Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Model G (energy) meets ITR

  1. #1
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Model G (energy) meets ITR

    Hey guys! What is the deal with ITR and the energymodel? In model A we got the information metabolism thing, strong/weak IE and complimentary. Take a few seconds or a minute and tell what you think ITR with the "energy model" does and look like.

  2. #2

  3. #3

  4. #4
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In model_A they did this by stating that duality is complementary and that duals aid each other. So lets take two duals and put it in this model G....

    Skärmavbild 2017-04-29 kl. 14.27.25.pngSkärmavbild 2017-04-29 kl. 14.31.06.png

  5. #5
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigerfadder View Post
    In model_A they did this by stating that duality is complementary and that duals aid each other. So lets take two duals and put it in this model G....

    Skärmavbild 2017-04-29 kl. 14.27.25.pngSkärmavbild 2017-04-29 kl. 14.31.06.png
    But since the model is kind of based in supervision and benefit rings maybe dual is not really the optimal relation within model G?

    Skärmavbild 2017-04-29 kl. 15.07.33.pngSkärmavbild 2017-04-29 kl. 15.11.39.png

  6. #6
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So at normal duality creative go (/is paired with) brake. In benefit (benefit->benefactor) Management go to Launcher and Creative go to Management.

  7. #7
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The full circle would be (benefactor to benefit):
    Management go to Creative.
    Creative go to Role.
    Role go to Launcher.
    Launcher go to Management.
    Demonstrative go to Manipulative.
    Manipulative go to Brake.
    Brake go to Control.
    Control go to Demonstrative.

    In duality: (Go to ≈ Paired with)
    Management go to Manipulative.
    Creative go to Brake.
    Role go to Control.
    Launcher go to Demonstrative.


    In supervision (supervisor -> supervisee):
    Management go to Brake.
    Brake go to Role.
    Role go to Demonstrative.
    Demonstrative go to Management.
    Creative go to Control.
    Control go to Launcher.
    Launcher go to Manipulative.
    Manipulative go to Creative.

    ITR with shared spins: Duality, Benefit, Supervision, Identical, Superego, Extinguishment.
    ITR with opposite spins: Activity, Mirror, Semi duality, Kindred, Conflict, Quasi-Identical, Mirage, Business.

  8. #8
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    By function seem most accurate. Mirage and dual is surprisingly negative.


    Last edited by Tigerfadder; 05-06-2017 at 04:08 PM. Reason: better picture quality

  9. #9
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ending this one person parade, I will try to apply Model G ITR and make conclusions.

    First of, Dual is still superior ITR. But, maybe ITR in model G is not that one dimensional as if one is best.

    Benefit is suppose to be good. If we look at the diagram over us we see that good behavior leads to good behavior and bad behavior leads to bad behavior.

    Surface interpretation of the descriptions:
    Management; as if someone who deals with a lot of papers and put them into brackets, give right pappers to the right person and just is the boss of what is going on.
    Creative; When thinking outside the box
    Role; Where you put yourself in the society, when in a big group project what part of it is of your "management".
    Launcher; Terminator, it is the "X happens do Y" commando thing. If someone give you a bunch of launcher you do like a rocket and launch. ;p

    Demonstrative; Political, No that is not right! This is the path! You challenge the status quo.
    Brake; Like when driving a car, you just crash it.
    Control; Fake management, you use this area in gaining power and control to yourself.
    Manipulative; You take the essence of this and try to change it to your gain.

    If Management go to Demonstrative that means that you do your management thingy and the other person when bouncing back this information is demonstrative it. So it becomes much more powerful and expressive.

    The end. Someone else can continue to make conclusions from this if they like. That would be great.

  10. #10
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I guess it can be tested? If you activate (/use) one of your function, lets say Creative or Manipulative, do you activate something in the other person? Like Demonstrative? Or Brake?

  11. #11
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In superego creative go to launcher. It makes it not that very exciting yet you make each other do stuff, take leaps, launch, a lot. It seems that each intertype relation can be rebranded some within this new frame of thinking and each intertype relation can be identified by new traits. It seem to work and is exciting! ;p

  12. #12
    Haikus niffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    TIM
    SLE-H 8w9 SX
    Posts
    2,808
    Mentioned
    282 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    The types are identical to Model A's so the ITR are identical. This thread is pointless, maybe you haven't caught on yet by how nobody's responded to it but yourself. I feel dirty even being here saying this.

  13. #13
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffer View Post
    The types are identical to Model A's so the ITR are identical. This thread is pointless, maybe you haven't caught on yet by how nobody's responded to it but yourself. I feel dirty even being here saying this.
    Go away niffer. You never was original dont be hater.

    At some point a figure just keep going on, there is no material to read on the topic lets just try to figure it out. If anyone gain something its good, if someone also enjoy exploring theory they can chime in.

    Im sorry you feel dirty @niffer

Posting Permissions

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