Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Beta Ni as the function of choice, reflection, and critique

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

    Default Beta Ni as the function of choice, reflection, and critique

    The beta Ni function, as Krig has reminded us, is defined by Gulenko as the intent to avoid past mistakes. In my view, beta Ni is made up of eight information processors which allow us to conceptualize choice and compare choices made.

    The IM element processed by beta Ni is choice. Choices are related to each other in terms of their influence in comparison to another available choice. If the influence is more positive than the other choice, then the choice is comparatively positive. If the influence is negative, then the choice is comparatively negative.

    How is the state of influence, for the positive or the negative, judged? The answer is relative to progress towards an idealized state, a positive potential outcome (in socionics terms, the relationship between delta Ne aspects). If a choice realizes positive potential, then it is positive. If it realizes negative potential, then it is negative. Potentials are, of course, judged relative to each other. Properly, one speaks of "scenarios", complexes of potential states that may be positive or negative. Starting from a state of observed negative potentials, we say a choice is "right" if the resulting outcome is a state whereat the situation is more positive than it previously was. Correspondingly, we say it is wrong if the situation is comparatively more negative. Of course, these judgments are completely relative and reflect our feelings about elements of the potential scenario and current situation.

    Looking at choice from a subelements point of view, we can perceive of choice as a change of destiny with regard to a specific event (a gamma Ni aspect). If an event is allowed to pass, then the state of the permissitivity is positive; if not, its permissitivity is negative. A change in our decision to let the event stand or not, is the making of a choice.

    I'm looking for a specific word in place of "event permissivity", but it escapes me. Has it even been coined...?

    Continuing, we reflect on a choice when we evaluate it based on the positivity of its outcome -- that is, the actual state that resulted compared with what we believed the choice would result in.

  2. #2
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,234
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Who is this "we" you keep alluding to, your socionic co-conspirator and rabble rouser against the forces of conservatardism?

  3. #3
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by k0rpsey View Post
    Who is this "we" you keep alluding to, your socionic co-conspirator and rabble rouser against the forces of conservatardism?
    I think you're introjecting.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  4. #4
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,234
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold View Post
    I think you're introjecting.
    You've got a new word and can't stop abusing it.

    tcaud makes frequent use of "we" when outlining his socionics ideas, and also when he's railing against political elites who've failed to read his mind and adopt his positions. In the first case he appears to either be aping Gulenko outright to make himself feel more socionicky, or merely adopting a common writing convention of joint research papers. In the second case he's hoping or assuming that others are in alignment with his desire to see political evildoers fall, or possibly appealing to the true spirits of the cartoon characters in the videogames his psychological theories are drawn from.

    And there's nothing in your description that's unique to Beta NFs.

  5. #5
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think it's the royal "we".
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Take your "we" discussion to another thread. This thread is only for the discussion of beta Ni.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,934
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by k0rpsey View Post
    You've got a new word and can't stop abusing it.

    tcaud makes frequent use of "we" when outlining his socionics ideas, and also when he's railing against political elites who've failed to read his mind and adopt his positions. In the first case he appears to either be aping Gulenko outright to make himself feel more socionicky, or merely adopting a common writing convention of joint research papers. In the second case he's hoping or assuming that others are in alignment with his desire to see political evildoers fall, or possibly appealing to the true spirits of the cartoon characters in the videogames his psychological theories are drawn from.
    Shut the fuck up.
    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    I'm looking for a specific word in place of "event permissivity", but it escapes me. Has it even been coined...?
    Imperatives.

  8. #8
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,234
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Take your "we" discussion to another thread. This thread is only for the discussion of beta Ni.
    "We" want to know what in your description isn't ubiquitous to all humans. It's just common sense that people seek to avoid repeating errors, that negative is negative, and positive is positive. Unless you've got secret definitions for the plain-speech terms above, what you've laid out says nothing that isn't self-evident to anyone with a pulse.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,934
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In the strict sense he's talking about socionics, not humans. Still I get a stronger sense of imperative from Betas. Tcaud is right about this.

  10. #10
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,234
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedratsshadow View Post
    He's talking about socionics, not humans.
    Now it all makes perfect sense.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,934
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    And what's your type?

  12. #12
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,234
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedratsshadow View Post
    And what's your type?
    Quote Originally Posted by crazedratsshadow View Post
    Shut the fuck up.
    ^

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Those who don't understand model A should not comment on advanced socionics topics like the nature of the functions. I mean really understanding of the basics is expected.

    I use the term "we" as a general means of engaging the audience and establishing rapport.

    "Imperative"... I think you are right.
    Last edited by tcaudilllg; 05-28-2011 at 10:54 PM.

  14. #14
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,234
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Those who don't understand model A should not comment on advanced socionics topics like the nature of the functions. I mean really understanding of the basics is expected.
    .
    You're trailing off into model tcaud, not dealing strictly with model A.

Posting Permissions

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