# Thread: the Strength of Functions Game

1. ## the Strength of Functions Game

If you can see past the attempt at humor, tell me what you think.
Assuming that the strength of functions is the following:
1st and 8th: 4/second
2nd and 7th: 3/s
3rd and 6th: 2/s
4th and 5th: 1/s

Potato (LSI) and the Goat (SEI) are playing a game. They are both merry types, but this has nothing to do with anything.

The game gives each the same task, which uses a specific information aspect and lasts 100 seconds.

The first task involves Si (deciding which spices are better suited for grilled tuna).

The Goat's Si will give him 4x100=400 strength points, but due to the high value Si has for him, he worked for a long time as a cook and his knowledge of recipes, spices, tuna and grills gives him 693 additional points. Total=1093 Si strength points.

The Potato's Si also gives him 400 points, and while he never really cared for cooking, his Si valuing family didn't talk about anything else and he unwillingly picked up a knowledge of 266 points. Total=666 Si points.

The Goat's tuna is way better.

The second task involves Te (insert something boring).

The Goat's terrible Te only gives him 100 points, and even the staggering numbers of duals he has had can't help him that much, as he never really understood the eerily effortless time they have with such things. Experience only gives him 69 points, for a total of 169.

The Potato's Te has been for years the only source his starving-for-Te INFj flatmate had, and this brought him to use it more than he would normally have. Knowledge of 278, plus 3x100=578.

The game went on and on through most of the functions, till the Goat got bored and dozed off, much to the frustration of the competitive Potato.

2. i dont understand whats going on here.

3. @ OP

4. Originally Posted by PotatoSpirit
If you can see past the attempt at humor, tell me what you think.
This is the part I don't understand. I don't think I can see past it.

5. It has been brought to my attention that the Goat was helped by his pet tuna on the first game. Cheater.

Originally Posted by Loki
This is the part I don't understand. I don't think I can see past it.
I'll translate from potatospeak another time, I don't feel like thinking now (c:

6. right now i really want soup with potatoes and meat

7. I think one's life experiences and studies can improve one's functional attempts/awareness.

In the first task (deciding which spices are better suited for grilled tuna), being sensitive to taste variations alone can help fulfill the task, but having knowledge/experience of various spices and their effects on other ingredients, as well as effects of cooking methods on the spice would gain Goat extra points over someone who doesn’t have that knowledge/experience.
Potato's knowledge/experience is more limited (not as extensive as Goat's).

However, I believe that another player who has, say, Si role (for example), but has chosen to spend time exploring and experimenting with tastes, spices, cooking methods, fish variations, etc, maybe even had taken a few cooking courses (or even a degree and/or works as a chef) could achieve a higher amount of points than either of you.

Perhaps it's even possible that a Si polr person could even come close to at least a tie with one of you..or give you a run for the money. Though I would want to know what prompted the person to work so hard, and expend so much time/energy at becoming decent at it if not good enough to be able to do so.

What if, in the second task, there was an INFp who had, during her course of trying to understand those around her, had come across information dealing with the second task. Said information came from two close friends, an ESTp and an INTp who were more than happy to help and support the INFp understand the task. The INTp helped her understand some short cuts and timing and such so that the INFp could accomplish the task with (comparatively) minimal effort. Also, the supportiveness of the ESTp helped the INFp develop confidence in her ability to do the task. Once the INFp understood it though, she quickly turned to less stressful and more enjoyable things. Like watching a couple of yahoos playing a silly socionics game…where… she catches on to Potato's competitiveness and the ESTp goads her into showing off a little. So the INFp (with a wink and a shy smile) sets out to accomplish the second task, using the shortcuts and understanding she learned, much to Potato's awe.

(Unfortunately, it took so much energy out of her, despite her previous lessons/experiences, that she left the game soon after to listen to some music and try to recover from the stress. It's been a week now, and we're still waiting to hear from her.)

8. .

9. Originally Posted by Diana
Goat meat by any chance?
I had considered saying something about goat's milk, but decided that would be too riske`

10. Originally Posted by PotatoSpirit
If you can see past the attempt at humor, tell me what you think.
Assuming that the strength of functions is the following:
1st and 8th: 4/second
2nd and 7th: 3/s
3rd and 6th: 2/s
4th and 5th: 1/s

Potato (LSI) and the Goat (SEI) are playing a game. They are both merry types, but this has nothing to do with anything.

The game gives each the same task, which uses a specific information aspect and lasts 100 seconds.

The first task involves Si (deciding which spices are better suited for grilled tuna).

The Goat's Si will give him 4x100=400 strength points, but due to the high value Si has for him, he worked for a long time as a cook and his knowledge of recipes, spices, tuna and grills gives him 693 additional points. Total=1093 Si strength points.

The Potato's Si also gives him 400 points, and while he never really cared for cooking, his Si valuing family didn't talk about anything else and he unwillingly picked up a knowledge of 266 points. Total=666 Si points.

The Goat's tuna is way better.

The second task involves Te (insert something boring).

The Goat's terrible Te only gives him 100 points, and even the staggering numbers of duals he has had can't help him that much, as he never really understood the eerily effortless time they have with such things. Experience only gives him 69 points, for a total of 169.

The Potato's Te has been for years the only source his starving-for-Te INFj flatmate had, and this brought him to use it more than he would normally have. Knowledge of 278, plus 3x100=578.

The game went on and on through most of the functions, till the Goat got bored and dozed off, much to the frustration of the competitive Potato.
I would add something to account for them using other functions - for instance, an LIE with an Si of 123 might have read an article on tuna spices in the process of building an important business relationship. With the problem thus moved into the ego, the LIE will be able to use several hundred points of Te.

That might be figured into the "knowledge" points... but no question is limited to one element.

11. Originally Posted by anndelise
I think one's life experiences and studies can improve one's functional attempts/awareness.
Get out! Looks like the conflictor got it (c:

My exact point was:
Functions themselves might not really get stronger, but the actual tasks you perform using them can also benefit from your experience, which comes from previous similar tasks you or someone around you performed.
The amount of such experience is likely to depend on how much you value this kind of information and looked for chances to use it/bask in it.
So Ego functions might look stronger than Id, because you are likely to have way more experience with Ego-related tasks.

Also I wanted to say that I see function strength as speed (V), experience as a fixed, almost instantaneous distance boost (Se) and actual task accomplishment as final distance (St).
Since I'm at it, I see intelligence (I) as the coefficient that multiplies speed. So with time (T) I have:
IVT+Se=St
St is what we usually see.

And yes, in everyday life you can use many functions for each task, and yes in everyday life your Ego also looks stronger than your Id because you actively try to use it more. But the game was perfect. And it decided for you what you had to use.

12. Potato is so cute

13. Originally Posted by anndelise
I had considered saying something about goat's milk, but decided that would be too riske`
hahaha... I know how they milk goats, but it took a moment for my mind wonder into milking bionicgoat...

14. lol I just noticed this topic. No fair hiding references to me in General Discussion... I don't read these threads

15. Originally Posted by Kristiina
hahaha... I know how they milk goats, but it took a moment for my mind wonder into milking bionicgoat...
milking me was the first thing you though of... don't try to deny it

16. Muddled mountain monkey makes more meaning, mostly.

17. Originally Posted by Subterranean
Muddled mountain monkey makes more meaning, mostly.

18. Originally Posted by ScarlettLux
Potato is so cute
Is this encouragement for the sickly little beta NF hidden in my superid?
I'm way cuter in my pink underwear btw.

How about "so right" or "so wrong"? (c:

19. Originally Posted by Bionicgoat
Thugs think the truth tolerates their thunderous transgressions!

(Thucking thesaurus!)

20. Originally Posted by PotatoSpirit
How about "so right" or "so wrong"? (c:
oh yeah so right baby, keep it up, oh yeah so right

is this what you want?

anyway I think yours is a good idea! of course the test cannot be done online...

21. Originally Posted by FDG
oh yeah so right baby, keep it up, oh yeah so right

is this what you want?
ahahahah I only need that kind of submission from you in the bedroom, biatch :-P

22. @PotatoSpirit:

Socionics theory can be too abstract at times. It's easier to understand if we talk about a tangible (and observable) object like the brain instead of something blurry like the "mind".

What you're describing is the typical behavior of a neural network. I don't know if you know about neural networks, but in the case you don't, they work exactly like you describe: the more training (or better put, the more exposure) the neural network has to an specific task, the better it handles it.

However, lacking in your nicely put example, is the fact that the brain, like any neural network, is still limited by the amount of neurons inside of it, so all functions grow at the expense of others and we return to the original idea that some functions are inevitably stronger than others. We can't end up with all functions being strong due to that.

The idea is biological by the way: functions compete for limited resources just like animals do in an ecosystem.

23. Originally Posted by mikemex
What you're describing is the typical behavior of a neural network. I don't know if you know about neural networks, but in the case you don't, they work exactly like you describe: the more training (or better put, the more exposure) the neural network has to an specific task, the better it handles it.
I don't know about neural networks, but I have a feeling it's not what I was talking about, which was a much "lower" kind of learning, that only involves memory. I guess there probably is a more "structural" kind of learning that actually increases function strength.

24. The concept of memory and processing being separated comes from computers. Inside the brain there is not such distinction. If there is the notion that inside the brain there are regions that serve as memory and regions that serve as processing units it is simply because the neural network that composes the brain must occupy some space and for that reason be subject to some constraining geometry. Neuronal nodes which are far from the sources of stimulus like the sensory nerves are likely to remain more or less unaffected compared to those that receive active impulses. But the whole brain and not just some regions engage at any moment.

So the idea that there is some function strength and some knowledge about the function seems to lack a biological base. And like I said, it's better if we limit our speculation to things we can observe.

25. Originally Posted by mikemex
The concept of memory and processing being separated comes from computers. Inside the brain there is not such distinction. If there is the notion that inside the brain there are regions that serve as memory and regions that serve as processing units it is simply because the neural network that composes the brain must occupy some space and for that reason be subject to some constraining geometry.
No, it's because lesions to certain areas of the brain impair certain functions and not others.
Originally Posted by mikemex
But the whole brain and not just some regions engage at any moment.
Lol yeah, and you can clearly see that in a MRI scan, can't you?

Look I'm not saying it's not connected, of course all areas are connected, but there are areas, and they have different functions... either that or Neurology is total fail.

26. I understand your point and I know you're right. I have a different, and complementary, perspective about it, tough. It's about causality. More on that later.

#### Posting Permissions

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