Talk:Information elements

I know I need to look up rules for wikis, but I wanted to point out that the the Dichotomies section, under Static vs Dynamic, the information given is erred. It states that:

" Static vs. dynamic

Static information is discrete and about things that change abruptly:

   Ne : discrete temporal phases and sets of discrete alternatives 
   Ti : discrete logical and structural dependencies between states of affairs. 
   Se : discrete spatial boundaries that delineate territory and control. 
   Fi : discrete types of interpersonal relationships, such as "friend" or "enemy". 

Dynamic information is continuous and about things that are in constant fluctuation:

   Si : one's continuous physical exchanges with one's environment. 
   Fe : the continuous excitations in people's psychological states. 
   Ni : the continuous evolution of things over time. 
   Te : the continuous incoming stream of objective facts about the world. "

"Discrete" in Socionics refers to the rational elements of T&F, not to "static information". "Continuous" in Socionics refers to the irrational elements of S&N, not to "dynamic information". references: http://informacionika.narod.ru/frameset.html?display=http%3A//informacionika.narod.ru/aspects.html http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=The_Structure_and_the_Elements_of_the_Socionics_Model

So the page is erred on it's definition of static, dynamic, Ne, Se, Fe, and Te. This has been creating confusion on the forums as well. Whether the forum confusion is caused by this wikipage, or whether the erred wikipage is caused by forum confusion, or separately, I dunno. But it would be nice to see it fixed.

I recognize that it may be easy for some to confuse the discrete/continuous with static/dynamic, because Static deals with discrete fields, while Dynamic deals with continuous fields. But that completely ignores that Static deals with continuous objects while Dynamic deals with discrete objects. (for an example of Fe as a discrete rational element, see: http://www.socionics.us/theory/be.shtml "Why is extraverted ethics considered a rational element? Because the forms of emotional expressions described above are all discrete — an intonation here, a gesture there, a cough here, a sudden frown there. EIEs and ESEs often seem abrupt because they constantly send out these discrete signals, without smooth transitions between them.") --Anndelise 12:29, 10 July 2010 (BST)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

I changed some of the wording to the Ti IM - I thought it was necessary to make it more general/accessible; for instance, how could a typical ILE see him/herself in some of the previous Ti words, without there being some emphasis on the big picture? --jason_m 19:15, 16 April (BST)

Heh. "Fundamental truth"… "a search for truth, both locally and universally"… sounds awful aggrandizing. Maybe you could at least try to come off a bit less self-stroking about Ti. Ashton 18:55, 17 April 2011 (BST)

The problem is that the ego functions that I'm stroking are technically Ti functions; more Ti egos would have identified with these statements. As it stands now, a lot of the statements sound more towards the Te end of the spectrum or are maybe more geared toward LSIs... They should be as generalizable as possible - consistent with all Ti types... jason_m 18:57, 25 Oct 2011 (BST)