Toggle Light / Dark / Auto color theme
Toggle table of contents sidebar
Gulenko Cognitive Styles
¶
Published as “Forms of Thinking” by
V. Gulenko
in
Journal “Socionics, Mentology and Personality Psychology”, N 4, 2002
.
Translated from original publication.
Introduction
¶
The manifestations of three dichotomies: StaticDynamic,
PositivismNegativism, and EvolutionInvolution; examined on four
levels: intellectual, social, psychological, and physical. From
these dichotomies are identified the cognitive styles corresponding
to Sociotypes. The features of Causal-Determinist,
Dialectical-Algorithmic, Holographical-Panoramic, and
Vortical-Synergetic forms of cognition are described. Also explored
is their formative influence on modern philosophical paradigms and
the special role of Supervision rings in societal transmission of
information.
Keywords
: Socionics, psychology, cognition, static, dynamic,
positivism, negativism, evolution, involution, information
metabolism, synergetics, Supervision relations
From the standpoint of their structure, cognition in my opinion is most
successfully modeled by combinations of these three dichotomies:
StaticDynamic, PositivismNegativism, and EvolutionInvolution. Why
these?
I came to understand this relationship in two ways. First, I noted that
the most rapid and complete exchange of information occurs through
Supervision rings, which are formed by these dichotomies. Second,
finding Socionics analogies to other models of comprehending reality
(worldviews) I found that information exchange in each of the four
Supervision rings embodied fundamental forms of intellectual activity
found across the history of established thought.
If my conclusions are valid, then the mental activity of Supervision
rings constitutes that which cognitive psychology typically refers to as
styles (or forms) of cognition. A strict deductive proof of this theory
is not my aim. Instead I will simply present the results obtained.
Coming from the practice of consultation, teaching, and training work,
inductive generalizations have more weight for me than the mathematical
calculations so dear to the hearts of some Socionists.
How do you determine that a person is actively thinking? Let us examine
from the side. He first loses internal composure, then recovers it (he
is using StaticDynamic). First doubts, then confidently asserts
something (he using NegativismPositivism). First specifies concretely,
then generalizes, moving from one logical level to another (a process
controlled by the InvolutionEvolution dichotomy as I will show below).
Emotional coloring, judgment speed, following the present pattern (i.e.
Logic/Ethics, Extro/Introversion, Rational/Irrational) all play their
specific role here, of course. But the three dichotomies which unite
Sociotypes into Supervision rings, exert a more noticeable impact on
aggregate social intelligence in the form it has historically developed.
I emphasize that in this article I will investigate the structural forms
of cognition, not their content. My attention will not be directed on
what a person thinks, but
how
they think. In other words, the
subject of my discussion will be on the instrumental and technical
aspects of thinking.
StaticDynamic Dichotomy
¶
In general terms, this dichotomy refers to orientation towards either
space
(Static) or
time
(Dynamic). The categories of space and
time are vital a priori concepts studied in detail by Immanuel Kant in
“Critique of Pure Reason”, contrasting them as extent and duration.
Statics depend more on space, Dynamics more on time. Filling space with
objects characterizes Static behavior, whereas Dynamics saturate time
with events. Statics cannot stand empty spacethey immediately fill it
with available items on hand. Dynamics cannot stand empty timeboredom,
stagnation, prolonged states of the same condition. In a certain sense,
Statics can be called people of place, Dynamics people of time.
Now consider this dichotomy on the individual levels of communication.
Intellectual Level
¶
Statics tend towards fragmentary-analytic thinking; Dynamics tend
towards associative-synthetic thinking.
Analysis, as defined by most sources, is the division of a whole into
clearly delimited parts. Analytical work is meant to delineate
boundaries. Whereas synthesis is akin to associativity, i.e. the
association of two or more concepts by fuzzy, rapid connections whereby
one occurrence immediately evokes others to mind. Resulting in a
coherent synthetic image with blurred internal boundaries.
The epitomization of Dynamic cognition formed the explanatory basis for
the nature of mental processes in the theory of associationism.
Aristotle first advanced the idea that spontaneous mental images can
converge so closely together that the similarity or contrast of multiple
associations emerges on the basis of contiguity. Later John Locke argued
that ideas of any degree of complexity emerge from the process of
associating simple sensations. In this case he contrasted the
association of ideas against purely semantic connections, which in his
opinion were secondary.
Indeed, eidetic mnemonic techniques showed that with aid of visual
association, it is possible to connect anything in the mind. Here are
some of the eidetic memory techniques originating in antiquity.
Roman orator Cicero used the ‘method of loci’ to memorize his speeches
by heart. He mentally laid out information in the corners of a room,
mentally returning to one corner or another to extract as required.
Medieval Dominican monks studying rhetoric used the same method. They
took a road familiar to them to the last detail and mentally walked down
it, successively laying out along the road statements which would be
presented before the audience. While speaking, they would mentally walk
the route, ‘raising’ key concepts they had previously laid there.
Contemporary advertising cleverly exploits the Dynamic side of human
cognition. It is mainly based on the mechanism of association by context
(manly cowboy next to a pack of cigarettes) or contrast (ordinary
laundry detergent vs. advertised laundry detergent). Judging by this
means of consumer inducement, advertising presumably influences Statics
much less than Dynamics. Statics memorize more effectively when material
is structured in rigid semantic relationships, where each concept is
fixed in memory cells like a computer.
Thus, Dynamics are stronger in synthesis operations (not mere simple
connections, but confluence of associations), while Statics are stronger
in analysis (not just any separation, but clear and precise
delineations). Thus, the discrete/continuous pairing has more to do with
the StaticDynamic dichotomy, than with otherwise customary
Rationality/Irrationality. But then, what exactly is the latter?
Irrationality indicates situationality (predominance of context over
aim), while Rationality indicates regularity (predominance of aim over
context).
Social Level
¶
Differences between Dynamic and Static types at this level corresponds
to the contrast between initiators and finalizers.
Dynamics are stronger at the beginning of any activity: they easily move
and quickly enter the realm of nominal activity. Rapid transitions from
a previous state into a new process of change itselfthis is their
customary life. Statics better sustain and continue what has already
begunthat which is already in motion. They must be preliminarily
excited.
However, in the Dynamic is a process of continuous readjustment of focus
and ‘drift’ of purposes. Because of this, the priorities of Dynamics are
volatile and poor in hierarchical coordination. One wish may be quickly
replaced by another and it is difficult for them to concentrate on any
one specific long-term goal without external support. The strength of
Dynamics is not in retaining goals, but in achieving them; they are
better tacticians than strategists.
The objectives of Statics are more stable and reliable. They know what
they want and are able to maintain long-term focus upon it. They arrange
priorities in their life and work, with well-differentiated primary and
secondary objectives that are rarely reversed. Statics are more
successful strategists than tacticians; they know
what
to do much
better than
how
to do it.
A predominance of Dynamics in any social group renders it unstable,
prone to endless change, and sensitive to external interference.
Conversely, if predominated by Statics, then rapid transformations prove
to be impossible due to excess psychological inertia, rendering the
group stabler but more conservative.
Psychological Level
¶
The StaticDynamic dichotomy controls the degree of equilibrium in the
nervous system. Generally, the nervous system of Statics can be regarded
as balanced and Dynamics as unbalanced.
This is tied to variability in the internal state commonly referred to
as ‘mood’. The mood of Dynamics, even if Rational, can substantially
change or fluctuate for seemingly insignificant reasons (from an outside
observer POV). The Dynamic wants total freedom but is more dependent on
ambient environmental conditions and needs a solid foundation.
Statics possess a relatively autonomous psycho-emotional state; their
mood is difficult to spoil, and equally difficult to raise. For Statics,
providing reliable support to those psychologically depending on them is
a routine situation.
Dynamics often develop a psycho-physiological phenomenon known as
‘synaesthesia’a complex relationship between the sensory modalities
that results in confluence between them. Synchronized perception of
color, sound, smell, and taste as a single complex gives Dynamics a
special vividness in their perception of reality. Sometimes fusion of
sensation is developed to such an extent that internal images appear
indistinguishable from reality. For Statics, given the discreteness of
their mental apparatus, regular synesthesia is usually a rare exception
or the result of special training.
Physical Level
¶
At this level, StaticDynamic manifests as contrasting impulses to
biological homeostasis/heterostasis. Homeostasis I understand as
constancy and heterostasis as variability of the organism and its
surrounding environment.
Dynamics are heterostatically inclined to change their material
conditions of life such as wardrobe, home interior, or furniture
arrangement, for sake of variety or out of boredom. For Statics this
tendency is uncharacteristic. Only with difficulty do they proceed with
changes to their home environment to which they have become accustomed.
They will do so only when it’s easier to yield to circumstantial
pressures, than to resist.
As types with variable metabolism, Dynamics can rapidly grow stout,
though just as quickly lose weight if they fall into a state of
emotional distress. Statics have the opposite problem, of a stabler
weight and build: if already seriously fat (or thin), they remain so for
longer times. Their bodily metabolism is more invariant.
The same laws apply in relation to other physiological parameters such
as temperature, blood pressure, perspiration, etc. For example, the body
temperature of Dynamics may fluctuate during the day even with no overt
symptoms of illness. With sufficient training, Dynamic types can
consciously change these parameters in the desired direction.
PositivistNegativist Dichotomy
¶
Positivism I understand as the tendency to maximize the positive,
Negativism as the tendency to minimize the negative. Positivists
primarily perceive the positive side of any phenomenon, and often turn a
blind eye to the negative. Negativists won’t overlook problems, and
simultaneously mitigate any positive aspects to their situation of
interest.
Intellectual Level
¶
At this level, the PositivismNegativism dichotomy manifests as
identification of similarities or differences in object comparison. In
Negativists thought processes prevails contrast, in Positivists leads
comparison. Meaning that Positivists more easily hold overall views of
an object, without considering its internal divisions. Conversely,
Negativists more easily distinguish its extreme points of separation and
opposing contrasts.
Directly relevant to this is a dichotomy known in cognitive psychology
as convergent/divergent thinking [5], discovered by J. P. Guilford. In
his opinion, divergent thinking, from simple initial data, yields
several different solutions to the same problem; a trait characteristic
to the alternative-thinking of Negativists.
Opposite this, convergent thinking searches for a single valid
encompassing solution; a trait more characteristic to Positivist
thinking. For them, a problem is unsolved until the validity of one
solution is proven against other alternatives.
Social Level
¶
PositivismNegativism affects the degree of internal group coherence and
regulates attraction/repulsion between its members.
An individual’s ability to assimilate into a group is typologically
predictable. Negativists are remote types. They need constant assurance,
even in a group they consider their own. Therefore it is more difficult
to fully integrate Negativists into a group. Positivists on the other
hand, are inclined to close range communication. They do not polarize
contrasts, but smooth them over in one way or another. Thus Positivists
facilitate monocentric group structure and unity of purpose. Whereas
Negativists amplify polarizing forces conducive to polycentric group
structure.
Consider the example of
SEI
, a fairly good-natured type, although
Negativist. Is there a behavioral tendency towards remoteness? Yes, it
contrasts its subgroup with other subgroups. Thereby disrupting,
unintentionally or not, unity of purpose in the whole group overall.
What process balances internal group cohesion? It is observed that
Positivists are drawn towards their opposite, which contributes to
overall group solidarity, particularly through the ease of intragroup
role distribution. Negativists on the other hand, have an inherent
paradoxical attraction to those similar to themselves. The nearer such
parallel charged elements converge, however, it becomes increasingly
difficult to implement mutual action. Repulsive forces rapidly emerge
and fracture group integration.
The overall incidence of monolithic or polarized group behavior is a
reliable index for gauging PositivistNegativist tendencies. Negativism
generates tension in intragroup relations, leading on one hand to an
increase in psychological distance between members, but on the other
hand activating its internal momentum to say “Move!”. Positivism by
contrast contracts psychological distance and encourages internal group
cohesion, but can also bring complacency, carelessness, and ‘vapidity’
of existence.
Psychological Level
¶
In a psychological sense, this dichotomy can be approximately
interpreted as trust/distrust.
Each type of person behaves in life according to how they answer the
following existential question: is human nature inherently good or evil?
For Positivists, human nature is inherently good, so they are more
likely to be trusting. This does not mean that they consciously consider
themselves to be good, just that they conduct themselves as if others
were. Negativists even under favorable conditions are inclined to expect
the worst. Their degree of trust in others is therefore is much lower.
The relation between Positivists and Negativists is illustrated well by
the analogy of electric conductors. Electric-people (Negativists who
have accumulated a negative psychological charge) discharge into
conductor-people (Positivists), who tend to provoke them in just the
right way to do so. All of which happens mostly automatically and
unconsciously. The resulting emotional flash establishing temporary
balance of psychological (electro-)potentials. This beneficial surge of
emotional release, Aristotle in his “Poetics” called
‘catharsis’psychological purging via intense experience.
Physical Level
¶
The spatial arrangement of conversation parties in front or near is a
key factor in communication, its importance first stressed by Harry S.
Sullivan. Negativists gain leverage in communication from positions
opposite the partner, Positivists from positions alongside or at an
angle deflecting a straight-on gaze.
Automatic reductions in confrontation due to being seated side by side,
are a common method used by marital psychologists working with couples.
Sitting side by side and addressing an imaginary third party, enables
couples to gradually decrease the severity of sore conflict.
Clinical psychologists studying nonverbal cues classify gestures
indicative of critical attitudes. Such gestures are typically
‘closed’for instance, a hand at the mouth. From a Socionics standpoint
then, closed demeanor is better explained by Negativism, not
Introversion.
Negativism induces tangible bodily tension. Negativists are inclined to
accumulate ‘charge’, making highly-charged Negativists easily
overexcitable (especially if also Dynamic). In order to compensate
against this, Negativists are recommended to engage in physical exercise
that relaxes and smooths internal tension. While Positivists are
recommended to perform physical exercise that excites and intensifies
their physiological processes.
EvolutionInvolution Dichotomy (Process-Result)
¶
In its most general form, I understand this dichotomy as ProcessResult;
or by its other informal name, RightLeft. More precisely, I refer to
the designated Latin words ‘evolutio’: “developing outward” and
‘involutio’: “coalescing inward.”
Intellectual Level
¶
Describing EvolutionInvolution at this level will initially contrast
deductive vs. inductive thinking. Unfortunately, the bulk of literature
on this cognitive dichotomy treats it in at least two different senses.
In the first sense, deduction is understood simply as a strict formal
sequence or expository progression of thought (aka Socionics
rationality), while induction is understood as conclusions stemming from
practical experience (aka Socionics irrationality).
I will frame this dichotomy in the second sense, namely as
simplification vs. complication of thought structure. Meaning that in
deductive thinking, given a set of simple and obvious statements
(axioms, postulates), the resultant consequences can be necessarily
derived (theorem). Reasoning flows in the direction of simple to
complex. Evolutionary types therefore mentally complicate the situation.
In inductive thinking reasoning proceeds the other way around. Observing
and comprehending complex phenomena, inductive thinking reduces them to
generalized diagrams and models stripped of details. Involutionary types
break down and simplify the situation in order to understand it.
Reasoning flows in reverse order from complex to simple.
The EvolutionInvolution dichotomy confers different scales of
examination in a problem. Evolutionary types see small to large. Details
are distinct. Scale is specific and precise like geographical map.
Involutionary types on the other hand, see large to small. Details are
vague. Scale is general and broad. The scale will alternate in
Negativists, since they think more alternatively, but the same priority
will remain.
It is worth noting that deductive thinking has always had priority in
society over inductive thinking. Constructing a deductively consistent
theory to explain a phenomenon, has always been seen as a researcher’s
coup de grace.
Social Level
¶
On the social level, differences between these approaches can be
contrasted as naturality/artificiality. By ‘naturality’ I refer to
primal behavior inherent to nature, and by ‘artificiality’ I refer to
behavior accepted by society. For example, in nature, survival of the
fittest is law, whereas in society, protection and care of the weak is
cultivated.
From this stems distinctions in one’s attitudes towards people in close
or distant circles. In the life of Evolutionary types, reputation plays
a much greater role. Opinions of others in external society tend to be
more important to them than opinions of friends or relatives.
Involutionary types depend less on social appraisal. They are more
accommodating towards people of their inner circle, whose opinions they
hold in higher esteem than those of public approval or disapproval.
There is a habit in Involutionary types to abruptly curtail
conversations. They do not simply cut off communication, but
specifically wind it up, quickly finish, or summarize what has been
said. They may also suddenly deflect onto tangents, then flip back to
the topic at hand. Evolutionary types may interpret this mannerism as a
sign of tactlessness, disinterest, or resentment.
Psychological Level
¶
EvolutionInvolution, along with other dichotomies, influences a key
parameter of stress in the psyche: Control of asymmetry in the
excitatory/inhibitory processes of the nervous system.
Evolutionary types recover more slowly from stress than Involutionary
types. Their inhibitory processes are less amenable to conscious control
than their excitatory processes, hence their tendency to dwell on
personal issues. After being pulled in by any process, they are often
unable to get out of it. Which can lead to gambling, drug use,
alcoholism, or other vices, even Internet-addiction.
Consequently, susceptibility to conditioning is higher in Evolutionary
types than in Involutionary types. Conditioned responses require
movement along a single path, without possibility of turning around or
deviating from the imposed route. One of the inhibitory mechanisms of
conditioning is phobia (obsessive fear). Imagine not being able to rid
yourself of thinking you will definitely fall on a slippery road. This
is an example of a phobia. And then you actually do end up falling, even
if wearing mountain-climbing boots. According to my observations,
Involutionary types do not seriously suffer such phobias.
Thus, Involutionary types more rapidly and less painfully get rid of
illusions, imposed opinions, suggested thoughts, fanatic states, etc. It
is because of EvolutionInvolution differences that quadras are split
rings of social progress are formed.
Physical Level
¶
The EvolutionInvolution dichotomy manifests on the lower level of
communication through an orientation towards either process or result.
Evolutionary types are more inclined to procedure, which involves
careful study of details. They are subject to the logic of the
development process, which assumes motion from beginning to end and top
to bottom.
Involutionary types rush to obtain a result, frequently neglecting
details of the process, which reduces overall quality. Such behavioral
patterns lead to a tolerant attitude towards returns and corrections.
They don’t mind accepting suboptimal, but convenient solutions. They are
characterized by backward motion, from end to beginning and from bottom
to top.
Let me illustrate this by an example of reading books. Glancing
immediately at the end or bottom part of the page is characteristic for
Involutionary types. Reading in reverse order does not deprive them
pleasure of novelty, on the contrary, it stimulates their activity in
assimilating information. Involution shouldn’t be confused merely with
impatient skimming ahead, after which one continues smooth reading.
Sharpness of movement is observed in Involutionary types, along with
sporadic shifting from one activity to another. These sudden shifts
overtly contrast to the smoothness of Evolutionary types. In traditional
Socionics, sharp movements are attributed to Rationality. In my opinion,
however, this quality is more determined by Involution. For
counterexample, consider the Evolutionary Rational types
LSI
and
EII
, whose motions are characteristically soft and smooth. Yet the
nature of movement in Involutionary Irrationals
SLE
and
IEE
is so
sharp that training them smooth movement is practically impossible.
To clarify the fundamental distinction between Involution and Evolution,
the following analogy will help. In biology, catabolism and anabolism
are the two sides of organic metabolism. Catabolismthe breakdown of
complex compounds to release energy and the elimination of decay
products from the organismcorresponds to the role of Involutionary
types in group dynamics. Anabolismthe assimilation from the external
environment of substances necessary for life and their transformation
into more complex compoundscorresponds to the communicative role played
by Evolutionary behavior.
Causal-Determinist Cognition
¶
Let us now examine the first cognitive form: It is analytic, positive,
and deductive. We will call this style Causal-Determinist. Its carriers
are Sociotypes
ILE
,
LSI
,
SEE
,
EII
.
As Statics, their cognitive activity is stable and clear. As
Evolutionary types, they think procedurally without overlooking parts
and intermediate details. As Positivists, they aim towards singularly
valid solutions.
Intellectual Sphere
¶
Causal-Determinist cognition is known under synonymous names as formal
logic or deterministic thinking, both of which emphasize its rigid
nature. Speech in this cognitive style takes shape with aid of the
connectives “because”, “therefore”, “consequently” (causal
conjunctions). The mental process consists in constructing chains of
cause and effect, reducing explanations to
deterministic mechanisms
.
Using the example of Aristotle, who first pointed out four ways to
explain phenomena, the reason for the existence of a sculpture is the
sculptor who fashioned it directly.
In the scientific sphere so thinks
ILE
, in the
managerial-administrative sphere is methodical
LSI
, in the social
sphere
SEE
calculates chains of material interests, in the
humanitarian sphere subject to the same categorical imperative is
EII
.
Social Sphere
¶
Aristotle is considered the discoverer of this approach. The basic laws
of formal thinking are outlined in his theory of syllogism. However, the
first to consistently put them into practice was Euclid, founder of
geometry. More recently, its principles grounded rationalist Rene
Descartes in his 1637 treatise “Discourse on the Method”. Then it
finally took shape in mathematical logic. The Causal-Determinist
paradigm reached its apogee in Logical Positivism, then increasingly
began to decline in value towards the end of the 20th century. However,
as the common stereotype of proof, it still dominates to this day.
I will touch its advantages. First, it is perceived by society as the
most authoritative, most convincing, and singularly correct. In
mathematics, it is formalized as the deductive-axiomatic method. Use of
it requires great intellectual stamina. Second, attributes of greater
clarity and concentration are inherent to this style. The type most
characterized by singular concentration is
LSI
. However, the
irrational
SEE
argues quite soundly, deriving one consequence from
another, implying focus on the chain of events. If even one link fails
for any reason, then Determinists lose their sense of rationale and find
it difficult to act because they see no reason to.
At the same time, Causal-Determinism has its drawbacks. It is primarily
the most artificial and removed from the laws of functioning life. Its
efficacy extends to the ‘logical’ formulation of already existing
results, the construction of operating mechanisms, but not fundamentally
new discoveries. The first dead end which formalization risks is
scholasticism, i.e. pointless albeit logically impeccable reasoning. The
second intellectual dead end faced by sequential Determinists is the
trap of reductionism, which they fall into on account of fragmenting
wholes into their component parts. This deficiency was noted even by the
ancient skeptics, as well as in modern times by Hume, who doubted that
any event could be dictated by strict reason.
Indeed, in building a long chain of cause and effect, it is difficult to
avoid the danger of circularity, the risk of falling into
circulus
vitiosus
a vicious circle in the proof. Kurt G?del’s theorem on the
incompleteness of formal systems, asserts that any sufficiently complex
system of rules is either inconsistent, or contains conclusions that can
be neither proven nor refuted by the rules of that system. This
established limits in the applicability of formal logic. Using the
deductive-axiomatic method, the medieval Scholastics in particular,
attempted to rigorously prove the existence of God. Resulting from
closure of causes in terms of effects, they circularly arrived at a
definition of God as the thought which thinks of itself.
Psychological Sphere
¶
Causal-Determinist cognition forges a mentality poorly protected from
indoctrination, or in extreme cases, even brainwashing. By skillfully
combining memorable words and actions, it is possible to gain control
over the behavior of specific individuals. Intelligent Determinists in
particular, are characterized by a strong dependence on the events of
childhood, which Sigmund Freud discovered in his time, though poorly
understood in full. Habits in pronounced Determinists are comparable in
their rigidity to conditioned reflexes.
Standard military interrogation procedures are designed to ensure
guaranteed cause-effect impacts upon the psyche. It includes measures of
exposure such as sleep deprivation, changes in room temperature and/or
humidity, denial of food subsequently followed by its delivery as a
reward, etc. Isolation of the detainee and the gradual imposition of
regulations, bears fruit sooner or later. In time, the vulnerability of
psychological destabilization is manufactured into dependence upon the
interrogator.
It is noteworthy that extreme critical situations, trigger a
‘slow-motion film’ state of mind in Determinists. Thinking becomes
particularly clear, but stretched out over time, such that seconds can
subjectively feel like minutes. Along these same lines, due to an abrupt
shakeup of their psyche, the stress of surprise severely impedes their
cerebral activity until they can recover in deep sleep.
The psychological school of Behaviorism represents this model of the
psyche. Its supporters believe that behavioral learning is achieved
through reinforcementrewarding adherence to rules and punishing their
violation. B. F. Skinner formulated the principle of operant
conditioning, according to which the behavior of living organisms is
completely determined by the cause-effect of this conditioning. He
proposed the method of ‘successive approximations’, in which students
receive positive reinforcement in instances where their behavior
conforms to that desired.
Behaviorists developed the concept of conditioned learning and
established a rigid procedural method of action towards the goal as the
basis for its operation.
Scientific Sphere
¶
Formal logical thinking in its time gave birth to the deterministic
cause-effect worldview. This is the worldview of classical physics whose
cornerstone is Newtonian Mechanics, and was the dominant paradigm until
the early 20th century. Rigid systems operate according to these
rulesorganisms and mechanisms. When faced with multi-factor processes
(such as psychology or society), however, reductionism loses its
explanatory power to portray complex phenomena in terms of their basic
components. Additionally, this classic paradigm has been too influenced
by the ideal of ‘progress’, in spite of numerous historical examples of
regressive tendencies, setbacks, repetitions, etc.
A real-life model of Causal-Determinist cognition is given by
information represented in the form of a chart or realistic illustration
made using a direct perspective. In this technique, objects are depicted
larger or smaller in proportion to their distance from the observer. By
drawing in this way, following strict instructions, any object can be
easily depicted.
Dialectical-Algorithmic Cognition
¶
The second cognitive form is of particular interest: it is synthetic,
negative, and deductive. The working name of this style is
Dialectical-Algorithmic. Representatives of this style are Sociotypes
EIE
,
ILI
,
LSE
,
SEI
.
As Dynamics, these types synthesize associational images. As
Evolutionary types, they increase deductive complexity of them. As
Negativists, they work well with contradictions and paradoxes.
Intellectual Sphere
¶
The essential distinguishing feature of the Dialectical style, is a view
of the universe as a unified struggle of opposites. In speech it often
uses syntactic constructions “if-then-else”, the predictive branches of
a developing process. Within limits, the Dialectic strives to find an
intermediate point of dynamic equilibrium between contrasting extremes.
Dialectical cognition is born from the colliding flow and counterflow of
thought, the consciousness and unconsciousness. Thinkers of this style
are characterized by an express inclination towards the synthesis of
opposites, the removal of contradictions, which they so keenly perceive.
Its advantages are obvious: it is the most
subtle and flexible
style.
It can easily switch to an opposite direction, and possesses
predictive
ability
, accompanied by an effective type of associative memory.
Algorithmic thinking is also good at solving problems of classification,
given their gift for recognizing complex patterns. Beyond the
circumstantial conditions of a problem, it perceives a fundamental
algorithm for its solution.
According to Aristotle, Dialecticals prognostic thinking explains
reality on the basis of
purposive
causes. For example, the cause of a
sculpture is an idea of it in the head of the sculptor. The main role is
played by a program, the intention of the creator. Thus, it can be
considered teleological, and hence the most ‘religious’ in its essential
thinking. Many scholars of this type sooner or later come to faith (not
necessarily a church confessional).
Social Sphere
¶
Historically, the first representative of a Dialectical worldview would
be Heraclitus. Epitomizing the Dynamic dichotomy, he was of the opinion
that “you cannot enter the same river twice” because whenever you enter
again, the flow is already of different water. In more recent times it
developed into Hegel’s comprehensive theory of a rational system. Since
Dialectical cognition, compared to other styles, is the most oriented
towards creative intention, it invariably leads to ideas of a creator,
an absolute, a cosmic intelligence, etc.
Two of its representatives
EIE
and
ILI
are usually recognized in
society as the most intellectual types. They form the backbone of
intellectual elites, expert clubs, esoteric groups, etc. They are the
best computer programmers, knowing better than other types how to work
with moving structuresalgorithms. Algorithmic diagrams consist of
blocks and arrows showing the order of transitions, branches, and loop
cycles. The crux of a program is its dynamic structurepointers, rather
than blocks. The formula “if-then-else” is, in essence, the core of any
algorithm.
The disadvantages in Dialectical-Algorithmic cognition include
instability and uncertainty. Algorithmics suffer from difficulty in
making choices and embracing unambiguous decisions. This thinking is
more comparable to a symphony of flowing interwoven imagery, rather than
a mechanism of clearly established instruction sets. Another problem is
increased criticality, which can be so high that it incurs
self-destruction, plunging them into danger of total detachment from
reality, and leading to mental disorders, especially in cases of
hereditary predisposition.
Psychological Sphere
¶
The psyche of Dialectical types is most prone to transformations. From a
psychological point of view, an unstable oscillating psyche is fertile
ground for suggestibility. Occasionally Dialectics lose control over the
parallel streams of thought fluctuating in their heads. They need only
tune out their internal oscillation between freedom of choice and
fatalism, and reinforce the latter. Doctors know that a small but
accurately timed shock can throw the heart into a state of fibrillation.
Likewise, a successfully directed signal at the right time can throw the
Dialectical psyche into a chaotic state.
The
EIE
Sociotype has a very suitable psyche for suggestive influence.
It is characterized by so-called moments of imprint vulnerability. In
these moments an intense suggestion is triggeredan imprintthe
prerequisites of which are a state of extreme fear, confusion, or
surprise. A ‘No Exit’ sign suddenly seen by a person of Algorithmic
psyche at a time of severe emotional turmoil, may catalyze a decision
about suicide. Exploiting this paradoxical nature of Dialectical types,
shock therapy is capable of completely reprogramming their conception of
reality, including core value judgments.
A certain, although rare sign of Dialectical cognitionaccidents that
lead to states similar to a deep trance or coma, followed by sudden
enlightenment or the appearance of esoteric abilities.
The other version is slow suggestion, primarily based on entrainment
through rhythmic vocalization and/or sound, multiple repetitions of the
same phrase with variation. Variations in this case are particularly
significant, working akin to the chorus in a song. Gradually a trance
state is reachedexternal relaxation with internal concentration. The
greater the monotony, the sooner a deep trance is reached. Hence why
some people rapidly settle down and fall asleep under a monotone
‘bubnezh’ TV.
Scientific Sphere
¶
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
viewAlbert 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.
Contemporary British mathematician Roger Penrose has suggested that the
human brain uses quantum gravity as a means for intuitive insight. He’s
written several books (“The Emperor’s New Mind” and “Shadows of the
Mind”) stipulating that the brain is a quantum computer, and that
Aristotelian logical thinking is actually alien to human beings. If he
is right, it follows that the integral type of humanity is
Dialectical-Algorithmic.
A real-life model of this thinkingdouble-images periodically passing
into each other. Simple example: a projection onto the plane of a
truncated pyramid. After examining it awhile it alternately seems
convex, with the top facing to the observer, then concave, with the rear
wall receding into the distance.
One more graphical illustration of Dialectical perception. What do you
see in the picture: a vase against a black background, or two facial
profiles on a white background? It depends on which one for you is the
background, and which is the figure. Some see a vase and the profiles
turn into a dark background, others see two black profiles and the white
vase goes into the background. But once a person sees both images,
fluctuations of attention begin. The picture seems to pulsate: you see a
vase, then the profiles. There is a dialectical exchange of
background/foreground. Triggering negative reverse perspective, where
distant or darkened objects are perceived more significantly than those
located closer to the observer.
Holographical-Panoramic Cognition
¶
In cognitive theory, the third cognitive form is the least studied: it
is analytic, negative, and inductive. The provisional name of this style
is Holographical-Panoramic. ‘Holograph’ originates from the Ancient
Greek words holos “entire, whole” and grapho “write”. This name is
derived from the Holographist’s ability to densely pack information via
method of ‘like to, similar’ analogy. Sociotypes possessing this form
are
SLE
,
LII
,
IEE
,
ESI
.
As Statics, Holographers attain reliable precision of thought. As
Negativists they periodically turn the object of thought to its opposite
side. As Involutionary types, they sporadically change the angle of
examination or criterion of judgment.
Intellectual Sphere
¶
This cognitive style has much in common with the holographic principle
in physics. A hologram (optical) is a statistically recorded
interference pattern made by two beams of light which are transmitted
and reflected from a single source. Holographic technology allows us to
obtain a three-dimensional image of an object. The hologram itself is an
aggregation of stripes and spots exactly resembling the embedded object.
The two beams of light are superimposed in such a way that every part of
the hologram carries information about the whole.
In this way, by mentally superimposing multiple projections of the same
object, Holographists reach a holistic view. To do this, they look at
the image and select a desired angle of examination. Holographic
cognition often utilizes the grammatical conjunctives: “or-or”,
“either-or”, “on the one hand, on the other hand”. It actively uses the
principle of perspective; unrestricted choice in point of view. The
holographic approach is a progressive approximation towards the purpose,
or away from it, accompanied by changes of perspective. The holographic
process is carried out as if calibrating focus.
Holographic cognition has a characteristic penetrating,
skeletal-revealing, ‘x-ray’ nature. It unhesitatingly cuts away details
and nuances, giving a coarsely generalized representation of the
subject. Take for example the two orthogonal cross-sections of a
cylinder: the horizontal section looks like a circle, and the vertical
section looks like a rectangle. Two different perspectives of an
indivisible whole which, when superimposed in the mind, produces
transition to a higher level of understanding about the object.
SLE
thinks this way in battle. Analyzing the situation, they simplify
it to two or three facets (frontal, flank, and/or rear), but then
quickly go to a higher tier of understanding.
LII
grasps the problem
from opposite sides, mentally rotating the situation in three dimensions
around its semantic axes.
ESI
first draws near to a person, then moves
away, seeming to probe the individual from all sides, cutting off those
who could let them down.
IEE
detects the possible hidden motivations
of a person, as if building their psychological ‘hologram’.
The main advantages of Holographic cognition are as follows. First, it
is multi-perspective. As already stated, because of this it attains a
dimensionally holistic and complete depiction. Second, it values
simplicity and clarity, avoids pretentiousness, and forgoes ‘bells and
whistles’. Holographists are particularly effective in crisis
situations, when it is necessary to make decisions quickly, and there is
no time to weigh all the details.
The obvious disadvantage of this cognitive style is that it appears too
rough, lacking adequate consideration to details which become important
when a process flows smoothly. Its information-dense constructs are
often difficult to decompress and unpack; to outsiders, they may seem
void of intermediate links for establishing coherency in their
connections.
According to Aristotle, Holographic cognition corresponds to explanation
by structural or formative causes. Aristotle called it the structure of
form. Returning to the sculptor example, the cause of the sculpture is
its latent form, which the sculptor merely sets free by cutting away
excess marble.
Social Sphere
¶
A vague idea of the holographic concept was expressed by Gottfried
Leibniz’s “Monadology”. His monad, a microcosmic reflection of the whole
world order, is analogous to a hologram. Ecologists regularly turned to
it in attempting to understand why there is stability in nature.
Relationships between living and non-living nature arising in a given
territory causes biogeocenosis, or ecosystem formation. Ecosystems are
primarily characterized by equilibrium of self-similarity over time,
where long-term coexistence of opposites without merging (synthesis) is
observed. Therefore, Static prevails over Dynamic in such communities.
Therein lies the fundamental law of homeostasis in the ecosystem.
General systems theory was later formed on the basis of these ideas. It
was founded by Austrian biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy, who introduced
the concept of open systems, which exchange matter, energy, and
information with the environment, thus resisting destabilization.
While Determinists attempt to explain the behavior of a system by its
component parts and interconnections, Holographists find novel qualities
illustrating emergent features in it that cannot be accounted for solely
from its internal structure. Therefore, the Holographical paradigm can
generally be called a systemic-ecological worldview.
Contemporary ‘green’ ideology is an epitomization of this cognitive
form. This does not in any way imply that the ideologues of this
movement are Holographical typescognitive styles and proclaimed
viewpoints may not necessarily coincide! Manifestations of one cognitive
style through another are completely typical. The books of “quantum
psychologist” Robert Anton Wilson are a good example of this, in which
his Dialectical-Algorithmic form is laden with multi-perspective,
holographic content [5].
Psychological Sphere
¶
Holographical cognition corresponds to a stable, self-possessed psyche
resistant to conditioning. In comparing the conditionability of an
LSI
psyche to its Involutionary Mirror
SLE
, observation shows that the
degree of psychological resistance is much higher in the latter. How is
this explained? By the durable cognitive infrastructure on which it is
built. Complete panorama, which allows periodic change of perspective on
the subject. Good balance between the immune and nervous systems, as
well as the primary sense organs.
In neuro-linguistic programming, this principle is used in a technique
called ‘reframing’. Reframing changes the perceptual framework
contextualizing an event. If we mentally place a familiar object into an
unfamiliar context, then significance of the whole situation changes.
For example, imagine a tiger first in a jungle, then in a zoo cage, then
on the balcony of your apartment. The standard Socionics type is
depicted as immersed in its ‘club’. But what if you shift it to quadra?
What if it turns out to be among types with opposite cognitive styles?
The chain can continue indefinitely.
With reframing it is possible to see the familiar with fresh eyes. The
type of the psyche in one who resorts to this technique remains constant
of course, only their subjective relation to the object of attention is
changed. The benefit of this method is primarily in the fact that new
perspectives emphasize aspects of a situation that may have been
previously underestimated, allowing the possibility of discovering new
avenues of growth, and expanding one’s existing range of choices.
Scientific Sphere
¶
A real-life physical model of this multi-perspective intellect is the
holograma superimposition of multiple images where each one can only be
seen when looking at a certain angle. Change of perspective occurs
intermittently and does not alter the system itself, only its
priorities. In this way, multiple standards can be implemented, making
it possible to work with a complex system as if it were a simple
sequence.
Another real-life prototype of Holographical cognition are fractal
objects, discovered by mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot in the 1970s.
Geometrically, fractals are figures with diffuse outlines, possessing
self-similar internal structures. For example, trees, snowflakes,
coastlines, etc. They are characterized by multiple internal forms
similar in principle to nesting-dolls. Like a hologram, any fragment of
a fractal contains complete information about the entire fractal. The
part is always structurally similar to the whole.
Socionics types are also like fractal objects. Hence my holographic
concept of personality as a nested system of types, one inside another
[4]. Which opposes the prevailing flat view of Socionics advocated by
people with reductionist thinking.
Vortical-Synergetic Cognition
¶
The fourth cognitive style: it is synthetic, positive, and inductive.
Its most appropriate title is Vortical-Synergetic. This form flows in
Sociotypes
ESE
,
SLI
,
LIE
,
IEI
.
Synergeticsthe science of how order emerges from chaos. The word
‘synergy’ in Ancient Greek means “concerted action”. The concept of
synergy continues to be discussed at present. In the West, it is called
‘Chaos Theory’ or ‘Nonlinear Dynamics’ [9]. For our purposes, it is
important to note that it is characterized by so-called dissipative
statesnon-equilibrium, nonlinear, unstable.
As Dynamics, Synergetics think fluidly with tints of one thought
cascading into another. As Positivists, they converge towards a point of
attraction. As Involutionary types, they frequently turn backwards and
jump over previous levels, displacing the flow of their thoughts like a
vortex or fluctuating storm.
IEI
as if in a kaleidoscope sees whimsical iridescent imagery,
dissolving then receding in flux.
LIE
thinks very experimentally with
many variants rapidly assorted and mentally tested on the fly for
practical applicability.
ESE
initiates a social torrent leaving behind
a trail of emotional turbulence. Thoughts ‘swarm’ and chaotically
displace one another.
SLI
‘lies in a drift’ as it were awaiting
favorable wind. Once the situation becomes favorable, self-organization
immediately takes hold and rapid thinking initiates, scrolling through
incoming information, identifying options most and least likely to
succeed.
Intellectual Sphere
¶
Characteristic of a ‘vortex’ is its self-organizing nature, moving like
a whirlwind. This manifests mentally as a rapid search for options,
tests, and the subsequent screening of variants which do not yield
results. It operates on basis of testing, advancing to the goal through
trial and error. In a sense, it is comparable to a perpetual lab
experiment in the brain.
The first advantage of Vortical cognitionliveliness and naturalness. It
seems to simulate the actual processes occurring in nature. Another
advantagefaith in success and luck. Synergetics do not confuse
temporary setbacks with error; they will undertake attempt after attempt
until success ultimately comes to them.
Its chief disadvantage is that the intellectual search is often blind
and uneconomical. Another difficulty is its randomness and spontaneity.
Synergetic intellect is a kind of chain reaction that catalyzes itself.
The mechanism of positive feedback operates: if not curbed, then the
concentration of effort first leads to an explosion, followed by
dissipation.
Synergetic intellect explains phenomena through substantive reasoning.
The very substance (material or substrate) itself generating phenomena
through natural movement. In the Aristotle example, the cause of
sculpture is the block of marble from which it was made.
Social Sphere
¶
Vortical cognition developed into a unique intellectual paradigm that
was deemed later than all others to have social merit, despite it being
most akin to natural phenomena. It is known that in natural conditions,
all processes run in cycles. For example, in laissez-faire economies
operating on Adam Smith’s ‘invisible hand’ principle, natural cyclical
fluctuations in market supply and demand guide the natural equilibrium
prices of goods.
Studying biological evolution, Charles Darwin discovered its origin as a
struggle for existence against natural selection, and survival of the
fittest organisms. The main engine of this ‘evolution’, is involution
through events of random variation, which abruptly leave no intermediate
gradual links between appearances of species.
Biological self-organization is catalyzed by mutationsudden,
unpredictable changes in genetic material. Involution generates
pulsating chaos, as evolution simultaneously selects and propagates
useful mutations.
Following in the involutionary trend of Darwinism, the concept of
‘punctuated equilibrium’ emphasizes the discontinuous development of
species observed in nature. Authors Gould and Eldridge conclude from
this fact that smooth gradual evolution of species is impossible under
natural conditions. To survive, all organs must simultaneously be in
working order; there are no creatures present with half-fin wings,
half-hoof toes, etc. According to this theory, the lifetime of a species
is divided into two unequal stages of duration. The first stage is
stasis, long periods where no significant species change occurs. Then
the second stage, a time of fracture when the species is rapidly
converted into another form, or dies out.
In the 20th century, as I mentioned, the vortex idea was rediscovered
and Synergetics adopted its armament. The motto of Synergeticsorder
through fluctuation. Such fluctuations (local perturbations in the
system) are analogous to biological mutation. Order in the chaotic
evolution of complex socio-psychological systems, Socionics understands
through the law of quadra progression. However, we
Psychological Sphere
¶
This cognitive style imbues qualities of endurance and optimism to the
psyche. However, the psyche of Synergetics is less stable than that of
Holographers. Synergetic types are partially conditionable, but capable
of discarding undesired habits. For restoration of normal mental life
they need specific, and sometimes long periods of trial and error.
Depriving their life of continuous forward movement exerts a bad effect
upon their mind. Operating principle: As ambient momentum of
circumstance declines, their self-determination atrophies. Lack of
oncoming circumstantial pressures renders them increasingly worse off.
The best countermeasure in such situations is positive self-programming.
Consisting of forcing disturbing thoughts to the background and
dissolving them in positive scenarios.
IEI
before sleep visualizes a
pleasant scene to remove disturbing experiences of the day.
LIE
casts
a desirable goal in its imagination, optimistic it will eventually
acquire the necessary persons and resources.
ESE
simply does not think
about past mistakes and its mood is improved by itself.
SLI
is not the
first place puts a positive scenario and awaits the moment possible to
implement it.
It is often forgotten that the synergetic aspect of development makes
extended forecasts futile. American meteorologist Edward Lorenz
descriptively coined this phenomenon the ‘Butterfly Effect’. Where a
butterfly waving its wings in some part of America can, with specific
confluence of circumstances, induce a hurricane somewhere in Indonesia.
Complex nonlinear phenomena are unpredictable, because tiny initial
influences with time can lead to enormous consequences. In conventional
life, this same phenomenon is called the Domino Effect. Where the
initial fall of the first domino successfully entails catastrophe of the
series. The catalyzing action, whose event occurs on your will,
determines which of the scenarios will runoptimistic or pessimistic.
Scientific Sphere
¶
This cognitive form reflects the synergy formed by the current
worldview. Within this paradigm during the 18th century arose the
Kant-Laplace hypothesis about the vortex origin of the sun and planets
from cosmic dust.
The Synergetic paradigm is opposed to Creationism; the emergence of
complex systems explains spontaneous creation, not divine intervention.
A typical example from the history of science is biochemist A. I.
Oparin’s hypothesis on the emergence of life from inanimate matter in
the primordial ‘broth’ of Earth’s early existence, which was largely
confirmed in Stanley Miller’s famous 1953 experiment.
Also hailing from the Synergetic paradigm comes the outlook of Nikolai
Amosov. According to him it “explains the evolution of the world’s
self-organizing structures miracles can happen, but are of no practical
value.” He sincerely believes demonstrative simulations can be recreated
by computer models.
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 historywhat if Alexander of Macedon did not die (pessimistic
version), how would the world have developed then (optimistic version)?
A real-life model of Synergetic cognition is the turbulent flow.
Turbulence is a liquid or gas flow, in which there is rapid mixing of
its moving layers. The behavior of such flows cannot be predicted.
Whereas the preceding laminar flow phrase exhibits clear regularities
deducible by Causal-Determinism.
Mathematical modeling of natural growth processes typically uses
exponential functions. Such functions describe geometric progressions,
rather than arithmetic values. Logarithmic (S-shaped) curves terminating
in saturation points are common in dynamic modeling. Implying that
self-organization is not omnipotent: after exceeding a certain limit, it
exhausts its own momentum. At which point it becomes necessary to either
yield to external structure, or create a new nexus of self-organization.
Synergetic types naturally select the latter.
Lev N. Gumilev offers a Synergetic account for involutions of
ethnogenesis in the birth, growth, and death process of societies.
Social systems dictate rules of selection for specific behaviors of
people. Charismatic-personalities (cranks, outcasts, dissenters)
engender a variety of diverse social mutations. Society holds them at
bay, until such time that it weakens for any reason (due to economic
crisis, internal wars, cultural stagnation, etc.). Afterwards, the
energy of a new order vigorously sweeps the decrepit system and begins
to grow in its place. But sooner or later, the new order itself will age
just the same and be forced to give way to an alternative system
ripening in its depths, and so forth.
Vortical cognition is hardest to convey to people of Algorithmic
cognition, since to them free choice and the game of chance opposes
teleology, fate, the special role of a creator, etc. When Synergetics
speak about the implicit order in chaos, if we translate their words to
the language of Socionics, they imply that Holographical cognition, with
its minimally convoluted ordering structures, is dual to the chaotic
vortex.
Conclusion
¶
What you focus attention on creates your subjective world. If you
concentrate attention on problems, then your world will be full of
obstacles. Focus on the positive side of the situation and it becomes
easier to live. Will reduce the scope of thought, come to the idea of
creator. You will enlarge, to believe in free will.
Socionics useful to formulate criterion for high-level professionals.
Average specialists analyze only the conditions of the problem, and
highly qualified only its method of solution. Anyone aware of their
own intellectual limitations can learn to overcome them, or better
yet, seek the aid of people which think in these forms already
because of their Sociotype. In any event, systematic work in this way
will increase efficiency of your intellect.
Quartet types, referred to as Supervision rings, are macro-model
internal information structures of the psyche. Perfecting this
structure is the first radical step in managing ever-increasing
volumes of data. The second step is to move to collective forms of
intellectual activity. All the complexity is to properly combine
these forms of thinking in a coherent group. Otherwise we are really
confronted with the end of the science, exhausted separately of all 4
basic paradigms established in the acclaimed book by J. Horgan [7].
Your thoughts will only firmly and without distortion penetrate
public consciousness if your quartet learns your POV. They indeed
think in the same form as you, but refract it through different kinds
of activity. Only after passing through all the regular stagesfrom
inception to development, debugging, and implementationcan an idea
be fully ushered into reality. No need to confine to quadra limits.
Real propagation occurs through the Supervision ring. Quadra is
important, but only a way-station along this path.
Thinking geniuses are most likely the ultimate version of
Dialectical-Algorithmic cognition. Its originality lies in free play
of mind, boundless imagination, and daring synthesis of contrasts.
Almost always, it accompanies negativity with respect to public
opinion. Often possesses a mystical streak. If Western typology
believes that brilliant thinkers belonged to a type, then in my
opinion it would be
EIE
. Unbalanced nervous system, hot and
restless heart, floods of idea associationsthis would be the
material from which nature sculpts geniuses.
Sources
¶
Alekseev AA, Gromova LA Do not get me pravilno6 or a book on how to
find your style of thinking, effective use of intellectual resources
and gain rapport with people. - St., School of Economics, 1993.
Gulenko VV Synthesis and antisintez polarities. Epistemological
dichotomy. Socionics, Mentology and personality psychology. - 1998. -
NN 5-6.
Gulenko VV, Tyshchenko VP Jung in school. Socionics - mezhvozrastnoy
pedagogy. Educational and methodical. allowance. - Novosibirsk:
Izdatel’stvo NGU, 1997.
Gulenko VV Man as a type system. The problem of diagnosing the ego
and persona. Socionics, Mentology and personality psychology. - 2000.
- N 6.
Robert A. Wilson. Quantum Psychology. Translated from English. Ed. J.
Nevstrueva. - K.: “Janus”, 1999.
Godefroy J. What is Psychology: In 2 Vols Volume 1: Ed. with the
French. - M.: Mir, 1996., Pp. 436.
Horgan J. The End of Science: A look at the limited knowledge in the
twilight of the Century of Science, Ed. from English. M. Zhukova. -
St.: Amphora, 2001.
Kapitsa SP, Kurdyumov SP, Synergetics and forecasts of the future.
Moscow: Nauka, 1997.
Gleick J. Chaos. Creating a new science, Ed. from English. M.
Nakhmanson, E. Wing. - St.: Amphora, 2001.
Examples
¶
This is not a formal part of the article.
This section contains examples of statements that have been collected
over time from various sources and that possibly reflect and illustrate
the workings of different cognitive styles.
‘’’Dialectical-Algorithmic Cognition (DA)
¶
EIE, ILI, SEI, LSE
“But I do think in complications and contingencies, and balance a lot
of conflicting possibilities in my mind all at once.” - EIE
“… my thinking style mostly consists of balancing opposites,
finding middle grounds and relative truths based on the relative
strength of opposing internal dispositions; when I’m under stress it
kind of feels like I’m walking a tight rope, trying to balance what’s
going on in my head. To me it feels like a constant balancing act of
my own internal tendencies for the things that I consider good and
evil, the things I consciously do to improve myself and the world and
my ability to promote my own vision of how I think things should be
vs. the evils I am compelled to do either by my own impulses that I
struggle to control or by circumstance. Everything I do is weighed on
these scales, every word that comes out of my mouth, every emotional
signal I send, every action I take, and the final outcome, what comes
out of me and goes into the world, is dependent on how the scales are
balancing inside me.” - EIE
“I have a horrible talent for entertaining and enhancing oppositions
in my mind. If two things don’t go together, I put them together in
my perceptions. And I get paralyzed or something. I’m basically nuts.
It’s that I really see how a thing and its opposite fit together,
locked up. And that can bring me a huge amount of pleasure, to see
that. The downside seems to be that I can’t … um, function. These
are gestalts. And so a good friend will come in with a nice hammer
and start breaking it into pieces.” - EIE
“The best I can represent it as would be something like a scale that
has weight being constantly poured onto it, and the ENFJ’s role is to
dictate where the weight falls in order to maintain proper balance. I
think it makes a lot of sense for Aristocratic EJs: rational
aristocracy is all about maintaining a social structure, so its
fitting that the Ejs have a style of thinking that supports their
role, one focused on “keeping things together.” The mental assumption
of Ej temperament is that everything is in motion, and that it should
be organized, and that energy needs to be exerted in order to
maintain organization; the Democrat Ejs (ENTjs) being the transition
point to aristocratic quadras, take a more generative role with
Vortex thinking, finding the right opportunity to promote cathectic
action; once the shift is made into an extant collective, the
Aristocratic Ejs (ENFjs) take on the role of holding everything
together once the opportunity to organize has been capitalized upon.” - EIE
“I wanted to set up a situation where there are hundreds of sentences
all of which are plausibly true to someone, but then in effect pose
the question “what do you do, how, for example, would you govern
given all these conflicting opinions?” - LSE, aristocratic EJ
“I feel like a triple-agent or a fence-sitter. … I don’t think I
switch sides so much as I’m thoroughly a part of both sides. In the
final battle, my friend and I will just be hitting ourselves.” - LSE
“All that we identify with in reality was all brought about by the
psychic current of introversion. Extraversion is like a
contra-density, a force of expansion and inflation that prevents the
complete nullification of all ideas and concepts, and the collapse of
all psychic energy in the universe into recursive introversion. It is
the mirror image of introversion in every respect, and has to be in
order to function as a perfect eternal balance giving rise to
infinite truths in infinite forms.” - ILI
“It’s challenging being a wife and a mother. It’s a paradox - a
paradox are when two opposites are true, and I’ve learned that my
life is full of mini-paradoxes, of much paradox. So being a wife and
a mother is probably one of the most extraordinary experiences and
the most fulfilling experiences in my life. But at the same time, it
has been very difficult to balance, being able to do the things that
I want to do and have the freedoms that I want to have, and also
being responsible for your brothers and your father. Im constantly
everyday trying to figure out that balance. Figuring out how to help
you fulfill your dreams, at the same time assisting Daddy and his
dreams, assisting your brothers and their dreams and then trying to
figure out what my dreams are. So every day when I wake up in the
morning and I go into meditation and I ask for guidance. I get
focused.” - ILI
“I tend to view myself in terms of certain attributes. Like for
example, I’m intelligent, foolish, amiable, distant, novelty-loving,
rut-oriented, independent, afraid of losing people, savor the moment,
and am pretty indolent. I have my moments, both ways. Sometimes at
the same time!” - SEI (notice the juxtaposition of the opposites)
“I suppose what I meant by grouping all these people in one thread is
that I think although they’re not the same type. Juxtaposing clearly
different individuals side by side helps me to see the psychology of
them. That’s probably super obvious to everyone but me, but for some
reason last night this was like a lame epiphany since usually when I
think of someone’s type I think of them alone, like an island, or
something.” - SEI
How DA and CD thinking styles complement each other, described by
ILE: “The way I look at CD logic and DA thinking is that they form a
state(static)-operator(dynamic) pairing. DA thinking provides the
algorithmic form. CD logic provides the variable which determines the
solution. So for function A(param X) {if X = b then Y else Z} DA
thinking provides the algorithmic form while CD thinking provides the
variable. By supply X, Y or Z is determined. I don’t create
if-then-else propositions. By supplying variables to pre-existing
functions, I determine the singular result.”
Tao Te Ching
by Lao-tzu exemplifies D-A thinking style. Notice the juxtaposition
of the opposites and numerous negativist, dynamic constructions. The
verses have a distinct back-and-forth rocking style.
“I’m not raging against socionics, do not see a point in that in the
first place. To me, it is the same, people who are against and people
who are for, same boat, different opinion but still same boat. If it
wasn’t some other scenario, those people wouldn’t be even here and
just said “meh”, and left. So they’re a part of the whole to me, a
cog, thinking they’re going to tinker with it and it is going to
sink. Well, true believers just tighten the screws seeing that and
balance is achieved. So you all can rage all you want, for and
against, for you all are wearing shackles that you put on yourself
willingly and enjoy it. For example: Subject A: Socionics is
bullshit, Subject B: Socionics is real: A+B = Socionics. Classic push
and pull. - LSE
Causal-Determinist Cognition (CD)
¶
LSI, SEE, ILE, EII
“I see flashes of instantaneous understanding of the cause and effect
of every possible action I could take at that very moment, and I
choose extremely quickly which one is the best choice.” - LSI
“There is like a flowchart in my mind. Every single possible if-then
statement is recorded and stored in my brain and I have an amazing
memory for it. My plans for the future can be written in C++ format
if I wanted. (If I get this job, I will stay for 6 months. Else I
will find a new job & work on my real estate liscence
simultaneously). When I was younger, interacting with people was a
huge flowchart for me, because I had no emotional intelligence (and
it is debatable if I still do). I would make a complete flowchart in
my mind so I could control the interaction and know exactly how a
person was going to react so I wouldn’t get my feelings hurt. For
example, I would plan an entire interaction in my mind, “I’m going to
say “hi, how are you?” her possible responses will be: nothing,
something non-commital, and something engaging. If the person says
nothing, I will try again and stop conversation if they don’t
respond. If the person says something non-committal, I’ll leave. If
the person says something engaging, I will start such-and-such topics
of conversation with him or her: X, Y, Z.” - LSI
How DA and CD thinking styles complement each other, described by
ILE: “The way I look at CD logic and DA thinking is that they form a
state(static)-operator(dynamic) pairing. DA thinking provides the
algorithmic form. CD logic provides the variable which determines the
solution. So for function A(param X) {if X = b then Y else Z} DA
thinking provides the algorithmic form while CD thinking provides the
variable. By supply X, Y or Z is determined. I don’t create
if-then-else propositions. By supplying variables to pre-existing
functions, I determine the singular result.”
“If one asks how one’s mind works, he notices areas where it is
(perhaps incorrectly) understood, that is, where one recognizes
rules. One sees other areas where he lacks rules. One could fill this
in by postulating chance or random activity. But this too, by another
route, exposes the self to the same indignity of remote control. We
resolve this unpleasant form of M** by postulating a third part,
embodying a will or spirit or conscious agent. But there is no
structure in this part; one can say nothing meaningful about it,
because whenever a regularity is observed, its representation is
transferred to the deterministic rule region. The will model is thus
not formed from a legitimate need for a place to store definite
information about one’s self; it has the singular character of being
forced into the model, willy-nilly, by formal but essentially
content-free ideas of what the model must contain.” - LSI or ILE
“I think here lies the problem with the system. There has been no
consistent principle put forth in the past five years, of how the
system actually works. Frankly I thought Socionics was a good theory
until baseless arguments begin on how the system works.” - LSI
“This is why socionics is so confusing. For some people it means one
thing, for another something else. There needs to be a set
description with no chance for uncertainty.” - LSI, (People of types
with C-D style of thinking seem to experience the most difficulty
learning socionics, perhaps because some of basic axioms of socionics
have never been clearly stated. The high levels of ambiguity embedded
in socionics present a challenge to C-D thinkers in attempting to
grasp it. V. Gulenko has also made a comment that socionics is easier
to grasp for Result types, which rely on VS or HP thinking styles.)
Vortical-Synergetic Cognition (VS)
¶
IEI, LIE, ESE, SLI
“But the best way to do it is - to make discoveries - is to make
short imperfect experiments. Don’t worry about taking notes, in most
cases, but just try things out. Shove nature around a little bit.
Disturb it. Disturb an organism, disturb a small system and find out
- to see if anything happens. And if it does, you might be on the
edge of an important breakthrough, and then you sit down and devise
experiments and take notes.” - SLI
“We are drowning in information, while starving for wisdom. The world
henceforth will be run by synthesizers - people able to put together
the right information at the right time, think critically about it,
and make important choices wisely.” - SLI
Tim Harford’s TED talk
- SLI, his
presentation demonstrates the trial-and-error intrinsic to VS
cognitive style
“My thinking is alike mucking about in puddles - randomized, but
following some sort of direction. Playing some music, my head clicks
together properly and thoughts come into focused torrents. Headwise,
I live in a world of organized chaos.” - IEI
“I love to deconstruct complex concepts, organize ideas, form
conclusions or arguments by looking at it through several different
lenses. I love that “Aha!” moment when everything clicks together for
me.” - IEI, forum poster
“To be blunt, I arrived at this typing out of gestalt. Since I know
myself better than anybody else, and since I am the common
denominator in all of my inter-type relations, my self typing becomes
the focal point around my understanding of socionics coalesces.
Imagining myself to be different types is akin to playing around with
the focus on a pair of binoculars. Everything comes out blurry at all
focal settings other than this one. At this point, everything snaps
into focus and I am taken aback by how well socionics premises appear
to jive with my own experiences. Every other focal setting produces a
jumbled mess of incoherence from which nothing of value can be
gleaned.” - IEI
“Sometimes the connections and perceptions in my mind are so abstract
there are no words to explain. A lot of times I just know something
and cant explain it - a premonition thats hard to articulate. If
its strong I usually say something or explore where its coming
from, but I will keep it to myself if people dont seem to
understand. Informed decisions require lots of information and
looking at a situation from as many different points of view as
possible. I find it amusing, the absurdity in everyday situations.” -
IEI
“Vortex thinking believes the system is not perfectly counter
balanced, and the connections of all the data imply the value of an
unknown variable (all the information points toward its value). The
value of the variable is what brings the system back into balance.
That’s why vortex thinking is opportunistic. Vortex thinking is
searching for something.” - IEI
Videos exemplifying the search for attractors:
Lorenz Attractor Simulation
,
Exploring Strange Attractors
.
“You imply that nature intends something. That’s just you projecting
your own human notions unto something that’s utterly inhuman in every
way. There is no natural equilibrium, no balanced system that we’re
parts of. There is no thought behind it. Nature is purposeless,
mindless, violent, self consuming chaos, only it’s so slow we barely
notice it. It does not “hint” and it does not “intend” us to
reproduce. We’re completely meaningless results of a 4 billion long,
automatic and completely mindless process of small random changes and
sifting by natural selection. Whatever purpose you see here is made
up by you.” - LIE
“Sometimes the time gap in between Point A and Point B is so far in
between that it allows me to think of all the things I could have
improved upon to have a better point B (interestingly enough while
this is happening my mind is also hovering over Point C). It’s this
point that I begin spiraling as the immensity of all the ways I could
have made it better weighs on my shoulders. Somewhere in that chaos,
the thought of “OMG I’m running out of time” crosses, until of course
one settles. An epiphany hits and BAM you realize, “You’re way ahead
in time and all things are falling into place (not perfect as
envisioned) but they are aligning as you’ve imagined.” At this point,
I think Point B is just about to meet you face-to-face at the exact
moment you’ve predicted and Point C is already peaking over in the
horizon.” - LIE
Alan Watts on
harnessing the power of nature
.
An
MMO game
likely
incepted by someone with V-S cog-style
Visual illustration of VS cognition
in music video
Holographical-Panoramic Cognition (HP)
¶
SLE, ESI, LII, IEE
“Art is the elimination of the unnecessary” - SLE
“Why the hell would I need to think about reasons? If I got them, I
do stuff; if I don’t, I might do stuff just the same. Oftentimes the
conclusion would be the same either way, but I get there faster if I
just chop out a large bulk, if not all, of the deliberation.” - IEE
“When shit hits the fan, I stop all thinking and just do a bunch of
stuff, and then everything turns out awesome. Seems I’m most
comfortable when all hell is breaking loose.” - IEE
“There are two aspects to any person: essence and behavior. Typology
based on behavior improves with complexity: the more dichotomies you
come up with, the more accurate it is. On the other side, typology
based on essence strives for simplicity: it’s about reducing
personality to its minimal expression. There is no limit about how
far you can go about complexity and this is why there are so many
behavioral typological systems. But simplicity has a limit and that
limit is probably Socionics.” - IEE
“I never over analyze the things that people say or do - I feel like
people’s intentions are always very clear to me.” - ESI
“I don’t really focus on what they’re doing or why. It’s just not
important to me. I’ll meet someone for the first time and pay hardly
any attention to what they’re doing, tbh. Usually people say the
wrong things or look awkward at first because they’re nervous, shy,
or just not open to me yetI’m not going to analyze the things they
say. It just isn’t of much significance to me. However, I do tend to
gather impressions of people when I first meet them, but it’s by
observing something else.
I suppose you could call it a person’s
undertone? Like if you meet some girl who acts extroverted and
bubbly, it’s not hard for me to look past that and see one general
face to hera more solid, internal, static thing that serves as a
core despite her outward expressions.
I guess it’s like spotting
depression in someone even if they act like they’re on top of the
world. And yeah, if I do meet someone that looks like they’re acting
against who they are, it feels obvious to me. That sort of impression
tends to last too, and I’ll wonder if they’ll ever start showing who
[I think] they are. And even though I’m not going to really judge
them for it, I still can’t get over the sense of internal friction
they give off, and I feel like I can’t get close to people like that.
I do trust my impressions, though. How I feel about them can and
probably will change over time, but who I think they are pretty much
stays the same.” - ESI
“Lets say that you are in a room that has no walls, no floor, and no
roof. This room is completely free of conventional rules except for
those of your own choosing, rules such as gravity for example. In
this room, the focus of your attention is an object that you are
dissecting or even expanding upon. You don’t have to come into direct
contact with the object in order to move it in anyway. However, you
choose to view the object will allow you to view in this way. You
could choose to inverse the object in anyway shape or form to
accurately/properly analyze it from your desired perspective.” - LII
“My frame of perception is constantly shifting, or I’m layering one
on top of the other.” - LII
“Ne delves into possible realities. First, a schema appears before
the mind’s eye, then the facts are filled in depending on the
context, but the facts are never given value. There is no seeking of
facts for their own sake.” - LII
LII’s explanation of HP thinking: “It is above all stable. Where
Positive/Process strives for impact, Negative/Result strives for
control. It involves a kind of sluggish maneuverability where the
person has the ability to quickly change course while at the same
time not making a lot of movements. The best analogy for this is a
kind of kung-fu fighter that stands still and only steps out of the
way when the opponent throws a punch at him. The above goes for the
EPs as much as it goes for the IJs. Negative/Result EP types (ESTp,
ENFp) can look a little IJ’ish for this reason. Their level of
volatility/abruptness is lower than that of ENTp and ESFp. …
Negative/Result/Static is about simply not acting. Positioning
yourself strategically and waiting until the right moment to move
arrives. This is not multitasking so much as it is simply being
ready. … Negative/Result is all about reaching that state of
familiarity where a very relaxed kind of control is possible, but one
needs to make a big effort to get there - slow to understand, but
very relaxed control once familiar with the topic.”
“I just started writing the script and kept writing, and it evolved
and evolved. Its like filling in a crossword puzzle. You know that
word has got to be abracadabra, right? Because theres no other word
it can be until you get halfway through and you see that the word
down the middle has a P in the middle of abracadabra and there is no
P. So therefore, one of them has to be wrong. They cant both be
right. And the same thing is true about structuring a drama. You go
along and say, “I know this has got to happen at the end of the
second act,” until you realize youve spent two years, and it doesnt
work. So somethings wrong. Either the first and third acts are wrong
or the second act is wrong. How am I going to fix it? The structure
is the whole thing  getting the movie to eat up 15 lines on a sheet
of paper so you can write it.” - SLE (This quote illustrates the
problem solving aspect of negativist H-P thinking. It is similar to
the above quote by an LII - the SLE likewise sees his puzzle as a
whole picture, then he simply proceeds to fill in the blanks and work
out the particulars, since for Result/Involutionary types, the
thinking flows
from general outlook to specifics
.)
“Well, you cant help but make a distinct movie. If you give yourself
up to the form, its going to be distinctively your own because the
forms going to tell you whats needed. Thats one of the great
things I find about working in drama is youre always learning from
the form. Youre always getting humbled by it. Its exactly like
analyzing a dream. Youre trying to analyze your dreams. You say, I
know what that means; I know exactly what that means; why am I still
unsettled? You say, Let me look a little harder at this little
thing over here. But thats not important; thats not important;
thats not important. The part where I kill the monster  thats the
important part, and I know that means my father this and that. But
what about this little part over here about the bunny rabbit? Why is
the bunny rabbit hopping across the thing? Oh, thats not important.
Making up a drama is almost exactly analogous to analyzing your
dreams” - SLE (From main article: “According to Aristotle,
Holographic cognition corresponds to explanation by structural or
formative causes. Aristotle called it the structure of form.
Returning to the sculptor example, the cause of the sculpture is its
latent form, which the sculptor merely sets free by cutting away
excess marble.”)