Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 81 to 120 of 173

Thread: The Crosstype Principle: Theory and Information Elements

  1. #81
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Joy and aurora_faerie: do either of you guys question your reliance on either intuition or sensing?
    Yes. I have extremely extremely weak and extremely weak . I depend on too much.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  2. #82
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    ...I suppose if we basic types always prefer one function over the other, then naturally a person who has no clear preference will see a world that was never apparent to us. Unconscious, indeed. ...They think we are the ones who are unconscious.

    Right gilligan87?
    I feel that way. Alot. I'd say about...80% of the time, I feel that way, and even a greater proportion of the time when I'm off my meds (Abilify). Even when I meet someone of comparable intelligence, I get the impression that there's something they just can't quite see, although I recently (a few weeks ago) devleoped a closer intellectual understanding with one whom I perceive as at least being close.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  3. #83
    divine, too human WVBRY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    6,028
    Mentioned
    237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default What is crosstype theory?

    I keep hearing people speak of crosstypes. Is there any information I can find on it, and if so, where?

    *waits for an ENTj to answer to this topic*


  4. #84
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    tchaulldig ... he basically invented the theory ...

  5. #85

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    136
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: What is crosstype theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheerio
    I keep hearing people speak of crosstypes. Is there any information I can find on it, and if so, where?
    As far as I know, it is a highly contested theory proposed by tcaudilllg that describes some people as having certain functions that are undifferentiated, like equally strong Te and Fe. (I didn't really read the threads about it, so that might not be an accurate description.) Anyway, if you're interested, you could do a forum search for "cross-types" or pm tcaudilllg. The two main threads that I remember seeing are here:

    http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...ight=crosstype
    http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...ight=crosstype

    The general consensus on the theory seems to be unfavorable, which you may have noticed from the replies to this thread. Personally, I don't even have more than a vague impression of what it's about.
    NiTe | Socionix

  6. #86
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    <3 Transigent
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  7. #87
    Cone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,717
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    </3 Transigent
    Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)

  8. #88
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'll say one thing: It's a very partisan theory. There are people who believe in it, people who don't, and people who don't give a damn.

    It's fact though, not theory. Crosstypes are everywhere.

  9. #89

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    703
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    I'll say one thing: It's a very partisan theory. There are people who believe in it, people who don't, and people who don't give a damn.

    It's fact though, not theory. Crosstypes are everywhere.
    And anyone who can't see the emperor's new clothes is stupid...

    The burden of proof is on you, not us.
    That faith makes blessed under certain circumstances, that blessedness does not make of a fixed idea a true idea, that faith moves no mountains but puts mountains where there are none: a quick walk through a madhouse enlightens one sufficiently about this. (A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.) - Friedrich Nietzsche

  10. #90
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    I'll say one thing: It's a very partisan theory. There are people who believe in it, people who don't, and people who don't give a damn.

    It's fact though, not theory. Crosstypes are everywhere.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  11. #91
    Cone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,717
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The trick to being open-minded is realizing that not all of any new theory is either absolutely correct or absolutely wrong, thus one must have the skill to realize what has potential in a theory and what does not. It is true that tcaudilllg uses functional definitions that are different from Socionics' definitions, thus if one studies the theory closely enough, one will find that crosstypes works (almost) perfectly in his system of definitions but not in Socionics'. However, the fact still remains that there are some people who do not fit easily into any specific Socionics type, and alot of these people could be found to be lacking in a specific skill set that is vital to social functioning. There is no doubt in my mind that these types of people exist. But the real question is: is the crosstype theory an accurate way to model these phenomena? It is in my opinion that no theory accurately models human behavior, quite simply because every theory misses the social side of things. Even still, I plan to incorporate some sort of working of crosstype theory in my future theoretical developments. Although that does not guarantee that it won't be altered beyond recognition...
    Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)

  12. #92
    divine, too human WVBRY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    6,028
    Mentioned
    237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Why is it so unpopular? Does it encourage you to eat baies or something? Or is tcaulding just a bad salesman of his own ideas("in fact it is not a theory, crosstypes are everywhere")?


  13. #93
    MysticSonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,993
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's unpopular because it's meeting the traditional opposistion from whatever would be the orthodoxy, and because a large majority of people just don't care.
    "To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"

    "Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."

  14. #94
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Transigent
    1. What is the point of crosstypes? I think the idea kind of wipes out the socionic relations, and the quadras. Is it just a way for tcaud to masturbate to the idea of "genius"? It is cute that he respects intellect so much, but jeez, tone it down.

    2. How likely is it that something is balanced perfectly 50/50. I would rather just say that someone with a miniscule preference for a certain side to be represented by that side entirely, and that they have learned to adapt to some extent. Like, an ISxp with a 50.0001% T preference and a 49.9999% F preference, I would rather just call an ISTp who has taken care of thier F side. Nothing can ever be perfectly balanced anyway, and furthermore, there is usually always a hidden preference, I don't know if many people are close to truly being even near 50/50.
    Who says it's 50/50? Wouldn't the sides cancel each other out in that case, and be undifferentiated? They had might as well not exist at all. You can call it crosstype, from a formal standpoint, or you can call it undifferentiation, from the symbolic view. Either way produces the same effect: function pairs that are defined by the environment, not by internal will.

  15. #95
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    We all use all of the functions.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  16. #96
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Transigent
    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Who says it's 50/50? Wouldn't the sides cancel each other out in that case, and be undifferentiated. They had might as well not exist at all. You can call it crosstype, from a formal standpoint, or you can call it undifferentiation, from the symbolic view. Either way produces the same effect: function pairs that are defined by the environment, not by internal will.
    (T) It is benificial that I go to work today, even though I don't want to.

    (F) That guy owes me money, but he is my friend and is in hard times.

    (T) That guy ran a stop sign.

    (F) I am going to run him off the road.

    (T) No, I don't want to break the law and get in trouble.

    (F) I will throw my coffee cup out the window at his car instead.

    (T) That girl looks hideous today.

    (F) I will tell her she looks nice anyway.

    (T) This guy has no idea what he is doing.

    (F) I am not going to point this out to him.

    etc., etc., etc.,

    Just cuz u got equal T and F, don't mean they don't exist.
    What? What is your point again?

  17. #97
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    It's fact though, not theory. Crosstypes are everywhere.
    Who on this forum would you say are crosstypes?
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  18. #98
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    every single one of us. duh.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  19. #99
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    It's fact though, not theory. Crosstypes are everywhere.
    Who on this forum would you say are crosstypes?
    Not many.

    I actually suspect that half the population is crosstyped. For one thing, given the correspondence system of relativity, four sides should be objectively perceivable in any group. (three subjectively) If for every perceiver there is a judge (potentially), then there should be a crosstype of judgement and perceiving for each. (think an electron for every neutron and proton in an atom) This is the potential, however, not the rule. I have no way of knowing how much of the population is crosstyped.

    I suspect that Joy, gilligan87, and heimdallr (who I've not seen in a while) are crosstypes. I suspect Diocletian is also, and Implied, and aurora_faerie.

  20. #100
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    And what do you propose I am a cross between?
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  21. #101
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    And what do you propose I am a cross between?
    ESTP and ENTP, of course. ExTP.

    This person is an introverted version of your type.

  22. #102
    divine, too human WVBRY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    6,028
    Mentioned
    237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    How do you know ? You sound like you just received a message from God or something.


  23. #103
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheerio
    How do you know ? You sound like you just received a message from God or something.
    How did Augusta know? She analyzed her environment, got a wide range of opinions, and tried to organize the apparent chaos around her into something coherent.

    Joy's behavior isn't explained by Augusta's theory. Psychorelativity can explain it.

  24. #104
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I didn't know ESTps are lazy.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  25. #105
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    I suspect that Joy, gilligan87, and heimdallr (who I've not seen in a while) are crosstypes. I suspect Diocletian is also, and Implied, and aurora_faerie.
    what about me

  26. #106
    MysticSonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,993
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "what about me Sad"

    Poor Woody is left out of the absurdity.
    "To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"

    "Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."

  27. #107
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MysticSonic
    "what about me Sad"

    Poor Woody is left out of the absurdity.
    I thought I _am_ the absurdity. But it turns out I'm not even included in the formula.

    And to tcaudilllg: Don't let people discourage you. Keep doing your thing if you believe in it. Just don't expect people to swallow your theories without chewing hard. Critical peer review is important part of theory development. And you should accept the fact that you might be wrong too.

  28. #108
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Like Relativity, which in a sense says that
    mass
    warps the space-time around it, PsychoRelativity would propose that
    the
    ego-based entities of our own minds warp the truth of passing
    information.
    So.... you're saying that I believe what I want to believe?

    lol that sounds more like someone else we all know...

    Truthfully, we ALL believe what we want to believe. None of of can know the 100% objective and complete truth.

    tcaudilllg, my problem with crosstyping is not that it's *your* theory or that I don't want to be a cross type. (LOL if they existed, I would be one, but not ExTp. I'm VERY Si and Fe, with Ne and Ti being the next runners up. Se may very well be even weaker for me than Te is!) The problem is that you know NOTHING about Socionics and do not understand model A or intertype relations or Fe, Fi, Te, Ti, Se, Si, Ne, and Ni. Your theory is similar to someone saying "I have a great idea! Why don't we start using water in our cars for fuel instead of gasoline", and then trying to convince people to put water in their fuel tanks. Sure, it sounds wonderful, but it just simply does not work with the mechanical components of the modern automobile. Perhaps one day they will make automobiles that run on water, BUT THEY ARE NOT STANDING WITH A GARDEN HOSE IN A GAS STATION PARKING LOT TRYING TO CONVINCE PEOPLE TO PUT WATER IN THEIR TANKS. They will have made a different machine entirely, one built from the ground up, one that is far more complex than the modern automobile.

    It's tempting to bitch about Bush and talk about hydrogen fueled vehicles, but this post is not political, it's to explain to tcaudilllg why his posts irritate me so much. I don't have a problem with you as a person, tcaudilllg, my problem is that you do not understand socionics AT ALL, and yet you think you have invented this awesome revolutionary theory about socioncis and you are attempting to sell it to us in a socionics forum, which is the same as they guy standing in the gas station parking lot with a garden hose, trying to convice people to put it in their tanks.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  29. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's not about Socionics. It's about the behavior Socionics tries to model. I'm saying that Socionics isn't a complete model of that behavior. That's all.

  30. #110
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    I'm saying that Socionics isn't a complete model of that behavior. That's all.

    How would you know? You clearly don't understand model A. If you did, you would understand why an ENTp can demonstrate strong Se, why an ENTp is more similar to an INTj than to an INTp or ENTj, and why intertype relations do not make sense AT ALL if crosstypes exist.

    Explain the 3rd and 7th functions to me, or explain how illusionary relations work, or tell me how a function can be both a PoLR/hidden agenda AND their creative function/function of concrete art AT THE SAME TIME.

    If you understood model A and intertype relations and still propesed this crosstype theory of yours... I would be very respectful of your ideas. In the meantime, don't try to say that a theory is incomplete when you don't even know the basics.

    (Can someone tell me why I'm saying all of this??? I don't usually get so aggressive over things like this. *scratches head*)
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  31. #111

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Tcaudilllg talks about differentiation/undifferentiated stuff.

    Basically, I think we can all see this, people within the same "type" have varying levels of differentiation. In socionics theory, we try and explain it by subtypes. Of course, this is an oversimplification and can't really describe the differences, but the point is that functions can be developed at different levels.

    What tcaudilllg says is that if two functions are close enough, then the person is "undifferentiated". Neither one really dominants over the other, in fact, they struggle for dominance. Let's say there is a person who is VERY extremely dominant with Si. It's their most pronounced function, and the only one that is clearly differentiated. Are they a thinker or a feeler? Te or Fe? Tcaudilllg will say that their concious decisions are made by neither. Naturally I'd disagree, and say that, although the difference is not as clearly defined as other ISxP types, either the logical or ethical matters will drive his decisions. It may not be apparent, but it still exists. For example, if his thoughts are critical and are from the viewpoint of the most rational choice, then he is the thinker, although he may not seem as cold, sharp, or direct to other people as "stong" thinking types.

    I'd also like to add that he doesn't seem to want to describe what they types are exactly. He just throws this stuff out there and believes that other people have already accepted it. He also seems to describe more types and intertype relationships than that he could have possibally encountered and studied for himself.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  32. #112
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    IMO, when a person is not sure of who they are when making decisions, it's not because of a function being undifferentiated, it's because somewhere along the way, a SHOULD got branded into their brain, and it contradicts their natural tendencies. This is a result of environment, not being a "crosstype".
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  33. #113
    Olga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Aylesbury
    TIM
    ESI
    Posts
    1,686
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Crosstype theory

    If the crosstype theory would not be relevant to observed phenomenon of undifferentiation, we would not pay any attention to it what so ever. But people actually argued and were emotional about it...so it may be a reason for it?
    I think the hole idea of crosstypes is related to the fact that there are differences within the types (I will not repeat what Rocky said already) and to say more, it throws a shadow over the knowledge of socioncs as postulate -as something caved in stone. Joy mentioned that
    intertype relations do not make sense AT ALL if crosstypes exist. I would suggest to look from a different point of view: could the crosstype theory help us to explain why intertype relationships do not always work as predicted?
    For example, if both partners in relationship are introverts so one of them may start to use more his/her extraverted function to support the relationships. If functions are tools or skills, they can be improved by practice to satisfy the needs although this ability will be limited depending on where the function is located within the structure and how strong is the basis for it's development.

    Tcaudilllg may be right or wrong and so me and many others who propose revolutionary ideas and theories on this forum. Yes we are aware of it but ....are you aware that what you believe in may be not as true as you think?


    Joy wrote:

    Explain the 3rd and 7th functions to me, or explain how illusionary relations work, or tell me how a function can be both a PoLR/hidden agenda AND their creative function/function of concrete art AT THE SAME TIME.

    That is the most interesting point - it is not impossible! I am not in a position to argue this point here and now, i need time to formulate my thoughts but if you have read my posts, so I made it obvious that hidden agenda (SuperEgo block) when developed, plays a crucial role for the development of personality and it becomes a powerful tool for the person because it's development is driven by fear and overcomes fear at the end. However if we talk of the same function (of a different colour or ) which is located in a different block, this is a different matter, because the blocks have got their meanings. The meaning of a block arise not as such from a role each function plays but rather from interaction of functions in a particular block. Soo...there is something to think about.
    Forgive us, rational types, when we talk as Gods, we judge (do we want it or not) and that is why our language can sound "funny". We don't mean to be rude.

    Critics is always better than ignorance. There is no need to take to close to your heart the ideas which taste different ...it may be simply a steppting stone, a little seed thrown into your mind which one day will grow into a beautiful tree of yours or somebody else's discovery.
    Let's have some fun!!! :wink:
    School of Associative socionics: http://socionics4you.com/

  34. #114
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    I'd also like to add that he doesn't seem to want to describe what they types are exactly. He just throws this stuff out there and believes that other people have already accepted it. He also seems to describe more types and intertype relationships than that he could have possibally encountered and studied for himself.
    That's true. That's because it's very difficult to imagine how people who are undifferentiated at all think. (for a differentiated individual like me, at least) Describing the types requires Ni, and the use of Ni is a very slow process for me. Describing the ExTx type last night took me several hours to finish, and I'm still not entirely satisfied with the explanation. I should note that you are MUCH better at explaining systems at work in the real world, Rocky. :wink: That's why I suggested YOU do that work.

    We expect a person to have one function to match each of ours. It's a subconscious expectation and when we don't see it at work we try to perceive a simulation of it by the functions they do have. It may seem like feeling, or thinking, but that doesn't mean it is. Tell-tale signs reveal that something is not quite right, although our minds are unable to tell us exactly what it is.

    Consider, looking at the earth before you, you would never suspect that it was round if you had not derived its roundness mathematically, or seen it from space. That's what crosstypes are like: they may seem to fit the simplest available model, but persistent mysteries beg further investigation.

  35. #115

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So you disagree with this?

    Let's say there is a person who is VERY extremely dominant with Si. It's their most pronounced function, and the only one that is clearly differentiated. Are they a thinker or a feeler? Te or Fe? Tcaudilllg will say that their concious decisions are made by neither. Naturally I'd disagree, and say that, although the difference is not as clearly defined as other ISxP types, either the logical or ethical matters will drive his decisions. It may not be apparent, but it still exists. For example, if his thoughts are critical and are from the viewpoint of the most rational choice, then he is the thinker, although he may not seem as cold, sharp, or direct to other people as "stong" thinking types.

    What's that person's judgement like?
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  36. #116
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    in defense of crosstype theory, i would like to point out that eastern religious traditions have various methods for meditation. and even though this looses some of the subtlety of the traditions, the idea of crosstypes does have some similarities with meditation methods. for instance, concentrating on breathing. for an N type, this method of using S for an extended period of time is intended to bring about transcendence, i.e. undifferentiation. many traditions also have different methods for different people.

    my criticism of crosstype theory is it is not a means of transcendence in itself. in a way, it is looking at the moon without actually going to the moon. every religious tradition has addressed the written word as a means of "undifferentiation", and the idea of a transcendental signifier is present in each. i am unsure what the goal of crosstyping is, as it does not seem to improve upon the socionic model, nor give us a means of "undifferentiation".
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  37. #117
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    in defense of crosstype theory, i would like to point out that eastern religious traditions have various methods for meditation. and even though this looses some of the subtlety of the traditions, the idea of crosstypes does have some similarities with meditation methods. for instance, concentrating on breathing. for an N type, this method of using S for an extended period of time is intended to bring about transcendence, i.e. undifferentiation. many traditions also have different methods for different people.

    my criticism of crosstype theory is it is not a means of transcendence in itself. in a way, it is looking at the moon without actually going to the moon. every religious tradition has addressed the written word as a means of "undifferentiation", and the idea of a transcendental signifier is present in each. i am unsure what the goal of crosstyping is, as it does not seem to improve upon the socionic model, nor give us a means of "undifferentiation".
    One cannot undifferentiate without rearranging one's brain. Psychological function is a biological circumstance. The goal of crosstyping is to understand how crosstyped people affect us and how we affect them. That way we won't find ourselves being completely overrun by our own unconscious. (as many of us tend to be) Being in the presence of a crosstype can be a bizzare experience.... It's important to understand what is going on in those situations, so that one is not overcome by unconsciousness.

  38. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    So you disagree with this?

    Let's say there is a person who is VERY extremely dominant with Si. It's their most pronounced function, and the only one that is clearly differentiated. Are they a thinker or a feeler? Te or Fe? Tcaudilllg will say that their concious decisions are made by neither. Naturally I'd disagree, and say that, although the difference is not as clearly defined as other ISxP types, either the logical or ethical matters will drive his decisions. It may not be apparent, but it still exists. For example, if his thoughts are critical and are from the viewpoint of the most rational choice, then he is the thinker, although he may not seem as cold, sharp, or direct to other people as "stong" thinking types.

    What's that person's judgement like?
    Who said he had judgement? He just acts. Period. Conditioning: consider that his "judgement". Bad memories. The judgements are made unconsciously, by the id alone, based on the memory content available.

  39. #119
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    in defense of crosstype theory, i would like to point out that eastern religious traditions have various methods for meditation. and even though this looses some of the subtlety of the traditions, the idea of crosstypes does have some similarities with meditation methods. for instance, concentrating on breathing. for an N type, this method of using S for an extended period of time is intended to bring about transcendence, i.e. undifferentiation. many traditions also have different methods for different people.

    my criticism of crosstype theory is it is not a means of transcendence in itself. in a way, it is looking at the moon without actually going to the moon. every religious tradition has addressed the written word as a means of "undifferentiation", and the idea of a transcendental signifier is present in each. i am unsure what the goal of crosstyping is, as it does not seem to improve upon the socionic model, nor give us a means of "undifferentiation".
    One cannot undifferentiate without rearranging one's brain. Psychological function is a biological circumstance. The goal of crosstyping is to understand how crosstyped people affect us and how we affect them. That way we won't find ourselves being completely overrun by our own unconscious. (as many of us tend to be) Being in the presence of a crosstype can be a bizzare experience.... It's important to understand what is going on in those situations, so that one is not overcome by unconsciousness.
    the notion that one cannot undifferentiate without rearranging one's brain is not accurate outside of a materialist viewpoint. yes, psychological function is a biological circumstance if you consider matter to be the ground of being, i.e. everything is matter. but what the eastern traditions tell us is that the ground of being is not matter, it is consciousness. we are to start with consciousness, not material. the eastern traditions even go so far as to say that consciousness exists without matter, and it is possible and even necessary to escape biology.

    i continue to be unsure about crosstyping theory providing an understanding of undifferentiated people for differentiated people. if meeting these crosstypes is such a bizarre experience, why hasnt it been explored sooner? strange phenomenon always get the most attention, but i see no strange phenomenon. it sounds as if a crosstyped individual unleashes uncontrollable unconscious forces in those around him/herself. shouldnt the crosstyped individual be the one most competent to deal with this bizarre situation at hand, as the crosstyped person lives in this state of undifferentiation? i am not seeing the need for the seemingly unwieldy theory.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  40. #120

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    So you disagree with this?

    Let's say there is a person who is VERY extremely dominant with Si. It's their most pronounced function, and the only one that is clearly differentiated. Are they a thinker or a feeler? Te or Fe? Tcaudilllg will say that their concious decisions are made by neither. Naturally I'd disagree, and say that, although the difference is not as clearly defined as other ISxP types, either the logical or ethical matters will drive his decisions. It may not be apparent, but it still exists. For example, if his thoughts are critical and are from the viewpoint of the most rational choice, then he is the thinker, although he may not seem as cold, sharp, or direct to other people as "stong" thinking types.

    What's that person's judgement like?
    Who said he had judgement? He just acts. Period. Conditioning: consider that his "judgement". Bad memories. The judgements are made unconsciously, by the id alone, based on the memory content available.
    interesting... I'll think about this...

    But, would one have an ID with Ti and another have an ID with Fi? Wouldn't that just make them ISTP and ISFP who only under the sole influence of their perception? If they were forced to strengthen their judging side, what would show? Are you saying that that would be impossible? Almost like that half of their brain is virtually unusable?
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •