Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Temperaments and Channels of Perception by Ledin

  1. #1
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Temperaments and Channels of Perception by Ledin

    On Channels of Perception in Socionics
    Vyacheslav Ledin, Kiev, 6, 12.08.2008.
    Original text: ?????? ?8: ?. ????? ? ??????? ?????????? ? ????????? | ????? ???????????? ?????????


    As is known, in the school of humanitarian socionics, the channels of perception are tied to socionics temperaments:


    •— vocal – linear-energetic temperament (EJ)
    •— kinesthetic – mobile-flexible (EP)
    •— auditory – balanced-stable (IJ)
    •— visual – receptive-adaptive. (IP)


    However, this classification has a number of difficulties and undeveloped knowledge, which interferes with the majority of novice socionists’ ability to valuably and correctly perceive it.

    I will give three essential theses, which can be examined as counter-arguments against this hypothesis.


    1. in general psychology, it is known that 90% of a person’s information is received through the eyes. Accordingly, [nearly] everything must formally be visual.


    2. There is no agreement between the channels theoretically predicted in socionics with actual diagnostics.

    In NLP there are procedures, which make it possible to determine the leading system. However, non-coincidence is fairly often observed when comparing the results of the leading system determined by NLP with types in socionics (information was obtained from Eugene Nechaevoy, who studied this question).

    Furthermore, by generalizing the observations of many specialists, he established that the distribution of the leading systems among people is extremely uneven - from 60% in the maximum to 5% in the minimum, which poorly agrees with the idea of the fundamental uniformity of type distribution (and consequently their prevailing channels) among people.


    3. the question of the channels of perception as such exceeds the scope of the object of the study of socionics, since the object of socionics is primarily tied to the processing of information already obtained by the psyche - but not to the obtaining of stimuli by the organism’s receptors.

    With regard to this, I want to propose for consideration my vision for the solution to the enumerated problems.

    First, I want to propose disregarding the treatment of the leading system as the system through which a person accepts information. In my view, it is more correct not to speak about the perception of information as such, but about the perception of the information meant for the person - from this point of view it becomes understandable that 90% of the information perceived through the eyes by no means indicates the total visual field (if “one looks but does not see, one heard but did not listen,” then even if a person formally accepts information, from our point of view, he in fact did not).

    As far as the leading channel is concerned, being connected to the maximally efficient perception of information (NLP treatment), this approach cannot be directly connected to socionics type. Indeed the effectiveness of the use of a certain channel depends, first of all, on its training and relates more to built up qualities (“how you use it – and how it is developed”); consequently, it relates to the field of psychology, not to socionics. If any relationship to socionics-related phenomena even exists, it is probabilistic and indirect (more below).


    Thus there arises the need for refining the treatment of the leading channel in connection with socionics.


    First of all, lets recall the fact that at the basis of socionics lies Antoni Kępiński's analogy of information metabolism - from this point of view the sociotype can be considered a mechanism, with the aid of which the psyche "overcooks” information. Thus it becomes understandable that if a connection exists, it must be related to information processing, not to perception. I.e. the leading channel first defines how much information is perceived across the channel, but not how it is effectively processed. Having reformulated a little, it is possible to say that the sociotype determines through which channel the significant information will be perceived and prioritized during realization (i.e. the percentage of the realized information across the visual channel will above all be visual, across the acoustic channel – auditory, and so on).

    Another essential point is the fact that information across this channel will not simply start, but stimulate the cognitive process (thus, for example, LN after reading something can know a certain piece of information sufficiently well, but in order to draw all the necessary conclusions, it is still better to find someone to relate it to).

    As for the effectiveness of the perception of information through different channels (traditional treatment of this concept), there’s a sufficiently indirect connection with factors in socionics. As has already been said above, the channel across which enters the most significant information will be the most developed. It seems logical that in the representatives of more social sociotypes, the oral faculty will enter into contact with other people to a considerable extent. Consequently, there is a greater probability that the auditory-vocal channel in the representatives of these sociotypes, with everything else being equal, will be better developed. Analogously, the visual channel in a cold-blooded intuitive has as much chance of being developed as in an extraverted sensor. + http://forum.thesocio.net/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=10
    Last edited by xerx; 06-30-2010 at 04:15 PM.
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  2. #2
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In a nut shell,

    Perceptual channels and socionics functions are not directly related. Socionics functions are responsible for interpreting data from perceptual channels, but don't control the volume and strength of this input. The interpretation of the data itself, how the mind "cooks" it, is the domain of socionics.

    A simple example is being Se dominant and having strong eyesight. There is no real correlation between them, but an Se dominant will be able to use whatever visual information he gets from that sense very well, and better than an intuitive.

    The article goes on to suggest that using a perceptual channel drives its development, which may be type related (as in the case of more social types having a better developed auditory-vocal system) but isn't necessarily true; it mentions in passing that an intuitive could develop better eyesight than an Se dominant, since presumably the intuitive would need to "look twice" to get a grip on the situation.
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  3. #3
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Interesting. I haven't read anything on this subject before. What is this "NLP" the writer refers to?
    Quaero Veritas.

  4. #4
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  5. #5
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Interesting. A little outside my current sphere of research, but perhaps I'll come back to it someday.
    Quaero Veritas.

  6. #6
    jughead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NC
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    883
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Perhaps then you could do some eyeball tests on people and determine visual acuity vs type. It would be based on a overall test of vision....too much modern day things probably make people a little blind..computers, lack of sunshine, reading etc.

Posting Permissions

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