to interpret thins most people consider beyond the grasp of psychology.. anything which you can break down into fundamental elements, you can interpret using this system.. you can also construct from the ground up a coherent construct in the name of a particular socionic impression. For example, I've been experimenting with writing INTp-Ni poetry and music (by breaking music down into elements)
    Alot of work needs to go into defining the intricate workings of the dominant function, and its awareness of existential integrity (the awareness the construct does not exist.. or the motivated drive to return a construct to a state of nonexistance; equilibrium... yin yang)
    INTp

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat
    and it motivated toward the development of the integrity of the construct.
    I think that may only apply to progressives like you and me. Labcoat, I suspect, would as a liberal argue it motivated toward developing the integrity of the relationship. Note that the construct will suffer if the relationship suffers, and the relationship could appear less apparent if the construct degrades. This appears to me an aspect of the liberal/progressive duality.

    I think many people here would substitute "growth" for "integrity", given the choice. Also, conservative types (specialists) would argure on behalf of preservation over development, especially because development can go awry and lead thereby to a degredation of existing quality if not handled responsibly. (imagine a person who wanted to develop something just to destroy it in the end....)

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat
    or the motivated drive to return a construct to a state of nonexistance; equilibrium... yin yang)
    Sounds like shadow-oriented behavior. I should note that although there is a drive to return the ego to non-existence, this is in favor of the id, that its brutish ways would once again reign supreme. (using the neocortex on behalf of the reptilian aspect, you might say.)

    I'm in agreement with you on all points. Interesting notion you have though of the relationship between the producer and the acceptor.... I'll have to study it more closely.

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    We definitely need expanded horizons as to what these concepts mean to us.

  23. #23
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    I think that may only apply to progressives like you and me. Labcoat, I suspect, would as a liberal argue it motivated toward developing the integrity of the relationship. Note that the construct will suffer if the relationship suffers, and the relationship could appear less apparent if the construct degrades. This appears to me an aspect of the liberal/progressive duality.

    I think many people here would substitute "growth" for "integrity", given the choice. Also, conservative types (specialists) would argure on behalf of preservation over development, especially because development can go awry and lead thereby to a degredation of existing quality if not handled responsibly. (imagine a person who wanted to develop something just to destroy it in the end....)



    Sounds like shadow-oriented behavior. I should note that although there is a drive to return the ego to non-existence, this is in favor of the id, that its brutish ways would once again reign supreme. (using the neocortex on behalf of the reptilian aspect, you might say.)

    I'm in agreement with you on all points. Interesting notion you have though of the relationship between the producer and the acceptor.... I'll have to study it more closely.
    Yes.. there are definitly language problems with what I wrote. The different ways you can look at the same thing.. and call it opposite names, is confusing. There are also parts of what I said which I am not completely sure about; and particularly the role of the dominant function in relation to the construct .. has yet to be clarified. Vaguely, in my mind, the ego is motivated toward achieving "id" in light of the "superego"; i.e., achieving the super-id... and discovering where the dominant function is motivated toward, may involve bringing into the equation the other blocks, and looking at everything simultaneously.
    It is also possible the language I used is tainted by the particular sociotype which I was describing.. INTp-Ni.. which is a progressive sociotype.
    When I say things like "elemental parts".. what exactly these elemental parts are, is up for specification; and it could be the elemental parts possess a liberal quality as units, but form together in a progressive fashion.
    A big question I have, is what change is in the name of. I vaguely implied it was in the name of returning to a state of equilibrium. ... or it could even be in the name of defying equilibrium. But change can't be a shot in the dark. There has to be a relative standpoint between the information which exists, and its potential for existing in an alternative form; the most universal alternative form being "nothingness"...
    There is alot which needs to be investigated.

    IMO, to return to your original post.. the process you described as (XXXx) can exist only in light of the lack of a construct.. it is a faith process. related to the mental dynamics of religious experiences... religious beliefs, and so on
    Last edited by crazedrat; 02-22-2008 at 10:50 AM.
    INTp

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Vaguely, in my mind, the ego is motivated toward achieving "id" in light of the "superego"; i.e., achieving the super-id... and discovering where the dominant function is motivated toward, may involve bringing into the equation the other blocks, and looking at everything simultaneously.
    Bing, I just learned something: that's a substantial rationale for seeking duality. Lots of conclusions to be drawn from that.

    Did you figure that yourself, or from some other source?

  25. #25
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i haven't particularly studied anything advanced in socionics, but i am kind of obsessed with wittgenstein.. he the influence with this; and i look at socionics through those glasses. i didn't extract this from sources other then wittgenstein and a few rudimentary papers on the natures of the functions. this doesn't mean another source may not of said what we are saying in a different way.. i am not sure, you would probably know more about that then i would. as far as i know its my own work
    INTp

  26. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    lol. this is all me man. i haven't read anything advanced in socionics, but i am kind of obsessed with wittgenstein.. he is kind of the influence with this
    I've heard of Wittgenstein. Interesting philosophy.

    Then I'll credit you for that observation.

  27. #27
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    my life is now meaningful
    INTp

  28. #28
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    well... about your "report". The more I look at things, the more obsolete alot of what you have been saying on dual theory.... and so fourth, seems. there is alot of information which i need to publish on this. who would i send it to? Do you know anyone who is an authority in the socionics community? and... what are you publishing? are you publishing anything? Etc.
    INTp

  29. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    well... about your "report". The more I look at things, the more obsolete alot of what you have been saying on dual theory.... and so fourth, seems. there is alot of information which i need to publish on this. who would i send it to? Do you know anyone who is an authority in the socionics community? and... what are you publishing? are you publishing anything? Etc.
    Well in as much as I can observe as regards the relationships between the types, it's primarily a matter of choosing aspects from the entire range of a given element to process based on their relevance to carrying out the energies of the exertion element of the same function. Also, one faces the same problems as with the metabolism type when trying to process information offered by another type: the elements have intrinsic weaknesses respective to their ordering and thus, will be less than effective at performing feats of action and observation that other types find remarkably easy.

    When you consider not only the problems solved but also the frustrations one faces in trying to carry out their solutions, then you begin having the appearance of a life story, one that becomes ever clearer the more traits you successfully dichotomize and appraise in the person. Obviously if people were matched with problems that they enjoyed solving and situations they felt comfortable handling, ours would be a more productive world. In particular, it seems to me such a world would be, so long as it steadfastly adhered to the dynamics of the socion, probably devoid of poverty and persistently productive. Recessions would be a thing of the past in all estimation. There would only be the objective situation of a system out of balance and it would be all too obvious how to restore it to balance and right away.
    Last edited by tcaudilllg; 03-10-2008 at 11:09 AM.

  30. #30
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Well in as much as I can observe as regards the relationships between the types, it's primarily a matter of choosing aspects from the entire range of a given element to process based on their relevance to carrying out the energies of the exertion element of the same function. Also, one faces the same problems as with the metabolism type when trying to process information offered by another type: the elements have intrinsic weaknesses respective to their ordering and thus, will be less than effective at performing feats of action and observation that other types find remarkably easy.

    When you consider not only the problems solved but also the frustrations one faces in trying to carry out their solutions, then you begin having the appearance of a life story, one that becomes ever clearer the more traits you successfully dichotomize and appraise in the person. Obviously if people were matched with problems that they enjoyed solving and situations they felt comfortable handling, ours would be a more productive world. In particular, it seems to me such a world would be, so long as it steadfastly adhered to the dynamics of the socion, probably devoid of poverty and persistently productive. Recessions would be a thing of the past in all estimation. There would only be the objective situation of a system out of balance and it would be all too obvious how to restore it to balance and right away.

    EDIT:
    I wrote out a long reply to this, only to talk myself in to agreeing with you once again... but in a different way then I did before.

    There are a few things not set in my mind about it, though.
    1: this dual type business is a matter of content, and discussing the integrity of a construct. So would a person X be INTp-ESFj in one sense (let's say I'm coherent in socionics)... but INTp-(something else) in another sense (where I'm inadequate in this area of life).
    The problem is a construct is limited in relevence to the information it contains. And a persons mind contains multiple information constructs... etc. With IM, these merge... with the dual type, there isn't a reason I can see they would have to be merged. They are contingent on the construct itself... they don't have a part in its formation
    2: That the dual type notation is slightly misleading. For example.. an INTp-ESFj is not concerned with the superid, ego, or superid blocks of an ESFj... but only with the ego functions of an ESFj.
    Last edited by crazedrat; 03-11-2008 at 09:34 PM.
    INTp

  31. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    EDIT:
    I wrote out a long reply to this, only to talk myself in to agreeing with you once again... but in a different way then I did before.

    There are a few things not set in my mind about it, though.
    1: this dual type business is a matter of content, and discussing the integrity of a construct. So would a person X be INTp-ESFj in one sense (let's say I'm coherent in socionics)... but INTp-(something else) in another sense (where I'm inadequate in this area of life).
    The problem is a construct is limited in relevence to the information it contains. And a persons mind contains multiple information constructs... etc. With IM, these merge... with the dual type, there isn't a reason I can see they would have to be merged. They are contingent on the construct itself... they don't have a part in its formation
    2: That the dual type notation is slightly misleading. For example.. an INTp-ESFj is not concerned with the superid, ego, or superid blocks of an ESFj... but only with the ego functions of an ESFj.
    Well that's ask ourself what the INTp-ESFj ego is. There are background elements and foreground elements. The foreground elements: +Ni-Te/-Fe+Si. The background elements: -Ne+Ti/+Fi-Se. The background is trying to overcome the foreground on behalf of the background id.

    I look at the background as a monstrous +Ti complex of -Se wills that are attempting to bring out the very worst in man's nature at the exclusion of the good. (-Ne/+Fi) The outcome of this terrible potency will be rampant strife that creates a history of sorrow. The foreground's counter to the background is to discuss ways these wills may be harmonized with each other. Calmed wills make for a serene, quiet whole. What is important is to discuss diplomacy between the wills, so to speak. ...I need to think on this more. I designed this theory to work with Model A, not Model B... I need to redesign it but first I need to know more about how signs influence the aspects in Model B; specifically, what they represent.

    I would think that the introduction of -Te would reduce the ferocity of the -Se wills which grips the +Ti organization.

    Edit: thought about this and I think I've come up with a real life correlate to the struggle. -Ne+Ti/+Fi-Se is for all intents and purposes natural selection: each organism has an innate potential (specialization) which allows it to compete with other organisms in the same society. Microsoft was known to employ this technique as its primary means of corporate organization in the 90s: every team in the company was competing against every other team, trying to outperform its "competitors". Losing teams were disbanded whatever their profit margin. Therefore, the potential of any given team was dependent on its performance struggle with the other teams in the organization.

    +Ni-Te/-Fe+Si takes a dim view of this, arguing instead that the teams should work together interdependently. This gives each team peace of mind over the course of project development.
    Last edited by tcaudilllg; 03-13-2008 at 03:12 PM.

  32. #32
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    EDITED MERCILESSLY:

    The tendency toward the id and superid, is the tendency toward the dissolution of society. This is thought of as sorrow in light of the existance of society... from the eyes of chaos and the universe, it is a neutral process, and a return to most natural being... sorrow; negative emotions... are contingent on the existance of positive emotions.. and without positive (that is, the stable society) there is no possibility for negative. XXXx suggests a dissolution of social order.

    If the ego were to finally triumph, it would be because it had dissolved itself.

    also... you say +Ni-Te... (as an example of how you are notating the ego block) but this doesn't express the whole functioning of the ego block... it goes like this: (For INTp) Si>Te/Fe>Ni.. where Te consists of Si, and Ni consists of Fe, and Fe is a consolidation of Te.
    There hasn't been enough attention payed to how the blocks function on a microscopic level.

    If you reverse the ego process you have Ni>Fe/Te>Si... this is the superego block. This is a check on the coherence of the ego block... the information moves coherently "forward" in the ego... its ability to move coherently "backward" (what is called the superego) is a measure of its wholistic coherence. If both these functions are working, what you have is a system of social order which energy is being exerted to maintain. (this energy is responsible for conflict, war, and ultimately the destruction of everything outside the social order [think of the world, and our society.. then think about global warming])

    There is the INTp Id: Se>Ti/Fi>Ne (where the ego is Si>Te/Fe>Ni, and the superego is Ni>Fe/Te>Si)... To the superego, the functions of the id are opposite, in similar descending order (opposite, meaning Ni to Se... Fe to Ti... etc.). This means the id and the superego combine into nothingness. From here you can say to the ego, the id is the dissolution of the imperative for coherence within the structure of the egos existance. This means the Id is the egos tendency to collapse itself, where the superego is the egos tendency to stabilize itself. The id is the longing for return to a lack of a social structure... longing to return to animal man; and beyond that, longing to live in the moment, without a construct limiting the motions of life and mind..

    There is the superid, Ne>Fi/Ti>Se (where the ego is Si>Te/Fe>Ni) ... the superid consists of the opposite functions of the ego...; where opposites exist simultaneously, you have social dissolution. This is the place where the collapse of the id and the stability of the superego have combined in light of the ego.. what you have left is no extended thought process; only a directed adapted, directly transforming mind.
    That is what XXXx is.. An INTp-ESFp.... or an INTp who has achieved social dissolution, is no longer an INTp. There is no ego left, it has been disolved... And this was being discussed earlier with ego death.

    The ultimate goal of the blocks is to achieve social dissolution, mental dissolution; and to return to a chaotic way of life..
    This means living without planning, or without saving, or without thinking... or without gaining, etc. Living in the moment, accepting the moment as chaotic.. looking at chaos and being one with chaos; and from there, having a tendency toward the maintenance of chaos... and having no fear to die; living the way an animal lives, basically. That is how it was before society began to grow, and dictate thinking and life.

    id, superego, superid, ego... etc., is a different perspective on the same information. And this information, is the construct, and the construct... is also called the society.


    Now from here you are talking of this thing called "dual type theory", and all I can see it is.. is a statement on the coherence of the construct; and how this construct is viewed (in terms of coherence) from the perspective of the different information blocks.


    My critique on the way you are going about describing dual type theory right now:
    1: you are painting "dual type" as seperate from IM type, where it is derived from the blocks themselves, and their relations to one another. It should be called something more like "development level"
    2: From what I wrote up there, I have the impression there will be a number of dual type notations which cannot exist, or there will be a number of dual types which are notated differently, but are expressing the same information dynamics.. for example, ego says XXXX... superid says YYYY..... they mean the same thing, said from opposite "sides". Like.. an INTp-ENFj may be the same thing as an INTp-ISTj. There is a better way of notating development of the persons construct... which talks about the blocks themselves more directly.
    3: The function dynamics of the dual type theory.. remain vague and undefined
    4: At first glance it would seem possible to be developed in certain areas, and underdeveloped in other areas... meaning a person could be multiple dual types. If that is true, i can see dual type theory being useful for describing characteristics of a type from different perspectives of their development.. but not pinning a particular type into a dual type






    Change of subject.
    I am thinking INTp-Te has function blocks like this:
    Ne>Fi/Fe>Ni ego
    Si>Te/Ti>Se superid
    Ni>Fe/Fi>Ne superego
    Se>Ti/Te>Si id

    Perceptions of Ne potential change inform an Fi internal imperative for their achievement. These Fi imperatives are seen as an array of possible Fe states of being, the most relevent of which is adopted into immediate consciousness as a singular Fe impression. This Fe state of affairs dictates its Ni possibilities of change preceding.
    And that INTp-Te has Te as their primary superid function... similar to how an INTp-Ni has Fi as its primary superid function... INTj-Ti has Si as its primary superid function, etc. The illusion INTp-Te has thinking in its ego function, comes from the dual introverted nature of its ego.



    Fi to Fe takes the place of Te to Fe... Te is pushed into the superid block, and becomes a reactive process instead of a creative process.
    You can see it if you watch a few of the INTP-Te's on this forum... they have a defensive thinking; the purpose of it is limit the scope of their vision, and confine their system to the Fi impression... this confinement is why they are known as the "experts" (see subtype descriptions recently posted)... and the word defines the type well.

    This is comin from thinking of four processes present in the ego (i.e. Si>Te/Fe>Ni) as opposed to two (Te/Ni).... where the first is the content of the second... the third is the content of the fourth... etc.
    It creates a "transfer session" which didn't exist before; or hadn't been explored before... between the second and third functions in the equation.. where an array of Te impressions is consolidated into a Fe impression, for example..
    If Te/Fe is possible, Fi/Fe is possible at this point... where Te is consolidated into Fe... Fi takes the opposite approach: instead of bein consolidated.. the initial Fi function is limited in scope, broken down into a Fe impression.
    Etc.
    It is worth noting Te and Fi opposite functions.. where a necessary requirement for opposition, is similarity.


    Fi and Te have a close relationship... after they have been either 1: in the case of Te consolidated into a Fe impression or 2: in the case of Fi limited into a Fe impression... the information for the dominant process is of the same form. The difference between the subtypes is a matter of where information is drawn from, and where it is directed toward... in one case, (example, INTp-Ni) information is drawn from the world, and directed toward the internal reality... in the other case, (INTp-Te), information is drawn from internal reality, and directed toward the world.
    The information is of the same form, it is pushed in a different direction.

    If you observe the subtypes, you will notice the main difference between... well, the dominant function subtype, vs. the secondary function subtype, is.. the secondary function subtype limits the scope of its awareness and develops a more focused information set.. where the dominant subtype universalizes their findings
    Last edited by crazedrat; 03-14-2008 at 01:58 AM.
    INTp

  33. #33
    Kristiina's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Estonia, Tartu
    Posts
    4,021
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Oh wait, shouldn't this thread go into the paranormal... oops... I meant Alternative or Non-socionic Based Type theories forum?
    EIE, ENFj, intuitive subtype.
    E3 (probably 3w4)

    Cool ILI hubbys are better than LSIs any time!

    Old blog: http://firsttimeinusa.blogspot.com/
    New blog: http://having-a-kid.blogspot.com/

  34. #34
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thank you, you would make an excellent accountant.
    Although I think your filing methods may be slightly off here. This is saying in a different way, things which have been fragmented, but existant, in socionics.. talked about in different areas, different places... this unifies things. Infact.. despite wording things so differently, I don't think any of my conclusions (that is, what it all leads up to) ... stray from a classic type + subtype view of socionics; and particularly the id and superego have been explained microscopicly... the conclusions drawn from doing so mesh with common conceptions of what the id, the superego, etc... are. So I wouldn't call it non-socionic based. It's more of a reformation, then a completely seperate system.
    Let's reword your statement: "I think I'm going to file this in the '"i don't understand or particularly care to learn, so i'm going to ignore"' section of my memory".
    There... that is more accurate. I think you will find it fits best in there.
    Anyway, I don't want your imput. I am waiting for tcaud...
    Last edited by crazedrat; 03-14-2008 at 01:15 AM.
    INTp

  35. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is so much information. I think you've pinpointed the whole undifferentiation thing very well actually. I like your arguement: XXXx is a state that may or may not be a type. A person who had no self will at all would be an XXXx... they wouldn't have any confidence in any of their own thinking.

    Well let's consider the case of the INTp-ESFj. You have a person who has a lot of observational awareness, but no confidence at all in their capacity to actually do anything about it. Their talents undermine their own ideas, so to speak. They conceive, but have no confidence at all in their own ability to implement save that which is conceived of by their conflictor. This actually tells me a lot about my ENFj-ISTp girlfriend, and I'll bet there are some people on the forums who would sympathize with this view.

    At the same time, you seem to be thinking of INTp-ESFj in a different light also. You see it also in the vein of an MBTI-style total cross. (e.g. crosstype) I think it has some utility in as much as you could break it down to the creative duality relation dynamics. By which I mean, Ti and Fe working together, Si and Ne working together, etc. This is, I highly suspect, the substance of effective creativity.

    That's thinking of them working together; however, what about when their signs are reversed? In that case, you'd end up in states of chronic neuroticism. Jung talked a lot about these states, for example the Fe dominant who becomes shallow and crass, the supermodel who exploits their Fe charms on behalf of obtaining objective ends and intentions. (or as they say, "pride goeth before the fall") It would be a decent idea to take a closer look at these.

  36. #36
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post

    That's thinking of them working together; however, what about when their signs are reversed? In that case, you'd end up in states of chronic neuroticism. Jung talked a lot about these states, for example the Fe dominant who becomes shallow and crass, the supermodel who exploits their Fe charms on behalf of obtaining objective ends and intentions. (or as they say, "pride goeth before the fall") It would be a decent idea to take a closer look at these.
    I think that would be a matter of developmental level, and what you are calling dual type theory. Where either the id or the superego is dominating the ego; or is coherent in light of the ego... the superid is only partially coherent; as a whole it is incoherent.
    INTp-Ni
    Ego: Si>Te/Fe>Ni
    Superid: Ne>Fi/Ti>Se
    Id: Se>Ti/Fi>Ne
    Superego: Ni>Fe/Te>Si

    If the ego is being dominated by the id, it can be said the construct of the ego is perpetually "reduced" (examine the functions of these blocks relative to one another; and the transfer between .. for example, Fi & Fe... same function with an E/I difference.. is a reduction process, as described earlier; Fi to Fe, means from an array of Fe impressions (Fi), you are selecting a single Fe impression. Fe to Fi, means functioning within a Fe impression, you are assigning this as the limit of your awareness Fi; and this is a reductionary process relative to the predecing role of Fi in transformation, compared with Fe)
    When the ego is: id coherent & superego incoherent, the superid is partially coherent in the following manner: Ne>Fi/Ti>Se (the superid) is a measure of the coherence of Se>Ti/Fi>Ne (the id); & the superid now functions the same way the superego functions relative to the ego... The superid becomes a check on the maintenance of the id. The id becomes a self-perpetuating construct.... & the superid is an imperative for the maintenance of this dissolution. It creates the imperative to perpetually dissolve the ego. As long as the ego remains incoherent in relation to the superego, this imperative for dissolution exists. This creates a state of perpetual dissolution... ; up until the ego reconciles the id with the superego, & XXXx is achieved...
    In this state, the superid is incoherent relative to the superego. It is resisting being "reduced" as a construct: Ni/Fe>Te/Si superego, relative to Ne/Fi>Ti>Se superid.

    Superid here, as a construct, is something which tells the ego it has to dissolve itself. It is justification for destruction; & even more, the imperative for destruction
    Last edited by crazedrat; 03-15-2008 at 10:18 PM.
    INTp

  37. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    I think that would be a matter of developmental level, and what you are calling dual type theory; where either the id or the superego is dominating the ego... the superid is only partially formed, and incoherent.
    That's not what I called dual-type theory.

  38. #38
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That is what I call your dual type theory. If you are thinking it is something else... there is probably two things happening.
    1: we do not understand eachother
    2: we have different problems to solve, and different assumptions; and from there different solutions


    &3: You can have your theory and I will have mine. I am just expressing how I was interpreting what you were saying.. maybe to open the door for you to provide insightful imput which would help me connect what you are saying with what I am thinking.

    &4: when an INTp and an INTj try and work together on something like this, the first thing which happens... is there is a long, long, long discussion trying to reconcile one anothers language
    INTp

  39. #39
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    with your dual type theory.. It is a matter of what construct your functions are working in. And that you can look at a construct, and if the correct information presents itself to you (namely, the information is in a remote form), have an XXXx process happening.. where you are, for example, an INTp; but the information is coherent from every form... if you are looking at things from an ESFjs eyes... if things are shown to you, step by step; and the construct is created, step by step, as an ESFj construct... it remains coherent as an ESFj construct: and looking at it, you have something close to an XXXx process.
    You are XXXx within a limited sense; within a limited construct...
    (Although from what I can see an INTp-ESFp is XXXx, an INTp-ESFj is a superego dominant ego... that is another issue.)

    This doesn't say anything, from what I can see, about the person as a whole... it is limited to the information observed
    Moreso, it still seems a matter of developmental level of the particular construct being examined...: where I can look at an ESFj construct... in INTp terms... and this construct now has a high developmental level. It is innately coherent in ESFj terms, and now it is examined in INTp terms.... through the examination process we develop a fairly coherent system. But if an ESFj looked at it, the cross reference effect wouldn't be occuring... they wouldn't reach as close to XXXx as an INTp observing the system, within the context of that system.

    ....
    Again, That is all a matter of what you are looking at.. and it will change, it is limited to the information being examined.

    This doesn't mean there may not be a "dominant developmental level" of a persons.. "dominant construct"
    I actually think that does exist..
    but it wouldn't be a matter of dual type.. it would be as simple as: superego dominant ego, id dominant ego... or dissolved ego.
    INTp

  40. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    That is what I call your dual type theory. If you are thinking it is something else... there is probably two things happening.
    1: we do not understand eachother
    2: we have different problems to solve, and different assumptions; and from there different solutions
    My thoughts, too.

    &3: You can have your theory and I will have mine. I am just expressing how I was interpreting what you were saying.. maybe to open the door for you to provide insightful imput which would help me connect what you are saying with what I am thinking.

    &4: when an INTp and an INTj try and work together on something like this, the first thing which happens... is there is a long, long, long discussion trying to reconcile one anothers language
    Yes, I saw that happening too. I definitely think you're seeing a different kind of phenomena than what I'm seeing. Using socionics I could emulate your INTp PoV in my own mind (to some degree) but it would be very inefficient. However I will be thinking about this and in a few months your points will probably be clear to me. (although in a different context.)

    My idea of dual-type theory is that the motor cortex of the human brain can have degrees of differentiation which vary from that of the brain structure socionics tries to (from on the outside looking in) model. So you end up with for example, an INTp who may have difficulty putting his own ideas into action. (from the standpoint of his being an INTp who wants to immediately get to work putting his plan into motion) For apparently 1/256 people, that works. For the other 15/256 INTps, it's more complicated, although it's still unclear I think exactly how. That's what we're trying to understand by developing dual-type theory. (labcoat and I)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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