Accepting/Creating, Static/Dynamic, and Limiting/Empowering

[RSV3]

Process: "where does this go?"
Result: "where does this come from?"

Accepting = Limiting when Dynamic, Empowering when Static
Creating = Empowering when Dynamic, Limiting when Static

Limiting/empowering is difficult to capture... but powerful. There are a number of different ways to distinguish either that aren't easy to reconcile though they certainly are united in one concept:

Very interesting! Just to clarify, are these accepting/creating terms you use synonymous with the 1, 3, 5, 7 accepting functions and the 2, 4, 6, 8 producing functions of Model A, or something different entirely? Could you give concrete examples of how this limiting/empowering dynamic would manifest differently, say between the different accepting and creative functions of an ENTp and INTj or ESFj and ISFp?

[mikemex]

I see all of this as pointless, but I obviously don't value Ti.

[FDG]

Very interesting ideas indeed.

[krieger]

I see all of this as pointless, but I obviously don't value Ti.

Obviously.

Very interesting! Just to clarify, are these accepting/creating terms you use synonymous with the 1, 3, 5, 7 accepting functions and the 2, 4, 6, 8 producing functions of Model A, or something different entirely?

Yeah, those, and no, not something entirely different. I'd like to emphasize that Accepting and Producing are about as misleading names as can be devised for them and in their current form only make sense in a very, very restricted context (apperantly one in which people are seen as transmitters and receptors of information...). If I had a say I'd call them "simple" and "complex" respectively. I sail on conventions when it prevents me from getting ostracized completely, though.

Could you give concrete examples of how this limiting/empowering dynamic would manifest differently, say between the different accepting and creative functions of an ENTp and INTj or ESFj and ISFp?

Sure. But as high as the level of abstraction is you're asking something very difficult of me. I can only give part of an answer.

First of all the background:
Static + Accepting makes Empowering
Dynamic + Creating makes Empowering
Static + Creating makes Limiting
Dynamic + Accepting makes Limiting

Descriptions of each are in the thread above.

The easiest of the types you asked about to understand is the ENTp.

ENTp's Ego Block: Empowering Static Intuition (empNe), Limiting Static Thinking (limTi).
The Ne of the ENTp is all about ranging over ways of understanding things. The ENTp litterally sees thousands of ways his observations can be combined into sensible "ideas". He doesn't want to limit himself, though. Each of the ideas is given the same attention; none are singled out. Ideas are "transient", "underdetermined of form" to ENTps and each individual idea is simply "arbitrary", "contingent" (hence why they love to cite alternatives when an INTj presents his singled out view). The Ti of an ENTp on the other hand is concerned with singling out an answer. Many of the possible ways he can fit things together are bound to have things in common, and when something is common between all ideas within a certain context, the ENTp locks it down as a fact. What you get is: a person who finds out the answer quicker than everyone else using his imagination.

Delve a bit deeper, though, and you get at the ENTp's Super-ID block, where s/he is the same as an ISFp except "weak":
ENTp's Super-ID Block: Limiting Dynamic Sensing (limSi), Empowering Dynamic Feeling (empFe)
What was it that triggered the imagination of the ENTp in the first place? This is where the "dynamic" functions come into play. Like I said "dynamic" functions are the functions of direct observation and direct registering of language. Since Si is Sensing what we're concerned with here is not something abstract but very concrete. Point at something and there it is. That there, not something else. Si can concern anything from a perceived picture to a sound heard from a first person perspective (though not objects themselves that have real life specifications; always the perspective from which objects are seen*). The fact that the ENTp is weak in this block means he doesn't pay much attention to how the sounds and pictures are placed in a sequence or graph. This he largely ignores (the ISFp knows better; she'll tell you all the details of a film after recognizing a single image of it). He doesn't navigate by them, but they are significant to him. How? Well, in that this stuff is exactly the stuff that he is trying to organize when he ranges over ideas. His ideas are simply combinations of these perspectives: this sound goes with this picture, this word with that film - and what do you get - there's your idea; an association network. The fact that empNe and limSi form an Accepting axis with the Dynamic bit being Limiting and the Static bit being Empowering, means that this single observed perspective creates an explosion of associations. This is what Accepting function axes do. The person has no questions about the stuff that was given at face value; s/he simply accepts that bit and doesn't worry about it. S/he does form tons of associations as to what happened behind the screens that brought the percept about.
I'm left with one function to explain: Creating Empowering Fe; a Dynamic Judging function. Remember that I spoke about the ENTp trying to single out an answer earlier. Fe concerns the social/emotional problem that the ENTp was trying to solve in the first place. As an Empowering Dynamic function, Creating Fe is a function of wonder and curiosity. It's something that is there but the person expects the bit of reality it pertains to to be of deeper significance that the stuff that was given to him/her. So this function presents a question, a problem. I'm back at go.

The other types would take me a similar amount of effort to get into.

* I do not mean to imply that a perspective of this kind does not have specifications; that would be non-sensical... The difference between perspective and object is difficult to put into words, but not too difficult to grasp intuitively. A way to understand: to know an object is to excercise reason on one's observations. Knowledge of a perspective is immediate. In socionics: Static (behind the screens) Perception must be Creating (complex, constructed from multiple observations) to be Limiting (known singled out). Dynamic (face value) Perception must be Accepting (simple, pertaining to one observation) to be Limiting (known singled out).

[RSV3]

Obviously.



Yeah, those, and no, not something entirely different. I'd like to emphasize that Accepting and Producing are about as misleading names as can be devised for them and in their current form only make sense in a very, very restricted context (apperantly one in which people are seen as transmitters and receptors of information...). If I had a say I'd call them "simple" and "complex" respectively. I sail on conventions when it prevents me from getting ostracized completely, though.



Sure. But as high as the level of abstraction is you're asking something very difficult of me. I can only give part of an answer.

First of all the background:
Static + Accepting makes Empowering
Dynamic + Creating makes Empowering
Static + Creating makes Limiting
Dynamic + Accepting makes Limiting

Descriptions of each are in the thread above.

The easiest of the types you asked about to understand is the ENTp.

ENTp's Ego Block: Empowering Static Intuition (empNe), Limiting Static Thinking (limTi).
The Ne of the ENTp is all about ranging over ways of understanding things. The ENTp litterally sees thousands of ways his observations can be combined into sensible "ideas". He doesn't want to limit himself, though. Each of the ideas is given the same attention; none are singled out. Ideas are "transient", "underdetermined of form" to ENTps and each individual idea is simply "arbitrary", "contingent" (hence why they love to cite alternatives when an INTj presents his singled out view). The Ti of an ENTp on the other hand is concerned with singling out an answer. Many of the possible ways he can fit things together are bound to have things in common, and when something is common between all ideas within a certain context, the ENTp locks it down as a fact. What you get is: a person who finds out the answer quicker than everyone else using his imagination.

Delve a bit deeper, though, and you get at the ENTp's Super-ID block, where s/he is the same as an ISFp except "weak":
ENTp's Super-ID Block: Limiting Dynamic Sensing (limSi), Empowering Dynamic Feeling (empFe)
What was it that triggered the imagination of the ENTp in the first place? This is where the "dynamic" functions come into play. Like I said "dynamic" functions are the functions of direct observation and direct registering of language. Since Si is Sensing what we're concerned with here is not something abstract but very concrete. Point at something and there it is. That there, not something else. Si can concern anything from a perceived picture to a sound heard from a first person perspective (though not objects themselves that have real life specifications; always the perspective from which objects are seen*). The fact that the ENTp is weak in this block means he doesn't pay much attention to how the sounds and pictures are placed in a sequence or graph. This he largely ignores (the ISFp knows better; she'll tell you all the details of a film after recognizing a single image of it). He doesn't navigate by them, but they are significant to him. How? Well, in that this stuff is exactly the stuff that he is trying to organize when he ranges over ideas. His ideas are simply combinations of these perspectives: this sound goes with this picture, this word with that film - and what do you get - there's your idea; an association network. The fact that empNe and limSi form an Accepting axis with the Dynamic bit being Limiting and the Static bit being Empowering, means that this single observed perspective creates an explosion of associations. This is what Accepting function axes do. The person has no questions about the stuff that was given at face value; s/he simply accepts that bit and doesn't worry about it. S/he does form tons of associations as to what happened behind the screens that brought the percept about.
I'm left with one function to explain: Creating Empowering Fe; a Dynamic Judging function. Remember that I spoke about the ENTp trying to single out an answer earlier. Fe concerns the social/emotional problem that the ENTp was trying to solve in the first place. As an Empowering Dynamic function, Creating Fe is a function of wonder and curiosity. It's something that is there but the person expects the bit of reality it pertains to to be of deeper significance that the stuff that was given to him/her. So this function presents a question, a problem. I'm back at go.

The other types would take me a similar amount of effort to get into.

* I do not mean to imply that a perspective of this kind does not have specifications; that would be non-sensical... The difference between perspective and object is difficult to put into words, but not too difficult to grasp intuitively. A way to understand: to know an object is to excercise reason on one's observations. Knowledge of a perspective is immediate. In socionics: Static (behind the screens) Perception must be Creating (complex, constructed from multiple observations) to be Limiting (known singled out). Dynamic (face value) Perception must be Accepting (simple, pertaining to one observation) to be Limiting (known singled out).

Thanks. That helped to clarify things.