Comparing Beren's cognitive functions to Socionics

[dataweaver]

I recently did a quick analysis comparing Dr. Linda Berens' "Dynamics of Personality Type: Understanding and Applying Jung's Cognitive Processes" to Model A. I'd post my findings here, except that I made extensive use of tables in illustrating my findings; so I'll just post a link.

Thoughts?

[xerx]

I haven't looked into this, but if she defines the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th functions the same way then the two models would be identical, mental/vital distinction notwithstanding.

If she's applying Jungian archetypes to the functions, then it makes sense she'd choose a different placement for them than Model A, since the non-valued functions would correspond to the repressed side of the personality, (hence Jungian "shadow").

[dataweaver]

So the Mental/Vital distinction isn't that big of a deal. Got it. The next step, then, is to compare and contrast the definitions of the individual roles with their prospective socionic function counterparts.

[xerx]

So the Mental/Vital distinction isn't that big of a deal. Got it. The next step, then, is to compare and contrast the definitions of the individual roles with their prospective socionic function counterparts.

I'll await your report.

[xkj220]

I am extremely interested in this. Looking forward to any conclusions you might arrive (it's smth I've trying to do as well).

I found this which might prove informative: http://www.bestfittype.com/cognitive...s/16types.html

[xkj220]

A few notes:

- I personally don't subscribe to the "mental" and "vital" distinctions of the rings in model A. Everything is mental (conscious) and vital (unconscious) at the same time, only that depending on your type some IM elements will be more of one, and others more of the other, imo. These observations are in tune with the "dimensionality theory".

- The fact that Berens and Augusta seem to have reached similar conclusions doesn't necessarily mean that Berens "copied" Augusta (given that Augusta's theories came first). If she didn't and she developed it out of her own observations; it would add weight to Model A (to both theories actually, which could very well be complementary and not exclusive).

I'll try to compare where exactly these functional roles differ from the ones described in model A, so that they can be addressed. We can then compare our conclusions.

Here's a resource for Model A definitions: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ons-model.html . The ones in the wikisocion also work for the most part (e.g. This).

[dataweaver]

for anyone who is interested, here is the book Dataweaver mentions: Dynamics of personality type ... - Google Books. (there is a viewing limit and i think some pages may not be available.)

Correct on both counts - and most annoyingly, page 31 is one of the missing pages: that's the page that gives Berens' definitions for all of the roles except the Leading and Supporting roles (which are summarized on page 30, along with slightly over a third of her definition of the Relief Role).

Some observations: Berens appears to be basing her roles on Beebes' Archetypes model (found here and here, and also here). She's changed the terminology a bit, but it's essentially the same theory. As such, her Leading Role corresponds to the Hero/Heroine Archetype in the cited articles; her Supporting Role corresponds to the Father/Mother Archetypes; her Relief Role corresponds to the Puer/Puella Archetypes; and her Aspirational Role corresponds to the Anima/Animus Archetypes. Likewise, her Opposing Role is the Opposing Archetype described in the first article; her Critic Role corresponds to the Senex/Witch Archetypes described in the second article; her Deceiving Role matches the Trickster Archetype; and her Devilish Role matches the Demonic/Daimonic Archetypes from the first article.

In terms of socionics, this would mean that the following should be compared and contrasted, in the context of the above articles:

• Leading function <-> Heroic Archetypes
• Creative function <-> Parental Archetypes
• Role function <-> Demonic/Daimonic Archetypes
• Vulnerable function <-> Trickster Archetype
• Suggestive function <-> Anima/Animus Archetypes
• Mobilizing function <-> Puer/Puella Archetypes
• Ignoring function <-> Opposing Archetype
• Demonstrative function <-> Senex/Witch Archetypes

If these can be shown to be compatible, then I think that Beebes' Archetypes theory can be viewed as being compatible with socionics.

Beebe also makes a big deal about the relationship between the Hero/Heroine and Anima/Animus Archetypes, referring to it as the Spine, and the relationship between the Father/Mother and Puer/Puella Archetypes, which he calls the Arms. In socionics, the analogous relationships would be between the Leading and Suggestive functions (Beebes' Spine), and the Creative and Mobilizing functions (Beebes' Arms). His Spine and Arms define functions that complement each other, forming what I have heard referred to as a "tandem pair" (and which socionics describes as complementary functions). He suggests that the Shadow has a similar structure, with the Ignoring and Role functions making up its Spine while the Demonstrative and Vulnerable functions make up its Arms.

Note that in each of these pairs, the information elements are of the same overall type (i.e., Perceiving or Judging), but diametrically opposed within that type: if one is Sensing, the other is Intuiting; if one is Thinking, the other is Feeling; and one is Extraverted while the other is Introverted. This establishes a set of four "tandem pairs", each of which gets placed as the "spine" or "arm" of either the conscious mind or the Shadow: , , , and . The two-symbol representation of the personality type determines which which tandem pairs go in the spine and arms, and how they're oriented: so a has as its Spine, and as its Arms. The Shadow's Spine and Arms reflect the conscious mind's Spine and Arms, but with the attitudes reversed: so the Spine and Arms of a 's Shadow would be and , respectively.

If there's enough compatibility between Beebes' Archetypal model (and hence Berens' Cognitive Dynamics) and socionics' Model A, then socionics can be used to provide more details for Beebes' and Berens' models: for example, socionics has already explored the complementary elements in some detail, and can thus provide "core themes" for each of Beebes' tandem pairs.

I'm pretty sure that all members of a given Quadra will have the same tandem pairs in their conscious minds, differing only in terms of which is the spine vs. the arms, and how they're oriented. In fact, socionics' intertype relationships could probably be rephrased in terms of how the spine and arms of each type compare; e.g., an Identical relationship has the same tandem pairs in the spine and arms, with the same orientation, while a Dual relationship has the same spine and arms, but with opposite orientations. In a Quasi-Identical relationship, one partner's spine and arms exactly matches the spine and arms of the other partner's Shadow. And so on.

[717495]

Copied from http://www.bestfittype.com/cognitive...s/16types.html

The Roles of the Processes
In each of the sixteen types, each of the eight processes plays a different “role” in the personality. The type code lets you know what role each process plays for each type. This is called “type dynamics.” It is also referred to as the “hierarchy of functions”: Dominant, Auxiliary, Tertiary, and Inferior. The roles are explained below to help you better understand the patterns. In most of what we do we rely on two of the processes—a preferred way of accessing information and a preferred way of organizing and evaluating that information. As we look more closely we can see that one process takes a leading role and the other takes a supporting role.*

In truth, we have access to all eight cognitive processes—the other six are often in the background, playing other kinds of roles. Each has a positive and a negative way of expressing itself. Each bears a different energy cost when we use it.

The Primary Processes
The primary processes are those used in the first four roles. Each process tends to emerge and develop at different times in our lives. During these times we are drawn to activities that use these processes. Then, learning the content and the skills that engage these processes is often nearly effortless. We find our interest is drawn to them and our interest is pulled away from things we were drawn to before.

The Leading Role (Dominant) (sometimes referred to as the 1st function)
The process that plays the leading role is the one that usually develops early in childhood. We tend to engage in this process first, trusting it to solve our problems and help us be successful. Being the most trusted and most used, it usually has an adult, mature quality to it. While we are likely to engage in it rather automatically and effortlessly, we have much more conscious control over it. The energy cost for using it is very low. Much like in the movies, the leading role has a heroic quality as using it can get us out of difficult situations. However, we can sometimes “turn up the volume” on this process and become overbearing and domineering. Then it takes on a negative dominating quality.

The Supporting Role (Auxiliary) (sometimes referred to as the 2nd function)
The supporting role is how we are helpful to others as well as supportive of ourselves. Once we have developed some facility with our leading role process, we are more likely to feel comfortable engaging in our supporting role process. In its most positive form, this can be quite like a nurturing parent. In its more negative aspect, it can be overprotective and stunting rather than helpful. When the leading role process is an extraverted one, the supporting role process is introverted. When the leading role process is an introverted one, the supporting role process is extraverted and may be quite active and visible as it provides a way of dealing with the outer world.

The Relief Role (Tertiary) (sometimes referred to as the 3rd function)
The relief role gives us a way to energize and recharge ourselves. It serves as a backup to the supporting role and often works in tandem with it. When we are younger, we might not engage in the process that plays this role very much unless our life circumstances require it or make it hard to use the supporting role process. Usually, in young adulthood we are attracted to activities that draw upon this process. The relief role often is how we express our creativity. It is how we are playful and childlike. In its most negative expression, this is how we become childish. Then it has an unsettling quality, and we can use this process to distract ourselves and others, getting us off target.

The Aspirational Role (Inferior) (sometimes referred to as the 4th function)
The aspirational role usually doesn’t develop until around midlife. We often experience it first in its negative aspect of projecting our “shoulds,” fears, and negativities onto others. The qualities of these fears reflect the process that plays this role, and we are more likely to look immature when we engage in the process that plays this role. There is often a fairly high energy cost for using it—even when we acquire the skill to do so. As we learn to trust it and develop it, the aspirational role process provides a bridge to balance in our lives. Often our sense of purpose, inspiration, and ideals have the qualities of the process that plays this role.


The Shadow Processes
The other four cognitive processes operate more on the boundaries of our awareness. It is as if they are in the shadows and only come forward under certain circumstances. We usually experience these processes in a negative way, yet when we are open to them, they can be quite positive.

The Opposing Role (sometimes referred to as the 5th function)
The opposing role is often how we get stubborn and argumentative—refusing to “play” and join in whatever is going on at the time. It might be easy for us to develop skill in the process that plays this role, but we are likely to be more narrow in our application of this skill, and it will likely take more energy to use it extensively. In its positive aspect, it provides a shadow or depth to our leading role process, backing it up and enabling us to be more persistent in pursuit of our goals.

The Critical Parent Role (sometimes referred to as the 6th function)
The critical parent role is how we find weak spots and can immobilize and demoralize others. We can also feel this way when others use the process that plays this role. It is often used sporadically and emerges more often under stressful conditions when something important is at risk. When we engage it, we can go on and on. To access its positive side of discovery, we must learn to appreciate and be open to it. Then it has an almost magical quality and can provide a profound sense of wisdom.

The Deceiving Role (sometimes referred to as the 7th function)
The deceiving role fools us into thinking something is important to do or pay attention to. The process that fills this role is often not trusted or seen as worthy of attention, for when we do engage it, we may make mistakes in perception or in decision making. Then we feel double bound—trapped between two bad options. Yet this role can have a positive side as it provides comic relief. Then we can laugh at ourselves. It can be refreshing and join with the relief role as we recharge ourselves through play.

The Devilish Role (sometimes referred to as the 8th function)
The devilish role can be quite negative. Using the process that plays this role, we might become destructive of ourselves or others. Actions (or inactions) taken when we engage in the process that plays this role are often regretted later. Usually, we are unaware of how to use the process that fills this role and feel like it just erupts and imposes itself rather unconsciously. Yet when we are open to the process that plays the devilish role, it becomes transformative. It gives us the impetus to create something new—to make lemonade out of lemons, rather than lament their sourness.

Think of the shadow processes as being situated just behind the stick figure to show that they are in the background. Just like a shadow, they are always there, but we are most often not actively using them.

[dataweaver]

Copied from Cognitive Processes and Type Dynamics

Thank you. The following links are to Wikisocion, while the summaries were copied from Wikipedia. I will edit the summaries later to make them more useful as comparisons; for now, I just want to get the basic framework laid out before I head off to work. Suggestions for more informative summaries of the socionic functions are welcome.

The Leading Role (Dominant) (sometimes referred to as the 1st function)
The process that plays the leading role is the one that usually develops early in childhood. We tend to engage in this process first, trusting it to solve our problems and help us be successful. Being the most trusted and most used, it usually has an adult, mature quality to it. While we are likely to engage in it rather automatically and effortlessly, we have much more conscious control over it. The energy cost for using it is very low. Much like in the movies, the leading role has a heroic quality as using it can get us out of difficult situations. However, we can sometimes “turn up the volume” on this process and become overbearing and domineering. Then it takes on a negative dominating quality.

The Leading Function
This is the strongest conscious function, and the most utilized function of the psyche. A person's outlook and role in life is largely determined by the nature of this function. One is generally very confident in the use of this function, and may defend it when challenged.

The Supporting Role (Auxiliary) (sometimes referred to as the 2nd function)
The supporting role is how we are helpful to others as well as supportive of ourselves. Once we have developed some facility with our leading role process, we are more likely to feel comfortable engaging in our supporting role process. In its most positive form, this can be quite like a nurturing parent. In its more negative aspect, it can be overprotective and stunting rather than helpful. When the leading role process is an extraverted one, the supporting role process is introverted. When the leading role process is an introverted one, the supporting role process is extraverted and may be quite active and visible as it provides a way of dealing with the outer world.

The Creative Function
This is second in influence only to the dominant function. It assists the dominant function in achieving its essence. One is generally less confident with the use of this function than with his dominant function. As a result, the creative function is sometimes less instrumental when a person is challenged or threatened, or when dealing with new and complex tasks and data.

The Relief Role (Tertiary) (sometimes referred to as the 3rd function)
The relief role gives us a way to energize and recharge ourselves. It serves as a backup to the supporting role and often works in tandem with it. When we are younger, we might not engage in the process that plays this role very much unless our life circumstances require it or make it hard to use the supporting role process. Usually, in young adulthood we are attracted to activities that draw upon this process. The relief role often is how we express our creativity. It is how we are playful and childlike. In its most negative expression, this is how we become childish. Then it has an unsettling quality, and we can use this process to distract ourselves and others, getting us off target.

The Mobilizing Function
This is a weak and unconscious function which one often understands poorly. Nonetheless, this function has a strong influence over one's actions. Individuals requires assistance from someone who uses it confidently in order to understand it. Often an individuals is only aware that they are totally unaware of how to use this function.

The Aspirational Role (Inferior) (sometimes referred to as the 4th function)
The aspirational role usually doesn’t develop until around midlife. We often experience it first in its negative aspect of projecting our “shoulds,” fears, and negativities onto others. The qualities of these fears reflect the process that plays this role, and we are more likely to look immature when we engage in the process that plays this role. There is often a fairly high energy cost for using it—even when we acquire the skill to do so. As we learn to trust it and develop it, the aspirational role process provides a bridge to balance in our lives. Often our sense of purpose, inspiration, and ideals have the qualities of the process that plays this role.

The Suggestive Function
This is a weak and unconscious function which is largely lacked. One requires assistance from somebody confident in this function in order to overcome the difficulties it presents. When left to ones own devices, the suggestive function goes unnoticed.

The Opposing Role (sometimes referred to as the 5th function)
The opposing role is often how we get stubborn and argumentative—refusing to “play” and join in whatever is going on at the time. It might be easy for us to develop skill in the process that plays this role, but we are likely to be more narrow in our application of this skill, and it will likely take more energy to use it extensively. In its positive aspect, it provides a shadow or depth to our leading role process, backing it up and enabling us to be more persistent in pursuit of our goals.

The Ignoring Function
This is a strong but unconscious function. One generally has a good grasp of this function, but attempts to limit its use considerably. Individuals will disregard this function when an argument calls for restraint or when it will be difficult to indulge in its essence.

The Critical Parent Role (sometimes referred to as the 6th function)
The critical parent role is how we find weak spots and can immobilize and demoralize others. We can also feel this way when others use the process that plays this role. It is often used sporadically and emerges more often under stressful conditions when something important is at risk. When we engage it, we can go on and on. To access its positive side of discovery, we must learn to appreciate and be open to it. Then it has an almost magical quality and can provide a profound sense of wisdom.

The Demonstrative Function
This function is so deeply rooted into the psyche that one is usually not consciously aware of its existence or utilization.

The Deceiving Role (sometimes referred to as the 7th function)
The deceiving role fools us into thinking something is important to do or pay attention to. The process that fills this role is often not trusted or seen as worthy of attention, for when we do engage it, we may make mistakes in perception or in decision making. Then we feel double bound—trapped between two bad options. Yet this role can have a positive side as it provides comic relief. Then we can laugh at ourselves. It can be refreshing and join with the relief role as we recharge ourselves through play.

The Vulnerable Function
This is a weak and conscious function, in addition to being the weakest function of the psyche. One painfully perceives his complete inability to use this function, and reacts negatively to its imposition upon him. Tactful assistance is required from one's mobilizing function to overcome the problems associated with this function.

The Devilish Role (sometimes referred to as the 8th function)
The devilish role can be quite negative. Using the process that plays this role, we might become destructive of ourselves or others. Actions (or inactions) taken when we engage in the process that plays this role are often regretted later. Usually, we are unaware of how to use the process that fills this role and feel like it just erupts and imposes itself rather unconsciously. Yet when we are open to the process that plays the devilish role, it becomes transformative. It gives us the impetus to create something new—to make lemonade out of lemons, rather than lament their sourness.

The Role Function
This is a weak but conscious function. One generally tries to be at least adequate in areas where use of the role function is necessary. However, generally one has very little control or confidence over the role function, and criticism is painfully acknowledged with respect to it. Tactful assistance is required from one's suggestive function to overcome the problems associated with the role function.

[xkj220]

Looking good. Here's more info: INTJ Information -- I yoinked this from intj.org, although it is no longer available. Seems similar to the one I linked to earlier, although it contains some additions, I think. Also, the tables are useful. I'll quote the text:

How do people with INTJ preferences interact with other types?
This page is based on the work done by Dr. John Beebe who mapped Jungian archetypes to the hierarchy of Cognitive Processes, and subsequent research by Dr. Linda Berens.

Brief background to these theories
Jung theorized that people take in information (Perceiving) and make decisions (Judging). He defined two Perceiving functions (iNtuiting and Sensing) and two Judging functions (Thinking and Feeling). He also said that each function can be used internally (Introverted) or externally (Extraverted). This defines 8 Cognitive Processes which are used by each of the 16 psychological types in a different hierarchical sequence. For INTJ, the sequence is:
Ni: Introverted iNtuition
Te: Extraverted Thinking
Fi: Introverted Feeling
Se: Extraverted Sensing
Ne: Extraverted iNtuition
Ti: Introverted Thinking
Fe: Extraverted Feeling
Si: Introverted Sensing

Beebe theorized that the position of each of these Cognitive Processes maps to certain archetypes, as shown here:
1. Heroic
2. Good Parent
3. Child (Puer/Puella)
4. Anima/Animus (opposite sex)
5. One-Dimensional Opposing Personality
6. Witch/Senex (same sex)
7. Trickster
8. Demonic

Some definitions and examples:
1. Heroic
This is the cognitive process you're most comfortable using. It's the one that develops first and becomes your most natural function. It's called "Heroic" since it generally "leads the charge" anytime a person needs to engage any functions. It can also be regarded as the "leader" among the cognitive processes and can come to the rescue in times of crisis.
In the case of INTJ, it's Introverted iNtuition (Ni) which manifests as a form of "knowing" that's not connected with the real world. This "knowing" is usually oriented toward the future. Sometimes, Ni is referred to as the "foreseeing" function.

2. Good Parent
This archetype usually operates in a supportive or protective role, helping the heroic function as needed. Some personality type authorities liken the first (heroic) fuction to the general in the tent on the battlefield, with the second (good parent) like the adjutant standing outside the tent, waiting for orders.
The INTJ "good parent" is Extraverted Thinking (Te), which usually wants to organize things in the real world. This (when combined with the "foreseeing" manifested by Ni) is what makes INTJs especially good at project management.

3. Child (Puer/Puella)
Puer means "boy" in Latin; puella means "girl". Jung used these terms to represent the archetypal child in us all. In this context, it means that the third position Cognitive Process (CP) is accessed in a "childlike" way. That is, it's not as well-developed as the top two, and is prone to shifts in perspective, in Beebe's terms, it can be "inflated" or "deflated". Not as dramatic as manic-depressive mood swings, but somewhat similar.
In the case of INTJ, our Introverted Feeling is our puer/puella, meaning that our deeply-held inner values are usually not as well developed as our Ni and Te. Consequently, it's possible that we can become alternatively petulant or grandiose depending on whether our values are being questioned or supported.

4. Anima/Animus (opposite sex)
If you're a male, your 4th position CP will be your anima, ie, your female archetypal counterpart. It represents the feminine side of the man. Conversely, if you're female, the 4th position CP will be your animus, ie, your male archetypal counterpart. There's still a lot of discussion about whether the 4th CP is conscious or unconscious, but most type experts agree that it represents one's aspirational side at best, or one's negative projections at worst.
In the case of INTJ, Extraverted Sensing is our anima/animus, meaning that we aspire to gain mastery over the real world, in the present, via our 5 physical senses. This can take the form of gaining prowess at sport or some other physical activity. (In my case, it took the form of studying Karate and learning swing dancing.)

5. One-Dimensional Opposing Personality
This is a construct invented by Dr. Beebe that represents the unconscious oppositional personality that holds up a "stop sign" when you encounter something you're uncomfortable with. (Some Jungians refer to this as the "Negative Anima/Animus" archetype.) In the case of INTJ, we instinctively balk at Extraverted iNtuition when we encounter it.
This is why ENFPs and ENTPs can drive us crazy! They're always exploring never-ending possibilities in the outside world, in the "here and now", which causes us to run away screaming! Our typical reaction is: "We know what to do; we've seen the future; we've charted the course -- let's move forward and stop all this procrastinating!" It takes practice and discipline to hear them out and extract valuable data from their insights.

6. Witch/Senex (same sex)
If you're a male, your 6th position CP will be your senex (wise old man), ie, your archetypal inner critic. Conversely, if you're female, your 6th position CP will be your witch, ie, your archetypal inner critic. As with any critic, the criticism offered can be destructive or constructive.
For an INTJ, Introverted Thinking directed at us instinctively causes us to assume it's negative criticism, and it takes practice to recognize the positive side, which is usually how it's intended. This is one of the most common causes of friction between INTJs and INTPs -- the INTP will take in an INTJs ideas and offer an Introverted Thinking analysis of them, and we immediately get defensive, because we perceive it via our witch/senex archetype.

7. Trickster
This arechetype can seem tricky or comedic depending on the context. But in either case, our tendency is to not trust it.
Extraverted Feeling (Fe) is the Trickster for INTJs. In situations where we're called upon to consider the needs of others from an empathic standpoint, we may find ourselves feeling embarrased because it seems almost frivolous. Similarly, when confronted with Fe from a person who favors that function (xxFJ types), we may become instinctively suspicious of the apparnet "tricky" nature of what's being offered. Good type development calls for us to release such feelings and consider the sincerity of Fe in such situations.

8. Demonic
This archetype is where our least proficient cognitive process resides. It can cause extreme distress when accessed. It's the one we most want to avoid.
For INTJs, Introverted Sensing (Si) is where our "demon" resides. It's the domain of past experience; of history; of recorded sensory impressions in our memory. It's common for INTJs to have a distorted or vague sense of their own past. Sometimes it's colored with false memories of good times or bad times. When others hit us with tedious historial detail, it's usually a signal for us to glaze over or run screaming from the room! However, in order to further one's individuation, it's wise to pay heed to Si and develop it to a point where it can be utilized effectively.

Berens developed this idea further by proposing positive and negative aspects of each position. She also used terminology that's more accessible to people who may be skeptical of the concepts of archetypes. For more information, read her book: "Dynamics of Personality Type: Understanding and Applying Jung's Cognitive Processes".
1: Leading; Dominating
2: Supporting; Overprotective
3: Relief; Unsettling
4: Aspirational; Projective
5: Backup; Opposing
6: Discovery; Critical
7: Comedic; Deceiving
8: Transformative; Devilish

--------

BTW-- so far I seem to encounter the greatest discrepancies in functions: 5 (soc. Ignoring), 6 (Demonstrative), 7 (PoRL) and 8(Role). Basically; the superego/id ones (what they call "unconscious" or "shadow"). In this order (from most discrepancy to least): 8,6~7,5.

[dataweaver]

Interestingly, Beebes mentioned that the Shadow roles are the least understood of the batch - not only in the sense of self-awareness, but also in the sense of how well the field of psychology understands them.

I'm curious: you've listed the functions where you found the greatest discrepencies, and a ranking of how severe those discrepencies are; could you also elaborate on exactly what the discrepencies are? For example, what discrepencies do you see between the Role function and the devilish/transformative role? (And likewise for the other three.)

In the former case, I didn't so much note discrepencies (in the sense of conflicts between the definitions) so much as a sense of apples-and-oranges - that the two definitions are addressing entirely different sets of concerns (possibly like the story of the Blind Men and the Elephant). But then, I have only a cursory familiarity with socionics; I only just learned of its existence this last week. So I'm a little shy on expertise concerning the socionic functions.

[xkj220]

Uh, err... sorry, I just don't deal with details very well. I barely skimmed through everything and that was the impression I got. Still, I'll try to answer this one:

For example, what discrepencies do you see between the Role function and the devilish/transformative role?

First of all, B&B say that this is the "weakest" function, which is not true, having verified myself (and having noticed it myself before I came to socionics) that it is indeed the "PoRL" (what they call "Trickster"). Another thing; they claim that this process is completely unconscious, and that it "erupts" without any conscious control over how it does. I find this not accurate.

But on the other hand, I fully agree with the idea that this function's results are many times highly unsatisfactory and regrettable, and tend to bring damage to the person and those involved in anything that the person tries to accomplish using it. In my opinion, this function is best relegated to an optional, intermittent use. The idea that it can be used to achieve great deeds is also interesting. Sort of a double-edged sword.

In the former case, I didn't so much note discrepencies (in the sense of conflicts between the definitions) so much as a sense of apples-and-oranges - that the two definitions are addressing entirely different sets of concerns (possibly like the story of the Blind Men and the Elephant)

Theoretically, both set of functions definitions should have areas where they overlap, and areas where they contradict (as they both presumably refer to the same things. If they weren't, then I guess the exercise would be futile. I personally don't think they are[referring to different things]). Independently of this, they will also contain a portion of truth, and a portion of un-truth. Ideally, it would be the best course of action to separate the "wheat" from the "chaff", and then "combine" all the "grains".

I only just learned of its existence this last week. So I'm a little shy on expertise concerning the socionic functions.

It'll take you a while to absorb all the new definitions and concepts. I'd also try to be selective from where you get information. Trust your own judgment best. Are you a or a (or maybe neither)?

[dataweaver]

[ArchonAlarion]

I like Dr. Beren. I remember this stuff from when I was into MBTI... interesting.