Yes, when it's been converted to energy, which would damage the properties of the mass somewhat...ions also have less mass than atoms too, not the same.Originally Posted by hitta
Mass is energy
Yes, when it's been converted to energy, which would damage the properties of the mass somewhat...ions also have less mass than atoms too, not the same.Mass is energy
No offense, but whats that got to do with the idea that atoms and compounds can produce energy.Yes, when it's been converted to energy, which would damage the properties of the mass somewhat...ions also have less mass than atoms too, not the same.Mass is energy
You said ions and atoms are the same because they have the same properties, or can have the same properties by virtue of having potential energy. It's a bit like saying a nuclear submarine is the same as a daffodil, because they are both made of matter.
Well in a way they all are the same, but thats not the argument I am trying to make.
it sure sounds like it, the way you tried to "greedily reduce" some of the Reinin dichotomies away. even if "things happen for a reason" on some exotic low level, that doesn't make the high level meaningless. chemistry still "exists" as a problem solving mechanism even if QM theoretically supersedes it, because in practicality there's still many situations where using an ion chart supersedes running a QM simulation. reinin dichotomies "exist" in the same way too, was the only argument i was trying to make prattling about high school science.
it's logically redundant and derived from the quadra values and duality is what i think. and i think that's pretty obvious too. you can have the last word though because the amount of time you're investing (and amount of socionics canon you're butchering) against the obvious makes me suspicious against there being any problems to be solved by arguing with you.
There is a reason for everything. QMs explains better what is actually happening. Noticing that a chemical reaction occurs isn't enough to explain why the chemical reaction is occurring. Everything breaks down infinitely, and the more it breaks down the better it explains what is happening on the top level. About the quadra values and the duality statement, I have doubts you even know what you are talking about. What does quadra values and duality have to do with my theory?
I still don't understand your point, I agree, Betas Se is different than the Se in gammas. Its +Se in Gammas vs.s -Se in Betas.
Once again, I am not attempting to explain +/-. I'm explaining that a function composite in a sub-block is composed of both introverted and extroverted varieties. The introverted variety will be +/-, and the extroverted variety will be the opposite. Now about the dichotomies, although I don't buy into them too much, could either be split two ways. You could assume that +Ne and -Ni are both static, and +Ni and -Ne are dynamic, or you could consider +Ne and -Ne to be static, and +Ni and -Ni to be dynamic. To be honest, I do not know what the right answer is. The latter would mean that types are composed of both static and dynamic parts in their base function(in which this makes the most sense to me). If the Reinin Dichotomies are to be correct, they need to be tweaked. Also, just curious, what type are you?
My 2 cents --
I don't know what they have to do with your theory, but they do explain why the
and
types (and their functions) are different in reality, without having to go for +/- or your version of it.
This thread is a good illustration of
ENTjs and ISTjs are different in their creative function that influences the thinking variable. ENTjs and ISTjs are both good in chaotic situations. They are very good under pressure. ISTjs and ENTjs are also the type of people to try to get rid of the negative influences instead of reinforcing the positives (-Te v.s. +Te) as an ESTj and an INTj would do. If an ISTj and an ENTj were both the owners of a business (although I'm not sure that ISTjs are the business people of the world) they would both like to take a lot of risks. They wouldn't be afraid the fire people often. This is how the (-Te +Ti) function works. ISTjs and ENTjs make the best athletes especially in clutch situations. This is because they share a common "function".My 2 cents --
I don't know what they have to do with your theory, but they do explain why the
This thread is a good illustration of
There are over 6000 dichotomies mathematically. Just because they fit into the common ones together isn't what makes them alike. There is functional similarities. There has to be, everything breaks down.
I hate to use Sergei Ganin's resources, because I find him to be rather retarded, but he created a simple code for dichotomies(although it could probably be solved by simple mathematics).
http://www.socionics.com/advan/comme...l?useless.html
Common dichotomies are the ones that are defined from joining two letters of a given type and comparing them to the two letters from another type. There are a lot more dichotomies than 15.
Um, by common I mean accepted. And yes I know what orthogonality. But thats irrelevant. There is still more dichotomies.
No... and I doubt you do either
You're stopping because you don't know why orthogonal dichotomies are the only ones used. You've yet to give a reason.
If they are redundant then all of the Reinen Dichotomies are redundant too. One thing I've noticed about you is you like to keep cutting down stuff, but you never give a reason for it? Why am I full of it? Do you even know?
this is plainly false and thehotelambush's proof on Wikisocion lucidly demonstrates why.
either you aren't visiting the reference material i've suggested or you don't understand basic mathematical concepts like orthogonality. (in spite of your expertise in quantum physics lol..)
good luck in life but i have better things to do than argue with you, like eat breakfast.
You sir are completely dense.
Hitta:
I suspect your theory offers a mechanistic explanation for the "shadow" personality. (sociopath/psychopath) The more I think about your theory, the more it makes sense.
Its very easy to see. Take an ENTj for example, he/she has a +Si/-Se PoLR. ENTjs shouldn't notice the things like pleasure, having a strong state of health, or anything towards the positive side of health. This is the given. Now everyone knows that ENTjs and INTps lack initiative. This is because of the PoLR. -Se is the function of initiative. Its the same function that ESTps use. Due to having -Se in and near their PoLR respectively ENTjs and INTps have no initiative.
But if you were to observe an ENTj with +Se... then they would have initiative and be sensitive to their health, right?
They would have an obsession with peace, am I right?
+Se isn't initiative. +Se is more similar to willpower,counterattack, and the concept of possession(as seen from +Se in ESFps). ENTjs are not the type to overthrow authority (which would be present in -Se agenda types (INTjs are an example of an -Se agenda). ENTjs have a need to know who's in charge of something. They also have a need to retaliate. ENTjs and INTps have a -Si hidden agenda also. They tend to try to fix all the negative issues with health. ENTjs and INTps tend to wash their hands often.But if you were to observe an ENTj with +Se... then they would have initiative and be sensitive to their health, right?
They would have an obsession with peace, am I right?
Your missing my point. I'm asking you, consider what an ENTj whose polarities were universally reversed would be like.
An INTj, INTjs with a +Si/-Se hidden agenda thanks to -Se have a strong need to overthrow authority.
Ok, reverse the polarities without reversing the functions. What do you get for the ENTj then?An INTj, INTjs with a +Si/-Se hidden agenda thanks to -Se have a strong need to overthrow authority.
An INTj an ENTjs is -Te/+Ti and +Ni/-Ne switch the polarities and you have +Te/-Ti and -Ni/+Ne which would be INTj.Ok, reverse the polarities without reversing the functions. What do you get for the ENTj then?An INTj, INTjs with a +Si/-Se hidden agenda thanks to -Se have a strong need to overthrow authority.
Mmm not quite.... What is the difference between -Ti/+Te and +Te/-Ti? You said these functions worked together....An INTj an ENTjs is -Te/+Ti and +Ni/-Ne switch the polarities and you have +Te/-Ti and -Ni/+Ne which would be INTj.Ok, reverse the polarities without reversing the functions. What do you get for the ENTj then?An INTj, INTjs with a +Si/-Se hidden agenda thanks to -Se have a strong need to overthrow authority.
Nothing imoMmm not quite.... What is the difference between -Ti/+Te and +Te/-Ti? You said these functions worked together....An INTj an ENTjs is -Te/+Ti and +Ni/-Ne switch the polarities and you have +Te/-Ti and -Ni/+Ne which would be INTj.Ok, reverse the polarities without reversing the functions. What do you get for the ENTj then?An INTj, INTjs with a +Si/-Se hidden agenda thanks to -Se have a strong need to overthrow authority.
But if Ti needs Te to affirm the real world relevance of its constructs, and Te needs Ti to comprehend what it is all those facts imply....
An ESTj and INTj both have the same dominant function. The only reason that INTjs seem more introverted is because of the stereotype thats created that implys that INTjs only use Ti in their base functions sub-block. This makes it so that only introverts think that they are INTjs. In reality a lot of ENTps(and some other types especially ESTjs and ISTps) are INTjs that are in reality extroverted. There is no difference between -Ti/+Te and +Te/Ti. The differences between ESTjs and INTjs are "seen" through the creative function. -Ti uses +Te a lot to communicate with the external world. +Te brings in data for -Ti to analyze.
Another way to see my theory clearly is to notice the similarity between INTjs/ENTps when compared to INFps/ENFjs. I see a bunch of quad divisions between types. I'd like to call the INTjs ENTps INFps and ENFjs the "originals" or the "uniques" or something like that. These 4 types try to be original and go against authority. This is due to them sharing the same intuition and the same agenda. -Se as a hidden agenda makes types go up against authority or the norms of society.
Expat, I think he's right. I'm always optimistic about my strength (my "endless, unbreakable will), even though I acknowledge that my coordination and general physical skills are weaknesses.
+Se absolutely defines my experience of Se.
Hitta:
In an effort to explain my thinking, I've tried illustrating how Te and Ti work together as base
At first glance they may seem similar, but there is a definite difference in attitude.+Te/-Ti (w/-Ni/+Ne)
All these facts indicate that the structure is poor. All my plans for better relationships are doomed due to this poor structure, but I can realize my potential by exploiting it!
-Ti/Te (w/+Ne/-Ni)
This structure is poor, I know that, but the phenomena are real. The possibility of a new structure that adequately explains these phenomena offers hope that the future can be changed into something better.
Yes hitta, you have definitely added to my understanding of socionics. I understand now. Thank you for taking the time to explain it to me.
What type are you?
INTj. The latter is pretty much how I think. ...I saw a sample of the former in the form of an ENTj videogame character who was described as "walking the path of darkness."
I can give you a link to the game if you like.
if +Se defines your experience you are not INTjWhat type are you?
if +Se defines your experience you are not INTj, INTjs lack willpowerWhat type are you?
Uh? Check your chart...
+Se for INTjs is in the PoLR
Correct, but the inability to accurately gauge will does not mean that you yourself does not posses it. INTjs can be quite willful so long as they avoid physical situations. Psychological will is as important as physical power.+Se for INTjs is in the PoLR
Classical socionics considerations of will extend only in as far as one can perceive it. Will may exist that is not perceived.
The lack of +Se is why a lot of INTjs end up as high school drop outs. INTjs can't finish anything.Correct, but the inability to accurately gauge will does not mean that you yourself does not posses it. INTjs can be quite willful so long as they avoid physical situations. Psychological will is as important as physical power.+Se for INTjs is in the PoLR
Indeed. My teachers were extremely lenient, and made many, many exceptions. They told me they were determined that I graduate on time.The lack of +Se is why a lot of INTjs end up as high school drop outs. INTjs can't finish anything.Correct, but the inability to accurately gauge will does not mean that you yourself does not posses it. INTjs can be quite willful so long as they avoid physical situations. Psychological will is as important as physical power.+Se for INTjs is in the PoLR
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote