Explaination of Process/Result and Interrogative/Declarative

[machintruc]

It's because introverted functions are blocked with extraverted ones; hence, one of his cycles is all static types, and the other all dynamics.

One could come up with a combined cycle, like the one I proposed in my cycles thread on essentially the same topic as this thread.

COMBINED CYCLE

(...)

It's not really "combined", like a single sequence, but the two cycles are happening at the same time. Therefore, they are somewhat "combined".

When you think on , you think of .

There can be steps of against , then against .

COMBINED CYCLE

against - ideas vs. opportunities - find a balance
against - stablility vs. efficency - find a balance
against - amount vs. quality - find a balance
against - ethicalness vs. popularity - find a balance

It's always something like "raw vs. actual". This is why Static types are called "Heavy".

[Jonathan]

It's not really "combined", like a single sequence, but the two cycles are happening at the same time. Therefore, they are somewhat "combined".

When you think on , you think of .

This is more or less what I mean. In the other thread, I talked about one function being reinterpreted as its counterpart flipping the i/e part and the sign (the sign just indicating another phase in the process/result cycle).

However, I would disagree with some of your one-word descriptions. In particularly, "opportunities" sounds more like to me than . "Ideas" could be either one. I know what you mean by relating to "quality" but it could be confusing...just as isn't necessarily the same as popularity, even though leading- types are often viewed as "popular."

[machintruc]

I thought of something simpler :

static and dynamic aspects of Chaos
static and dynamic aspects of Order
static and dynamic aspects of Control
static and dynamic aspects of Harmony

[tcaudilllg]

It's not really "combined", like a single sequence, but the two cycles are happening at the same time. Therefore, they are somewhat "combined".

When you think on , you think of .

There can be steps of against , then against .

COMBINED CYCLE

against - ideas vs. opportunities - find a balance
against - stablility vs. efficency - find a balance
against - amount vs. quality - find a balance
against - ethicalness vs. popularity - find a balance

It's always something like "raw vs. actual". This is why Static types are called "Heavy".

I'd like to state that when I talk of the "transcendent function", this is what I am referring to. The transcendent function allows one to acheive this balance instantaneously, at will.

For example, most of the INTjs here have learned to balance Ti against Te perfectly. For that matter, I think we continue to be amazed at how different balanced logic is from unbalanced logic, and the markedly different worlds of either.

Now it's, as you say, ethicalness vs. popularity. (but that's really simplifying it.) I see it more as a problem of being faced with all of these internal dispositions that somehow figure into the great Si scheme of survival, but are morally reprehensible -- downright nefarious -- otherwise.

Finding Se vs Si seems to a problem of a cash crunch vs hedonism. (for INTj) Ne vs Ni is the challenge of a lifetime.

[machintruc]

I'd like to state that when I talk of the "transcendent function", this is what I am referring to. The transcendent function allows one to acheive this balance instantaneously, at will.

What do you call "transcendent function" ?

[tcaudilllg]

What do you call "transcendent function" ?

I've wrote about it on wikisocion
http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...unction_theory

[machintruc]

I've wrote about it on wikisocion
http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...unction_theory

What information aspect does the transcendental function reflect ?

[tcaudilllg]

What information aspect does the transcendental function reflect ?

Depends on the type, although the transcendent function is not so much an element as a kind of interfunction relation. I've reckoned that switching the lesser element of a block with its polar opposite in that block's contrary (for example, +Te base to -Te program in INTj) effects the viewpoint that goes along with it. It also balances the relationship between the two functions because, for example, +Te not seen as creeping stronger and stronger to reinforce +Ti's bid to overcome -Ti's reign. (in INTj) Rather, -Ti observes its foundation in -Te and feels itself utterly internally secure. (external security is another matter, because +Fe is still out there as an energy source for +Ti to continue its struggle.)