Posted by Kronus on August 25, 1998 at 11:05:13:
In Reply to: Re: A Plausible Hypothesis posted by walter on August 23, 1998 at 13:26:35:
Walter:
1. I do find Keisey's thumbnails to be helpful. I would extrapolate the information to how adults view movies. As a SEVEN, I find that both elements of symbolism (metaphor) and description (continuity of story line) are important elements to the successful cinematic creation. My FOUR spouse and I often disagree about the content and value of a movie based on her wish for the film-maker to delve into more "relationship" story lines and my desire to see "shotgun fights." I must admit that I do have a bias for action, however, if the relationship line is important and contributes to the story line "shot gun fighting" becomes secondary. Two notable films: Uley's Gold and Private Ryan. Both had action but the real dynamic was in the relationships of the characters... another notable feature was Mel Gibson's, Braveheart. In Braveheart not all of the war scenes were depicted, this made for a better movie in my opinion. The question becomes: is this a result of equinimity between Sensing and iNtuiting
function or is there another dynamic at work here?
2. As to the identification of iNtuitors v. Sensors in early childhood: for a teacher the question is usually more of, does the child "get it" or are they interested? I suspect that most teachers assume the child is a "fence post" when in reality they are internalizing data or involved in iNtuitive response rather than kinesthetically moving about or demonstrating "correct behaviors". I believe we need to spend more time exploring this avenue to fully explain why children "shut-down" or at minimum appear to shut down. I have spent quite a bit of time learning about the process of reading and language development, and in the process attempting to reconcile kinesthetic, visual and audio learning styles. As an audio-cognitive process (speaking) the function of language acquisition appears fairly straight-forward; when we add in the visual-abstractive process of assigning symbols to audio stored units the process becomes more difficult, especially when we consider that the English language contains several meanings for the same audio cue, and perhaps as many for the written symbols. There is also the matter of brain function and interconnectivity which occurs as a result of shifting from speach to written symbolism. Is the shift from purely audio-cognitive function to audio-visual-kinesthetic (kinesthetic here referring to motor function of the eye movement to view each symbol on the page) accounted for by Jung or Gurdjieff models? Or are they merely explanations for "defense mechanisms"?
3. We need to define or at base, agree to acceptable contextual terms:
ACTION: ability to make determinate decisions and to follow a course of action (syn: movement)
NON-ACTION: inabilty, or incapacity to establish a course of action or undertake conclusive resulting behaviors (syn: inactivity)
FEAR OF OUTCOME: mental or physical stasis resulting from the inability to reconcile potential outcomes or probabilities which may result from choosing one course of action over another
COMFORT: mental condition of acceptance that a course of action is either going to yield a certain result or can be modified as circumstances change
4. Let's return to the Anecdotal Observation in our next missive.
5. I need to hear more about the Dyonisian Temperament prior to comment.
Case Study: Joe is a person who acts. When faced with a decision he quickly analyzes the available information and moves toward some activity which will resolve the remaining unansered questions, but allow for modification of that decision if his intuitive assumptions were initially incorrect. Joe has a bias for action and results. He regularly describes himself as "the reasonable man" and attempts to frame everything in terms of cause and effect. On the surface Joe is trusting of people's motivations but undernieth it all he does not believe that people will act anyway but in their own special interest.
Sally, tends to require facts, figures, and view all potential outcomes with skepticism and caution. She always has an unanswered question about situations confronting her in her life. She tends to be able to look at a situation and ask deep meaningful questions and extrapolate, almost mystically, scenerios which no one, heretofore, had thought of. She is cynical of people's motivations always looking for the hidden agenda. Privately she will express this, but remains mute on the subject to the public.
When buying a new car Joe quietly goes about researching price, reliability, and relative value of one model over another; Sally accepts Joe's input but relies more heavily on past experiences with similar vehicles. Joe establishes a grid of relative values and selects the one vehicle with the best performance rating within his price range; Sally tends to look more at the absolutes and prefers to find ways of affording the best/highest value irrespective of price. When Joe has decided to BUY he moves toward that end; Sally never appears to make a decision and questions occur to her, which she asks, even while signing the loan papers. Many of Sally's questions are either considered irrelevent, overly detailed, or of negligible concern to Joe, who demonstrates annoyance with their being asked AFTER his decision has been made.
When the car needs routine servicing Sally asks: could this have been avoided; whereas, Joe views it as a normal event to be encountered. Sally loves the way the car looks; Joe is more in tune with how the car performs. Sally thinks the car is jinxed because she has been sideswiped twice. Joe wants to pay it off and get another car because of all the body work and potential for internal damage that can't be detected.
Walter, your dialogue is GREATLY appreciated.
Kronus