Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 45

Thread: Bukalov on the dimensionality of functions

  1. #1
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,469
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Bukalov on the dimensionality of functions

    article in .doc format.
    Last edited by xerx; 10-12-2008 at 06:31 AM.

  2. #2
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Thumbs up

    That's very interesting. I think they are correlated to Feldman's, Graves', and Morler's Levels.

    I just don't like Bukalov's compliance to subtypes. Even if they even exist they're no environmental because (for example) I'm extrovert subtype, and environment forced me to live like an introvert.

    And, I think Bukalov made a mistake on making dimensionality of conscious and subconscious functions non-symmetrical.
    Last edited by machintruc; 02-12-2008 at 12:28 PM.

  3. #3
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The vector model, developed by the author in 1989, for a period of 10 years actively is already used by specialists in sotsionike, since it makes it possible to easily and accurately describe the individual internal structure of the functions of Tim, and also to simulate and to describe intertipnye relations. From it it is possible to derive mathematical equations of the type as the totalities of the functions of psycho-information spaces [ 2, 5 ]. The relative length of vectors in the functions for a model of the type makes possible to build and to describe the individual portrait (vector diagram) of personality BY IT, which finds wide application in the practical work of the international institute of sotsioniki [ 6 ]. The collections of these vectors are explained and is described the origin of the psychos-form, empirically proposed in. V. gulenko [ 7 ]: dominant, kreativnuyu, that normalizes and harmonic. Let us emphasize that these psychos-form are not connected with the psychos-form S. dellinger [ 1 ] and are the additional characteristic of personality.
    Got any articles on this fabled "vector model"...? It seems to be prerequisite for a proper understanding of this article.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    One thing is clear from this: Boukalov is no Augusta. Augusta knew to shut up about the math; Bukalov doesn't.

    I was following him kinda until he started using mathematical notation... after which point I found myself too focused on trying to recognize the letters to take in the text. The mathematical equations do not belong anywhere save in his private little notes. It's a very far-out model: he's putting Jung's functions all on level with the blocks. Now that I think about it, it's not a bad idea, because they are all functions of the brain after all. The blocks do appear to be distinct from the functions; it would appear from my standpoint that the blocks are the prizes the functions seek. The better the block, the better the information you can get and the more useful "you" (speaking of a function here) are to the personality.

    But now wait, t is Ni, therefore t shouldn't be there, should it? Eh... I think this guy needs to back off the physics and think more in terms of psyche; but he's just shooting from his Ni id after all.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    One thing is clear from this: Boukalov is no Augusta. Augusta knew to shut up about the math; Bukalov doesn't.

    I was following him kinda until he started using mathematical notation... after which point I found myself too focused on trying to recognize the letters to take in the text. The mathematical equations do not belong anywhere save in his private little notes. It's a very far-out model: he's putting Jung's functions all on level with the blocks. Now that I think about it, it's not a bad idea, because they are all functions of the brain after all. The blocks do appear to be distinct from the functions; it would appear from my standpoint that the blocks are the prizes the functions seek. The better the block, the better the information you can get and the more useful "you" (speaking of a function here) are to the personality.

    But now wait, t is Ni, therefore t shouldn't be there, should it? Eh... I think this guy needs to back off the physics and think more in terms of psyche; but he's just shooting from his Ni id after all.
    No, Here t is not White Intuition, but the dimension of Time

    find "dimensionality of functions" in Wikisocion

  6. #6
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    Machintruc is right, t isn't really the [Ni] perception of time here. It is the "vector" of globality. A "vector" is distinct from a function - a function is defined as a collection of vectors. So a function with t, will have the capacity to think globally, whereas a function that lacks this vector will not. Your 1st function for instance has the vector of globality which allows it to integrate multiple situations together into a working model of reality.
    I don't think functions don't lack vectors. I think such "lacking" vectors are just very difficult to use.

  7. #7
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    That's a possibility, of course. Bukalov and co. seem to insist that each function is only five dimensional, so some vectors will be completely missing.
    Five dimensional ?

  8. #8
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    Yes five dimensional. Each function has x number of conscious vectors and y number of unconscious vectors to a total of five vectors (x+y=5).

    eg. Function one has 4 conscious vectors and 1 unconscious vector. The total number of its vectors is 5. Function two has 3 conscious and 2 unconscious, etc.
    and what are the unconscious vectors ?

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah well, when INTj and ENTp go off into their private little subjectivity zones, don't expect them to understand each other unless they're sharing the same zone. Boukalov seems to have done a good job codifying Gulenko's observations into a model (that's how Alpha works), but he needs to back off from expecting INTjs to understand his formulas....

    Have you guys ever seen Bukalov's "Physics of Consciousness and Life" journal? It's far out.... Let's just say that he was so totally self absorbed with it, that it made my doubting of crosstype theory a difficult justification. He seemed a typeless wonder if ever there was one. What happens when you cross socionics with high energy physics? Anyone... hey, anyone? Hello?

    Oh yeah, I just realized that positing that any number of electrons anywhere in space form a wave means that they are all the same particle and have precisely the same properties! (don't tell Buky, though he'd never believe it heh.)

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    Lol, I haven't checked out his journal yet but it sounds awesome.
    Oh it's amazing dude... you never knew the Number 17 was so significant.... (I'm being sarcastic here. Very sarcastic.)

    In sum, his "journal" purports to explain the entire universe, and then some. I would NOT take it seriously except as a case study of eh, Fe indulgence.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    On the Ne/Se thing:
    I think Bukalov had by this point failed to distinguish the mathematical role of the superego, and attributed it to his own functions for all cases. (either that, or his example was ENTp specific.)

    This is an unabashedly self-centric viewpoint on personality. Typical Bukalov.

    I'd like to point out that it would appear my own observations on the role of the program function are consistent with his, save from a different angle.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee View Post
    from I/Id directions it also seems to stem (right?) that (take duals A and B) A's conscious functions program B's unconscious functions.
    Oh come on, it's not like you're actually understanding any of this. You're just listening to the piper.

  13. #13
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't see how anyone can gather from what is divulged in the article what the hell it is you're supposed to be able to calculate with these vectors and math formulas. What is used as the input data? Are people just uncritically accepting the conclusions and concepts that the article gives without even knowing what this vector model "does"...?

    The stuff in the article is definitely groundbreaking if it can be used to reach definite results. Unfortunately it's not only potentially groundbreaking; it's also highly dubious.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Bukalov appears to be postulating by this that there exists such a thing as psychic space. I agree with labcoat that this notion is exceedingly dubious. Will, yes. Space, no.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee View Post
    ?:

    function model:

    e.g. f1 = active{I,N,s,T}, subdued{id}

    assume duality has it that perfect information balance is ensured within a dual system.

    f4 - active{I},subdued{id,E,Se,Ne}
    f8 - active{id,Se,Ne,E}, subdued{I}
    so seems like active information filters produce enough information processing to cover for all of the same, but subdued filters of the dual as well as not to cause any information streams other than direct conscious experience or I for the dual's polr.

    f1 - active{I,N,s,t},passive{id}
    f4 - active{I},passive{id,E,Se,Ne}
    person with f4 experiences a mismatched to own functional configuration attempt to send him or her, by the f1 person, an id level information, which is, again, mismatched. function's passive components will also experience a mismatch. an energy waste may result?
    What the hell are you saying?

    I refuse to participate in the formulization of socionics. This is not physics, but psyche. Period. We don't have to deal in the psyche with all the damn "color" and "spin" inexplicable Te crap they have in physics. In socionics all the functions are equal; in physics Se, Ni, and Te hold court regardless of how much they square with the other functions. If the facts say X is Y, then it doesn't matter if X *should* be B by Ti's count: it's Y. Jung and Freud both forsook any movement toward a mathematization of the psyche, and it will take a stronger man than Bukalov to lead it down that dark road.

    Bukalov is shamelessly self-indulging himself by approaching socionics the way Einstein approaches relativity. That we can all see.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee View Post
    [idiocy]
    Blech.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What pisses me off about it is that he had explained his reasoning in a way that he KNOWS most people will be unable to follow or understand, even among socionists. He's grandstanding in a way. As I say, typical Bukalov.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    It's too bad, because this is one of the few articles on this subject that I could find that was published online.
    Am I right in thinking that those "dimensions" break down to "there are five ways the functions can use information and it turns out not all of them have access to all the ways"?

  19. #19
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    We needn't specify anymore except to say that these skew the original value of the function's output in proportion to the numerical value of a,b,c,d.
    Mitin thought of the Golden Proportion.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    pretty much. but the way he puts it is more scientific.
    Then I guess what we need to understand is what the ways are. Then we can build up an understanding of the phenomena of our own accord.

    Now to help us understand this, first you need to concentrate on identifying what about what Bukalov said is egotistical and superfluous, and cut it out. We don't need to know about that nor do we want to know. Basically, we need you to restate this model in your own words, from YOUR understanding. We'll give Bukalovsky his credit for making us aware of it, but he did a god-awful job of explaining it. (that we'll credit to you as your theory of his explanation. )

  21. #21
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    (a,b,c,d) are extremely general scalar quantities measuring any linear complexity the function might have. What does this linear complexity represent in terms of psychology? Well, it probably represents any extraneous alterations to the function, or any complexity it might have not directly stemming from its vector composition. Hence, it could represent the process of educating the function or any number of other building-up activities. Setting a,b,c,d = 1 gives a representation of the psyche upon it's first entry to the world, prior to any experience. We needn't specify anymore except to say that these skew the original value of the function's output in proportion to the numerical value of a,b,c,d.

    putting everything together yields: Y= aI^4 - bL^3 + cF^2 - dR
    Thanks. What gather from this is the following:

    - Bukhalov assigns "dimensionality numbers" to each of the functions in the model A
    - Bukhalov claims there is a factor multiplying the performance of each function (we can speculate it is affected by training, education)
    - the dimensionality determines the power to which this factor is raised

    A particular thing to notice: training the base function leads to growth of a factor to the power of 4, whereas training of the PoLR function leads to growth of a factor to the power of 1. As such, the effect of training the PoLR is in comparison negligible.

    Further, we have the performance of + functions counteracting that of the - functions in the determination of how large a resulting value is.

    All this as claimed by Bukhalov, with little to no given justification.

    Something that is still hazy to me: if functions themselves (I, L, F, R) are said to be values, what is the use of the factors (a, b, c, d) multiplying them? Appearently a,b,c,d signify training, but what do I, L, F, R say about a function?

    -The input-
    The formulas don't even bother answering that question. The input is defined by the four different vectors - whether it's input about the situation, or input about norms or whatever. The above equation only provides the most general/barebones formulation of this by setting the dimensionality of the functions. Do you see why I said that the math was almost trivial?

    -The output-
    Y = the output = the psyche, and it is merely the sum of each individual function added together. Again, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the psyche is the sum of its parts.
    Ah, so using this we can calculate the volume of the psyche. Finally! Millions of lives will be saved.

    On a serious note, thanks for the clarification.

  22. #22
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    -The output-
    Y = the output = the psyche, and it is merely the sum of each individual function added together. Again, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the psyche is the sum of its parts.
    I think an alternative interpretation is needed here, by the way. The resulting value signifies the extent to which the + functions overpower the - functions.

    A potential weakness of the model: when the variables a,b,c,d and the values of the functions themselves amount to less than 1, the higher dimensionality functions end up weakening their accompanied function as opposed to strengthening it. So one needs to be clear about the fact that 1 is the lowest value the model can handle, unless one thinks it acceptable that in situations where experience is very low, the PoLR function has an advantage over the base function.

  23. #23
    The Troll Slayer Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,009
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    OMG I wish I would have saw this earlier. With the vectors that is what I was trying to explain. The Dominant function is the most stable function in the ego, it leaks in to the unconscious though. The creative ego function leaks into the unconscious even more. The unconscious functions leak into the conscious as well.
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  24. #24
    The Troll Slayer Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,009
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is the model I used before



    Thats what I think hes talking about when he talks about the vectors.
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  25. #25
    The Troll Slayer Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,009
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  26. #26
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    Here is the link to the Russian article in .doc format. Because you'll have to copy and paste repeatedly into an online translator, I was courteous enough to provide a slightly cleaned up machine translation further down this page. Apparently, for all you skeptics (ahem... Gamma NTs) out there, not that you'll be convinced by this alone or anything, but dimensionality is something that's widely popular with Russian socionists in typing clients right now.

    The dimensionality of functions is one of many first steps necessary to understanding model B. I have yet to track down a definitive article on model B, but from what I gather, it at least synthesizes the concept of a function's dimensionality with the whole +/- thing. So far as I can tell (but I could be wrong), all the references to model B having five dimensional functions is due to the concept of dimensionality. And all the talk about model B being a four dimensional model has to do with +/- adding a fourth dimension to the already accepted standard dichotomies of E/I, S/N, T/E.
    There is one more piece of information about model B that I have come across but cannot find any complete articles concerning - model B accounts for subtypes by each person having two rings of information metabolism (superficially similar to how dual-type theory looks like). The inner ring determines type, whereas the outer ring is flexible and seems to dualize or identify with the child's parents or environment. No word as to whether subtype can change.

    Now then, on to the concept of dimensionality. There are eight different dimensions, only five of which any given function can have. Four dimensions are conscious dimensions that are information vectors, whereas the other four are unconscious dimensions that are energy vectors.

    A short description of each dimension is procided in the article down the page. Here is the link to a second Russian article that talks in depth about dimensions and gives examples. I would recommend reading this one as well even if it is a bit long. link

    All functions have five dimensions independent of their place in model A. Each function has a mix of conscious and unconscious dimensions. No function has all conscious or all unconscious dimensions. The total number of dimensions is eight (t,s,N,I,E,Se,Ne,id)

    -1st function has 4 conscious (t,s,N,I) and 1 unconscious (id) subdued dimension
    -2nd function has 3 conscious (s,N,I) and 2 unconscious (id,Ne) subdued
    -3rd function has 2 conscious (N,I) and 3 unconscious (id,Ne,Se) subdued
    -4th function has 1 conscious (I) and 4 unconscious (id,Ne,Se,E) subdued

    -5th function has 1 unconscious (id) and 4 conscious (I,N,s,t) subdued
    -6th function has 2 unconscious (id, Ne) and 3 conscious (I,N,s) subdued
    -7th function has 3 unconscious (id,Ne,Se) and 2 conscious (I,N) subdued
    -8th function has 4 unconscious (id,Ne,Se,E) and 1 conscious (I) subdued

    here is a diagram from the article:


    An important application of this theory is in the observation of relations between types. Take conflictors for example. Your polr only has 1 conscious dimension (I). Your conflictor's 1st function has 4 dimensions. You get overwhelmed by the sheer size of the information coming from your conflictor.

    Why is it that duals easily accept information from each other? This is because the 5th and 6th functions have the exact same dimensions as the 1st and 2nd, making information transfer between vital and mental blocks a piece of cake.
    This is what I was trying to explain in XXXx thread.
    Apparently there are already socionicists (?) all over the ideas.. with good details and models.
    I think that draws all my work; and really all the work on this board, to a close.
    good article, thanks for posting. you kind of... relieved my obsessional neurosis, to a certain degree, with this.
    INTp

  27. #27
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,938
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Bukalov's fifth dimension is just a complicated way of saying that the conscious Ego and the subconscious SuperId are linked to each other, on occasion. If this wasn't the case, noone would be aware of the subconscious and psychologists would be out of a job.
    Last edited by Subteigh; 04-17-2008 at 07:00 PM.

  28. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    A higher dimension constitutes a program which has an awareness of all the broader movements of a lower dimension. And fwiw, I'm happy that the article helped you to resolve your obsessional neurosis.
    Well from that angle it makes sense then. But someone should tell Bukalov that most psychologists don't know to define a dimension that way.

    And the math was, again, a travesty. Most psychologists do not do math.

  29. #29
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee View Post
    i wonder when can we actually read about the essence of these already. like can't you guys do up a popular language post on these at all?
    INTp-Ni ego block: Si>Te/Fe>Ni
    ISFj-Si ego block: Ni>Fe/Te>Si (and that is the order of the INTps superego block functions)

    there is a one dimensional awareness of one another here

    Si>Te/Fe>Ni compared to..
    Ne>Fi/Ti>Se
    There is a four dimensional awareness...
    as you follow each function along step by step, you are watching whether the information is "compatible" with the relative other information function...
    INTp

  30. #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    If you want to understand Bukalov better, don't take him so seriously. If he's anything like me, he probably doesn't take himself too seriously either.
    I'd never thought of that.

  31. #31
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the word dimension seems kind of misleading; because the number of dimensions a particular thing is, is dependent on how you choose to organize it.. and you could look at the same information and find a way to see it as either two dimensional, or four dimensional... etc. a better word would be .. tiered
    INTp

  32. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Am I right in thinking that three dimensional functions are spontaneous because they are anxious over what might happen next? (because they lack the time dimension?)

    In that case, 2D functions would, lacking the presumably 3D characteristic of "permanence", see reality through an unstable, malleable lense: the person would have no observance of said function as being in any way reliable, seeing it as completely moulded by circumstance and dependent on the same. And if the function was unidimensional? Then I would imagine it having no relation even between its aspects, much like we consider Se traits in classical physics: points on a numerical line, reaching upward or downward. This is why this theory has the potential to be somewhat frightening: it becomes impossible to know if your assessment of what a function "is" is the right one therefore.

  33. #33
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the impressions I have of this are:

    4D is a 2D impression of 3D info
    3D is a 2D impression of 2D info
    2D is a 2D impression of 1D info
    1D is a 2D impression of 0D info
    ....

    before i was thinking of it like this:

    dominant is a 4D impression of 3D information
    secondary is a 3D impression of 4D information
    tertiary is a 3D impression of 2D information
    weak is a 2D impression of 3D information
    INTp

  34. #34
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    experience..........concrete past
    norms................static present (a locked/unchanging image)
    situation.............dynamic present (an image unfolding/changing before the individual in real time)
    parameter...........future (the ability to glimpse into the future)
    Now I know how is cognitive maturity related to long-term thinking...

  35. #35
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That is saying the same thing as the dimensional transformation model.
    1: 4D>3D = abstractions compressed into a system model = abstractions being relevent models of states of being, where compressed together form a coherent impression of the future = parameter / future
    2: 2D>3D = immediate perceptions compressed into a system model = situation / dynamic present
    3: 3D>4D = existing system model is treated as an abstraction = system model formed from past experience is treated as a singular understanding = experience / concrete past
    4: 3D>2D = System model seen to dictate possibilities for immediate information = norms / static present

    These information transformation notations are microscopic ways of discussing the functions, where 4D>3D is Si/Ni, 3D>4D is Ti/Fi, 3D>2D is Te/Fe, 2D>3D is Se/Ne ... there is a further specificion required for differentiating the functions which remain similar after this differentiation.

    The essay is talking about how functions can possess these different dimensionally transformative qualities.
    It is saying a function can take on characteristics of another function...
    It is a big reworded theory of dual-type
    INTp

  36. #36
    Yaaroslav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kiev UA
    TIM
    INTJ
    Posts
    321
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Boukalov: The dimension of the functions of information metabolism

    Original - There:
    http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/pdf/as-p203.pdf

    Here is the translation taken from google translator:
    Boukalov AV
    The dimension
    FUNCTIONS OF INFORMATION METABOLISM
    Introduced the concept of dimension functions of information metabolism.
    The dimension of an information metabolism is determined by the location function
    A model and is described by four vectors: globality, the situations, norms and personal
    experience. The notion of dimension is easy to explain the nature and specificity of intertype
    relationships that are open in Socionics.
    Key words: mental functions as an information
    metabolic model of the psyche, the dimension function, Socionics, intertype relationships.
    As you know, in the typology of Jung and Socionics in models A and B, the degree of
    development of mental functions, or functions of information metabolism is not the same.
    In particular, on a conscious level in models A or B stands 4 functions with decreasing
    capacity: software, realizable, and contact the place of least resistance
    (Junior). A similar proportion and function are located in the vital ring.
    It is known that the space occupied by FIM, defines the role of the above functions. Arise
    However, the following questions:
    1) how the contents of the same PPM (intuition, logic, ethics, and sensory)
    depending on where in the model?
    2) that defines the roles of these functions in the mental and vital rings?
    The author has established that the perceived space of mental function,
    standing in the first place, consists of 4 measurements or coordinates. These coordinates,
    submitted to mutually perpendicular vectors, the following:
    1) coordinate (vector) time t
    􀁇
    (Vector or global);
    2) coordinate (vector), the momentary situation aspect of the function S
    􀁇
    ;
    3) coordinate (vector) norms or cultural upbringing, customs and accepted in society
    N 􀁇
    ;
    4) coordinate (vector) I
    􀁇
    (Or I
    􀁇
    ), Which includes self-esteem, personal experiences,
    intrinsic values ​​and desires.
    We emphasize that these vectors can also be arranged on the fractal
    where necessary, more detailed analysis.
    In the mental ring on intuitive extravert (􀀝 􀀤 (ILE)) are
    the following functions:
    􀀝 → 􀀤 I + → L-
    􀁮 􀁰 or 􀁮 􀁰
    􀀢 􀁭 􀀟 R-􀁭 F +
    Turning to the notations, we can write the equation for the reduced
    mental ring:
    Y = aI - bL + cF - dR (4)
    2
    (3)
    3
    (2)
    4
    (1)
    As we see the functions appearing in different places have different dimensions.
    Similarly, we can consider all the PPM, depending on their dimensions or location
    Model A. The first function contains all four vectors and is therefore most
    developed:
    The second function contains three vectors, excluding the time vector and globality.
    Vector situation allows her to creatively and effectively operate in a momentary situation.

    The third function contains only vectors of norms and personal experience, and is therefore
    normalized by the corresponding aspect (in this case, strong-willed sensorics &#1048607, and
    sensitive to changes in the situation or the need for a global assessment of this
    aspect.
    The fourth function, the place of least resistance is just the vector I
    􀁇
    on
    relevant aspect. Therefore, it is sensitive to any unusual
    stimulus.
    If, from a physical point of view, the mental basis compared to some
    space, the vital basis of the space can be mapped, which involves
    mental, that is, they are in a relationship of complementarity. Now consider the general
    8 (16)-dimensional basis. It each vector corresponds to the mental level of the conjugate
    he vector of the vital level. Vector of global reach and complementary paired energy vector
    (E
    􀁇
    ), Which operates the body. This energy is understood as the energy of the libido (libido) or
    psychic energy, in the sense that it considered the CG Jung. Vector of the situation (S
    􀁇
    ) In
    consciousness of the world or the vector of the situation or condition of the human body (ES
    􀁇
    );
    vector of social norms (N
    􀁇
    ) Corresponds to the conjugate vector of the physiological norm
    the body, limiting its capabilities and instincts as norms of behavior of the organism (EN
    􀁇
    )
    excessive exposure to this vector lead to autonomic manifestations in the body;
    Finally: I am self-vector
    􀁇
    (I
    􀁇
    ) Can be associated in the minds of the analogous vector in
    unconscious, which expresses the aspirations and desires of the body, in fact, in this
    context, it can be called id
    􀁇
    (It), by analogy with the term Id, introduced by Freud, but
    we have found a vector is denoted with a capital letter, since it is part of the
    Id.


    Anouther part - I'll show you in the next massage
    DO YOU CONSIDER: YOU CAN NOT MISTAKE?
    (You words - doesn't matter. The matter is - your deeds)
    Anyone who would dare argue with me should be able to pass the test on the basis of Socionics. Otherwise, he will be recognized as a boor.
    Remember: NO CONVERGENCE - NO SCIENCE!

  37. #37
    Yaaroslav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kiev UA
    TIM
    INTJ
    Posts
    321
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In the vital basis of differentiation and reduction of dimension functions
    is similar to the mental.
    Consider all the FIM, standing at different places in the vital ring ILE:
    􀀡 → 􀀠 E6 → S5
    􀁮 􀁰 or 􀁮 􀁰
    􀀞 􀁭 􀀣 T7 􀁭 P8
    Thus, the equation for the unconscious part of the vital ring 􀀝 􀀤 (ILE)
    can be written as follows:
    Z = fS - kE + lT-mP4
    (8)
    3
    (7)
    2
    (6)
    1
    (5)
    At the same time the most powerful of the vital function of the model is the eighth, but the most
    weak (and therefore suggestive) - the fifth function.
    It may seem that there is a contradiction, due to the fact that in our model
    B1 [2] direction of the flow of information vital to the ring is similar to
    mental ring of the most powerful features of the weakest, but in the opposite direction,
    compared to model A. This is consistent with already being found
    units of consciousness and unconscious on a scale of rationality-irrationality. However,
    marked patterns hold when considering the circulation of information
    unconscious functions of the conscious aspects of the installation or described in Model A,
    and, as the movement of information in the mind and the unconscious is defined
    compensatory principle, then the apparent circulation of conscious attitudes in
    vital ring looks back true, vital circulation. Thus,
    there is a more general model B, which includes the Model A and B1 as private
    aspects. Its features include:
    1) B contains a folded model as model A, 8 FIM, but it is not flat, and 3 -
    dimensional. Given the character, function, detailed model B consists of 16 FIM and constructed in
    4-dimensional space;
    DO YOU CONSIDER: YOU CAN NOT MISTAKE?
    (You words - doesn't matter. The matter is - your deeds)
    Anyone who would dare argue with me should be able to pass the test on the basis of Socionics. Otherwise, he will be recognized as a boor.
    Remember: NO CONVERGENCE - NO SCIENCE!

  38. #38
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    We already know this.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  39. #39
    Yaaroslav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kiev UA
    TIM
    INTJ
    Posts
    321
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    for every function from first to eighth (sixteenth) are considered as
    conscious (mental) and unconscious (vital) installation. These
    are established on the basis of the bases of the 4 (8) and experimental vectors of 4 (8 -
    mi) of vital vectors forming a common 8 (16)-dimensional basis;
    3) the center coordinates of the vectors associated with the function of consciousness c (*) or the Self;
    4) the presence of vital structures of the vectors shows the connection between consciousness and body,
    mental and physiological.
    Understanding of mental structures in Freud, Jung and
    A. Augustinavichiute
    Thus, we have a double superbazis
    Psychology and Socionics structures. On the one hand,
    a set of 8 (16) FIM introduced by Jung and Augustinavichiute,
    on the other - is 8 (16) component vector basis,
    we proposed. If the first describes the semantics
    mental spaces, the second - their hierarchical
    ordering in the mental continuum. The presence of this base
    forms the structure of the psyche TIM. Note also that
    some aspects of this basis appeared in various models of the psyche.
    Thus, for Freud it levels the ego, superego and the id can be associated with the following set
    vectors:
    Thus, if Freud distinguished between the structure of consciousness, the structure of the unconscious
    it does not exist. In his Id in our model includes id
    􀁇
    , E S
    􀁇
    , E N
    􀁇
    , E
    􀁇
    .
    In CG Jung described the structure of mental model containing vital to
    archaic consciousness level installation:


    In Model A Augustinavichiute also considered only the perceived
    mental and vital installations, however, following Freud highlighted the levels of the psyche Ego,
    S. Ego, Id, S. Id and closed mental and vital ring.
    In the model of the author (B1 or B) All 8 (16) functions have the mental and vital
    installation of consciousness and unconsciousness. This model represents a complete
    system open with respect to the dyad, quadra, socion.
    From an examination of a vector basis of relations are clear differences between the ego and
    Superego in models A or B: in the superego are normalized functions, although the model
    Freud, it can not be identified - it is easy to describe a set of model vectors.
    DO YOU CONSIDER: YOU CAN NOT MISTAKE?
    (You words - doesn't matter. The matter is - your deeds)
    Anyone who would dare argue with me should be able to pass the test on the basis of Socionics. Otherwise, he will be recognized as a boor.
    Remember: NO CONVERGENCE - NO SCIENCE!

  40. #40
    Yaaroslav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kiev UA
    TIM
    INTJ
    Posts
    321
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In model B the sum of the vectors for each function is constant and equal to five. So
    , the total dimension of each function is equal to five. At the same time, decreasing the dimension
    conscious (unconscious) of the vector space corresponds to an increasing
    dimension of the unconscious (conscious) of the vector space setting. We write
    Now the symbolic equation that leads to getting FIM dimension: if we accept
    that there is a common space of FIM, its dimension is 8x4 = 32 (with signs
    16x4 = 64 features): Z = Y32
    DO YOU CONSIDER: YOU CAN NOT MISTAKE?
    (You words - doesn't matter. The matter is - your deeds)
    Anyone who would dare argue with me should be able to pass the test on the basis of Socionics. Otherwise, he will be recognized as a boor.
    Remember: NO CONVERGENCE - NO SCIENCE!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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