• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Cognitive Styles

Typh0n

clever fool
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
3,497
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Gulenko Cognitive Styles - Wikisocion

I wonder if anyone has heard of these.

The four styles are:

Casual-Determinist cognition - SEE, EII, ILE, LSI

Dialectical-Algorithmic cognition - SEI, EIE, ILI, LSE

Holographic-Panaramic cognition - SLE, LII, IEE, ESI

Vortical-Synergetic cognition - LIE, IEI, ESE, SLI

What is your type, and do you identify with your style? I am LIE, so I should identify with Vortical-Synergetic. While the article is kind of wordy and abstract, I find the style fits better than the alternate style, Dialectical-Algorithmic would, if I were ILI (the other type I sometimes consider for myself). I relate to his description of dynamics and positivists, the part about positivists being attracted to their opposites in groups as opposed to negativists who are attracted to similar people. The author says, negativists are polarizing, and positivists remove polarities. I see myself more as positivist, the description of dynamic totally fits me too but I was pretty sure about that to begin with. So positive plus dynamic is Vortical cognition...

This part of the article struck me as especially important (under conclusion):

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 stages—from inception to development, debugging, and implementation—can 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.

Thoughts?
 

Polaris

AKA Nunki
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
2,326
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I identify to some extent with all four of them, which I suspect is the case for most people who read that article. If I had to choose which one I most identify with, it would either be Vortical-Synergetic or Dialectical-Algorithmic. The one I least identify with is Causal-Deterministic.
 

CertainlySkeptic

New member
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
23
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp
I relate the least to Vortical-Synergetic, since it's way too random hence then, also chaotic by its experimental nature.
I've had a knack to do anything according to the proper step-by-step, so it's either Dialectical-Algoritmic or Holographical-Panoramic.
 
Top