Quadra Progression

[Gilly]

Quadra Progression is currently my focus within Socionics, and I have some ideas, but before I waste my time explaining my thoughts, I want to know if anyone actually gives a shit. No, I don't care if it sounds cool and you want to hear more; no, I don't give a damn if you read my other threads and didn't quite get it but wouldn't mind reading if I wrote some more; I want to know if anyone out there is actually already interested in the topic of Quadra progression, who I won't have to explain everything six trillion times to understand it, and is interested in discussing, studying, and applying it in depth.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Gilly]

Well personally I think that quadra cycles function in both directions, but if you have something to say then say it.

[Crispy]

Is quadra progression that thing where you type countries or whaaaaaaaaat?

[strrrng]

lol

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Gilly]

I use one DGABDG... I'll eventually write about that (I wrote previously but I was asked to delete), meantime yes, I'm interested to hear a sensible explanation supporting the ABGD one.

I've done it multiple times on the forum and elaborated down to subtype pairs and their roles; I'm actually just getting down on what I think of as quadra "regression;" I think the forward progressing cycle (DABGD) moves from human nature towards organization and societal structure, whereas the regressing cycle (DGBAD) moves from structured society towards prioritization of expression and harnessing of more instinctual drives. I'm also interested in the roles subtypes play and what the nature of subtypes says about the roles different types play in the two cycles, specifically which types come to the forefront or play a supporting role in each one.

[jughead]

give an example for each one of these
"think the forward progressing cycle (DABGD) moves from human nature towards organization and societal structure, whereas the regressing cycle (DGBAD) moves from structured society towards prioritization of expression and harnessing of more instinctual drives."
The wording is blurring my understanding of it and it sounds like they could both be the same thing just chicken and egg.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I care Gilly, but I honestly think you're becoming an asshole. And I just think that's counterproductive for you. You just seem stressed out and I want you to chill. A more effective narcissist leader catches more flies with honey then having a 'tude.

Anyways, yeah I'd genuinely give a shit. So rant away.

[Gilly]

I care Gilly, but I honestly think you're becoming an asshole. And I just think that's counterproductive for you. You just seem stressed out and I want you to chill. A more effective narcissist leader catches more flies with honey then having a 'tude.

There are things I care about more than being an "effective narcissist leader," namely my integrity.

Anyways, yeah I'd genuinely give a shit. So rant away.

This response says otherwise.

[Blaze]

Quadra Progression is currently my focus within Socionics, and I have some ideas, but before I waste my time explaining my thoughts, I want to know if anyone actually gives a shit. No, I don't care if it sounds cool and you want to hear more; no, I don't give a damn if you read my other threads and didn't quite get it but wouldn't mind reading if I wrote some more; I want to know if anyone out there is actually already interested in the topic of Quadra progression, who I won't have to explain everything six trillion times to understand it, and is interested in discussing, studying, and applying it in depth.

yes i think it's a good idea. quadra progression is a broader application of socionics that describes social progress. it fits in very well with the Turnings Theory. it provides context for where types typically find their niches. and for what's going on in the larger social context.

there is an embedded, spiritual level of quadra progression as well; i have this idea about the age of souls and how that's different from type to type, quadra to quadra.

any discourse on quadra progression could be good since there are multiple levels to look at including social progress, context, and spiritual embeddedness. my only request is that you remain receptive to input on this topic.

[Gilly]

give an example for each one of these
"think the forward progressing cycle (DABGD) moves from human nature towards organization and societal structure, whereas the regressing cycle (DGBAD) moves from structured society towards prioritization of expression and harnessing of more instinctual drives."
The wording is blurring my understanding of it and it sounds like they could both be the same thing just chicken and egg.

The Ti/Fe axis of the Socion represents the peak of sublimation of human emotion and instincts, while the Te/Fi axis represents the peak of repression of these for the sake of organization; one Quadra cycle moves from Ti/Fe to Te/Fi (this is traditional quadra progression, DABGD) while the other moves from Te/Fi to Ti/Fe (quadra regression, DGBAD).



When Delta, being the lowest state of energy and thus the beginning and end of each quadra cycle, moves towards Alpha, it is the result of slow stagnation in society caused by Delta's puritanically practical approach; Alphas rise, at first in an attempt to provide a fresh perspective on things, and suggest a few changes, but as moral boundaries are stripped away in the progression of Ne/Si towards Ti/Fe, the need for more integral social change is recognized, and an upwelling of public opinion begins, eventually organizing at the peak of Ti/Fe between Alpha and Beta. The transition from Alpha to Beta represents the decision for commitment and dedication, to narrow the scope of focus and target attempts at making change in society. As Beta progresses towards the Se/Ni axis, its actions become more drastic as the extent of repression becomes apparent, eventually culminating in an act of desperation or cataclysm on the part of the most invested individuals. This cataclysm serves as a moral lesson in the progression to Gamma, who begin to see the necessity to place moral boundaries on actions, and dictate conditions of societal cooperation as they lock down in an attempt to control the chaos created by Beta. Slowly, the momentum of Beta dissent is halted, and the transition back to Delta represents the return to organization and stability. Examples: Communist Russia/The Cold War, Fight Club

When Delta regresses to Gamma, it initiates the cycle by passing through the peak of repression, as opposed to progressing towards it. Delta, representing the peak of societal organization and stability, moves towards Gamma in an attempt to expand the boundaries of society and its influence while maintaining its collective moral contract; this, however, breaks down when Gamma attempts aggressive expansion and more direct control of its populace without appeasing changing social sentiments. This invariably leads to an upwelling of dissent in the form of grassroots organization, perhaps terrorism or riots of some sort, in the transition to Beta, which gradually becomes tempered by the ensuing chaos and obvious need for reorganization, lest social structure crumble completely. The transition from Beta to Alpha encompasses a compromise of sorts, in which more radical thinkers are supported by those who have reestablished stability in an attempt to reorganize society in a manner that is more accommodating of human nature; however their ideas are inevitably dismissed as impractical and not conducive to broad-spectrum cooperation, eventually transitioning back to the formulated long-term stability of Delta, hopefully having left a few shards of regret and caution lodged in the minds of survivors. Examples: V for Vendetta, Children of Men

[Gilly]

yes i think it's a good idea. quadra progression is a broader application of socionics that describes social progress. it fits in very well with the Turnings Theory. it provides context for where types typically find their niches.

there is an embedded, spiritual level of quadra progression as well; i have this idea about the age of souls and how that's different from type to type, quadra to quadra.

any discourse on quadra progression could be good since there are multiple levels to look at including social progress, context, and spiritual embeddedness. my only request is that you remain receptive to input on this topic.

Your request will be completely ignored.

[Blaze]

Your request will be completely ignored.

and therein lies the problem my friend.

[Gilly]

and therein lies the problem my friend.

I see no problem. Why don't you tell me what's so horribly wrong?

[Blaze]

I see no problem. Why don't you tell me what's so horribly wrong?

just write what you're gonna write dude. sounds like a good topic.

[Gilly]

just write what you're gonna write dude. sounds like a good topic.

Why don't you keep your passive aggression the fuck out of my topic if you have nothing to contribute, you rancid bitch.

[crazedrat]

I think quadras can progress in any number of different patterns depending on the content they're being related to.

[Gilly]

Care to describe how that would work?

[crazedrat]

The typical model progresses through the refinement of new ideas / information:
Alpha > Delta > Gamma > Beta
What if you changed this to "the assertion of standardized information"?:
Gamma > Beta > Alpha > Delta
What about "The application of processed information"?:
Beta > Gamma > Delta > Alpha
What about "The establishment of new guidelines"?:
Delta > Alpha > Beta > Gamma

[Blaze]

Why don't you keep your passive aggression the fuck out of my topic if you have nothing to contribute, you rancid bitch.

somebody's got their panties all in a bunch.

[Gilly]

somebody's got their panties all in a bunch.

Do I have to say it again? Get out.

[Blaze]

are you serious? wow....

i do have things to contribute...i am waiting for you to say something.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Gilly]

1. Beta meets Gamma: Gamma, as people, they don't use totally new and revolutionary values/ideas/ways of thinking, and although one might say that the these ideas are not totally new, considering that they are seeded by Alphas, but they are not renown and don't prove any productiveness until they sediment to common practices.

That's why Beta has to mediate between Alpha and Gamma: by shifting from Ne/Si to Se/Ni while maintaining Fe/Ti, they share the same ideological bent, but simply winnow the field of ideas down to what is ultimately the most important and practicable. Beta promotes, then Gamma refines the implemented ideas into their practical form.

2. Gamma meets Delta: well here what doesn't make sense for me is how Delta can accept the continuous sense of shining novelty and variation that Gamma offers. Delta is a heritage quadra and almost anything you flap under their nose day-by-day is ignored, they instinctively stick to what existed when they were born or grew up with.

Well Gamma is a quadra of developing tradition. Look at the pairs: for LIE/TeNi to function at the height of its ability in practical matters, it needs the home and its personal life to be as simple as possible, which is what ESI/FiSe does for them, similar to how TiSe makes matters of ideology as black-and-white as possible for FeNi to promote them effectively; the difference is that FeNi/TiSe is Aristocratic, meaning that their processes are combinatory (developing ideology to be promoted), whereas Democratic TeNi/FiSe are compartmentalized, and therefore purely complimentary (stable home life to maximize working capacity).

So when personal life is stabilized, traditions are developed in the form of family rituals, which are passed on to Delta SiTe and NeFi for consistent practice and ritualization.

To make what I think more clear, think about this matter: there are two ways of renewing things, of progress and two ways of selecting them.
- renewal: by finding a new niche and filling it with something totally new (Alpha) or by mixing the existing ideas into new "packages" (Gamma). Both find and fill niches, but Gamma finds the lack of existing goods in different places.

Well both are Democratic quadras, meaning they fill in the gaps left by the broad strokes painted by Aristocracy; this is why they fill niches, not because they go together.

- selection: by adoption of what works for them, then ftw (Delta) or by promotion of "the best" (Beta).

Likewise, Aristocratic quadras can't go in sequence precisely because of this: they both try to select and promote a broad-spectrum ideology, and you can't just switch between ideologies without having one person sit down at some point and go, "Hey, there's some shit missing here." Hence, Democratic quadras separate Aristocratic quadras.

---

In the framework of my view, it is the Irrationals/Irrational functions which makes the entrance into the quadra stage, which makes the change, while the Rational brings these endeavours to fruition.

I dunno, I think it's obvious that they function in the order in which they progress: Ne/Si->Ti/Fe->Se/Ni->Fi/Te->Ne/Si. So Alpha starts with Si/Ne, Beta starts with Ti/Fe, Gamma starts with Se/Ni, and Delta starts with Fi/Te; the transitions work archetypally and systematically, so I can't really see a reason to question it.

---
My alternative to the view in your next post, note that I didn't think about it yet, and I consider that from a historical POV there can be only one:

Looking back to the past century in the West (mainly), the pre-ww era appears to be a bazaar of scientific and philosophical ideas, with a minimum of social, or interest in maintaining the existing social hierarchy (Alpha), then these ideas began to clash, climaxing with the creation of a new political elite and the wars (Beta). Then came the peaceful period of the turned-up sleeves up to the '60s-'70s (Delta, this apparently was a Rational-Irrational process, "work first, rejoice after"). Based on these resources, the eighties were a commercial explosion, where all what people got went in an aggressive trade campaign, up to these days (Gamma) - business, infrastructure, banking, media networks (music, bands, film, television) - , with the peak of the economic depression and these pragmatic battles for influence like the wars in the Middle East when no one asks for righteousness but for usefulness. Why are US, Europe, Russia and China disagreeing anymore? Because they're not carrying an ideological battle like 70 years ago, but they're in the same business.

1. I think Gamma represents the end-period of wars, like the Nuremburg Trials, by default: in order to end a war, a practical approach must be taken to cease things with as little turbulence as possible, and therefore a contractual approach has to be adopted so that all can agree on the outcome; otherwise the war was useless. This is Gamma: consensus building on how to most efficiently stop chaos, while still maintaining their boundaries and priorities.

2. I think the 1980s-early 1990s were the most Delta period we have seen in a while, with relative prosperity for all, (with, as you say, everybody being in the same business - this is Delta Aristocracy, trying to loosely unify as many people as possible under implicit contractual assumptions of mutual interests) undercut by small periods of violence that were quickly dealt with and suppressed in as minimalistic of a fashion as possible.

Like I said, I think that we just entered the Alpha stage, of sitting back and thinking about things, about what we're doing wrong. The signs are everywhere, people acknowledge that it was all about the money, the misguidance of the political structures, that what's happening is not necessarily what each of us wants - including consumerism, we crave for "true values" and try to make new currents of thought, because the past 70 years didn't offer any and the pre-ww ones are not really applicable anymore.

I agree that we are in an Alpha stage, but only because we seem to have regressed from Delta, beginning at some point in the 90s with the US going to Gamma in the form modifying their tariff laws to exploit Mexico (NAFTA) for the purposes of aggressive economic expansion and making huge leaps and bounds in computer technology, entering into a Beta stage by starting a war and trying to lock down the country using fear tactics, and now finally rescinding into an Alpha stage as a way to find some way we can live with a nameless fear over our heads and still continue to grow as a country.

That's just the US, though.



[quote]This fragment is just one of my thoughts, not productive for anything, but staying prepared for the eventuality of a mistake:

Like I said previously, I see Ni/Se and Fi/Te as global views, which see all the world as a whole, while Ne/Si and Fe/Ti as localized, focused on the particular and individual.

I disagree; Delta is the quadra of mass collectivity, most likely to see the interconnectedness of all things, if you will.

But in the context of intra-quadra Irrational-Rational evolution, I find both progressions as counter-intuitive: at the quadra joins, a localised element should (in a way) not meet a global scale one:

It's counter intuitive because quadras progress according to their functional patterns, not simply always going from Irrational to Rational; Aristocratic quadras go from Rational to Irrational, while Democratic Quadras go from Irrational to Rational. It makes perfect sense: the "group" quadras begin with organization, and end in dissolution as they transition towards the individual, while the "individual" quadras begin with emergence and end with organization as they transition back to groups.

- in the traditional progression (the one Gilly supports): ... Ne/Si|Fi/Te -> Ne/Si|Fe/Ti -> Ni/Se|Fe/Ti -> Ni/Se|Fi/Te -> Ne/Si|Fi/Te. The regression would be the same thing.

No, progression is (Delta)>SiNe>(Alpha)>TiFe>(Beta)>SeNi>(Gamma)>FiTe >(Delta)>SiNe>(Alpha)>TiFe...etc.

On the other hand, the elements of the same type form a whole anyway (the sum of the writings on a wall create a written wall), just that they don't make part of the same framework, like Ni/Se/Fi/Te. I've made a drawing illustrating this view: .
Alpha is the third part, it contains only localized elements which meet both the global elements of Gamma and Beta.

So, the order there is Delta->Gamma->Alpha->Beta.
---

So it appears that this works actually like a rule, many particular interests meeting a larger interest, it's like the population buying the products of a store, I will talk again about this.

The history and logic dictate us to acknowledge that the Aristocratic quadras use Rationality as an entrance, the types of these quadras are also judgemental and that makes sense with everything. So, I should correct the diagram:
Voila! Now this, on one hand, explains the historical period between the 40s and the 70s and the Delta approach to things like "we work, then rejoice". On the other hand it corrects the nonsense that the Beta behaviour of selecting the promoting works from Se to Ti, because it's exactly the opposite! You use your Ti/Fe to pick quality, than Ni/Se to make it known.

Yes, exactly...I thought you were positing the idea that each quadra begins with P functions, but you seem to have corrected yourself...?

Why would it be like this? Generally, Delta and Gamma have a practical approach, while Alpha and Beta (Ti/Fe) adopt the discipline of quintessential and ideological thinking. Be warned that you're starting off the traditional progression taken too much for granted, which IMO drives you into overlooking the intrinsic qualities of the elements to confine the extrinsic ones that this progression dictates, using the arbitrary choice of the order of values.

Well ideology stems from the upwelling of natural impulses, which seed the desire for change and the breakup of stagnation.

I'd call it a relation instead, because it's a static structure based on the valued elements which makes each quadra connect with the adjacent one, but doesn't explain the flow of resources and ideas in the whole cycle because what's valid at one joint is invalid at the other, completely. For example, nothing of the collaboration between Alpha and Beta will get further into an Beta-Gamma collaboration, things simply get dismissed because they're not applicable in the opposite context.

Not sure what you're getting at here.

[discojoe]

I hate abstract visual diagrams.

[strrrng]

lol. can't say I don't share the same sentiment in this situation. if you understand a concept, what's the point? it's value is mathematical, not intuitive.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Gilly]

I hate abstract visual diagrams.

Yeah, they don't make any sense to me either.

[discojoe]

lol. can't say I don't share the same sentiment in this situation. if you understand a concept, what's the point? it's value is mathematical, not intuitive.

There's no point other than to speak in shorthand to other nerds.

Yeah, they don't make any sense to me either.

They make sense to me, but I have to stare at them and force myself to care enough to decode the information.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Aiss]

The idea behind my previous view was the fact that Irrational functions are usually used to perceive the new and the Rational ones are used in decision-making. I just found this order natural.

... and plus irrational elements paired with minus rational elements happen to coincide with Democratic. I think bi-directional quadra progression makes far more sense considering +/- elements.

Also, you make a good if awfully misrepresented point about connections vs concepts. Alphas value internal objects and external fields, Gammas value internal fields and external objects - both static and dynamic. Meaning in Alpha, fields are always external (i.e. object's place in the system or interaction is explicit), but object itself is internal (i.e. implicit, potential-oriented - "adding new dots"). In Gamma, objects are external (it is just what it is), fields are always internal (implicit relationship, consequences of interactions - "(re)connecting the dots", focus on context).

Analogically, Beta and Delta are aristocratic - minus irrational and plus rational elements. Betas value external statics and internal dynamics (of both fields and objects), Deltas value internal statics and external dynamics. In Beta changeable aspects of reality are implicit, whereas constant ones are explicit and clear. In Delta, what's constant is implicit, while changes - actions and interactions - are explicit.

(On another note, I have this idea that internal/external is "subject to interpretation"/"subject to evaluation", but that might be influenced by internal irrational (N) / external rational (T) too much.)

[Gilly]

They make sense to me, but I have to stare at them and force myself to care enough to decode the information.

I couldn't be bothered for more than a glance.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

In Gamma, objects are external (it is just what it is)

Keep in mind "dynamics of objects" means something different from "object". It just relates to some fact expressed about the activity of an object.

The closest thing to a function that pinpoints objects themselves is ISxjs' Se, imo.

Pinocchio's visual diagrams make no sense whatsoever.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[silverchris9]

I care Gilly, but I honestly think you're becoming an asshole. And I just think that's counterproductive for you. You just seem stressed out and I want you to chill. A more effective narcissist leader catches more flies with honey then having a 'tude.

Anyways, yeah I'd genuinely give a shit. So rant away.

. I was trying to find a clever way to express my appreciation for this post, but I couldn't. I hope you find a wonderful gay estp at some point, Sam. Because other people are fun. As is sex with your preferred gender. And you seem like a hard worker (in the way that IEIs "work"), and I firmly believe that hard workers deserve consolation. Once I almost cried listening to "Joy Inside My Tears" by Stevie Wonder. Not actually almost, I was pretty far from actually crying. But if I was a cry-er, and I was really sure no one would walk by, I might've cried a little. But it definitely would have been one of those manly one tear down the cheek and no more numbers. Definitely.

There are things I care about more than being an "effective narcissist leader," namely my integrity.

I kind of feel like I'm going through the same stage. You do have to stop considering the fact that you are probably wrong for a while to test out your ideas and see where they're right and where they're wrong. It's like, you can't just tweak the plane forever in the shop, you're going to have to let it fly and crash and then figure out what went wrong. Also, it's a lot harder to do something when you don't let yourself believe wholeheartedly in it. I'm obviously reading myself into a post you made on the internet, but I also don't think I'm that off.

I hate abstract visual diagrams.

ARGH. Me too! I look down at them and immediately I'm just like wtf. When I was taking physics, it would take me way longer to sit down, look at the diagram, figure out what all the diagram is saying, and makes sense of all the pictures than to actually figure out what equations to apply and how to manipulate them. And even then, half the time I'd get the diagram wrong. Te fail. I remember even back in the 8th grade I hated having to draw graphs. I thought it was a huge waste of time. I mean, can't you just look at the data and figure out the trend that way? Anyway.

Anyway, to respond to the OP, yes, this is a topic that I would be interested in learning about; yes, I am almost certainly quick enough to keep up with you understanding-wise; yes, I think it is a valuable area of study; yes, you should write in-depth about it. Just... try to make the writing interesting. Ideas are harder to hack through without interesting presentation. Not saying I won't do it, just saying it'll help you meet the readers half-way.

Also, I want to know what you think of the idea that the beta phase has a significant effect on the subsequent delta phase, insofar as the beta phase changes what I like to call the imaginative possibilities, what we are even capable of perceiving, etc.

It would also be cool if you could elaborate on the difference between the Delta-Alpha-Beta progression and the Delta-Gamma-Beta progression, perhaps focusing on the difference between a Gamma style transition from Delta to Beta and an Alpha style transition from Delta to Beta. Also, would you expect the Beta phase to be significantly different based on what quadra does the transition from Delta to Beta?

[crazedrat]

Yeah I hate those visual diagrams too. I think it's the irrelevant aspects of the diagram which annoy me and distract me from the important point. They seem like fluff added in for spectacular impact. Must be a Ne / Ni thing

[717495]

Lol.

What is this shit even about?

[Aiss]

Keep in mind "dynamics of objects" means something different from "object". It just relates to some fact expressed about the activity of an object.

The closest thing to a function that pinpoints objects themselves is ISxjs' Se, imo.

I speak about "external objects, both static and dynamic", because object Gamma values are Se and Te. My point was that both objects' qualities (statics) and actions (dynamics) are explicit (external), therefore valued perception of objects is explicit.

Not for me because I don't recognize the +/-. I relate to the view that here's no difference between Alpha Ne and Delta Ne, or something.

It is true that, in real life, Introverted information can't be separated from Extroverted one, at least separated information can't be assimilated by humans - one can't say "that" without knowing what it is, for example. Even less probable is to talk about fields without objects they're between.
Therefore, information is assimilated in blocks of two IEs, that doesn't make an IE different from another with the same name but paired differently.

Aristocratic quadras have the functions paired in the same Externality, S+T and N+F, there's no other secret, +/- is an additional theoretical speculation of an obvious fact. Not that it would be "wrong", but simply it creates the opportunity to be utilized in an incorrect manner, when used as an additional property.

Yes, I've even written somewhere else that +/- is just another way of saying same/differing internality/externality. But after giving it a chance, I found it a useful representation, and making sense. It actually makes quite a few things appear more intuitive to me (in conventional meaning), not the least Aristocratic/Democratic dichotomy. When internal is paired with external, perception is expanded. When internal and external are separate, judgment is expanded.

I also find it useful because people are often unable to distinguish between IE and block, resulting in different descriptions of the same elements by neighbouring quadras. Describing "pure" IEs works when these are assimilated, eliminating other functions' influences as much as possible. But it's often impossible.

This is related to what of what I said, and how? Sounds like poetry to me, no offence .

Related to this (Alpha adding new to an old arrangement, Gamma rearranging old in a new way):

To make what I think more clear, think about this matter: there are two ways of renewing things, of progress and two ways of selecting them.
- renewal: by finding a new niche and filling it with something totally new (Alpha) or by mixing the existing ideas into new "packages" (Gamma). Both find and fill niches, but Gamma finds the lack of existing goods in different places.
- selection: by adoption of what works for them, then ftw (Delta) or by promotion of "the best" (Beta).