The Mathematics of Socionics

[Exodus]

OK I decided to typeset this properly in LaTeX.

Here is the article (still in progress).

[Exodus]

reserved for more info

[Timmy]

I don't get it. Is there anyway at all you could flesh out the math speak so that those of us without a math degree can understand your train of thought?

[Korpsy Knievel]

I don't get it. Is there anyway at all you could flesh out the math speak so that those of us without a math degree can understand your train of thought?

That looks like this.

[Timmy]

That looks like this.

ha

[woofwoofl]

Awesome I'm gonna love this, but (as it was/is with the periodic system of the socion) it'll take me a while to absorb! It's gonna be awesome when I do though... looking forward to seeing this all unfold

[discojoe]

Oh dear god.

[Exodus]

I dunno who wrote this, but: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics#Mathematics

Though technically the way they have it set up in base2 doesn't actually work correctly. I was able to tweak it awhile ago to make an intertype calculator that did work correctly, but I'll be fucked if I can remember exactly what I did.

Hm looks kind of bullshitty to me, but yeah there is some math here. They are on to something wrt those three Reinin dichotomies. They are more 'real' than the other ones, IMO. That is, there are the same relationships among all the Democratic types. There are 7 'real' dichotomies. Of the Reinin dichotomies, they left out Result Process and Negativist Positivist. Ironically, two of the Jungian dichotomies are not 'real' either, because the supervisor of an intuitive type is not always intuitive, for example.

I just posted some more stuff. If anyone actually wants to understand this, let me know what is unclear or too abstract. There is a fair amount of background stuff to explain.

[EyeSeeCold]

Hm looks kind of bullshitty to me, but yeah there is some math here. They are on to something wrt those three Reinin dichotomies. They are more 'real' than the other ones, IMO. That is, there are the same relationships among all the Democratic types. There are 7 'real' dichotomies. They left out Result Process and Negativist Positivist. Ironically, two of the Jungian dichotomies are not 'real' either, because the supervisor of an intuitive type is not always intuitive, for example.

I just posted some more stuff. If anyone actually wants to understand this, let me know what is unclear or too abstract. There is a fair amount of background stuff to explain.

"real"?

Can you elaborate your position? I wouldn't mind a pm or wall post.

[Exodus]

"real"?

Can you elaborate your position? I wouldn't mind a pm or wall post.

A dichotomy is defined as 'real' if it is always either 1. flipped or 2. kept the same by a relationship. E.g. supervisor changes EI, NS, JP for rationals, but it changes EI, FT, JP for irrationals. Therefore NS and FT aren't 'real' in the sense of being strictly a result of intertype relations.

[krieger]

i really don't recommend calling the club dichotomies "unreal". they are actually one of the few things in socionics that work and make sense with reasonable consistency.

i personally make a distinction between superficial and deep dichotomies. quadra dichotomies are generally deep because they create positive interaction between types that are superficially (i.e. in terms of description) very different. club dichotomies are more shallow, because quasi's and contraries look similar while not interacting in a positive way.

introvert/extrovert is also shallow, because it doesn't affect interaction very much (dual > activity because i/e differs, but super-ego > conflictor because i/e is shared? its inconsistent when you try to explain it either way). rational/irrational is deep, because between dual and activity and between super-ego and conflictor it is always the one that shares your rational/irrational property that has the most positive interaction with you.

the interesting thing is that shallow properties are the easiest to base on objective typing method on, while deep properties most affect one's subjective "vibes".

[Exodus]

Yeah I don't actually think they're not real. I use those dichotomies all the time. Although...wait till I get to the OTHER dichotomies...

[RandomSequence]

Although...wait till I get to the OTHER dichotomies...

Bump.

[Exodus]

I made some parts more readable and will try to add the rest of my research soon. Any thoughts comments or questions?

[Brilliand]

G, x, q and c are missing from the key at the top. Superego, Conflictor, Quasi and Extinguishment are also missing. I'm guessing:

g=Superego
c=Conflictor
q=Quasi-identical
x=Extinguishment

[tcaudilllg]

Because inquiry regarding personal Fe is totally worthless :thumbs up:

[Exodus]

G, x, q and c are missing from the key at the top. Superego, Conflictor, Quasi and Extinguishment are also missing. I'm guessing:

g=Superego
c=Conflictor
q=Quasi-identical
x=Extinguishment

Whoops, that's right.

[MisterNi]

I'm guessing this was on the wiki before the database wipe? Anyway, congrats on redoing it.

[Exodus]

I'm guessing this was on the wiki before the database wipe? Anyway, congrats on redoing it.

yeah, and I've discovered/clarified some things since then. In particular, much about the proper formalization of dichotomies has become clear since then.

[Exodus]

I finally got around to describing the alternative dichotomy system. Check it out, it doesn't require any math knowledge.

4: 1st function alpha/gamma, beta/delta, external/internal, involved/abstract

4: 2nd function alpha/gamma, beta/delta, external/internal, involved/abstract

4: I/E, J/P, static/dynamic, democratic/aristocratic

3: questioner/declarer, negativist/positivist, process/result

= 15 in all, just like the Reinin dichotomies.

[Exodus]

Hmm, looks like someone has investigated this stuff, at least a little. Can anyone find the article in question?

[EyeSeeCold]

This?

http://translate.googleusercontent.c...puLFwrOOqJLjDw

[Exodus]

No, that one is just about Reinin dichotomies. I'm looking for one about the relationship structure.

I've just added a lot more info on dichotomies and models.

[Nexus]

here is an interesting idea...a complete Abelian subgroup existing within the Reinin factors:

optimistic(pessimistic) fearful(painful) aligning(stabilizing)


optimistic(pessimistic) inquisitive(assertive) perceiving(judging)

fearful(painful) inquisitive(assertive) extroverted(introverted)

aligning(stabilizing) inquisitive(assertive) investing(managing)


perceiving(judging) extroverted(introverted) aligning(stabilizing)

perceiving(judging) investing(managing) fearful(painful)

extroverted(introverted) investing(managing) optimistic(pessimistic)

So model-a structure, quadra values, and IM elements exist only with respect to each other to support but not affect these indisputable fundamental behaviors - constructive(implementing), stubborn(accommodating), patient(open), inspired(resourceful), sensing(intuiting), thinking(feeling), deciding(reasoning), and understanding(knowing) all define each other within the context of the others listed above, and perhaps evolved separately to fit the needs of the more fundamental interactions... I believe that the 7 core traits reflect attitudes among the divisions of labor that gave rise to civilization with the advent of food surplus/farming which made a common language for customer-marketer relations feasible. The nature of skilled work allowed the accepting-creating ego archetype itself to be realized, to support the values that were conducive to individual trade operations, and so socionics was born...

[Exodus]

optimistic/pessimistic? Are you using different dichotomy names?

It may be possible to derive the relationship group from the dichotomies - I'll look into it. But the reverse seems more natural, especially now that I've shown that there exists an alternative dichotomy system. I know people love Reinin dichotomies, but they don't fall out of the theory quite as easily as you might like. Socionics is first and foremost a theory of relationships, not dichotomies.

[Nexus]

optimistic/pessimistic? Are you using different dichotomy names?

It may be possible to derive the relationship group from the dichotomies - I'll look into it. But the reverse seems more natural, especially now that I've shown that there exists an alternative dichotomy system. I know people love Reinin dichotomies, but they don't fall out of the theory quite as easily as you might like. Socionics is first and foremost a theory of relationships, not dichotomies.

being independent of model a, im elements, and quadra values, and so even more fundamental than socionics, I am pretty sure that this interaction predates the relationship group...also, I have been using the dichotomies that have been most useful to me recently for typing and exploring the psyche

[rat1]

I already showed you shitheads the math for Ji/Je/Pi/Pe. Take it one step further to trigometric functions and vuala, you have the 8 functions.

[woofwoofl]

here is an interesting idea...a complete Abelian subgroup existing within the Reinin factors:

optimistic(pessimistic) fearful(painful) aligning(stabilizing)


optimistic(pessimistic) inquisitive(assertive) perceiving(judging)

fearful(painful) inquisitive(assertive) extroverted(introverted)

aligning(stabilizing) inquisitive(assertive) investing(managing)


perceiving(judging) extroverted(introverted) aligning(stabilizing)

perceiving(judging) investing(managing) fearful(painful)

extroverted(introverted) investing(managing) optimistic(pessimistic)

So model-a structure, quadra values, and IM elements exist only with respect to each other to support but not affect these indisputable fundamental behaviors - constructive(adaptive), stubborn(accommodating), patient(open), inspired(resourceful), sensing(intuiting), thinking(feeling), deciding(reasoning), and understanding(knowing) all define each other within the context of the others listed above, and perhaps evolved separately to fit the needs of the more fundamental interactions... I believe that the 7 core traits reflect attitudes among the divisions of labor that gave rise to civilization with the advent of food surplus/farming which made a common language for customer-marketer relations feasible. The nature of skilled work allowed the accepting-creating ego archetype itself to be realized, to support the values that were conducive to individual trade operations, and so socionics was born...

this is intriguing... what are the more commonly used names for these Reinins? I'll look into this; the more tools I have at my disposal, the better...

As far as I go about things, I usually look at Judicious/Decisive, Merry/Serious, Positivist/Negativist, Extratim/Introtim, Process/Result, Perceiving/Judging, and Aristocratic/Democratic, roughly in descending order, and always case-specific, depending on what hits me the hardest...

I was creating a system involving dichotomies with equations using absolute value extensively, I left the thing laying around my old computer somewhere...

[Nexus]

here are my substitutions for the Reinin factors:

constructive - construct-creating
implementing - emotion-creating
stubborn - obstinate
accommodating - yielding
patient - farsighted
open - carefree
inspired - strategic
resourceful - tactical
optimistic - positivist
pessimistic - negativist
fearful - process
painful - result
aligning - static
stabilizing - dynamic
inquisitive - asking
assertive - declaring
investing - democratic
managing - autocratic

[Nexus]

another good substitution for yielding is teasing

[ClownsandEntropy]

I'm curious: what is this mathematical system of Socionics aiming to do? I can understand if perhaps it gives clarity, but it seems a lot of mathematical work if there is nothing to be gained from it. Not that there's then anything wrong with it if there's nothing to be gained.

[Korpsy Knievel]

By ignoring the validity of socionics' premises (correct categorization of cognitive attributes as IEs, reified IM, etc.) and simply accepting its conclusions (Model A), it allows us to formulate further extrapolations that add a fresh castle atop the one already erected upon the clouds.

[Exodus]

@Huitzi Wrong subforum...

I'm curious: what is this mathematical system of Socionics aiming to do? I can understand if perhaps it gives clarity, but it seems a lot of mathematical work if there is nothing to be gained from it. Not that there's then anything wrong with it if there's nothing to be gained.

Honestly that's a good question. I've been thinking a lot about what this stuff might "mean", but with very little insight to speak of yet. It's like what that guy said when people asked him why he climbed Mt. Everest. "Because it's there."

But that's not to say that a more dedicated experimentalist might extrapolate something useful.

I already showed you shitheads the math for Ji/Je/Pi/Pe. Take it one step further to trigometric functions and vuala, you have the 8 functions.

Can you explain this or give me a link?

By ignoring the validity of socionics' premises (correct categorization of cognitive attributes as IEs, reified IM, etc.) and simply accepting its conclusions (Model A), it allows us to formulate further extrapolations that add a fresh castle atop the one already erected upon the clouds.

Ok, but you could say that about most threads on this forum.

[Brilliand]

It may be possible to derive the relationship group from the dichotomies - I'll look into it. But the reverse seems more natural, especially now that I've shown that there exists an alternative dichotomy system. I know people love Reinin dichotomies, but they don't fall out of the theory quite as easily as you might like. Socionics is first and foremost a theory of relationships, not dichotomies.

This model differs from the Reinin dichotomies by a switch over the J/P dichotomy - i.e.:

merry/serious = judging/perceiving ? base(alpha/gamma) : creative(alpha/gamma)
base(alpha/gamma) = judging/perceiving ? merry/serious : judicious/decisive

(judging/perceiving ? merry/serious : judicious/decisive means "if judging, use merry/serious; if perceiving, use judicious/decisive")

The fact that the function dichotomies do not directly parallel the Reinin dichotomies always did strike me as a weakness in Socionics. The switch over J/P is the dividing line. (This is, of course, completely different from the J/P switch sometimes thought to convert between MBTI and Socionics.)