Very carefully. Lol but seriously I just got a general impression. You're very easy for me to understand.
OMG how did you manage to correctly pin down my enneagram tritype and DCNH subtype???
The most interesting part is that I see latent elements of myself in you, which is convenient in terms of Ne and Si because Ne sees potential and helps a person develop potential in those around them. Very awesome. Now I want to create a theory about how cognitive styles play into duality.
You're welcome. Your response was great. So even though aesthetics revolve around artistic qualities and sensibilities, the basic ingredients of your thinking are principles and feelings. So, we can mix these feelings principles to achieve balance, like a zen feeling. Applying this thinking to interpersonal relationships, we can mix the aesthetic principles and feelings of the world to create collective harmony. This makes a surprising amount of sense to me. It looks like you're high the H factor of DCNH. It also sounds like your enneagram tritype is 296. My cognitive style? I tend to interpret the world in terms of how one thing effects another, and what conditions have to be met to achieve specific affects. Like in the thread I titled "Socionics Causing Relativism", I saw that socionics provides a condition for people to see things through the lens of relativism. Also, when I try to develop solutions for problems, I tend to devise one principle or idea that will achieve a lasting, overarching impact through time and space. And now that I think about it, it makes a lot of sense why this style would be compatible with your style. I try to create things that yield maximum payoff, and if those things hold an aesthetic principle for you to incorporate, then it saves you a substantial amount of work. But yes, to give you an example, when I first entered the field of cyber-security, all I wanted to do was develop an everlasting security models that would do exactly what they were intended - whether the models were philosophical or practical, it didn't matter. Ne and Te probably work together to achieve a new kind of impact. Ti is heavily involved, too. Don't worry about the time. Each response is worth the wait. I find it extremely easy to talk to you. Do you find it easy to talk to me?
Thank you! To answer your questions: I know that some people describe Si in terms of comfort, harmony or even physical sensations. But I don't think that's true. At least for me, it's more about aesthetics. I think aesthetic is the right word to use. I'm not talking about just the physical attributes of an object here. The word "aesthetic" is defined in the dictionary as " a set of principles underlying the work of a particular artist or artistic movement." And yes, I do think of myself as an artist in that sense. I find there is beauty everywhere, and that you only need to look. I think it's difficut to separate Si from Fi as they're both 4D functions for me. This seems to make sense as well, because Si/Ti SLI seems to have a different cognitive style. I primarily see myself as an artist with my own "aesthetic." I'm aware of what I like and don't like, but not necessarily in an Fi kind of way. The sensations need not be physical either they can be mental or psychological. I "feel" things, like the atmosphere of a room, someone's dislike of me, the stress I have to work under, etc. Another comparison I can make, I'm a control engineer of my own mind. I'm always striving to keep an equilibrium, a constant state. While I don't like to be deprived, I don't like excess either, and there is a balance to it, I think. I want things to be "unified" to have the zen feeling. Like, if I'm the artist, I want to become a part of the painting. I want to recognize my sense of aesthetic in the world around me and I want to become part of it. That way I can "belong" to the world. When I connect with people, I want to match their "aesthetic" so that we can all become one in the end. I think this is what makes me good at reading people. I am so attuned to changes in my environment, like a good control system. I'm not sure if this is abstract or concrete. I think, I would say, it's an abstraction of the concrete. I don't think in terms of cause and effect, that idea is so bizarre to me. I'm very present, and in the moment. Yes, my thinking isn't very rigid, but I wished it were. And thank you for the compliment <3 Can you tell me something about your cognitive style. And I'm sorry it takes so long to respond. I have to think hard about this stuff to be able to answer. It's so hard to pin down because the inside of my head doesn't make much sense...
Thank you, I appreciate it. It does seem like you have that style. Specific questions: when you synthesize information, what's it usually about? Is it really abstract? Is it concrete? How does the synthesis even happen? It's hard for me to even wrap my head around because I mostly think in terms of cause and effect, and I'm very terrible and synthesizing information. So I'm trying to figure out what causes your way of thinking. FWIW, I think your kind of cognition has its perks in that it combines opposites; even if someone convinces you of something stupid, some other element will be mixed in to prevent rigidity in your thinking. You probably find a way out of old modes of thinking through an opposing viewpoints. You seem really smart to me.
Okay so I went through the link you sent me. It was a bit difficult to figure this out but here's the stuff I relate to: "The essential distinguishing feature of the Dialectical style, is a view of the universe as a unified struggle of opposites. In speech it often uses syntactic constructions "if-then-else", the predictive branches of a developing process." I had to really think hard about what this means. But it's true I do talk like that, and I can definitely take extremist views. I have had people tell me "those aren't the only two options." But aside from this, I'm not exactly sure what else this means. "Dialectical cognition is born from the colliding flow and counterflow of thought, the consciousness and unconsciousness. Thinkers of this style are characterized by an express inclination towards the synthesis of opposites, the removal of contradictions, which they so keenly perceive." This is true. If I'm presented with one position in debate, I'm interested in knowing what the opposition is. I sort of strive to create harmony, if that makes sense. I want everything to converge at a single point. As for the rest, I do tend to think algorithmically. And I assumed most people did as well? It's easier to synthesize information like that. "Algorithmics suffer from difficulty in making choices and embracing unambiguous decisions." This is so true for me. "From a psychological point of view, an unstable oscillating psyche is fertile ground for suggestibility" I'm not too sure if this is what it means, but I am prone to manipulation. I kind of need a "core" or something to hold on to, but even that can be changed. I can change belief systems easily and I have been "brainwashed" before as well. It's not that hard. Typically I place a lot of trust on the people who try to educate me. I often feel like I'm stupid and I can't really figure things out on my own. Because it's so easy to just abandon one perspective and take up another. Do you have any specific questions?
At first, I was puzzled about your conclusion that ethical types have to keep things going, but now that I think about it, you have a strong point. You'd think that extraverts would seek energy from relationships, but it's the ethical type that desires interpersonal harmony. Harmony requires some amount of contact. Additionally, SEIs in particular bring stability to the table and anchor things with what I'd call "homeostasis." Si. Comparatively, they have to rein in the more distractable Ne dom and bring the relationship home, so to speak, if they intend to keep things going. Lol don't trust the too weird to be true types, even if they are ILE. I had a friend who was probably LSI, but he was a pathological liar. Despite how imaginative ILE can be, pathological lying is a different cluster of things to watch out for. I mean, ILE does tend to bring out the weirdest shit possible, however improbable. But if it's not logical, just disregard it. You don't want to waste your time with someone who's too busy creating a network of lies to pay attention to you.
I wanted to ask you about your cognition. So, Gulenko says that SEI has "Dialectical Algorithmic Cognition", which is described here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-Gulenko I have experience with this form of cognition as it relates to EIE and ILI, but not so much SEI. Assuming the description fits for you, could you describe how this happens in your own mind?
The way you describe your lazy friend sounds a hell of a lot like me when I was going through school. Sure, sometimes I took leadership positions when I was the best fit, but for the most part I just generated ideas and let others sort out the odds and ends. For example, during my junior year, I came up with this idea of a Jackalope trap, which of course, was presented as though Jackalopes were real creatures, capable of being lured by whiskey and cheese. Now that I think about it, the girl who worked with me on that project was probably Alpha SF, lol. But I'm sorry your friend didn't take more initiative. You say you kept following your crush around - that's what I love about SEIs; they're dedicated and loyal. My senior year of high school, I dated an SEI who went to the church I attended, and she seemed to express traits of stability and dedication. To my own detriment, I had a shallow outlook, and dropped the ball because I didn't find her physically attractive. However, in hindsight, I think she would have made for a very devoted partner because she stuck around long after I flaked out. She often made her presence felt on social media for what seemed like months. Her consistency in this regard seemed almost to a fault because she wasted a lot of time not knowing to judge me for the flake I was. I, however, should have been more upfront with her about what I wanted. As a side note, she seemed to really enjoy listening to my abstract ramblings about the movie we watched. It was District 9. More amazingly, she seemed very gracious, despite how unreliable I was. No resentment or anything. Retrospectively, we would have made a great couple, based on the comfort level. Embarrassing when rumors like that start going around, huh? In first grade, my best friend interrogated me about the crush I had. I placed my trust in him, told him, and he immediately ran off to inform the entire world. You were smart not to give your roommate the real name of your crush. Also smart to turn the situation to your advantage, as it started to involve the ILE.
