# Thread: +/- : what does that really mean ? - put your definitions

1. ## +/- : what does that really mean ? - put your definitions

We know, information aspects are subdivided like this :

- Statics / Dynamics
- Bodies / Fields (bodies / fields)
- Internal / External (implicit / explicit)

I've even heard of a derivative axis of "integral/differential" which corresponds to P/J.

+/- here is related to Process/Result, and NOT to Positivist/Negativist, as some could think. Positivists have dominant static + or dynamic -, Negativists have dominant static - or dynamic +.

But still I don't really know what do Plus and Minus really mean. Definitions are very different among socionists.

2. +/- has also been defined as short range vs long range (which has also been used in various ways:
a. long range Ne = NeFi; short range Ne = NeTi; long range Ti = TiNe...(something like that)
b. Delta and Beta have long range P with short range J; while Alpha and Gamma have it the other way
c. pick a type, follow model A to see how each type uses the functions (ie, the Ti of an NeFi is short range whereas the Ti of an NeTi is long range)
d. etc etc etc

3. Originally Posted by anndelise
+/- has also been defined as short range vs long range (which has also been used in various ways:
a. long range Ne = NeFi; short range Ne = NeTi; long range Ti = TiNe...(something like that)
b. Delta and Beta have long range P with short range J; while Alpha and Gamma have it the other way
c. pick a type, follow model A to see how each type uses the functions (ie, the Ti of an NeFi is short range whereas the Ti of an NeTi is long range)
d. etc etc etc
yes, but what does short/long range mean ?

4. Originally Posted by machintruc
Originally Posted by anndelise
+/- has also been defined as short range vs long range (which has also been used in various ways:
a. long range Ne = NeFi; short range Ne = NeTi; long range Ti = TiNe...(something like that)
b. Delta and Beta have long range P with short range J; while Alpha and Gamma have it the other way
c. pick a type, follow model A to see how each type uses the functions (ie, the Ti of an NeFi is short range whereas the Ti of an NeTi is long range)
d. etc etc etc
yes, but what does short/long range mean ?
lol, i have no idea anymore, i've seen that used in various ways too

one common way has been long term vs short term, as in, 'over the long term blah blah blah, but for now, bleh bleh bleh' (or something similar to that effect). as in, with Fi, you'd have "short term ethics" as in the ethics needed now or for this particular situation, for these specific people....while long range Fi would be more concerned with the rules of Fi ethics and how Fi would affect beyond this situation, beyond the immediate people involved, etc.
there have been other ways it's been used, but i don't remember them at the moment

5. Originally Posted by machintruc

yes, but what does short/long range mean ?
Originally Posted by anndelise
lol, i have no idea anymore, i've seen that used in various ways too

one common way has been long term vs short term, as in, 'over the long term blah blah blah, but for now, bleh bleh bleh' (or something similar to that effect). as in, with Fi, you'd have "short term ethics" as in the ethics needed now or for this particular situation, for these specific people....while long range Fi would be more concerned with the rules of Fi ethics and how Fi would affect beyond this situation, beyond the immediate people involved, etc.
there have been other ways it's been used, but i don't remember them at the moment

This reminds me of when people say that creative Fi looks like Fe, and why INTjs can be confused about whether they are INTps.

6. Originally Posted by Ms. Kensington
Originally Posted by machintruc

yes, but what does short/long range mean ?
Originally Posted by anndelise
lol, i have no idea anymore, i've seen that used in various ways too

one common way has been long term vs short term, as in, 'over the long term blah blah blah, but for now, bleh bleh bleh' (or something similar to that effect). as in, with Fi, you'd have "short term ethics" as in the ethics needed now or for this particular situation, for these specific people....while long range Fi would be more concerned with the rules of Fi ethics and how Fi would affect beyond this situation, beyond the immediate people involved, etc.
there have been other ways it's been used, but i don't remember them at the moment

This reminds me of when people say that creative Fi looks like Fe, and why INTjs can be confused about whether they are INTps.
off topic msk

7. Originally Posted by machintruc
Originally Posted by Ms. Kensington
Originally Posted by machintruc

yes, but what does short/long range mean ?
Originally Posted by anndelise
lol, i have no idea anymore, i've seen that used in various ways too

one common way has been long term vs short term, as in, 'over the long term blah blah blah, but for now, bleh bleh bleh' (or something similar to that effect). as in, with Fi, you'd have "short term ethics" as in the ethics needed now or for this particular situation, for these specific people....while long range Fi would be more concerned with the rules of Fi ethics and how Fi would affect beyond this situation, beyond the immediate people involved, etc.
there have been other ways it's been used, but i don't remember them at the moment

This reminds me of when people say that creative Fi looks like Fe, and why INTjs can be confused about whether they are INTps.
off topic msk
is it?
some people often confuse the "long range Fi" as being "Fe"
I can see how something similar could happen with Ti or Te, or when people talk about if someone is valuing Te or not, arguing about whether the long range Te is Te or is short range Te the real Te, etc.

8. yeah I was trying to explain what people think that -/+ is.. myself I don't have a good idea.

Two ways to explain are by analogy or example.

9. Actually, I meant which properties of reality aspects does +/- reflect.

10. first off it is a property of function pairs, not functions themselves; so it is doubtful to what extend any 'aspect' of information can be linked to it directly.

IMO it works like a mirror to the accepting/creating relation between function pairs, except it concerns how patterns are learned rather than put to use. so an ISTj will learn Se patterns by copying them from the Ti patterns he knows, but when he puts them to use, he will again start off with his Ti knowledge and explain the Se in respect to that.

still working on the undelying framework of these explanations, but I think I'm making progress with that.

11. Originally Posted by labcoat
first off it is a property of function pairs, not functions themselves; so it is doubtful to what extend any 'aspect' of information can be linked to it directly.

IMO it works like a mirror to the accepting/creating relation between function pairs, except it concerns how patterns are learned rather than put to use. so an ISTj will learn Se patterns by copying them from the Ti patterns he knows, but when he puts them to use, he will again start off with his Ti knowledge and explain the Se in respect to that.

still working on the undelying framework of these explanations, but I think I'm making progress with that.
So how can a Positivist have static + or dynamic - and a Negativist have static - or dynamic + ?

12. sounds like an odd way of defining negativist/positivist without needing to resort to the phantom-dichotomy limiting/empowering. (though there is actually no need to call that one a phantom construct, it being a mathematical certainty and all)

Empowering = extrovert and perceiving or introvert and judging
Limiting = introvert and perceiving or extrovert and judging

Negativist = -empowering, +limiting
Positivist = +limiting, -empowering

those should give the correct types.

your definitions seem to refer to how the accepting function of static negativists is always -, etc.

13. Originally Posted by labcoat
sounds like an odd way of defining negativist/positivist without needing to resort to the phantom-dichotomy limiting/empowering. (though there is actually no need to call that one a phantom construct, it being a mathematical certainty and all)

Empowering = extrovert and perceiving or introvert and judging
Limiting = introvert and perceiving or extrovert and judging

Negativist = +empowering, -limiting = the peak of capability is reached, no need to prove oneself, looking out towards danger and inadequacy
Positivist = -limiting, +empowering = looking back at having been restricted, seeing oppurtunities suddenly turning up, wanting to get as close as one can to the peak of ones ability

those should give the correct types.

your definitions seem to refer to how the accepting function of static negativists is always -, etc.
Result types have always dominant -, so Static Negativists, which are Result, have always dominant -

14. Hypothesis :

Interrogative types have dominant e+ or i-.
Declarative types have dominant e- or i+.

Let's suppose :

+ means subjective "short-range"
- means objective "long-range"

e- objective bodies (declaring)
i+ subjective fields (declaring)

Let's suppose :

e- and i+ are known - when known, bodies must be objective and fields subjective.
e+ and i- are unknown - when unknown, bodies must be subjective and fields objective.

Askers focus on the unknown, Declarers focus on the known.

- Asker : "I don't know it, can tell me please ?"
- Declarer : "Yes I know it !"

Other example :

(s = static, d = dynamic)
Positive types have dominant s+ or d-
Negative types have dominant s- or d+

s+ subjective statics (positive)
s- objective statics (negative)
d+ subjective dynamics (negative)
d- objective dynamics (positive)

s+ and d- are present - when present, statics must be subjective and dynamics objective.
s- and d+ are absent - when absent, statics must be objective and dynamics subjective.

logical inconsistency ??? - I'll probably work more on that.

If +/- means subjective/objective, then it would mean, for example, than an SEI is more focused on sensations (subjective sensing fields - +), as an SLI is more focused on interactions (objective sensing fields - -).

15. some hypothetic raw data - tell me what you think of this :

Let's suppose that aspects can have 7 dichotomies, but not based on internal/external, but on E/I, J/P, and +/- :

E/I = bodies / fields
J/P = differential / integral
Statics/Dynamics = static / dynamic

Process/Result or +/- = subjective / objective
Aristocratic / Democratic = collective / individual
Negativist / Positivist = absence / presence
Interrogative / Declarative = unknown / known

it will make those relations on structural properties of reality aspects :

present bodies collective
absent fields collective
present fields individual
absent bodies individual

present known integral
absent unknown integral
present unknown differential
absent known differential

present subjective static
absent objective static
present objective dynamic
absent subjective dynamic

collective known static
individual unknown static
collective unknown dynamic
individual known dynamic

collective integral subjective
individual differential subjective
collective differential objective
individual integral objective

subjective known bodies
objective unknown bodies
subjective unknown fields
objective known fields

bodies integral static
fields differential static
bodies differential dynamic
fields integral dynamic

16. If a INTj's Ti is long-range, and short-range, what ranges are the other functions?

I've got a few ideas swimming in my head at the moment - e.g. your SuperEgo block might act negatively to a polarity different from your own (from other peoples' Ego block) - you are happy but touchy about your 3rd + 4th functions - they give you your ethics which cannot be questioned by you or anyone else (that's what the SuperEgo is supposed to represent). These functions are deeply personal to you, and you don't like people trending on them (at least not directly - it must be done through the Ego block).

Meh - does anyone actually care? .

17. Originally Posted by Subterranean
If a INTj's Ti is long-range, and short-range, what ranges are the other functions?

I've got a few ideas swimming in my head at the moment - e.g. your SuperEgo block might act negatively to a polarity different from your own (from other peoples' Ego block) - you are happy but touchy about your 3rd + 4th functions - they give you your ethics which cannot be questioned by you or anyone else (that's what the SuperEgo is supposed to represent). These functions are deeply personal to you, and you don't like people trending on them (at least not directly - it must be done through the Ego block).

Meh - does anyone actually care? .
Actually, I'm more talking of information aspects than information elements.

18. But they can be mapped onto everything else if you can work out how the various functions + polarities work in different blocks and in relation to other people - e.g. you might have a static Ego, dynamic SuperEgo, dynamic SuperId and a static Id - the different strengths of these blocks and the different polarities of their functions are all part of the integrity of the whole.

19. Originally Posted by Subterranean
But they can be mapped onto everything else if you can work out how the various functions + polarities work in different blocks and in relation to other people - e.g. you might have a static Ego, dynamic SuperEgo, dynamic SuperId and a static Id - the different strengths of these blocks and the different polarities of their functions are all part of the integrity of the whole.
No, because in the psyche, static elements have approximately the same level of differentiation, and the same is true for dynamic elements.

Do you like Signal Processing ? I'll explain you :

Ego and SuperEgo have high differentiation or sampling
SuperId and Id have low differentiation or sampling

Ego and Id have high amplitude
SuperEgo and SuperId have low amplitude

#### Posting Permissions

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