Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Origin of IM types, differentiation/integration of Socion

  1. #1
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Origin of IM types, differentiation/integration of Socion.

    Hypothesis 1 : more classical and quite realistical

    1. Brain is created in embryo. It slightly differentiates during its creation like fingerprints.
    2. Brain has acquired a differentiation pattern so it won't develop symmetrically.

    Hypothesis 2 : less classical but explains more correlation between enneagram types and socionic types

    1. Brain is created in embryo. Neurochemical transmitters have some activity in it.
    2. Neurochemical transmitters make brain focus more on certain aspects. It makes the brain acquire a differentiation pattern.
    3. Brain has lost the capability to develop symmetrically.

    Brain have 16 patterns of differentiation. There are no subtypes. On each orthogonal dichotomy, a psyche has 61.8% of a trait and 38.2% of the other. Differentiation of complex systems are most often (possibly always) doing on the golden ratio bias.

    Those 16 patterns form the socion, which is itself a symmetrical structure. Psyches integrate to the socion. Types are evenly distributed, so we'll have elements and traits evenly distributed. Integration of complex systems are most often (possibly always) doing on the 1:2 ratio bias.

    Differentiation is 382-618, and Integration is 500-500. I read of Mitin and I understood that.

  2. #2
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    An argument in favor of hypothesis 2 is the analogy with the development of language: there is a certain age-treshold after which a person cannot learn languages to nearly as high an effect as before it. Perhaps development of type is locked down after a certain age in a similar way.

    Do you know the precise reasoning for the golden ratio between type preferences...? I'm having difficulty imagining how such a accurate number could have resulted from observation...

  3. #3
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    An argument in favor of hypothesis 2 is the analogy with the development of language: there is a certain age-treshold after which a person cannot learn languages to nearly as high an effect as before it. Perhaps development of type is locked down after a certain age in a similar way.

    Do you know the precise reasoning for the golden ratio between type preferences...? I'm having difficulty imagining how such a accurate number could have resulted from observation...
    Psyche is a natural complex system. Natural complex systems are more likely to differentiate like 618-382.

  4. #4
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    enneagram is bullshit.

    it's like my own in-one-second-invented "threeagram"

    happy people
    sad people
    mean people

    well if you look long enough, you probably find some correlation with socionics...

  5. #5

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •