Discussion of Gulenko's Cognitive Styles

[squark]

Ok, will go through this more later and explain better but this part is wrong -

This is the antithesis to C-D cognition. C-D includes EVERYTHING, while H-P strips it down to its bare essentials.

CD doesn't have anything to do with including everything - it just means endpoint follows from beginning point in direct links. Whether those links are even expressed may or may not happen. A person may count by 5s or 10s instead of by ones - the progression still happens the same. (Think if x+5, then 10 follows 5 for counting by 5s as an example. It's still if-then)

HP isn't stripping things down either - what it's doing is making a kind of holistic model of something. It might help to realize that Gulenko is LII. This long inclusive article is a product of his HP thinking.

Edit: I personally don't see much in the social aspects to consider, and would only look at the cognitive aspects. You can see it all with just two aspects. Process/Result and Static/Dynamic or with three by adding Convergence/Divergence.

Process: follows this definition of theorem: a general proposition not self-evident but proved by a chain of reasoning; a truth established by means of accepted truths. So, if you've taken geometry and done proofs - it's like that. You take what is known, and build from that to establish what else can be known from these facts. You're using what is known to prove or show what is unknown. <- this sentence may have actually been in the paper, I'd have to re-look.

Result: Complex structure represented by simplest form - generalized diagrams, models stripped of details. Okay, for this think of all those charts that Gulenko makes and all of the various models his ideas have gone through. You may also remember thehotelambush making pictorial models of socionics ideas, as well as anndelise doing the same. It is broad overview kind of thinking. Holistic. Seeing the whole thing at once.

-Note. People do not stay in only one mode of thinking. They use other modes. When Gulenko or hotel or anndelise explain their models or overview ideas they have to switch into the reasoning mode, showing the links created from the model. This is why Gulenko's paper is so long and inclusive, it takes the picture he's developed and tries to then reason out each part. If he had started only from what was known and built on it - it would look different, much simpler, more like reinin's book. When Gulenko just shows a model, the model itself is not very detailed, it is a holistic summary view.

A very simplified way of comparing the two might be reasoning vs gestalt.

Being able to sum things up doesn't mean you're taking a whole picture view, and in fact listen to any IEE (hp thinking) talk for awhile and you'll see they usually do quite the opposite of summing up, and that has to do with negativist ie divergence, vs positivist which is convergence. Converging allows for the summing up - coming to singular points from the whole. Diverging expands outward instead, going in different directions.