Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Particles and Functions

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Particles and Functions

    If we think of people as particles of the socion, then would these descriptions of the functions be accurate?

    Extroverted intuition - observation of the post-interaction state of external functions
    Extroverted sensing - observation of present external function states
    Introverted intuition - observation of one's own post-interaction state
    Introverted sensing - observation of one's present state
    Extroverted feeling - observation of external function strengths
    Extroverted thinking - prioritization of external functions according to their strengths
    Introverted feeling - observation of one's own function strengths
    Introverted thinking - prioritization of one's own functions


    Extroversion - observation of the world
    Introversion - observation of oneself
    Intuition - observation of future states
    Sensing - observation of present states
    Feeling - observation of function strength levels
    Thinking - rearrangement of function heiarchies
    Judgement - restraint
    Perception - action

  2. #2
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    no. to begin, your definition of extroversion excludes the extrovert from observing oneself. and we all know that extroverts are capable and very often do observe themselves.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  3. #3
    Kristiina's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Estonia, Tartu
    Posts
    4,021
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I like these. There are a few I don't understand, but most of them seem like decent summaries of the use of functions.

    Extroverted feeling - observation of external function strengths
    Extroverted thinking - prioritization of external functions according to their strengths
    Could you explain this for example? Sounds serious and complicated, but I don't think I get it.
    EIE, ENFj, intuitive subtype.
    E3 (probably 3w4)

    Cool ILI hubbys are better than LSIs any time!

    Old blog: http://firsttimeinusa.blogspot.com/
    New blog: http://having-a-kid.blogspot.com/

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,294
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Edited for gayness.
    ENTp

  5. #5
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    tc: the validity of seeing the mechanisms of material reality (i.e. physics) as analagous to the mechanisms of the psyche has never been established. we have yet to be shown how "the psyche is symmetric to the physical universe".

    psychorelativity seeks certainty? isn't that science? it seems you use different words but say the same things that have already been said.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  6. #6
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,704
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Transigent
    + + crack - - - females = tcaud
    Elaborate, I don't understand.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-4w5-9w1

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    tc: the validity of seeing the mechanisms of material reality (i.e. physics) as analagous to the mechanisms of the psyche has never been established. we have yet to be shown how "the psyche is symmetric to the physical universe".

    psychorelativity seeks certainty? isn't that science? it seems you use different words but say the same things that have already been said.
    Think of points of the cosmos, then, as synonomous with personalities, only on a different scale. The particles/points of the universe are all personalities whose destiny is to interact with each other. In time their interaction patterns perfectly repeat themselves, cycling time in a never ending loop.

    I don't want to go into specifics here, because it is completely off the topic of socionics types proper. The point is that the functions of socionics are respective to any single particle of a system in terms of its strengths, weaknesses, and apparent nature.

  8. #8
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    tc: the validity of seeing the mechanisms of material reality (i.e. physics) as analagous to the mechanisms of the psyche has never been established. we have yet to be shown how "the psyche is symmetric to the physical universe".

    psychorelativity seeks certainty? isn't that science? it seems you use different words but say the same things that have already been said.
    Think of points of the cosmos, then, as synonomous with personalities, only on a different scale. The particles/points of the universe are all personalities whose destiny is to interact with each other. In time their interaction patterns perfectly repeat themselves, cycling time in a never ending loop.

    I don't want to go into specifics here, because it is completely off the topic of socionics types proper. The point is that the functions of socionics are respective to any single particle of a system in terms of its strengths, weaknesses, and apparent nature.
    your analogy is pointless and gives no greater understanding than what we already have. furthermore, your terminology is ambiguous. "points of the cosmos"?
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    tc: the validity of seeing the mechanisms of material reality (i.e. physics) as analagous to the mechanisms of the psyche has never been established. we have yet to be shown how "the psyche is symmetric to the physical universe".

    psychorelativity seeks certainty? isn't that science? it seems you use different words but say the same things that have already been said.
    Think of points of the cosmos, then, as synonomous with personalities, only on a different scale. The particles/points of the universe are all personalities whose destiny is to interact with each other. In time their interaction patterns perfectly repeat themselves, cycling time in a never ending loop.

    I don't want to go into specifics here, because it is completely off the topic of socionics types proper. The point is that the functions of socionics are respective to any single particle of a system in terms of its strengths, weaknesses, and apparent nature.
    your analogy is pointless and gives no greater understanding than what we already have. furthermore, your terminology is ambiguous. "points of the cosmos"?
    Points of the cosmos: spatial units that are as small as small can be. Their dimensions in terms of length, width, and height are the Planck length, which is about 10^-32 meters. An electron could be considered a system of exchanges of energy between these points. Think the pixels of a cursor as it moves along your monitor: the points on the screen change to reflect the cursor's position on it.

    Psychorelativity defines causal circumstances as self-adaptations of points in response to exchanges of function strength levels between each other. Therefore the causal universe, or any defined system of two or more points, can be expressed in terms of relational adaptations.

  10. #10
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,704
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Tcautilldg, I think what you wrote has some validity. The perceiving function descriptions seem very accurate to me. The judging functions though don't discern enough to decipher why thinking and feeling are so different. Perhaps you should elaborate more on each of your statements, since they are very general. Though, maybe you just wanted to state the general idea of how each function works and that is fine too.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-4w5-9w1

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Free_Thinker
    Quote Originally Posted by Transigent
    + + crack - - - females = tcaud
    Elaborate, I don't understand.
    [Spacey elaboration] + [timely elaboration] + [crack cocaine] - [spacey thought] - [timely thought] - [pussy] = a really spaced out guy who has alot of time on his hands to elaborate and does not have the brains to back it, and it wouldn't matter cause he isn't getting much pussy anyhow.

    Is that more clear?

  12. #12
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,704
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    Quote Originally Posted by Free_Thinker
    Quote Originally Posted by Transigent
    + + crack - - - females = tcaud
    Elaborate, I don't understand.
    [Spacey elaboration] + [timely elaboration] + [crack cocaine] - [spacey thought] - [timely thought] - [pussy] = a really spaced out guy who has alot of time on his hands to elaborate and does not have the brains to back it, and it wouldn't matter cause he isn't getting much pussy anyhow.

    Is that more clear?
    I see what your saying, but I think you mixed it around. He does have the brain to elaborate, but won't execute the time or effort to back it up.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-4w5-9w1

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Free_Thinker
    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    Quote Originally Posted by Free_Thinker
    Quote Originally Posted by Transigent
    + + crack - - - females = tcaud
    Elaborate, I don't understand.
    [Spacey elaboration] + [timely elaboration] + [crack cocaine] - [spacey thought] - [timely thought] - [pussy] = a really spaced out guy who has alot of time on his hands to elaborate and does not have the brains to back it, and it wouldn't matter cause he isn't getting much pussy anyhow.

    Is that more clear?
    I see what your saying, but I think you mixed it around. He does have the brain to elaborate, but won't execute the time or effort to back it up.
    Could be ...

  14. #14
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    tc: the validity of seeing the mechanisms of material reality (i.e. physics) as analagous to the mechanisms of the psyche has never been established. we have yet to be shown how "the psyche is symmetric to the physical universe".

    psychorelativity seeks certainty? isn't that science? it seems you use different words but say the same things that have already been said.
    Think of points of the cosmos, then, as synonomous with personalities, only on a different scale. The particles/points of the universe are all personalities whose destiny is to interact with each other. In time their interaction patterns perfectly repeat themselves, cycling time in a never ending loop.

    I don't want to go into specifics here, because it is completely off the topic of socionics types proper. The point is that the functions of socionics are respective to any single particle of a system in terms of its strengths, weaknesses, and apparent nature.
    your analogy is pointless and gives no greater understanding than what we already have. furthermore, your terminology is ambiguous. "points of the cosmos"?
    Points of the cosmos: spatial units that are as small as small can be. Their dimensions in terms of length, width, and height are the Planck length, which is about 10^-32 meters. An electron could be considered a system of exchanges of energy between these points. Think the pixels of a cursor as it moves along your monitor: the points on the screen change to reflect the cursor's position on it.

    Psychorelativity defines causal circumstances as self-adaptations of points in response to exchanges of function strength levels between each other. Therefore the causal universe, or any defined system of two or more points, can be expressed in terms of relational adaptations.
    despite your insistence on using terminology to cloud the fact that you are not saying anything, i will make the point for you that you are trying to make. 1. the universe is a causal mechanism. 2. the universe consists of "points" which are related to each other causally. 3. by analogy, the psyche is a "point" and therefore subject to causal laws. 4. hence the attempt by yourself to quantify the psyche through the use of mathematics.

    in the future, make your arguments and posts more transparent. no need to show off your extensive vocabulary. simplify to demonstrate your understanding, if indeed you have some new understanding as you claim.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  15. #15
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Particles and Functions

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    If we think of people as particles of the socion, then would these descriptions of the functions be accurate?
    i am not sure why we would want to, but ok. so, a particle is a "spatial unit" that is "as small as small can be". your definition of "particle" as "space" is confusing and i am not convinced that you understand what you have written because you have not given a determination at what point "particle becomes space". such a determination would have huge implications for your system, and because you have not even mentioned it makes me think that i am giving this way too much of my time.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Extroverted intuition - observation of the post-interaction state of external functions
    what about the fact that intuition is about future possibilities? what does your definition of extroverted intuition have to do with "particles"?
    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Extroverted sensing - observation of present external function states
    i was under the impression that sensors relied on senses, or the material world, not "function states". what does function states mean anyways? more silly terminology.
    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Introverted intuition - observation of one's own post-interaction state
    again, i don't associate intuition with post. more with pre.
    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Introverted sensing - observation of one's present state
    too bad this definition has absolutely nothing to do with extroverted sensing. every valid system i have seen distinguishes between the two, yet acknowledges some similarity.

    i could go on, but there are too many inconsistencies to take it seriously

    you dont even understand that thinking/feeling are both judging functions; hence your labeling of feeling as an observation in your first post.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  16. #16
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    a good way to gain understanding or compose something beautiful:

    1. begin with an axiom. an axiom is a sentence or proposition that is taken for granted as true, and serves as a starting point for deducing other truths. it doesn't have to taken as truth, but it gives a starting point. the more explicit and delineated the better, as this shows the amount of thought put into the exercise.

    2. the axiom will give an implicit direction in which to look for building blocks upon which to build upon the axiom. these building blocks fit with the axiom, and give insights into both the axiom, and the building blocks themselves.

    3. the entire system doesn't have to consist of many parts. a few will do if the level of understanding is sufficient. just spend a sufficient amount of time in contemplation.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Particles and Functions

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    what about the fact that intuition is about future possibilities?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    again, i don't associate intuition with post. more with pre
    ASTOUNDING REBUTTAL

Posting Permissions

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