Te - What is it, how does it work? Need Help understanding static vs. dynamic.

[Rebelondeck]

.....they're classifications. It's like saying AIDS is the cause of AIDS. It's like analyzing the lack of immune system in a patient and saying "This is AIDS! AIDS is real!". Well... yes! But why? What causes it?.......There is no limit to what the combination of logic can produce, as that is infinite.......

My view of Socionics models certainly does have parallels with your AIDS statement. Although rationalization can produce infinite possibilities, overall behaviour does seem to be confined within some operational boundaries; for example, individuals that produce brilliant work, but regardless of their intellect, never seem to socialize well, or never seem to manage their resources, or never seem to control their temper, etc. Brilliance seems to have more to do with the brain (faster CPUs or memory access) but people of one particular type seem to run (albeit at varying efficiencies) on very similar operating systems......

Edit: Faster CPU/memory enables wider bandwidth in processing but not so much as to affect type.

a.k.a. I/O

[Singu]

My view of Socionics models certainly does have parallels with your AIDS statement. Although rationalization can produce infinite possibilities, overall behaviour does seem to be confined within some operational boundaries; for example, individuals that produce brilliant work, but regardless of their intellect, never seem to socialize well, or never seem to manage their resources, or never seem to control their temper, etc. Brilliance seems to have more to do with the brain (faster CPUs or memory access) but people of one particular type seem to run (albeit at varying efficiencies) on very similar operating systems......

Edit: Faster CPU/memory enables wider bandwidth in processing but not so much as to affect type.

a.k.a. I/O

Well "not socializing well" for example does seem to have a limit, whether it's hardware or software. But the fact that neuroplasticity takes over unused portions of the brain that was originally intended for some other use, perhaps suggests that those things are more software than hardware.

I don't think there's anything that suggests say, an SEI can't be an entrepreneur, if he/she chose to. This SEI might have the talent to become a successful entrepreneur, but he/she chooses not to because he's not interested in making money, and instead becomes an artist instead. So the question is... why? I don't think there's anything that physically prevents him from becoming an entrepreneur, as if there's some laws of nature that prevents him from doing so (if there is, then it should be explained).

And if you say that it puts too much strain on him because being an entrepreneur is too stressful or something, then well, what makes an olympic athlete who deliberately goes through straining and stressful training everyday so that he could become an olympic champion? You might say that well, the difference is in whether one has a striking vision for what he/she wants to achieve and work for that, or not. And again... is this more hardware, or software? Is this inborn, or is it learned? Or a bit of both?

Another thing is that I don't think you can separate human psychology from history, because our psychology, like our biological organs, are an accumulation of what has gradually evolved over time. So inevitably, they're going to have some evolutionary baggages, like our blind spots, wisdom teeth, tonsils, appendixes and so on that are quite useless and serve no purpose. It should be no different for our psychology, and our psychology is full of evolutionary baggages that serve not much purpose and are even detrimental to us. So it's no wonder that things like love and relationships are so messy, because they're imperfect and because we have so much psychological evolutionary baggages.

So I don't think that our psychology can be fully understood without considering those reality as well. The classification approach often assumes a kind of a "designer" or "intelligent design" approach, where it assumes our psychology is very neat and streamlined, and it works perfectly well like an orderly mechanical clock. Or that it's just a matter of finding such a perfect order that supposedly exist naturally, perhaps within us, if we only looked harder. But I think that's a mistake, I think the reality is that we are very messy creatures, full of imperfections and disorderliness.

[Squirrel]

Well, yeah, it does. And I can do role Fe pretty well for a short time. (But long enough for an LSI to mistake me for her dual - - -)

I thought I'm the only one who has this problem