:Si:: Stimulie and Stimulus

[tcaudilllg]

As I see it, is at bottom a matter of relating stimulus to stimulie.

• * If one is apprehending the need of a stimulie for a specific stimulus, the function used is metabolism
  * If one is seeking to provide the stimulus to the stimulie, the function used is exertion

This principle is illustrated by the following diagram:


In this example, is the stimulus, which is observed to stimulate an receptor.

The following is an example of metabolism paired with exertion , used to demonstrate the phenomenon of / duality:


This pattern find expression in the activity of the neurotransmitters which are responsible for the exchange of information in the brain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_synapse


exertion types are always attempting to "fill in" for something. This tendency can be observed in their movements, which may seem "at peace with" their environs. exertion types believe they should respond to the needs of the environment as quickly as possible by providing the necessary stimulus. exertion types observe that if people's stimulie go unsatisfied by normal means, they will seek to make life difficult for others (exertion ), or else seek relationships which are not in their best interest (exertion ) in hopes of attaining the needed stimulie.

People on this forum I believe to be exertion types: [s:c130862394]flower[/s:c130862394] Kelly.
EDIT: did I say flower? I meant Kelly.

[krieger]

Any chance this girl is an exertion Si type?

*nope*

VI pic is in the blog, as are some samples of her writing.

[tcaudilllg]

Could be... I'll need to think about it.

[tcaudilllg]

Exertion type seems easiest to deduce when one has an idea of how the person studied believes others will act. For example, if you want to stop people from doing something, how do you go about it? Controlling people's produced energies is the content of our considerations regarding exertion.

[krieger]

The person in question would let her surroundings know how she experiences the event she wants to end. An appeal to allies to rally to her help, and an implicit way of letting the offender know what she thinks of them.

Example:

Reacting to a person shouting: "My ears are ringing. They're kind of loud aren't they?"

-- probably going to take down the link and these posts tomorrow out of respect for privacy

[tcaudilllg]

The person in question would let her surroundings know how she experiences the event she wants to end. An appeal to allies to rally to her help, and an implicit way of letting the offender know what she thinks of them.

Example:

Reacting to a person shouting: "My ears are ringing. They're kind of loud aren't they?"

-- probably going to take down the link and these posts tomorrow out of respect for privacy

I don't follow. How does exertion let its surroundings know what events it wants to end? I think it's more a matter of keeping events from happening, as opposed to ending them.

Although that would apply for creative exertion types. (I consider "types" to be dominants, after Jung's usages of the term. If you're going to say 1st or 2nd function types, say "ego" types.)

About the relationship to and : I was thinking today that there seems a correlation between their cooperation and the theory of general relativity. This because, wherever you have , you have , just as you have factual connections interlinking the components of structures into objective causal chains of phenomena. One cannot fill a stimulie with a stimulus unless one has the force to move the stimulus. So behind every interrelationship there exists a force allowing it to continue. Easy enough to understand from an INTj's point of view, perhaps... but what about the reverse? What does give to ? The reverse holds equally true: behind every force there is a driving interrelational dynamic. There is no force without need, no need filled without force.

Intuitively, the - relationship is manifest in the theory of relativity: energy -- that is, force -- follows the pathway of least resistance, and that pathway is always determined by the substance the energy is moving through space -- a stimulus -- and its destination, always a stimulie. In the most fundamental case, light is the stimulus, and gravity is the stimulie.

Obviously something is missing. The theory of relativity is incomplete.

[tcaudilllg]

I'd like to say that I meant Kelly/aurora_faerie, as opposed to flower, when I discussed people on this forum who I believe are exertion types.