Amendments to Gulenko's Stress Resistance Groups & Cognitive Styles

[Aramas]

Gulenko failed to take note of the existence of two different types of stress resistance, which resulted in him concluding that evolutionary types were more able to be conditioned and simply less resistant to stress. In addition to the chronic stressor that Gulenko refers to simply as "stress," there are two more kinds: acute/critical stress, and infinitesimal stress.

Evolutionary/process types are better able to handle situations of acute/critical stress. What this means is that they are more able to respond to situations of extreme, pivotal castrophe, danger, or stress that happens very quickly and subsides almost as quickly as it came. What's interesting is that Gulenko noticed that the Causal-Determinist style of cognition responded well to critical situations, saying that for them it is as if time slows down in these scenarios. But he did not follow this observation to the final conclusion that handling critical scenarios well implies an ability to handle a certain kind of stress well: that of acute/critical stress.

Infinitesimal stress is the slow accumulation of very small stressors over a very long period of time, or the introduction of an environment where there are many sources of background stress that are subsumed into all aspects of the environment (all-encompassing) -- again for a very long period of time. An example of situations like these would be that of covert propaganda. Evolutionary/process types handle this stress quite well, as we can see with dialectical-algorithmic types often seeing beyond the veil of a false environment where the stimuli are all-encompassing and non-rejectable for most (see: The Matrix).

Gulenko broadened his conclusions on stress resistance in his essay on forms of cognition, and in it, he states that the Holographic-Panoramic form of cognition is the most resistant to psychological conditioning. However, assuming that psychological conditioning depends on the ability to stress a person's mind to its breaking point, one would have to question whether or not different kinds of stress make different styles of conditioning applicable to different contexts and therefore different types. That is, in some situations, people are more susceptible to critical, immediate stressors, and in others, they might be more susceptible to repeated, somewhat strong "hits" of stress over a medium-length period of time. And there is also the situation in which conditioning comes from the repeated accumulation of very small stressors (or influences or stimuli) over a very long period of time.

So, it follows that evolutionary and involutionary types are more or less susceptible to psychological conditioning in differing contexts. The evolutionary types are most easily conditioned in situations of chronic stress, while the involutionary types are more easily conditioned in scenarios where stress is critical or infinitesimal. I wonder whether Gulenko was being a bit unintentionally self-aggrandizing when he said that his own form of cognition was the most stress resistant, because he is LII, and that form of cognition is Holographic-Panoramic. People often like to think that they are strong, because it helps their self-image.


Types belonging to each cognitive style as per @Tigerfadder's request:

Causal-Deterministic (positivist, process, evolutionary): ILE, LSI, EII, SEE
Vortical-Synergistic (positivist, result, involutionary): ESE, IEI, SLI, LIE
Holographic-Panoramic (negativist, result, involutionary): LII, SLE, IEE, ESI
Dialectical-Algorithmic (negativist, process, evolutionary): SEI, EIE, LSE, ILI

And the stress resistance groups (according to Gulenko):
Stopped by stress: ILE, SEI, ILI, SEE
Mobilized by stress: LIE, ESI, ESE, LII
Resistant to stress: IEE, SLI, SLE, IEI
Vulnerable to stress: EIE, LSI, LSE, EII

My modifications:
High-Critical/Infinitesimal Stress Resistant: EIE, LSI, LSE, EII
Medium-Critical/Infinitesimal Stress Resistant: ILI, SEE, SEI, ILE
High-Chronic Stress Resistant: IEE, SLI, SLE, IEI
Medium-Chronic Stress Resistant: LIE, ESI, ESE, LII

*Groups marked "High" are groups that are more polarized/specialized in their ability to handle certain kinds of stress. They are tailored to a certain form of stress handling and do not operate well with the other kind -- at all. Medium types are a hybrid mix of the two, more able to handle their own kind of stress, but also mildly resistant to the other.

[Pookie]

But then why are all the Js hella cranky all the time.

Irrationals >

[Tigerfadder]

Can you add which type belongs to what group?

[Aramas]

But then why are all the Js hella cranky all the time.

Irrationals >

Actually, I've known some rather cranky irrationals.

[Tigerfadder]

and stress resistance groups? ;p

[Aramas]

and stress resistance groups? ;p

Done.

[Tigerfadder]

Im familiar with the stress groups, not that much with the cog styles. It seem to be the pattern of his spins within both these things. Stopped and Vulnerable in one direction and Mobilized and Resistant in an other. Your definitions definitely have a more neutral sound to them. Gulenkos is always a bit simplistic. I would want new definitions of the cognitive styles. Process is suppose to be about processing something, like dealing with wood and shape it for example. And result of which deal with the final product and thing in the terms of results. Involutionary is fine, just cant see how it is changing anything.

[Aramas]

Im familiar with the stress groups, not that much with the cog styles. It seem to be the pattern of his spins within both these things. Stopped and Vulnerable in one direction and Mobilized and Resistant in an other. Your definitions definitely have a more neutral sound to them. Gulenkos is always a bit simplistic. I would want new definitions of the cognitive styles. Process is suppose to be about processing something, like dealing with wood and shape it for example. And result of which deal with the final product and thing in the terms of results. Involutionary is fine, just cant see how it is changing anything.

Process and result describes how the types differ in their manner of thinking. Involution and evolution also describe other details about those ways of thinking. They're not redundant terms, and in themselves, they are accurate.

[lavos]

This theory doesn't work IMO (the gulenko original one, not your amendment). I think the +/- theory matters much more when deciding traits like this. IF it's type related, that I'm not sure. Probably enneagram is a huge factor.

[Tigerfadder]

Process and result describes how the types differ in their manner of thinking. Involution and evolution also describe other details about those ways of thinking. They're not redundant terms, and in themselves, they are accurate.

What conclusions are made out of the cog types? Now more curious. Also if I may shoot a bunch of questions, how do you define stress in this context?

[Aramas]

What conclusions are made out of the cog types? Now more curious. Also if I may shoot a bunch of questions, how do you define stress in this context?

Gulenko talked about the idea of psychological conditioning in relation to type in his article on cognitive styles. The article on stress resistance was about just that by itself. I put the two together, relating stress resistance and psychological conditioning, because Gulenko did imply that psychological conditioning and stress resistance were related by saying that the Holographic-Panoramic style was both the most stress resistant and the most difficult to condition psychologically.

I'm not sure I have a solid concrete definition of stress yet. It might relate to hits on weak functions or simply situations where undue influence or stimuli attempts to impose itself on the individual. Or it could be something else.

[Bertrand]

stress is a result of whenever your preferred methods of dealing with an issue are frustrated (this extends to "methods" of metabolizing emotional information, coping with the unknown, boredom, etc--not just practical matters). its essentially your cognitive strengths meeting resistance and the demand of the environment for you to switch to weaker less preferred, even painful, functions to compensate. the load that creates we experience firsthand as "stress"