-
Angel of Lightning
Here's what I'm thinking at present (after reading Krig's post)...
Process: Consider many types simultaneously
Result: Consider one type at a time
Positivist: Comes to a final answer
Negativist: Constantly reconsidering
Static/Dynamic just seems like the Reininization of those dichotomies at this point. Dynamic is when the initial spread matches the final spread (many-many or one-one), whereas Static is where it doesn't (holographic - considering one type at a time to arrive at a set of probabilities, cause-effect - considering many types at once to come to one conclusion).
(The effect of Krig's post here was the process/result distinction)
EDIT: The Positivist/Negativist distinction here is uncomfortably similar to the "I know I don't really understand the theory"/"I understand the theory well" distinction.
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
Ti centric
I think the impact of thinking style should not be overstated. It is a relatively difficult to quantify phenomenon compared to several other things in socionics. I would expect temperament and club to have a far greater impact on the way a person reaches their self-typing than thinking style.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules