Holographic Thinking

[strrrng]

it's kind of like sizing up an idea/situation/etc. as inherently different than, and disconnected from, every other thing, so that the most relevant aspects are captured. vortex complements this by synthesizing things based on assumed relevance.

[krieger]

Result is often described as "multi-tasking". The thing is, depending on whether you're talking about Positive/Result/Dynamic or Negative/Result/Static, the exact way in which the person multitasks can differ greatly.

I think Positive/Result/Dynamic most conforms to the obvious interpretation of the term. It is all about the person making very quick movements and being in a constant way active while not "investing" deeply in any single movement so that s/he can retreat from the activity almost instantly after initiating it.

Negative/Result/Static, though, is about simply not acting. Positioning yourself strategically and waiting until the right moment to move arrives. This is not multitasking so much as it is simply being ready.

The common factor between the two is the lack of investment in any single activity or goal, which allows the constant tailoring of one's course.

ah i see what you mean about control and small changes of course. i can picture it. what about the thought process? it's easy for me to understand cause and effect, vortex, and dialectic thinking, but i can't quite wrap my mind around holographic. also, there was something somewhere about how holographic thinkers will discard things or something like that...i'd like to know more about this ring of supervision.

One thing I think characterizes the thought process is that it spends more time on the stage of "learning to understand" a problem (or subject matter or environment or... etc). Basically it spends a lot of time familiarizing itself with the topic. Once this familiarization stage is completed, it can act very quickly and decisively in that particular environment, but it becomes difficult to attain the same level of control in any new endeavor. Positive/Process types on the other hand sort of "rush" to materialize their understanding, so they reach the point at which they can decide quicker, but they don't ever get to the point where a topic is "familiar" to them. This means that they need to keep making an large effort no matter how familiar they are with the subject in question.

Negative/Result is all about reaching that state of familiarity where a very relaxed kind of control is possible, but one needs to make a big effort to get there.

Negative/Result: slow to understand, very relaxed control once familiar with the topic
Positive/Process: quick to understand, pretty much never reaches state of relaxation and keeps making the maximum effort

[Blaze]

One thing I think characterizes the thought process is that it spends more time on the stage of "learning to understand" a problem (or subject matter or environment or... etc). Basically it spends a lot of time familiarizing itself with the topic. Once this familiarization stage is completed, it can act very quickly and decisively in that particular environment, but it becomes difficult to attain the same level of control in any new endeavor. Positive/Process types on the other hand sort of "rush" to materialize their understanding, so they reach the point at which they can decide quicker, but they don't ever get to the point where a topic is "familiar" to them. This means that they need to keep making an large effort no matter how familiar they are with the subject in question.

Negative/Result is all about reaching that state of familiarity where a very relaxed kind of control is possible, but one needs to make a big effort to get there.

Negative/Result: slow to understand, very relaxed control once familiar with the topic
Positive/Process: quick to understand, pretty much never reaches state of relaxation and keeps making the maximum effort

interesting. sounds very intj. does this apply to the rest of the ring of supervision? i can see the waiting and watching with all the types in this ring, where is the discarding? they discard that which is unfamiliar? and the term holographic, does this refer to their need for a thorough, transparent understanding of a thing? and, how does this differ between the ethicals and logicals of this supervision ring?

i am definitely positive. i can't wait too long or i become bored and will lose motivation for action. it's almost like i need to be a little confused so i am motivated to quench the quest for knowledge. once i feel like i know or understand, i become bored on and unmotivated and won't do productive work.

[krieger]

interesting. sounds very intj. does this apply to the rest of the ring of supervision?

Probably to a lesser extent, but what I wrote is all based on my understanding of Accepting/Creating and +/-. It follows directly from my interpretations of the terms.

Accepting/Creating and +/- are both processes with a beginning and end, or more accurately put, a primitive state and an advanced one. The primitive state is a state of preparation, the advanced state one of action and appliance.

Accepting/Creating seems to be the process that preceeds +/-. So Accepting/Creating is also a bit like a preparation state to +/-. Accepting/Creating has more to do with learning to understand a situation and +/- more with working with the situation from one's understanding.

In Result types, the two processes are oppositely aligned. What is advanced in one is primitive in the other and vice versa. This basically means that the Result types extensively prepare first for what is a primitive state in the other process. They are constantly working on teaching themselves to get the preparation in the later process done as well as possible.

In Process types, the two process are aligned, so what is primitive in one is also primitive in the other. So this means the preparation is immediately followed by an appliance.

Where Result types can only start on the +/- process until the Accepting/Creating process is done, Process types can start on +/- immediately because it runs on the same track as Accepting/Creating. The tradeoff is that - function is Creating (taking effort), so there is no comfortable slide downward from there. It's a mentally intensive activity where Result gets an easy break.

ps. I base most of this on a comparison of my working habits with those of ISTjs and ENTps

[Blaze]

understood, even if it is rather abstract. not sure what you mean in describing a transition from accepting/creating to +/-. although i have not paid a lot of attention to the subtheory of +/-.

i have thought that progress moves from alpha irrationals, to beta rationals, to gamma irrationals, to delta rationals....then to delta irrationals, to gamma rationals, to beta irrationals, and finally to alpha rationals. that this is the complete cycle of information development and social progress. that there is a jump in the supervision/benefit rings that occurs in delta. that the age of delta is middle age, that maximum social power and civilization lies in delta.

alternatively, or perhaps simultaneously, ideas are born in alpha and disseminated through the rings of supervision and benefit in opposite directions. so, perhaps there is a jump in delta and information is moving across the rings and through the quadras at once.

so, in concert with the forms of thinking: cause and effect pairs with dialectic in the beginning through middle stages of implementation of an idea, while a refinement and feedback loop occurs through the holographic/vortex cycle.

alternatively, or again, perhaps simultaneously, the idea is born in alpha and the left and right rings of social progress give a different interpretation of the idea and push it through the quadra cycle. cause and effect/positive thinking moves faster initially, though, making the initial spread and implementation of an idea arrive in fuller development at delta more quickly. perhaps the cause and effect/dialectic rings are smaller, since they have a smaller space to cover, they seem faster.

[Blaze]

i work right now with a dual pair of deltas, IEE and SLI. they think i'm taking over. doing everything. i think it's just hard for them to keep up with my thinking. i'm leaving, though, for a different job. soon, after i'm gone, they will realize that i've only laid the flexible infrastructure that they can bring to fuller development in time.

i'm interested in the topic of thinking and how it applies to work and how information tends to travel. the strongest support i've received at work has been from an EII (who knew?) another ILE, and an EIE. i think the explanation for this is the rings of supervision and benefit....with the underlying explanation of thought forms. consequently, your supervision partners are very much connected to you in terms of the way they think. it could actually be a resolution to the other problems in the relation...

i work in a government agency that is exploding with new ideas right now, very different from business as usual in the government.

[Beautiful sky]

Result is often described as "multi-tasking". The thing is, depending on whether you're talking about Positive/Result/Dynamic or Negative/Result/Static, the exact way in which the person multitasks can differ greatly.

I think Positive/Result/Dynamic most conforms to the obvious interpretation of the term. It is all about the person making very quick movements and being in a constant way active while not "investing" deeply in any single movement so that s/he can retreat from the activity almost instantly after initiating it.

Negative/Result/Static, though, is about simply not acting. Positioning yourself strategically and waiting until the right moment to move arrives. This is not multitasking so much as it is simply being ready.

The common factor between the two is the lack of investment in any single activity or goal, which allows the constant tailoring of one's course.



One thing I think characterizes the thought process is that it spends more time on the stage of "learning to understand" a problem (or subject matter or environment or... etc). Basically it spends a lot of time familiarizing itself with the topic. Once this familiarization stage is completed, it can act very quickly and decisively in that particular environment, but it becomes difficult to attain the same level of control in any new endeavor. Positive/Process types on the other hand sort of "rush" to materialize their understanding, so they reach the point at which they can decide quicker, but they don't ever get to the point where a topic is "familiar" to them. This means that they need to keep making an large effort no matter how familiar they are with the subject in question.

Negative/Result is all about reaching that state of familiarity where a very relaxed kind of control is possible, but one needs to make a big effort to get there.

Negative/Result: slow to understand, very relaxed control once familiar with the topic
Positive/Process: quick to understand, pretty much never reaches state of relaxation and keeps making the maximum effort

By positive result dynamic I can see EIE or SEE from real life examples

[Beautiful sky]

it's kind of like sizing up an idea/situation/etc. as inherently different than, and disconnected from, every other thing, so that the most relevant aspects are captured. vortex complements this by synthesizing things based on assumed relevance.

Was this for me?
It's perfect and I can understand it well.

[krieger]

i have thought that progress moves from alpha irrationals, to beta rationals, to gamma irrationals, to delta rationals....then to delta irrationals, to gamma rationals, to beta irrationals, and finally to alpha rationals. that this is the complete cycle of information development and social progress. that there is a jump in the supervision/benefit rings that occurs in delta. that the age of delta is middle age, that maximum social power and civilization lies in delta.

+/- is the progression between functions within a quadra in this cycle rather than between quadras. It is the process you describe on a miniature level.

[Blaze]

+/- is the progression between functions within a quadra in this cycle rather than between quadras. It is the process you describe on a miniature level.

ergo, there is a little jump between the supervision rings in every quadra.

[Metaphor]

Hmmmm, I believe that punting as a work of creating another word for deconstructing lexemes in the process is the way how Holographical-Panoramic works to an extent. As you see that everything that you perceive has resemblances towards each other, its shape of "thing"/"lexeme" is constantly shifting from another perspective to one of another part, hence builds a holistic graphic of overview according to the panorama that one has to be seen as the act of conceptual creation to be theoretical in the process or it's just my angle of view that isn't apt enough to understand what one and all can't be seen as the act of seeing the layers of perspective in a methodological sense of "creation".