Originally Posted by
anndelise
Exactly, it's about information processing, not traits.
Yes, it's a model, a model about how people process information.
Right, people can't be perfectly modeled.
It would be expected, then, that there would be conflicts when actually applying the model to..you know...the real world...to real people. It's part of testing the model, to see how accurate it is, or if changes to the model need to be made.
Also, if you're not bothering to apply the model, nor test it, then what they hell are you doing with it?
Statements like "Si is about observing the explicit interactive relationships between objects" and "Se is about observing the explicit static properties of objects" helps to differentiate what is happening in the psyche.
Yes, on some level, both these information exist within a person's psyche.
But no, they are not the same thing.
When one is consciously focusing on the explicit interactive relationships between objects, the actual objects themselves fall into the backdrop...into the subconscious part of the mind... taking on a 'hazy' quality.
When one is consciously focusing on the explicit static properties of objects, the actual explicit interactions fall into the backdrop..into the subconscious part of the mind....taking on a 'hazy' quality.
Some people prefer one way of viewing, others the other way.
Some people have developed strong mental maps using one way of the viewing, others the other way.
As you said above, "model A shows the information and how it evolves its way to the ego process and back to the subconscious". Please don't confuse the fact that people themselves have all 8 elements nor all 8 aspects, that that means that all 8 are the preferred information to deal with, nor that all 8 are consciously focused on at the exact same time.
A metaphor for grasping the differences of foci is to take into consideration how the human eye works.
One way that we can get an idea of what we are seeing is too catch the details of what we are looking at, by narrowing our eyes to focus on small, specific points. But if it stayed on one specific point, the mind wouldn't grasp what was being looked at, as the sensation would quickly fade. So the eye darts around, seeing detailed bits and pieces while the back of the mind builds up an image of what's being looked at.
Another way to get an idea of what we are seeing is to relax the vision, and take it in as a whole. But by doing so, we don't see the actual details of what we are looking at. Our eyes still have to move around to different parts of what we are seeing, but the movements is slower. The movement allows the back of our mind to pick up some of the details, and builds up an image of what's being looked at.
The eyes cannot do both types of seeing at the exact same time.
Those people who prefer, or are wired, to do more narrowed visual focus with the quick darting will naturally develop a more detailed map.
Those who prefer, or are wired, to do more peripheral seeing, will develop less detailed maps. That doesn't mean that less detail is bad, but it IS a different kind of map.
Our minds build up off those maps, creating more and more complex maps of a topic, or even of the world.
By the same token, according to model A, the conscious ego cannot do all 8 elements nor all 8 aspects at the exact same time. But this doesn't stop the subconscious from picking up information related to the other elements.
Now, just because the conscious ego cannot do all 8 elements nor all 8 aspects at the exact same time, doesn't mean that it doesn't develop the ability to juggle some of the 8 elements or some of the 8 aspects.
As the psyche develops success in juggling the elements/aspects in certain ways, those ways become ingrained in the psyche, until it becomes far easier to juggle in those particular ways, than to juggle in differing ways.
Model A attempts to model this.
No, they don't, not in the conscious ego at the exact same time as the other. Hence why Si is paired with Ne, and Se is paired with Ni. But Si is not paired with Se because they contain similar aspects that will
a) cause a conflict in the conscious ego, and
b) cause a conflict in the subconscious
Yes, people have access to every element of information, to every aspect of information. You may find this "cute and aloof", but it IS part of being human.
When we talk about Si and Se, we are talking about different types of information which the human mind juggles, thus leading to ego elements, etc, which is supposedly what the 'damned model' models. If it's not modeling how humans process information, then what the hell is it modeling?? or, as you say..."What's the damned point?"