On the effect of I/E shift on the taciturn and narrator cycles

[krieger]

I just had one of those breaking-through-a-layer-of-the-matrix twilight-zone like experiences where a part of socionics that once seemed mysterious suddenly showed a comprehensible part of itself.

Based on Gulenko's ideas of "crossed" function values across +/- (i.e. Delta and Alpha both value Te+ and Ti-, etc) I've always known that the following sequences of types were significant to the extent that Gulenko was right:

ENFj-INTj-ESTj-ISFj-ENFj (taciturn, rational, negativist cycle or "temperament")
INFp-ENTp-ISTp-ESFp-INFp (taciturn, irrational, positivist cycle or "temperament")
ISTj-ESFj-INFj-ENTj-ISTj (narrator, rational, positivist cycle or "temperament")
ESTp-ISFp-ENFp-INTp-ESTp (narrator, irrational, negativist cycle or "temperament")

(there is still a slight possibility that rational and irrational should alternate in these sequences instead of i/e; but I tend to think J/P is the more structurally important trait of the two and therefore the stable one; the advantage of the other approach is that Focal/Diffuse would be held common in any function shared by adjacent types, for example INFp Ni and INTj Ne are both Focal)

Not only do these sequences line up the types so as to make the types with common values adjacent to one another; they also lend a basis for the idea that the ID functions of a type are reversed in +/-. In other words, the ID Ni of an INTj is not the ENTj version of Ni, but the ENFj version. This gets rid of all kinds of annoying relativation problems along the lines of "if ID and Ego are the same anyway, why are INTj and ENTj different at all?" ; the NiTe this refers to is just a state in between of ENFj and ESTj, not anything involving ENTj.

Where does the new breakthrough come in...

Basically up to this point I have never had any inkling of how a transition from one type to another on this cycle "feels" or what I should look for in my experiences so as to register such a transition happening. Until now...

Take a common function between two types on the cycle; we don't use i/e like we normally do, cause i/e is not common between shared functions of two adjacent types on the cycle. Instead, we use taciturn/narrator. This gives rise to the t/n functions (Tt, Tn, St, Sn, Ft, Fn, Nt, Nn). But let's take the shared Nt between ENFj and INTj...

ENFj - i - Nt - e - INTj

The introverted "side" of the function is always on the left, while the extroverted function is always on the right. I/e acts much the way +/- does on the regular temperament cycles.

Now here's basically the idea: the starting state is the type on the left, and the transition is one towards the type on the right. During this transition, a mentality of inward contemplation changes to a mentality of outward activity.

In very simple terms, this describes the process of getting more and more familiar with a topic until the point is reached where one is confident to bring expression to it in the outer world. +/- has been described in very similar terms in the past. This should be pretty easy to relate to a psychological event of some kind.

[krieger]

But wait till you see this...

ISTj - e - Sn - i - ESFj

The progression is opposite on the narrator cycles.

In narrators there is something different going on; like their knowledge of certain isolated outer states makes them confident in a condensed "opinion" type of judgment.

[EyeSeeCold]

This is all very interesting. Has this been improved upon?

[Trevor]

Gulenko's blog entry of 22.10.2010.

http://goul.socionics.kiev.ua/2010/1...li-nevyigodno/

This question is not just interesting but also practically important. In real life it happens that a person is forced to work not in their stereotype environment, but contrary to their type or related. By which model of behavior should he/she navigate then?

The answer is this. In the opposite type of environment it's favorable to act on the Adaptation(temperament??) equivalent unit (equivalent to the shift to "superego"). And in a related setting it's favorable to act on the dual temperament i.e. Semidual or Illusory offset should be preferred.

For example, an INTj, once in a management setting, will be prone to decentralize and devolve/delegate authority the same way an ESTj would. But an INTp, by contrast, will develop authoritarianism, like ESTp would. An ENFj in a social environment, to gain a foothold there, will be prone to moralization, like ISFj would. But an ENFp will go towards accommodating, the same thing ISFp does.

But why our offseted INTj doesn't act according to the temperament of identity, that is, like an ISTj or INFj? After all, it would seem justified by the fact that it is not necessary to change the balanced energy.

Apparently, somehow the criterion of "Taciturn - Narrator" comes into play, nature whichof is as much energetic/energy related (??). I've talked about this more than once on several conferences of the International Socionics Institute. The fact is that if an INTj is to chose ISTj (or INFj) strategy he/she would have to switch on Taciturn/Narrator (as well as Negativism for Positivism), which is very energetically expensive.

Of course, I haven't recklessly discarded the alternative hypothesis - an offset on a Benefit cycle, where "Taciturn-Narrator" would stay the same. In this case, an INTj in administrative setting would act ISTp-like, and in the humanitharian setting he/she would act INFp-like. However, what to do with Rationality/Irrationality? Even before it was known that this trait is highly correlated with compatibility at a close range, and so changing its polarity would be equivalent to the loss of recharge from the outside. My opinion is that such a shift, ie benefit ring offset, or supervision perhaps, is possible, but rather volatile/unstable and very difficult. And therefore, unjustified.

As an example, I point attention towards growth of aluminum tycoon Oleg Deripaskiy. More about his psychological features can be learned from a documentary film by Alexei Pivovarov - "Capital ". Based on non-verbal cues and judgments of style, I've typed Deripaskiy as ISTj, the Inspector.

By tracking his activities, we see a clear shift in the direction of ENTj. In other words, something unintelligible, (the Inspector has the makings of a dominant place as a successful entrepreneur. Thus is formed and then fastened one or the other subtype. Overcoming difficulties, some people are mitigated, while others are hardened. From the same type basis - completely different persons.)
---------------------------

Interesting, wooohooo.

[krieger]

i am 100% in alignment with Gulenko on this.

[tcaudilllg]

Consistent with my experience as well. I remember when my INTJ mom took an MBTI test and scored ESTJ. She immediately concluded that there was something wrong with how she was relating to her work, that a part of herself so important had been compromised by environmental pressures. But she does do the delegation thing decently well... although unlike an ESTJ, she ended up doing the lions share of the work herself, where an ESTJ would probably just restrict themselves to the management end.

But Lab this is interesting, because you seem to be questioning model A itself at this point. However, I do resist making plans that specifically involve other people, unless they ask me for direction.

[EyeSeeCold]

Gulenko's blog entry of 22.10.2010.

http://goul.socionics.kiev.ua/2010/1...li-nevyigodno/

He elaborated:

http://socioniko.net/ru/articles/thes02.html

EDIT: Well it came before the blog entry, but still is an elaboration.

[717495]

quadra m, a-d, value 1-8 (a-d)!
verg style: a / b, g / d, a / d, g / b -- narrator cycle, R1 => S2 => I1 => P2...
rl style: a / g, b / d, a / d, b / d -- taciturn cycle, L1 => T2 => F1 => E2...
style: inverse -- IJ => IP => EP => EJ => IJ2 => IP2...

(verg style / ch(irn)! ) ~ (rl style / irn(ch)) =>
verg style ~ ch(irn)! +, rl style ~ irn(ch) -, or (verg style / ch(irn)! ) ~ (rl style / irn(ch))...
*product of quadra m, a-d => value 1-8 (a-d)!

-
irn1 ILE, EII, IEI, LIE (Nx1, (Fx1/Lx1)!)
ch1 ESI, LSE, SLE, SEI (Nx2, (Fx2/Lx2)!)
verg style
ext/T ~ narr E(tact L)! => E ~ tact S(narr I)!/ext => ext/S ~ narr R(tact P)!...
int/S ~ tact P(narr R)! => P ~ narr T(tact F)!/int => int/T ~ tact L(narr E)!...
P--A--B--G--D-
1--I--T---P--S-
2--S--E---R--I-
3--L--F---T--P-
4--E--T---F--R-

-
irn2 SLE, ESI, SEI, LSE (Nx3, (Fx3/Lx3)!)
ch2 LSI, ESE, SEE, SLI (Nx4, (Fx4/Lx4)!)
rl style
(ext/T)! ~ narr I(tact S) => E ~ (tact S(narr I)/ext)! => ext/S! ~ narr R(tact P)...
(int/S)! ~ tact P(narr R) => P ~ (narr T(tact F)/int)! => int/T! ~ tact L(narr E)...
P--A--B--G--D-
1--L--E---T--R-
2--E--T---F--P-
3--I--L---R--S-
4--S--T---P--I-

[EyeSeeCold]

But wait till you see this...

ISTj - e - Sn - i - ESFj

The progression is opposite on the narrator cycles.

In narrators there is something different going on; like their knowledge of certain isolated outer states makes them confident in a condensed "opinion" type of judgment.

More of this.

[Beautiful sky]

LSE does not like delegating.