Lightbulb: I/E and Creative Functions

[XcaliburGirl]

Has anyone read this:
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel...fo%2faushra%2f
?
(If anyone knows where I can find a human translation of this, that'd help.)

It explains the difference between extraverts and introverts.

The thing that really got me was about how extraverts see things in terms of subjects/objects while introverts see the relationships between said objects.
So when things don't add up, the extraverts use their introverted second functions to change the relationships to fit the objects, and the introverts use their extraverted second functions to change the objects to fit the relationships. Hence the second functions being creative.

(Someone who knows more about this, tell me if I understand it correctly.)

[Cone]

The accepting/creating process is the functional way to express the understanding process, i.e. analysis/synthesis. The analysis process (first function) inputs information, splitting the whole into its parts. Then the synthesis process kicks in (if it can), reassembling those parts into a whole. The whole process is one of redefinition, where you destroy the associations in the raw information and add in your own. That way, you can relate information to your own knowledge. This is understanding.

The I/E difference is probably how you showed it to be. Extraverts start with objects, then supply the relations between them. Introverts start with relations, then supply the objects. Supposedly...

[Waddlesworth]

Xcaliburgirl, I like that you're quoting Augusta, because that's where socionics begins.
The translations are a mess and a good translation requires alot of work, being that an actual russian that is highly skilled in english would know which words are best in which place, so sometimes it looks a little incomprehensible... or very. Sergei Ganin wrote that a good translation takes time, but that an English translation and/or publication is in the works. We'll just have to wait.

But still, alot can be gained from looking at the electronic translations. Also, in another post you wrote about how the best explanation of functions is in Augusta's definition, dealing with potential and kinetic energy. I think that you're right. This is a very different way of thinking and requires very different thought processes.

But about the creative process. I was able to decipher, to an extent, the meanings behind static and dynamic. As can be found in "The Dual Nature of Man" the Static functions are and the Dynamics are .

Now outwardly and in an informational sense statics are the perception of the external reality, everything around us and the actual experience of it, judgement included, it appears, although that may not be the best explanation. Dynamics are manipulated by this, that is, the very act of perceiving means that the judgement is being altered. It doesn't have to really do with consciousness, such as "I am trying to solve a problem" although it looks like that if we analyze it. It is really an "automatic" process, in terms of the guidelines of the theory, it seems. So the dynamics are constructs manipulated by the perception. Dynamics manifest as rules or standards being acted out. A streetsign, although it is a perception, is also in a way. A code of ethics, such as vows or standards of behavior, these would be ethical dynamics. When you act these out, you are perceiving them since where you do it and how you do it changes. Where you do it and how you do it seems to be what defines the creative function.

This is how it SEEMS to be explained, although I am not going to proclaim that I am 100% accurate. experiencing a environment rearranges this information, therefore generating new . The comparative of this is drawn not to but and rearranges such in creative ways. In both cases this manifests as concrete act. Here is a description, of course, of the ENTp and his comparative, the ENFp. Creativity does not really generate new information, it just rearranges it. Reality is not the generation of new information, but the rearranging of existing information.

So dynamics are a certain phase of energy, while statics are another. these phases all resonate with one another and alter one another in different ways, but all the individual is is a sort of "knot" in this.

Socionics is also informational, it isn't about the brain, although the brain is informational, so its included in the theory. All things we generate, material or abstract, are also information.

[Scrummy]

elbow tchaikovsky freezer burn