Results 1 to 40 of 50

Thread: light/heavy club members

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,629
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default light/heavy club members

    I wondered what's the difference between light and heavy club members. Wikisocion is actually the only place where I've read of them. For instance, LIE and ILI are light researchers (NT club), while ILE and LII are heavy ones. It's the same with pragmatists, socials and humanitarians, too. Why is that? What makes the difference?
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  2. #2
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,871
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default x

    Heavy --> develop theories, try to convince others, grasp similarities between situations...

    Light --> action, immediate results, solve the problem and neglect theoretical models...
    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  3. #3
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,629
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thanks for your answers!

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    Heavy --> develop theories, try to convince others, grasp similarities between situations...

    Light --> action, immediate results, solve the problem and neglect theoretical models...
    Is this explanation mainly related to NTs or is it the same with every club?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor View Post
    What types are heavy?
    The others already said it, but that's more clear:
    heavy socials --> SEE, ESI, light socials --> ESE, SEI
    heavy researchers --> ILE, LII, light researchers --> LIE, ILI
    heavy pragmatists --> SLE, LSI, light pragmatists --> LSE, SLI
    heavy humanitarians --> IEE, EII, light humanitarians --> EIE, IEI
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  4. #4
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,937
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I like the terms Heavy and Light, actually. They fit my ideas of what Static and Dynamic represent quite well.

  5. #5
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,629
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, they are not bad, but you might not initially know what they exactly mean. Even though I was about right with my first assumption.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  6. #6
    Feeling fucking fantastic golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Second story
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    3,724
    Mentioned
    250 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Interesting how many people's takes on "dynamic" = bad.
    LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”

    Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”

    LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”

  7. #7
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,840
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegaDoomer View Post
    It's the same with pragmatists, socials and humanitarians, too.
    What types are heavy?

  8. #8
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,313
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegaDoomer View Post
    For instance, LIE and ILI are light researchers (NT club), while ILE and LII are heavy ones.
    Yea

    Quote Originally Posted by MegaDoomer View Post
    The others already said it, but that's more clear:
    heavy socials --> SEE, ESI, light socials --> ESE, SEI
    heavy researchers --> ILE, LII, light researchers --> LIE, ILI
    heavy pragmatists --> SLE, LSI, light pragmatists --> LSE, SLI
    heavy humanitarians --> IEE, EII, light humanitarians --> EIE, IEI
    Maybe because some types invest partly more in other clubs.

    LII ---> heavy researcher
    ILI ---> light researcher ---> lighter humanitarian
    ILE ---> heavy researcher
    LIE ---> light researcher ---> lighter pragmatist

  9. #9
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,682
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Light and heavy is biased though, it is implied to mean how much consideration is taken to a subject. But it is all a matter of your perspective.

  10. #10
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,629
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    Maybe because some types invest partly more in other clubs.

    LII ---> heavy researcher
    ILI ---> light researcher ---> lighter humanitarian
    ILE ---> heavy researcher
    LIE ---> light researcher ---> lighter pragmatist
    Sounds not bad, are these your own ideas?
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  11. #11
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,937
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Basically the Heavy types like to directly address and confront the subject matter. Light types mostly only circle around the issues and make implications towards them.

  12. #12
    Creepy-male

    Default

    But how does that work for Socials or Pragmatists?

  13. #13
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,682
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thanks Arthur View Post
    But how does that work for Socials or Pragmatists?
    Heavy Socials will confront the matter directly, just like heavy Researchers. Light Socials will beat around the bush or bounce around the issue, only touching on the boundaries. Friends is the easiest way to picture it, but I think social gatherings can expose the differences also. Light Socials may only want to gauge the moods of people and make sure everything "appears" satisfactory. Whereas heavy Socials may personally get involved with each person, closing the psychological (and perhaps physical) distance between them.

    With Pragmatists, I'm not sure, but it seems the heavy party will get down to the core issue of things. Analyzing the situation from all fronts. While the light party will compare situations and acknowledge the ones that seem important and the ones that don't.

  14. #14
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,313
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegaDoomer View Post
    Sounds not bad, are these your own ideas?
    The specific idea is, I don't know about the general idea. There might be some kind of link to Ganin's proposal that irrationals are more both F and T, and rationals are more both S and N (which was a typing help guide that I never was able to verify). A large part was just LIEs because of Te dominant seem more pragmatic to me and my own experience with ILIs being softies and kind of humanitarian (or perhaps a better word in my case is NF - idealist type) in a detached Fi way, I don't know about any of the other types as of now.

  15. #15
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,682
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't know how to organize it, but everyone is light or heavy something on a two dimensional scale.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    TIM
    ILI-Ni
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Light Researcher

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    I wondered what's the difference between light and heavy club members. Wikisocion is actually the only place where I've read of them. For instance, LIE and ILI are light researchers (NT club), while ILE and LII are heavy ones. It's the same with pragmatists, socials and humanitarians, too. Why is that? What makes the difference?
    I can only give an opinion through my judgements and some thinking about myself and my experience on alpha researchers. I'm speaking as a gamma researcher(ILI critic). I am insulted by other comments on dynamic researchers so I thought I could share my interpretation. I will start with some examples. Ne searches for all possibilities with no connections to the real world, Ni searches only those connected to the real world by reflecting on previous events to predict only the most likely outcome. Ti logic accepts and is comfortable with purely abstract theories with no connection to reality, but Te only finds harmony with theories connected to the real world making it more practical. That hints out the fact that static researchers are confident with purely abstract ideas and dynamic researchers are comfortable with abstractions connected with the real world. All researchers are abstract, but the distinction lies in where the heavy emphasis is on. Statics place heavy emphasis on their abstract world with no consideration of the real world , but the dynamics places heavy emphasis on the real world instead of pure abstractions thus making them lightly focused on abstractions. Static advantages- Statics are not limited by the real world, therefore they have a broad focus on their imagination, thus the can come up with brilliant abstact theories and ideas, they take the mathematical or philosophical approach to life. Static disadvantages- The heavy focus on abstractions makes them unproductive, they also have a high chance in believing and religiously following false abstractions which are light years from the bounds of reality. Dynamic advantages- Dynamics find interest in abstracions connected to the real world thus they have lower chances in believing false theories and wasting time on non-realistic ideas, they connect their ideas with the real world which can make them more successful, they take the scientific approach to life. Dynamic disadvantages- Dynamics can be narrow minded in rejection of ideas.

    It makes sense in my case, I'm starting my journey in theoretical physics, ideas like string theory and relativity all make pure sense with no ifficulty to me, but they exhaust me because they are highly abstract, so I rather quantum mechanics, and I even developed my own theory but I lack the math to complete it because my highest qualification is matric and I'm just starting my bsc physics. So tell me I'm shallow and not a deep thinker. All researchers are deep thinkers, they just differ in what they find more important, the abstract vs reality conflict that's all.

  17. #17
    Poster Nutbag The Exception's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    my own personal bubble
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    103 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    What about Se base types? They are static types and yet they are very focused on the real world.
    LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP



  18. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    TIM
    ILI-Ni
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Exactly, N and T are abstract, S and F are inabstract. My post was focused on researchers, but I can try to answer your question. Se base types are inabstract and static, therefore you use the same principle as with the abstract, Se places heavy emphasis on the real world because it is inabstract. Si types don't place heavy emphasis on the real world, they also feel comfort with abstractions to find total harmony and comfort, things like meditation, music and harmonious thoughts are valued. For the inabstract, try using the reverse.

  19. #19
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,397
    Mentioned
    325 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chips and underwear View Post
    What about Se base types? They are static types and yet they are very focused on the real world.
    Good point. I would say these names don't make much sense but there is no context as to what article this originally came from, who came up with it, or what it is supposed to mean. It sounds like a dual-type theory (tcaudilllg) thing.

    Most ideas about the static/dynamic dichotomy are pretty half-baked at best.

  20. #20
    Seed my wickedness Sanguine Miasma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    7,563
    Mentioned
    321 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think it is more about imposing your pragmatical/socialite views. It is not hard to find Se types in leading positions for example.

    Delta NFs. They seem to be quite unnoticeable to a public. What is exactly going on with them? I must admit that I have very little clue what is exactly going on in humanism.

    I was reading another day about great division between humanism and science departments. The years I spent on my studies I must say that I never went to see the "dark" side. Few days ago I went into humanistic department library. It looked bit different....
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    NO Private messages, please. Use Discord instead.

  21. #21
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,009
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It seems the statics of all clubs are considered "heavy" and the dynamics "light".

    Statics are said to focus on stable aspects of reality, while dynamics on the flowing, changeable ones.

    One thing that jumps out at me is that "light" member of some club is always a dual of "heavy" member of the opposite club, while they conflict with the "light" one. The reverse is true for "heavy" members. This would suggest somehow opposite approaches to what clubs stand for, i.e. "heavy" types could be seen as more serious or intense about it as it's stable for them and they're more attached to it; "light" types are dynamics, who see those aspects as changeable and flexible, but seek stability in complementary elements.

  22. #22
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,937
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, just another term for Static/Dynamic. Static = Heavy, Dynamic = Light.

    Dynamic is basically a catch word for "shallow" in socionics. It hints at the issues without really penetrating into them or addressing them directly. It deals with the investigatory process or perspective from which the subject is seen rather than with the subject matter itself.

  23. #23
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,714
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    Yeah, just another term for Static/Dynamic. Static = Heavy, Dynamic = Light.

    Dynamic is basically a catch word for "shallow" in socionics. It hints at the issues without really penetrating into them or addressing them directly. It deals with the investigatory process or perspective from which the subject is seen rather than with the subject matter itself.
    there is a negative connotation to the word shallow though. even though you didn't mean it negatively. sometimes i use the words lateral and vertical instead.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  24. #24
    Feeling fucking fantastic golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Second story
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    3,724
    Mentioned
    250 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze View Post
    there is a negative connotation to the word shallow though. even though you didn't mean it negatively. sometimes i use the words lateral and vertical instead.
    Better. I use the words "shallow" or "surface" or "package" sometimes to describe what I do best. Such descriptors don't get at my feelings or my thoughts, though. They apply to what kind of action I can successfully undertake and carry out.

    Or, if I am responsible for both the lateral and vertical aspects of producing something, let's say ... I conceive of it laterally first, and then I fill in the vertical components, and I will probably seek help with delivering the vertical.
    LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”

    Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”

    LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”

Posting Permissions

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