Determinism vs Free will

[Singu]

It seems like, and also in my experience, that determinists tend to be usually the "Causal-Determinist Cognition" (ILE, LSI, SEE, EII) group in the Gulenko's Cognitive Styles (http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...gnitive_Styles).

And the people who tend to believe in free will tend to be the Vortical-Synergetic Cognition (ESE, SLI, LIE, IEI) group.

Synergetics recognize the critical role of chance and free will in transitional moments of history. Synergetically-minded scholars frequently consider alternative historical outcomes. British historian Arnold J. Toynbee in particular, explored this twist on the course of ancient history—what if Alexander of Macedon did not die (pessimistic version), how would the world have developed then (optimistic version)?

Or it could simply be the difference between static vs dynamic. Or there is not much correlation. But in my experience, it tends to fall in line with that trend. Statics tend to believe in determinism more.

For example, Einstein was an ILE, as well as a determinist.

Dialectical thinking best corresponds to the quantum-probabilistic worldview of modern physics. According to this paradigm, there are no immutable laws, only tendencies and probabilities. Quantum Mechanics is built on the counterintuitive principle of particle-wave duality, according to which microcosmic objects behave as particles and as waves. Two of the 20th century's greatest physicists disputed over this view—Albert Einstein and Neils Bohr. The former defended causal-determinism as the nature of the universe, the latter advocated a probabilistic ontology. In the aftermath, Bohr won. Though apart from its historical context, the dispute makes little sense, given that these cognitive forms are dual to one other. Jung's principle of 'synchronicity' also lies within the Dialectical paradigm.

Quantum physics seem more like a Dynamic way of looking at the world, and counter-intuitive to Ti.

Edit: Actually I'm starting to think that there's no correlation...