An alternative view on information aspects

[Petter]

...

I apologize for a delayed reply.

The general control system configurations are open-loop (Ij and Ep) and closed-loop (Ej and Ip).

Can you explain this part a bit further?

"This is Thinking, mainly Ti." This is why I used the word "refer" because I find it easier to explain input by showing results whether it be via T or F. If I recall the joke: I'm an Injeneer but I donno how to spel it.

What do you mean by 'input' here?

[Rebelondeck]

.......Can you explain this part a bit further?....What do you mean by 'input' here?

@Petter I can refer you to my comments C3 and C5 on my first article below. To better answer your second question, would the second article add anything to the first?

http://www.socionics.com/articles/mytake.html

http://www.socionics.com/articles/int_ext.html

a.k.a. I/O

[Petter]

@Petter I can refer you to my comments C3 and C5 on my first article below. To better answer your second question, would the second article add anything to the first?

http://www.socionics.com/articles/mytake.html

http://www.socionics.com/articles/int_ext.html

a.k.a. I/O

"Extroverted output rationalizes data in real-time; Te and Fe seek to control or deal with external environments, circumstances and issues as they happen by producing immediate responses."

This is problematic since an ILI chess player would use both Ni and Te in order to visualize and calculate future moves.

[Rebelondeck]

"Extroverted output rationalizes data in real-time; Te and Fe seek to control or deal with external environments, circumstances and issues as they happen by producing immediate responses."

This is problematic since an ILI chess player would use both Ni and Te in order to visualize and calculate future moves.

You seem to be assuming that information elements are correct;one shouldn't employ them or any related model to explain a different model, which is a closed loop control system that has N and T limits. Visualizations and future projections are irrelevant at this level; one has to think of the transfer and handling of data at a CPU-like level. Information elements are higher-order observations mixed in with lower order with no particular view of actual process structure or flow.

a.k.a. I/O

[Petter]

You seem to be assuming that information elements are correct;one shouldn't employ them or any related model to explain a different model, which is a closed loop control system that has N and T limits. Visualizations and future projections are irrelevant at this level; one has to think of the transfer and handling of data at a CPU-like level. Information elements are higher-order observations mixed in with lower order with no particular view of actual process structure or flow.

a.k.a. I/O

I have discarded the information aspects in OP, Aushra's information aspects and SSS's information aspects/elements. They don't work. See my new thread: "Definitions of the Cognitive Functions (or IM elements)". And yes, I think they are correct.

My current view is that we should define IM elements/functions via eight different kinds of information. This is essentially what SSS have done, but they have presented inaccurate definitions. For example, their distinction between extroverted and introverted elements does not work, especially Te vs. Ti.

However, there is another way to define IM elements/functions (i.e. your method?). You have tried to define how the functions process information, right? Or, have you tried to define both how and what (kinds of information each function processes)?

[Rebelondeck]

........You have tried to define how the functions process information, right? Or, have you tried to define both how and what (kinds of information each function processes)?

Correct. Unfortunately as I said above, in some of my articles, I tried to explain my perspectives using IEs, thinking I could better get my point across to Socionics but that was a mistake and I could not edit or delete these articles. Yes, my objective was to show how actual movement of data and limits on processing dovetail into the Socionics observations. I thought that the IEs have yet to be studied to determine an actual physical structure/configuration that can precipitate the elements as Socionics has defined them. These structures would be more familiar to an engineer or a systems analyst than perhaps a psychologist.

a.k.a. I/O

[Petter]

Correct. Unfortunately as I said above, in some of my articles, I tried to explain my perspectives using IEs, thinking I could better get my point across to Socionics but that was a mistake and I could not edit or delete these articles. Yes, my objective was to show how actual movement of data and limits on processing dovetail into the Socionics observations. I thought that the IEs have yet to be studied to determine an actual physical structure/configuration that can precipitate the elements as Socionics has defined them. These structures would be more familiar to an engineer or a systems analyst than perhaps a psychologist.

a.k.a. I/O

OK. I think your method includes 'what' to some degree and my method includes 'how' to some degree, though.

"Temperament is the source of the above primal tendencies. Extroversion or introversion is a property of temperament - the former refers to functions that operate from the perspective of being in the external world and addressing memory from the outside, while introverted functions operate within memory and address the external world from the inside."

Let's assume you are looking at two stones, and you are trying to decide which one is bigger. Which function processes this comparison in your view?