1. Published on Amazon? If you have a book, e-book, or audiobook available on Amazon.com, we'll promote it on WritingForums.org for free. Simply add your book to our Member Publications section. Add your book here or read the full announcement.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Dismiss Notice


Published by Frederyk in the blog Frederyk's blog. Views: 108

Over the past few years, I have often come to doubt my own intelligence. Fluctuating between unsure and unmitigatingly depressed by surety, a slow realization has begun to set in. In terms of people, I view thought processes as "initiators" and "reactors", myself being a reactor.

Initiators I view as the majority. Note that this is not referring or assimilating to extroverts or introverts. Initiators conceptualize theories and tend to have very solid ground. I think this may have some correlation to the Ni/Ne functions. They are self motivated to follow their ideas from spontaneity. I still haven't a very solid theory on them, as I am not one of them given my own classifications. I am more so meaning to say that initiators already possess what drives them. Reactors need something else in order to "act". Initiators do not have something that drives them, but reactors rather have preset mechanisms where there are several triggers [think of a floor covered with mouse traps] and need something to set them off into thought.

Reactors I view as a small minority. Reactors need stimulation to come up with their best ideas/works. An outside influence is needed to provoke their minds into motion. Not necessarily an active stimulant. It could be the way the sun sets one day or another, or the sound of a hushed voice in a quiet stairwell. Generally, it would be subtle things or simple questions that completely set the wheels of their minds in motion, spurring their mechanics to create and become proprietors for new theories, ideas and conceptualizations. The foundation for their ideas is a mix of links in their database of knowledge that is uniquely triggered by seemingly random, but strictly pre-set inspirations. So very many pathways are webs articulately woven into and throughout their thought processes that they have little or no ability to truly map such out. Unaware of what is needed for inspiration most of the time, they do have the ability to retrace their steps and provide the logical step-by-step of connections that led them to the thoughts/actions/theories that they were inspired to come up with, as well as why such managed to inspire them.

Although everything is a reaction to something, and everything must have a contrast in order to exist, there are still distinctions. You could say that I am an organism of the biosphere, and that you are an organism of the biosphere, but with too much generalizing, it would be difficult to tell the two apart.

Initiators are sort of an adverse concept to reactors. They push towards the now, pre-possessing knowledge of the "what" that they so wish to find out. Reactors /need/ that external afflatus to create their own ideas. With such they also become self aware of them. Initiators are erstwhile already possessing such awareness of theirs. The difference of the two is arrantly operose to find and deviate between, but I cannot help but believe it is unmistakeably there.

This is all for now. Don't be too critical, it is just myself rambling a random theory I've been pandering with for a while.

You need to be logged in to comment