The energy model. (Model G)

[Soupman]

Share of spins create 4 new groups.

ILE, EIE, SEE, LSE = leader/linker
ESE, SLE, LIE, IEE = implementer/organizer
SEI, LSI, ILI,EII = stabilizer
LII, IEI, ESI, SLI = corrector/perfector



From : The Socion thread


Maybe "energy" goes from alpha to delta and "direction" goes from delta to alpha. In that case in each quadra the leader/linker always force the energy into the quadra and the corrector always force thedirection into the quadra.

Amusing read but Viktor doesn't understand the IP temperament philosophy - it's not about perpetual stability always being modified, being free to adapt to the world as it may ever be. I'm inclined to move from system to system although my systems are always stable, things do get boring so I feel I should always be prepared to try something different.

I don't understand his ILI views and they don't describe me. Perhaps I'm just not a Gamma type but rather the missing IP Alpha NT, given my own obsession with ideas.

When he talks about ideas for the sake of ideas - I believe that is rubbish, all ideas aren't created equal only great ideas change the world. If the ideas aren't practicable it just means the person isn't a great thinker, the person isn't worthy of the term scientist. I think he likes to cut himself some slack for indulging in impracticable ideas.

To be honest, I do too, but I know there is a difference in intellect between romanticised ideas and the level of intelligence required to cross the bridge from dreams to the real world. It calls for a superior understanding of one's reality.

[Tigerfadder]

Amusing read but Viktor doesn't understand the IP temperament philosophy - it's not about perpetual stability always being changed being free to adapt to the world as it may ever be. I don't understand his ILI views and they don't describe me. Perhaps I'm just not a Gamma type but rather the missing IP Alpha NT, given my own obsession with ideas.

When he talks about ideas for the sake of ideas - I believe that is rubbish, all ideas aren't created equal only great ideas change the world. If the ideas aren't practicable it just means the person isn't a great thinker, the person isn't worthy of the term scientist. I think he likes to cut himself some slack for indulging in impracticable ideas.

To be honest, I do too, but I know there is a difference in intellect between romanticised ideas and the level of intelligence required to cross the bridge from dreams to the real world. It calls for a superior understanding of one's reality.

Aint it the curse of LII that their thinking does not too often have practical purposes?

[Soupman]

Aint it the curse of LII that their thinking does not too often have practical purposes?

No it is just him, it is a matter of intellect, he knows how to dream like many of us but simply isn't smart enough to construct the bridge.

Viktor thinks hard science is "Te" and very shallow as evidenced in his perception of ILI as people interested in light science

[Soupman]

The High IQ LII create profound models of reality owing to a superior abstraction of the world which makes their models worth it in science. After I did more research I later discovered that IQ and creative thinking genes factor more than sociotypes.

[Tigerfadder]

The High IQ LII create profound models of reality owing to a superior abstraction of the world which makes their models worth it in science. After I did more research I later discovered that IQ and creative thinking genes factor more than sociotypes.

How do you factor sociotypes?

[Soupman]

How do you factor sociotypes?

Partially by the stereotypes which can be reliable as a heuristic guess, however, I have an LII friend from university with a very high IQ and he defies Viktor's assertion that LII create impractical and unworkable systems. He wouldn't be a supercomputer programmer and researcher if he wasn't intelligent enough to devise workable systems, which are also logically consistent and elegant.

In modern science and engineering, models are supposed to be both workable and logically consistent. Theoretical research is supposed to pave the way to practice - everything must be reinforced empirically.

[Tigerfadder]

Partially by the stereotypes which can be reliable as a heuristic guess, however, I have an LII friend from university with a very high IQ and he defies Viktor's assertion that LII create impractical and unworkable systems. He wouldn't be a supercomputer programmer and researcher if he wasn't intelligent enough to devise workable systems, which are also logically consistent and elegant.

In modern science and engineering, models are supposed to be both workable and logically consistent. Theoretical research is supposed to pave the way to practice - everything must be reinforced empirically.

I do not think you get it, even if your language is so very cool. LII do not base their logic in practicality is not the same as their logic is not consistent or that they create "unworkable systems".

Do you factor it, sociotypes, as .3 important whereas IQ is .9 important?

[Soupman]

I do not think you get it, even if your language is so very cool. LII do not base their logic in practicality is not the same as their logic is not consistent or that they create "unworkable systems".

Do you factor it, sociotypes, as .3 important whereas IQ is .9 important?

We have subjective differences on the definition of practicality (the term is ambiguous owing to variations in interpretations), if you haven't read it Viktor thinks mathematics is "Te" as well as applied research that he says Gamma NTs are liable to.

Anyway there is nothing wrong with disagreements provided people remain civil, it is not like any of us has got the monopoly on the absolute truth

[Tigerfadder]

We have subjective differences on the definition of practicality (the term is ambiguous owing to variations in interpretations), if you haven't read it Viktor thinks mathematics is "Te" as well as applied research that he says Gamma NTs are liable to.

Anyway there is nothing wrong with disagreements provided people remain civil, it is not like any of us has got the monopoly on the absolute truth

Well you are the guy jumping into this thread with saying that everything is horseshit, pretty much. Help me understand the arrows in combination with the externalities/internalities. Is it a path in the elements a person take when solving something? Is it a never ending circuit that just goes around?

[Jeremy8419]

Partially by the stereotypes which can be reliable as a heuristic guess, however, I have an LII friend from university with a very high IQ and he defies Viktor's assertion that LII create impractical and unworkable systems. He wouldn't be a supercomputer programmer and researcher if he wasn't intelligent enough to devise workable systems, which are also logically consistent and elegant.

In modern science and engineering, models are supposed to be both workable and logically consistent. Theoretical research is supposed to pave the way to practice - everything must be reinforced empirically.

Any of the types can jump off into the deep end of their own type's respective pool.

Your friend is probably a pretty normal LII and person, but still an LII. Whereas your friend is chilling in the shallow section of the pool enjoying the cool water and nice day, Viktor is 5'5", bobbing in 7' water, hollering at others to come see how cool bobbing is. Then he gets a muscle cramp from not waiting long enough after sammiches.