Gulenko is one of the more controversial socionists, and has created plenty of models that are more or less used in wider socionics. One model that he has created is the “forms of cognition”. It’s based around the so called supervision rings. Supervision is an intertype relationship, and the supervision ring is the four types that are connected through supervision. He theorized, through observations and three different dichotomies (process/result, positivist/negativist, and static/dynamic, can be found here), that information flows quickly and rapidly, and an intellectual similarity between the types.
The Forms of cognition is based around supervision, or rings of supervision, which comes back to an intertype relationship, and is different from any other socionics grouping. They are all either static or dynamic, positivist or negativist, and process or result based. This creates four groups with four types in each, like quadras or temperaments, but with an entirely different focus. Where quadras is about the type of information you focus on, and temperament about how you apply that information (sort of), the form of cognition is how you approach information. In his article, he writes that he’s focused on how a person thinks, and not what they’re thinking.
This is the name he gives the form of cognition of ILE, LSI, SEE, and EII, because of their tendency to think in cause and effect, a very deterministic (not to be confused with philosophical determinism) approach. They try to find a singular cause to something, tracing things backwards to see what made something happen.
It has a rigid nature, and he describes it as formal logic. It’s a way of thinking that is essential in math, and often seen as the way to approach proof of something. Because of its reliance on prior steps, for tracing something from a singular cause, it falls short if one of those steps is wrong. Because of this, they run the danger of being manipulated, by someone changing one step in the ladder to something else, which causes the entire ladder to change direction. Since it’s based on formal logic, and formal logic alone, it also tends to work by itself, and doesn’t need empiricism to back it.
We can say that the cause of Michelangelo’s David is the artist (Michelangelo).
This form is the one of LSE, ILI, EIE, and SEI. They see reality in opposites, always find a point of balance between them. In the above picture, we can describe this form of cognition as in between seeing the vase and the faces, constantly switching between the two. This makes them able to quickly switch focus, but also less stable, easily getting thrown off focus. This make them vulnerable to people throwing them off balance by messing with this.
They are using a type of teleology, where the they view things through their purpose, similarly to how Aristotle explained his metaphysics. Because of the reliance of a purpose, Gulenko writes that these types often end up with some type of religious view.
The cause of the sculpture of David is the intention that Michelangelo had with it.
SLE, ESI, IEE, LII. With this form of cognition, we can think of a hologram, that someone walks around to observe from every possible angle, and gets a highly detailed picture of. When approaching a problem (the specific problem depends on the type), they pull up a picture of it, rotates it, cuts away what’s unimportant, and creates a holistic view of it, focusing on any information that they need for the task at hand.
It’s effective in a crisis, since they look at everything that they need, from multiple perspectives. One thing Gulenko mentions is that the reason he creates so many theories about socionics, is that he is one of those types, so he sees the type as a hologram, in a sense, looking at it from any possible angle.
David was already in the block of marble, all Michelangelo had to do was to find it.
A form of cognition that I’d like to compare to a whirlwind, is that of LIE, IEI, ESE, and SLI. It’s highly focused on emerging and creating order in chaos, and is always jumping back and forth. They have a strong belief in success and luck, and quickly forgets temporary setbacks. Because of how quickly they move back and forth, they can quickly discard bad habits.
One of the downsides is that this trial-and-error, maybe best described as the invisible hand that Adam Smith talked about, is that it can be uneconomical. A lot of resources will have to go to trying things out and failing. On the other hand, they’re moving back in such a speed that it won’t take much extra time.
The cause of the sculpture doesn’t need an artist, but lies in the marble block.
The information is mostly taken from this article.