Thinking as the highest form of human cognitive activity

Cheat sheet on psychology - BASIC FORMS AND TYPES OF THINKING

21. BASIC FORMS AND TYPES OF THINKING.

Basic forms of thinking:

1.Concept

— the unity of essential properties, connections and relationships of objects or phenomena reflected in thinking; a thought or system of thoughts that identifies and generalizes objects of a certain class according to certain general and generally specific characteristics for them;

2.Judgment

- a form of thinking in which something is affirmed or denied about an object, its properties or relationships between objects. Types of judgments and relationships between them are studied in philosophical logic;

3.Inference

- conclusion.

Types of thinking:

1. In form:

— Visually effective

- a type of thought process based on the direct perception of objects and phenomena, their transformation in reality. It is genetically the earliest type of thinking.

— Visual-figurative thinking

- this is a type of thinking associated with imagining situations and changes in them, with the creation of images. Thanks to it, it is possible to recreate the real characteristics of an object as an image visible from different points of view. Makes it possible to carry out unusual combinations of objects and their properties in the image, to carry out operations that are impossible in reality.

— Verbal and logical thinking

is a conceptual type of thinking based on the use of logical operations and concepts. The basis of this type of thinking is the development of linguistic means of communication. It is characterized by abstraction, operating with the most essential features and properties of objects, groups and classes of these objects.

2. By character:

— Theoretical thinking

– thinking that develops in the process of mentally operating with scientific concepts, analyzing the general characteristics of an object, and establishing general patterns. It is based on abstraction and is aimed at explaining phenomena, knowledge of laws and rules. Theoretical thinking operates on the general system properties of objects.

— Practical thinking

– this is thinking that develops in the process of transforming reality. It is based on the specification of general knowledge and information.

3. By degree of deployment:

— Analytical or logical thinking

- a type of thinking that is carried out through consistent logical conclusions. It unfolds in time, consciously, and has clearly defined stages.

— Intuitive

– a type of thinking that is based on direct penetration into the essence of a phenomenon, the establishment of a pattern; fast progress, no stages.

— Paralogical thinking

as a special type of thinking appeared at an early stage of development, when humanity had not yet formed a system of logical laws. In modern society, its elements are manifested in everyday superstitions, prejudices, mass fears, etc.

4. By degree of novelty:

— Reproductive thinking

is a type of thinking process that is based on the reproduction and application of ready-made knowledge and skills.

— Productive (creative) thinking

– a type of thought process characterized by the creation of a subjective new product and transformation in cognitive activity.

5. According to the degree of volitional participation:

- Involuntary mental

processes occur without the participation of the will of the individual. Examples of such processes include the transformation of dream images.

- Voluntary thought processes

occur under the influence of the will of the individual. Example: solving mental problems.

6. In relation to reality:

— Realistic thinking

directed to the outside world, regulated by logical laws.

— Autistic thinking

– a pathological type of thought processes, characterized by a separation from direct experience, reality.

Thinking as the highest form of human cognitive activity

First of all, thinking is the highest cognitive process. It represents the generation of new knowledge, an active form of creative reflection and transformation of reality by man. Thinking generates a result that does not exist either in reality itself or in the subject at a given moment in time. Thinking can also be understood as the acquisition of new knowledge, the creative transformation of existing ideas. It is also found in elementary forms in animals.

The difference between thinking and other psychological processes is also that it is almost always associated with the presence of a problem situation, a task that needs to be solved, and an active change in the conditions in which this task is given. Thinking, unlike perception, goes beyond the limits of the sensory data and expands the boundaries of knowledge. In thinking based on sensory information, certain theoretical and practical conclusions are made. It reflects existence not only in the form of individual things, phenomena and their properties, but also determines the connections that exist between them, which most often are not given directly to man in his very perception.

General characteristics of thinking as a mental process

In practice, thinking as a separate mental process does not exist; it is invisibly present in all other cognitive processes: perception, attention, imagination, memory, speech. The highest forms of these processes are necessarily associated with thinking, and the degree of its participation in these cognitive processes determines their level of development.

Thinking

- this is a special kind of theoretical and practical activity that involves a system of actions and operations included in it of an indicative-research, transformative and cognitive nature.

Types of thinking.

Most often, thinking is divided into theoretical and practical. At the same time, in theoretical thinking, conceptual and figurative thinking are distinguished, and in practical thinking, visual-figurative and visual-effective.

Theoretical conceptual thinking

- this is thinking, using which a person, in the process of solving a problem, turns to concepts, performs actions in the mind, without directly dealing with the experience gained through the senses. He discusses and searches for a solution to a problem from beginning to end in his mind, using ready-made knowledge obtained by other people, expressed in conceptual form, judgments, and inferences. Theoretical conceptual thinking is characteristic of scientific theoretical research.

Theoretical imaginative thinking

differs from conceptual in that the material that a person uses here to solve a problem is not concepts, judgments or inferences, but images. They are either directly retrieved from memory or creatively recreated by the imagination. This kind of thinking is used by workers in literature, art, and in general people of creative work who deal with images. In the course of solving mental problems, the corresponding images are mentally transformed so that a person, as a result of manipulating them, can directly see the solution to the problem that interests him.

Both types of thinking considered - theoretical conceptual and theoretical figurative - in reality, as a rule, coexist. They complement each other quite well, revealing to a person different but interconnected aspects of existence. Theoretical conceptual thinking provides, although abstract, but at the same time the most accurate, generalized reflection of reality. Theoretical figurative thinking allows us to obtain a specific subjective perception of it, which is no less real than the objective-conceptual one.

A distinctive feature of visual-figurative thinking

— lies in the fact that the thought process in it is directly related to the thinking person’s perception of the surrounding reality and cannot take place without it. Thoughts are visual and figurative, a person is tied to reality, and the images themselves necessary for thinking are presented in his short-term and operative memory (in contrast, images for theoretical figurative thinking are extracted from long-term memory and then transformed).

This form of thinking is most fully and comprehensively represented among children of preschool and primary school age, and among adults - among people engaged in practical work. This type of thinking is quite developed in all people who often have to make decisions about the objects of their activity only by observing them, but without directly touching them.

Visual-effective thinking

— its peculiarity lies in the fact that the thinking process itself is a practical transformative activity carried out by a person with real objects. The main condition for solving the problem in this case is the correct actions with the appropriate objects. This type of thinking is widely represented among people engaged in real production work, the result of which is the creation of any specific material product.

Let us note that the listed types of thinking also act as levels of its development. Theoretical thinking is considered more perfect than practical thinking, and conceptual thinking represents a higher level of development than figurative thinking.

All types of thinking in humans coexist and can be represented in the same activity. However, depending on its nature and ultimate goals, one or another type of thinking dominates. For this reason they all differ. In terms of their degree of complexity, in terms of the demands they place on a person’s intellectual and other abilities, all of these types of thinking are not inferior to each other.

Thinking, unlike other processes, occurs in accordance with a certain logic. Accordingly, in the structure of thinking the following logical operations can be distinguished: comparison, analysis, synthesis, abstraction and generalization.

There are three main forms of thinking

: concept, judgment and inference.

Concept

- this is a form of thinking that reflects the general and, moreover, essential properties of objects and phenomena. Each object, each phenomenon has many different properties and characteristics. These properties, signs, can be divided into two categories - essential and non-essential.

A concept exists in the form of the meaning of a word and is denoted by a word. Each word generalizes (except, of course, words denoting proper names). In concepts, our knowledge about objects and phenomena of reality crystallizes in a generalized and abstract form. In this respect, the concept differs significantly from the perception and representation of memory: perception and representation are concrete, figurative, and visual; the concept has a generalized, abstract, non-visual character.

In judgments

connections and relationships between objects and phenomena of the surrounding world and their properties and characteristics are reflected. Judgment is a form of thinking that contains the affirmation or denial of any position regarding objects, phenomena or their properties.

Judgments can be general, particular and individual. In general judgments, something is affirmed or denied regarding all objects and phenomena united by a concept, for example: “All metals conduct electricity.”

Inference

- a form of thinking in which a person, comparing and analyzing various judgments, derives a new judgment from them. A typical example of inference is the proof of geometric theorems.

A person uses mainly two types of inferences - inductive and deductive.

Induction

- this is a way of reasoning from particular judgments to a general judgment, the establishment of general laws and rules based on the study of individual facts and phenomena.

Deduction

- this is a way of reasoning from general judgment to private judgment, knowledge of individual facts and phenomena based on the building of general laws and rules.

What is creative thinking

? J. Guilford was one of the first to try to formulate an answer to this question. He believed that the “creativity” of thinking is associated with the dominance of four features:

A. Originality, non-triviality, unusual ideas expressed, a pronounced desire for intellectual novelty. A creative person almost always and everywhere strives to find his own solution, different from others.

B. Semantic flexibility, i.e. the ability to see an object from a new angle, discover its new use, and expand its functional application in practice.

B. Figurative adaptive flexibility, i.e. the ability to change the perception of an object in such a way as to see its new, hidden sides.

Research into creative thinking has identified conditions that facilitate or hinder the ability to quickly find a solution to a creative problem. Let us consider these conditions in a generalized form.

1. If in the past a certain method of solving certain problems by a person turned out to be quite successful, then this circumstance encourages him to continue to adhere to this method of solution in the future. When faced with a new task, a person tends to apply it first.

2. The more effort was spent on finding and putting into practice a new way to solve a problem, the more likely it is to turn to it in the future. The psychological costs of discovering a new solution are proportional to the desire to use it as often as possible in practice.

3. The emergence of a thinking stereotype, which, due to the above conditions, prevents a person from abandoning the old one and looking for a new, more suitable way to solve the problem. One of the ways to overcome such an established stereotype is to stop trying to solve the problem altogether for a while, and then return to it with a firm determination to try only new ways to find a solution.

4. A person’s intellectual abilities, as a rule, suffer from frequent failures, and the fear of another failure begins to automatically arise when faced with a new task. It generates defensive reactions that interfere with creative thinking, which is usually associated with risk to one's self. As a result, a person loses faith in himself, he accumulates negative emotions that prevent him from thinking. The feeling of success for strengthening the intellectual potential of people is just as necessary as the feeling of the correctness of any movement for its assimilation.

5. Maximum efficiency in solving intellectual problems is achieved with optimal motivation and an appropriate level of emotional arousal. This level is completely individual for each person.

6. The more knowledge a person has, the more diverse his approaches to solving creative problems will be. However, the relevant knowledge must be multidirectional, since it has the ability to orient thinking towards different approaches to a solution.

Creative people often surprisingly combine maturity of thinking, deep knowledge, diverse abilities, skills and peculiar “childish” traits in their views on the surrounding reality, in behavior and actions.

What prevents a person from being a creative person and showing originality of thinking? GLindsay, K. Hull and R. Thompson give their answer to this question. They believe that a serious obstacle to creative thinking can be not only insufficiently developed abilities, but also, in particular:

1. The tendency to conformism, expressed in the desire that dominates creativity to be like other people, not to differ from them in one’s judgments and actions.

2. Fear of being a “black sheep” among people, of seeming stupid or ridiculous in your judgments.

3. Fear of seeming too extravagant, even aggressive in your rejection and criticism of other people's opinions.

4. Fear of retaliation from another person whose position we criticize.

5. Overestimation of the importance of your own ideas.

6. Highly developed anxiety. A person who has this quality usually suffers from increased self-doubt and is afraid to openly express his ideas.

7. There are two competing ways of thinking: critical and creative. Critical thinking

aimed at identifying shortcomings in the judgment of other people.
Creative thinking
is associated with the discovery of fundamentally new knowledge, with the generation of one’s own original ideas, and not with evaluating the thoughts of others.

A person whose critical tendency is too pronounced pays the main attention to criticism, although he himself could create, and quite well. On the contrary, a person whose constructive, creative thinking dominates critical thinking often turns out to be unable to see shortcomings in his own judgments and assessments.

The way out of this situation is for the child to develop both critical and creative thinking from childhood, making sure that they are in balance, accompany and periodically replace each other in any mental act.

Features of mental activity

Thinking is characterized by individual characteristics, which may include the following:

• breadth – the ability to cover many aspects of cognizable phenomena without missing details;
• depth – the ability to penetrate into the essence of knowable phenomena;
• independence – the ability to independently formulate goals and objectives and solve them on one’s own;
• efficiency – individual pace of implementation of mental operations;
• flexibility – freedom from the constraining influence of methods and techniques for solving cognitive problems fixed by past experience;
• criticality - the ability to objectively evaluate, comprehend cognizable objects, and test put forward positions, hypotheses, and conclusions.

Do you need to select material for your study work? Ask a question to the teacher and get an answer in 15 minutes! Ask a Question

Thinking develops throughout an individual's life, ensuring personal development.

Properties of thinking

Thinking is a process during which the systematic relationships of the environment are modeled. There are many other definitions that approach this process from different angles. Properties of thinking are significant characteristics that help to better understand the essence of this phenomenon and its direction.

Basic properties of thinking

Thanks to the specific properties of human thinking, we perceive the surrounding reality exactly as we perceive it. So, the list of properties includes the following:

1. The main property of thinking is its direction. This suggests that he always has a certain ultimate goal, his thoughts answer the question posed (not always important or significant, sometimes arbitrary).
2. Thinking can be positive or negative. A person can approach each situation differently, based on exactly how he is used to thinking. Some people are used to worrying and noticing only the bad aspects of what is happening (negative thinking), while others are always determined to find the positives even in an unpleasant situation (positive thinking). Psychologists are sure: the latter are happier.
3. Thinking can be directed to the past or to the future. In the first case, a person is inclined to talk about what happened, how it happened, what should have been done, and so on. If thinking is directed to the future, then a person will be inclined to talk about how to get out of the situation.
4. Thinking necessarily forms concepts. It seeks to characterize a situation, phenomenon, object, order, compare, find differences from similar ones, and so on.
5. Thinking cannot be objective, it is always subjective. One way or another, personal thoughts, feelings, and emotions always interfere with it. Thanks to this property, creative thinking forces a person to express himself by creating something that conveys his images and ideas.
6. Thinking is logical. Logic may not always be correctly constructed. But she is definitely present.
7. Thinking can be developed or undeveloped. Undeveloped thinking is found only in children and narrow-minded people who do not seek to analyze the situation and are ready to live, relying only on instincts and simple needs. The vast majority of adults have developed thinking and continue to develop throughout their lives.

The properties of thinking in psychology characterize the thought process from different sides and allow us to penetrate deeper into the complex essence of the phenomenon itself, which occurs every second with every person in a state of wakefulness.

Approaches to definition and understanding of the essence of thinking

Definition 1
In modern scientific literature, thinking is understood as mental activity aimed at indirect and generalized cognition of socio-natural objective reality through the identification, disclosure and establishment of relationships, mechanisms and patterns between objects, phenomena, phenomena, processes of cognition.

Finished works on a similar topic

• Course work Properties of thinking 420 rub.
• Abstract Properties of thinking 280 rub.
• Test work Properties of thinking 250 rub.

Receive completed work or specialist advice on your educational project Find out the cost

Thinking is closely related to perception, however, if perception provides direct knowledge of reality, thinking is indirect. The basic unit of the thought process is thought - a cognitive action aimed at analyzing and comparing various factors according to characteristic features.

A practical guide to thinking styles.

A thinking style is a system that has a relatively constant core, structure, and selectivity to external influences. Each of us thinks within the framework of the style that has developed in the course of life, often believing that this style is optimal. Let's look at the five main thinking styles and their combinations.

When making a decision, we voluntarily or unwittingly use a set of certain mental strategies. Each set of strategies has its own strengths and weaknesses. Each can be useful in some specific situation, but can also lead to disaster if used excessively or incorrectly.

Despite this, each of us masters only one or two sets of strategies and applies them throughout our lives, regardless of the nature of the situation. We rarely take the trouble to find new ways of thinking, although by doing so we could increase our adaptability to problematic situations and events in everyday life.

It doesn't matter at all how much people like each other, how well they get along, or how nice they seem. When it comes to solving a problem or making a decision, any two people chosen at random will likely not only approach the situation differently - it will appear as if they are dealing with two different situations.

The original concept of a typology of the effectiveness of using an individual’s intellectual resources was proposed by A. Harison and R. Bramson and adapted for the Russian audience by A. Alekseev and L. Gromova (1993). Knowledge about thinking styles should help managers:

• learn to find a common language with “difficult” people and influence them more effectively;
• develop the strengths and weaknesses of the intellect, make it more powerful and effective;
• become more accurate and objective in perceiving, understanding and evaluating what other people say and do.

The concept of “thinking style” (or “intellectual style”) reflects a trivial fact: all people think differently about the same thing. Individual differences in thinking turned out to be so diverse, depending on such a large number of factors, that it has not yet been possible to bring them to a common denominator, despite the almost century-long history of their experimental study.

Thinking style is understood as an open system of intellectual strategies, techniques, skills and operations to which a person is predisposed due to his individual characteristics. Thinking styles begin to develop in childhood and develop throughout a person's life.

However, the style of thinking is, although open, that is, replenished all the time, but a system that has a relatively constant core, structure and selectivity to external influences. There are also people with a complex stylistic organization who have more than one such core. They either have an equally good command of several styles of thinking (more precisely, a combination of them), or are characterized by what can be called intellectual spinelessness (not to be confused with low intelligence!). Let's look at the five main thinking styles and their combinations.

The most important distinguishing feature of the qualitative approach is the recognition of the equivalence of all styles of thinking. Each of them has strengths and weaknesses, but by themselves they cannot be ranked from “best” to “worst” (or from “smart” to “stupid”). Thinking styles do not depend on the level of intelligence development.

Each of us thinks within the framework of the style that has developed in the course of life, often believing that this style is optimal. Some of us cannot even imagine that it is possible to think differently, frame questions differently, make decisions differently, etc.

Characteristics of Thinking Styles

1.1. Synthetic style

The main strategy of synthesis is dialectics. Essentially, to synthesize means to create something qualitatively new and original from things or ideas that themselves do not possess similar qualities and look sharply different from each other, and sometimes completely incompatible.

Combining dissimilar, often opposing ideas, views, positions, etc. is exactly what Synthesizers enjoy doing most. Their favorite form of thinking is speculative (that is, theorizing) thinking, a thought experiment. The Synthesizer's motto is “What if?..”

Synthesizers are always integrators. They are looking for a way to “combine the incompatible” in a new combination. Unlike owners of other styles of thinking, they themselves firmly recognize only one “fact”: differences of opinion on facts have always existed, exist and will exist among people.

Those with a synthetic style are extremely sensitive to contradictions in the reasoning of others and have an increased interest in paradoxes and conflicts of ideas. Moreover, they are often interested in the emergence of such conflicts and can even provoke them by asking unexpected, sharp “Socratic” questions in order to clarify the starting positions of the other side.

Finally, another passion of Synthesizers is the love of change. They tend to see the world as constantly changing and approve of other people's vision of the world. Synthesizers are not afraid of uncertainty, but untrodden paths and the unknown irresistibly attract them to themselves: what if something new appears around the next turn? They probably thereby often complicate their own lives, but Synthesizers are proud of their creativity (that is, the ability and inclination to create in the broad sense of the word), their sense of the new, their sharpness of sight and language, and, often secretly, their talent (alas, not always recognized others).

1.2. Idealistic style

The main strategy of the idealist is associative thinking. Idealists are people who, first of all, have a broad view of things. They are prone to intuitive, global assessments and do not bother themselves with a detailed analysis of problems based on a full set of facts and formal logic.

Another feature of Idealists is an increased interest in goals, needs, motives and, naturally, human values. They are good at formulating goals, and not only their own. “Where are we going and why?” - a classic question from Idealists. They are especially interested in the “quality of life”: what is good and what is evil in this world.

Idealists are similar to Synthesizers in that they are not inclined to concentrate on hard numbers and dry facts. The difference between them lies in different approaches to resolving contradictions. Idealists tend to believe that differences and disputes can always be resolved. We are convinced that people are able to agree on anything as soon as they agree on goals. From this it is clear that Idealists do not value conflict and do not enjoy it; conflict seems to them unproductive and therefore completely unnecessary.

The thinking of Idealists can be called receptive, i.e. easily and without internal resistance perceiving a wide variety of ideas, positions and proposals.

Idealists like to be perceived as open, trustworthy, supportive, and helpful to others—that is, helpful to people. Satisfying their needs requires high quality work and exemplary behavior. Because of their “too” idealistic standards, they are often disappointed in people whose aspirations and standards seem to them less exalted than their own.

When it comes to finding a solution to a problem, Idealists demonstrate high professionalism in situations where it is difficult to clearly formulate the problem and where emotions, feelings, assessments and values ​​are important factors.

1.3. Pragmatic style

The main strategy of a pragmatist is to take into account possibilities in every possible way. The motto of the Pragmatists is: “Anything that works” is good. Direct personal experience is their main and only measure of the correctness/incorrectness of ideas, decisions, actions, and life in general.

Pragmatists stand out among other people by their tendency to find new ways to satisfy their own and others' needs using only those materials and information that are at hand. It is not common for them to request additional funds, resources, much less reserves. In solving any problems, they tend to demonstrate a gradual, “piecemeal” or incremental approach - “one thing at a time” and “from now to now” with the goal of getting a specific result as quickly as possible. Pragmatists are more similar to Realists than to representatives of other thinking styles.

More on the blog: A person grows as his goals grow!

While the Analyst believes in predictability and the Idealist in “noble intentions,” the true Pragmatist does not believe in such “nonsense.” In his opinion, the world as a whole is unpredictable, practically impossible to understand, much less manage. Therefore, “we’ll do this today, and then we’ll see.”

As a rule, the behavior of Pragmatists is less predictable than the behavior of owners of other styles of thinking, primarily because it is extremely difficult to guess the course of their thoughts due to the arbitrariness in the choice of facts.

Pragmatists have a good sense of the situation and have the ability to grasp supply and demand in the broadest sense of these words. And they are happy to share their thoughts with others, always ready to collaborate, enthusiastically involved in the process of collective thinking and decision-making, showing a sincere interest in formulating strategies and tactics for quickly achieving goals.

In general, Pragmatists are quite flexible and adaptive people, both in terms of thinking and behavior. They usually have well-developed communication skills; are able to put themselves in the shoes of another person. They are far from indifferent to the attitude of others towards them; they want to be liked, approved, or at least accepted for their thoughts and behavior.

1.4. Analytical style

The main strategy of the Analyst is to find the best path. Representatives of the analytical style are distinguished by a logical, methodical, thorough (with an emphasis on detail) and careful manner of solving problems. Before making a decision, they develop a detailed plan and try to collect as much information as possible, so they often win.

Analysts are more theory-oriented than anyone else, but when they are told this, they are often surprised, disagree, and sometimes offended. Committed Analysts, especially those not directly involved in theoretical work, see themselves as realistic, fact-based, practical people. Of course, in a certain respect they are. However, behind the attention they pay to objective facts lie broad and deep theories.

In general, Analysts tolerate the unknown, uncertainty, and chaos worse than others. They tend to see the world as logical, rational, orderly and predictable.

Analysts value knowledge, take learning seriously, and from an early age acquire a variety of theories that help them explain events and bring order to their environment. In addition, they respect authorities, do not like to change their views and preferences, and try to regularly apply the acquired theoretical knowledge in practice. Over time, the process of applying the learned “theories” becomes automatic and ceases to be recognized by them.

When a problem arises, the Analyst will most likely look for a formula, procedure, method, or system that can provide a solution to the problem. Because of his dominant interest in method, he strives to find the “best way” to solve a problem.

While the Synthesizer has an interest in conflict, change and novelty, the Analyst prefers rationality, stability and predictability. Where the Idealist focuses on values, goals, and the “big picture,” the Analyst prefers to focus on objective data, procedure, and “best method.” While the Pragmatist's approach is experimental, the Analyst's approach is based on a detailed, detailed plan and a search for a rationally justifiable "best way."

Analysts spend a lot of effort obtaining information. They pride themselves on their competence, knowledge and understanding of all sides of any situation.

1.5. Realistic style

The main strategy of the Realist is empiricism. In most respects, Realists are at the opposite end of the thinking style spectrum from the Synthesizer.

Many people have difficulty understanding the differences between Realists and Pragmatists. In fact, in everyday speech these two terms are often used as synonyms, but this is not the case. Pragmatists and Realists rely on different underlying assumptions and values, and the mental strategies they use are fundamentally different, although often complementary.

The Realists' motto is: "Facts are facts." In other words, Realists are primarily empiricists, not theorists. For them, “real” is only what can be directly felt: felt, touched, personally seen or heard, experienced, etc. This is where they are the opposite of Synthesizers, who are convinced that interpretation and conclusions are always more important observable "facts". Realists cannot help but see that people do not always agree with each other. Because they believe that without reaching agreement at the level of facts, things cannot be done and there is no point in starting anything at all.

“Realistic thinking” is characterized by specificity and an attitude towards correction, correction of the situation in order to achieve a certain result. The problem for Realists arises whenever they see something is right and want to fix it. Unlike Pragmatists with their penchant for experimentation (“it didn’t work out this way, let’s try that”), realists want to conduct business accurately, reasonably and with full confidence that if they have already corrected something, then it will continue to be done without surprises and unforeseen changes. And if something does happen, they will try to introduce another amendment and again firmly stick to the chosen course.

In general, Realists are much closer to Analysts than to everyone else. Both of them are based on facts, are focused on the objective, concrete and material, and show a tendency to be methodical and practical results. But there are also fundamental differences between them. The Realist will probably be irritated by the deductive, formal-logical procedures of the Analyst, as well as the latter’s desire to collect additional information and search for perfection. A realist wants to do a specific task as well as possible, based on the facts at his disposal.

What Realists and Synthesizers have in common is the need to be in control. Realists feel the need to control resources, people and results, Synthesizers - the need to control the process: understand and stay one step ahead of a certain decision, conflict or simply argumentation; both tend to become irritated by overly detailed analysis and protracted discussion. Finally, they are proud of their harshness, causticity, and ability to confuse others.

Diagnostics of thinking styles

2.1. How to recognize a Synthesizer

Synthesizers often behave defiantly, openly express skepticism, mock, and precisely when you find no reason for such behavior. They tend to be in opposition, especially to popular opinion, to disagree with what everyone seems to agree with without hesitation.

Synthesizers place themselves, as it were, above the situation, breaking away, in the opinion of others, from reality. Naturally, such behavior causes irritation in many and a desire to bring them back to earth, put them in their place, besiege them. But true Synthesizers are original and that alone deserves respect. They are the ones who find an aspect or approach to a problem that simply does not occur to others. Therefore, along with the irritation of some, Synthesizers evoke admiration (and secret envy!) of others.

Synthesizers love to point out to people the absurdity of the situation in which they find themselves. And this often turns out to be a turning point in the course of events.

In general, Synthesizers enjoy theorizing, philosophizing, formulating and resolving paradoxes only until the discussion becomes too serious or even dark and they realize, in addition to the absurdity of the behavior of others, the absurdity of the very act of arguing. Apparently, this is why many people think that Synthesizers do not take everything as seriously as others would like.

The synthesizer does not like to say what seems simplistic; he often tries to seem irrelevant to the issue being discussed. However, if you listen carefully to the Synthesizer, these digressions often turn out to be relevant and productive, although one may have to use all his intellectual resources to understand this.

More on the blog: How to improve your communication skills

The Synthesizer’s speech is impressive, but quite complex: introductory words and sentences, qualifying adjectives and constructions (“probably”, “more or less”, “relatively”, “mainly”, “essentially”, “not at all”, “on the other hand” sides”, etc.)

In general, Synthesizers, like everyone else, may or may not be deep thinkers, but they are the ones most likely to give this impression of themselves.

There is one almost sure-fire way to recognize a Synthesizer. When you hear someone express a well-reasoned, fairly original and deep idea, and then suddenly smash it to smithereens and even make fun of themselves, you know: this is a Synthesizer.

2.2. How to recognize an Idealist

First of all, by an open, supportive and inviting smile, as well as by other, verbal and non-verbal, signals that Idealists send to partners in order to establish emotional contact and trusting relationships with them. They have a rich arsenal of means to achieve this goal. The input includes frequent nods of approval, an attentive and interested look, a confidential tone, indirect questions, soft, probing forms of expressing one’s views, etc.

The idealistic style of thinking is more common among people who are sociable or, more precisely, people who are inclined to communicate. More often than others, strangers talk to them in transport, public places, on the street, ask how to get to the right place, etc.

Sadness and resentment, disappointment and indignation are expressed just as openly in their facial expressions, pantomimes, gestures and speech as positive emotions. However, even in the depressed or indignant state of Idealists, there is something that makes people encourage and reassure them more often than others. Apparently, their appearance partly serves as a guarantee that a person who sympathizes with them will not run into hysteria and rudeness.

Idealists almost never behave boldly or defiantly. They feel very uncomfortable even in an open dispute, not to mention a conflict. In tense situations, all their behavior is subordinated to one goal - to prevent a quarrel from breaking out.

Idealists love to talk about people and their problems, discussed at the level of emotions, motives, and relationships. They do not like to overload their speech with facts and lose interest in others when they abuse the presentation and analysis of facts, especially if the latter are in no way related to personal problems.

Typically, Idealists ask a lot of questions to their communication partners, but this does not at all resemble an interrogation. A conversation with an Idealist inspires hope, because the Idealist needs questions to assess the other party’s need for his help or to clarify the partner’s life values, goals, intentions, in order to find common ground.

However, Idealists are extremely strong in their actions, beliefs, ethical and social standards.

2.3. How to recognize an Analyst

For many, the first meeting with the Analyst is puzzling, discouraging, confusing, or agitated, followed by irritation. The reason is the external dryness, restraint, coldness, formality and closedness of the Analysts. It is difficult to talk to them, especially for the first time, because by their appearance it is difficult to assess their intentions, attitude towards their partner, towards his words and actions. Sometimes it seems that they are not listening to you (this is not true, because they are listening, and very carefully). But when you get to know Analysts better and get used to their style of communication, you discover that it is very possible to deal with them.

Speech features are another reliable identifying feature of Analysts. In their normal state, they speak evenly, quietly, and restrainedly. The manner of speech is cautious, although quite firm and disciplined. Sometimes it even seems that these people are pronouncing pre-prepared phrases. Analysts are not those who like to spend time talking or tremble with impatience to make their opinions public. However, these are precisely the people who, if you turn to them for information, often tell you much more than you would like to know.

Analysts do not like to engage in conversations that seem irrational, illogical, aimless, “philosophical,” or “unconventional.” They also don’t like empty, “society” chatter, “excessive” frivolity, “inappropriate” jokes.

In tense situations, the Analyst appears stubborn and unshakable, at least at first. If the pressure on him does not stop, but on the contrary, increases, he simply leaves. This is a kind of psychological defense in difficult, emotionally charged situations.

The Analysts' humor is subtle, restrained, discreet and, again, rational. They are no strangers to irony.

Finally, another reliable sign of true Analysts is a thorough, serious, deliberate approach to everything they do.

2.4. How to recognize a Pragmatist

Like Idealists, Pragmatists often have an open, friendly appearance. However, in some respects they are more mobile, active, courageous, less impressionable and tense than Idealists.

Pragmatists enjoy easy communication. Humor, simple and clear ideas and proposals, interest and passion, speed and ease of agreement with partners - all this contributes to the development of communication and prevents tension. But sometimes it happens that Pragmatists “overact” and give the impression of insincere, hypocritical people. According to Pragmatists, more than one road leads to any goal, and no one knows in advance which will be the shortest.

What Pragmatists don't like is, firstly, abstract, theoretical conversations and speculative reasoning. Secondly, Pragmatists easily become bored when the conversation concerns details and becomes too formal (conducted strictly according to plan). In tense situations, when they are unable to defuse the situation and direct the course of events in the desired direction, Pragmatists usually look as if they are tired of everything and would rather it all end.

Pragmatists bring excitement to the most seemingly boring events, if only they are not disturbed: give space, do not control every step, maintain interest and enthusiasm. The opposite approach causes them irritation and boredom. And letting the Pragmatist get bored means losing him.

2.5. How to recognize a Realist

Realists look like ordinary people - open, direct, sincere, confident, strong and independent, assertive, and sometimes aggressive. To some, their directness and frankness may seem like a game, although, as a rule, this is not the case. They are really quick to express their opinions because, unlike many others, they have one. Probably for the same reason, they very quickly and clearly express their agreement or disagreement with their communication partner, using both verbal and nonverbal means.

Realists do not mince words, but they do not like sentimental or theoretical conversations. They themselves express themselves briefly and clearly and expect the same from others. They value their partner's frankness and are usually positive, but in tense situations they get excited and begin to speak in a harsh, authoritative tone that does not allow for objections, sometimes showing arrogance and often stubbornness.

Realists’ favorite topics of communication are current, urgent matters, the factual side of events. Expressed Realists, as a rule, are strong and integral natures; they are not characterized by reflection and sophistication. A cheerful, but not too “intellectual” company - this is where Realists can relax and make others laugh. They make decisions quickly, are not afraid to take responsibility, speak simply, clearly and convincingly, and are closer to “ordinary people” than many others.

Author: Yuri Petrovich Platonov, Doctor of Psychology, Professor of St. Petersburg State University, Rector of the St. Petersburg State Institute of Psychology and Social Work, Honored Worker of Higher Education of the Russian Federation.

Source

Read our classified materials