We should compile a list, using every user's information/life experiences as input to explain each function. Simply explain what each function means IN YOUR OWN WORDS the best you can. Try to be detailed. 'Internal statics of fields' doesn't really say anything at all. Don't be too quick in your descriptions, but don't confuse people by being too wordy, either.
It's okay if the answers contradict each other. We'll smooth that out later, as a group- to come up with the best possible answer.
You might think this has already been done before. But we all obviously have some insights that are different than what it's in the mainstay sites. (Truthfully, a lot of that is shit anyway) We all have certain perceptions that diverge from the mainstream socionics club. And that's okay. But if something doesn't evolve, it's bound to die out.
Your type and quadra will be taken into consideration (it might be silly for me to talk about Fi when I don't value it as much as Fe, for example) - up to a certain point, as well as how many posts you have and your general reputation in the forum. I will take Gilly's point of view more seriously than say, greenlantern's - but the degree of this isn't an exact science. I can't stress this enough, final results will be agreed upon by the *entire* community until EVERYBODY's more or less happy with what we concoct. Impossible? I didn't say it was going to be easy. But we need to do this.
This is *just* about functions btw. Keep it on topic. If this exercise proves to be a success, we can then use the same PEER-REVIEWED, scientific method for type descriptions and anything we want. Then, if somebody says something asshatery about a function that is clearly too much of a disconnect with the objective, peer-reviewed material we have available- we can properly educate them. New, insightful information can be taken into consideration though, and will be changed accordingly if somebody per chance says something truly awe-inspiring the community agrees with.
AND DO NOT ARGUE SOMEBODY ELSE'S DESCRIPTIONS. This is just what the functions are according to *You.* We will argue about the 'Final Draft' *later*. There will be plenty of time for that. Do not criticize what somebody else wrote AT ALL, you got that? If somebody criticizes you, don't criticize them back. Obvious trollers ie cpig saying 'THIS DOESN'T EXIST YOU SOCIALIST ******S (I don't care if it does or not - it's too interesting to pass up) will be ignored. As well as anything so mental masturbatory none of us can understand what you mean. But don't be afraid to be smart. You should 'know your audience' when you describe a function. Speak in a blended way that can balance all our personalities if you can.
The more people that participate in this, the merrier. This thread should be LONG. Then, as a community- we can streamline the information to make the best god fucking darnit description of all the functions available. We will write up a description of each function using a comprehensive list of the information shared. I will then re-draft it many times with the community's help, before it's finalized as official.
(This method still has a lot of biases that I'm not aware of yet, I know- but we will come to that in time. Like I said this is meant to take time and work, and effort.)
It's time to get some objectivity up in this bitch. It's time to MOVE somewhere where this shit. It is time, for SOCIONICS!