Information aspects

[Aiss]

The Information aspect - Wikisocion article is far from complete, and other resources are scattered (like Notes on "The Semantics of the Information Elements" ), so let's put it together in this thread - post any sources, notes, ideas you'd like to share.

[mfckr]

.

[krieger]

(Se) EOS = Phenonema

I think Se is interested in the object that occasions a phenomenon more so than it is interested in individual phenomena themselves. Phenomenology is the study of how things appear to the subject, so it should be associated with an introvert/field function if anything ever is.

[Mattie]

I tried to trim down, swap around, and add a few to the individual aspects to the words that gave the clearest feeling and definition:

= Phenonema, Denomination, Appraisal, Texture, Composition, Contour
= Corollary, Etiology, Determinancy
= Parameters, Schematic, Axiom
= Homeostasis
= Permutation
= Induction
= Essence??
= Coalescence, Evolution

The bolded ones I'm particularly satisfied with, the others could use more searching.

[Galen]

I think permutation and translation seem like very apt characteristics of Ne.

I talked a little while ago with esper about Ni, and she described Ni as "evolution" as well. From what I've come to understand from that discussion, Ni is attune to the way that changes in internal characteristics of a thing alter the entire structure. Conversely, Ne would see those internal characteristics as isolated entities without an implicit sense of cohesion behind them? I'll have to sleep on it.

[Mattie]

I think permutation and translation seem like very apt characteristics of Ne.

I talked a little while ago with esper about Ni, and she described Ni as "evolution" as well. From what I've come to understand from that discussion, Ni is attune to the way that changes in internal characteristics of a thing alter the entire structure. Conversely, Ne would see those internal characteristics as isolated entities without an implicit sense of cohesion behind them? I'll have to sleep on it.

I kept batting back and forth in that, I didn't know what connotation evolution would have when someone read it- If they thought of the Theory (which I did), they might think of adaptation and how the environment or sexual selection causes species to change, or if they thought of the term in general, (which I think most people will), it would be the change of something over a course of time, past and future. So I changed it back to .

I really wasn't satisfied with any of the ones, they didn't seem to click with me at all. All the other ones I could at least see where it was coming from and the words had particular feelings with them... None of the ones did

[mfckr]

I think Se is interested in the object that occasions a phenomenon more so than it is interested in individual phenomena themselves. Phenomenology is the study of how things appear to the subject, so it should be associated with an introvert/field function if anything ever is.

I wasn't using Phenomenon according to its meaning in Phenomenology.

Unrelated, but I do think any serious study of functions must ultimately be founded in their Phenomenological nature.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[mfckr]

Very good idea to keep records on them. For the record - even if I consider your reservations - most of the keywords there are bogus, for the associated aspects, IMO. Some are actually good.

All of this started out as a quest to find the perfect word corresponding to the abstract process I saw representing each function/aspect. I chose the words I did because I felt they described or captured a relevant quality of these processes.

All of the words refer to a specific meaning, usually drawn from the OED (Oxford English Dictionary). Many of these are not commonly used meanings, so beware of that.

Some of them are also highly subject-dependent words exclusive to some scientific or mathematical field. Example, the word Divergence listed under , is used for its meaning in vector calculus because I felt this process qualitatively depicts the way perceives sensory information. Induction is used for in the sense of electromagnetic induction, because I felt this process usefully describes the way in which works between people.

Edit: here, for example, the notions associated with Static are perfect, but the ones associated with dynamic are actually static as well. It would rather be more correct: Change, Variation (actually I see "variable", as long as it's an adjective, yes, that's correct, when it's a noun - with a sense of a placeholder, that would not do it), Effect (s), etc.

The crux of what I see as distinguishing Dynamic/Static, is that Dynamic functions deal with time-dependent information whereas Static functions are time-independent. Naturally, any perception of change belies an awareness of time, which is why I tend to associate Dynamic with terms relating to 'change'. Static functions on the other hand, treat information 'as is' in the instantaneous moment or in some timeless apprehension irrespective of what was or will be.

Then Extrinsic, although I put it on Decisive and Serious, that could be considered Fields as IA - idem with Intrinsic.
Then Objective/Subkective to External /Internal.

What do you think?

You're talking about Reinin Dichotomies, which I think is outside the contextual scope of these information aspect descriptors.

[Beautiful sky]

By you say evolution because things to them are constantly changing?
so is stable, stability.

[mfckr]

By you say evolution because things to them are constantly changing?

Think of how the process of evolution works and it will tell you something about how the process of works. Starts with something simple and gradually compounds into something which unfolds with ever greater complexity.

so is stable, stability.

Sort of; I wouldn't call it stable/stability. gives a more appropriate information framework with which to grows its thinking in, so that what results is more refined and accurate. Without , it runs the risk of becoming increasingly unbounded and disconnected from actual reality.

[mfckr]

Anyway, we're not getting anywhere (you appear as a clear ESI to me), we simply have totally different directions.

Cool.

Edit: don't take it the wrong way, it's just I prefer not to talk, not that you're wrong, or something.

Not a problem. No offense taken.

[tcaudilllg]

The Information aspect - Wikisocion article is far from complete, and other resources are scattered (like Notes on "The Semantics of the Information Elements" ), so let's put it together in this thread - post any sources, notes, ideas you'd like to share.

I translated Augusta's work on the subject, and its in this forum still.