Catch-22

[wildcat]

This is the declension of E (Extraversion)

06 07 08 09 10 11 12
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
04 05 06 07 08 09 10
03 04 05 06 07 08 09
02 03 04 05 06 07 08
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
00 01 02 03 04 05 06

This is the declension of I

06 05 04 03 02 01 00
07 06 05 04 03 02 01
08 07 06 05 04 03 02
09 08 07 06 05 04 03
10 09 08 07 06 05 04
11 10 09 08 07 06 05
12 11 10 09 08 07 06
12 11 10 09 08 07 06

In the number in the loci
6(7 X 7) =

6666666
6666666
6666666
6666666
6666666
6666666
6666666

=

d. of I
=
d. of E

 

[wildcat]

Alright! I appreciate your patience.

We shall be there! Sit tight!

 

[wildcat]

The dichotomy of E =

quantified P (> Impulsivity quantified):

6666666
4444444
2222222
0000000
0000000
0000000
0000000

+

qualified J (Activity qualified)

0123456
1234567
2345678
3456789
2345678
1234567
0123456

or parallelly

6789876
5678765
4567654
3456543
2345432
1234321
0123210

+

0000246
0000246
0000246
0000246
0000246
0000246
0000246

The parallel dichotomy depicts impulsivity(a dichotomy of P as well) qualified; activity( a dichotomy of J as well) however quantified.
Qualification brings about the contour of the MBTI pattern (choice). Quantification is about quantity (how much). It leaves out the aspect of choice.

 

[wildcat]

MBTI is unlinear.
Therefore it is a process of qualification while it excludes the linear component.

0123210
1234321
2345432
3456543
4567654
5678765
6789876

0123456
1234567
2345678
3456789
2345678
1234567
0123456

6543210
7654321
8765432
9876543
8765432
7654321
6543210

6789876
5678765
4567654
3456543
2345432
1234321
0123210

We pick out what is above number 6 in each component while leaving out the loci composed of the straight lines.

We zero 6 (because it is composed of straight lines); we zero what is below 6 as invalid.

0XX0XX0
X0X0X0X
XX000XX
000O000
XX000XX
X0X0X0X
0XX0XX0

 

[wildcat]

0XX0XX0
X0X0X0X
XX000XX
000O000
XX000XX
X0X0X0X
0XX0XX0

8 clusters.
24/3 = 8
It follows in the 4(5 + 5) model a cluster equals one locus.

of which in the 6(7 X 7) model: clockwise from top 12345678
equals the vertical from top left:

87
16
25
34

and the horizontal from the rock bottom from the right:

56
47
38
21

check

8123
1876

9999


counter check

5432
4567

9999

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

MBTI is unlinear.
Therefore it is a process of qualification while it excludes the linear component.

0123210
1234321
2345432
3456543
4567654
5678765
6789876

+

6789876
5678765
4567654
3456543
2345432
1234321
0123210

=

0XX0XX0
X0X0X0X
XX000XX
000O000
XX000XX
X0X0X0X
0XX0XX0

So those two graphs above added together equal this one below? This would be the same for the other two graphs that I deleted from the quote as well?

 

[wildcat]

So those two graphs above added together equal this one below? This would be the same for the other two graphs that I deleted from the quote as well?

There is no add. No plus mark. Strictly speaking there is no = either. The four graphs coexist on an imaginary plane. On this imaginary plane they give birth to a contour, and the outcome of the contour is the graph below. The contour is the beginning of a form. The idea is to see which picture, which form or gestalt springs forth.. out of the framework of the gualified imaginarily coexistent number structure.
The imaginary plane is not a dichotomy. It is a holistic entity.. the ontological cohabitation plane of the structural whole.

 

[wildcat]

The post 104 is only a check.. of what I earlier on suggested we should do.. but we didn't, cos nobody was interested at the time.

I suggested we remove the straight lines of the 6 soup:

6(7 X 7) =

6666666
6666666
6666666
6666666
6666666
6666666
6666666

we zero the straight lines one by one

0666666
6066666
6606666
6660666
6666066
6666606
6666660

6666660
6666606
6666066
6660666
6606666
6066666
0666666

6666666
6666666
6666666
0000000
6666666
6666666
6666666

6660666
6660666
6660666
6660666
6660666
6660666
6660666

0660660
6060606
6600066
0000000
6600066
6060606
0660660

So you see the contour of the qualification process has begun to take shape already. It is not an accident, of course. MBTI is a qualification process: it is about a choice. We have found the mbti in the loci.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

I apologize for all of the questions, but the last graph above:

0660660
6060606
6600066
0000000
6600066
6060606
0660660

Is it describing MBTI as a whole? Each cluster of '6' is given to a letter i.e. I and E (ha.) N and S etc. (or the clusters denotate a complete set of a function like the upper left quadrant describes the scale of E and I), or is this something different?

I will keep in mind that there is no adding or equalling from now on ! At least for this case, that is.

 

[wildcat]

I apologize for all of the questions, but the last graph above:

0660660
6060606
6600066
0000000
6600066
6060606
0660660

Is it describing MBTI as a whole? Each cluster of '6' is given to a letter i.e. I and E (ha.) N and S etc. (or the clusters denotate a complete set of a function like the upper left quadrant describes the scale of E and I), or is this something different?

I will keep in mind that there is no adding or equalling from now on ! At least for this case, that is.

Yes. Well perceived.
It does describe MBTI in the enirety.

The two clusters on the left depict IP. If one of the IP's has the first function Fi, and the other one has got the first function Ti, then we already have drawn the axioms F and T and we go on and in the process determine the other axioms. It may or may not be the case.
If it is not the case or we do not know, or we do not want to determine it yet, we look further. The two clusters up at the top depict EP. If one of EP's has the first function Se, and the other one has the first function Ne, we have already drawn the axioms S and N and we can go on and in the process determine the other axioms. It may or may not be the case.

The two clusters on the right depict EJ. If one of them has the first function Fe and the other one has got the first function Te, we can determine the axioms of F and T from there.
That is, the axiom dividing line is then between them. It may or may not be the case.

The two clusters at the bottom depict IJ. If one of them has the first function Si and the other one has the first function Ni, we can determine the axioms of S and N from there. It may or may not be the case.

Equalling is the finding of the lowest common denominator between the axioms. It is a useful procedure; we used it when we qualified the numbers and therefore we could find the MBTI loci. If there is adding we use the mark + .. if there is no sign of + in sight there is no adding.

There are more ways to find the MBTI loci than one; the simplest is simply to eliminate the straight lines. However, we wanted to find the sound theoretical basis, therefore the equalling. If we are equalling, I try to remember to mention it.

You are welcome to ask any questions! No need to apologize.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

How exactly do you determine which grouping of 6 means which function cluster (IP, EJ etc.)? I know you pointed out which ones were which, I was just curious as to how you knew that from the graph.

 

[wildcat]

How exactly do you determine which grouping of 6 means which function cluster (IP, EJ etc.)? I know you pointed out which ones were which, I was just curious as to how you knew that from the graph.

You have posted the valid questions in the thread. I expected this question.
Spatially, there is no beyond.
The axiom is within only.
A change in the axiom in the order does not change anything. What comes, goes.
It is about the order. In other words, there is no space outside.

The other side is not beyond. It is the other side of what is.
IP could be the direct opposite, or the cross direct opposite of what I have chosen.
The order would be the same.

A universal entity is not in a thing. It is the thing. It does not have axioms apart from its own axioms. The reference point is within.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

I felt like that might be the case. Just as long as you remained consistent, you could designate what you wished each to be.

 

[wildcat]

I felt like that might be the case. Just as long as you remained consistent, you could designate what you wished each to be.

Exactly.

 

[wildcat]

How to make it easy?
Look for the component party (c).

if 100 - 1
c. = 100 + T(1)

100 + T(1) -
100 - 1
= 11

T(2) = 2 X T(1)

T(11) = 11

a mismatch?
no, 11 X 10 = 110

check

99 - T(01 X 9) = 011-02
99 - T(02 X 9) = 022-04
99 - T(03 X 9) = 033-06
99 - T(04 X 9) = 044-08
99 - T(05 X 9) = 055-10
99 - T(06 X 9) = 066-12
99 - T(07 X 9) = 077-14
99 - T(08 X 9) = 088-16
99 - T(09 X 9) = 099-18
99 - T(10 X 9) = 110-20

 

[alcea rosea]

What a thread!
I don't have a clue what you are talking about but it looks like something intelligent.
My math skills (or something) cannot interpret this stuff, but I blame my right hemisphere that has taken over my thought process.

 

[wildcat]

What a thread!
I don't have a clue what you are talking about but it looks like something intelligent.
My math skills (or something) cannot interpret this stuff, but I blame my right hemisphere that has taken over my thought process.

I am a right brainer, too.

 

[alcea rosea]

I am a right brainer, too.

You use it better, the right side.

 

[wildcat]

You use it better, the right side.

You can beat me any time.

 

[alcea rosea]

You can beat me any time.

I probably couldn't.

But, more calculations, please! I want to be amazed even if I don't understand. I think it's wonderful how people's brains work differently.