Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 69

Thread: WOOFIAN SOCIONICS

  1. #1
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default WOOFIAN SOCIONICS

     
    I went just a bit insane a few days back, and made a post in which I took massive piles of triple-digit fractions, took them to the power of other fractions, and rammed the figures through an entire model's worth of dimensionalities, over and over and over again. Totally worth it. The biggest point is that the model begins to loosen in particular ways if and when certain functions become accentuated.

    I also went insane a few more days back and took a Model X approach to Model B. Part of me was uncomfortable with effectively butchering some of the internals of the Hitta/Bukalov model. As time marched on, a larger part of me stopped giving a shit, due to many reasons, the pivotal one being that Tcaudilllg's handling of the Hitta/Bukalov Model B allowed for an incredibly solid case to be made for Ashton as LII. Something went terribly wrong.

    Variance in subtyping also exists between socionists. The most common subtyping system involves affixing the abbreviation for either the Base function or the Creative function to either the beginning or the end of the multi-letter name of the type itself. The second most common system involves affixing either D, C, N, or H to the name of the type. D means more Te and Fe, C means more Se and Ne, N means more Ti and Fi, and H means more Si and Ni. Approach to the DCNH system in this manner is almost completely universal, save for one or two particular instances in which it was suggested that D means more Base, C means more Creative, N means more Role, and H means more strength in the Vulnerable function, but this approach sucks and I've never seen it used.

    Anyways, within the two-subtype system, the varience is larger and more understandable. The simplest approach is to look at whether the Base or the Creative function is more accentuated than what is standard for the type. The Accepting/Producing approach has Base subtypes as having accentuation in the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th functions; Creative subtypes would have accentuation in the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th functions. The Inert/Contact system would have Base subtypes accentuating the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 8th functions; Creative subtypes would accentuate the 2nd, 3rd, 6th, and 7th functions.

    Going from there, the Accepting/Producing system should have Base subtypes as more exaggerated embodiments of their temperaments, and Creative subtypes as closer to their Mirrors. The Inert/Contact system would have types "winging" out towards clubs in adjacent quadras that correspond to both the Benefit cycles and the Taciturn/Narrator cycles.

    Despite the complaints I've seen about DCNH, evidence points to the two-subtype system being a far bigger mess. Evidence also points towards the very term itself, "two-subtype system", being one hell of a misnomer, due to such a variance of subtypes all being under the guise of identical names.

    Let's try something something different. Something more fluid, and consequentially, more unbreakable.



    WOOFIAN SOCIONICS: IT WAS BOUND TO HAPPEN ONE OF THESE DAYS

    Any verbal descriptions of IEs, and for that matter, any verbal descriptions of anything, will be bound by the constraints of peoples' capacity to understand and utilize language, peoples' capacity to pay attention to stuff, and all sorts of other shit. A distance between what exists and what is understood to exist via a description will always be present. Opening up the whole can of worms about what constitutes "exists" is something I ain't gonna do right now. Given all of that, the best approach is to look at these, as well as any other verbal descriptions, as close approximations to "the real thing", and a diversity of understandings is the best way we can all close in on this crazy shit. By no means should the writings below be your only source of information on the functions. Look far and wide.


    PART I: THE BASICS

    Aspectonics draw the lines, and Carl Gustav Jung's work illuminates the spaces within.

    First, Irrationality versus Rationality.

    Irrationality deals with what is. I would like to use the term Elementalism here; a one-word definition of "a focus on the fundamental 'is'" would best deal in what "is" is, not the "isn't" that "is" isn't.

    Rationality deals with organization of "what is", the organization itself being separate from the elemental "is" that is determined via Irrationality.

     
    Irrational:

    As I make use of this term it does not denote something contrary to reason, but something outside the province of reason, whose essence, therefore, is not established by reason.

    Elementary facts belong to this category, e.g. that the earth has a moon, that chlorine is an element, that the greatest density of water is found to be 4.0 centigrade. An accident is also irrational in spite of the fact that it may sustain a subsequent rational explanation.

    The irrational is a factor of existence which may certainly be pushed back indefinitely by an increasingly elaborate and complicated rational explanation, but in so doing the explanation finally becomes so extravagant and overdone that it passes comprehension, thus reaching the limits of rational thought long before it can ever span the whole world with the laws of reason. A completely rational explanation of an actually existing object (not one that is merely postulated) is a Utopian ideal. Only an object that has been postulated can also be completely explained on rational grounds, since it has never contained anything beyond what was postulated by rational thinking. Empirical science also postulates rationally limited objects, since its deliberate exclusion of the accidental allows no consideration of the real object as a whole; hence empirical observation is always limited to that same portion of the object which has been selected for rational consideration. Thus, both thinking and feeling as directed functions are rational. When these functions are concerned not with a rationally determined choice of objects, or with the qualities and relations of objects, but with the incidental perceptions which the real object never lacks, they at once lose the quality of direction, and therewith something of their rational character, because they accept the accidental. They begin to be irrational. That thinking or feeling which is directed according to accidental perceptions, and is therefore irrational, is either intuitive or sensational. Both intuition and sensation are psychological functions which achieve their functional fulfillment in the absolute perception of occurrences in general. Hence, in accordance with their nature, their attitude must be set towards every possibility and what is absolutely accidental; they must, therefore, entirely forgo rational direction. Accordingly I term them irrational functions, in contrast to thinking and feeling, which reach perfection only when in complete accord with the laws of reason.

    Although the irrational, as such, can never become the object of a science, nevertheless for a practical psychology it is of the greatest importance that the irrational factor should be correctly appraised. For practical psychology stirs up many problems that altogether elude the rational solution and can be settled only irrationally, i.e. they can be solved only in a way that has no correspondence with the laws of reason. An exclusive presumption or expectation that for every conflict there must also exist a possibility of rational adjustment may well prove an insurmountable obstacle to a real solution of an irrational character. (v. Rational).


    Rational:

    The rational is the reasonable, that which accords with reason. I conceive reason as an attitude whose principle is to shape thought, feeling, and action in accordance with objective values. Objective values are established by the average experience of external facts on the one hand, and of inner psychological facts on the other. Such experiences, however, could represent no objective 'value', if 'valued' as such by the subject; for this would already amount to an act of reason. But the reasoning attitude, which permits us to declare as valid objective values in general, is not the work of the individual subject, but the product of human history.

    Most objective values—and reason itself among them—are firmly established complexes handed down to us through the ages, to the organization of which countless generations have labored with the same necessity with which the nature of the living organism, in general, reacts to the average and constantly recurring conditions of the environment, confronting them with corresponding function-complexes—as, for instance, the eye, which so perfectly corresponds with the nature of light. We might, therefore, speak of a pre-existing, metaphysical world-reason, if, as Schopenhauer has already pointed out, the reaction of the living organism that corresponds with average external influence were not the indispensable condition of its existence. Human reason, therefore, is merely the expression of human adaptability to the average occurrence which has gradually become deposited in solidly organized complexes, constituting our objective values. Thus the laws of reason are those laws which rule and designate the average 'correct' or adapted attitude. Everything is rational which harmonizes with these laws, and everything irrational (q.v.) which contravenes them.

    Thinking and feeling are rational functions in so far as they are decisively influenced by the motive of reflection. They attain their fullest significance when in fullest possible accord with the laws of reason. The irrational functions, on the contrary, are such as aim at pure perception, e.g. intuition and sensation; because, as far as possible, they are forced to dispense with the rational (which presupposes the exclusion of everything that is outside reason) in order to be able to reach the most complete perception of the whole course of events.


    People will have a blend of the two, as far as interfacing with the world goes. As for human examples, I would like to use Aleister Crowley as an excellent example of extreme Irrationality, and Immanuel Kant as an excellent example of extreme Rationality.

    Second, Extroversion versus Introversion.

    Extroversion deals with discrete, compartmentalized objects. Many of these objects happen to be people. Appropriately enough, Bodies is used in reference to Extroversion, usually in regards to the functions themselves.

    Introversion deals with everything at once. As Bodies was used for Extroversion, so is Fields used for Introversion.

     
    Extroversion:

    In our descriptions of this and the following type it will be necessary, in the interest of lucid and comprehensive presentation, to discriminate between the conscious and unconscious psychology. Let us first lend our minds to a description of the phenomena of consciousness.

    THE GENERAL ATTITUDE OF CONSCIOUSNESS

    Everyone is, admittedly, orientated by the data with which the outer world provides him ; yet we see that this may be the case in a way that is only relatively decisive. Because it is cold out of doors, one man is persuaded to wear his overcoat, another from a desire to become hardened finds this unnecessary; one man admires the new tenor because all the world admires him, another withholds his approbation not because he dislikes him but because in his view the subject of general admiration is not thereby proved to be admirable; one submits to a given state of affairs because his experience argues nothing else to be possible, another is convinced that, although it has repeated itself a thousand times in the same way, the thousand and first will be different. The former is orientated by the objective data; the latter reserves a view, which is, as it were, interposed between himself and the objective fact. Now, when the orientation to the object and to objective facts is so predominant that the most frequent and essential decisions and actions are determined, not by subjective values but by objective relations, one speaks of an extraverted attitude. When this is habitual, one speaks of an extraverted type. If a man so thinks, feels, and acts, in a word so lives, as to correspond directly with objective conditions and their claims, whether in a good sense or ill, he is extraverted. His life makes it perfectly clear that it is the objective rather than the subjective value which plays the greater role as the determining factor of his consciousness. He naturally has subjective values, but their determining power has less importance than the external objective conditions. Never, therefore, does he expect to find any absolute factors in his own inner life, since the only ones he knows are outside himself. Epimetheus-like, his inner life succumbs to the external necessity, not of course without a struggle; which, however, always ends in favour of the objective determinant. His entire consciousness looks outwards to the world, because the important and decisive determination always comes to him from without. But it comes to him from without, only because that is where he expects it. All the distinguishing characteristics of his psychology, in so far as they do not arise from the priority of one definite psychological function or from individual peculiarities, have their origin in this basic attitude. Interest and attention follow objective happenings and, primarily, those of the immediate environment. Not only persons, but things, seize and rivet his interest. His actions, therefore, are also governed by the influence of persons and things. They are directly related to objective data and determinations, and are, as it were, exhaustively explainable on these grounds. Extraverted action is recognizably related to objective conditions. In so far it is not purely reactive to environmental stimuli, it character is constantly applicable to the actual circumstances, and it finds adequate and appropriate play within the limits of the objective situation. It has no serious tendency to transcend these bounds. The same holdsgood for interest: objective occurrences have a well-nigh inexhaustible charm, so that in the normal course the extravert's interest makes no other claims.

    The moral laws which govern his action coincide with the corresponding claims of society, i.e. with the generally valid moral viewpoint. If the generally valid view were different, the subjective moral guiding line would also be different, without the general psychological habitus being in any way changed. It might almost seem, although it, is by no means the case, that this rigid determination by objective factors would involve an altogether ideal and complete adaptation to general conditions of life. An accommodation to objective data, such as we have described, must, of course, seem a complete adaptation to the extraverted view, since from this standpoint no other criterion exists. But from a higher point of view, it is by no means granted that the standpoint of objectively given, facts is the normal one under all circumstances. Objective conditions may be either temporarily or locally abnormal. An individual who is accommodated to such con certainly conforms to the abnormal style of his surroundings, but, in relation to the universally valid laws of life. He is, in common with his milieu, in an abnormal position. The individual may, however, thrive in such surroundings but only to the point when he, together with his whole milieu, is destroyed for transgressing the universal laws of life. He must inevitably participate in this downfall with the same completeness as he was previously adjusted to the objectively valid situation. He is adjusted, but not adapted, since adaptation demands more than a mere frictionless participation in the momentary conditions of the immediate environment. (Once more I would point to Spitteler's Epimetheus). Adaptation demands an observance of laws far more universal in their application than purely local and temporary conditions. Mere adjustment is the limitation of the normal extraverted type. On the one hand, the extravert owes his normality to his ability to fit into existing conditions with relative ease. He naturally pretends to nothing more than the satisfaction of existing objective possibilities, applying himself, for instance, to the calling which offers sound prospective possibilities in the actual situation in time and place. He tries to do or to make just what his milieu momentarily needs and expects from him, and abstains from every innovation that is not entirely obvious, or that in any way exceeds the expectation of those around him. But on the other hand, his normality must also depend essentially upon whether the extravert takes into account the actuality of his subjective needs and requirements; and this is just his weak point, for the tendency of his type has such a strong outward direction that even the most obvious of all subjective facts, namely the condition of his own body, may quite easily receive inadequate consideration. The body is not sufficiently objective or 'external,' so that the satisfaction of simple elementary requirements which are indispensable to physical well-being are no longer given their place. The body accordingly suffers, to say nothing of the soul. Although, as a rule, the extravert takes small note of this latter circumstance, his intimate domestic circle perceives it all the more keenly. His loss of equilibrium is perceived by himself only when abnormal bodily sensations make themselves felt.

    These tangible facts he cannot ignore. It is natural he should regard them as concrete and 'objective', since for his mentality there exists only this and nothing more—in himself. In others he at once sees "imagination" at work. A too extraverted attitude may actually become so regardless of the subject that the latter is entirely sacrificed to so-called objective claims; to the demands, for instance, of a continually extending business, because orders lie claiming one's attention or because profitable possibilities are constantly being opened up which must instantly be seized.

    This is the extravert's danger; he becomes caught up in objects, wholly losing himself in their toils. The functional (nervous) or actual physical disorders which result from this state have a compensatory significance, forcing the subject to an involuntary self-restriction. Should the symptoms be functional, their peculiar formation may symbolically express the psychological situation; a singer, for instance, whose fame quickly reaches a dangerous pitch tempting him to a disproportionate outlay of energy, is suddenly robbed of his high tones by a nervous inhibition. A man of very modest beginnings rapidly reaches a social position of great influence and wide prospects, when suddenly he is overtaken by a psychogenic state, with all the symptoms of mountain-sickness. Again, a man on the point of marrying an idolized woman of doubtful character, whose value he extravagantly overestimates, is seized with a spasm of the oesophagus, which forces him to a regimen of two cups of milk in the day, demanding his three-hourly attention. All visits to his fianceé are thus effectually stopped, and no choice is left to him but to busy himself with his bodily nourishment. A man who through his own energy and enterprise has built up a vast business, entailing an intolerable burden of work, is afflicted by nervous attacks of thirst, as a result of which he speedily falls a victim to hysterical alcoholism.

    Hysteria is, in my view, by far the most frequent neurosis with the extraverted type. The classical example of hysteria is always characterized by an exaggerated rapport with the members of his circle, and a frankly imitatory accommodation to surrounding conditions. A constant tendency to appeal for interest and to produce impressions upon his milieu is a basic trait of the hysterical nature. A correlate to this is his proverbial suggestibility, his pliability to another person's influence. Unmistakable extraversion comes out in the communicativeness of the hysteric, which occasionally leads to the divulging of purely phantastic contents; whence arises the reproach of the hysterical lie.

    To begin with, the 'hysterical' character is an exaggeration of the normal attitude; it is then complicated by compensatory reactions from the side of the unconscious, which manifests its opposition to the extravagant extraversion in the form of physical disorders, whereupon an introversion of psychic energy becomes unavoidable. Through this reaction of the unconscious, another category of symptoms arises which have a more introverted character. A morbid intensification of phantasy activity belongs primarily to this category. From this general characterization of the extraverted attitude, let us now turn to a description of the modifications, which the basic psychological functions undergo as a result of this attitude.

    THE ATTITUDE OF THE UNCONSCIOUS

    It may perhaps seem odd that I should speak of attitude of the 'unconscious'. As I have already sufficiently indicated, I regard the relation of the unconscious to the conscious as compensatory. The unconscious, according to this view, has as good a claim to an I attitude' as the conscious.

    In the foregoing section I emphasized the tendency to a certain one-sidedness in the extraverted attitude, due to the controlling power of the objective factor in the course, of psychic events. The extraverted type is constantly tempted to give himself away (apparently) in favour of the object, and to assimilate his subject to the object. I have referred in detail to the ultimate consequences of this exaggeration of the extraverted attitude, viz. to the injurious suppression of the subjective factor. It is only, to be expected, therefore, that a psychic compensation of the conscious extraverted attitude will lay especial weight upon the subjective factor, i.e. we shall have to prove a strong egocentric tendency in the unconscious. Practical experience actually furnishes this proof. I do not wish to enter into a casuistical survey at this point, so must refer my readers to the ensuing sections, where I shall attempt to present the characteristic attitude of the unconscious from the angle of each function-type, In this section we are merely concerned with the compensation of a general extraverted attitude; I shall, therefore, confine myself to an equally general characterization of the compensating attitude of the unconscious.

    The attitude of the unconscious as an effective complement to the conscious extraverted attitude has a definitely introverting character. It focusses libido upon the subjective factor, i.e. all those needs and claims which are stifled or repressed by a too extraverted conscious attitude. It may be readily gathered from what has been said in the previous section that a purely objective orientation does violence to a multitude of subjective emotions, intentions, needs, and desires, since it robs them of the energy which is their natural right. Man is not a machine that one can reconstruct, as occasion demands, upon other lines and for quite other ends, in the hope that it will then proceed to function, in a totally different way, just as normally as before. Man bears his age-long history with him in his very structure is written the history of mankind.

    The historical factor represents a vital need, to which a wise economy must respond. Somehow the past must become vocal, and participate in the present. Complete assimilation to the object, therefore, encounters the protest of the suppressed minority, elements belonging to the past and existing from the beginning. From this quite general consideration it may be understood why it is that the unconscious claims of the extraverted type have an essentially primitive, infantile, and egoistical character. When Freud says that the unconscious is "only able to wish", this observation contains a large measure of truth for the unconscious of the extraverted type. Adjustment and assimilation to objective data prevent inadequate subjective impulses from reaching consciousness. These tendencies (thoughts, wishes, affects, needs, feelings, etc.) take on a regressive character corresponding with the degree of their repression, ie. the less they are recognized, the more infantile and archaic they become. The conscious attitude robs them of their relatively disposable energycharge, only leaving them the energy of which it cannot deprive them. This remainder, which still possesses a potency not to be underestimated, can be described only as primeval instinct. Instinct can never be rooted out from an individual by any arbitrary measures; it requires the slow, organic transformation of many generations to effect a radical change, for instinct is the energic [sic] expression of a definite organic foundation.

    Thus with every repressed tendency a considerable sum of energy ultimately remains. This sum corresponds with the potency of the instinct and guards its effectiveness, notwithstanding the deprivation of energy which made it unconscious. The measure of extraversion in the conscious attitude entails a like degree of infantilism and archaism in the attitude of the unconscious. The egoism which so often characterizes the extravert's unconscious attitude goes far beyond mere childish selfishness; it even verges upon the wicked and brutal. It is here we find in fullest bloom that incest-wish described by Freud. It is self-evident that these things are entirely unconscious, remaining altogether hidden from the eyes of the uninitiated observer so long as the extraversion of the conscious attitude does not reach an extreme stage. But wherever an exaggeration of the conscious standpoint takes place, the unconscious also comes to light in a symptomatic form, i.e. the unconscious egoism, infantilism, and archaism lose their original compensatory characters, and appear in more or less open opposition to the conscious attitude. This process begins in the form of an absurd exaggeration of the conscious standpoint, which is aimed at a further repression of the unconscious, but usually ends in a reductio ad absurdum of the conscious attitude, i.e. a collapse. The catastrophe may be an objective one, since the objective aims gradually become falsified by the subjective. I remember the case of a printer who, starting as a mere employé, worked his way up through two decades of hard struggle, till at last he was the independent possessor of a very extensive business. The more the business extended, the more it increased its hold upon him, until gradually every other interest was allowed to become merged in it. At length he was completely enmeshed in its toils, and, as we shall soon see, this surrender eventually proved his ruin. As a sort of compensation to his exclusive interest in the business, certain memories of his childhood came to life. As a child he had taken great delight in painting and drawing. But, instead of renewing this capacity for its own sake as a balancing side-interest, he canalized it into his business and began to conceive 'artistic' elaborations of his products. His phantasies unfortunately materialized: he actually began to produce after his own primitive and infantile taste, with the result that after a very few years his business went to pieces. He acted in obedience to one of our 'civilized ideals', which enjoins the energetic man to concentrate everything upon the one end in view. But he went too far, and merely fell a victim to the power of his subjective infantile claims.

    But the catastrophic solution may also be subjective, i.e. in the form of a nervous collapse. Such a solution always comes about as a result of the unconscious counterinfluence, which can ultimately paralyse conscious action. In which case the claims of the unconscious force themselves categorically upon consciousness, thus creating a calamitous cleavage which generally reveals itself in two ways: either the subject no longer knows what he really wants and nothing any longer interests him, or he wants too much at once and has too keen an interest—but in impossible things. The suppression of infantile and primitive claims, which is often necessary on "civilized" grounds, easily leads to neurosis, or to the misuse of narcotics such as alcohol, morphine, cocaine, etc. In more extreme cases the cleavage ends in suicide.

    It is a salient peculiarity of unconscious tendencies that, just in so far as they are deprived of their energy by a lack of conscious recognition, they assume a correspondingly destructive character, and as soon as this happen their compensatory function ceases. They cease to have a compensatory effect as soon as they reach a depth or stratum that corresponds with a level of culture absolutely incompatible with our own. From this moment the unconscious tendencies form a block, which is opposed to the conscious attitude in every respect ; such a bloc inevitably leads to open conflict.

    In a general way, the compensating attitude of the unconscious finds expression in the process of psychic equilibrium. A normal extraverted attitude does not, of course, mean that the individual behaves invariably in accordance with the extraverted schema. Even in the same individual many psychological happenings may be observed, in which the mechanism of introversion is concerned. A habitus can be called extraverted only when the mechanism of extraversion predominates. In such a case the most highly differentiated function has a constantly extraverted application, while the inferior functions are found in the service of introversion, i.e. the more valued function, because the more conscious, is more completely subordinated to conscious control and purpose, whilst the less conscious, in other words, the partly unconscious inferior functions are subjected to conscious free choice in a much smaller degree.

    The superior function is always the expression of the conscious personality, its aim, its will, and its achievement, whilst the inferior functions belong to the things that happen to one. Not that they merely beget blunders, e.g. lapsus linguae or lapsus calami, but they may also breed half or three-quarter resolves, since the inferior functions also possess a slight degree of consciousness. The extraverted feeling type is a classical example of this, for he enjoys an excellent feeling rapport with his entourage, yet occasionally opinions of an incomparable tactlessness will just happen to him. These opinions have their source in his inferior and subconscious thinking, which is only partly subject to control and is insufficiently related to the object ; to a large extent, therefore, it can operate without consideration or responsibility.

    In the extraverted attitude the inferior functions always reveal a highly subjective determination with pronounced egocentricity and personal bias, thus demonstrating their close connection with the unconscious. Through their agency the unconscious is continually coming to light. On no account should we imagine that the unconscious lies permanently buried under so many overlying strata that it can only be uncovered, so to speak, by a laborious process of excavation. On the contrary, there is a constant influx of the unconscious into the conscious psychological process; at times this reaches such a pitch that the observer can decide only with difficulty which character-traits are to be ascribed to the conscious, and which to the unconscious personality. This difficulty occurs mainly with persons whose habit of expression errs rather on the side of profuseness. Naturally it depends very largely also upon the attitude of the observer, whether he lays hold of the conscious or the unconscious character of a personality. Speaking generally a judging observer will tend to seize the conscious character, while a perceptive observer will be influenced more by the unconscious character, since judgement is chiefly interested in the conscious motivation of the psychic process, while perception tends to register the mere happening. But in so far as we apply perception and judgment in equal measure, it may easily happen that a personality appears to us as both introverted and extraverted, so that we cannot at once decide to which attitude the superior function belongs. In such cases only a thorough analysis of the function qualities can help us to a sound opinion. During the analysis we must observe which function is placed under the control and motivation of consciousness, and which functions have an accidental and spontaneous character. The former is always more highly differentiated than the latter, which also possess many infantile and primitive qualities. Occasionally the former function gives the impression of normality, while the latter have something abnormal or pathological about them.


    Introversion:

    THE GENERAL ATTITUDE OF CONSCIOUSNESS

    As I have already explained in section 1 of the present chapter, the introverted is distinguished from the extraverted type by the fact that, unlike the latter, who is prevailingly orientated by the object and objective data, he is governed by subjective factors. In the section alluded to I mentioned, inter alia, that the introvert interposes a subjective view between the perception of the object and his own action, which prevents the action from assuming a character that corresponds with the objective situation. Naturally, this is a special case, mentioned by way of example, and merely intended to serve as a simple illustration. But now we must go in quest of more general formulations.

    Introverted consciousness doubtless views the external conditions, but it selects the subjective determinants as the decisive ones. The type is guided, therefore, by that factor of perception and cognition which represents the receiving subjective disposition to the sense stimulus. Two persons, for example, see the same object, but they never see it in such a way as to receive two identically similar images of it. Quite apart from the differences in the personal equation and mere organic acuteness, there often exists a radical difference, both in kind and degree, in the psychic assimilation of the perceived image. Whereas the extraverted type refers preeminently to that which reaches him from the object, the introvert principally relies upon that which the outer impression constellates [sic] in the subject. In an individual case of apperception, the difference may, of course, be very delicate, but in the total psychological economy it is extremely noticeable, especially in the form of a reservation of the ego. Although it is anticipating somewhat, I consider that point of view which inclines, with Weininger, to describe this attitude as philautic, or with other writers, as autoerotic, egocentric, subjective, or egoistic, to be both misleading in principle and definitely depreciatory. It corresponds with the normal bias of the extraverted attitude against the nature of the introvert. We must not forget—although extraverted opinion is only too prone to do so—that all perception and cognition is not purely objective: it is also subjectively conditioned. The world exists not merely in itself, but also as it appears to me. Indeed, at bottom, we have absolutely no criterion that could help us to form a judgment of a world whose nature was unassimilable by the subject. If we were to ignore the subjective factor, it would mean a complete denial of the great doubt as to the possibility of absolute cognition. And this would mean a rechute into that stale and hollow positivism which disfigured the beginning of our epoch—an attitude of intellectual arrogance that is invariably accompanied by a crudeness of feeling, and an essential violation of life, as stupid as it is presumptuous. Through an overvaluation of the objective powers of cognition, we repress the importance of the subjective factor, which simply means the denial of the subject. But what is the subject? The subject is man—we are the subject. Only a sick mind could forget that cognition must have a subject, for there exists no knowledge and, therefore, for us, no world where 'I know' has not been said, although with this statement one has already expressed the subjective limitation of all knowledge.

    The same holds good for all the psychic functions: they have a subject which is just as indispensable as the object. It is characteristic of our present extraverted valuation that the word 'subjective' occasionally rings almost like a reproach or blemish; but in every case the epithet 'merely subjective' means a dangerous weapon of offence, destined for that daring head, that is not unceasingly convinced of the unconditioned superiority of the object. We must, therefore, be quite clear as to what meaning the term 'subjective' carries in this investigation. As the subjective factor, then, I understand that psychological action or reaction which, when merged with the effect of the object, makes a new psychic fact. Now, in so far as the subjective factor, since oldest times and among all peoples, remains in a very large measure identical with itself—since elementary perceptions and cognitions are almost universally the same—it is a reality that is just as firmly established as the outer object. If this were not so, any sort of permanent and essentially changeless reality would be altogether inconceivable, and any understanding with posterity would be a matter of impossibility. Thus far, therefore, the subjective factor is something that is just as much a fact as the extent of the sea and the radius of the earth. Thus far, also, the subjective factor claims the whole value of a world-determining power which can never, under any circumstances, be excluded from our calculations. It is the other world-law, and the man who is based upon it has a foundation just as secure, permanent, and valid, as the man who relies upon the object But, just as the object and objective data remain by no means always the same, inasmuch as they are both perishable and subject to chance, the subjective factor is similarly liable to variability and individual hazard. Hence its value is also merely relative. The excessive development of the introverted standpoint in consciousness, for instance, does not lead to a better or sounder application of the subjective factor, but to an artificial subjectification of consciousness, which can hardly escape the reproach 'merely subjective'. For, as a countertendency to this morbid subjectification, there ensues a desubjectification of consciousness in the form of an exaggerated extraverted attitude which richly deserves Weininger's description "misautic". Inasmuch as the introverted attitude is based upon a universally present, extremely real, and absolutely indispensable condition of psychological adaptation, such expressions as 'philautic', 'egocentric', and the like are both objectionable and out of place, since they foster the prejudice that it is invariably a question of the beloved ego. Nothing could be more absurd than such an assumption. Yet one is continually meeting it when examining the judgments of the extravert upon the introvert. Not, of course, that I wish to ascribe such an error to individual extraverts; it is rather the present generally accepted extraverted view which is by no means restricted to the extraverted type; for it finds just as many representatives in the ranks of the other type, albeit very much against its own interest. The reproach of being untrue to his own kind is justly levelled at the latter, whereas, this, at least, can never be charged against the former.

    The introverted attitude is normally governed by the psychological structure, theoretically determined by heredity, but which to the subject is an ever present subjective factor. This must not be assumed, however, to be simply identical with the subject's ego, an assumption that is certainly implied in the above mentioned designations of Weininger; it is rather the psychological structure of the subject that precedes any development of the ego. The really fundamental subject, the Self, is far more comprehensive than the ego, because the former also embraces the unconscious, while the latter is essentially the focal point of consciousness. Were the ego identical with the Self, it would be unthinkable that we should be able to appear in dreams in entirely different forms and with entirely different meanings. But it is a characteristic peculiarity of the introvert, which, moreover, is as much in keeping with his own inclination as with the general bias, that he tends to confuse his ego with the Self, and to exalt his ego to the position of subject of the psychological process, thus effecting that morbid subjectification of consciousness, mentioned above, which so alienates him from the object.

    The psychological structure is the same. Semon has termed it 'mneme',[2] whereas I call it the 'collective unconscious'. The individual Self is a portion, or excerpt, or representative, of something universally present in all living creatures, and, therefore, a correspondingly graduated kind of psychological process, which is born anew in every creature. Since earliest times, the inborn manner of acting has been called instinct, and for this manner of psychic apprehension of the object I have proposed the term archetype. I may assume that what is understood by instinct is familiar to everyone. It is another matter with the archetype. This term embraces the same idea as is contained in 'primordial image' (an expression borrowed from Jakob Burckhardt), and as such I have described it in Chapter xi of this book. I must here refer the reader to that chapter, in particular to the definition of 'image'.

    The archetype is a symbolical formula, which always begins to function whenever there are no conscious ideas present, or when such as are present are impossible upon intrinsic or extrinsic grounds. The contents of the collective unconscious are represented in consciousness in the form of pronounced tendencies, or definite ways of looking at things. They are generally regarded by the individual as being determined by the object—incorrectly, at bottom—since they have their source in the unconscious structure of the psyche, and are only released by the operation of the object. These subjective tendencies and ideas are stronger than the objective influence; because their psychic value is higher, they are superimposed upon all impressions. Thus, just as it seems incomprehensible to the introvert that the object should always be decisive, it remains just as enigmatic to the extravert how a subjective standpoint can be superior to the objective situation. He reaches the unavoidable conclusion that the introvert is either a conceited egoist or a fantastic doctrinaire. Recently he seems to have reached the conclusion that the introvert is constantly influenced by an unconscious power-complex. The introvert unquestionably exposes himself to this prejudice; for it cannot be denied that his definite and highly generalized mode of expression, which apparently excludes every other view from the outset, lends a certain countenance to this extraverted opinion. Furthermore, the very decisiveness and inflexibility of the subjective judgment, which is superordinated to all objective data, is alone sufficient to create the impression of a strong egocentricity. The introvert usually lacks the right argument in presence of this prejudice; for he is just as unaware of the unconscious, though thoroughly sound presuppositions of his subjective judgment, as he is of his subjective perceptions. In harmony with the style of the times, he looks without, instead of behind his own consciousness for the answer. Should he become neurotic, it is the sign of a more or less complete unconscious identity of the ego with the Self, whereupon the importance of the Self is reduced to nil, while the ego becomes inflated beyond reason. The undeniable, world-determining power of the subjective factor then becomes concentrated in the ego, developing an immoderate power claim and a downright foolish egocentricity. Every psychology which reduces the nature of man to unconscious power instinct springs from this foundation. For example, Nietzsche's many faults in taste owe their existence to this subjectification of consciousness.

    THE UNCONSCIOUS ATTITUDE

    The superior position of the subjective factor in consciousness involves an inferiority of the objective factor. The object is not given that importance which should really belong to it. Just as it plays too great a role in the extraverted attitude, it has too little to say in the introverted. To the extent that the introvert's consciousness is subjectified, thus bestowing undue importance upon the ego, the object is placed in a position which in time becomes quite untenable. The object is a factor of undeniable power, while the ego is something very restricted and transitory. It would be a very different matter if the Self opposed the object. Self and world are commensurable factors; hence a normal introverted attitude is just as valid, and has as good a right to existence, as a normal extraverted attitude. But, if the ego has usurped the claims of the subject, a compensation naturally develops under the guise of an unconscious reinforcement of the influence of the object. Such a change eventually commands attention, for often, in spite of a positively convulsive attempt to ensure the superiority of the ego, the object and objective data develop an overwhelming influence, which is all the more invincible because it seizes upon the individual unawares, thus effecting an irresistible invasion of consciousness. As a result of the ego's defective relation to the object—for a will to command is not adaptation—a compensatory relation to the object develops in the unconscious, which makes itself felt in consciousness as an unconditional and irrepressible tie to the object. The more the ego seeks to secure every possible liberty, independence, superiority, and freedom from obligations, the deeper does it fall into the slavery of objective facts. The subject's freedom of mind is chained to an ignominious financial dependence, his unconcernedness of action suffers now and again, a distressing collapse in the face of public opinion, his moral superiority gets swamped in inferior relationships, and his desire to dominate ends in a pitiful craving to be loved. The chief concern of the unconscious in such a case is the relation to the object, and it affects this in a way that is calculated to bring both the power illusion and the superiority phantasy to utter ruin. The object assumes terrifying dimensions, in spite of conscious depreciation. Detachment from, and command of, the object are, in consequence, pursued by the ego still more violently. Finally, the ego surrounds itself by a regular system of safeguards (Adler has ably depicted these) which shall at least preserve the illusion of superiority. But, therewith, the introvert severs himself completely from the object, and either squanders his energy in defensive measures or makes fruitless attempts to impose his power upon the object and successfully assert himself. But these efforts are constantly being frustrated by the overwhelming impressions he receives from the object. It continually imposes itself upon him against his will; it provokes in him the most disagreeable and obstinate affects, persecuting him at every step. An immense, inner struggle is constantly required of him, in order to 'keep going.' Hence Psychoasthenia is his typical form of neurosis, a malady which is characterized on the one hand by an extreme sensitiveness, and on the other by a great liability to exhaustion and chronic fatigue.

    An analysis of the personal unconscious yields an abundance of power phantasies coupled with fear of the dangerously animated objects, to which, as a matter of fact, the introvert easily falls a victim. For a peculiar cowardliness develops from this fear of the object; he shrinks from making either himself or his opinion effective, always dreading an intensified influence on the part of the object. He is terrified of impressive affects in others, and is hardly ever free from the dread of falling under hostile influence. For objects possess terrifying and powerful qualities for him—qualities which he cannot consciously discern in them, but which, through his unconscious perception, he cannot choose but believe in. Since his conscious relation to the object is relatively repressed, its exit is by way of the unconscious, where it becomes loaded with the qualities of the unconscious. These qualities are primarily infantile and archaic. His relation to the object, therefore, becomes correspondingly primitive, taking on all those peculiarities which characterize the primitive objectrelationship. Now it seems as though objects possessed magical powers. Strange, new objects excite fear and distrust, as though concealing unknown dangers; objects long rooted and blessed by tradition are attached to his soul as by invisible threads; every change has a disturbing, if not actually dangerous aspect, since its apparent implication is a magical animation of the object. A lonely island where only what is permitted to move moves, becomes an ideal. Auch Einer, the novel by F. Th. Vischer, gives a rich insight into this side of the introvert's psychology, and at the same time shows the underlying symbolism of the collective unconscious, which in this description of types I am leaving on one side, since it is a universal phenomenon with no especial connection with types.


    Taken together, this leaves four main preferences on how to interface with the world, known here as the Temperaments; EP, IP, EJ, and IJ. The word "Temperament" is used in Myers-Briggs in reference to something else entirely, something that is most closely represented in Socionics as the Clubs, more on that later.

     
    Recapitulation of Extraverted Irrational Types:

    I call the two preceding types irrational for reasons already referred to; namely, because their commissions and omissions are based not upon reasoned judgment but upon the absolute intensity of perception. Their perception is concerned with simple happenings, where no selection has been exercised by the judgment. In this respect both the latter types have a considerable superiority over the two judging types. The objective occurrence is both law-determined and accidental. In so far as it is law-determined, it is accessible to reason; in so far as it is accidental, it is not. One might reverse it and say that we apply the term law-determined to the occurrence appearing so to our reason, and where its regularity escapes us we call it accidental. The postulate of a universal lawfulness remains a postulate of reason only; in no sense is it a postulate of our functions of perception. Since these are in no way grounded upon the principle of reason and its postulates, they are, of their very nature, irrational. Hence my term 'irrational' corresponds with the nature of the perception-types. But merely because they subordinate judgment to perception, it would be quite incorrect to regard these types as unreasonable. They are merely in a high degree empirical; they are grounded exclusively upon experience, so exclusively, in fact, that as a rule, their judgment cannot keep pace with their experience. But the functions of judgment are none the less present, although they eke out a largely unconscious existence. But, since the unconscious, in spite of its separation from the conscious subject, is always reappearing on the scene, the actual life of the irrational types exhibits striking judgments and acts of choice, which take the form of apparent sophistries, cold-hearted criticisms, and an apparently purposeful selection of persons and situations. These traits have a rather infantile, or even primitive, stamp; at times they are astonishingly naive, but at times also inconsiderate, crude, or outrageous. To the rationally orientated mind, the real character of such people might well appear rationalistic and purposeful in the bad sense. But this judgment would be valid only for their unconscious, and, therefore, quite incorrect for their conscious psychology, which is entirely orientated by perception, and because of its irrational nature is quite unintelligible to the rational judgment. Finally, it may even appear to a rationally orientated mind that such an assemblage of accidentals, hardly deserves the name 'psychology.' The irrational type balances this contemptuous judgment with an equally poor impression of the rational; for he sees him as something only half alive, whose only aim in life consists in fastening the fetters of reason upon everything living, and wringing his own neck with criticisms. Naturally, these are gross extremes; but they occur.

    From the standpoint of the rational type, the irrational might easily be represented as a rational of inferior quality; namely, when he is apprehended in the light of what happens to him. For what happens to him is not the accidental—in that he is master—but, in its stead, he is overtaken by rational judgment and rational aims. This fact is hardly comprehensible to the rational mind, but its unthinkableness merely equals the astonishment of the irrational, when he discovers someone who can set the ideas of reason above the living and actual event. Such a thing seems scarcely credible to him. It is, as a rule, quite hopeless to look to him for any recognition of principles in this direction, since a rational understanding is just as unknown and, in fact, tiresome to him as the idea of making a contract, without mutual discussion and obligations, appears unthinkable to the rational type.

    This point brings me to the problem of the psychic relation between the representatives of the different types. Following the terminology of the French school of hypnotists, the psychic relation among the more modern psychiatrists is termed I 'rapport'. Rapport chiefly consists in a feeling of actual accord, in spite of recognised differences. In fact, the recognition of existing differences, in so far as they are common to both, is already a rapport, a feeling of accord. If we make this feeling conscious to a rather high degree in an actual case, we discover that it has not merely the quality of a feeling that cannot be analysed further, but it also has the nature of an insight or cognitional content, representing the point of agreement in a conceptual form. This rational presentation is exclusively valid for the rational types; it by no means applies to the irrational, whose rapport is based not at all upon judgment but upon the parallelism of actual living events. His feeling of accord is the common perception of a sensation or intuition. The rational would say that rapport with the irrational depends purely upon chance. If, by some accident, the objective situations are exactly in tune, something like a human relationship takes place, but nobody can tell what will be either its validity or its duration. To the rational type it is often a very bitter thought that the relationship will last only just so long as external circumstances accidentally produce a mutual interest. This does not occur to him as being especially human, whereas it is precisely in this situation that the irrational sees a humanity of quite singular beauty. Accordingly each regards the other as a man destitute of relationships, upon whom no reliance can be placed, and with whom one can never get on decent terms. Such a result, however, is reached only when one consciously tries to make some estimate of the nature of one's relationships with one's fellow-men. Although a psychological conscientiousness of this kind is by no means usual, yet it frequently happens that, notwithstanding an absolute difference of standpoint, a kind of rapport does take place, and in the following way. The one assumes with unspoken projection that the other is, in all essential points, of the same opinion as himself, while the other divines or senses an objective community of interest, of which, however, the former has no conscious inkling and whose existence he would at once dispute, just as it would never occur to the latter that his relationship must rest upon a common point-of-view. A rapport of this kind is by far the most frequent; it rests upon projection, which is the source of many subsequent misunderstandings.

    Psychic relationship, in the extraverted attitude, is always regulated by objective factors and outer determinants. What a man is within has never any decisive significance. For our present-day culture the extraverted attitude is the governing principle in the problem of human relationship; naturally, the introverted principle occurs, but it is still the exception, and has to appeal to the tolerance of the age.


     
    Recapitulation of Introverted Irrational Types:

    The two types just depicted are almost inaccessible to external judgment. Because they are introverted and have in consequence a somewhat meagre capacity or willingness for expression, they offer but a frail handle for a telling criticism. Since their main activity is directed within, nothing is outwardly visible but reserve, secretiveness, lack of sympathy, or uncertainty, and an apparently groundless perplexity. When anything does come to the surface, it usually consists in indirect manifestations of inferior and relatively unconscious functions. Manifestations of such a nature naturally excite a certain environmental prejudice against these types. Accordingly they are mostly underestimated, or at least misunderstood. To the same degree as they fail to understand themselves—because they very largely lack judgment—they are also powerless to understand why they are so constantly undervalued by public opinion. They cannot see that their outward-going expression is, as a matter of fact, also of an inferior character. Their vision is enchanted by the abundance of subjective events. What happens there is so captivating, and of such inexhaustible attraction, that they do not appreciate the fact that their habitual communications to their circle express very, little of that real experience in which they themselves are, as it were, caught up. The fragmentary and, as a rule, quite episodic character of their communications make too great a demand upon the understanding and good will of their circle; furthermore, their mode of expression lacks that flowing warmth to the object which alone can have convincing force. On the contrary, these types show very often a brusque, repelling demeanour towards the outer world, although of this they are quite unaware, and have not the least intention of showing it. We shall form a fairer judgment of such men and grant them a greater indulgence, when we begin to realize how hard it is to translate into intelligible language what is perceived within. Yet this indulgence must not be so liberal as to exempt them altogether from the necessity of such expression. This could be only detrimental for such types. Fate itself prepares for them, perhaps even more than for other men, overwhelming external difficulties, which have a very sobering effect upon the intoxication of the inner vision. But frequently only an intense personal need can wring from them a human expression.

    From an extraverted and rationalistic standpoint, such types are indeed the most fruitless of men. But, viewed from a higher standpoint, such men are living evidence of the fact that this rich and varied world with its overflowing and intoxicating life is not purely external, but also exists within. These types are admittedly one sided demonstrations of Nature, but they are an educational experience for the man who refuses to be blinded by the intellectual mode of the day. In their own way, men with such an attitude are educators and promoters of culture. Their life teaches more than their words. From their lives, and not the least from what is just their greatest fault, viz. their incommunicability, we may understand one of the greatest errors of our civilization, that is, the superstitious belief in statement and presentation, the immoderate overprizing of instruction by means of word and method. A child certainly allows himself to be impressed by the grand talk of its parents. But is it really imagined that the child is thereby educated? Actually it is the parents' lives that educate the child—what they add thereto by word and gesture at best serves only to confuse him. The same holds good for the teacher. But we have such a belief in method that, if only the method be good, the practice of it seems to hallow the teacher. An inferior man is never. a good teacher. But he can conceal his injurious inferiority, which secretly poisons the pupil, behind an excellent method or, an equally brilliant intellectual capacity. Naturally the pupil of riper years desires nothing better than the knowledge of useful methods, because he is already defeated by the general attitude, which believes in the victorious method. He has already learnt that the emptiest head, correctly echoing a method, is the best pupil. His whole environment not only urges but exemplifies the doctrine that all success and happiness are external, and that only the right method is needed to attain the haven of one's desires. Or is the life of his religious instructor likely to demonstrate that happiness which radiates from the treasure of the inner vision? The irrational introverted types are certainly no instructors of a more complete humanity. They lack reason and the ethics of reason, but their lives teach the other possibility, in which our civilization is so deplorably wanting.


     
    Recapitulation of Extraverted Rational Types:

    I term the two preceding types rational or judging types because they are characterized by the supremacy of the reasoning and the judging functions. It is a general distinguishing mark of both types that their life is, to a large extent, subordinated to reasoning judgment. But we must not overlook the point, whether by 'reasoning' we are referring to the standpoint of the individual's subjective psychology, or to the standpoint of the observer, who perceives and judges from without. For such an observer could easily arrive at an opposite judgment, especially if he has a merely intuitive apprehension of the behaviour of the observed, and judges accordingly. In its totality, the life of this type is never dependent upon reasoning judgment alone; it is influenced in almost equal degree by unconscious irrationality. If observation is restricted to behaviour, without any concern for the domestic interior of the individual's consciousness, one may get an even stronger impression of the irrational and accidental character of certain unconscious manifestations in the individual's behaviour than of the reasonableness of his conscious purposes and motivations. I, therefore, base my judgment upon what the individual feels to be his conscious psychology. But I am prepared to grant that we may equally well entertain a precisely opposite conception of such a psychology, and present it accordingly. I am also convinced that, had I myself chanced to possess a different individual psychology, I should have described the rational types in the reversed way, from the standpoint of the unconscious—as irrational, therefore. This circumstance aggravates the difficulty of a lucid presentation of psychological matters to a degree not to be underestimated, and immeasurably increases the possibility of misunderstandings. The discussions which develop from these misunderstandings are, as a rule, quite hopeless, since the real issue is never joined, each side speaking, as it were, in a different tongue. Such experience is merely one reason the more for basing my presentation upon the subjective conscious psychology of the individual, since there, at least, one has a definite objective footing, which completely drops away the moment we try to ground psychological principles upon the unconscious. For the observed, in this case, could undertake no kind of cooperation, because there is nothing of which he is not more informed than his own unconscious. The judgment would entirely devolve upon the observer—a certain guarantee that its basis would be his own individual psychology, which would infallibly be imposed upon the observed. To my mind, this is the case in the psychologies both of Freud and of Adler. The individual is completely at the mercy of the arbitrary discretion of his observing critic—which can never be the case when the conscious psychology of the observed is accepted as the basis. After all, he is the only competent judge, since he alone knows his own motives.

    The reasonableness that characterizes the conscious management of life in both these types, involves a conscious exclusion of the accidental and nonrational. Reasoning judgment, in such a psychology, represents a power that coerces the untidy and accidental things of life into definite forms; such at least is its aim. Thus, on the one hand, a definite choice is made among the possibilities of life, since only the rational choice is consciously accepted; but, on the other hand, the independence and influence of those psychic functions which perceive life's happenings are essentially restricted. This limitation of sensation and intuition is, of course, not absolute. These functions exist, for they are universal; but their products are subject to the choice of the reasoning judgment. It is not the absolute strength of sensation, for instance, which turns the scales in the motivation of action, but judgment, Thus, in a certain sense, the perceiving-functions share the same fate as feeling in the case of the first type, or thinking in that of the second. They are relatively repressed, and therefore in an inferior state of differentiation. This circumstance gives a particular stamp to the unconscious of both our types; what such men do consciously and intentionally accords with reason (their reason of course), but what happens to them corresponds either with infantile, primitive sensations, or with similarly archaic intuitions. I will try to make clear what I mean by these latter concepts in the sections that follow. At all events, that which happens to this type is irrational (from their own standpoint of course). Now, since there are vast numbers of men whose lives consist in what happens to them more than in actions resulting from reasoned intention, it might conceivably happen, that such a man, after careful analysis, would describe both our types as irrational. We must grant him, however, that only too often a man's unconscious makes a far stronger impression upon one than his conscious, and that his actions often have considerably more weight and meaning than his reasoned motivations.

    The rationality of both types is orientated objectively, and depends upon objective data. Their reasonableness corresponds with what passes as reasonable from the collective standpoint. Subjectively they consider nothing rational save what is generally considered as such. But reason is also very largely subjective and individual. In our case this share is repressed—increasingly so, in fact, the more the significance of the object is exalted, Both the subject and subjective reason, therefore, are always threatened with repression and, when it descends, they fall under the tyranny of the unconscious, which in this case possesses most unpleasant qualities. We have already spoken of its thinking. But, in addition, there are primitive sensations, which reveal themselves in compulsive forms, as, for instance, an abnormal compulsive pleasure seeking in every conceivable direction ; there are also primitive intuitions, which can become a positive torture to the individuals concerned, not to mention their entourage. Everything disagreeable and painful, everything disgusting, ugly, and evil is scented out or suspected, and these as a rule only correspond with half-truths, than which nothing is more calculated to create misunderstandings of the most poisonous kind. The powerful influence of the opposing unconscious contents necessarily brings about a frequent interruption of the rational conscious government, namely, a striking subservience to the element of chance, so that, either by virtue of their sensational value or unconscious significance, accidental happenings acquire a compelling influence.


     
    Recapitulation of Introverted Rational Types:

    Both the foregoing types are rational, since they are founded upon reasoning, judging functions. Reasoning judgment is based not merely upon objective, but also upon subjective, data. But the predominance of one or other factor, conditioned by a psychic disposition often existing from early youth, deflects the reasoning function. For a judgment to be really reasonable it should have equal reference to both the objective and the subjective factors, and be able to do justice to both. This, however, would be an ideal case, and would presuppose a uniform development of both extraversion and introversion. But either movement excludes the other, and, so long as this dilemma persists, they cannot possibly exist side by, side, but at the most successively. Under ordinary circumstances, therefore, an ideal reason is impossible. A rational type has always a typical reasonal variation. Thus, the introverted rational types unquestionably have a reasoning judgment, only it is a judgment whose leading note is subjective. The laws of logic are not necessarily deflected, since its onesidedness lies in the premise. The premise is the predominance of the subjective factor existing beneath every conclusion and colouring every judgment. Its superior value as compared with the objective factor is self-evident from the beginning. As already stated, it is not just a question of value bestowed, but of a natural disposition existing before all rational valuation. Hence, to the introvert rational judgment necessarily appears to have many nuances which differentiate it from that of the extravert. Thus, to the introvert, to mention the most general instance, that chain of reasoning which leads to the subjective factor appears rather more reasonable than that which leads to the object. This difference, which in the individual case is practically insignificant, indeed almost unnoticeable, effects unbridgeable oppositions in the gross; these are the more irritating, the less we are aware of the minimal standpoint displacement produced by the psychological premise in the individual case. A capital error regularly creeps in here, for one labours to prove a fallacy in the conclusion, instead of realizing the difference of the psychological premise. Such a realization is a difficult matter for every rational type, since it undermines the apparent, absolute validity of his own principle, and delivers him over to its antithesis, which certainly amounts to a catastrophe.

    Almost more even than the extraverted is the introverted type subject to misunderstanding: not so much because the extravert is a more merciless or critical adversary, than he himself can easily be, but because the style of the epoch in which he himself participates is against him. Not in relation to the extraverted type, but as against our general accidental world-philosophy, he finds himself in the minority, not of course numerically, but from the evidence of his own feeling. In so far as he is a convinced participator in the general style, he undermines his own foundations, since the present style, with its almost exclusive acknowledgment of the visible and the tangible, is opposed to his principle. Because of its invisibility, he is obliged to depreciate the subjective factor, and to force himself to join in the extraverted overvaluation of the object. He himself sets the subjective factor at too low a value, and his feelings of inferiority are his chastisement for this sin. Little wonder, therefore, that it is precisely our epoch, and particularly those movements which are somewhat ahead of the time, that reveal the subjective factor in every kind of exaggerated, crude and grotesque form of expression. I refer to the art of the present day.

    The undervaluation of his own principle makes the introvert egotistical, and forces upon him the psychology of the oppressed. The more egotistical he becomes, the stronger his impression grows that these others, who are apparently able, without qualms, to conform with the present style, are the oppressors against whom he must guard and protect himself. He does not usually perceive that he commits his capital mistake in not depending upon the subjective factor with that same loyalty and devotion with which the extravert follows the object By the undervaluation of his own principle, his penchant towards egoism becomes unavoidable, which, of course, richly deserves the prejudice of the extravert. Were he only to remain true to his own principle, the judment of 'egoist' would be radically false; for the justification of his attitude would be established by its general efficacy, and all misunderstandings dissipated.


    All Irrationality is split into two halves, Sensation and Intuition.

    Sensation deals with the "what is" that is tangible. The weight of a brick. The smell of the night air.

     
    Sensation

    According to my conception, this is one of the basic psychological functions (v. Function). Wundt also reckons sensation among the elementary psychic phenomena.

    Sensation, or sensing, is that psychological function which transmits a physical stimulus to perception. It is, therefore, identical with perception. Sensation must be strictly distinguished from feeling, since the latter is an entirely different process, although it may, for instance, be associated with sensation as 'feeling-tone'. Sensation is related not only to the outer stimuli, but also to the inner, i.e. to changes in the internal organs.

    Primarily, therefore, sensation is sense-perception, i.e. perception transmitted via the sense organs and 'bodily senses' (kinæsthetic, vaso-motor sensation, etc.). On the one hand, it is an element of presentation, since it transmits to the presenting function the perceived image of the outer object; on the other hand, it is an element of feeling, because through the perception of bodily changes it lends the character of affect to feeling, (v. Affect). Because sensation transmits physical changes to consciousness, it also represents the physiological impulse. But it is not identical with it, since it is merely a perceptive function.

    A distinction must be made between sensuous, or concrete, and abstract sensation. The former includes the forms above alluded to, whereas the latter designates an abstracted kind of sensation, i.e. a sensation that is separated from other psychological elements. For concrete sensation never appears as 'pure' sensation, but is always mixed up with presentations, feelings, and thoughts. Abstract sensation, on the contrary, represents a differentiated kind of perception which might be termed 'æsthetic' in so far as it follows its own principle and is as equally detached from every admixture of the differences of the perceived object as from the subjective admixture of feeling and thought, thus raising itself to a degree of purity which is never attained by concrete sensation. The concrete sensation of a flower, for instance, transmits not only the perception of the flower itself, but also an image of the stem, leaves, habitat, etc. It is also directly mingled with the feelings of pleasure or dislike which the sight of it provokes, or with the scent-perceptions simultaneously excited, or with thoughts concerning its botanical classification.

    Abstract sensation, on the other hand, immediately picks out the most salient sensuous attribute of the flower, as for instance its brilliant redness, and makes it the sole or at least the principal content of consciousness, entirely detached from all the other admixtures alluded to above. Abstract sensation is mainly suited to the artist. Like every abstraction, it is a product of the differentiation of function: hence there is nothing primordial about it. The primordial form of the function is always concrete, i.e. blended (v. Archaism, and Concretism). Concrete sensation as such is a reactive phenomenon, while abstract sensation, like every abstraction, is always linked up with the will, i.e. the element of direction. The will that is directed towards the abstraction of sensation is both the expression and the activity of the æsthetic sensational attitude.

    Sensation is a prominent characteristic both in the child and the primitive, in so far as it always predominates over thinking and feeling, though not necessarily over intuition. For I regard sensation as conscious, and intuition as unconscious, perception. For me, sensation and intuition represent a pair of opposites, or two mutually compensating functions, like thinking and feeling. Thinking and feeling as independent functions are developed, both ontogenetically and phylogenetically, from sensation (and equally, of course, from intuition as the necessary counterpart of sensation).

    In so far as sensation is an elementary phenomenon, it is something absolutely given, something that, in contrast to thinking and feeling, is not subject to the laws of reason. I therefore term it an irrational (q.v.) function, although reason contrives to assimilate a great number of sensations into rational associations.

    A man whose whole attitude is orientated by the principle of sensation belongs to the sensation type (v. Types).

    Normal sensations are proportionate, i.e. their value approximately corresponds with the intensity of the physical stimulus. Pathological sensations are disproportionate, i.e. either abnormally weak or abnormally strong: in the former case they are inhibited, in the latter exaggerated. The inhibition is the result of the predominance of another function; the exaggeration proceeds from an abnormal amalgamation with another function, e.g. a blending with a still undifferentiated feeling or thinking function. In such a case, the exaggeration of sensation ceases as soon as the function with which sensation is fused is differentiated in its own right.

    The psychology of the neuroses yields extremely illuminating examples of this, where, for instance, a strong sexualization (Freud) of other functions very often prevails, i.e. a blending of sexual sensation with other functions.


    Intuition deals with the "what is" that is intangible. Someone else is gonna have to handle this one...

     
    Intuition:

    (From intueri = to look into or upon) is, according to my view, a basic psychological function (v. Function). It is that psychological function which transmits perceptions in an unconscious way. Everything, whether outer or inner objects or their associations, Can be the object of this perception. Intuition has this peculiar quality: it is neither sensation, nor feeling, nor intellectual conclusion, although it may appear in any of these forms. Through intuition anyone content is presented as a complete whole, without our being able to explain or discover in what way this content has been arrived at Intuition is a kind of instinctive apprehension, irrespective of the nature of its contents. Like sensation (q.v.) it is an irrational (q.v.) perceptive function. Its contents, like those of sensation, have the character of being given, in contrast to the 'derived' or 'deduced' character of feeling and thinking contents. Intuitive cognition, therefore, possesses an intrinsic character of certainty and conviction which enabled Spinoza to uphold the 'scientia intuitiva' as the highest form of cognition.[61] Intuition has this quality in common with sensation, whose physical foundation is the ground and origin of its certitude. In the same way, the certainty of intuition depends upon a definite psychic matter of fact, of whose origin and state of readiness, however, the subject was quite unconscious.

    Intuition appears either in a subjective or an objective form: the former is a perception of unconscious psychic facts whose origin is essentially subjective; the latter is a perception of facts which depend upon subliminal perceptions of the object and upon the thoughts and feelings occasioned thereby.

    Concrete and abstract forms of intuition may be distinguished according to the degree of participation on the part of sensation. Concrete intuition carries perceptions which are concerned with the actuality of things, while abstract intuition transmits the perceptions of ideational associations. Concrete intuition is a reactive process, since it follows directly from the given circumstances; whereas abstract intuition, like abstract sensation, necessitates a certain element of direction, an act of will or a purpose.

    In common with sensation, intuition is a characteristic of infantile and primitive psychology. As against the strength and sudden appearance of sense-impression it transmits the perception of mythological images, the precursors of ideas (q.v.).

    Intuition maintains a compensatory function to sensation, and, like sensation, it is the maternal soil from which thinking and feeling are developed in the form of rational functions. Intuition is an irrational function, notwithstanding the fact that many intuitions may subsequently be split up into their component elements, whereby their origin and appearance can also be made to harmonize with the laws of reason. Everyone whose general attitude is orientated by the principle of intuition, i.e. perception by way of the unconscious, belongs to the intuitive type [62] (v. Type).

    According to the manner in which intuition is employed, whether directed within in the service of cognition and inner perception or without in the service of action and accomplishment, the introverted and extraverted intuitive types can be differentiated.

    In abnormal cases a well-marked coalescence with, and an equally great determination by, the contents of the collective unconscious declares itself: this may give the intuitive type an extremely irrational and unintelligible appearance.


    All Rationality is split into two halves, Logic and Ethics.

    Distinguishing between the two of these will become easier as things get broken down more. I see the former as digital and the latter as analog. Creating a map of an area by only drawing lines will be different than creating a map of an area by only drawing curves, and a visual representation of Euclidian geometry will be different from a visual representation of fractal geometry, yet a sense of inherent organization will be clearly visible in both. A .wav file is a digital representation of an analog sound form that only works because of the usage of hundreds of millions of binary dichotomizations.

  2. #2
    fka lungs ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,630
    Mentioned
    635 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    this is pretty awesome. i read the whole thing without my attention drifting off and don't see anything i disagree with. a little lost on the math and .wav file metaphor stuff but i think i get the gist. looking forward to seeing more.

  3. #3
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    nice

  4. #4
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default the flood of Jung continues for all that is elemental

    PART II: THE SLIGHTLY LESS BASICS


    Sensation, Intuition, Logic, and Ethics can be abbreviated as S, N, T, and F respectively. For all of the aforementioned, there are two main approaches. One of them deals in discrete and compartmentalized pieces of the world. The other deals in seeing the whole of everything, absolutely boundless. The term "bodies" is commonly used for the former approach, and "fields" is used for the latter. A "bodies" approach to S, N, T, and F is denoted by affixing a lowercase "e" to the end of each respective letter; thus, Se, Ne, Te, and Fe. A "fields" approach to S, N, T, and F is denoted by affixing a lowercase "i" to the end of each respective letter; thus, Si, Ni, Ti, and Fi.

    Extroverted Sensing, or Se, is an approach to Sensing that effectively weighs and identifies all manner of objects. I see a tree outside. Can I climb it? Does the wood look rotted in crucial places that would cause the branch to collapse if I pull myself off the ground while holding that branch?

     
    Sensation:

    Sensation, in the extraverted attitude, is most definitely conditioned by the object. As sense-perception, sensation is naturally dependent upon the object. But, just as naturally, it is also dependent upon the subject; hence, there is also a subjective sensation, which after its kind is entirely different from the objective. In the extraverted attitude this subjective share of sensation, in so far as its conscious application is concerned, is either inhibited or repressed. As an irrational function, sensation is equally repressed, whenever a rational function, thinking or feeling, possesses the priority, ie. it can be said to have a conscious function, only in so far as the rational attitude of consciousness permits accidental perceptions to become conscious contents; in short, realizes them. The function of sense is, of course, absolute in the stricter sense; for example, everything is seen or heard to the farthest physiological possibility, but not everything attains that threshold value which a perception must possess in order to be also apperceived. It is a different matter when sensation itself possesses priority, instead of merely seconding another function. In this case, no element of objective sensation is excluded and nothing repressed (with the exception of the subjective share already mentioned). Sensation has a preferential objective determination, and those objects which release the strongest sensation are decisive for the individual's psychology. The result of this is a pronounced sensuous hold to the object. Sensation, therefore, is a vital function, equipped with the potentest [sic] vital instinct. In so far as objects release sensations, they matter; and, in so far as it lies within the power of sensation, they are also fully accepted into consciousness, whether compatible with reasoned judgment or not. As a function its sole criterion of value is the strength of the sensation as conditioned by its objective qualities. Accordingly, all objective processes, in so far as they release sensations at all, make their appearance in consciousness. It is, however, only concrete, sensuously perceived objects or processes which excite sensations in the extraverted attitude; exclusively those, in fact, which everyone in all times and places would sense as concrete. Hence, the orientation of such an individual corresponds with purely concrete reality. The judging, rational functions are subordinated to the concrete facts of sensation, and, accordingly, possess the qualities of inferior differentiation, i.e. they are marked by a certain negativity, with infantile and archaic tendencies. The function most affected by the repression, is, naturally, the one standing opposite to sensation, viz. intuition, the function of unconscious perception.


    The Extraverted Sensation Type:

    No other human type can equal the extraverted sensation-type in realism. His sense for objective facts is extraordinarily developed. His life is an accumulation of actual experience with concrete objects, and the more pronounced he is, the less use does he make of his experience. In certain cases the events of his life hardly deserve the name 'experience'. He knows no better use for this sensed 'experience' than to make it serve as a guide to fresh sensations; anything in the least 'new' that comes within his circle of interest is forthwith turned to a sensational account and is made to serve this end. In so far as one is disposed to regard a highly developed sense for sheer actuality as very reasonable, will such men be esteemed rational. In reality, however, this is by no means the case, since they are equally subject to the sensation of irrational, chance happenings, as they are to rational behaviour.

    Such a type—the majority arc men apparently—does not, of course, believe himself to be 'subject' to sensation. He would be much more inclined to ridicule this view as altogether inconclusive, since, from his standpoint, sensation is the concrete manifestation of life—it is simply the fulness [sic] of actual living. His aim is concrete enjoyment, and his morality is similarly orientated. For true enjoyment has its own special morality, its own moderation and lawfulness, its own unselfishness and devotedness. It by no means follows that he is just sensual or gross, for he may differentiate his sensation to the finest pitch of æsthetic purity without being the least unfaithful, even in his most abstract sensations, to his principle of objective sensation. Wulfen's Cicerone des r¨cksichtlosen Lebensgenusses is the unvarnished confession of a type of this sort. From this point of view the book seems to me worth reading.

    Upon the lower levels this is the man of tangible reality, with little tendency either for reflection or commanding purpose. To sense the object, to have and if possible to enjoy sensations, is his constant motive. He is by no means unlovable; on the contrary, he frequently has a charming and lively capacity for enjoyment; he is sometimes a jolly fellow, and often a refined æsthete.

    In the former case, the great problems of life hinge upon a good or indifferent dinner; in the latter, they are questions of good taste. When he 'senses', everything essential has been said and done. Nothing can be more than concrete and actual; conjectures that transcend or go beyond the concrete are only permitted on condition that they enhance sensation. This need not be in any way a pleasurable reinforcement, since this type is not a common voluptuary; he merely desires the strongest sensation, and this, by his very nature, he can receive only from without. What comes from within seems to him morbid and objectionable. In so far as lie thinks and feels, he always reduces down to objective foundations, i.e. to influences coming from the object, quite unperturbed by the most violent departures from logic. Tangible reality, under any conditions, makes him breathe again. In this respect he is unexpectedly credulous. He will, without hesitation, relate an obvious psychogenic symptom to the falling barometer, while the existence of a psychic conflict seems to him a fantastic abnormality. His love is incontestably rooted in the manifest attractions of the object. In so far as he is normal, he is conspicuously adjusted to positive reality—conspicuously, because his adjustment is always visible. His ideal is the actual; in this respect he is considerate. He has no ideals related to ideas—he has, therefore, no sort of ground for maintaining a hostile attitude towards the reality of things and facts. This expresses itself in all the externals of his life. He dresses well, according to his circumstances ; he keeps a good table for his friends, who are either made comfortable or at least given to understand that his fastidious taste is obliged to impose certain claims upon his entourage. He even convinces one that certain sacrifices are decidedly worth while for the sake of style.

    But the more sensation predominates, so that the sensing subject disappears behind the sensation, the more unsatisfactory does this type become. Either he develops into a crude pleasure-seeker or he becomes an unscrupulous, designing sybarite. Although the object is entirely indispensable to him, yet, as something existing in and through itself, it is none the less depreciated. It is ruthlessly violated and essentially ignored, since now its sole use is to stimulate sensation. The hold upon the object is pushed to the utmost limit. The unconscious is, accordingly, forced out of its me[accent]tier as a compensatory function and driven into open opposition. But, above all, the repressed intuitions begin to assert themselves in the form of projections upon the object. The strangest conjectures arise; in the case of a sexual object, jealous phantasies and anxiety-states play a great role. More acute cases develop every sort of phobia, and especially compulsive symptoms. The pathological contents have a remarkable air of unreality, with a frequent moral or religious colouring. A pettifogging captiousness often develops, or an absurdly scrupulous morality coupled with a primitive, superstitious and 'magical' religiosity, harking back to abstruse rites. All these things have their source in the repressed inferior functions, which, in such cases, stand in harsh opposition to the conscious standpoint; they wear, in fact, an aspect that is all the more striking because they appear to rest upon the most absurd suppositions, in complete contrast to the conscious sense of reality. The whole culture of thought and feeling seems, in this second personality, to be twisted into a morbid primitiveness; reason is hair-splitting sophistry—morality is dreary moralizing and palpable Pharisaism—religion is absurd superstition—intuition, the noblest of human gifts, is a mere personal subtlety, a sniffing into every corner; instead of searching the horizon, it recedes to the narrowest gauge of human meanness.

    The specially compulsive character of the neurotic symptoms represent the unconscious counterweight to the laisser aller morality of a purely sensational attitude, which, from the standpoint of rational judgment, accepts without discrimination, everything that happens. Although this lack of basic principles in the sensation-type does not argue an absolute lawlessness and lack of restraint, it at least deprives him of the quite essential restraining power of judgment. Rational judgment represents a conscious coercion, which the rational type appears to impose upon himself of his own free will. This compulsion overtakes the sensation-type from the unconscious. Moreover, the rational type's link to the object, from the very existence of a judgment, never means such an unconditioned relation as that which the sensation-type has with the object. When his attitude reaches an abnormal one-sidedness, he is in danger of falling just as deeply into the arms of the unconscious as he consciously clings to the object. When he becomes neurotic, he is much harder to treat in the rational way, because the functions to which the physician must appeal are in a relatively undifferentiated state; hence little or no trust can be placed in them. Special means of bringing emotional pressure to bear are often needed to make him at all conscious.


    Introverted Sensing, or Si, is an approach to Sensing that takes in everything at once and has that specific whole as identifiable. The smell of the spring air, the tangible wetness and the smell of the earth itself all at once. Different from the winter in so many ways.

     
    Sensation:

    Sensation, which in obedience to its whole nature is concerned with the object and the objective stimulus, also undergoes a considerable modification in the introverted attitude. It, too, has a subjective factor, for beside the object sensed there stands a sensing subject, who contributes his subjective disposition to the objective stimulus. In the introverted attitude sensation is definitely based upon the subjective portion of perception. What is meant by this finds its best illustration in the reproduction of objects in art. When, for instance, several painters undertake to paint one and the same landscape, with a sincere attempt to reproduce it faithfully, each painting will none the less differ from the rest, not merely by virtue of a more or less developed ability, but chiefly because of a different vision; there will even appear in some of the paintings a decided psychic variation, both in general mood and in treatment of colour and form. Such qualities betray a more or less influential cooperation of the subjective factor. The subjective factor of sensation is essentially the same as in the other functions already spoken of. It is an unconscious disposition, which alters the sense-perception at its very source, thus depriving it of the character of a purely objective influence. In this case, sensation is related primarily to the subject, and only secondarily to the object. How extraordinarily strong the subjective factor can be is shown most clearly in art. The ascendancy of the subjective factor occasionally achieves a complete suppression of the mere influence of the object; but none the less sensation remains sensation, although it has come to be a perception of the subjective factor, and the effect of the object has sunk to the level of a mere stimulant. Introverted sensation develops in accordance with this subjective direction. A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus. Subjective perception differs remarkably from the objective. It is either not found at all in the object, or, at most, merely suggested by it; it can, however, be similar to the sensation of other men, although not immediately derived from the objective behaviour of things. It does not impress one as a mere product of consciousness—it is too genuine for that. But it makes a definite psychic impression, since elements of a higher psychic order are perceptible to it. This order, however, does not coincide with the contents of consciousness. It is concerned with presuppositions, or dispositions of the collective unconscious, with mythological images, with primal possibilities of ideas. The character of significance and meaning clings to subjective perception. It says more than the mere image of the object, though naturally only to him for whom the subjective factor has some meaning. To another, a reproduced subjective impression seems to suffer from the defect of possessing insufficient similarity with the object; it seems, therefore, to have failed in its purpose. Subjective sensation apprehends the background of the physical world rather than its surface. The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them. Such a consciousness would see the becoming and the passing of things beside their present and momentary existence, and not only that, but at the same time it would also see that Other, which was before their becoming and will be after their passing hence. To this consciousness the present moment is improbable. This is, of course, only a simile, of which, however, I had need to give some sort of illustration of the peculiar nature of introverted sensation. Introverted sensation conveys an image whose effect is not so much to reproduce the object as to throw over it a wrapping whose lustre is derived from age-old subjective experience and the still unborn future event. Thus, mere sense impression develops into the depth of the meaningful, while extraverted sensation seizes only the momentary and manifest existence of things.


    The Introverted Sensation Type:

    The priority of introverted sensation produces a definite type, which is characterized by certain peculiarities. It is an irrational type, inasmuch as its selection among occurrences is not primarily rational, but is guided rather by what just happens. Whereas, the extraverted sensation-type is determined by the intensity of the objective influence, the introverted type is orientated by the intensity of the subjective sensation-constituent released by the objective stimulus. Obviously, therefore, no sort of proportional relation exists between object and sensation, but something that is apparently quite irregular and arbitrary judging from without, therefore, it is practically impossible to foretell what will make an impression and what will not. If there were present a capacity and readiness for expression in any way commensurate with the strength of sensation, the irrationality of this type would be extremely evident. This is the case, for instance, when the individual is a creative artist. But, since this is the exception, it usually happens that the characteristic introverted difficulty of expression also conceals his irrationality. On the contrary, he may actually stand out by the very calmness and passivity of his demeanour, or by his rational self-control. This peculiarity, which often leads the superficial judgment astray, is really due to his unrelatedness to objects. Normally the object is not consciously depreciated in the least, but its stimulus is removed from it, because it is immediately replaced by a subjective reaction, which is no longer related to the reality of the object. This, of course, has the same effect as a depreciation of the object. Such a type can easily make one question why one should exist at all; or why objects in general should have any right to existence, since everything essential happens without the object. This doubt may be justified in extreme cases, though not in the normal, since the objective stimulus is indispensable to his sensation, only it produces something different from what was to be surmised from the external state of affairs. Considered from without, it looks as though the effect of the object did not obtrude itself upon the subject. This impression is so far correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious, thus snatching away the effect of the object. This intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to shield himself directly from any possible influence of the object. In any aggravated or well-marked case, such a protective guard is also actually present. Even with only a slight reinforcement of the unconscious, the subjective constituent of sensation becomes so alive that it almost completely obscures the objective influence. The results of this are, on the one hand, a feeling of complete depreciation on the part of the object, and, on the other, an illusory conception of reality on the part of the subject, which in morbid cases may even reach the point of a complete inability to discriminate between the real object and the subjective perception. Although so vital a distinction vanishes completely only in a practically psychotic state, yet long before that point is reached subjective perception may influence thought, feeling, and action to an extreme degree, in spite of the fact that the object is clearly seen in its fullest reality. Whenever the objective influence does succeed in forcing its way into the subject—as the result of particular circumstances of special intensity, or because of a more perfect analogy with the unconscious image—even the normal example of this type is induced to act in accordance with his unconscious model. Such action has an illusory quality in relation to objective reality, and therefore has a very odd and strange character. It instantly reveals the anti-real subjectivity of the type, But, where the influence of the object does not entirely succeed, it encounters a benevolent neutrality, disclosing little sympathy, yet constantly striving to reassure and adjust. The too-low is raised a little, the too-high is made a little lower; the enthusiastic is damped, the extravagant restrained; and the unusual brought within the 'correct' formula: all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. Thus, this type becomes an affliction to his circle, just in so far as his entire harmlessness is no longer above suspicion. But, if the latter should be the case, the individual readily becomes a victim to the aggressiveness and ambitions of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused, for which they usually take vengeance at the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled stubbornness and resistance. When there exists no capacity for artistic expression, all impressions sink into the inner depths, whence they hold consciousness under a spell, removing any possibility it might have had of mastering the fascinating impression by means of conscious expression. Relatively speaking, this type has only archaic possibilities of expression for the disposal of his impressions; thought and feeling are relatively unconscious, and, in so far as they have a certain consciousness, they only serve in the necessary, banal, everyday expressions. Hence as conscious functions, they are wholly unfitted to give any adequate rendering of the subjective perceptions. This type, therefore, is uncommonly inaccessible to an objective understanding and he fares no better in the understanding of himself.

    Above all, his development estranges him from the reality of the object, handing him over to his subjective perceptions, which orientate his consciousness in accordance with an archaic reality, although his deficiency in comparative judgment keeps him wholly unaware of this fact. Actually he moves in a mythological world, where men animals, railways, houses, rivers, and mountains appear partly as benevolent deities and partly as malevolent demons. That thus they, appear to him never enters his mind, although their effect upon his judgments and acts can bear no other interpretation. He judges and acts as though he had such powers to deal with; but this begins to strike him only when he discovers that his sensations are totally different from reality. If his tendency is to reason objectively, he will sense this difference as morbid; but if, on the other hand, he remains faithful to his irrationality, and is prepared to grant his sensation reality value, the objective world will appear a mere make-belief and a comedy. Only in extreme cases, however, is this dilemma reached. As a rule, the individual acquiesces in his isolation and in the banality of the reality, which, however, he unconsciously treats archaically.

    His unconscious is distinguished chiefly by the repression of intuition, which thereby acquires an extraverted and archaic character. Whereas true extraverted intuition has a characteristic resourcefulness, and a 'good nose' for every possibility in objective reality, this archaic, extraverted intuition has an amazing flair for every ambiguous, gloomy, dirty, and dangerous possibility in the background of reality. In the presence of this intuition the real and conscious intention of the object has no significance; it will peer behind every possible archaic antecedent of such an intention. It possesses, therefore, something dangerous, something actually undermining, which often stands in most vivid contrast to the gentle benevolence of consciousness. So long as the individual is not too aloof from the object, the unconscious intuition effects a wholesome compensation to the rather fantastic and over credulous attitude of consciousness. But as soon as the unconscious becomes antagonistic to consciousness, such intuitions come to the surface and expand their nefarious influence: they force themselves compellingly upon the individual, releasing compulsive ideas about objects of the most perverse kind. The neurosis arising from this sequence of events is usually a compulsion neurosis, in which the hysterical characters recede and are obscured by symptoms of exhaustion.


    Extroverted Intuition, or Ne, is something I apparently suck ass at describing. Take it away, Uncle Carl...

     
    Intuition:

    Intuition as the function of unconscious perception is wholly directed upon outer objects in the extraverted attitude. Because, in the main, intuition is an unconscious process, the conscious apprehension of its nature is a very difficult matter. In consciousness, the intuitive function is represented by a certain attitude of expectation, a perceptive and penetrating vision, wherein only the subsequent result can prove, in every case, how much was 'perceived-into', and how much actually lay in the object.

    Just as sensation, when given the priority, is not a mere reactive process of no further importance for the object, but is almost an action which seizes and shapes the object, so it is with intuition, which is by no means a mere perception, or awareness, but an active, creative process that builds into the object just as much as it takes out. But, because this process extracts the perception unconsciously, it also produces an unconscious effect in the object. The primary function of intuition is to transmit mere images, or perceptions of relations and conditions, which could be gained by the other functions, either not at all, or only by very roundabout ways. Such images have the value of definite discernments, and have a decisive bearing upon action, whenever intuition is given the chief weight; in which case, psychic adaptation is based almost exclusively upon intuition. Thinking, feeling, and sensation are relatively repressed; of these, sensation is the one principally affected, because, as the conscious function of sense, it offers the greatest obstacle to intuition. Sensation disturbs intuition's clear, unbiassed, na[umlaut]ive awareness with its importunate sensuous stimuli; for these direct the glance upon the physical superficies, hence upon the very things round and beyond which intuition tries to peer. But since intuition, in the extraverted attitude, has a prevailingly objective orientation, it actually comes very near to sensation; indeed, the expectant attitude towards outer objects may, with almost equal probability, avail itself of sensation. Hence, for intuition really to become paramount, sensation must to a large extent be suppressed. I am now speaking of sensation as the simple and direct sense-reaction, an almost definite physiological and psychic datum. This must be expressly established beforehand, because, if I ask the intuitive how he is orientated, he will speak of things which are quite indistinguishable from sense-perceptions. Frequently he will even make use of the term 'sensation'. He actually has sensations, but he is not guided by them per se, merely using them as directing-points for his distant vision. They are selected by unconscious expectation. Not the strongest sensation, in the physiological sense, obtains the crucial value, but any sensation whatsoever whose value happens to become considerably enhanced by reason of the intuitive's unconscious attitude. In this way it may eventually attain the leading position, appearing to the intuitive's consciousness indistinguishable from a pure sensation. But actually it is not so.

    Just as extraverted sensation strives to reach the highest pitch of actuality, because only thus can the appearance of a complete life be created, so intuition tries to encompass the greatest possibilities, since only through the awareness of possibilities is intuition fullysatisfied. Intuition seeks to discover possibilities in the objective situation; hence as a mere tributary function (viz. when not in the position of priority) it is also the instrument which, in the presence of a hopelessly blocked situation, works automatically towards the issue, which no other function could discover. Where intuition has the priority, every ordinary situation in life seems like a closed room, which intuition has to open. It is constantly seeking outlets and fresh possibilities in external life. In a very short time every actual situation becomes a prison to the intuitive; it burdens him like a chain, prompting a compelling need for solution. At times objects would seem to have an almost exaggerated value, should they chance to represent the idea of a severance or release that might lead to the discovery of a new possibility. Yet no sooner have they performed their office, serving intuition as a ladder or a bridge, than they appear to have no further value, and are discarded as mere burdensome appendages. A fact is acknowledged only in so far as it opens up fresh possibilities of advancing beyond it and of releasing the individual from its operation. Emerging possibilities are compelling motives from which intuition cannot escape and to which all else must be sacrificed.


    The Extraverted Intuitive Type:

    Whenever intuition predominates, a particular and unmistakable psychology presents itself. Because intuition is orientated by the object, a decided dependence upon external situations is discernible, but it has an altogether different character from the dependence of the sensational type. The intuitive is never to be found among the generally recognized reality values, but he is always present where possibilities exist. He has a keen nose for things in the bud pregnant with future promise. He can never exist in stable, long-established conditions of generally acknowledged though limited value: because his eye is constantly ranging for new possibilities, stable conditions have an air of impending suffocation. He seizes hold of new objects and new ways with eager intensity, sometimes with extraordinary enthusiasm, only to abandon them cold-bloodedly, without regard and apparently without remembrance, as soon as their range becomes clearly defined and a promise of any considerable future development no longer clings to them. As long as a possibility exists, the intuitive is bound to it with thongs of fate. It is as though his whole life went out into the new situation. One gets the impression, which he himself shares, that he has just reached the definitive turning point in his life, and that from now on nothing else can seriously engage his thought and feeling. However reasonable and opportune it may be, and although every conceivable argument speaks in favour of stability, a day will come when nothing will deter him from regarding as a prison, the self-same situation that seemed to promise him freedom and deliverance, and from acting accordingly. Neither reason nor feeling can restrain or discourage him from a new possibility, even though it may run counter to convictions hitherto unquestioned. Thinking and feeling, the indispensable components of conviction, are, with him, inferior functions, possessing no decisive weight; hence they lack the power to offer any lasting. resistance to the force of intuition. And yet these are the only functions that are capable of creating any effectual compensation to the supremacy of intuition, since they can provide the intuitive with that judgment in which his type is altogether lacking. The morality of the intuitive is governed neither by intellect nor by feeling; he has his own characteristic morality, which consists in a loyalty to his intuitive view of things and a voluntary submission to its authority, Consideration for the welfare of his neighbours is weak. No solid argument hinges upon their well-being any more than upon his own. Neither can we detect in him any great respect for his neighbour's convictions and customs; in fact, he is not infrequently put down as an immoral and ruthless adventurer. Since his intuition is largely concerned with outer objects, scenting out external possibilities, he readily applies himself to callings wherein he may expand his abilities in many directions. Merchants, contractors, speculators, agents, politicians, etc., commonly belong to this type.

    Apparently this type is more prone to favour women than men; in which case, however, the intuitive activity reveals itself not so much in the professional as in the social sphere. Such women understand the art of utilizing every social opportunity; they establish right social connections; they seek out lovers with possibilities only to abandon everything again for the sake of a new possibility.

    It is at once clear, both from the standpoint of political economy and on grounds of general culture, that such a type is uncommonly important. If well-intentioned, with an orientation to life not purely egoistical, he may render exceptional service as the promoter, if not the initiator of every kind of promising enterprise. He is the natural advocate of every minority that holds the seed of future promise. Because of his capacity, when orientated more towards men than things, to make an intuitive diagnosis of their abilities and range of usefulness, he can also 'make' men. His capacity to inspire his fellow-men with courage, or to kindle enthusiasm for something new, is unrivalled, although he may have forsworn it by the morrow. The more powerful and vivid his intuition, the more is his subject fused and blended with the divined possibility. He animates it; he presents it in plastic shape and with convincing fire; he almost embodies it. It is not a mere histrionic display, but a fate.

    This attitude has immense dangers—all too easily the intuitive may squander his life. He spends himself animating men and things, spreading around him an abundance of life—a life, however, which others live, not he. Were he able to rest with the actual thing, he would gather the fruit of his labours; yet all too soon must he be running after some fresh possibility, quitting his newly planted field, while others reap the harvest. In the end he goes empty away. But when the intuitive lets things reach such a pitch, he also has the unconscious against him. The unconscious of the intuitive has a certain similarity with that of the sensation-type. Thinking and feeling, being relatively repressed, produce infantile and archaic thoughts and feelings in the unconscious, which may be compared with those of the countertype. They likewise come to the surface in the form of intensive projections, and are just as absurd as those of the sensation-type, only to my mind they lack the other's mystical character; they are chiefly concerned with quasi-actual things, in the nature of sexual, financial, and other hazards, as, for instance, suspicions of approaching illness. This difference appears to be due to a repression of the sensations of actual things. These latter usually command attention in the shape of a sudden entanglement with a most unsuitable woman, or, in the case of a woman, with a thoroughly unsuitable man; and this is simply the result of their unwitting contact with the sphere of archaic sensations. But its consequence is an unconsciously compelling tie to an object of incontestable futility. Such an event is already a compulsive symptom, which is also thoroughly characteristic of this type. In common with the sensation-type, he claims a similar freedom and exemption from all restraint, since he suffers no submission of his decisions to rational judgment, relying entirely upon the perception of chance, possibilities. He rids himself of the restrictions of reason, only to fall a victim to unconscious neurotic compulsions in the form of oversubtle, negative reasoning, hair-splitting dialectics, and a compulsive tie to the sensation of the object. His conscious attitude, both to the sensation and the sensed object, is one of sovereign superiority and disregard. Not that he means to be inconsiderate or superior—he simply does not see the object that everyone else sees; his oblivion is similar to that of the sensation-type—only, with the latter, the soul of the object is missed. For this oblivion the object sooner or later takes revenge in the form of hypochondriacal, compulsive ideas, phobias, and every imaginable kind of absurd bodily sensation.


    Introverted Intuition, or Ni, is an approach to Intuition that, more or less, feels out the unbounded intangible.

     
    Intuition:

    Intuition, in the introverted attitude, is directed upon the inner object, a term we might justly apply to the elements of the unconscious. For the relation of inner objects to consciousness is entirely analogous to that of outer objects, although theirs is a psychological and not a physical reality. Inner objects appear to the intuitive perception as subjective images of things, which, though not met with in external experience, really determine the contents of the unconscious, i.e. the collective unconscious, in the last resort. Naturally, in their per se character, these contents are, not accessible to experience, a quality which they have in common with the outer object. For just as outer objects correspond only relatively with our perceptions of them, so the phenomenal forms of the inner object are also relative; products of their (to us) inaccessible essence and of the peculiar nature of the intuitive function. Like sensation, intuition also has its subjective factor, which is suppressed to the farthest limit in the extraverted intuition, but which becomes the decisive factor in the intuition of the introvert. Although this intuition may receive its impetus from outer objects, it is never arrested by the external possibilities, but stays with that factor which the outer object releases within.

    Whereas introverted sensation is mainly confined to the perception of particular innervation phenomena by way of the unconscious, and does not go beyond them, intuition represses this side of the subjective factor and perceives the image which has really occasioned the innervation. Supposing, for instance, a man is overtaken by a psychogenic attack of giddiness. Sensation is arrested by the peculiar character of this innervationdisturbance, perceiving all its qualities, its intensity, its transient course, the nature of its origin and disappearance in their every detail, without raising the smallest inquiry concerning the nature of the thing which produced the disturbance, or advancing anything as to its content. Intuition, on the other hand, receives from the sensation only the impetus to immediate activity; it peers behind the scenes, quickly perceiving the inner image that gave rise to the specific phenomenon, i.e. the attack of vertigo, in the present case. It sees the image of a tottering man pierced through the heart by an arrow. This image fascinates the intuitive activity; it is arrested by it, and seeks to explore every detail of it. It holds fast to the vision, observing with the liveliest interest how the picture changes, unfolds further, and finally fades. In this way introverted intuition perceives all the background processes of consciousness with almost the same distinctness as extraverted sensation senses outer objects. For intuition, therefore, the unconscious images attain to the dignity of things or objects. But, because intuition excludes the cooperation of sensation, it obtains either no knowledge at all or at the best a very inadequate awareness of the innervation-disturbances or of the physical effects produced by the unconscious images. Accordingly, the images appear as though detached from the subject, as though existing in themselves without relation to the person.

    Consequently, in the above-mentioned example, the introverted intuitive, when affected by the giddiness, would not imagine that the perceived image might also in some way refer to himself. Naturally, to one who is rationally orientated, such a thing seems almost unthinkable, but it is none the less a fact, and I have often experienced it in my dealings with this type.

    The remarkable indifference of the extraverted intuitive in respect to outer objects is shared by the introverted intuitive in relation to the inner objects. Just as the extraverted intuitive is continually scenting out new possibilities, which he pursues with an equal unconcern both for his own welfare and for that of others, pressing on quite heedless of human considerations, tearing down what has only just been established in his everlasting search for change, so the introverted intuitive moves from image to image, chasing after every possibility in the teeming womb of the unconscious, without establishing any connection between the phenomenon and himself. Just as the world can never become a moral problem for the man who merely senses it, so the world of images is never a moral problem to the intuitive. To the one just as much as to the other, it is an ae[]sthenic problem, a question of perception, a 'sensation'. In this way, the consciousness of his own bodily existence fades from the introverted intuitive's view, as does its effect upon others. The extraverted standpoint would say of him: 'Reality has no existence for him; he gives himself up to fruitless phantasies'. A perception of the unconscious images, produced in such inexhaustible abundance by the creative energy of life, is of course fruitless from the standpoint of immediate utility. But, since these images represent possible ways of viewing life, which in given circumstances have the power to provide a new energic potential, this function, which to the outer world is the strangest of all, is as indispensable to the total psychic economy as is the corresponding human type to the psychic life of a people. Had this type not existed, there would have been no prophets in Israel.

    Introverted intuition apprehends the images which arise from the a priori, i.e. the inherited foundations of the unconscious mind. These archetypes, whose innermost nature is inaccessible to experience, represent the precipitate of psychic functioning of the whole ancestral line, i.e. the heaped-up, or pooled, experiences of organic existence in general, a million times repeated, and condensed into types. Hence, in these archetypes all experiences are represented which since primeval time have happened on this planet. Their archetypal distinctness is the more marked, the more frequently and intensely they have been experienced. The archetype would be—to borrow from Kant—the noumenon of the image which intuition perceives and, in perceiving, creates.

    Since the unconscious is not just something that lies there, like a psychic caput mortuum, but is something that coexists and experiences inner transformations which are inherently related to general events, introverted intuition, through its perception of inner processes, gives certain data which may possess supreme importance for the comprehension of general occurrences: it can even foresee new possibilities in more or less clear outline, as well as the event which later actually transpires. Its prophetic prevision is to be explained from its relation to the archetypes which represent the law-determined course of all experienceable things.

    The Introverted Intuitive Type:

    The peculiar nature of introverted intuition, when given the priority, also produces a peculiar type of man, viz. the mystical dreamer and seer on the one hand, or the fantastical crank and artist on the other. The latter might be regarded as the normal case, since there is a general tendency of this type to confine himself to the perceptive character of intuition. As a rule, the intuitive stops at perception; perception is his principal problem, and—in the case of a productive artist—the shaping of perception. But the crank contents himself with the intuition by which he himself is shaped and determined. Intensification of intuition naturally often results in an extraordinary aloofness of the individual from tangible reality; he may even become a complete enigma to his own immediate circle.

    If an artist, he reveals extraordinary, remote things in his art, which in iridescent profusion embrace both the significant and the banal, the lovely and the grotesque, the whimsical and the sublime. If not an artist, he is frequently an unappreciated genius, a great man 'gone wrong', a sort of wise simpleton, a figure for 'psychological' novels.

    Although it is not altogether in the line of the introverted intuitive type to make of perception a moral problem, since a certain reinforcement of the rational functions is required for this, yet even a relatively slight differentiation of judgment would suffice to transfer intuitive perception from the purely æsthetic into the moral sphere. A variety of this type is thus produced which differs essentially from its æsthetic form, although none the less characteristic of the introverted intuitive. The moral problem comes into being when the intuitive tries to relate himself to his vision, when he is no longer satisfied with mere perception and its æsthetic shaping and estimation, but confronts the question: What does this mean for me and for the world? What emerges from this vision in the way of a duty or task, either for me or for the world? The pure intuitive who represses judgment or possesses it only under the spell of perception never meets this question fundamentally, since his only problem is the How of perception. He, therefore, finds the moral problem unintelligible, even absurd, and as far as possible forbids his thoughts to dwell upon the disconcerting vision. It is different with the morally orientated intuitive. He concerns himself with the meaning of his vision; he troubles less about its further æsthetic possibilities than about the possible moral effects which emerge from its intrinsic significance. His judgment allows him to discern, though often only darkly, that he, as a man and as a totality, is in some way interrelated with his vision, that it is something which cannot just be perceived but which also would fain become the life of the subject. Through this realization he feels bound to transform his vision into his own life. But, since he tends to rely exclusively upon his vision, his moral effort becomes one-sided; he makes himself and his life symbolic, adapted, it is true, to the inner and eternal meaning of events, but unadapted to the actual present-day reality. Therewith he also deprives himself of any influence upon it, because he remains unintelligible. His language is not that which is commonly spoken—it becomes too subjective. His argument lacks convincing reason. He can only confess or pronounce. His is the 'voice of one crying in the wilderness'.

    The introverted intuitive's chief repression falls upon the sensation of the object. His unconscious is characterized by this fact. For we find in his unconscious a compensatory extraverted sensation function of an archaic character. The unconscious personality may, therefore, best be described as an extraverted sensation-type of a rather low and primitive order. Impulsiveness and unrestraint are the characters of this sensation, combined with an extraordinary dependence upon the sense impression. This latter quality is a compensation to the thin upper air of the conscious attitude, giving it a certain weight, so that complete 'sublimation' is prevented. But if, through a forced exaggeration of the conscious attitude, a complete subordination to the inner perception should develop, the unconscious becomes an opposition, giving rise to compulsive sensations whose excessive dependence upon the object is in frank conflict with the conscious attitude. The form of neurosis is a compulsion-neurosis, exhibiting symptoms that are partly hypochondriacal manifestations, partly hypersensibility of the sense organs and partly compulsive ties to definite persons or other objects.


    Quote Originally Posted by lungs View Post
    this is pretty awesome. i read the whole thing without my attention drifting off and don't see anything i disagree with. a little lost on the math and .wav file metaphor stuff but i think i get the gist. looking forward to seeing more.


    The allusion to the .wav format is a bit present-biased, what came first were compact discs. The information was stored by burning pits into the film of the disc itself, and the pits and flats are physically represented values of one and zero respectively, thus the binary dichotomizations. A .wav file will be very raw and direct in representing this, with .flac being compressed on a data level but effectively lossless as far as audio reproduction goes. 50MB is a reasonable estimate for the average size of the data used to represent a five-minute song; a byte is eight bits, a bit is one binary dichotomization. The .mp3 format is more compact, but the sibilance in the cymbals and the crispness of the music will be noticeably lost when the bitrate dips below 256kbps; anyone who claims otherwise can adjust the figure to "tens of millions" of binary dichotomizations and be on their way. Also, from Jung in the Irrationality section:

    The irrational is a factor of existence which may certainly be pushed back indefinitely by an increasingly elaborate and complicated rational explanation, but in so doing the explanation finally becomes so extravagant and overdone that it passes comprehension, thus reaching the limits of rational thought long before it can ever span the whole world with the laws of reason.
    Sufficiently replicating the Irrational strictly via the Rational is apparently doable, but it sure does take a hell of a lot of work, and I've got a lot of related stuff in the world of aspectonics that I wanna get to once it all comes together enough...

  5. #5
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default the Jung-a-thon comes to a close, and the roots have been laid down

    Extroverted Logic, or Te, is an approach to Logic that deals with fragmented particles of data.

     
    Thinking:

    As a result of the general attitude of extraversion, thinking is orientated by the object and objective data. This orientation of thinking produces a noticeable peculiarity.

    Thinking in general is fed from two sources, firstly from subjective and in the last resort unconscious roots, and secondly from objective data transmitted through sense perceptions.

    Extraverted thinking is conditioned in a larger measure by these latter factors than by the former. judgment always presupposes a criterion ; for the extraverted judgment, the valid and determining criterion is the standard taken from objective conditions, no matter whether this be directly represented by an objectively perceptible fact, or expressed in an objective idea ; for an objective idea, even when subjectively sanctioned, is equally external and objective in origin. Extraverted thinking, therefore, need not necessarily be a merely concretistic thinking it may equally well be a purely ideal thinking, if, for instance, it can be shown that the ideas with which it is engaged are to a great extent borrowed from without, i.e. are transmitted by tradition and education. The criterion of judgment, therefore, as to whether or no a thinking is extraverted, hangs directly upon the question: by which standard is its judgment governed—is it furnished from without, or is its origin subjective? A further criterion is afforded by the direction of the thinker's conclusion, namely, whether or no the thinking has a preferential direction outwards. It is no proof of its extraverted nature that it is preoccupied with concrete objects, since I may be engaging my thoughts with a concrete object, either because I am abstracting my thought from it or because I am concretizing my thought with it. Even if I engage my thinking with concrete things, and to that extent could be described as extraverted, it yet remains both questionable and characteristic as regards the direction my thinking will take; namely, whether in its further course it leads back again to objective data, external facts, and generally accepted ideas, or not. So far as the practical thinking of the merchant, the engineer, or the natural science pioneer is concerned, the objective direction is at once manifest. But in the case of a philosopher it is open to doubt, whenever the course of his thinking is directed towards ideas. In such a case, before deciding, we must further enquire whether these ideas are mere abstractions from objective experience, in which case they would merely represent higher collective concepts, comprising a sum of objective facts ; or whether (if they are clearly not abstractions from immediate experience) they may not be derived from tradition or borrowed from the intellectual atmosphere of the time. In the latter event, such ideas must also belong to the category of objective data, in which case this thinking should also be called extraverted.

    Although I do not propose to present the nature of introverted thinking at this point, reserving it for a later section, it is, however, essential that I should make a few statements about it before going further. For if one considers strictly what I have just said concerning extraverted thinking, one might easily conclude that such a statement includes everything that is generally understood as thinking. It might indeed be argued that a thinking whose aim is concerned neither with objective facts nor with general ideas scarcely merits the name 'thinking'. I am fully aware of the fact that the thought of our age, in common with its most eminent representatives, knows and acknowledges only the extraverted type of thinking. This is partly due to the fact that all thinking which attains visible form upon the world's surface, whether as science, philosophy, or even art, either proceeds direct from objects or flows into general ideas. On either ground, although not always completely evident it at least appears essentially intelligible, and therefore relatively valid. In this sense it might be said that the extraverted intellect, i.e. the mind that is orientated by objective data, is actually the only one recognized.

    There is also, however—and now I come to the question of the introverted intellect—an entirely different kind of thinking, to which the term I "thinking" can hardly be denied: it is a kind that is neither orientated by the immediate objective experience nor is it concerned with general and objectively derived ideas. I reach this other kind of thinking in the following way. When my thoughts are engaged with a concrete object or general idea in such a way that the course of my thinking eventually leads me back again to my object, this intellectual process is not the only psychic proceeding taking place in me at the moment. I will disregard all those possible sensations and feelings which become noticeable as a more or less disturbing accompaniment to my train of thought, merely emphasizing the fact that this very thinking process which proceeds from objective data and strives again towards the object stands also in a constant relation to the subject. This relation is a condition sine qua non, without which no thinking process whatsoever could take place. Even though my thinking process is directed, as far as possible, towards objective data, nevertheless it is my subjective process, and it can neither escape the subjective admixture nor yet dispense with it. Although I try my utmost to give a completely objective direction to my train of thought, even then I cannot exclude the parallel subjective process with its all-embracing participation, without extinguishing the very spark of life from my thought. This parallel subjective process has a natural tendency, only relatively avoidable, to subjectify objective facts, i.e. to assimilate them to the subject.

    Whenever the chief value is given to the subjective process, that other kind of thinking arises which stands opposed to extraverted thinking, namely, that purely subjective orientation of thought which I have termed introverted. A thinking arises from this other orientation that is neither determined by objective facts nor directed towards objective data—a thinking, therefore, that proceeds from subjective data and is directed towards subjective ideas or facts of a subjective character. I do not wish to enter more fully into this kind of thinking here; I have merely established its existence for the purpose of giving a necessary complement to the extraverted thinking process, whose nature is thus brought to a clearer focus.

    When the objective orientation receives a certain predominance, the thinking is extraverted. This circumstance changes nothing as regards the logic of thought—it merely determines that difference between thinkers which James regards as a matter of temperament. The orientation towards the object, as already explained, makes no essential change in the thinking function; only its appearance is altered. Since it is governed by objective data, it has the appearance of being captivated by the object, as though without the external orientation it simply could not exist. Almost it seems as though it were a sequence of external facts, or as though it could reach its highest point only when chiming in with some generally valid idea. It seems constantly to be affected by objective data, drawing only those conclusions which substantially agree with these. Thus it gives one the impression of a certain lack of freedom, of occasional short-sightedness, in spite of every kind of adroitness within the objectively circumscribed area. What I am now describing is merely the impression this sort of thinking makes upon the observer, who must himself already have a different standpoint, or it would be quite impossible for him to observe the phenomenon of extraverted thinking. As a result of his different standpoint he merely sees its aspect, not its nature; whereas the man who himself possesses this type of thinking is able to seize its nature, while its aspect escapes him. judgment made upon appearance only cannot be fair to the essence of the thing—hence the result is depreciatory. But essentially this thinking is no less fruitful and creative than introverted thinking, only its powers are in the service of other ends. This difference is perceived most clearly when extraverted thinking is engaged upon material, which is specifically an object of the subjectively orientated thinking. This happens, for instance, when a subjective conviction is interpreted analytically from objective facts or is regarded as a product or derivative of objective ideas. But, for our 'scientifically' orientated consciousness, the difference between the two modes of thinking becomes still more obvious when the subjectively orientated thinking makes an attempt to bring objective data into connections not objectively given, i.e. to subordinate them to a subjective idea. Either senses the other as an encroachment, and hence a sort of shadow effect is produced, wherein either type reveals to the other its least favourable aspect, The subjectively orientated thinking then appears quite arbitrary, while the extraverted thinking seems to have an incommensurability that is altogether dull and banal. Thus the two standpoints are incessantly at war.

    Such a conflict, we might think, could be easily adjusted if only we clearly discriminated objects of a subjective from those of an objective nature. Unfortunately, however, such a discrimination is a matter of impossibility, although not a few have attempted it. Even if such a separation were possible, it would be a very disastrous proceeding, since in themselves both orientations are one-sided, with a definitely restricted validity; hence they both require this mutual correction. Thought is at once sterilized, whenever thinking is brought, to any great extent, under the influence of objective data, since it becomes degraded into a mere appendage of objective facts; in which case, it is no longer able to free itself from objective data for the purpose of establishing an abstract idea. The process of thought is reduced to mere 'reflection', not in the sense of 'meditation', but in the sense of a mere imitation that makes no essential affirmation beyond what was already visibly and immediately present in the objective data. Such a thinking-process leads naturally and directly back to the objective fact, but never beyond it ; not once, therefore, can it lead to the coupling of experience with an objective idea. And, vice versa, when this thinking has an objective idea for its object, it is quite unable to grasp the practical individual experience, but persists in a more or less tautological position. The materialistic mentality presents a magnificent example of this.

    When, as the result of a reinforced objective determination, extraverted thinking is subordinated to objective data, it entirely loses itself, on the one hand, in the individual experience, and proceeds to amass an accumulation of undigested empirical material. The oppressive mass of more or less disconnected individual experiences produces a state of intellectual dissociation, which, on the other hand, usually demands a psychological compensation. This must consist in an idea, just as simple as it is universal, which shall give coherence to the heaped-up but intrinsically disconnected whole, or at least it should provide an inkling of such a connection. Such ideas as "matter" or "energy" are suitable for this purpose. But, whenever thinking primarily depends not so much upon external facts as upon an accepted or secondhand idea, the very poverty of the idea provokes a compensation in the form of a still more impressive accumulation of facts, which assume a one-sided grouping in keeping with the relatively restricted and sterile point of view; whereupon many valuable and sensible aspects of things automatically go by the board. The vertiginous abundance of the socalled scientific literature of today owes a deplorably high percentage of its existence to this misorientation.


    The Extraverted Thinking Type:

    It is a fact of experience that all the basic psychological functions seldom or never have the same strength or grade of development in one and the same individual. As a rule, one or other function predominates, in both strength and development. When supremacy among the psychological functions is given to thinking, i.e. when the life of an individual is mainly ruled by reflective thinking so that every important action proceeds from intellectually considered motives, or when there is at least a tendency to conform to such motives, we may fairly call this a thinking type. Such a type can be either introverted or extraverted. We will first discuss the extraverted thinking type.

    In accordance with his definition, we must picture a, man whose constant aim—in so far, of course, as he is a pure type—is to bring his total life-activities into relation with intellectual conclusions, which in the last resort are always orientated by objective data, whether objective facts or generally valid ideas. This type of man gives the deciding voice—not merely for himself alone but also on behalf of his entourage—either to the actual objective reality or to its objectively orientated, intellectual formula. By this formula are good and evil measured, and beauty and ugliness determined. All is right that corresponds with this formula; all is wrong that contradicts it; and everything that is neutral to it is purely accidental. Because this formula seems to correspond with the meaning of the world, it also becomes a world-law whose realization must be achieved at all times and seasons, both individually and collectively. Just as the extraverted thinking type subordinates himself to his formula, so, for its own good, must his entourage also obey it, since the man who refuses to obey is wrong—he is resisting the world-law, and is, therefore, unreasonable, immoral, and without a conscience. His moral code forbids him to tolerate exceptions; his ideal must, under all circumstances, be realized; for in his eyes it is the purest conceivable formulation of objective reality, and, therefore, must also be generally valid truth, quite indispensable for the salvation of man. This is not from any great love for his neighbour, but from a higher standpoint of justice and truth. Everything in his own nature that appears to invalidate this formula is mere imperfection, an accidental misfire, something to be eliminated on the next occasion, or, in the event of further failure, then clearly a sickness.

    If tolerance for the sick, the suffering, or the deranged should chance to be an ingredient in the formula, special provisions will be devised for humane societies, hospitals, prisons, colonies, etc., or at least extensive plans for such projects. For the actual execution of these schemes the motives of justice and truth do not, as a rule, suffice; still devolve upon real Christian charity, which I to do with feeling than with any intellectual 'One really should' or I one must' figure largely in this programme. If the formula is wide enough, it may play a very useful rôle in social life, with a reformer or a ventilator of public wrongs or a purifier of the public conscience, or as the propagator of important innovations. But the more rigid the formula, the more, does he develop into a grumbler, a crafty reasoner, and a self-righteous critic, who would like to impress both himself and others into one schema.

    We have now outlined two extreme figures, between which terminals the majority of these types may be graduated.

    In accordance with the nature of the extraverted attitude, the influence and activities of such personalities are all the more favourable and beneficent, the further one goes from the centre. Their best aspect is to be found at the periphery of their sphere of influence. The further we penetrate into their own province, the more do the unfavourable results of their tyranny impress us. Another life still pulses at the periphery, where the truth of the formula can be sensed as an estimable adjunct to the rest. But the further we probe into the special sphere where the formula operates, the more do we find life ebbing away from all that fails to coincide with its dictates. Usually it is the nearest relatives who have to taste the most disagreeable results of an extraverted formula, since they are the first to be unmercifully blessed with it. But above all the subject himself is the one who suffers most—which brings us to the other side of the psychology of this type.

    The fact that an intellectual formula never has been and never will be discovered which could embrace the abundant possibilities of life in a fitting expression must lead—where such a formula is accepted—to an inhibition, or total exclusion, of other highly important forms and activities of life. In the first place, all those vital forms dependent upon feeling will become repressed in such a type, as, for instance, aesthetic activities, taste, artistic sense, the art of friendship, etc. Irrational forms, such as religious experiences, passions and the like, are often obliterated even to the point of complete unconsciousness. These, conditionally quite important, forms of life have to support an existence that is largely unconscious. Doubtless there are exceptional men who are able to sacrifice their entire life to one definite formula; but for most of us a permanent life of such exclusiveness is impossible. Sooner or later—in accordance with outer circumstances and inner gifts—the forms of life repressed by the intellectual attitude become indirectly perceptible, through a gradual disturbance of the conscious conduct of life. Whenever disturbances of this kind reach a definite intensity, one speaks of a neurosis. In most cases, however, it does not go so far, because the individual instinctively allows himself some preventive extenuations of his formula, worded, of course, in a suitable and reasonable way. In this way a safety-valve is created.

    The relative or total unconsciousness of such tendencies or functions as are excluded from any participation in the conscious attitude keeps them in a relatively undeveloped state. As compared with the conscious function they are inferior. To the extent that they are unconscious, they become merged with the remaining contents of the unconscious, from which they acquire a bizarre character. To the extent that they are conscious, they only play a secondary rôle, although one of considerable importance for the whole psychological picture.

    Since feelings are the first to oppose and contradict the rigid intellectual formula, they are affected first this conscious inhibition, and upon them the most intense repression falls. No function can be entirely eliminated—it can only be greatly distorted. In so far as feelings allow themselves to be arbitrarily shaped and subordinated, they have to support the intellectual conscious attitude and adapt themselves to its aims. Only to a certain degree, however, is this possible; a part of the feeling remains insubordinate, and therefore must be repressed. Should the repression succeed, it disappears from consciousness and proceeds to unfold a subconscious activity, which runs counter to conscious aims, even producing effects whose causation is a complete enigma to the individual. For example, conscious altruism, often of an extremely high order, may be crossed by a secret self-seeking, of which the individual is wholly unaware, and which impresses intrinsically unselfish actions with the stamp of selfishness. Purely ethical aims may lead the individual into critical situations, which sometimes have more than a semblance of being decided by quite other than ethical motives. There are guardians of public morals or voluntary rescue-workers who suddenly find themselves in deplorably compromising situations, or in dire need of rescue. Their resolve to save often leads them to employ means which only tend to precipitate what they most desire to avoid. There are extraverted idealists, whose desire to advance the salvation of man is so consuming that they will not shrink from any lying and dishonest means in the pursuit of their ideal. There are a few painful examples in science where investigators of the highest esteem, from a profound conviction of the truth and general validity of their formula, have not scrupled to falsify evidence in favour of their ideal. This is sanctioned by the formula; the end justifieth the means. Only an inferior feeling-function, operating seductively and unconsciously, could bring about such aberrations in otherwise reputable men.

    The inferiority of feeling in this type manifests itself also in other ways. In so far as it corresponds with the dominating positive formula, the conscious attitude becomes more or less impersonal, often, indeed, to such a degree that a very considerable wrong is done to personal interests. When the conscious attitude is extreme, all personal considerations recede from view, even those which concern the individual's own person. His health is neglected, his social position deteriorates, often the most vital interests of his family are violated—they are wronged morally and financially, even their bodily health is made to suffer—all in the service of the ideal. At all events personal sympathy with others must be impaired, unless they too chance to be in the service of the same formula. Hence it not infrequently happens that his immediate family circle, his own children for instance, only know such a father as a cruel tyrant, whilst the outer world resounds with the fame of his humanity. Not so much in spite of as because of the highly impersonal character of the conscious attitude, the unconscious feelings are highly personal and oversensitive, giving rise to certain secret prejudices, as, for instance, a decided readiness to misconstrue any objective opposition to his formula as personal ill-will, or a constant tendency to make negative suppositions regarding the qualities of others in order to invalidate their arguments beforehand—in defence, naturally, of his own susceptibility. As a result of this unconscious sensitiveness, his expression and tone frequently becomes sharp, pointed, aggressive, and insinuations multiply. The feelings have an untimely and halting character, which is always a mark of the inferior function. Hence arises a pronounced tendency to resentment. However generous the individual sacrifice to the intellectual goal may be, the feelings are correspondingly petty, suspicious, crossgrained, and conservative. Everything new that is not already contained formula is viewed through a veil of unconscious and is judged accordingly. It happened only in middle of last century that a certain physician, famed his humanitarianism, threatened to dismiss an assistant for daring to use a thermometer, because the formula decreed that fever shall be recognized by the pulse. There are, of course, a host of similar examples.

    Thinking which in other respects may be altogether blameless becomes all the more subtly and prejudicially, affected, the more feelings are repressed. An intellectual standpoint, which, perhaps on account of its actual intrinsic value, might justifiably claim general recognition, undergoes a characteristic alteration through the influence of this unconscious personal sensitiveness; it becomes rigidly dogmatic. The personal self-assertion is transferred to the intellectual standpoint. Truth is no longer left to work her natural effect, but through an identification with the subject she is treated like a sensitive darling whom an evil-minded critic has wronged. The critic is demolished, if possible with personal invective, and no argument is too gross to be used against him. Truth must be trotted out, until finally it begins to dawn upon the public that it is not so much really a question of truth as of her personal procreator.

    The dogmatism of the intellectual standpoint, however, occasionally undergoes still further peculiar modifications from the unconscious admixture of unconscious personal feelings; these changes are less a question of feeling, in the stricter sense, than of contamination from other unconscious factors which become blended with the repressed feeling in the unconscious. Although reason itself offers proof, that every intellectual formula can be no more than a partial truth, and can never lay claim, therefore, to autocratic authority; in practice, the formula obtains so great an ascendancy that, beside it, every other standpoint and possibility recedes into the background. It replaces all the more general, less defined, hence the more modest and truthful, views of life. It even takes the place of that general view of life which we call religion. Thus the formula becomes a religion, although in essentials it has not the smallest connection with anything religious. Therewith it also gains the essentially religious character of absoluteness. It becomes, as it were, an intellectual superstition. But now all those psychological tendencies that suffer under its repression become grouped together in the unconscious, and form a counterposition, giving rise to paroxysms of doubt. As a defence against doubt, the conscious attitude grows fanatical. For fanaticism, after all, is merely overcompensated doubt. Ultimately this development leads to an exaggerated defence of the conscious position, and to the gradual formation of an absolutely antithetic unconscious position; for example, an extreme irrationality develops, in opposition to the conscious rationalism, or it becomes highly archaic and superstitious, in opposition to a conscious standpoint imbued with modern science. This fatal opposition is the source of those narrow-minded and ridiculous views, familiar to the historians of science, into which many praiseworthy pioneers have ultimately blundered. It not infrequently happens in a man of this type that the side of the unconscious becomes embodied in a woman.

    In my experience, this type, which is doubtless familiar to my readers, is chiefly found among men, since thinking tends to be a much more dominant function in men than in women. As a rule, when thinking achieves the mastery in women, it is, in my experience, a kind of thinking which results from a prevailingly intuitive activity of mind.

    The thought of the extraverted thinking type is, positive, i.e. it produces. It either leads to new facts or to general conceptions of disparate experimental material. Its judgment is generally synthetic. Even when it analyses, it constructs, because it is always advancing beyond the, analysis to a new combination, a further conception which reunites the analysed material in a new way or adds some., thing further to the given material. In general, therefore, we may describe this kind of judgment as predicative. In any case, characteristic that it is never absolutely depreciatory or destructive, but always substitutes a fresh value for one that is demolished. This quality is due to the fact that thought is the main channel into which a thinking-type's energy flows. Life steadily advancing shows itself in the man's thinking, so that his ideas maintain a progressive, creative character. His thinking neither stagnates, nor is it in the least regressive. Such qualities cling only to a thinking that is not given priority in consciousness. In this event it is relatively unimportant, and also lacks the character of a positive vital activity. It follows in the wake of other functions, it becomes Epimethean, it has an 'esprit de l'escalier' quality, contenting itself with constant ponderings and broodings upon things past and gone, in an effort to analyse and digest them. Where the creative element, as in this case, inhabits another function, thinking no longer progresses it stagnates. Its judgment takes on a decided inherency-character, i.e. it entirely confines itself to the range of the given material, nowhere overstepping it. It is contented with a more or less abstract statement, and fails to impart any value to the experimental material that was not already there.

    The inherency-judgment of such extraverted thinking is objectively orientated, i.e. its conclusion always expresses the objective importance of experience. Hence, not only does it remain under the orientating influence of objective data, but it actually rests within the charmed circle of the individual experience, about which it affirms nothing that was not already given by it. We may easily observe this thinking in those people who cannot refrain from tacking on to an impression or experience some rational and doubtless very valid remark, which, however, in no way adventures beyond the given orbit of the experience. At bottom, such a remark merely says 'I have understood it—I can reconstruct it.' But there the matter also ends. At its very highest, such a judgment signifies merely the placing of an experience in an objective setting, whereby the experience is at once recognized as belonging to the frame.

    But whenever a function other than thinking possesses priority in consciousness to any marked degree, in so far as thinking is conscious at all and not directly dependent upon the dominant function, it assumes a negative character. In so far as it is subordinated to the dominant function, it may actually wear a positive aspect, but a narrower scrutiny will easily prove that it simply mimics the dominant function, supporting it with arguments that unmistakably contradict the laws of logic proper to thinking. Such a thinking, therefore, ceases to have any interest for our present discussion. Our concern is rather with the constitution of that thinking which cannot be subordinated to the dominance of another function, but remains true to its own principle. To observe and investigate this thinking in itself is not easy, since, in the concrete case, it is more or less constantly repressed by the conscious attitude. Hence, in the majority of cases, it first must be retrieved from the background of consciousness, unless in some unguarded moment it should chance to come accidentally to the surface. As a rule, it must be enticed with some such questions as 'Now what do you really think?' or, again, 'What is your private view about the matter?' Or perhaps one may even use a little cunning, framing the question something this: 'What do you imagine, then, that I really think about the matter?' This latter form should be chosen when the real thinking is unconscious and, therefore projected. The thinking that is enticed to the surface this way has characteristic qualities; it was these I had in mind just now when I described it as negative. It habitual mode is best characterized by the two words 'nothing but'. Goethe personified this thinking in the figure of Mephistopheles. It shows a most distinctive tendency to trace back the object of its judgment to some banality or other, thus stripping it of its own independent significance. This happens simply because it is represented as being dependent upon some other commonplace thing. Wherever a conflict, apparently essential in nature, arises between two men, negative thinking mutters 'Cherchez la femme'. When a man champions or advocates a cause, negative thinking makes no inquiry as to the importance of the thing, but merely asks 'How much does he make by it?' The dictum ascribed to Moleschott: "Der Mensch ist, was er isst" (" Man is what he eats ") also belongs to this collection, as do many more aphorisms and opinions which I need not enumerate.

    The destructive quality of this thinking as well as its occasional and limited usefulness, hardly need further elucidation. But there still exists another form of negative thinking, which at first glance perhaps would scarcely be recognized as such I refer to the theosophical thinking which is today rapidly spreading in every quarter of the globe, presumably as a reaction phenomenon to the materialism of the epoch now receding. Theosophical thinking has an air that is not in the least reductive, since it exalts everything to transcendental and world-embracing ideas. A dream, for instance, is no longer a modest dream, but an experience upon 'another plane'. The hitherto inexplicable fact of telepathy is ,very simply explained by 'vibrations' which pass from one man to another. An ordinary nervous trouble is quite simply accounted for by the fact that something has collided with the astral body. Certain anthropological peculiarities of the dwellers on the Atlantic seaboard are easily explained by the submerging of Atlantis, and so on. We have merely to open a theosophical book to be overwhelmed by the realization that everything is already explained, and that 'spiritual science' has left no enigmas of life unsolved. But, fundamentally, this sort of thinking is just as negative as materialistic thinking. When the latter conceives psychology as chemical changes taking place in the cell-ganglia, or as the extrusion and withdrawal of cell-processes, or as an internal secretion, in essence this is just as superstitious as theosophy. The only difference lies in the fact that materialism reduces all phenomena to our current physiological notions, while theosophy brings everything into the concepts of Indian metaphysics. When we trace the dream to an overloaded stomach, the dream is not thereby explained, and when we explain telepathy as 'vibrations', we have said just as little. Since, what are 'vibrations'? Not only are both methods of explanation quite impotent—they are actually destructive, because by interposing their seeming explanations they withdraw interest from the problem, diverting it in the former case to the stomach, and in the latter to imaginary vibrations, thus preventing any serious investigation of the problem. Either kind of thinking is both sterile and sterilizing. Their negative quality consists in this it is a method of thought that is indescribably cheap there is a real poverty of productive and creative energy. It is a thinking taken in tow by other functions.


    Introverted Logic, or Ti, is an approach to Logic that deals with a skeletal framework of sense.

     
    Thinking:

    When describing extraverted thinking, I gave a brief characterization of introverted thinking, to which at this stage I must make further reference. Introverted thinking is primarily orientated by the subjective factor. At the least, this subjective factor is represented by a subjective feeling of direction, which, in the last resort, determines judgment. Occasionally, it is a more or less finished image, which to some extent, serves as a standard. This thinking may be conceived either with concrete or with abstract factors, but always at the decisive points it is orientated by subjective data. Hence, it does not lead from concrete experience back again into objective things, but always to the subjective content, External facts are not the aim and origin of this thinking, although the introvert would often like to make it so appear. It begins in the subject, and returns to the subject, although it may undertake the widest flights into the territory of the real and the actual. Hence, in the statement of new facts, its chief value is indirect, because new views rather than the perception of new facts are its main concern. It formulates questions and creates theories; it opens up prospects and yields insight, but in the presence of facts it exhibits a reserved demeanour. As illustrative examples they have their value, but they must not prevail. Facts are collected as evidence or examples for a theory, but never for their own sake. Should this latter ever occur, it is done only as a compliment to the extraverted style. For this kind of thinking facts are of secondary importance; what, apparently, is of absolutely paramount importance is the development and presentation of the subjective idea, that primordial symbolical image standing more or less darkly before the inner vision. Its aim, therefore, is never concerned with an intellectual reconstruction of concrete actuality, but with the shaping of that dim image into a resplendent idea. Its desire is to reach reality; its goal is to see how external facts fit into, and fulfil, the framework of the idea; its actual creative power is proved by the fact that this thinking can also create that idea which, though not present in the external facts, is yet the most suitable, abstract expression of them. Its task is accomplished when the idea it has fashioned seems to emerge so inevitably from the external facts that they actually prove its validity.

    But just as little as it is given to extraverted thinking to wrest a really sound inductive idea from concrete facts or ever to create new ones, does it lie in the power of introverted thinking to translate its original image into an idea adequately adapted to the facts. For, as in the former case the purely empirical heaping together of facts paralyses thought and smothers their meaning, so in the latter case introverted thinking shows a dangerous tendency to coerce facts into the shape of its image, or by ignoring them altogether, to unfold its phantasy image in freedom. In such a case, it will be impossible for the presented idea to deny its origin from the dim archaic image. There will cling to it a certain mythological character that we are prone to interpret as 'originality', or in more pronounced cases' as mere whimsicality; since its archaic character is not transparent as such to specialists unfamiliar with mythological motives. The subjective force of conviction inherent in such an idea is usually very great; its power too is the more convincing, the less it is influenced by contact with outer facts. Although to the man who advocates the idea, it may well seem that his scanty store of facts were the actual ground and source of the truth and validity of his idea, yet such is not the case, for the idea derives its convincing power from its unconscious archetype, which, as such, has universal validity and everlasting truth. Its truth, however, is so universal and symbolic, that it must first enter into the recognized and recognizable knowledge of the time, before it can become a practical truth of any real value to life. What sort of a causality would it be, for instance, that never became perceptible in practical causes and practical results?

    This thinking easily loses itself in the immense truth of the subjective factor. It creates theories for the sake of theories, apparently with a view to real or at least possible facts, yet always with a distinct tendency to go over from the world of ideas into mere imagery. Accordingly many intuitions of possibilities appear on the scene, none of which however achieve any reality, until finally images are produced which no longer express anything externally real, being 'merely' symbols of the simply unknowable. It is now merely a mystical thinking and quite as unfruitful as that empirical thinking whose sole operation is within the framework of objective facts.

    Whereas the latter sinks to the level of a mere presentation of facts, the former evaporates into a representation of the unknowable, which is even beyond everything that could be expressed in an image. The presentation of facts has a certain incontestable truth, because the subjective factor is excluded and the facts speak for themselves. Similarly, the representing of the unknowable has also an immediate, subjective, and convincing power, because it is demonstrable from its own existence. The former says 'Est, ergo est' ('It is ; therefore it is') ; while the latter says 'Cogito, ergo cogito' (' I think ; therefore I think'). In the last analysis, introverted thinking arrives at the evidence of its own subjective being, while extraverted thinking is driven to the evidence of its complete identity with the objective fact. For, while the extravert really denies himself in his complete dispersion among objects, the introvert, by ridding himself of each and every content, has to content himself with his mere existence. In both cases the further development of life is crowded out of the domain of thought into the region of other psychic functions which had hitherto existed in relative unconsciousness. The extraordinary impoverishment of introverted thinking in relation to objective facts finds compensation in an abundance of unconscious facts. Whenever consciousness, wedded to the function of thought, confines itself within the smallest and emptiest circle possible—though seeming to contain the plenitude of divinity—unconscious phantasy becomes proportionately enriched by a multitude of archaically formed facts, a veritable pandemonium of magical and irrational factors, wearing the particular aspect that accords with the nature of that function which shall next relieve the thought-function as the representative of life. If this should be the intuitive function, the 'other side' will be viewed with the eyes of a Kubin or a Meyrink. If it is the feeling-function, there arise quite unheard of and fantastic feeling-relations, coupled with feeling-judgments of a quite contradictory and unintelligible character. If the sensation-function, then the senses discover some new and never-before-experienced possibility, both within and without the body. A closer investigation of such changes can easily demonstrate the reappearance of primitive psychology with all its characteristic features. Naturally, the thing experienced is not merely primitive but also symbolic; in fact, the older and more primeval it appears, the more does it represent the future truth: since everything ancient in our unconscious means the coming possibility.

    Under ordinary circumstances, not even the transition to the 'other side' succeeds—still less the redeeming journey through the unconscious. The passage across is chiefly prevented by conscious resistance to any subjection of the ego to the unconscious reality and to the determining reality of the unconscious object. The condition is a dissociation—in other words, a neurosis having the character of an inner wastage with increasing brain-exhaustion—a psychoasthenia, in fact.


    The Introverted Thinking Type:

    Just as Darwin might possibly represent the normal extraverted thinking type, so we might point to Kant as a counterexample of the normal introverted thinking type. The former speaks with facts; the latter appeals to the subjective factor. Darwin ranges over the wide fields of objective facts, while Kant restricts himself to a critique of knowledge in general. But suppose a Cuvier be contrasted with a Nietzsche: the antithesis becomes even sharper.

    The introverted thinking type is characterized by a priority of the thinking I have just described. Like his extraverted parallel, he is decisively influenced by ideas; these, however, have their origin, not in the objective data but in the subjective foundation. Like the extravert, he too will follow his ideas, but in the reverse direction: inwardly not outwardly. Intensity is his aim, not extensity. In these fundamental characters he differs markedly, indeed quite unmistakably from his extraverted parallel. Like every introverted type, he is almost completely lacking in that which distinguishes his counter type, namely, the intensive relatedness to the object. In the case of a human object, the man has a distinct feeling that he matters only in a negative way, i.e., in milder instances he is merely conscious of being superfluous, but with a more extreme type he feels himself warded off as something definitely disturbing. This negative relation to the object—indifference, and even aversion—characterizes every introvert; it also makes a description of the introverted type in general extremely difficult. With him, everything tends to disappear and get concealed. His judgment appears cold, obstinate, arbitrary, and inconsiderate, simply because he is related less to the object than the subject. One can feel nothing in it that might possibly confer a higher value upon the object; it always seems to go beyond the object, leaving behind it a flavour of a certain subjective superiority. Courtesy, amiability, and friendliness may be present, but often with a particular quality suggesting a certain uneasiness, which betrays an ulterior aim, namely, the disarming of an opponent, who must at all costs be pacified and set at ease lest he prove a disturbing-element. In no sense, of course, is he an opponent, but, if at all sensitive, he will feel somewhat repelled, perhaps even depreciated. Invariably the object has to submit to a certain neglect; in worse cases it is even surrounded with quite unnecessary measures of precaution. Thus it happens that this type tends to disappear behind a cloud of misunderstanding, which only thickens the more he attempts to assume, by way of compensation and with the help of his inferior functions, a certain mask of urbanity, which often presents a most vivid contrast to his real nature. Although in the extension of his world of ideas he shrinks from no risk, however daring, and never even considers the possibility that such a world might also be dangerous, revolutionary, heretical, and wounding to feeling, he is none the less a prey to the liveliest anxiety, should it ever chance to become objectively real. That goes against the grain. When the time comes for him to transplant his ideas into the world, his is by no means the air of an anxious mother solicitous for her children's welfare; he merely exposes them, and is often extremely annoyed when they fail to thrive on their own account. The decided lack he usually displays in practical ability, and his aversion from any sort of re[accent]clame assist in this attitude. If to his eyes his product appears subjectively correct and true, it must also be so in practice, and others have simply got to bow to its truth. Hardly ever will he go out of his way to win anyone's appreciation of it, especially if it be anyone of influence. And, when he brings himself to do so, he is usually so extremely maladroit that he merely achieves the opposite of his purpose. In his own special province, there are usually awkward experiences with his colleagues, since he never knows how to win their favour; as a rule he only succeeds in showing them how entirely superfluous they are to him. In the pursuit of his ideas he is generally stubborn, headstrong, and quite unamenable to influence. His suggestibility to personal influences is in strange contrast to this. An object has only to be recognized as apparently innocuous for such a type to become extremely accessible to really inferior elements. They lay hold of him from the unconscious. He lets himself be brutalized and exploited in the most ignominious way, if only he can be left undisturbed in the pursuit of his ideas. He simply does not see when he is being plundered behind his back and wronged in practical ways: this is because his relation to the object is such a secondary matter that lie is left without a guide in the purely objective valuation of his product. In thinking out his problems to the utmost of his ability, he also complicates them, and constantly becomes entangled in every possible scruple. However clear to himself the inner structure of his thoughts may be, he is not in the least clear where and how they link up with the world of reality. Only with difficulty can he persuade himself to admit that what is clear to him may not be equally clear to everyone. His style is usually loaded and complicated by all sorts of accessories, qualifications, saving clauses, doubts, etc., which spring from his exacting scrupulousness. His work goes slowly and with difficulty. Either he is taciturn or he falls among people who cannot understand him; whereupon he proceeds to gather further proof of the unfathomable stupidity of man. If he should ever chance to be understood, he is credulously liable to overestimate. Ambitious women have only to understand how advantage may be taken of his uncritical attitude towards the object to make an easy prey of him; or he may develop into a misanthropic bachelor with a childlike heart. Then, too, his outward appearance is often gauche, as if he were painfully anxious to escape observation; or he may show a remarkable unconcern, an almost childlike naivete. In his own particular field of work he provokes violent contradiction, with which he has no notion how to deal, unless by chance he is seduced by his primitive affects into biting and fruitless polemics. By his wider circle he is counted inconsiderate and domineering. But the better one knows him, the more favourable one's judgment becomes, and his nearest friends are well aware how to value his intimacy. To people who judge him from afar he appears prickly, inaccessible, haughty; frequently he may even seem soured as a result of his antisocial prejudices. He has little influence as a personal teacher, since the mentality of his pupils is strange to him. Besides, teaching has, at bottom, little interest for him, except when it accidentally provides him with a theoretical problem. He is a poor teacher, because while teaching his thought is engaged with the actual material, and will not be satisfied with its mere presentation.

    With the intensification of his type, his convictions become all the more rigid and unbending. Foreign influences are eliminated; he becomes more unsympathetic to his peripheral world, and therefore more dependent upon his intimates. His expression becomes more personal and inconsiderate and his ideas more profound, but they can no longer be adequately expressed in the material at hand. This lack is replaced by emotivity and susceptibility. The foreign influence, brusquely declined from without, reaches him from within, from the side of the unconscious, and he is obliged to collect evidence against it and against things in general which to outsiders seems quite superfluous. Through the subjectification of consciousness occasioned by his defective relationship to the object, what secretly concerns his own person now seems to him of chief importance. And he begins to confound his subjective truth with his own person. Not that he will attempt to press anyone personally with his convictions, but he will break out with venomous and personal retorts against every criticism, however just. Thus in every respect his isolation gradually increases. His originally fertilizing ideas become destructive, because poisoned by a kind of sediment of bitterness. His struggle against the influences emanating from the unconscious increases with his external isolation, until gradually this begins to cripple him. A still greater isolation must surely protect him from the unconscious influences, but as a rule this only takes him deeper into the conflict which is destroying him within.

    The thinking of the introverted type is positive and synthetic in the development of those ideas which in ever increasing measure approach the eternal validity of the primordial images. But, when their connection with objective experience begins to fade, they become mythological and untrue for the present situation. Hence this thinking holds value only for its contemporaries, just so long as it also stands in visible and understandable connection with the known facts of the time. But, when thinking becomes mythological, its irrelevancy grows until finally it gets lost in itself. The relatively unconscious functions of feeling, intuition, and sensation, which counterbalance introverted thinking, are inferior in quality and have a primitive, extraverted character, to which all the troublesome objective influences this type is subject to must be ascribed. The various measures of self-defence, the curious protective obstacles with which such people are wont to surround themselves, are sufficiently familiar, and I may, therefore, spare myself a description of them. They all serve as a defence against 'magical' influences; a vague dread of the other sex also belongs to this category.


    Extroverted Ethics, or Fe, is an approach to Ethics that deals with ephemeral emotional states.

     
    Feeling:

    Feeling in the extraverted attitude is orientated by objective data, i.e. the object is the indispensable determinant of the kind of feeling. It agrees with objective values. If one has always known feeling as a subjective fact, the nature of extraverted feeling will not immediately be understood, since it has freed itself as fully as possible from the subjective factor, and has, instead, become wholly subordinated to the influence of the object. Even where it seems to show a certain independence of the quality of the concrete object, it is none the less under the spell of. traditional or generally valid standards of some sort. I may feel constrained, for instance, to use the predicate 'beautiful' or 'good', not because I find the object 'beautiful' or 'good' from my own subjective feeling, but because it is fitting and politic so to do; and fitting it certainly is, inasmuch as a contrary opinion would disturb the general feeling situation. A feeling-judgment such as this is in no way a simulation or a lie—it is merely an act of accommodation. A picture, for instance, may be termed beautiful, because a picture that is hung in a drawing-room and bearing a well-known signature is generally assumed to be beautiful, or because the predicate 'ugly' might offend the family of the fortunate possessor, or because there is a benevolent intention on the part of the visitor to create a pleasant feeling-atmosphere, to which end everything must be felt as agreeable. Such feelings are governed by the standard of the objective determinants. As such they are genuine, and represent the total visible feeling-function.

    In precisely the same way as extraverted thinking strives to rid itself of subjective influences, extraverted feeling has also to undergo a certain process of differentiation, before it is finally denuded of every subjective trimming. The valuations resulting from the act of feeling either correspond directly with objective values or at least chime in with certain traditional and generally known standards of value. This kind of feeling is very largely responsible for the fact that so many people flock to the theatre, to concerts, or to Church, and what is more, with correctly adjusted positive feelings. Fashions, too, owe their existence to it, and, what is far more valuable, the whole positive and widespread support of social, philanthropic, and such like cultural enterprises. In such matters, extraverted feeling proves itself a creative factor. Without this feeling, for instance, a beautiful and harmonious sociability would be unthinkable. So far extraverted feeling is just as beneficent and rationally effective as extraverted thinking. But this salutary effect is lost as soon as the object gains an exaggerated influence. For, when this happens, extraverted feeling draws the personality too much into the object, i.e. the object assimilates the person, whereupon the personal character of the feeling, which constitutes its principal charm, is lost. Feeling then becomes cold, material, untrustworthy. It betrays a secret aim, or at least arouses the suspicion of it in an impartial observer. No longer does it make that welcome and refreshing impression the invariable accompaniment of genuine feeling; instead, one scents a pose or affectation, although the egocentric motive may be entirely unconscious.

    Such overstressed, extraverted feeling certainly fulfils æsthetic expectations, but no longer does it speak to the heart; it merely appeals to the senses, or—worse still—to the reason. Doubtless it can provide æsthetic padding for a situation, but there it stops, and beyond that its effect is nil. It has become sterile. Should this process go further, a strangely contradictory dissociation of feeling develops; every object is seized upon with feeling-valuations, and numerous relationships are made which are inherently and mutually incompatible. Since such aberrations would be quite impossible if a sufficiently emphasized subject were present, the last vestige of a real personal standpoint also becomes suppressed. The subject becomes so swallowed up in individual feeling processes that to the observer it seems as though there were no longer a subject of feeling but merely a feeling process. In such a condition feeling has entirely forfeited its original human warmth, it gives an impression of pose, inconstancy, unreliability, and in the worst cases appears definitely hysterical.


    The Extraverted Feeling Type:

    In so far as feeling is, incontestably, a more obvious peculiarity of feminine psychology than thinking, the most pronounced feeling-types are also to be found among women. When extraverted feeling possesses the priority we speak of an extraverted feeling-type. Examples of this type that I can call to mind are, almost without exception, women. She is a woman who follows the guiding-line of her feeling. As the result of education her feeling has become developed into an adjusted function, subject to conscious control. Except in extreme cases, feeling has a personal character, in spite of the fact that the subjective factor may be already, to a large extent, repressed. The personality appears to be adjusted in relation to objective conditions. Her feelings correspond with objective situations and general values. Nowhere is this more clearly revealed than in the so-called 'love-choice'; the 'suitable' man is loved, not another one; he is suitable not so much because he fully accords with the fundamental character of the woman—as a rule she is quite uninformed about this—but because he meticulously corresponds in standing, age, capacity, height, and family respectability with every reasonable requirement. Such a formulation might, of course, be easily rejected as ironical or depreciatory, were I not fully convinced that the love-feeling of this type of woman completely corresponds with her choice. It is genuine, and not merely intelligently manufactured. Such 'reasonable' marriages exist without number, and they are by no means the worst. Such women are good comrades to their husbands and excellent mothers, so long as husbands or children possess the conventional psychic constitution. One can feel 'correctly', however, only when feeling is disturbed by nothing else. But nothing disturbs feeling so much as thinking. It is at once intelligible, therefore, that this type should repress thinking as much as possible. This does not mean to say that such a woman does not think at all; on the contrary, she may even think a great deal and very ably, but her thinking is never sui generis; it is, in fact, an Epimethean appendage to her feeling. What she cannot feel, she cannot consciously think. 'But I can't think what I don't feel', such a type said to me once in indignant tones. As far as feeling permits, she can think very well, but every conclusion, however logical, that might lead to a disturbance of feeling is rejected from the outset. It is simply not thought. And thus everything that corresponds with objective valuations is good: these things are loved or treasured; the rest seems merely to exist in a world apart.

    But a change comes over the picture when the importance of the object reaches a still higher level. As already explained above, such an assimilation of subject to object then occurs as almost completely to engulf the subject of feeling. Feeling loses its personal character—it becomes feeling per se; it almost seems as though the personality were wholly dissolved in the feeling of the moment. Now, since in actual life situations constantly and successively alternate, in which the feeling-tones released are not only different but are actually mutually contrasting, the personality inevitably becomes dissipated in just so many different feelings. Apparently, he is this one moment, and something completely different the next—apparently, I repeat, for in reality such a manifold personality is altogether impossible. The basis of the ego always remains identical with itself, and, therefore, appears definitely opposed to the changing states of feeling. Accordingly the observer senses the display of feeling not so much as a personal expression of the feeling-subject as an alteration of his ego, a mood, in other words. Corresponding with the degree of dissociation between the ego and the momentary state of feeling, signs of disunion with the self will become more or less evident, i.e. the original compensatory attitude of the unconscious becomes a manifest opposition. This reveals itself, in the first instance, in extravagant demonstrations of feeling, in loud and obtrusive feeling predicates, which leave one, however, somewhat incredulous. They ring hollow; they are not convincing. On the contrary, they at once give one an inkling of a resistance that is being overcompensated, and one begins to wonder whether such a feeling-judgment might not just as well be entirely different. In fact, in a very short time it actually is different. Only a very slight alteration in the situation is needed to provoke forthwith an entirely contrary estimation of the selfsame object. The result of such an experience is that the observer is unable to take either judgment at all seriously. He begins to reserve his own opinion. But since, with this type, it is a matter of the greatest moment to establish an intensive feeling rapport with his environment, redoubled efforts are now required to overcome this reserve. Thus, in the manner of the circulus vitiosus, the situation goes from bad to worse. The more the feeling relation with the object becomes overstressed, the nearer the unconscious opposition approaches the surface.

    We have already seen that the extraverted feeling type, as a rule, represses his thinking, just because thinking is the function most liable to disturb feeling. Similarly, when thinking seeks to arrive at pure results of any kind, its first act is to exclude feeling, since nothing is calculated to harass and falsify thinking so much as feeling-values. Thinking, therefore, in so far as it is an independent function, is repressed in the extraverted feeling type. Its repression, as I observed before, is complete only in so far as its inexorable logic forces it to conclusions that are incompatible with feeling. It is suffered to exist as the servant of feeling, or more accurately its slave. Its backbone is broken; it may not operate on its own account, in accordance with its own laws, Now, since a logic exists producing inexorably right conclusions, this must happen somewhere, although beyond the bounds of consciousness, i.e. in the unconscious. Preeminently, therefore, the unconscious content of this type is a particular kind of thinking. It is an infantile, archaic, and negative thinking.

    So long as conscious feeling preserves the personal character, or, in other words, so long as the personality does not become swallowed up by successive states of feeling, this unconscious thinking remains compensatory. But as soon as the personality is dissociated, becoming dispersed in mutually contradictory states of feeling, the identity of the ego is lost, and the subject becomes unconscious. But, because of the subject's lapse into the unconscious, it becomes associated with the unconscious thinking—function, therewith assisting the unconscious thought to occasional consciousness. The stronger the conscious feeling relation, and therefore, the more 'depersonalized,' it becomes, the stronger grows the unconscious opposition. This reveals itself in the fact that unconscious ideas centre round just the most valued objects, which are thus pitilessly stripped of their value. That thinking which always thinks in the 'nothing but' style is in its right place here, since it destroys the ascendancy of the feeling that is chained to the object.

    Unconscious thought reaches the surface in the form of irruptions, often of an obsessing nature, the general character of which is always negative and depreciatory. Women of this type have moments when the most hideous thoughts fasten upon the very objects most valued by their feelings. This negative thinking avails itself of every infantile prejudice or parallel that is calculated to breed doubt in the feeling-value, and it tows every primitive instinct along with it, in the effort to make 'a nothing but' interpretation of the feeling. At this point, it is perhaps in the nature of a side-remark to observe that the collective unconscious, i.e. the totality of the primordial images, also becomes enlisted in the same manner, and from the elaboration and development of these images there dawns the possibility of a regeneration of the attitude upon another basis.

    Hysteria, with the characteristic infantile sexuality of its unconscious world of ideas, is the principal form of neurosis with this type.


    Introverted Ethics, or Fi, is an approach to Ethics that deals with personal values.

     
    Feeling:

    Introverted feeling is determined principally by the subjective factor. This means that the feeling-judgment differs quite as essentially from extraverted feeling as does the introversion of thinking from extraversion. It is unquestionably difficult to give an intellectual presentation of the introverted feeling process, or even an approximate description of it, although the peculiar character of this kind of feeling simply stands out as soon as one becomes aware of it at all. Since it is primarily controlled by subjective preconditions, and is only secondarily concerned with the object, this feeling appears much less upon the surface and is, as a rule, misunderstood. It is a feeling which apparently depreciates the object; hence it usually becomes noticeable in its negative manifestations. The existence of a positive feeling can be inferred only indirectly, as it were. Its aim is not so much to accommodate to the objective fact as to stand above it, since its whole unconscious effort is to give reality to the underlying images. It is, as it were, continually seeking an image which has no existence in reality, but of which it has had a sort of previous vision. From objects that can never fit in with its aim it seems to glide unheedingly away. It strives after an inner intensity, to which at the most, objects contribute only an accessory stimulus. The depths of this feeling can only be divined—they can never be clearly comprehended. It makes men silent and difficult of access; with the sensitiveness of the mimosa, it shrinks from the brutality of the object, in order to expand into the depths of the subject. It puts forward negative feeling-judgments or assumes an air of profound indifference, as a measure of self-defence.

    Primordial images are, of course, just as much idea as feeling. Thus, basic ideas such as God, freedom, immortality are just as much feeling-values as they are significant as ideas. Everything, therefore, that has been said of the introverted thinking refers equally to introverted feeling, only here everything is felt while there it was thought. But the fact that thoughts can generally be expressed more intelligibly than feelings demands a more than ordinary descriptive or artistic capacity before the real wealth of this feeling can be even approximately presented or communicated to the outer world. Whereas subjective thinking, on account of its unrelatedness, finds great difficulty in arousing an adequate understanding, the same, though in perhaps even higher degree, holds good for subjective feeling. In order to communicate with others it has to find an external form which is not only fitted to absorb the subjective feeling in a satisfying expression, but which must also convey it to one's fellowman in such a way that a parallel process takes place in him. Thanks to the relatively great internal (as well as external) similarity of the human being, this effect can actually be achieved, although a form acceptable to feeling is extremely difficult to find, so long as it is still mainly orientated by the fathomless store of primordial images. But, when it becomes falsified by an egocentric attitude, it at once grows unsympathetic, since then its major concern is still with the ego. Such a case never fails to create an impression of sentimental self-love, with its constant effort to arouse interest and even morbid self-admiration just as the subjectified consciousness of the introverted thinker, striving after an abstraction of abstractions, only attains a supreme intensity of a thought-process in itself quite empty, so the intensification of egocentric feeling only leads to a contentless passionateness, which merely feels itself. This is the mystical, ecstatic stage, which prepares the way over into the extraverted functions repressed by feeling, just as introverted thinking is pitted against a primitive feeling, to which objects attach themselves with magical force, so introverted feeling is counterbalanced by a primitive thinking, whose concretism and slavery to facts passes all bounds. Continually emancipating itself from the relation to the object, this feeling creates a freedom, both of action and of conscience, that is only answerable to the subject, and that may even renounce all traditional values. But so much the more does unconscious thinking fall a victim to the power of objective facts.


    The Introverted Feeling Type:

    It is principally among women that I have found the priority of introverted feeling. The proverb 'Still waters run deep' is very true of such women. They are mostly silent, inaccessible, and hard to understand; often they hide behind a childish or banal mask, and not infrequently their temperament is melancholic. They neither shine nor reveal themselves. Since they submit the control of their lives to their subjectively orientated feeling, their true motives generally remain concealed. Their outward demeanour is harmonious and inconspicuous; they reveal a delightful repose, a sympathetic parallelism, which has no desire to affect others, either to impress, influence, or change them in any way. Should this outer side be somewhat emphasized, a suspicion of neglectfulness and coldness may easily obtrude itself, which not seldom increases to a real indifference for the comfort and well-being of others. One distinctly feels the movement of feeling away from the object. With the normal type, however, such an event only occurs when the object has in some way too strong an effect. The harmonious feeling atmosphere rules only so long as the object moves upon its own way with a moderate feeling intensity, and makes no attempt to cross the other's path. There is little effort to accompany the real emotions of the object, which tend to be damped and rebuffed, or to put it more aptly, are 'cooled off' by a negative feeling-judgment. Although one may find a constant readiness for a peaceful and harmonious companionship, the unfamiliar object is shown no touch of amiability, no gleam of responding warmth, but is met by a manner of apparent indifference or repelling coldness.

    One may even be made to feel the superfluousness of one's own existence. In the presence of something that might carry one away or arouse enthusiasm, this type observes a benevolent neutrality, tempered with an occasional trace of superiority and criticism that soon takes the wind out of the sails of a sensitive object. But a stormy emotion will be brusquely rejected with murderous coldness, unless it happens to catch the subject from the side of the unconscious, i.e. unless, through the animation of some primordial image, feeling is, as it were, taken captive. In which event such a woman simply feels a momentary laming, invariably producing, in due course, a still more violent resistance, which reaches the object in his most vulnerable spot. The relation to the object is, as far as possible, kept in a secure and tranquil middle state of feeling, where passion and its intemperateness are resolutely proscribed. Expression of feeling, therefore, remains niggardly and, when once aware of it at all, the object has a permanent sense of his undervaluation. Such, however, is not always the case, since very often the deficit remains unconscious; whereupon the unconscious feeling-claims gradually produce symptoms which compel a more serious attention.

    A superficial judgment might well be betrayed, by a rather cold and reserved demeanour, into denying all feeling to this type. Such a view, however, would be quite false; the truth is, her feelings are intensive rather than extensive. They develop into the depth. Whereas, for instance, an extensive feeling of sympathy can express itself in both word and deed at the right place, thus quickly ridding itself of its impression, an intensive sympathy, because shut off from every means of expression, gains a passionate depth that embraces the misery of a world and is simply benumbed. It may possibly make an extravagant irruption, leading to some staggering act of an almost heroic character, to which, however, neither the object nor the subject can find a right relation. To the outer world, or to the blind eyes of the extravert, this sympathy looks like coldness, for it does nothing visibly, and an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.

    Such misunderstanding is a characteristic occurrence in the life of this type, and is commonly registered as a most weighty argument against any deeper feeling relation with the object. But the underlying, real object of this feeling is only dimly divined by the normal type. It may possibly express its aim and content in a concealed religiosity anxiously shielded, from profane eyes, or in intimate poetic forms equally safeguarded from surprise; not without a secret ambition to bring about some superiority over the object by such means. Women often express much of it in their children, letting their passionateness flow secretly into them.

    Although in the normal type, the tendency, above alluded to, to overpower or coerce the object once openly and visibly with the thing secretly felt, rarely plays a disturbing role, and never leads to a serious attempt in this direction, some trace of it, none the less, leaks through into the personal effect upon the object, in the form of a domineering influence often difficult to define. It is sensed as a sort of stifling or oppressive feeling which holds the immediate circle under a spell. It gives a woman of this type a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious. This power is derived from the deeply felt, unconscious images; consciousness, however, readily refers it to the ego, whereupon the influence becomes debased into personal tyranny. But, wherever the unconscious subject is identified with the ego, the mysterious power of the intensive feeling is also transformed into banal and arrogant ambition, vanity, and petty tyranny. This produces a type of woman most regrettably distinguished by her unscrupulous ambition and mischievous cruelty. But this change in the picture leads also to neurosis.

    So long as the ego feels itself housed, as it were, beneath the heights of the unconscious subject, and feeling reveals something higher and mightier than the ego, the type is normal. The unconscious thinking is certainly archaic, yet its reductions may prove extremely helpful in compensating the occasional inclinations to exalt the ego into the subject. But, whenever this does take place by dint of complete suppression of the unconscious reductive thinking-products, the unconscious thinking goes over into opposition and becomes projected into objects. Whereupon the now egocentric subject comes to feel the power and importance of the depreciated object. Consciousness begins to feel 'what others think'. Naturally, others are thinking, all sorts of baseness, scheming evil, and contriving all sorts of plots, secret intrigues, etc. To prevent this, the subject must also begin to carry out preventive intrigues, to suspect and sound others, to make subtle combinations. Assailed by rumours, he must make convulsive efforts to convert, if possible, a threatened inferiority into a superiority. Innumerable secret rivalries develop, and in these embittered struggles not only will no base or evil means be disdained, but even virtues will be misused and tampered with in order to play the trump card. Such a development must lead to exhaustion. The form of neurosis is neurasthenic rather than hysterical; in the case of women we often find severe collateral physical states, as for instance anæmia and its sequelæ.

  6. #6
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Extroversion deals with discrete, compartmentalized objects. Many of these objects happen to be people. Appropriately enough, Bodies is used in reference to Extroversion, usually in regards to the functions themselves.

    Introversion deals with everything at once. As Bodies was used for Extroversion, so is Fields used for Introversion.
    the thing i want you to realize is that the context of this can shift diametrically depending on whether you're thinking of objects and states of affairs "out there" in the real world, or experiences/perspectives and subjective states of affairs... extroversion handles the experiences in sweeping scoops. and introversion deals with the experiences sequentially on individual basis.

    also I would say this mostly goes for Pe and Pi... Ji and Je are rather different animals. they don't deal much with objects or perspectives but with events, facts and meta-facts

    ... also to get the purest examples of these, stick to the Focal versions of each (IPs Pi and IJs Pe)

    if i'm discussing those anyway, notice that the Focal Pi is Accepting (effort-free) and Focal Pe is Creating (epistemically difficult). which gets at something akin to cartesian doubt, i.e. your experiences are an immediate known whereas knowledge of focally singled out objects is subject to constant doubt and complication.

    i'd say P functions generally have a character of "grasping" or understanding a thing, meaning they always to a large extent feel like handling lots of things at a time. it's the J functions that isolate and distinguish. although this has many implicit sweeping features as well. it's rarely 100% cut and dry.

  7. #7
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    TIM
    SEER ~ 458 sx/sp
    Posts
    9,899
    Mentioned
    735 Post(s)
    Tagged
    40 Thread(s)

    Default

    @woofwoofl

    This may just be what I was looking for when I was questioning Logic/Ethics and Intuition/Sensing...thank you. I will have to read a couple times before I decide if I can "like" it and/or agree with it (heh) but still wanted to let you know I appreciate it.

    "When I ought to be thinking of heaven he will nail me to earth"

     







  8. #8
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,520
    Mentioned
    233 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa View Post
    nice
    But what is nice? What do you mean by this??

    I cannot follow this. I tried. I am looking at all the likes and constructives and awesomes and all I can think of is the bobbleheads praising the emperor got when he wore no clothes.

    Trying to find something to grasp, I clicked on "Alleister" Crowley, the man born Edward Crowley. And it got worse! What a useless, wasted and thoroughly destructive life. I imagine when he died and saw his entire life flash before him, and he saw all of his life's actions and words and how they affected others and then the lives of those affected by him, and sees how that effect affected others, rippling out and out and out -- when I think of that vast, vast wasteland of misery emanating from the one single life, I am sickened and overwhelmed.

  9. #9
    Olduvai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,346
    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William View Post
    lol, I'm not gonna spoil his moment of glory

  10. #10
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    TIM
    SEER ~ 458 sx/sp
    Posts
    9,899
    Mentioned
    735 Post(s)
    Tagged
    40 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    But what is nice? What do you mean by this??

    I cannot follow this. I tried. I am looking at all the likes and constructives and awesomes and all I can think of is the bobbleheads praising the emperor got when he wore no clothes.
    Can you explain what you don't agree with that relates to socionic specifically? I want to make sure you're not writing it all off due to religious beliefs. I am trying to understand myself so that is why I didn't "like" anything yet so if you have something to add or subtract I would like to "hear" it.

    "When I ought to be thinking of heaven he will nail me to earth"

     







  11. #11
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    But what is nice? What do you mean by this??

    I cannot follow this. I tried. I am looking at all the likes and constructives and awesomes and all I can think of is the bobbleheads praising the emperor got when he wore no clothes.

    Trying to find something to grasp, I clicked on "Alleister" Crowley, the man born Edward Crowley. And it got worse! What a useless, wasted and thoroughly destructive life. I imagine when he died and saw his entire life flash before him, and he saw all of his life's actions and words and how they affected others and then the lives of those affected by him, and sees how that effect affected others, rippling out and out and out -- when I think of that vast, vast wasteland of misery emanating from the one single life, I am sickened and overwhelmed.
    I had a hard time following it too. I like his effort.

  12. #12
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,520
    Mentioned
    233 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa View Post
    I had a hard time following it too. I like his effort.
    A for effort!

  13. #13
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,520
    Mentioned
    233 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    Can you explain what you don't agree with that relates to socionic specifically? I want to make sure you're not writing it all off due to religious beliefs. I am trying to understand myself so that is why I didn't "like" anything yet so if you have something to add or subtract I would like to "hear" it.
    None of it has to do with religious beliefs. If one wanted to stretch things to root that out (but why?), you could highlight my reaction to the guy held up as an example of "extreme rationalism" (the guy I would hold up as an example of extreme something else). Perhaps you could say that being turned off by someone who makes others lives miserable has something to do with religious beliefs? Its true that in my religion, we are called to treat others how we want to be treated. But that's not unique to Christianity; its kind of universal. Kind of human.

    As to Socionics discussion, I have no worthwhile contribution to Woof's theory other than to say I could not follow it. Perhaps imbibing in something mind-altering might help the matter, though. ...Perhaps marijuana will be legalized soon. ..
    Last edited by Eliza Thomason; 04-14-2014 at 12:07 AM.

  14. #14
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    TIM
    SEER ~ 458 sx/sp
    Posts
    9,899
    Mentioned
    735 Post(s)
    Tagged
    40 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ahh, well I must have misunderstood your constructive criticism of Wolf's ideas as moral condemnation of Crowley. Glad I asked or would still have the wrong idea about your motives.
    Treat Crowley as subhuman...do unto others...

    "When I ought to be thinking of heaven he will nail me to earth"

     







  15. #15
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,520
    Mentioned
    233 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Re: Crowley:
    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    What a useless, wasted and thoroughly destructive life. ... -- when I think of that vast, vast wasteland of misery emanating from the one single life, I am sickened and overwhelmed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    Ahh, well I must have misunderstood your ...as moral condemnation of Crowley. Glad I asked or would still have the wrong idea about your motives.
    Treat Crowley as subhuman...do unto others...
    Maybe I have your moral condemnation of "moralizing" confused here.

    So I wonder, when people consider that notorious World War II German dictator (whose last name begins with the letter H whose name gets censored from this website) was subhuman, based on his biographical details concerning how he lived his life and decisions he made and he how treated others, do you think that they are wrong to "moralize" like that?

  16. #16
    Mermaid with Stellar views SyrupDeGem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    All about dat heart, no trouble.
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,472
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    But what is nice? What do you mean by this??

    I cannot follow this. I tried. I am looking at all the likes and constructives and awesomes and all I can think of is the bobbleheads praising the emperor got when he wore no clothes.

    Trying to find something to grasp, I clicked on "Alleister" Crowley, the man born Edward Crowley. And it got worse! What a useless, wasted and thoroughly destructive life. I imagine when he died and saw his entire life flash before him, and he saw all of his life's actions and words and how they affected others and then the lives of those affected by him, and sees how that effect affected others, rippling out and out and out -- when I think of that vast, vast wasteland of misery emanating from the one single life, I am sickened and overwhelmed.
    There is a lot of Jung in there. Did you find that hard to follow also? Or did you not read past the first couple of links? Jung is the basis of socionics so if you are having difficulty with that then it explains a lot to me.
    @woofwoofl, I'm still on the first tier of explanations and I find I can follow it fairly well. The maths are not overly complicated nor is the theory, it's very well thought out and I look forward to reading more. Will be asking questions as they arise. Good Job!

    Also, I was reading some of it aloud whilst listening to some chill step and I noted that it sounded really amazing, philosophical even. I had an idea to record it.

    Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.

    In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.

    When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.

    So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.

    InvisibruJim

  17. #17
    A dusty and dreadful charade. Scapegrace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    TIM
    ill
    Posts
    3,055
    Mentioned
    169 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    But what is nice? What do you mean by this??

    I cannot follow this. I tried. I am looking at all the likes and constructives and awesomes and all I can think of is the bobbleheads praising the emperor got when he wore no clothes.

    Trying to find something to grasp, I clicked on "Alleister" Crowley, the man born Edward Crowley. And it got worse! What a useless, wasted and thoroughly destructive life. I imagine when he died and saw his entire life flash before him, and he saw all of his life's actions and words and how they affected others and then the lives of those affected by him, and sees how that effect affected others, rippling out and out and out -- when I think of that vast, vast wasteland of misery emanating from the one single life, I am sickened and overwhelmed.

    "[Scapegrace,] I don't know how anyone can stand such a sinister and mean individual as you." - Maritsa Darmandzhyan

    Brought to you by socionix.com

  18. #18
    Local Hero Saberstorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Isle of Man
    TIM
    Robespierre
    Posts
    2,064
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I hope everybody realizes he is joking when he says "Woofian Socionics" - he is just summarizing the basics of Jungian typology that is common to all models of Socionics. Because he has used rich quotes from Jung, he is trying to minimalize the confusion of restating things in his own words. If we admit that "Woofian" is tongue-in-cheek - this can be retitled as a "The Jungian basis for Socionics, a Primer."

    However, Woofwoofl is also addressing subtypes ... a forum obsession of about 3 years ago I believe that has died down just recently. He also seems to address information aspects with a slight twist - his own spin to them.
     
    God is most glorified when we are most satisfied in Him.
    - John Piper


    Socionics -
    the16types.info

  19. #19
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saberstorm View Post
    I hope everybody realizes he is joking when he says "Woofian Socionics" - he is just summarizing the basics of Jungian typology that is common to all models of Socionics. Because he has used rich quotes from Jung, he is trying to minimalize the confusion of restating things in his own words. If we admit that "Woofian" is tongue-in-cheek - this can be retitled as a "The Jungian basis for Socionics, a Primer."
    The roots were necessary for me to state, because I've seen a lot of socionists sever the roots of Jung off of the tree of socionics. A hierarchy of dichotomies is presented, with everything springing from Irrational/Rational as opposed to the more common Extroversion/Introversion. Not necessarily a huge deal one way or another, but when organizing writing, something's gotta be at the base, and I put P/J at the very root, organizing the subdivisions accordingly. I think any non-aspectonical condensations of functions should be taken with a handful of others, the more the better, and a sort of average should be found between them based on whatever works for the individual socionist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Saberstorm View Post
    However, Woofwoofl is also addressing subtypes ... a forum obsession of about 3 years ago I believe that has died down just recently. He also seems to address information aspects with a slight twist - his own spin to them.
    And this is where the future writings will get much more complex. As far as I'm concerned, all of the 16 types are subtypes of the original 8. In theory, the two-subtype system should bring this to 4 subdivisions of 8, but in practice, the differing opinions on where to draw the line muddies the waters a ton. The next post is where everything gets absolutely wild, and it may take a while to write...

  20. #20
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    TIM
    SEER ~ 458 sx/sp
    Posts
    9,899
    Mentioned
    735 Post(s)
    Tagged
    40 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    Re: Crowley:

    Maybe I have your moral condemnation of "moralizing" confused here.

    So I wonder, when people consider that notorious World War II German dictator (whose last name begins with the letter H whose name gets censored from this website) was subhuman, based on his biographical details concerning how he lived his life and decisions he made and he how treated others, do you think that they are wrong to "moralize" like that?
    I don't want to get into a debate...as neither of these people have anything to do with the information presented and how it can apply... sorting out my personality within and beyond socionics. I was looking for feedback concerning his presentation as a whole. I personally do not consider anyone subhuman.. but I wouldn't call you "wrong" for feeling the way you do. We already know we see things differently that way.


    @Saberstorm

    Yes I am aware title is kinda playful.

    "When I ought to be thinking of heaven he will nail me to earth"

     







  21. #21
    Local Hero Saberstorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Isle of Man
    TIM
    Robespierre
    Posts
    2,064
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woofwoofl View Post
    The roots were necessary for me to state, because I've seen a lot of socionists sever the roots of Jung off of the tree of socionics. A hierarchy of dichotomies is presented, with everything springing from Irrational/Rational as opposed to the more common Extroversion/Introversion. Not necessarily a huge deal one way or another, but when organizing writing, something's gotta be at the base, and I put P/J at the very root, organizing the subdivisions accordingly. I think any non-aspectonical condensations of functions should be taken with a handful of others, the more the better, and a sort of average should be found between them based on whatever works for the individual socionist.



    And this is where the future writings will get much more complex. As far as I'm concerned, all of the 16 types are subtypes of the original 8. In theory, the two-subtype system should bring this to 4 subdivisions of 8, but in practice, the differing opinions on where to draw the line muddies the waters a ton. The next post is where everything gets absolutely wild, and it may take a while to write...
    I have read Jung's eight original types, and they resemble kindred pairs. For example, both the LSI and LII seem like Jung's "Introverted Thinking Man" and both the ILE and IEE resemble Jung's "Extraverted Thinking Man." However, with the use of plus minus functions, there are eight types in late Model A, X & B . Plus/Minus introduces a new similarity through mirror pairs instead of the kindred.

    All mirror pairs have identical IEs with plus minus. The LII and ILE have the same IEs while the kindred of the LII (the LSI) shares the same IEs as his mirror, the SLE. (Of course, the kindred of the ILE - the IEE - shares the same IEs as his mirror, the EII.)

    This introduces a new layer of complexity in the gallant attempt to reduce the 16 back to 8.

    I personally think kindred behave very similarly. They have the same fears and expectations from others. Mirror image pairs are much closer to each other in a "conversational" sense.
     
    God is most glorified when we are most satisfied in Him.
    - John Piper


    Socionics -
    the16types.info

  22. #22
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default woofie quadra cycles

    PART III: THE UNIVERSE

    Jung described eight particular approaches to interfacting the world by describing the people who used them. From there, Aushra Augusta took those approaches and elementalized them into discrete intangible units known as the functions. A degree of inherence was then supposed, in that the attitudes were looked at as fixed and permanent, which meant that the functions could then be seen as existing inside of people as information elements. From there, a strictly arranged constellation of these metaphysical fragments were set into sixteen arrangements known as the types, and the manner in which they were set is referred to as Model A.

    From the structure of Model A itself and via the laws of mathematics, Grigoriy Reinin unearthed the Reinin dichotomies. Augusta added to their written descriptions, as did many forum users here on the16types. As the temperaments and clubs were created from the Jungian dichotomies, groupings such as the Gulenko Cognitive Styles were created from the Reinin dichotomies. Of all groupings comprised of these dichotomies, the quadras most vividly separate Socionics from MBTI, and have inspired a multitude of writings on the forums.

    As Augusta elementalized the attitudes Jung discovered, and compartmentalized them into eight discrete units partitioned by aspectonics, so did these very elements become charged, polarized, and flavored in various different ways, opening the doors to an infinitely richer socion. The two main systems here are plus/minus and focal/diffuse, and for portability purposes, I will likely use "x" for focal(limiting) and "o" for diffuse(empowering), just as "+" is used for plus(process) and "-" is used for minus(result).

    My notation in my typelists of old have been filled with notation pointing towards certainty along certain axes and uncertainty along others, for example, "Ne/Si IxTx". I see absolutely no reason to pinpoint everything at the exact level of precision in the exact same ways as the sixteen standard socionics types do; they are but subdivisions of the original eight, and if my notation, my findings, other peoples' findings, and other peoples' parameters of decision and indecision, both on a personal level, and on the level of an overall pool of data accumulated from multiple people; if those all point towards things not currently described in the system, then it's time to dig into the undercurrents of the socion.

    An aspectonical look at the quadras themselves leaves us with the following:

    Alpha explicit fields, implicit objects
    Beta. explicit statics, implicit dynamics
    Gamma explicit objects, implicit fields
    Delta explicit dynamics, implicit statics


    The implications are concordant with my typings and a bulk of the typings I've seen across the forums, both in terms of people, and loose generalizations about non-sentient things that exist in the world, for example, "this painting is so Beta". A lot of this is going to be geared towards the world of art; if a means of typing is to exist by observation of visible human expression, I'd rather it be through examination of art, in all senses of the term, than through dynamic phrenology or worse.

    Alpha's simultaneous valuation of all explicit fields points towards a certain unequalled textural richness in all art forms, and a certain inseparability of art and internally derived order. A clockwork design running through the heart of the universe to be revealed and unearthed. I have typed, and many other people have typed, a multitude of, and a proportionately large number of drummers for whom LII is the best fit, one of whom has gone so far as to have gear-teethed designs emblazoned on all of his cymbals. A sort of dark majesty exists here that isn't touched upon nearly enough, as shown in the paintings of Gustav Klimt in the visual realm; from the NT side of things, King Crimson's Red album and much of Sonic Youth exist here, and on a more SF bent, all of Bjork's solo work at least.

    The core of the underground heavy metal world is deep in the heart of Gamma, with Pantera leaning towards the SF areas, and Meshuggah leaning towards the NT areas. The complexities are now stretched across the fields of time, and the battery is relentless; if the logical core of Alpha is one tremendous clock, then Gamma's would be something of an inversion; a mighty, shrapnel filled cyclone; instead of the greatest compaction of mass being in the core, the center would be wide open. For all of the explicit to be at home in the external results in a markedly concrete and direct notion of reality; as Klimt was for Alpha, so would Chuck Close be for Gamma. Front 242 has been typed as an entire Gamma quadrable. All of MechWarrior would be at home in Gamma.

    If Gamma would be an area of maximum concreteness, then Delta would be an area of maximum detail. Gamma's sense of propulsion and homeorrhesis; as the power of the kicks and pushes goes downwards, the frequency of them increases, and a sense of steady flow is reached; from discrete states to dynamism, the span between a series of still-frame pictures and the continual flow of snapshots of lower resolution known as video; all of this would give way to something more omnidirectional and placidly chaotic. A junkyard has no tremendous amount of continuous movement within its territory, but a huge amount of treasure to unearth. The Shire would be in Delta as well, as would the central point of the entire progressive rock movement.

    With the undercurrence made dynamic, and the evident made strictured, everything is wide open for the emotive to fly free. In the spirit of the directed conciseness that much of Beta aims for in writings, I'll link this, then this, and be on my way.

  23. #23
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,520
    Mentioned
    233 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hey, @woofwoofl , I feel I should make an addendum to what I wrote. Just because I could not follow your theory may well mean nothing at all. Saberstorm seems to get it and so does Geminatronix. I should tell you that I am in the middle of too many things I am trying to get done by a deadline and have sometimes lately been very anxious, and in fact I was so anxious about the time I wrote that comment that I had been trying to Google some simple FedEx overnight info; and my mind could not follow it and I came up with no info because staring at the page my mind went blank (so I asked SLI...). Last night I remembered this and thought I had better admit that its a good chance the problem is me as to following your theory. And I don't want to turn in for the night without saying so. Basically I rushed to judgement and I am sorry.

    However my reaction to the Crowley dude was genuine and I do think there must be Irrationals/Rationals examples who would serve you better. Maybe you prefer atheists? There must be better examples. Maybe you can add a couple of well-known regular folk, like maybe James Madison (Rational) and Dolly Madison (Irrational).

    Or you could balance out the extreme atheists with a couple of extreme Saints. These two are Doctors of the Church (Out maybe 5000 canonized Saints, only 33 are named Doctors) and also they are two of the best known Saints.
    ST. THOMAS AQUINAS known for his rational logic, and ST. THERESE OF LISIEUX, died at only twenty four and is one of the most popular Saints of all time, and I think she is very much an Irrational. .

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    184
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Good thread. I understand the information elements a lot better now.

    Ne is like, magic or something.

  25. #25
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default dem/aristo and plus/minus

    PART IV: THE SCHISM:

    All of the groundwork I've laid is pretty by-the-book. Here's where shit gets fun.

    I want something with more fluidity and explanatory power. I think stereotyponics sucks, and dynamic phrenological approaches are a coarse instrument whose value is incredibly dependent on the practitioner; there's some nice results when people feel it out for themselves sometimes, but trying to standardize any methods and set them in stone too hard leads to this.

    I love the shit out of the plus/minus functions. Seeing them as merely condensations of the clubs is too simplistic. Process/Result is being tethered to the very elements themselves. From the expansive Hitta/Bukalov model, Gulenko's writings pointed towards a streamlined Model B, and I want to ease up on the internal strictures even further. For instance:

    . . . . . . . .1 . . . 2 . . . 3 . . . 4 . . . 5 . . . 6 . . . 7 . . . 8
    hit/buk LIE -Te/+Ti +Ni/-Ne -Fe/+Fi +Si/-Se -Fi/+Fe +Se/-Si -Ti/+Te +Ne/-Ni
    gulenko LIE . -Te . . +Ni . . -Fe . . +Si . . +Fi . . -Se . . +Ti . . -Ne


    Gulenko's writings talk about the weak functions as if they're problem areas to be overridden by the oppositely polarized strong functions of another person, preferably a dual. This type of handling of the model is beautiful, symmetrical, and ultimately imperfect; describing the strong functions by mentioning what's there is excellent, describing the weak functions by mentioning what's not there is problematic.

    Also, from Model A's setting of the "what" in stone, eight "what"s derived from eight "how"s; to apply another "how" to these elementalized "how"s via plus/minus, and to set them in stone via any Model B, results in something hard to digest. What once were semi-clear concepts, like what constitutes a valued function, now get completely lost in the mudpile.

    I don't wanna ditch all of Model A, but I do wanna fill the spaces in between and focus more on that. Keeping to the Ego blocks and taking a wide sweep of the quadras results in this:

    Alpha +Ne +Si -Fe -Ti
    Beta. -Se -Ni +Fe +Ti
    Gamma +Se +Ni -Te -Fi
    Delta -Ne -Si +Te +Fi


    That covers all sixteen valued plus/minus functions incredibly cleanly. Visible now, for once, is the Democratic/Aristocratic dichotomy, which also draws the quadra lines; all -/result rationality and +/process irrationality would be democratic, and all -/result irrationality and +/process rationality would be aristocratic. An aristocratic approach would consist of mentally constructing groupings for people, and perhaps all objects, to be seen as being part of, a sort of view of people as being comprised of multiple tribes, oftentimes with formulations of "this person is an X person", with X being filled in by all manner of values. Tribalism is another word I'd like to use as far as the aristocratic side of the divide goes, the vertical structure that establishes a hierarchy itself would be attributable to +/process functions being J functions, obvious in Beta as +Ti; the term "tribalism" would place the focal point further towards the perceptual.

    On an aspectonical level, this gets even more interesting:

    dem NT, SF; one explicit and implicit fxn per block
    ari ST, NF; explicit fxns together, implicit fxns together


    I've written about the aristocratic/tribalist approach, but this inseparability and balance between the evident and the subtle on all levels in the democratic approach stands in sharp relief against the evident and the subtle operating more firmly within their own spheres as per the aristocratic/tribalist approach. I mentioned the illustration of Thoth's Six of Swords as being a nice visual depiction of -/result Ti, internally-derived logic unencumbered by tethers to the realm of the physical.

  26. #26
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    jung's work has its major limitations... the main gripe i have with his type descriptions is that he uses objectivity in varying contexts to mean two fundamentally different and irreconcileable things. the first treats subjectivity like a kind of non-rational way of thinking where the person can not trace back his conclusions and motivations to person-independent factors, kind of like intuition (another issue being that a confusion between this and intuition is given rise to). the other is a passive kind of objectivity where it simply means a concern for or attention to states of affairs and entities outside of the person him/herself as opposed to mere disjoint experiences and qualia.

    these two are epistemic objectivity/subjectivity and ontological objectivity/subjectivity.

    jung's ambiguity between the terms would not be in any way a problem if it weren't for the fact that two are not just different, but fundamentally opposite to each other in the chief context in which they appear.

    the more ones attention goes to states of affairs removed from oneself, the harder it is to not resort to implicit and private means of processing knowledge of these, because their epistemic relation to ones states of knowledge is very complex, let alone to those of others with which one communicates about them. making the reasoning process explicit at a certain point becomes pragmatically impossible on account of its inefficiency.

    in other words, the more ontologically objective the orientation of one's thinking, the more epistemically subjective it becomes.

    the reverse applies in more or less the same way.

    socionics accounts for this difficulty when one interprets the terms as follows:

    ontological objectivity/subjectivity: Pe, Pi
    epistemic objectivity/subjectivity: Je, Ji

    with ontological objectivity being paired with epistemic subjectivity at all times and ontological subjectivity with epistemic objectivity.

    jung's treatment leaves this principle in the typology's ontological foundation obscured and is for that reason a major obstacle to your understanding of it if you take it seriously.

    ps. another thing to know is that in order to discuss any topic at all, it must be raised out of the merely ontologically subjective; experiences and qualia in their proper form are impossible to relate; every communication of these is to an extent already an abstraction into ontologically objective form. hence why the dilemma between the two arises in the first place in the architecture of the mental

  27. #27
    Éminence grise mikemex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Third Planet
    TIM
    IEE-Ne
    Posts
    1,631
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Woofian socionics". LOL, I like that...

    Good thread. I'll comment later.
    [] | NP | 3[6w5]8 so/sp | Type thread | My typing of forum members | Johari (Strengths) | Nohari (Weaknesses)

    You know what? You're an individual, and that makes people nervous. And it's gonna keep making people nervous for the rest of your life.
    - Ole Golly from Harriet, the spy.

  28. #28
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,485
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    the first treats subjectivity like a kind of non-rational way of thinking where the person can not trace back his conclusions and motivations to person-independent factors, kind of like intuition (another issue being that a confusion between this and intuition is given rise to).

    the other is a passive kind of objectivity where it simply means a concern for or attention to states of affairs and entities outside of the person him/herself as opposed to mere disjoint experiences and qualia.

    these two are epistemic objectivity/subjectivity and ontological objectivity/subjectivity.
    How does the subjective / objective dichotomoy apply to the first one, if not as concern for entities inside / outside oneself?
    Capitalism is the belief that the rich won't work hard when they don't earn enough money, and that the poor won't work hard when they earn too much.

  29. #29
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xerx View Post
    How does the subjective / objective dichotomoy apply to the first one, if not as concern for entities inside / outside oneself?
    it concerns much more abstract entities in that sense, such as principles and processes. the point is that the character of the mental mode is completely different from the other and the two are operationally not just irreconcileable but actively contrary.

    if i had to phrase the issue in condensed form, it'd be that empiricism is perspective dependent and empiricism must be departed from to depart from a perspective dependent mentality. this is how Pe and Je never pair in the socionical psyche and the gap between the two only ever bridged in a roundabout way.

  30. #30
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,485
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    it concerns much more abstract entities in that sense, such as principles and processes. the point is that the character of the mental mode is completely different from the other and the two are operationally not just irreconcileable but actively contrary.

    if i had to phrase the issue in condensed form, it'd be that empiricism is perspective dependent and empiricism must be departed from to depart from a perspective dependent mentality. this is how Pe and Je never pair in the socionical psyche and the gap between the two only ever bridged in a roundabout way.
    I'm having trouble understanding the second paragraph.

    Do you mean that Pe represent empiricism, which is itself fundamentally dependent on perspective ( i.e. person-dependent )?

    Or do you mean that empiricism is person-independent and hence Je, and that it is necessary to depart from Pe in order to be empirical?


    I'm gonna guess that your answer maybe along the lines of any concept is more or less a mixture of Px and Jx, in which case I'm now less sure how empiricism can be defined, or whether there are even two kinds of empiricism (given PeJi & PiJe).


    Also,

    the more ones attention goes to states of affairs removed from oneself, the harder it is to not resort to implicit and private means of processing knowledge of these, because their epistemic relation to ones states of knowledge is very complex, let alone to those of others with which one communicates about them. making the reasoning process explicit at a certain point becomes pragmatically impossible on account of its inefficiency.
    Why is it even possible (however long it takes) for one state to converge to a solution without its opposite (e.g. Je w/o Pi)?
    Capitalism is the belief that the rich won't work hard when they don't earn enough money, and that the poor won't work hard when they earn too much.

  31. #31
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Do you mean that Pe represent empiricism, which is itself fundamentally dependent on perspective ( i.e. person-dependent )?
    Je is most tightly linked to empiricism, the step-wise quantification of perspective. Pe is the result of composing many empirical acts into one model, which renders the influence of each individual empirical act diminished. the problem is rooted in the fact that these acts by definition occur at different points in time, and intermediately conditions may have changed. an assumption of permanence (statics) is raised which can not be rationally justified. this is how Static-Limiting information is Creating and for that reason fragile; attack the permanence premise, demonstrate its being a possible rather than actual world in carnap's sense and the sandcastle crumbles.

    Why is it even possible (however long it takes) for one state to converge to a solution without its opposite (e.g. Je w/o Pi)?
    the same way certain substances can form suspensions without being able to form compounds. it's human quasi-rationality cheating the limits of true rationality.

  32. #32
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,485
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    Je is most tightly linked to empiricism, the step-wise quantification of perspective. Pe is the result of composing many empirical acts into one model, which renders the influence of each individual empirical act diminished. the problem is rooted in the fact that these acts by definition occur at different points in time, and intermediately conditions may have changed. an assumption of permanence (statics) is raised which can not be rationally justified. this is how Static-Limiting information is Creating and for that reason fragile; attack the permanence premise, demonstrate its being a possible rather than actual world in carnap's sense and the sandcastle crumbles.
    can time be abstracted into a static concept such that change can be incorporated into a static model?


    the same way certain substances can form suspensions without being able to form compounds. it's human quasi-rationality cheating the limits of true rationality.
    are you defining heuristics?
    Capitalism is the belief that the rich won't work hard when they don't earn enough money, and that the poor won't work hard when they earn too much.

  33. #33
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    can time be abstracted into a static concept such that change can be incorporated into a static model?
    only with painstaking effort; it's possible in principle but pragmatically infeasible. whenever you deal with dynamics you almost invariably handle solely references rather than modeling the referred-to in detail; otherwise the complexity of the modeling act mounts to extremes within moments. you're right that in the strictest sense there is no need to bring a distinction between the time and space into any of this (time just being a 4th spatial dimension*), but in practice the correspondence holds.

    * btw, where space is concerned in socionics, one is not restricted to 3 dimensions; possibility spaces and their respective dimensions can be incorporated into a mental model. there is no need for conceptual space to restrict itself to geometry. the only limits to the extent of the dimensional wafering are practical ones.

    are you defining heuristics?
    sure, not the worst word for it.

  34. #34
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default interconnections and undercurrence

    PART V: THE COMPLETE ELEMENTS

    If there's anything I've ever contributed to Socionics moreso than anything else, it'll probably be notation that either starts with or passes through me and goes from there to wherever you want to take it.

    Anyways, just as there's -/Result and +/Process, let there be x/Focal and o/Diffuse, as well as #/Focal and @/Diffuse. Focal would be well-served by line segments converging on one singular point; "x" marks the spot, and "#" traps it. Diffuse would be well-served by something more nebulous and omnidirectional; "o", and "@". The x/o notation is more visually sparse, and their diametric opposition is clear to anyone who has ever played tic-tac-toe; the #/@ notation is more distinct and identifiable, and it doesn't math up the visual/conceptual field.

    Other terms for x/Focal and o/Diffuse are Limiting and Empowering respectively. Let's start big:

    Extroversion o/Diffuse P, x/Focal J
    Introversion x/Focal P, o/Diffuse J

    Static o/Diffuse Base (all Accepting), x/Focal Creative (all Producing)
    Dynamic x/Focal Base (all Accepting), o/Diffuse Creative (all Producing)


    Going down one level from there, let's work with the eight basic types in a Model J oriented way:

    . base counterparts
    Ne oNe -#Ti +#Fi oSi
    Se oSe +#Ti -#Fi oNi
    Fe xFe -@Ni +@Si xTi
    Te xTe +@Ni -@Si xFi
    Ni xNi -@Te +@Fe xSe
    Si xSi +@Te -@Fe xNe
    Fi oFi -#Ne +#Se oTe
    Ti oTi +#Ne -#Se oFe


    Taking the Model J apart and plugging the charged basics into the sixteen types would result in the following:

    . . base crea . . . base crea . . . base crea . . . base crea
    ILE +@Ne -#Ti . EIE +#Fe -@Ni . SEE +@Se -#Fi . LSE +#Te -@Si
    SEI +#Si -@Fe . LSI +@Ti -#Se . ILI +#Ni -@Te . EII +@Fi -#Ne
    ESE -#Fe +@Si . SLE -@Se +#Ti . LIE -#Te +@Ni . IEE -@Ne +#Fi
    LII -@Ti +#Ne . IEI -#Ni +@Fe . ESI -@Fi +#Se . SLI -#Si +@Te


    First thing I noticed was the identical charges of the bases within every supervision ring. I immediately went to the cog styles:

    HPcog -@Base, +#Creative
    VScog -#Base, +@Creative
    CDcog +@Base, -#Creative
    DAcog +#Base, -@Creative


    And here I'll go function by function, organizing everything by minus/plus and diffuse/focal; this will take multiple posts:

     
     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    SLEs are strong-willed, independently-minded individuals who are able to recognize levels of willpower and motivation in others. They are almost always collected and ready for action. They are adept at organizing others effectively towards any given objective, and have no problem "getting the job done," even if it requires stepping on a few toes. They will take the initiative and act at the opportune moment. SLEs will often act without complete information, improvising as they go, but are successful nonetheless. Instability energizes them, as they are active people who think clearly on the move and tend to be unsatisfied with a stationary, peaceful lifestyle.

    SLEs easily spot power dynamics within any given structure, hierarchy or relationship, and strive for a secure position where they are less subordinate to others. At the same time, SLEs are comfortable with hierarchies, and recognize that they are a necessary part of everyday life. SLEs may sometimes seem dismissive of those of a lower social status, as if they were weak or inferior in some way. Likewise, they see dependence as weakness, and so strive to minimize their dependence on others, especially in their personal relationships.

    SLEs' energetic and direct nature tends to make them natural leaders. They are quick to assume this role, even in alien or unfamiliar environments. They usually adopt a direct administrative style and build a bureaucratic structure beneath them over time. They will take full responsibility for their actions, and understand these terms when they take a leadership-based role within a group, company or organization as being part of what leadership is about.

    SLEs are highly observant and take note of all the objects present in their surroundings. They are well aware of which objects they have, and which they want, and tend to be possessive of their property. At the same time, they also have a generous streak and can easily bestow gifts and share their property with others to demonstrate acceptance of the other person or people.


    Stratievskaya:

    "The strong are listened to even when they speak in whisper." (Alexander Lebed). Strength, power, determination, persistence and perseverance – these are the main program values of representatives of this type. This is why they are very adept as evaluating the strength and "volitional capacity" of each person. Their attention is turned towards those who aspire to power, and they try not to yield the "volitional initiative."

    The main point of reference that holds the attention of Zhukov is the distribution of power in the existing social structure and his own capabilities in this respect. In other words, all through his life, consciously or unconsciously, regardless of his occupation and interests, members of this type are constantly posing themselves with a question: "Who will win over whom?". All "volitional sensing" of Zhukov is considered under these terms: "Either I overcome him, or he overcomes me." ("When I was little my father suppressed me, now that I grew up I've suppressed him.")

    The sense of their personal strength and power, their own authority and capability, have an exceptional significance for Zhukov. He respects authority and force, and will respect a hierarchical system that is founded on "right", in his view, balance of power. Zhukov attempts to find a position for himself within the framework of already existing system. This is the first stage in all of his endeavors, his "program-minimum", his first goal.

    "Volitional" program of Zhukov consists of consecutive achievement of short-range goals by all means possible. ("The end justifies the means.") The ultimate goal of Zhukov is to attain the most powerful position within the hierarchy. It does not matter who he is today - the head of the department, or the leader of the opposition: he always feels himself to be a person of power and authority. Within the area that was entrusted to him, he is invulnerable, unquestioned authority, "God and king". Even working in the department as a regular employee, Zhukov determined to reach higher level can within a short time attain influence with his higher-up (sometimes this is better for him than becoming a leader himself.)

    Organization of power structures and leadership within them is one of the social functions of the representative of this type. Intercalation into a system, search for like-minded people within it, introduction into the sphere of influence and important business interests, followed by introduction of "his people", whose activities he will oversee, coordinate, and who will obey him at the right moments - all this is leads to creation of his own structure within the already existing system: gradual takeover of power by method of "gradually shrinking iron hoop."

    On goals that don't correspond to specific tasks Zhukov does not waste his time. Moreover, he will not let himself be misled and thrown off the course. (For example, a movement will interest him only if it has an actual chance of growing and gaining influence; he will join it only if he sees for himself a real opportunity for advancement.)

    Position of the "errand boy" for Zhukov is unacceptable - that he tries to avoid by all means. Zhukov also finds himself incapable of asking anyone for their help: he feels that this is humiliating. Thus he tries to construct the situation in such a manner that others will to do what he wants (a minor version of the method of "iron hoop").

    Unthinkable for Zhukov situation is where he is taken for a dupe; this is more than a blow to the ego – it's the collapse of his whole program. Often there is an impression that he is obsesses with the whole notion of "respect - disrespect." He constantly and everywhere requires recognition of himself (which in itself is already a sign of his underlying insecurity). The more he feels himself an "errand boy" on the inside, the more attention and respect he demands.

    He dislikes being dependent. Dependence for him is a sign of weakness. Ability to make others depend on yourself – is a sign of power. (He likes to offer his "valuable" services, likes to be the "needed" person, can "recall" the service rendered and ask for repayment of debt.)

    His constant desire to grab more power and extend the range of his influence is dictated not only unfulfilled ambition, but also an internal requirement to insure himself from the situation of forced submission. ("Either I submit him, or he will submit me.") Throughout his life, he seems to be accumulating an additional "margin of safety". He does not simply "oppress for no reason", he tries to capture a little more "for the future" - in case he's made to surrender something, it won't be as disappointing – he will give in, but it won't be "his own". Quality that is widespread in representatives of this type – capture of administrative, physical, and, most importantly, territorial advantages.

    The conquest of space for Zhukov is a task of paramount importance, and it is realized by him in the most natural and therefore not always conscious way. Even if it's a capture of extra space in the communal kitchen or extra meters of yard space, Zhukov will still feel dissatisfied if the initiative came from someone else. For representatives of this type, taking up space is the most natural state. (Often, without knowing it, Zhukov chooses a central position in the available space – he can, for example, move himself to the middle of a room, and feels himself well communicating with those who are sitting along the wall.)

    Sometimes Zhukov prepares for himself an "area of action" quite deliberately. For example, having decided to go explore another city or another country, he gathers requests from his friends, which gives him the opportunity to visit their friends and relatives, to ask them about life there and the times, tell about himself, make new acquaintances, get a place to live for a day or two, and before you know he's accepted as one of their own, and the next time he visits as if he's visiting friends.

    In everyday life Zhukov often wins space over with noise and sounds. For child-Zhukov it is characteristic to shout responses to his parents across the entire yard - at this moment he feels that he owns all of the surrounding space. For Zhukov who has moved to a new place (especially residents of southern countries) it is very characteristic as soon as they arrive to put on some music at full volume, and leave the door to his house or apartment wide open, so that the neighbors have no illusions about who is the boss here. For the same reason, some Zhukovs themselves don't like very "musical" neighbors around and may ask for their eviction.

    Zhukov's distribution of power is always very primitive: "either - or" there is no alternative. This is because he is always focused on close-range goals – either he takes it, or he doesn't ("Either you succeed or you fail."). His entire system of relations is subject to this, by and large, "either the leader – or the servant","either the owner - or a nobody."In his system, the balance of power has only two power poles: the strong and the weak. Zhukov prefers to be in a strong pole, but if he has found himself defeated, he is able to admit it and submit to the winning side.

    Zhukov is distinguished by an exceptional capacity for work and drive, which grows proportionally to the number of obstacles he faces.

    He does not allow anyone to doubt his ability and his right to direct and lead others. He often speaks as if he is making declarations - confidently, in a commanding voice. Does not allow for leniency (thinks this may turn around negatively). Prefers to only demand. Uses every opportunity to show his volitional qualities - determination, perseverance, steadfastness, declaring of himself as a strict but fair leader.

    Zhukov usually excels in roles of leader-organizer: he accurately assesses the qualifications of his workers, asks the top performance from everyone, assigns the work for optimal distribution of forces. He sets the most intensive pace of work in order to achieve the most productive returns in minimum of time.

    Under normal conditions, Zhukov does not feel like he is "in his regime", but in an emergency situation he becomes activated and mobilized. For this reason, he likes to create an atmosphere of psychological tension. Likes telling scary stories, likes to paint things with dark colors, in order to create a sense of urgency. Extreme conditions invigorate Zhukov, which is why he sometimes toughens disciplinary conditions that keep his subordinates in constant tension. He may bring unfounded extremeness into a calm work schedule: this to him feels normal, and, therefore, others will have to make themselves feel comfortable within it.

    Prefers group discussion of solutions by the group, but he will accept the final decision as well as the responsibility for the decision made. "The battle was won not by the one who has given good advice, but the one who took responsibility for its implementation and given the orders." (Napoleon Bonaparte).

    Zhukov likes and knows how to take responsibility.

    He quickly grasps the present situation and the distribution of power, makes a decision and acts. He is able to take risks, to go "all-in". Not subject to fear. The more dangerous the situation is, the more collected and determined he becomes. In extreme conditions, his will power, determination, courage and practical thinking help him to find a resolution.

    In critical situations, he calls for decisive actions, for "building up power". (Frivolity and carelessness are qualities that should not be tolerated, in his opinion.) Prefers to act calmly and extremely energetically, responding with a blow to a blow. In case of external physical danger he will prudently withdraw. But if, under the circumstances, it was necessary to engage in a conflict situation, he prefers not to retreat but to fight to the end, even to the detriment of his own interests. ("Victory at all costs!)

    Not inclined to adapt to his partner, but to dictate. Usually tries to be polite and mature, but if his sense of self worth has been slighted, he is unable to hide his irritation. In the "slighted" state, he is internally nervous and tries to find an exit from the situation.

    In a group, he often takes on the role of the informal leader, the secret controller of the situation, at the critical moment prefers to stay in the shade.

    About expediency of action, endurance and stamina, the need to mobilize one's forces, he speaks in a tone that invites no opposition.

    He likes to discuss discipline, the need to develop a strong-willed and determined character. Constantly keeps people around him in a tight, mobilized state.

    Demanding with respect to himself and others: people who do not fulfill their promises do not earn his respect. In his eyes, they mean absolutely nothing. His contempt for such people does not bother to hide.

    Zhuiov is confident in his own power and significance, as well as in his social mission.

    Venturesome, given to contention and competition.

    To everyone and everywhere imposes his life values as a kind of absolute truth not to be questioned. Often and gladly speaks of the "harsh reality", appreciates the ability to take life "as it is". Willing to share his life experiences, although often too intrusive when trying to teach "how to live." Always knows "how to" and "how not to."


    Filatova:

    Volitional pressure, the uncontrollable desire for activity, sporting tone and resoluteness are basic qualites exemplified by the SLE. She is a person of activity, contemplation, as a way of life, is alien to her. She will attempt by any means to achieve her goals; her means of achievement will not be hampered by ceremonial (i.e. bureaucratic) regulations

    In her struggles the SLE will never yeald the initiative. If necessary she will wait for the proper moment to act and will never forsake the opportunity at hand. Her influence is goverened by her power. She doesn't often think of other unusual ways to solve problems. She does not submit herself to the success of a common cause but rather is capable of shouldering the responsibility of leadership herself. She is inflexible and rigid when conducting others towards the execution of activities/goals. She decisively manifests interest in her work and is not tormented or distracted by pangs in her consciousness, even if, for the achievement of her goals, she must pinch, punish of offend soemone. When that, which she desires, si impossible to reach quickly and directly, she will seek alternate routes and will, without fail, tend to attain one.

    She is an innate leader, able to organize work/activities on any scale. Even in a new environment, or new realms of activity, previously alien to her, it remains possible for her to be confident that sooner or later, she will prove herself capablr of taking control. True sometimes she emanates excessive pressure, in a volitional sense: i.e. anywhere that soemthing , in an SLE's opinion, is under fufilled or lacks completio, further work will be managed with her personal interferance. Being energetic and ambitious the SLE assumes that the significance of an individual is determined by his/her situation in society, by the ability of the individual to attain his/her place in life; hence she may prove to be, at times, intolerant, even rough, in terms of respect, with those of lower status. She may consider others to be measly, if that individual has failed to reach a fitting place in the social hierarchy. On the other hand those that possess authority in society are worthy of her respect.

    The SLE will never give up, she will never allow herself to be conquered. If forced to suffer humiliation she will gather the necessary resources needed to take vengeance; she does not pardon offenses directed against her.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    The SEE is always present in the here and now. An SEE knows exactly which relations he has influence over at the moment, and exactly how much influence he has (i.e. how far can he "push"). If an SEE wants someone that he does not "have", he can spend lots of time thinking about how to get it. The SEE finds it hard to be content with what he has.

    SEEs are quick to notice confrontational behavior. It is very obvious to an SEE when someone is displaying aggression, even in the most subtle passive-aggressive fashion. Confrontational behavior does not phase the SEE, whether his reaction is to respond with confrontation or hostility himself, creating an outwards appearance of indifference and unimpressiveness, or trying to calm down the offender/make them feel guilty. The various means available to the SEE to achieve the above goals are not nearly as important to the SEE as the end.

    The SEE is motivated on some level in all of his affairs towards his goal of exclusiveness. He prefers to be in as high of a position of demand and respect as possible. It fills the SEE with joy to be have many different people competing for his attention and affection. Such a scenario reassures the SEE with the fact that he has been doing things right and that his hard work has paid off. Thus the SEE is often found surrounded by a large circle of friends and romantic interests.

    An SEE views material objects as well as people in terms of how they can be used to achieve his goals. Upon losing a superficial friendship or a materialistic object, the SEE is sentimental only in terms of how it affects what he is currently striving for. For example, SEE would not see much point in being in the middle of the nowhere by himself with lots of gold and other showy yet useless objects. These things might only be important to him in regards to how they make other people think about him, or how it would indicate his status.

    With extroverted sensing as his base, the SEE would much prefers to be a "go getter," out doing things as opposed to thinking about what he could be doing.


    Stratievskaya:

    For the man of this type are characteristic the volitional protection of its own interests (and of the interests of "their command"), the protection of its own priority by any price. But not for the purpose of direct and merciless suppression, but for the maximum realization of its own creative and ethical potential, for the most complete expression of its own bright individuality, for the realization of its own ethical purposes and tasks.

    Therefore the ratio of forces in the system of the values of Caesar - this is first of all the competition of personal achievements and successes. To Caesar is important the acknowledgement of his personal merits importantly the acknowledgement of his authority through the realization of his personal qualities acknowledgement by his most sensitive and most thoughtful leader, by the most energetic and most active acknowledgement by his most loyal and most reliable friend acknowledgement by his best and most unsurpassed in his kind worker.

    No matter by what it neither would be occupied, whatever activity for itself nor selected. Caesar always poses for himself the problem of being best of the good by himself purpose very praiseworthy and deserving respect, but from other side - what physical forces he is worthwhile to live entire life as on the sport contest being constantly examined to the rivals, constantly comparing its own successes with the strange achievements, constant stress in the eternal tendency to be pulled out forward and not to yield superiority.

    Caesar tries easily and rapidly to attain the stated goals Uvlechenno being occupied by the selected matter, without considering those spent for achievement of success by efforts, Caesar it is capable to the exceptional fitness for work and on any, even contradicting the common sense victims. (for example, one of the representatives of this type, the beginning singer "placed" to itself voice, being occupied simultaneously in three instructors of vokala unfortunately, result it did not justify the spent efforts.)

    Without a moment's hesitation about that which risks to seem by boastful, Caesar at every turn "reports" about his achievements, sometimes sufficiently sincerely being surprised so that others lag behind his "model" rates: "as, you yet did not make this task? But 4 already following I make!" It seemingly proposes in any matter "to be equal" to it. And in fact, why no? Caesar magnificently knows how to impose the spirit of creative competition and business activity on the most passive and most indifferent to the general enthusiasm person. It will force to podsuyetit'sya the most passive and the inactive (what extreme point of samootstranennosti and passiveness would reach its dual Balzac, if not exceptional enthusiasm and the hyper-activity of Caesar)

    Caesar always condemns and blames passiveness, absence of initiative, retreat from the selected plans in the people. It cannot be said so that Caesar would clearly encourage the skill "to work by elbows" - it is faster, it encourages the skill "to fight, to search for, to find and not to surrender". Caesar does not respect those, who pass before the difficulties. He always for the active stand in life, for the active search for the solutions sometimes the methods, which he proposes for the solution of problems, appear somewhat rectilinear. Not that so that it would propose to go and to break into the closed doors (although this also is not excluded), to defend its rights by any possible method, to attain that outlined with any conditions, this already without fail.

    To Caesar it is actually important to know, what problems are solved by the method of volitional pressure, and what are not. Therefore, giving advice, to which, possibly, it itself and did not follow, Caesar makes this of the considerations of obtaining information with the important for himself, "program" aspect of "volitional sensoriki". where it is possible "to press", while where - it is cannot.

    In the estimation of potential rivals Caesar first of all in exactly the same manner examines the ability of man to resist the exerted to it pressure, and also the skill to postoyat' for himself and readiness to give immediate rebuff frequently confident in his power superiority or feeling, that the situation "works" on it, Caesar can himself allow "trial falling out" to the side of that, its whose power potential it now interests. The absence of immediate protection sometimes directs it at the erroneous thought, that man is not generally to it capable. Sometimes such prompt conclusions lead it to the very unpleasant situations.

    To Caesar it is extremely unpleasant, when him they publicly "put in place" - this understates its self-appraisal. Is still more absurd the situation, when any generally unfamiliar person for the incomprehensible reasons it attacks. In this case Caesar feels himself very lost. Unfortunately, he is not always capable to rapidly take control over his feelings and to quietly and solidly require explanations.

    Caesar can vividly, sometimes provocatively "state" about himself. He can defy society, it can take to himself the scandalous stage means: for it this not is more than the expression of its own creative individuality. Much more than it disturbs the absence of interest in itself. Unwillingness to note its clearly expressed abilities, unwillingness to recognize its success, unwillingness to obey its leadership.

    Caesar first of all of men of action. Therefore especially painfully it receives any limitation of its activity. (problem, which it fairly often encounters, since its activity bears sufficiently contradictory and confused nature.) Its activity assumes wide spread and scale of measures.

    It is exceptionally initiative-taking, it can literally "break" into the strange life, in the strange relations, because of what the impression of insolent person and impudent person frequently is produced. Frequently there is bestseremonen and it is obtrusive.

    In the tendency to take initiative by any price Caesar frequently appears far from in better shape, because of what sometimes he falls into awkward situation, it is sometimes simply it is pitiful or ridiculous. (about which do not give god to it to say.) There is nothing sicker for Caesar than to see that all its efforts to conquer (precisely to conquer) the authority, popularity or arrangement, lead to the diametrically opposite results. To the honor of Caesar, he knows how to recognize the fact of his own errors and is capable to publicly recognize his fault, although possibly this to it is given more heavily than by other.

    It would be incorrect to say that his ambitions were important for Caesar first of all. The incomprehension of its good intentions is much more offensive for it. In its right to the leadership Caesar it is completely sincerely confident. Therefore the nonrecognition of its priority for it is deeply offensive, since this first of all nonrecognition of its merits, it honest selfless, creative, with the complete return of the forces of labor. If Zhukov has leadership - this is the strategic calculation, where any jamming of its ambitions is received as hostile falling out. Caesar, in contrast to Zhukov, fights not for self assertion of his own ambitions, but for the right to justify the confidence entrusted to it. Simply stated, if to Zhukov is important the sensation of his real authority. To Caesar importantly voluntary acknowledgement and confidence. To Zhukov it is important to take authority. To Caesar it is important to hold leadership. If authority is necessary to Zhukov, in order to head system, then to Caesar in order first of all to maximally realize its creative ethical potential, to democratize the system headed by it, to ethical improve it. If we zhukovskaya strategy - tendency take all spheres of influence, then for Caesar it is important to take "supremacy" in all spheres of its activity: personal merits, in his opinion, even more greatly convince surrounding in its right to the leadership.

    If Zhukov always rigidly checks the seized sphere of influence, then Caesar does not always note that he generally took some space.

    (it should be noted that the comparison of the program functions of Zhukov and Caesar is given for the explanation of fundamental differences in them "volitional sensorikakh", but completely not in order to indicate, who of them a "good" leader, but who "poor" - in each of them his social function, necessary for the realization in the specific situation and under the specified public conditions.)

    Behavior of Caesar first of all are characterized by rapidity and energetic nature, immediate and comprehensive initiative. Caesar for himself unnoticeably fills entire surrounding space. He does not always note, are not always evaluated the methods, which he uses for the fastest achievement of the sympathies: to it is more important to hold his authority, and for this he is ready honest and to ethically work out the undertaken himself obligations.

    The problem of Caesar also in the fact that in contrast to Zhukov, who always knows, "as is must". Caesar distinctly knows only "as not must". With all his exceptional talents Caesar is faster destroyer, than creator. In the policy he is the destroyer of totalitarian and authoritarian systems. In the skill he - daring innovator, who subverts the existing to it kept balance forms. He can be the founder of new direction in the skill, which no one besides it and to continue will be able. To imitate - as much as desired, to continue - no. Among the representatives of this type frequently are encountered bright creative individualities, thoroughly gifted personalities.

    The discrepancy "volitional sensoriki" Caesar consists in very democratism of his autocracy. Caesar sincerely hates tyranny and despotism, it from those, whose name they write "on the fragments of samovlast'ya". And at the same time it by all means attempts not to be inferior its influence. The acknowledgement of its own defeat in this plan for it is especially agonizing. Attempt with any price to hold its influence frequently brings Caesar k. to desperate and contradictory behavior, which have for it frequently tragic consequences.


    Filatova:

    The Strong individual. Irrepressibly he approaches his goals and, at any costs, tries to reach them. “Only success, only victory!”

    SEE – always the leader, ambitious and confident. Naturally proves to be the center of attention in any group. The desire, without fail, to lead, to control; leads to rivalries, competition with other aspirants. However, SEE deftly senses the nuances in his relations, wonderfully senses the moods of others towards him. If someone, whom he must deal with, is capable of holding him at a distance, of resisting him, SEE will not bother with him, but if, and when, he feels slack he can press and become unceremonious. Will not seek conflict without reason. Can act diplomatic and insinuating in order to achieve objectives. But if conflict arises he can express himself directly, unambiguously.

    Always, and in everything, SEE tries to display his advantages to others. Should he suffer injustice he will find a way to turn it around, presenting himself to others so as not to lose face, even conversely to appear the victor. He never acknowledges his injuries.

    SEE tends not to get lost in the difficult situation; in such cases he rather reacts with more strength, mobilizing to surmount the difficulty.

    Energetic and noisy, he creates the impression that he is occupying as much space as possible.

    SEE noticeably develops the shadow function of the extroverted sense of sensations (Se), especially when viewed from the exterior. SEE loves bright, garish clothing; he prefers to appear from “better to extravagant” rather than “everyday and gray”. It pleases him to be noticed, to garner the attention of others.


     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    LSIs prefer to apply their clear, logical thinking to forcibly affect how the real world is organized, rather than simply producing conjectures or thought exercises that have no material application. LSIs prefer to work with systems of "real" things — material assets, organizations, management, and production — and to perfect their structure and organization (Ti). When they are certain they are right, LSIs can act decisively to enforce rules, and, if necessary, to punish violators, in order to protect the integrity of the system.

    LSIs handle high-pressure situations well and can maneuver skillfully around obstacles to achieve their goals. They cannot be intimidated easily by displays of force or aggression, but follow closely the balance of power and make sure they are in the best position.


    Stratievskaya:

    Concrete logical program must take root by concrete methods, and which can be more concrete than the method of volitional action?

    After appointing Maxim the theorist of concrete systems, nature armed with this his powerful tool, as flexible and manipulation volitional action - goal-directed influence on those surrounding by means of the sensation of its force, significance, by means of the sensation of the lawfulness of its volitional pressure.

    The belonging with the actually existing public structures gives to Maxim the sensation of its own social significance, which it sees in the service to the ideals of its system: it creates theoretical base by it, erects the strong administrative arrangements, firm to all periods. (predominating system it can be pulled down, and its administrative arrangement it is capable of rapidly re-form and of continuing to function under another flag and another slogan.)

    Maxim distinguishes high exactingness both of itself and of those surrounding; intolerance to any kind to the manifestations of disorder within the framework of its system, to the cultivation in it of anarchy and chaos.

    Maxim is sincerely enraptured by this quality as fitness for work. The selfless labor for the good of society, for the good of the association - this is the standard of human activity, which one only and can be permitted in the healthy and viable social system. And vice versa, any slackness, irresponsibility and sloppiness undermine the public of abutment, they lead society to the destruction, the social calamities and the catastrophes; therefore with these phenomena, it counts, it is necessary to fight by all forces, without the pity and the condescension.

    Maxim is always ready to fight with the manifestations of disorder in the society. (it can spend the time of its leave on fight with the deficiencies in the system of sanatorium maintenance and of public nutrition; and to return by that by home get tiredded, but happy - one additional center of sloppiness is liquidated by its efforts, and now vacationers can obtain valuable maintenance)

    Within the framework of "maksimovskoy" system cannot be simply the groups of people - there is the association, united under overall interest and hierarchically organized; independent of number and age of its members are always assigned someone, corresponding for the management in the "trusted section" (the "commander of asterisk", "critical on the corridor", etc.). (volitional sensorika of Maxim, in contrast to voinstvenno-moralizatorskoy sensoriki of Dreiser is administrative -mafiozno1 "sensoriki of Zhukov, bears" military-administrative "nature - in view of the social specific character of dyad" Hamlet - Maxim ". This partly explains, why within the framework of "maksimovskoy" social system the group of children is converted into the "asterisk", into the "component" or into the "force tyuey oktyabryat".)

    Maxim can conveniently be arranged at any level of social hierarchy. For it the main thing - to occupy place in this system. It with the identical zeal can carry out any official work, and its business relations are constructed according to the occupied position: it requires from the subordinates and tries not to argue with the authorities. to "authorities be seen" - quite maksimovskaya saying, and the argument: "I was only subordinated to order" - the most convincing. And to it it is incomprehensible, as this it is possible to dispute. According to its logic, in its system that being subordinate is subordinated to that be highering, low-order - to elder.

    It is politely strict in the rotation, it is always disciplined, pulled, accurate, operating, required, punctual: all these qualities ideally correspond to the social function of Maxim - to work for the good of public system.

    Its house it also examines as the trusted to it section of system. Therefore there everything is subordinated to its laws and rules. The distribution of family budget, the behavior of the members of family - everything must undergo a strict control and calculation. the "order of things" in the "maksimovskom" house acquires special significance, both in the straight line and figuratively - this not only specific place for each thing, but also specific place of each member of family in the family hierarchy.

    The creatively used by it system of encouragement and punishment is the tool of volitional action for Maxim (system of "whip and cake"). Within the framework of the section of system trusted to it Maxim will not suffer even the least resistance to its will. The nearer the distance of his interrelations, the the stricts measure for volitional action it uses.

    It is necessary to give credit, Maxim before punishing, has a habit to explain, for which it punishes and why (necessary to bring up consciousness in the member of society), but if "misdeed" is repeated too frequently, Maxim punishes also without the warning. Moreover, the rapidity of his punishment is unexpected and therefore frightening: "occupations music were for me samoi by present torture. They began from the fact that the father itself tuned violin, accurately spread notes and, most important, it weighed to the back of chair belt. It was worthwhile for me only to be distracted or to pass false note, to me here it fell by belt... Then then, after such occupations father was especially affectionate, he laid to me candy under the pillow... It loved to say, that along the same system were trained many great musicians... "

    Maxim loves to use the procedures checked, especially if they coincide from its intrinsic point of view and are noted for their positive results.

    System "encouragement and punishment" Maxim actually it is constructed on a drop in the sensory sensations, and sensations it, as any sensorik, magnificently examines - knows and what is present pain, and that such present is enjoyment (but if he does not know, then it can want from the purely cognitive considerations to test this on itself or on others). It must be noted that this form of volitional action is calculated first of all for that in order to activate and to discipline Hamlet, and also to his weak, and sometimes also sufficiently inert sensoriku, which without the appropriate ("maksimovskogo") pulse in work will not be included. Without the confidence in the fact that next to it is located the strong and rigid hand, without the consciousness of the fact that there is a boundary of its vsedozvolennosti, without drops in the sensory sensations Hamlet itself it very badly feels - it seemingly it loses rod, tone, support and orientators, it begins to be depressed, to be irritated, to vrednichat', it begins to provoke partner to the quarrel, as if requiring that that would prove, on that it was capable. Hamlet respects force and despises slabakov and slyuntyaev; therefore with Maxim he sufficiently rapidly finds common language, feeling in it partner, in every respect of his worthy.

    Furthermore, in this stage in work has already been included and the aspect of sensoriki of sensations, which in Maxim realizes subconsiously - with respect to drops in his own mood. Therefore Maxim himself always cannot realize, why to him suddenly it was wanted to someone to make painfully and which him to this impelled, since this desire in it appears fairly often, but with the least irritation, almost it is instinctive. Then then it can bring under its act logical base and explain that made this for educational purposes. If Maxim calculates, that too he overdid it in the measures for its action, compulsorily will find the method by any good act to smooth out its fault.


    Filatova:

    Represents his force of will, purposefulness, discipline and order. These are the basic traits he relies on to put a program into practice. He attempts to occupy as high a position as possible in the practical hierarchy, to prevail in the collective, to correctly apply his abilities and to qualitatively organize his labors in work that is deserved. LSI lives in a strict system of his own conceptions; he can zealously make an example of those below him that refuse to respect his position within the vertical hierarchy. He may assume that another’s simple disagreement, with his opinion, is an encroachment upon his status and immediately attack the position of the supposed aggressor.

    LSI possesses outstanding endurance and stamina. He tries to reach perfection in everything that he makes and zealously adheres this fact to insure that others do not exceed him in the thoroughness, honesty and the aesthetic value of his work.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    ESIs take direct action to accomplish their goals and desires in the face of external obstacles, and also the interests of their close friends, family, or associates. This may involve prodding others to take necessary action, deliberately applying pressure in specific situations, or abruptly taking on an organizational role. ESIs do not generally seek out confrontation, but neither are they afraid of it. They are inclined to be resolute in taking action and value this quality in themselves and others; however, this also leads to occasional impulsiveness, leading to actions that the ESI later regrets and wishing he hadn't taken, with considerable self-criticism.

    ESIs take their responsibilities seriously and tend to perform them diligently and with care. They expect the same of others and make that clear. They can be very demanding co-workers and bosses, but not more than they are of themselves.

    ESIs tend to evaluate people's ethical behavior "as it is" and not "as it could be" or "as it could be interpreted according to the context or another person's point of view". That means that they can be perceived as unrelentingly harsh, even unforgiving or vindictive, when correcting, punishing or even avenging what they see as unethical behavior, especially betrayal of trust. "Evil must be punished" or even "destroyed" is one of the ESI's mottos.

    ESIs place great value in long-term achievement and accumulation of wealth, but only as long as those do not conflict with their Fi priorities.

    ESIs have a strong sense of what is and is not physically attractive, and will often judge themselves against a very difficult criteria.


    Stratievskaya:

    ESI knows how to subordinate people to his system of ethical and moral values, which comprises the main purpose of his existence. He is not inclined to remain a distant observer and commentator of the moral problems in his society or social group. Instead, he directly participates and takes concrete actions to counter any violations of ethical standards. This trait has earned him the epithet "militant moralist".

    Representatives of this type consider as their duty to reveal all the "evil" that they detect in their surroundings; to expose public defects, to fight corruption and criminality, and any violations of ethical norms; to actively fight for universal prosperity, for purity of ethical standards, for the restoration of justice and fairness, for the ecology of the environment – this is ESI's first inclination.

    Creative volitional sensing of ESI especially vividly manifests in extreme situations – when there is a need for him to protect his own interests and the interests of his system of relations. He will not allow anyone to encroach on his relations and greatly dislikes when someone speaks ill of someone he considers to be a friend or in positive light. He prefers to draw his own conclusions and make up his own judgments regarding other people and does not allow anyone else to impose their views or exert volitional pressure on him; for example, he won't allow anyone to set him against a friend. He is very obstinate and unwillingly changes his opinion about people. For someone who is dear to him, a friend or a loved one, he will go through fire and water and steel pipes, without deliberation and without thinking of present dangers. He guards his relationships and people close to him from outside attacks.

    When someone attempts to exert undesirable influence or take unwanted ethical initiative, Dreiser is capable of giving a rebuff of incredible force. Sometimes he has an unpleasant aftertaste after such an incident – he feels that he has responded too harshly, that it was too much, that he overestimated the need for defense and "shot a cannon at a sparrow". But in any case, the last word without fail must remain after him. (Otherwise what kind of a sensing type would he be?)

    Sometimes, picking up on hostile attitudes of those around him, ESI goes on defensive even before he is openly "attacked", but in such cases he almost immediately notices his unfairness and feels pangs of conscience; he cannot allow himself to go on offensive first – this contradicts his ethical program.

    In case of neutral or formal relations, ESI is polite, disciplined, neat and requires the same from others: one shouldn't irritate others by rough manners, provoking behavior, and untidy appearance.

    Dreiser is characterized by exceptional capacity for work, expeditiousness, and diligence in carrying out his work and assignments. The motivation behind all his efforts is dictated by his "program" ethical aspect and can be expressed by a slogan: "Do for others, as you want to be done for yourself." Thus, at work he expends maximum effort. If he is required to give even more, this quickly leads to excessive strain and nervous breakdown, which sharply worsens his work efficiency and productivity, and his relations with his superiors.

    He is often demanding and exacting, both of himself and of others, in all aspects of life: friendship, love, business relations, work – in everything he has heightened but equal requirements for himself and for others; responsibility for his words and actions, for expressed feelings, for given promises, for "those whom you have tamed", for quality in work; responsibility before others, before colleagues, relatives, family members... But the greatest responsibility – before himself. Conscientious. If due to circumstances he cannot fulfill an obligation, he will feel distressed. For the same reason, he doesn't like to go into debt or buy anything on credit – he feels worried that he will not be able to return it in time.

    At home, ESI tries to maintain cleanliness and order (he considers it inadmissible to "let loose" of domestic matters and thinks of this as irresponsible in relation to other members of the family). Even if he brings some work to finish it at home, first he tries to take care of all domestic chores and matters, and later he will quietly sit down and work. Leaving home, he will tidy it up – it is unpleasant for him to return to a messy apartment. After the departure of guests, within the same evening he will find the energy to wash all the dishes, wipe all the surfaces, put everything in its places. He will thoroughly clean his apartment and only then he will allow himself to rest. He feels irritated by seeing crumbs on the table or spots on the floor, scattered clothing, "piles" on work on a desk. He will put off his most pressing matters to eliminate these "points of irritation", and, if chance presents itself, can strictly reprimand his family members for their irresponsible attitude towards state of their living and working space. Excessive disorder at his home depresses him to such an extent, that can even serve one of the motives for a divorce.

    Dreiser is frustrated by any deviations from established by him order. Even such a minor incident as the food which he serves not being consumed in the progression which he planned it – this is already irritating for him. This irritation Dreiser suppresses only in the company of his dual, Jack (LIE) – only he is allowed to somehow disrupt Dreiser's order, and even then, only within reasonable limits. Otherwise, cleaning up the mess and disorganization would take up much of Dreiser's time and energy, which he will estimate as disrespect for his labor, and for which he will immediately "strictly demand and exact" from Jack.)

    Dreiser doesn't like to involve strangers into solving his problems – he prefers to manage by his own forces, whatever it costs him. He also does not sympathize with those, who solve their problems at another's expense. Burdening others with one's own problems he considers to be inconsiderate and tactless; in his understanding, this is disrespectful of another's free time, his right for leisure and rest. For the same reason, he tries not to impose his company of anyone, even his closest friends and even if he feels very lonely.

    Dreiser hates organized evil and attempts to counter it with united good ("militant virtue"): "... if people who are evil and deceitful are connected and organized, then honest people must do the same" (Leo Tolstoy.)*

    (Tolstoy was most likely sociotype EIE, hence the talk about uniting all the people.)

    Dreiser hates the very principle of organized abuse: "How is it possible to unite evil?! – indeed this is monstrous! This means to bring about a catastrophe and to cause many grievances for many people! This needs to be eliminated – evil must be punished!" He has a special dislike for criminal organizations. Representatives of this type are unlikely to get involved in such business. The type of a man, who strives by all truths and untruths to obtain power, and use it to subordinate others to himself, evokes in Dreiser the deepest antipathy and frustration, which he, even within the framework of decency, will not be able to hold in.


    Filatova:

    ESI conducts her moral program into life with the persistence of volitional sense. But, in general, it is difficult to recognize this installation at a close distance since in practice it is disguised by external conformity, she ably feels and comprehends to mood of another and their attitude towards what is occurring.

    For a time she tries to tune, to exhibit delicacy, but eventually develops the tendency towards volitional pressure, especially in terms of putting her principles into practice against encountered obstacles. In such cases are developed the concealed (only at first glance) qualities of exacting demand and persistence. She is confident in her rightness. Finds it necessary to subordinate others to herself – through this she experiences a feeling of satisfaction but she does not openly demonstrate this.

    Her strong sense is represented in her economic activity: she’s zealous, honest and conscientious, especially in domestic circumstances. She generally keeps a lot of products in storage (i.e. buried, in a shed, garage). Always makes sure there are reserves. She makes sure that there is a minimum of waste, whether it is remaining floor panels or remainders of food products.

    This thrift contributes to allow her to accumulate a sufficient means in order to buy a necessary quantity of articles in daily life, which symbolize welfare – gifts for others, household machines etc. She obtains everything via honest labor and scrupulous economy, not by reckless adventure or by dishonest mechanizations – such would contradict her moral principles.


     
     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    ILIs place great importance on factual accuracy and a basic understanding of how things work. They may be inclined to look down on or pity people who consistently demonstrate ignorance of what they consider to be simple, essential facts. It is often also very important to ILIs that a person's beliefs account for any new factual information. For this reason, ILI's are often characterized by a nagging and constant sense of doubt, contradiction, and misinformation. They tend to be skeptical of other people's positions, and even frequently question their own. In groups the ILI will often question the validity of the information exchanged. Likewise, many ILIs will use a mocking and aggressive tone if they believe that the information being presented is incorrect or absurd. ILIs can also be very adept at removing errors in facts and statistical data, especially in undertakings that they consider as high priorities. ILIs may brush off failure unconcernedly, viewing it as merely a necessary misstep on the road towards success.

    A sense of the efficiency in an ILI's life is a prerequisite for his inner peace. This manifests very differently in ILIs than SLIs; the latter are much more likely to be proactive about making their physical environment comfortable and managed with an efficient use of resources. In contrast, ILIs are largely indifferent to their physical surroundings, and their desire for efficient allocation of resources may extend to less tangible forms, e.g. the allocation of resources in a game or hypothetical political scenario, the efficiency of a computer program or corresponding piece of code. An ILI will demonstrate perfectionistic tendencies most clearly in such situations where they can work out the details in their heads or on paper.

    ILIs can differ significantly from Te dominant types in that they are less likely to take direct action to achieve practical and societal gain, and may not even choose to gather new information very actively. ILIs often do not acquire knowledge with any clear purpose other than to further their own understanding. When ILIs do use their knowledge for specific purposes, such knowledge is not usually considered a means to an end. When ILIs are required to pursue practical knowledge required for some aspect of their functioning -- such as how to fill out a series of bureaucratic forms -- sometimes ILIs embrace this information and quickly assimilate every aspect of it. More often, they will be disinterested and spurn this activity to whatever extent possible.

    ILIs tend to have a deep, factual understanding of subjects or fields of interest. Sometimes ILIs perceive the real-world occurrences around them, such as the daily tedium of work or school, through a lens created to understand the information that they care about most, though they may choose not to share this perception with others. They often have little to contribute in many social situations, but when a topic of interest comes around they can end up being the center of attention, disseminating the information of their expertise.

    ILI humor is typically saturated with irony, cynicism, witticisms, and sarcasm. When provoked, an ILI can engage in highly toxic sarcasm, insulting the offender's intelligence. In such situations, the ILI can come across as cold and malicious, but the ILI will see himself as simply punishing an obnoxious individual for his foolishness.

    ILIs are often highly critical of others' ideas and actions. Typically this is because these ideas violate the ILI's understanding of the facts, or because ILIs see more efficient or realistic solutions. ILIs often channel their energy towards constructive criticism because they frequently lack the initiative to take decisive action themselves.


    Stratievskaya:

    Balzac's time is filled either with matters and affairs or with reflections on how to better accomplish them.

    Balzac performs best where he is not pressed, influenced, distracted or interfered with, where there is the smallest probability of unnecessary fuss, confusion, urgency, ethical sorting out of relations or intrigues in the association.

    Internally, he is deeply independent and strives in any matter to free himself from the circumstances. However urgent and pressing are the proceedings at his work, on him this has no effect: he will methodically and calmly work through his workday, deliberately and conveniently distribute his forces, alternating different types of work and the different types of loads.

    Balzac pedantically follows assigned requirements and specifications. If a specific sequence of work has been established, he will strictly follow it through. Where he is only responsible for the final result but the sequence of steps was not specified, he prefers to follow his own plan and work schedule, if possible, and his own rational procedures.

    He is very assiduous, with pleasure takes on tedious, meticulous work, thoroughly familiarizes himself with all its details. Before turning in work, he attentively checks it, verifying that there are no errors and omissions. It is very important for Balzac that the analysis of mistakes in his work would be timely, most importantly, constructive.

    Constantly worries about his level of qualification. Always grateful for valuable indications and advice regarding his work.

    He greatly worries when his work does not earn appreciation – this leads him to thoughts of his own unsuitability for a given profession. Sometimes he comes to the conclusion that he will bring more benefit working as consultant, instructor, methodologist, or inspector, rather than occupying positions that require executive and implementary activities.

    He greatly enjoys when new workers are sent to receive instructions from him. Balzac loves to teach, advise, and instruct – this is his moment, his hour of triumph, which he impatiently awaits.

    One should not teach Balzac, in which order he should realize his plans, when and how to take up his matters. Especially, one should not try to teach him what to do and how to do it. He prefers not to deal with who, who know "how it should be": he knows this better than anyone.
    s
    The main thing is that he knows whether some matter is worth engaging in, in general. First of all, in his opinion, one should thoroughly think over what this matter is, to whom and for what it is necessary, and precisely how he will be instrumental for its realization.

    If he is assigned some work, but not appointed a time period for its fulfillment, Balzac will not even consider this as an assignment: he either will forget about it or ignore it. He needs to be argumentatively explained for what it is needed and how soon his contribution is expected. Only then will he approach it with seriousness. His approach is more easily understood considering his tendency to not undertake any superfluous, pointless actions, to not do that which nobody needs.

    For Balzac, as for any representative of the 3rd quadra, is very important to be aware of his own usefulness and necessity: he won't do anything that is not needed by anyone, he wants to be free for matters, that are actually necessary. Balzac will take up work which he considers to be useless only if so far he has been unemployed and has no money to pay for his livelihood. Later, he will try to find himself a more beneficial application.

    Balzac is one of those people, who will "measure off seven times" and think one hundred additional times before deciding to "make the cut".

    Balzac will compulsorily think about the consequences of his participation in anything. He tries not to risk with anything and never subject himself to indeterminate risks. He is not one of those, who joins the opposition or dissenting movement, although he can maintain personal relations with individual representatives from such groups. It is not necessary for him, for he knows how to wait for the right political situation to use it for realization of his plans.


    Filatova:

    ILI knows how to obtain a bird’s eye view, from above, on the dynamics of an ongoing process. His aim is to guide these dynamics towards their practical realization. Once he has predicted the eventual result he awaits the “right moment” to act and will not do anything until such a moment arrives (will never undertake useless work). After he’s aware of the real prospects he moves in to action.

    His ability to recognize the whole of something sometimes leads ILI to multiple solutions for the same problem. Thus, now and again, he finds it difficult to give preference to one thing over another. He does not like being hurried, he waits for a problem to “mature” and his opinions to be incorporated into the big picture of things, which is already present in his imagination. In ILI is characteristic a certain reservation; he tries to leave enough room for possible corrective measure to be taken in the future.

    ILI’s fitness for work is exceptionally selective. If he finds the proper career he can immediately display remarkable energy and fantastic fitness in his tasks. His life can be a continuum of sleepless nights and states of extreme stress, which last for months or even years. Naturally works in solid and pedantic manner.

    On the other hand if he fails finding the right job/career then his skepticism begins to take over as he asks himself, “Why is all of this necessary? Nothing good can come of this…” He cannot even force himself to meet the bare minimum expectations, and may lead to serious repercussions such as being dismissed from work or dropping out of college/university… In such cases he feels helpless to do anything and irrationality leaves him at difficulty even to meet the minimum needs for survival.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    SLIs typically have a dry, matter-of-fact speaking style and focus on conveying accurate information rather than emotions. They like to take note of and emphasize the usefulness or uselessness of things and how well things or people achieve their intended goals. SLIs are often masters at getting the greatest return from the fewest possible actions.

    SLIs place great emphasis on having high quality objects and people in the right places. They enjoy the process of analyzing and comparing different goods and services when making purchasing decisions and do not like to delegate this task to other people. They enjoy the process of assessing quality and functionality and finding the best price for the chosen option. They effectively and sparingly allot resources and discern between primary and secondary needs. They have a good sense for how much their work is worth and whether something is a good deal or not. They have little problem giving up work that brings too little return for the time and effort invested. They have no interest in careers in which they do not believe they are the best. SLIs recognize fairness and conscientiousness (or the lack thereof) in other people and try to avoid working with those who cannot be trusted to follow through.

    The SLI's objective and creative motive is to find materials, localities, spaces, and actions that will engage and move the senses and produce proper sensations within people. The SLI is essentially "a person's person". However, SLIs are only keen on people from a distance, because people are objects varying in quality of nature. SLIs do not prefer doing much complicated analysis (subdued Symbol l.gif) and rather enjoy the process of synthesising things they ense. They understand their entire world by identifying what causes pleasant and unpleasant reactions. When identifying these, the SLI feels a sense of power because this allows them to adapt and use objects (and people) as he or she feels need.


    Stratievskaya:

    SLIs usually act prudently; they are practical in almost all situations. They solve any problem methodically and rationally, and they try to extract the maximum of benefit from any effort. SLIs develop any idea so that it will bring the maximum return in practice.

    SLIs focus on the goal in the development of new procedures and new technologies. They are interested in any scientific discovery from the point of view of its practical application.

    The SLI applies a rational approach to work. His rationalism increases the effectiveness and efficiency of his work, as is his primary goal. Any work is carried out qualitatively, methodically, at a steady rate, thoroughly studying details.

    The SLI thoroughly prepares his workspace, ensuring it is equipped with all that is necessary to work efficiently. The SLI’s tools are always carefully organized, sometimes even at identical distance from each other. The SLI devotes as much attention to the process of preparation for work as to the work itself.

    Whatever the SLI does, no matter what it is, he does unhurried and thoroughly, obtaining the maximum pleasure from the very process of work. The SLI can undertake any interesting matter with enthusiasm, as long as it brings real results. He can tediously and methodically investigate the most complex and intricate matters and can successfully carry out work that seems to others to be completely impracticable. For example, the SLI can fix an instrument that seemed to be hopelessly damaged, using the most unexpected adaptations. (But if the SLI it refuses to overhaul something, it has calculated that it finally lost its functional properties, and he may boldly throw it out altogether.)

    The SLI knows how to divide any complex and difficult-to-solve problem into several steps, breaking it into feasibly-solved tasks: “... But you show that your problem is like the need to move an enormous mountain, which will be possible only if by the handful you move the earth to the side. At least each day on one handful... But then before your eyes you will see that the problem by itself will be solved.”

    For the SLI the process of the solving a problem is the main work. Therefore he tries to solve problems systematically, consecutively, and technically, and yet with pleasure. (It brings the SLI pleasure when there is progress towards solving a problem, though the progress may be slow.)

    The SLI knows how and loves to render practical services and concrete aid in order to resolve business, technical, and everyday problems. In the SLI’s understanding this is the best way to prove his friendship and to achieve understanding.

    The SLI will never be occupied by a matter which does not bring him moral satisfaction. It is important so that his work be paid well, but he can make it unselfishly, “as a gift.” If his work is done smoothly and brings pleasure then the SLI may be occupied by it in his free time as well.

    The SLI prefers to prove his opinion on matters of business by the practical results of work. He is contented when his labor brings appreciation. In any matter he attempts to match a high professional level. In judging work, including his own or that of a stranger, the SLI can be very critical; he is exacting both to itself and to others. His praise it is not easy to earn.

    Evaluating the aesthetic side of work, value is placed on proportion and originality of the general idea. (The SLI sometimes even values originality above aesthetics, since he is greatly interested by this aspect. Therefore the work, which is not characterized by originality, even if it is aesthetically irreproachable, cannot cause enthusiasm in the SLI. So he will reject the work which does not correspond to his own idea about the assigned theme.)

    The SLI loves to teach, and he explains everything clearly and intelligibly. He knows how and loves to instruct. It is pleasant to the SLI when others turn to him for advice or consultation. It considers as its duty to train even for the simplest things.

    The SLI loves to explain the sequence of the work he carries out in an understandable way. He loves to work visibly, in the presence of “spectators.” For example, he may make an electric appliance and explain the reason for its breakdown and each step in the process.


    Filatova:

    In order to realize the program of the first function everything around him is made convenient, useful, and attractive by means of practical activity. SLI is a master in his work. What he does, he does with perfection; he works thoroughly and makes things not only useful but also attractively designed. He understands well the possibilities of using one material over another, and knows precisely in which cases the one better to use. He studies models of high-quality production. He is interested in the most effective methodology. He loves his work to be sound. If necessary he can work from early in the morning until late at night. In such cases he does not take shortcuts to make his work more convenient or pleasant.

    SLI knows how to focus on the primary objective whilst not forgetting about the components. This ability is inherent in reading lectures, constructing a house, and sport training. If, in his point of view, he has attained perfection then he loves to change the objective of his activity: he finds it tiresome to be occupied with the same routine work over a long period of time. In regards to such his irrationality is developed.

    SLI spends time making sufficient preparations before beginning a new project; he collects material and accumulates different information. He likes to try different things so that he may better sense the possibilities inherent in forthcoming work.

    On the one hand he has a characteristic perseverance. On the other hand portrays certain inertness. He may take a while to start things but at the last moment mobilize and rapidly complete his work. He will not begin a task deemed doubtful. He prefers reliability and definition, calculation, but not risk.

    He loves to work independently so that he does not have to adapt himself to anyone else. Is especially irritated by illogical instructions.


     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    LIEs naturally accumulate knowledge as per factual information from books and other second-hand sources in matters they find useful, either because it's their professional field, or something they find interesting and of potential use in the future. In order to function at optimal level, they feel the need to know how their external environment works, in order to make sense of it and control it, or be one step ahead of it. That means, for instance, a need to have at least a basic general understanding of the broader workings of any structure they are in (as a country, company, or organization) rather than just carry out whatever specific task they have been assigned. That gives LIEs a basic confidence on being well-informed in the subjects they decided to be informed about. That, coupled with an inclination to correct any errors in their environment (so that it makes sense and is efficient), leads to a behavior that can be described as "know-it-all", that is, voicing their knowledge and correcting erroneous remarks made by others, often seen as arrogance on the part of LIEs.

    LIEs evaluate external reality - work activities, world events, finances, procedures, personal relationships, conversations - from the point of view of factual accuracy and "making sense" and efficiency. It leads to an inclination to be proactive in increasing the efficiency and reasonableness of the external world, as well as a sense of self-worth connected to being involved and productive in activities seen as useful, profitable, or that increase one's knowledge base. To give out information that they know not to be factually accurate is disturbing to LIEs and avoided as much as possible. The LIE's ideal world of communication is one of blatant factual truth, no compromise made for goals to be achieved or for possible hurt feelings.

    To say "no, that's not correct" or "that's not true" to correct others' statements, volunteering knowledge in order to correct them; and saying "this way of doing things is inefficient, let's improve it"; generally offering information that can be applied to productive purposes - these are marks of the LIE's drives. Not to be able to act on them has a negative effect on their sense of usefulness and self-worth.

    LIEs's preferred mode of action - when they feel at their best - is when able to be very active, and proactive, in ways they find to be useful, productive, logical, and profitable in the longer term. Conversely, periods where they are not sure of the actions to take tend to lead them into paralysis and depression.


    Stratievskaya:

    There is no larger misfortune for the LIE than the impossibility of finding a proper application for his own proactive, pragmatic qualities. His entire life is a search for opportunities that would allow him to fully realize his strengths and to apply his acumen and abilities to interesting and promising endeavors.

    LIE's pragmatic qualities manifest depending on the objective possibilities that present themselves with specific conditions and various situations. The LIE does not rely on his own volitional efforts and qualities – this is inexpedient, especially since in life there are still such things as luck, good fortune, and other external circumstances, which create situations where it makes the most sense to apply effort and utilize one's skills and talents. Under unfavorable circumstances, LIE considers it to be generally senseless to force himself to do anything – it is better to attempt to influence the conditions instead. "Sisyphean labor" is not for him.

    Representatives of this type actively advocate for the equally fair conditions and equally broad range of possibilities for everyone. The LIE promotes the restoration of fairness, trying to return that which is rightfully due to him.

    If there is no possibility to restore fairness, LIE searches for a new place, where his point of view will be shared, where his work will be appropriately valued. Representatives of this type are involved in continuous search for best conditions and broader possibilities for application for their abilities and talents. Frequent change of professions is characteristic for them, as well as change of their place of residence: things didn't work out here – they depart for other places, discover new lands, new opportunities. They are "pioneers". If it was impossible for them to realize themselves in one sphere, they boldly try themselves in another, until finally they find an occupation that satisfies them.

    They prefer to attain high efficiency via reasonable and rational distribution of their efforts and energy. For this very reason, representatives of this type don't have an equal when it comes to development and introduction of new technologies, rational and effective organization of work process; they adeptly generate interesting ideas for realization; they are originators of many progressive technologies and methods.

    The LIE is an ardent opponent of all irrational and ineffective methods of operation. Organizing work and production, he also attributes value to material incentives and personal interest of the workers.

    Prefers work of concrete and practical application. He is not seduced by abstract and removed projects.

    He is not able to act contrary to his own opinion i.e. contrary to his own conception of what is sensible. Every activity he examines from the point of view of its expediency, its purpose ("otherwise, what for?"). He enjoys working and knows how to produce work of high quality ("otherwise, what's the point?").

    He considers it expedient to be occupied by a job that generates good profit. He tries not to deal in minor things (usually does not engage in criminal activities, in spite of promising income, since this may go against his system of ethical value, to which he is subconsciously oriented.)

    The LIE likes to earn "big" money ("otherwise, what's the point?"), and enjoys expending it. He doesn't like as much to save money nor to deny himself in his pleasures and habits. To set a sum aside, to accumulate and grow it, he doesn't always know how to do. Most readily he spends money that came "easily" to him (as in winning or receiving it as a gift). Generally not inclined to very adventurous projects, the LIE is capable to invest "light" money into enterprise, usually not making solid investments in terms of thinking everything through and making calculated investments.

    The LIE doesn't forgive himself for mistakes and failures, but outwardly he upholds calmness and optimism: "Mistakes are there to learn from them."

    Not petty and piddling, and dislikes this in others. He assumes: if you know how to earn – you have the right to spend. More easily and freely spends large sums of money – more heavily parts with smaller ones, due to which, despite the broadness of his character, may make the impression of being stingy. Irrespective of his income level, the LIE prefers to buy expensive things considering this to be a mark of quality.

    He doesn't like to be occupied with repairs, maintenance, remodeling. He prefers to earn enough and then simply purchase everything new or hire people who will do this work for him.

    In difficult times, however, he does not discount doing hard work, if it is rewarded well. The LIE does not like trivial, routine work, does not like working through minor details and specifics, dislikes being "on the pickup", "on service call", as well as mindless, unenterprising labor.

    The LIE don't tolerate or allow outside control of his behavior and actions, his time and quality of his work – he considers this to be a sign of distrust which is insulting to him. He considers mutual confidence to be a standard of relationships both in business and in personal life.

    Tries not to get involved with irresponsible people, dislikes cheats and charlatans, "dishonest game" and "freeloaders".

    The LIE prefers to promise a little less, but then to do a little more. He thinks of the future outcomes and evaluates his actions from the point of view of their consequences. He dislikes irresponsibility in dealings.

    LIE does not like to control someone else's work in process of its realization – he prefers to evaluate the final result.

    Does not like to depend on someone else's timetable and deadlines, or initiative; therefore prefers work where he can be his own boss: assign his own pace, make his own plans, establish his own standards. Does not like collaborating with a slow partner.

    Excellent leader and organizer. The LIE knows how to distribute work with respect to abilities and possibilities of each person. He immediately evaluates people according to their activities, level of qualification, and abilities. The work which he undertakes LIE carries out with the enthusiasm, quickly and qualitatively.

    Bureaucratic red-tape LIE sees as a great evil – it frustrates him greatly, kills his business activity and depresses him. The need to live under the conditions, where his business qualities find no application, where his labor does nor earn adequate payment – this suppresses him. He tries not to remain in such an environment for long. The LIE is very dynamic; he easily adapts to new conditions, stoically endures burdens and deprivations (especially, if he is aware that over the course of time such exertion will be quite profitable).

    Representatives of this type work well in extreme environments and conditions (rescuers, emergency personnel, testers and pioneers, stuntmen). Specifically, in extreme situations the LIE most readily manifests his volitional qualities, endurance, composure, logical keenness, and also the talent to accurately calculate his timing, forces and possibilities (when he is relaxed, however, he can generally forget about timeliness).

    The LIE never gives up before the difficulties but mobilizes all his energies in order to overcome them.


    Filatova:

    A person’s natural state should revolve around his work activity, and LIE, as much as possible, corresponds to this principle. He is the strong worker, works willingly with a sharp understanding and comprehension of each action; therefore he makes everything productively, effectively and with great pleasure.

    LIE – one of the most dynamic psycho-types, he is very active, possesses fast reactions and takes the initiative. He capably calculates his actions so as to be economical. Being engaged in industrial activity he easily translates his thoughts into reality, it is better to put waste to use than to throw it out. Can conceptualize the optimum method of making use of space so that no room is wasted. Thus he precisely comprehends which task is major and which is minor. He attempts to determine the precise order of his preferences: so that minor trifles should not prevent him from carrying out what is deemed the most important task/goal. He applies these same abilities in the realms of his hobbies: should he find something to be impossibly immense he’s able to reasonably limit himself.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    LSEs are sensitive to the productivity, quality, and effectiveness of everything around them. These are topics that they discuss frequently and have strong opinions about. They tend to freely comment on that which is pointless, poorly done, bound to fail, and all manifestations of unprofessionalism, as well as offer numerous tips and pointers for how these things can be improved.

    LSEs are drawn to efficient technology — all manner of devices, gadgets, things, and methods that perform a certain job perfectly, decreasing the amount of energy required to achieve a desired result. Their expectations for quality and performance are high, and they are highly aware of how well the things they have actually meet their needs.

    LSEs' approach to life is practical and realistic. They tend to have a clear idea of the results they would like to achieve, and set forth finding ways to achieve those results in the most rational way possible.

    LSEs' primary mode of talking about things is to use a factual, non-emotional perspective. They are interested in objective events, facts, and knowledge that cannot easily be called into question. They may come across as dry or monotone because of their emphasis on objective, rather than emotional aspects of communication.

    LSEs try hard to be people of their word. They remember agreements made and do not take promises lightly. They judge other people by how conscientious and reliable they are in interaction and cooperation. LSEs expect people to say what they mean and do what they say. As their innate understanding of personality is not very fine-tuned, they judge others' character more by their objective deeds than by their attitudes and motives, which can be hard for the LSE to discern.

    LSEs are proponents of an orderly, stable, and rational society with efficient mechanisms in place to address all of society's needs. They view trustworthy cooperation on all levels as the foundation of such a society, beginning with their own families.


    Stratievskaya:

    The business calculation Of shtirlitsa first of all is based on its personal volitional qualities, on its skill to lead, to require, to pack its personal labor, on its skill to distribute resources and to use reserves, independent of objective economic conditions, regardless of whether or not they are favorable. The main thing is that they are stable. (in contrast to the jack, whose business calculation is based on strong intuition, on the skill to adapt to constant changes and to use them to one's own benefit; on the maximum use of objective conditions and possibilities.)

    Representatives of this type are distinguished by the most exceptional fitness for work and business activity. The volume of their work is limited by neither time nor workforce. One gets the impression that they want to alter every aspect of productivity that falls in their field of vision.

    Their business activity is limitless and never exhausted. After starting a project they constantly begin new tasks and possibilities go deeply into the process of work in the manner that as if they dig out "gold vein".

    They lead any work with the highest level of professionalism. The sheer volume of their knowledge is astounding! In any matter they manifest exceptional exactness and samootdachu: "everything that I make, I do well". "victory expects that, in whom all in the order, and this is called success" (Amundsen).

    Entire sense of their life - in the work, in the labor, in the occupation by the selected matter. People of this type usually do not understand how it is possible to give less than one's best. Irresponsibility in labor is not recognized. In their understanding, those who works "haphazardly" fail their purpose as human beings. It does be worthwhile to speak about their relation to any "khalyavchikam" and lazy persons - these people for them exist at the completely antipole. (at the ripe age Of shtirlitsy they usually no longer expend its forces on the fight with them - nevertheless entire evil in the light you will not eradicate, but there are the matters and more important)

    The selfless labor Of shtirlits is considered standard Therefore, as a rule, it is meager to the praise and the encouragement (instructors of this type usually is assigned work in the dual volume) only, which does encourage Shtirlits, this counter initiative (if it it did charge to make a task in two versions, and you it did make into four - fine person, but following time these four versions they will be already your standard) of course it is possible to orient Shtirlitsa, also, to that so that it would give the smaller volume of work (that magnificently it does know how to make its conflict? Esenin), but its this orientation usually pricks up ears and greatly he disturbs - time departs, and work is accumulated.

    The enormous volume of the work Of shtirlits is counted by way of things - both for itself and for others. Only to closest people, and into the rarest minutes, it can be complained to the fatigue. (overloads and overvoltage they accompany these people entire life)

    Usually, when Shtirlits sees that in someone the work is not obtained, it selects and makes itself, in this case in detail showing and explaining, as it is necessary this to make. (Shtirlits in contrast to Zhukov never it teaches, "as must to live" - it he learns, "as necessary to make" one or other matter or another)

    On the part of the invention of procedures representatives of this type out of the competition. Positive property of shtirlitsevskikh method of operations - skill to maximally use the available reserves and possibilities. (for example, an instructor of this type it can require the fulfillment of complex targets by the precisely most accessible means, but otherwise, in his opinion, to work you will not learn)

    The effectiveness of shtirlitsevskikh procedures often simply strikes with its results using minimum possibilities, it reaches the naivysochayshikh results only because of its procedure and quantity of inserted labor.

    Developing its procedures, Shtirlits subconsiously is oriented for people, which know how to design its forces, possibility and the time of the fulfillment of work (as this makes its dual Dostoyevsky).

    And this circumstance must be taken into the attention - otherwise, movement to its procedures leads to the overloads and overvoltage on no account should be copied failure in the work on "doubtfulness" of shtirlitsevskikh procedures to say nothing of the fact that charge is exceptionally painfully its ranite, it will be in the root incorrect: never and under no circumstances Of shtirlits it will recommend that, of what it is not personally convinced on the basis of repeatedly checked experience. Therefore never it is not possible it to scold for the "irresponsible" business councils - such advice it in principle of giving is capable (another matter - if someone something incorrectly he understood, but this no longer its fault)

    Representatives of this type are characterized by an extremely high degree of personal responsibility. That that by them obeshchano, is carried out always and with any circumstances. They will never promise to do something but not carry it out. Shtirlitsy are pedantic and demanding in everything concerning mutual commitments. It is very executive and distsiplinirovanny Of shtirlitsy do not love, when to them they are turned with the trifling request, since they relate too seriously to any commission. They themselves never are turned to the strange aid without the good enough causes. They prefer to solve their problems on their own and they require the same from others.

    They do not believe in easy success. For them, the value of any work is determined by the quantity of labor given. "if everything seems lungs, this error-free proves, that the worker is very little skillful and the work his higher than understanding" (Lednardo.da.vinchi). If work is carried out too rapidly, Shtirlits begins to search for deficiencies in the process, which they almost always find.

    They are experts at evaluating the professionalism and business qualities of colleagues. (but sometimes they are "bought" to the showy zeal) they place great value on being competent in varied fields of knowledge. They themselves frequently display comprehensive erudition.

    They evaluate every aspect of work according to its expediency. They never attempt what is clearly impossible. Their behavior be commensurate first of all by expediency and by business interests. Technical specifications for a maximally productive work magnificently organize.

    Shtirlits is not capable to sit without the matter - it is constantly ready to activity. It possesses exceptional energy. (if, for example, it organizes colleagues to the general harvesting, itself actively in it it participates.)

    Not molly-coddle and not beloruchka. It is always exacting both to itself and to others. The attention of those surrounding to the deficiencies and the unresolved problems constantly are turned, it criticizes colleagues for the insufficient activity, for the absence of initiative and enthusiasm in business.

    In the work it is characterized by irreproachable accuracy. The quality control of work no one it entrusts checks both itself and partners. Its own work it is possible not to check.

    They are not haughty and do not consider the quality of their own work to be the limit of perfection. If someone carries out work more qualitatively than they do, they are sincerely glad. However, they do not approve when such individuals brag about the fact.

    Reporting for the accomplished work, does not forget to transfer entire that made, to turn attention to the successes and achievements.

    It does not make possible for its mood to influence its own fitness for work. (but the fitness for work of colleagues its poor mood it usually very strongly influences.)

    Carrying out critical work, never it designs for improvisation, success or inspiration, but only to the timely beginning and the hard work. (with the concept "timely beginning" in Shtirlitsa not all it proceeds satisfactorily - sometimes they begin work too early, when the process of preparation is not yet finished and much necessary data on the forthcoming matter is still insufficiently clear.)

    They attempt to follow through with all their endeavors and will not allow themselves to stop work in the middle. However, being that they are often overloaded with other tasks, they will charge a subordinate to finish their work, although they do this extremely rarely and unwillingly.)


    Filatova:

    For the logical extrovert the reality of the external world is above all. She is directed towards practical activity. The sphere of production and technology interests her. She knows how to rationally and effectively work. LSE’s thinking carries a clearly expressed practical direction. The practical possibility of designing and choosing articles in daily life, the implementation of labor interests…

    Any dispute for her is a serious argument – this is a fact. She herself gives actual proofs to her proofs and requires that others do the same. In beginning a task she thoroughly assembles the relevant information, analyzes the possible variants, and only acts if the components of everything are clear to her. This tactic permits her to act logically, rationally and economically.

    She’s irritated by incompetent directions – in such situations may manifest sharpness or flare up. But if her opponent convincingly substantiates his/her proofs, LSE will peacefully assume the task. Valid laws are essential since they are integral to the concept of objective reality and such institutions of statehood as parliaments, ministries, law courts, penitentiaries etc. Any form of society is impossible without valid laws, and therefore LSE relates with proper respect to facts that are guarded by laws; she is the innate lawyer.

    Her innate feeling of discipline may lead her into military educational institutions; many excellent officers are representatives of this psycho-type.

  35. #35
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default here comes a huge dump of implicit object function material

     
     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    IEEs easily become enamoured with new ideas and prospects and tend to start working on them immediately, almost impulsively. The tendency to be preoccupied with yet unrealized potential makes it hard for them to bring existing projects and situations to full completion and materialization. It is easier to start something new than finish something old. When instilled with a sense of opportunity and novelty, the pace at which IEEs begin new undertakings can be almost frightening.

    IEEs need to have quite a bit of free time available to investigate new opportunities, ideas, insights, and people that come along their way. Somehow they manage to keep pursuing these things even when they are overloaded with work and responsibility.

    IEEs are "big picture" people: they easily grasp large concepts and effortlessly translate their observations into generalizations and trends. When learning a new subject, understanding the basic principles and how they fit together is more important than rote memorization of facts. They like to combine multiple things and ideas, rather than follow one thing to a logical conclusion. IEEs hate missing opportunities of any sort. They typically love irony because unforeseeable things can puzzle and excite them at the same time.


    Stratievskaya:

    Exceptional insight is characteristic of representatives of this type. They can determine practically the nature of man from one view, moreover it is so accurate that it is almost immediately capable of giving to it capacious and laconic characteristic.

    The development of situation in its ethical plan magnificently will foresee. It is frequently capable of sufficiently accurately predicting the course of events in the future.

    Thin psychologists, the thinly feeling least change moods also of relations. They wonderfully feel collocutor. Easily they associate. Wonderfully they work with the people.

    Actor- Huxley very rapidly finds contact with the public and it they magnificently hold for the elongation of entire their appearance. Magnificently they work in show business, moreover on the appearances they usually appear better than on the rehearsals. the "fear of scene" of them is not characteristic, the presence of public - only pleasantly excites.

    Representatives of this type wonderfully work also in medicine - this, as a rule, splendid diagnosticians, capable of determining disease at earliest stage of his development and according to the most distant signs.

    Because of the skill to select for the realization of their plans the most successful possibility, the representatives of this type are capable of achieve enormous successes, without applying for this of superfluous efforts.

    Those possibilities, which the case allows to them magnificently are used. From each situation they know how to extract the maximum of benefit for itself.

    For the representatives of this type characteristically constant and general testing of its possibilities and their comparison with the possibilities of those surrounding. They adore to create the situation of competitions for itself and improvised tests, checkings and examinations - for others. They usually sufficiently jealous relate by Huxley to the strange achievements, unwillingly is recognized itself strange superiority, and if they praise someone, then only those, whose competition they do not fear, or those, they attempt to conquer whose arrangement.

    Steep demand for its own possibilities leads to the fact that rises and the significance of this factor as success. Success, in the understanding by Huxley, this is standard. The absence of its success pricks up ears as something unhappy. This, "program" requirement for itself does not make possible for representatives of this type to allow any errors, errors or failures. They themselves this cannot allow, since the acknowledgement of its own error and failure will understate their self-appraisal, i.e., will lower their idea about its own possibilities.

    Therefore in any situation and with any circumstances representatives of this type try to be held "at the height" or to at least produce this impression in those surrounding. ("as itself you will present, so you they will receive"). Moreover, Huxley generally fairly often pretends to the reputation of "person without the deficiencies". Greatly it does not love, when they criticize its behavior and, although theoretically he understands, "that everything not without the sin", personally no serious "sins" it recognizes after itself; therefore sometimes it can half-seriously say: "if you see in me some deficiencies, say to me about this, and I will be corrected".

    The methods of the achievement of success always disturb and interest representatives of this type. Many of them are the authors of the books about how to dostich' the success in one or other sphere or another and as to succeed in one or other field or another.

    The need always and for everything to be at the height forces them in any situation and with any circumstances to pretend to the prize or the gain. Blind and hopeless situations, in their opinion, simply there must not exist. In the awkward position it is not possible to place one of them, since they simply recognize after themselves no fault and in any situation tyuey povedut themselves so, as if nothing special it occurred.

    Huxley has the phenomenal ability not to reveal his awkwardness and not to recognize himself by that conquered under no circumstances.

    The prospect for the achievement of success with the price of long-standing and tedious labor seems them not very attractive - too good they know, as there is short-lived popularity and as they are changeable the interests of crowd. Thus, do be worth for the minute glory many years slave away and being occupied only by one matter, missing other possibilities?

    They consider it for itself necessary to conquer the attention of those surrounding and to retain by any its price - this for them its kind training the "intuition of success". Many of them, especially in the childhood and in the youth, they constantly "pull" attention to itself. They are irritated and be nervous, if their presence is ignored. Gathering the attention of those surrounding, Huxley literally "blooms": he tries to appear itself how possible more interesting and it is more original (moreover into this with it better not to compete). But if nevertheless they do not feel to itself a sufficient interest, they demonstratively ignore all those being present, what is simultaneously call to society and by one additional means to draw to itself attention.

    "to enjoy success", "to conquer popularity", "to retain popularity" - all these are the "exploits" of one order, and for the representatives of this type - achievements, which have paramount significance. For this very reason many of them have a tendency toward the audacious and extravagant tricks and daring "ethical experiments". Many of them even at the ripe age preserve the ability to ridicule, to tease, to mimic and to banter. (that it is always delicately and appropriately.)

    Greatly they love to boast. Frequently they tell about their successes in the representatives of opposite floor or about how was easily and originally they succeeded in finding way out from the very difficult situation. Impression is created, that Huxley as if does not think about the fact that similar histories wake up in listeners the desire to follow his example, although precisely for this they are said in reality. Even if Huxley's "exploits" from the beginning also to the end those invented, to it nevertheless is interesting to look, as others will make that, what it, in reality, to make did not decide (but about which very colorfully it described).

    Huxley constantly "investigate" the potential possibilities of people in the most different situations, moreover as "laboratory" them serves entire surrounding peace. Huxley wonderfully knows how to probe situation strange hands ", to learn on the strange errors and on the strange experience.

    Each time, when a representative of this type it shades any "original idea",, he sufficiently rapidly visualizes, who from its environment could become its executor and tester. Huxley magnificently knows how to find those, who with the interest receive his concepts and agree to realize them. He knows how to convince any, even most careful and most prudent person in the fact that the undertaking proposed to them is done precisely in the interests of "executor", no troubles are promised to it, but even vice versa - large and obvious benefits. Of course Huxley always error-free accurately determines, to what precisely bait and to what argument "will be purchased" the man, which he outlined for his "experiment". If his concept realizes successfully or some by benefit, Huxley will be to this sincerely rad, although he will not miss the case to extract for himself the specific benefit (for example, it will hint to man, that now it to it by something is obliged).

    In the case of the failure of Huxley's "experiment" less anything he thinks about the fact that someone "substituted" and is culprit whose- that of troubles. (Huxley generally tries a little less to think about his failures: "not pilite sawdust", as advises Carnegie's Deyl.) Inspiring someone by its new idea, it does not completely exclude its successful completion, although in any event it risks in no way: if undertaking completes successfully, they will be grateful to it and they are obliged. Even if result proves to be unfavorable, experience is at least acquired, moreover personally for it painless. Such conditions for "experiment" explain by the fact that Huxley in essence its - pessimist. It is careful and prudent with entire apparent lightness and recklessness; therefore it prefers to go along the beaten paths, but in this case he tries at any cost to come by the first and to obtain prize. ("to intercept" prize it it can also before the finish, that in its eyes not a bit it does not diminish the price of victory, on the contrary, only it increases.)

    Since the strange successes, merits and reaching do not leave indifferent of representatives of this type, in Huxley frequently appears the desire to recheck strange successes. For example, if girl friend bragged by prospects and possibilities on her new work, he will not be quieted by Huxley, until it forces someone of its familiar "to verify", actually these prospects then are tempting. Any information about the possibilities for the representatives of this type is extremely important, and if it by them seems improbable, they try to verify its once more. They themselves as the "intelligence officers" appearing extremely unwillingly: with the least danger for itself "are cleft" and "on simplicity of sincere" they substitute those, who sent them.

    To send Huxley to the critical commission very riskovanno. This only seems that in any situation they behave not predicted - always there is something constant in their behavior: with any circumstances they try to enter with the smallest losses for themselves.

    Huxley will not miss the possibility to test everything which attractively and tempting appears. Magnificently it knows how "to hold nose downwind". It knows how to be up to date in all events, opinions and movements. He knows, what opinion must be supported and what direction it is necessary to join, moreover it will always be one of the first. (many as a result of these qualities it seems by insinuating person.)

    It knows how to present its abilities, possibilities and qualification in the most advantageous light, independent of their real level. Frequently "it bluffs", moreover it does not fear to be exposed in this, since are considered its actions as the experiment: its self-advertisement will justify well, it will not justify - it is not also terrible. Acquired experience can sometimes prove useful.

    It is inclined to overestimate its abilities, as, however, it sometimes underestimates them in others. Frequently it starts on the work, which considerably exceeds its competence, calculating, that in the course of time it will enter into the policy of the matter and will work not worse than others, or there can be to it it will be presented some possibility itself to recommend well.

    To be exposed in the incompetence it does not fear, since it magnificently cans "itself tax", and, furthermore, as has already been spoken, never it acknowledges in its errors, even if it they frankly expose - it is turned and departs, without troubling itself by explanations and by apologies. If it nevertheless decides itself to justify, it will always know how this to make with the ease: "let us assume in me yet not all is obtained, but I is ready to learn, and 4 I do not consider itself hopeless!" (Huxley in certain cases it is not troubled to seem by incompetent, especially before the man, who adores to explain and to teach, by such, for example, it appears its dual Of gaben.)

    This ease in the acknowledgement of errors explains by the fact that Huxley, according to the large calculation, never and in nothing considers himself guilty, but willingly is created the visibility of repentance and self-criticism, when it considers it necessary to someone "to accompany". Sometimes the "acknowledgement of its own errors" - for it advantageous ethical trick or tactical trick.

    Modesty is not considered in its eyes dobrodetel'yu, although the absence of modesty in others sharply condemns. (means, which helps to it to pritormozit' strange quickness.) And although its own individuality he tries to manifest with each convenient (and inconvenient) case, it relates critically to any manifestation of individuality in others. In the sphere of any activity for itself it always notes, who to it competitor, but who is not. Those, in anyone it does not see rival, and whose of arrangement intends to attain, it knows how to cheer up, to support, to inspire. But compulsorily will find the method "to hew wings" to anyone who although in by something can embark on its path.

    Knows how to focus attention of those surrounding even to most insignificant its reaching, knows how to give to him weight and significance, and if necessary it knows how "to fan" it into the large victory. (quality, because of which Huxley is capable wonderfully to be affirmed at the new place or to strengthen his shaking himself professional authority.)

    It loves to teach unlucky wretches. Strange successes and achievements frequently are placed in an example. It knows how and loves to tie its installations and to orient toward its values. Any manifestation of indifference to the glory, to the career, to successes and to the achievements of others, any unwillingness to be included in competition or contest condemns, since receives as the sign of weakness, lightness. (sometimes is considered this the manifestation of the individualism: "by all this is necessary, but to you - for some reason no!")

    Nothing excess Huxley they try about itself not to tell, at least in the wide to circle or to the unfamiliar people: they fear, that this information can be used by them into the harm. If someone of the close ones makes a slip of the tongue about them excess, always this they condemn. True, strange secrets themselves to store do not know how, especially, if we them about this do not previously ask. Sometimes, as without a moment's hesitation, it is made a slip of the tongue anything "compromising".

    Huxley loves to create the ticklish situations (indeed to him so interesting to observe them!) And already with the most innocent form it can place someone in the awkward position, being puzzled in this case, why they are offended to it. (indeed for Huxley - this not is more than the game: it would seem, there is no such awkwardness, from which they could not easily leave.)

    And nevertheless, to Huxley they try under no circumstances not to substitute itself under the possible troubles and for this reason love no one "to cover". They fear to take excess responsibility to itself. Therefore very quietly they can forego all their previous promises, if this forces them to some difficult or risky behavior.

    They adore to conduct friendship with the celebrities or at least with the members of their family. They do not miss the case to describe about their brilliant (or influential)"friends". Indispensable participants and the habitues of the most popular get-togethers. Always in the searches for anything "new and inte-resnen'kogo".

    Huxley's interests are extensive and diverse, but it is very surface and unstable. Entire new and unknown draws it, alas, temporarily. Huxley rapidly is carried along and rapidly he grow colds. Its interest in the new acquaintances and the new relations is so surface and short. As child, who investigates new toy it glances into its device, and then loses to it interest, so also by Huxley he hurries to be dismantled at the essence of each person: superficially, it is deep whether - not importantly, as soon as purpose it is achieved and curiosity is satisfied, Huxley ceases to be interested in it, and the fate of relations further with it to him is completely indifferent. (Huxley it frequently brags by the fact that someone "sent", it refused to someone, someone it expelled, of someone "nadinamil".)

    Huxley knows how to rapidly estimate people with respect to their possibilities and abilities. He always knows, from whom what to expect, whom for which to use. It possesses the ability to see in each person his most vulnerable point, him to "akhillesovu heel". Magnificently it knows how to play on the weaknesses of others and uses this ability for achievement of its purposes, erecting its own mechanism of relations, which will be examined in the following division.


    Filatova:

    For the IEE it is most important to find, to see, to comprehend the new possibility where there previously never was one. Her attention is always riveted towards the unique and unusual. She’s stimulated by new ideas and is willing to receive information from any sources. This can lead her to unexpected scientific discoveries, museum exhibitions, non-traditional methods of entertainment and medicine, journeys, meeting with new people…

    Her interest flashes rapidly, like that of a child at the sight of a new toy, but as soon as the object of entertainment loses its novelty she becomes uninterested, her interest vanishes rapidly and she hurries to be charmed by a new possibility. Because of her fresh views and openness to new things IEE often possesses a set of abilities and talents. It pleases her to test herself in different fields – many representatives of this psycho-type design well, can be easily trained for sports and in musical instruments, fascinated by psychology, theatre, cinematography, and art. They test their abilities in the moment, write verses, and are ingenious storytellers.

    As a rule IEE is very penetrating: she can easily predict what it is possible to expect in the future from another individual, especially if she is sufficiently familiar with him/her. As no other she knows how to inspire, to reveal the abilities and talents of others, to manifest support towards others to realize themselves. In people she values kindness, uniqueness and talent. Envy is alien to her – her creative nature allows her to see many possible avenues worth following. Even in old age she’s always ready to learn new things.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    The ILE is typically a "big picture" kind of person, and tends to speak in generalizations about both people and things, omitting any details he deems mundane or uninteresting. He is acutely aware of what interests and what bores him. This leads him to always search for novelty and surprising things. At any given moment, the ILE usually has a number of projects and/or skills that he is working on developing, and stays with these interests as long as he feels they have potential for growth. The ILE gets bored easily with rote tasks that do involve lots of repetition and little innovation, although he tolerates them if they are necessary to succeed in society.

    The ILE is a creative thinker, and enjoys discussing his often unusual perspectives with others. These will often be expressed through unique and strange (but effective) analogies.

    The ILE is constantly aware of the possibilities inherent in social, natural or other systems, and of the areas with the greatest potential within them. The ILE operates by using Extroverted Intuition to attune themselves to the multiple variables continually being expressed within the environment and proceeds to elucidate feasible connections and boundaries of context in order to change the way one perceives that which is operating below the surface of either everyday life or more dynamic technical arenas. To An ILE, the world is a vast network of stars with infinitely interchangeable constellations emerging from the open-ended framework. Extroverted Intuition as a leading function pushes with white-hot intensity the active rearranging of the lego-blocks of reality; not necessarily with any intention towards construction or creativity, but with the ultimate goal of introducing novelty and fresh perspectives. Combined with Introverted Thinking as a secondary function, Extroverted Intuition finds compatible yet more disciplined, objective thinking to harness its irrational, unruled nature into a potentially functional talent.


    Stratievskaya:

    For Don Quixote, the study of any subject is first of all a study of the perspectives opening themselves before him. The ability of seeing new possibilities occurring in any sphere is his strongest and most characteristic trait.

    Don Quixote is a dreamer and romantic, who captivates himself and others with his ideas. A lack of participation of others in his plans is painfully received by him. He is irritated by people that are incapable of and do not want to dream. Grounded “realists” that perceive his dreams to be empty and worthless risk finding in him an ardent and irreconcilable opponent.

    For Don Quixote, thought and fantasy are two things that go together. While thinking, Don Quixote fantasizes; while fantasizing, he thinks.

    Representatives of this type express phenomenal skill in many different spheres of intellectual creativity, generating ideas and proposing hypotheses, which leave behind the achievements of their era by several centuries.

    Their contributions to the development of society’s intellectual activities cannot be overvalued. Prominent representatives of this type are rightfully considered to be founders of many scientific schools.

    The opening of new horizons and new perspectives in all spheres of scientific, artistic, and socio-political activity is their greatest purpose.

    Don Quixotes’ skill to understand the very essence of things with incomprehensible quickness is amazing. Least of all, Don Quixote needs the thing being explained to be “laid out shelf-by-shelf.” He becomes extremely irritated, if he is assumed to be slow. Usually, he himself “controls the tempo” of the reception of new material: he suggests to his interlocutor that he has already understood everything that has been said and the presentation can be continued.

    While comprehending the meaning of a new phenomenon, he is already thinking about its possible applications. During childhood schooling, representatives of this type often give off the impression of a thoughtless student in class. In fact, as a rule, the teacher least of all expects that the meaning of the new material has already been understood long ago; and that he is now simply independently thinking it over, disconnected from the irritating explanations, which were supposed to be for “slow idiots,” and that retard his creative thoughts, incomparably more important and interesting than the school teacher’s primitive examples.

    Barely having opened new possibilities for himself, Don Quixote begins to activate those around him towards new and original projects. In fact, he himself actively participates in their designing, subsequently allowing others to realize them.

    He does not like to stick with one and the same project, with one and the same idea, but it would be a mistake to consider him a person of erratic interests. Don Quixote loses interest in his project only in several cases: if he no longer sees any possibilities in its realization or the realization of this project is entering its final phase, and at this time a new, more promising idea appears on his path.

    A quick changeover to new, more interesting projects is highly characteristic for Don Quixote. In his understanding, it is pointless to waste time on something, which has been almost thought through to its conclusion, while the horizons of new opportunities are constantly expanding, opening access to new ideas and theories.

    Captivated by anything, Don Quixote is unable to not be distracted by another affair. Therefore, it is not enough to say that he prefers to do only what interests him—Don Quixote is unable to do that, which does not interest him. We can confidently assert that, for any representatives of this type, mandatory education of some required subject is a painful torture and outright abuse of his own self.

    Intuition and inspiration are his genuine and meticulously guarded valuables. In any situation, Don Quixote defends his right to act as his intuition and inspiration suggest.

    All possible instructions, directions, directives, and circular letters are definitely not for him. In his understanding, a work timetable is an abuse of his inspiration. Why should he have to generate his ideas at some predetermined hour?!

    Captivated by his work, Don Quixote is able to show exceptional industry and miracles of efficiency, but in the period, when the idea has not yet ripened and is only being thought over, Don Quixote can make a completely mistaken impression of a person languishing from boredom. In reality, wherever he is and whomever he is talking to, whether he is asleep or awake, his thinking is able to catch any, even seemingly the most insignificant impulse, which could possibly interest Don Quixote, and in the future find a reflection in his ideas, theories, and projects.

    Any new information can become a source of inexhaustible inspiration for Don Quixote. His intellectual creativity is a constant and uninterrupted process. If Don Quixote stops generating ideas for even a half hour or an hour, then he is either sick or exhausted. In either case, it is a very troubling symptom.

    Don Quixote is always an audacious fantasy combined with a tireless and inquisitive mind. Bravely destroying all obsolete and non-viable systems, before his contemporaries he pushes the horizons of the future, considering it his duty today to think about the problems that will occur to mankind tomorrow.

    In all their seeming fantasticality, the ideas, theories, and projects, in whose world Don Quixote lives and exists, to him personally give the image of being realistically implementable and in no case torn from actuality, because they are founded on realistic information and on the understanding of the real essence of things. By virtue of these reasons, many representatives of this type consider themselves true realists and categorically disagree with being called romantics and empty dreamers.

    Don Quixote has a habit of generously gifting his ideas. And the more generously he gifts them, the more he generates them. And because Don Quixote understands better than anyone else that it is impossible to hold the ungraspable, he is more likely to agree to someone else working out and patenting his idea, than to allow his “offspring” to perish at the root, without developing into even a semi-serious project. Therefore, the best thing that a theorizing Don Quixote can wish for himself is to get the opportunity to head a scientific collective that works out wide-ranging and prospective projects.

    As a rule, the ideas of Don Quixotes are supposed to bring happiness to all of mankind or at least one part of it; it is therefore that Don Quixotes appear to be naïve dreamers in the eyes of their contemporaries. History has proven the possibility of realization of practically all Don Quixotes' ideas, and the allegation that not every theory has been successfully realized can be explained by both the miscalculations of Don Quixotes, who are inclined to, as far as possible, ignore facts, which would be adverse to the popularization of the theory they are developing, as well as the miscalculations of the realizers of their theory, which frequently alter the Don Quixotes’ theories to their own aims.

    Don Quixote’s sphere of interests is extremely wide. In fact, his astounding erudition combines with an exceptionally deep understanding in many various, and not immediately related, spheres in an amazing way. Intellectually, Don Quixote lives very spaciously and satisfied. He takes from life the most interesting and wonderful things, and in return generously bestows her with the fruits of his creativity, of which there are enough for his contemporaries, with a surplus for his descendants.

    Many representative of this type are endowed with a magnificent memory for numbers and historical dates. At any minute, they can recite and excerpt from some literary composition or scientific work with astounding accuracy. They can freely reproduce any encyclopedic data from memory (a “walking library”).

    Don Quixote receives any new information, new methods, new approach, new possibilities with huge enthusiasm. By virtue of his optimism, he often supposes the suggested best outcome of the events. He often thinks about what should be or what could be, and not about what actually is. Reality enters its correction to his calculations, but, unfortunately, not always in time.

    Don Quixote is endowed with an affinity to tear himself away from reality, because fantasy and inspiration can possess him at any time and any place. This also explains his absentmindedness, due to which he can forget not only where one thing or another is, but where he himself is. Don Quixote may not hear that someone is speaking to him, not see that there is someone right next to him. He can smile at his own thoughts, converse or argue with himself. He many forget to greet a person because, at that moment, he is not thinking about manners at all. (For Don Quixote, the society’s rules of conduct, just as any other set of rules, do not constitute an indisputable truth.)

    He is able to pull off an extravagant prank. In fact, for him, extravagancy is not only a means of self-expression, but also an opportunity to attract attention to his ideas and theories.

    He is attracted and interested by everyone who is able to make original ideas, who is capable of seeing the unusual in the ordinary and find hidden opportunities in places, where it seems as if nothing further could be invented. Everyone who is incapable of doing this is not worth much in his understanding.

    He can quite accurately state the character, skills, and potential of those around him (unfortunately, not always in a tactful fashion).

    He is able of accurately evaluating the intellectual potential of his interlocutor.

    He is capable of and likes to develop his own skills. In fact, he takes this process very seriously. Any hindrance in this is perceived as an infringement on his rights.

    He does not like to admit his own mistakes, therefore he always finds an explanation for his failures. Most often, he “writes them off” on others. This can be explained by the fact that, first of all, Don Quixote does not forgive himself for his own mistakes. He therefore tries to whitewash himself in the eyes of others, so as to not aggravate his suffering with their reproaches.

    He is inclined to advertising himself (especially in his youth) and to overvaluing his own potential. But, in a circle of close friends, he can complain about bad luck and his personal unluckiness.

    Under psychological discomfort, especially as a child or teen, Don Quixote departs from the realistic actuality to a sphere of completely made-up fantasies, where he attempts to creatively realize himself: he thinks up fantastical stories about himself and his friends, draws pictures that only he is able to understand, writes poetry. In a word, he contrives another life, which seems to exist on the flipside of reality. In this other life, everything occurs in the best possible way for him. Furthermore, it sometimes appears to be his main life. He sometimes remembers the occurrences and characters in his made-up life brighter than real occurrences. He prefers not to tell anyone about this otherworldly life, except maybe the people closest to him and those who understand him best; this is his deep, carefully guarded secret.

    A sense of internal freedom and independence is very characteristic and inherent to Don Quixote. Therefore, his second, “unreal” life constitutes an extra living space in case reality becomes unbearable.

    It is impossible to force Don Quixote to think “like everybody else,” impossible to push him into a framework of convention, and impossible to forbid him to freely express himself.

    Whether others are comfortable around him or not, he is how he is. Everything else is the problem of those, who are psychologically incompatible with him.


    Filatova:

    ILE possesses an inextinguishable interest in the new and unusual, which promise to provide him with gripping prospects and possibilities in the future. The greater such possibilities are, the more they will interest the ILE. His interest flashes instantly, causing him to dip boundlessly into a new area of activity, but just as quickly his interest towards the subject may cool if it doesn’t seem to promise anything in the long-range.

    He is exceptionally creative, constantly in search of the best way to realize his abilities. His greatest enemy is someone who will not allow him to realize himself, a person that tries to crush his sincere enthusiasm with things such as routine work. ILE also wonderfully sees the potential possibilities in the people that surround him. He pushes others towards disclosing their abilities; he inspires them, before them revealing prospects one more brilliant than another. His approaches do not take heed of the established norms, nor does he hesitate in overthrowing them, with ease he tosses the old aside where they’ve become obsolete. The ILE’s behaviour may frequently appear to be unpredictable, even chaotic. This is because his indefatigable inquisitiveness is subordinated by moments of illumination – such moments provide the occasion needed for him to immediately act. When not inspired by such moments he willingly spends his time with others where he’ll find meaning in whatever activity he partakes in.



     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    EIIs have a natural understanding of people's inner makeup and see what can be done with that makeup to bring them closer to ideals. EIIs have a very well-developed view of what people and relationships should be like and are able to help others reach those ideals.

    EIIs understand people very well. They often give good advice, and have a strong understanding of the inner workings of even the most complicated minds. They have well developed ideas concerning ideal emotional states for individuals, and always have advice as to how an individual can reach that ideal.

    One of the largest complaints of EIIs revolve around the idea of "wasted potential." A lot of their neuroses, and "drive," come from fears that they are not achieving the maximum possible ideal in a certain field or area of life. Unlike IEEs, though, EIIs consider "leveraging potential" more in terms of depth - mastery of one or several specific areas - rather than breadth.


    Stratievskaya:

    The EII finds it difficult to implement and realize his "non-conflicting" system of relations in a world full of contradictions. The qualities that aid and encourage him in this noble endeavor are his innate optimism and flexible intuition of possibilities.

    EII believes that in each complex situation one should search for means, methods, and forms to smooth out emergent contradictions. For example, if both sides agree to certain concessions, this will already yield some results and their conflict will be, although partially, resolved. Conveniences of those near him EII often values greater than his own. EII constantly correlates own behaviors with the opinions, interests, and way of life of other people.

    Creatively implemented intuition of possibilities allows the EII to be farsighted, prudent and judicious in his behavior. The purpose of his foresight is to be able to foresee possible complications of relations and act preemptively to avoid or prevent them. For example, an EII woman, when she was preparing a children's celebration, portioned the sweets in equal portions, since if she didn't do so, as she could foresee one of the invited children will eat more than others, and therefore make other children upset by such unfairness - and this cannot be allowed! For the same reason she did not allow her grandsons to bring candy out on the street - she considered the possibility that this will inspire resentment and envy in other children, and this would could have negative consequences.

    Despite all his optimism, EII is capable of prudently calculating the worst course of events precisely for the purpose of avoiding negative consequences and making sure that everything works out in best possible way for himself and for others. As a result of these intuitive calculations, EII safeguards and insures his future actions. This sometimes leads to a positive outcome and the EII is able to avoid many troubles. For example, a family of the "enemy of the people"* in expectation of their exile, have decided to give away their piano to a girl for their neighborhood as a gift. The girl (Dostoyevsky) was categorically against this present and demanded that the piano would be sent back. This episode in her family is recounted as a legend – it is considered that by this act she has saved her own family from repressions.

    *Likely this story originated in the times of Stalin's repressions, when those who came into disfavor with the new communist regime were labeled "enemies of the people" and sent into exile to Siberia and other inhospitable locations.

    And nevertheless, however strong an intuition the EII possesses, his calculations do not always prove to be accurate. Indeed, one cannot foresee and account for all circumstances, especially because frequently EII takes the desired for the real, and traces sometimes an imaginary course of events rather than the real one, relying on previously conceived stereotypes and generalized notions. For example, he will try to reconcile husband and wife, fearing that if he does not interfere, their broken personal life could later affect him, too. In another case, he doesn't interfere between those who are fighting in order to "not draw the fight onto himself" and not to acquire future enemies.

    In each specific case the correctness of calculations and behavior of Dostoyevsky depends on his previous experience and on how deeply he understands the situation.

    Ethical-intuitive influence of EII is founded on his ability to notice and develop everything that is good in the human soul – this traits allows representatives of this type to do magnificent work as pedagogues. In each individual, EII denotes their ethical qualities and their potential. Dostoyevsky does not understand and does not accept such notions as "damaged children" or "rotten children". In his conception, there is not such concept as "damaged children" that could not be mended and persuaded by a positive personal example. Of course, development of positive qualities requires expenditure of time and honest effort and a lot of patience. Therefore, in the opinion of Dostoyevsky, the educator must constantly work on himself, improving his own qualities, instilling into himself a sense of conscientiousness and responsibility for the fate of the person entrusted to him.

    In exactly the same manner Dostoyevsky considers that there are no relations that are initially hopeless, that could not be mended and improved with sufficient resourcefulness and patience, with the ability "to wait out the storm", to prove the sincerity of one's motives, to display the best traits of one's nature on one's personal example.


    Filatova:

    The EII seeks true values in life and finds meaning in existence through harmony in her relations with other people. She particularly values high spirituality and high morals. As far back as youth the EII uses her imagination to form a certain moral ideal, which she then attempts to reach. At the foundation of this function frequently is found the development of a feeling of duty. Thus the smallest divergence in behaviour away from the ideal is dealt with severely, internally. This tendency towards self-perfection can itself become a tyrant. This tyranny of duty, in its extreme manifestations, can lead the EII to develop contempt for herself. It can also lead her to blame others when their behaviour fails to correspond with said representation of decency. This sort of maximization, which frequently characterizes itself in the EII’s youth can lead to confrontation with her contemporaries. Such confrontations are difficult tests, which weigh heavily upon her.

    Since the moral norms she considers compulsory tend to be extremely high and difficult to live up to she may often respond by gradually increasing the permanent feeling of guilt, which stems from all her misdeeds. With difficulty she deposits herself towards these laws. She considers every failure in her life to be punishment for her inadvertence. This sense of guilt can accompany the EII throughout their entire life.

    The accumulation of materials values and career success never supercede the EII’s goal of existence: to find their purpose, to make a life before it passes them by, to realize their talents. For their moral ideal they are willing to go to the “executioner’s bloc”. In the psychologically extreme situation they stick to their ideal. However, in ordinary situations EII prefers to leave states of conflict, assuming that kindness and decency are the best ways of deciding any misunderstandings.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    The LII often applies Ti in an academic field such as mathematics, one which allows for abstract speculation to be realized in concrete conclusions. The LII does not much care for implementation or hands-on work, requiring some degree of independence from material demands in order to develop his own ideas. If the LII feels made to do a task he perceives as boring, he will try to find an original way to do it, if simply for the sake of developing an interesting idea. The LII can think on his feet, and is able to consider multiple viewpoints, although if he feels that he has fully analyzed an idea in the past, he may dismiss it out of hand with Ti.

    The LII is always in tune with the "big picture", looking at things from the most general perspective possible. Given this frame of reference, he sees many ways ordinary life could be changed to meet his vision of how things should be. Thus the LII is often seen by other more practically-minded types as naively idealistic.

    The LII does not come up with ideas simply for their own sake, but tries to relate everything back to "the main point". He quickly becomes impatient or disinterested with discussion that is simply meant to generate ideas, instead of realizing them.


    Stratievskaya:

    Coming out as the creator of the project of absolute validity and the creator of the theory of objective truth, Robesp'er in each concrete situation searches for and find possibilities for the implementation of its logical program. It is possible to create the society of ideally valid system, if... Further is erected the project of the conditions, which must be artificially created in the society and to which it is necessary to pull each of its members. The logical program Of robesp'era always realizes by means of the search for the possibilities, which adapt the specific existing conditions to a certain abstract project.

    Generating its social ideas, Robesp'er is abstracted from the particular circumstances, considering that it is possible to change them and to adapt. As a result its idealized theories encounter the real contradictions of specific social conditions and frequently they realize in that distorted, sometimes and distorted form (if generally they realize). The social ideas Of robesp'era better and the more successfully realize the weaker the contradiction between its theory and conditions actually existing in the society. History shows: than higher level of the mother

    Alni welfare of the society, the more easily are inoculated in it the ideas of universal (robesp'erovskogo) equality and validity (as an example it is possible to compare "robesp'erovskiy socialism" of the times of great French revolution and period of "war Communism" in Russia with socialism, accepted in modern Sweden, which today can be considered the model of the realization of robesp'erovskoy social theory) the logical program Of robesp'era more successfully realizes, the more successfully goes the search for possibilities in each concrete situation that it is reached because of flexibility and manipulativeness of the robesp'erovskoy "intuition of possibilities", which creatively uses such "tools" as the "method of individual approach" and the "method of the levelling off of the possibilities", which are reduced to the coordination of individual possibilities.

    Weak pulls to the strong, "the latter yes will first be", "who was anyone, that will become all". However, the possibilities of strong, in turn, are limited so, that they become accessible to weak. As a result of this coordination the society is converted into the social system, with which "by magnificent color blooms the mediocrity".

    There are no clearly expressed contradictions, but they are rare and the clearly expressed individualities Of robesp'er it coordinates possibilities in its surrounding society always relative to her own idea about the "validity" and "objective truth". In view of this reason both these concepts acquire deeply subjective painting. Thus, one representative of this type considers it necessary to give to his children the broad education (not worse than in others) and thus to grant to them the sufficiency of the possibilities to find its place in the life. Another will calculate for itself by normal to ensure each adult member of its family with personal automobile, but the expensive broad education for its children will consider as prohibitive luxury, on top of that it will condemn the neighbor, which expends last money on the aesthetical training.

    In each of the representatives of this type its subjective idea about the "standard" and about the "luxury", that was formed under the effect of the obtained training and prevailing mental'nosti, relative to which he coordinates the distribution of possibilities (and the distribution of material goods) both for itself and for its environment. "person himself to bring up is obliged" - to the development of the personal abilities Of robesp'ery usually is paid sufficiently serious attention, but, as a rule, they always try this to make taking into account the real possibilities of applying the individual abilities. For example, if adult person is trained for a new profession to any "practical" specialty, this Robesp'er only greets. But if man at the ripe age expends last money on his personal instruction in music or in drawing, this behavior it will seem, putting it mildly, in frivolous.

    Usually Robesp'er sufficiently accurately evaluates objective conditions in each concrete situation, just as it knows how to estimate the individual possibilities of man. It knows how to check objective and subjective chances, on the basis of the estimation of situation, he always knows, to whom which "shines", also, with what conditions.

    Wonderfully it knows how to estimate its own possibilities. If there are no suitable conditions for applying its abilities and there are no possibility to influence these conditions (revolutions soon it will not foresee), Robesp'er it awaits more favorable circumstances, or it attempts to adapt its subjective possibilities to the already existing objective conditions. In any event, never make possible for themselves the whining because of their own neudachlivosti, although the stranger, not insured, in his opinion, to vezuchesti completely can envy. It can analyze the experience of its own failures, but he tries not to recognize them opened. (quality, characteristic of many intuitam. Its sense consists in not dragging after itself the load of previous failures, this interfere withs future success, it understates the self-appraisal of man, "kompleksuyet" it.)

    To its failures and vital confusions it knows how to relate "philosophically". A representative of this type usually considers that besides already known conditions and circumstances, besides the visible regularities, in the world there are concealed, invisible laws, which influence the real motion of events and components with the visible regularities single whole. Robesp'er knows how after the separate facts to see general regularities.


    Filatova:

    In order to build a convincing system, compliant with the laws of logic, LII attempts to penetrate into the essence of objects and events; seeks the underlying reason for the occurrence. Cannot live without a basic set of beliefs; if it is necessary to abandon one (such occurs extremely rarely), she’ll formulate another. In such cases it is very important to be convinced of the validity of the values, which compose her interest: her ideology must have solid internal support.

    She’s drawn foreword by intuitively penetrating into universal matters, but as soon as she’s satisfied with understanding one, is drawn to another. What she already wholly understands is very clear and seems uninteresting. She’s only capable of admiring the result she’s obtained for a short time, for soon after appears a sensation of triviality for what she’s done.

    One of the LII’s most positive qualities lies in the ability to dismantle intricate and complex questions, to focus on the important points, to view the problem “from above” and clearly present this understanding. If she comprehends the essence of the problem well enough she will not yield to those that oppose her, will always promulgate her position.

    A very characteristic feature of the LII is the ability to sense well the course of time. She cannot naturally spend it in vain. She works peacefully, from afar appears to do so leisurely. Her ability to concentrate, to not be distracted by external interference, guarantees her efficiency with work. As a rule the LII is capable of determining when the job is done. Her precision manifests itself in her personal obligations: if LII agreed to be at a meeting but never showed up – it means that something serious befell her.


     
     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    SEIs are sensitive to the emotional atmosphere around them, either from an individual, a group, or even from inanimate objects and their physical environment. A positive emotional atmosphere is essential to their sense of well being and inner peace, and they either try to create that atmosphere by directly influencing their surrounding, or by simply removing themselves from the situation or people that in their view is the cause of a negative emotional environment. In the former case they often use humor to lighten the atmosphere by cracking jokes and lighthearted teasing.

    A SEI can also take the role of a "clown" of sorts to ensure all people are emotionally light and comfortable. SEIs are also capable of creating an intimate open atmosphere where others can be comfortable sharing their emotions or talking about their problems. SEIs also tend to mirror and heighten the emotions experienced by the group dynamically.

    SEIs are generally unable to conceal their feelings because their faces are so emotionally expressive. They display their comfort and discomfort vividly, and can often be seen wearing the widest smiles or the longest frowns.


    Stratievskaya:

    In the emotional plan of the Dumases the dual impression frequently is produced: outwardly - these are lighthearted jovial merry fellow and optimist, internally - man is restrained and stressed.

    In the unfamiliar society of the Dumases he tries not to attract special attention, more it observes, than it acts. It outwardly always seems calm, balanced, confident in itself. It is internally reserved and distrustful with that being seemed openness. Frequently is produced the impression of man "to itself on the mind". And actually, Dumas fears to make a slip of the tongue about himself anything excess.

    It associates easily, freely on the close distance in its company; it knows how to create unconstrained situation. It loves to entertain friends by amusing histories.

    It knows how and loves to be the soul of company. Mood wonderfully is raised by jokes. If some jokes prove to be inappropriate, it can rapidly and tactful change theme. But it must be noted, Dumas supports in the company a good mood only in such a case, when this does not contradict his own internal state.

    It is peaceful. It is friendly. It knows how to create the sensation of heat and cordiality. Greatly it locates to itself and it can find contact by any environment. It wonderfully feels collocutor, knows how to it to emotionally tune, moreover this makes completely sincerely. The confidence of people very easily conquers, but never by this it misuses (if only this do not require the interests of its work).

    Easily it causes to the frankness. (quality, which makes possible for representatives of this type to be good intelligence officers, by agents, by psychotherapists and by educators.)

    It knows how to memorize and to reproduce the once experienced emotions, knows how to visualize the experience of another person, his feeling and his nature. It knows how emotionally to recreate and to survive in itself the emotional state of another person, it knows how seemingly to pass him through itself. (because of this quality of the Dumases it can be very good actor, diplomat or mediator.)

    If with it zatevayetsya quarrel or dispute, he always tries to discharge situation, he tries to distract debaters or to quiet them. (quality, calculated for the problematic ethics of its duala of Don Quixote, constantly zatevayushchego the dispute, which passes into the quarrel.) Of course Dumas himself can be pulled into the quarrel with their konflikterom and nevertheless the state of hostility to him is very unpleasant. For this very reason it prefers to come out as the connecting link between the opposing parties. ("the master of shuttle diplomacy".) It always is glad at the possibility of someone to reconcile, to persuade, to convince. Its matters are arranged well by unofficial means.

    Working on the leading post, he tries to maintain good relations with all subordinates. It considers it for itself important to pay attention to psychological climate in the association.

    He tries to a little less criticize others - it does not love to dispute and to acquire to itself enemies. Therefore, even if it is necessary someone to criticize, he tries to make this in the soft form. But if it sees that this will traumatize someone, he tries not to aggravate relations and is transferred everything into the joke. (quality, completely necessary with the contact with this dualom as Don Quixote, who, as has already been spoken, very acutely receives criticism in its address.)

    Dumas knows how to be the director of the mood: if it considers it necessary to quiet someone or to comfort, will make this magnificently. If it considers it necessary to draw attention to its problems, will make this "creatively": it will create the situation of the completely intolerable stress and not "will let go" until its problem they begin at least partially to decide, or until itself is quieted. Dumas is not troubled openly to speak about his problems, moreover in this he does not always limit himself by close circle, because of what it can produce the impression of whimperer. (this ethical tactics it is calculated for the ethics of the emotions of its duala of Don Quixote, whom it is sometimes necessary to distract from its fantastic projects and to place before the fact of the concrete, actually existing problem.)


    Filatova:

    SEI is an epicure in both the physical and emotional realms. His emotionalism is developed in every respect. He loves many forms of art, especially music and singing. Frequently he plays a musical instrument, sings for entertainment. He is a good writer, poet, and artist. He is also an artist in love, and loves adventures in this sphere. He knows how to pleasantly care for another, to supply both emotional and sensual pleasure to his significant other. Depending on the circumstance SEI will use these traits in order to focus attention on himself.

    When it becomes apparent that a relationship is ending the SEI moves foreword, he takes part in one last conversation and hopes that everything else will fall in place without his participation. He then attempts to immediately bring a new acquaintance into his life; preceding the final break with the previous partner.

    Generally SEI tries to avoid tension by any means necessary. If a conflict flares up between others he tries to play the intermediary in order to reconcile the opposing parties as soon as possible. He finds himself to be inferior in the case of an argument, will therefore often agree with the collocutor. He very poorly responds to physical aggression. In such situation he is capable of defending himself but will afterwards feel regret and excessively talk about what has occurred. Most of the time his tactic is to walk away from tense situations, to return to a psychologically convenient territory, return to sensory comfort.

    When another suddenly attacks his immediate response is down-to-earth rather than any attempt to seem superior. This mode of acting insures that he may leave a conflict situation with having suffered minimal loss.

    His tendency to provide pleasure for himself and close ones frequently serves to make him the soul of the gathering. But if a group does not serve to please him he will simply find another circle of people that he finds more likeable. Sincere physical comfort is his principal motivation. When he suffers long periods without this sensation he begins to get depressed and everything falls out of his control.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    IEIs apply their understanding of trends of behavior over time to observing, analyzing, and influencing people's moods. They make contact with other people by attempting to influence their emotions positively, which is their way of creating something in themself worthy of being included in interaction.

    IEIs are comfortable discussing feelings that arise from interaction between people. They are naturals at guessing who has been offended and approaching the person and helping them to let off steam and make amends with the offender. IEIs are typically quick to take the blame for offenses upon themselves in order to show their acceptance and good will towards the other person, and create good attitudes.

    IEIs' speech and voice usually have a certain dramatic affect and depth of feeling, which influence the emotions in the atmosphere; these feelings can be used to generate elation and boisterous laughter. If IEIs prefer, they can also generate and communicate their feelings of sadness and loss. They are adept at communicating depth of feeling. If things seem too quiet and low-key, they may even generate controversy or conflict to liven things up and get people involved once again in a high-spirited atmosphere.

    The IEI will often say something that sounds very deep and heartfelt only to immediately realize the ridiculousness of what they are saying and make light of it. In this way, the IEI does not induce a formal separation between joking and being serious (like their mirror, the EIE), because they are less premeditated in expression in their natural state.


    Stratievskaya:

    Second value, which IEI generously shares with those around him is the skill to create positive attitudes and to improve the moods of others by his presence.

    To all the observed phenomena Esenin responds impressionably with a dynamic personal interest. It would seem that there does not exist in nature an object, subject, or event, which would leave him indifferent.

    This quality positively predisposes people to Esenin. It seems unthinkable to turn away from a person who is so sincerely captivated and excited by everything good that is in you, who sees in you so many interesting things as before you have not even imagined. Esenin also knows how to listen, empathically looking into the eyes of his conversation partner – it would seem that he has never heard anything wiser in his lifetime! His dear, kind, modest smile is like a sun ray reflection on his face. Sometimes it is dreamy, sometimes sly, but always well-wishing, optimistic and encouraging.

    Moods of Esenin are also similar to a solar beam: affable, agreeable, affectionate, lighthearted, joyful, in romantic-dreamy state of the soul, he thinks distractedly on some removed topic, and the entire world acquires bright colors, becomes filled by sunlight and "sparkles with fresh dew". Blissful state, as a sweet opium dream, the fairytale sleep, which is desirable to prolong to infinity, but which will end precisely when Esenin will consider it necessary to put an end to it. Esenin dislikes when some external stimulus interferes with this illusory-ethereal harmony – in such moments he feels as the author of the ruined creation. (It would be incorrect to think of Esenin as a kind of “drug” which is meant to cloud the head or lull to sleep from vigilance. Absolutely not! His primary psychological task is to relax his dual, Zhukov (SLE), who is often stressed and inclined to overload himself.)

    Esenin is a “craftsman” of attitudes and moods: whichever picture he paints. This is the instrument of his influence on his surroundings – by this he can “reward” as well as punish. In his understanding, a mood has a material component to it, alike a work of art.

    In cases when the atmosphere of "serene harmony” that he created is not valued and rewarded properly, Esenin considers it necessary "to draw another picture", in other colors, but no less bright and saturated. (Mood for Esenin is a method to manipulate his environment.)

    Almost no one knows how to creatively quarrel as Esenin, timely amplifying or easing his emotional influences which are applied with exceptional accuracy, masterfully applying words enough for his partner to learn the lesson and draw the conclusions from his own errors and to try to as soon as possible correct them, in order not to repeat hence. Again, such ethical influence is psychologically oriented at his dual, Zhukov (SLE), at his inert emotions and somewhat coarse ethics. That which for Zhukov is nothing more than an effective method of emotional activation for others (more sensitive personalities) can be unbearably trying.

    In communication and relations Esenin holds sufficiently close psychological distance, as a consequence of which he can feel himself too vulnerable and too dependent of his partner. Therefore his quarrels are a required measure, whose purpose, from one side, is to adjust psychological distance, from another – to draw attention to potential problems and to express his needs in a form in which they are most readily received by his dual.

    Esenin cannot speak of his problems in a “business tone” – this in his understanding is too crude and tactless, as he is subconsciously oriented at vulnerable emotions and demonstrative pragmatism of Zhukov. Therefore, he considers that a tactful and subtle hint is enough that his partner would correctly understand him and himself offer his services.

    Esenin feels uncomfortable when the created by him tone does not find proper response and support in those around him. This may lead to sharp drops in his state and even pour out into a quarrel.

    In conversation, Esenin perceives his partner, adjusts and adapts to him. If, for some reason, the contact has not transpired smoothly this calls his attention. He starts to contemplate on the reasons he was not allowed to approach, perhaps this person is not as simple as it seems, or may be even dangerous (here works his "negative” intuition of time – the desire to distance from danger).

    Presenting his ethical evaluations of people around him, Esenin does it in accord to his state: if he is in good spirits, he praises the person and offers his compliments, if he is poor mood he will talk about them and judge them unkindly. In upset and irritated state he gets an insurmountable desire to speak “truth right to person’s face” and may say the most absurd and most unpleasant things.

    Periodically Esenin be the instigator of conflicts – these are means for him to assess his own position in the system of relations. The entire range of states of Esenin is not only his "artistic palette", but also his "set of instruments" and his "weapons storage". Esenin is confident in his charm and his appeal, in his "arsenal" of attractive and dear fronts, which he magnificently uses. Moreover, these these are not just external appearances but unique states of his soul.


    Filatova:

    After having interpreted the dynamics of a situation the IEI attempts, emotionally, to influence the surrounding people and to push them towards appropriate activities. He knows how to manipulate people through moods, to incite the necessary reaction and feeling; he does not accomplish this through force but with persuasion; frequently through an emotional surge that signals to others that he will perish as a brittle, delicate entity if help does not arrive and his requests are not fulfilled! He finds that activities relating to business bring hardship upon him; therefore he tries to dispose of such work to people nearby. The IEI is easily inspired by a favorable climate, but is also very easy to offend: a sufficient negative intonation is all it takes to throw him into a state of despondency for the whole day.

    He is confident of his correctness and if those that surround him fail to follow through with the necessary activities his indignation and emotionalism can reach such a degree that, for a long period, he cannot be quieted, as he continues, with fervor, to prove his position to all.

    He loves to be the center of attention when in the company of familiar people. He knows how to direct himself towards others – to smile at someone, to support another’s remark, to be civil and conformal.

    The IEI frequently suffers from bouts of melancholy and disappointment, followed by periods of isolation. When such periods come to a close he will once again emerge bright and alert, with positive expectations directed towards the changes in his life. When he finds himself in a loving and understanding atmosphere his best qualities are revealed: the ability to melt tension and lend morale support. He understands the moods of those that he cares about and attempts to improve them; is ready to provide warmth and sympathy.

    Possessing high emotionalism, the IEI sensitively responds to all forms of art. He especially loves music and poetry; he frequently creates his own. He often attends concerts and develops a natural literary gift.


     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    The ESE is quick to recognize and respond to passion and emotional involvement, stimulating it where there is none and fueling it where there is. He is well aware of his own and others' passions and tastes and likes to do and say things that stimulates and gives expression to these passions. The ESE likes to see people become lively and animated and show what they feel without thinking first. The ESE equally expects others to let out their negative emotions (despair, anger, sadness) in periods of distress, since he knows keeping them inside can only aggravate bitterness and discontent. His dual the LII finds this openness liberating, and appreciates someone who can positively guide and influence the emotions he communicates.

    The ESE is typically an engaging communicator, communicating a kind of naive excitement about whatever he talks about. He likes to playfully personalize discussion of topics by telling stories and sharing anecdotes drawn from his past.

    The ESE sees reality through the prism of the emotional atmosphere around him, which is mainly, though not exclusively, influenced by the surrounding people and their moods. He will always have much to say about the "vibe" given off by various sensory stimuli.

    He is not at all hesitant about steering the emotional environment in the direction he sees fit. He'll liven up the atmosphere with jokes if it's too gloomy, or get people down to business if they're being too frivolous.

    The ESE makes inquiries into people's states based on cues given by their expressions.

    The ESE will take great satisfaction in interacting with people who are receptive to emotional activation.


    Stratievskaya:

    Stormy emotions on the strong volitional pressure, "volitional emotionalism" and "emotional will". Representatives this type consider necessary to hide neither their of emotion nor of their desires: both that and, etc. - naturally and it is expressed from the good motive, however, so that in this of poor? Therefore increasingly better and increasingly worse of the fact that occurs with them, it becomes immediate known for that surrounding.

    Hugo generously shares both the his happiness and his problems. It panically fears the troubles (indeed life it is created for happiness and pleasures, and it so it is short!). Hugo does not actively and very emotionally desire to himself troubles. It warns itself people, which create to themselves (but it means and to it) problems. Itself renounces to have with them the matter and others it warns, moreover in the very emotional form: "so that by 4 e5- cabbage soups kogd- yes -nibud6 with it it were connected!.." If troubles nevertheless occur, Hugo does not consider it necessary to hide them: indeed it is necessary to somehow draw attention to its problems! Hugo will rather demonstrate his weakness to the completely outside person, than to that, who is the real culprit of his problems. To the negative emotions of that will give output faster than positive: for it it is important to employ all possible means - provided somewhat more rapidly to get rid of the troubles.

    It occurs, that insignificant worsening in the conditions of life of Hugo receives as trouble and already is created the situation of panicky, hysterical fuss. This behavior infrequently finding understanding in those surrounding - that which from the side is received as insignificant or unessential, within the framework of the vital values of Hugo it is received precisely as the substantial change to the worse, which in the course of time, possibly, will take the shape of a difficult-to-solve problem. Hugo panically fears some negative tendencies both in his personal life and in its surrounding reality. Therefore he always is socially and politically active. He tries to maximally use his civil liberties, in order to make its life and life of its society of calm and satisfactory.

    Hugo is oriented to the most natural vital values: happiness and the health of its children, the prosperity of its close ones, the creative realization of its personal possibilities, the freedom of views and judgments, peace and the prosperity of his surrounding people. And precisely these values, ideas and views Hugo is ready always and to everywhere defend, stinting on either forces or of time, with entire flame and heat of its deeply emotional soul. For Hugo the characteristically stormiest manifestation of emotions. , where it appears by any of the representatives of this type, begins "emotional interchange", the "rotation of emotions in nature".

    Hugo does not transfer the state of the lowered emotionalism. The situation, where all suppress its mood, where little they associate, little they speak out, in no way emotionally itself they manifest, it is clear not for it - you will not understand that in people on the mind, you do not know how they live and which disturbs them. ("it me brought to the health resort, yes there and it left! But that to me to there make?! There no one with each other he talks! There only with their they associate!.. It arrived, 4 it I ask: "you where me brought?!! Here no one talked with me! This as so it is possible to rest?!!") Hugo from the morning to the evening can speak about his problems, but it cannot suffer, when someone another complains to it about its life.

    Hugo greatly does not love to listen history about the strange troubles, especially, if them tell completely outside to him people, which he little knows and by which by anything soak cannot. But perhaps someone will become more easily, even if in it is spoiled mood? Usually Hugo does not manifest the increased interest in the strange problems: does not desire to spoil to itself mood and he does not want to get involved in into the strange troubles. Then Hugo is always lively interested in the reason for the elevated mood in those surrounding. ("if little whether coma happiness it leaned, then let it will describe, it can and to me it will transport!")

    Hugo adores to raise mood by all, who, in his opinion, this requires. He frequently something speaks or he makes only in order to raise mood. For example, it can, after arriving to the work, solemnly to declare, what prepares for all its colleagues gifts - by each it sews aprons to 8 March, and they already even are cut out. This does not completely mean that the colleagues will sometimes see these aprons.

    This is in no way compulsorily important another - to create the pleasant elevated mood, to create the atmosphere of the holiday (once already speech it goes about the gifts), to create conditions for good relations, to obtain the general approval, to become at least temporarily the hero of day but most important - this to precisely assign mood, and all then can satisfactorily forget (Hugo it does not love about the aprons, when they resemble to it about the incomplete promises: indeed it far from always promises in order to carry out) Hugo - these are always strong feelings, always vividly emotional nature.

    Hugo's feelings rapidly pass into the passion - into the passionate desire or into the passionate hatred. Hugo rarely can be seen with calm and that balanced. Usually it weakens and is calmed only with the contact with its dualom By robesp'erom (when between it and its dualom occurs the "emotional interchange" of the specific nature and quality). The natural emotional state of Hugo - these are slightly the elevated mood, pleasant excitation, with the charge of cheerfulness, optimism and Hugo's confidence in itself - this is always strong and bright temperament. Not by chance the roles, played by actors of this type, this always interesting characters, bright and unforgettable natures.

    The episodes, in which they participate by actor- Hugo, adornment of any play and the "raisin" of any film Hugo's emotions frequently are developed at the very rapid rate - this is of its kind the firework of emotions. For this very reason characteristic episode with the clearly expressed drop in the emotions to representatives of this type to play much easier than central role with the gradual emotional development of means. (although central roles many them them they play simply lustrously)

    Hugo magnificently sees the nature of man - precisely through the emotions expressed by it. This makes possible for it to be by excellent psychologist to very accurately evaluate the emotional state of man and deeply to it to be anxious the ethical insight of Hugo is wholly built on the skill to understand the motives of behavior of the people through the emotions expressed by them. The nature of the intentions of man of Hugo magnificently is understood according to the expression of his eyes, according to the nature of his smile. Hugo magnificently sees in the man his nature and his ethical potential.


    Filatova:

    People of this psycho-type, as the leading function suggests, are utterly emotional. Her emotionality manifests itself vividly in her ability to enthusiastically appear glad at any important event. She tries to create a holiday atmosphere everywhere. This is easily accomplished with the aid of others, by uplifting those around her by means of her enthusiasm, energy and high tone.

    The most trifling event may serve as a source of enthusiasm; buying an interesting book, taking a day off work, meeting an interesting man…

    Life for her is like an emotional sea in which she bathes. She manages her space, absorbs its energy, and emerges twice as strong. ESE cannot live without contact with other people; they are highly valued to her. She’s inclined to exaggerate their characteristics and prefers not to note their “dark” sides.

    ESE seeks to avoid all negative human reactions (offense, despondency, irritation, etc.), with the conviction that: life is too short, so why spend it so poorly? Nonetheless, in her life, as with all people, there are objectively difficult periods. These are usually caused by tensions in relations with other people, which weigh heavily upon her. She finds these especially difficult to deal with if they’re connected with her house and family. ESE may also find herself in an unpleasant situation due to her gullibility. It occurs that her emotional impetuosity may splash out by excessive garrulity and/or boasting.

    During bad times she finds it difficult to hide her feelings, in such situations ESE attempts to get away from it all, preferring to suffer her troubles in isolation. She assumes that others will seek her out and share their happiness, which she’ll then augment.

    Generally ESE suffers horribly due to any conflict situation, even when she isn’t a direct participant: she’s easily emotionally entangled in quarrels and takes everything too close to heart.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    EIEs are naturally animate and passionate and are skilled at generating liveliness and excitement. They believe that people need to be emotionally involved in life, not distant or indifferent to the important things that are happening. EIEs often hold strong views about governance and social custom, though their beliefs stem from the interests of their close emotional relationships. EIEs like to involve people in interaction and create groups based around a shared experience. They tend to try to continually broaden these groups and engage people who seem to be on the sidelines. The individuals who the EIE is spending time with are far more important to the EIE than the event that is actually taking place. EIEs like to make their friends laugh, and employ an over-the-top style of humor. Often the joke is on the EIE, whether or not they know it.

    EIEs are one of the most insightful types about the minds and inner workings of people, and as a result are likely to be skilled persuaders. Their sensitivity to the emotional flow around them allows them a relative sense of emotional control of a situation, and they have an uncanny ability to convince others, even without the use of logic. EIEs generally don't use their persuasion tactics for manipulative gain over others (as much of their sense of self-worth comes from impacting people positively), but they can use these tactics negatively in cases where they cannot win approval of their arguments. In many situations, nevertheless, EIEs value equality among social standards and do not mind taking the back seat if others wish to take the lead. EIEs love their friends, and they will do anything to keep them. Time spent alone for the EIE is often spent thinking about how to better interact with close relationships, even when time spent in those relationships is not particularly pleasing. Even when the other individual is hostile, if the EIE judges them to be a friend they will act in a caring fashion and show affection to the other.


    Stratievskaya:

    For Hamlet, the world of human experiences, feelings, and emotions is not only the sphere of his interest and observations, but primarily it is his "workshop" and "laboratory" – here he creates and investigates.

    To study the soul of a person, to see the source of his pain and sufferings, to reveal the depths of his experiences, to understand the personal motives of his behaviors in all their apparent contradictions – in this Hamlet sees his destiny; he was born for this, and with this, in essence, he will deal his entire life, regardless of which occupation or sphere of activities he chooses.

    No one from his circle of acquaintances will be left out from his "emotional impact": to whom – with a minor joke, to whom – by sharp quip, to whom – with a ruse, to whom – with refined irony; to any person he will show his soul as if in a mirror. Anyone he will draw into his "theater", into his "emotional game", into his "workshop-laboratory".

    To the object of his jokes Hamlet frequently refers with affectionate irony and an aire of lenient superiority, as if Hamlet is now positioned somewhere above him, in some other world, where the entire absurdity and awkwardness of the behavior of the subject of his attention is especially visible to him. The jokes of Hamlet usually have mystifying and dark notes. ("Daniel, here I am!!!.. – are you frightened?! - I left the food. If you don't eat it up, I will then!!!... – frightened?! – I will eat it myself! Only try to not take the milk. I will feed to the dogs!!!.. – frightened?! Not you, but milk of course!..")

    To create an oppressive, tense situation for Hamlet is so natural, that he can do this in practically in any state – good mood, poor mood; and from boredom, and from having little to do. A minor occasion will be sufficient, and suddenly, there arise metallic notes in his voice, and strict intonations, and hammered articulation, and a heavily fixed gaze and self-collected pauses (during which he is thinking about the continuation of his "monologue").

    Around each person Hamlet creates the certain emotional field, which he at his own discretion "charges" first positively, then negatively, constantly expressing his attitude towards this individual's ethical qualities, moreover, not as his personal opinion, but as a general, already prevailing opinion, in which he personally would only be glad to have doubts. Since all of this is presented in the form of subtle hints and accompanied by the most expressive mimicry, the person immediately feels himself intrigued, and imperceptibly for himself falls under Hamlet's emotional influence, becoming an "obedient marionette", which can be pulled by the ropes by this, it would seem, benevolent conversation partner.

    With difficulty does one realize this in time, and attempt to come out from under this "charming" influence – here Hamlet suddenly acts very offended, and displays such affliction and disappointment, that a person immediately feels uncomfortable for his "tactless" behavior, and it seems like no other options remain but to voluntarily yield to his influence.

    Assuming either intently indifferent, or mysterious, or saddened look, Hamlet attempts to draw attention and intrigue everyone, whom he can reach. Subconsciously, Hamlet takes any opportunity to find for himself suitable objects for his emotional influence, most ideal of which is his dual Maxim (LSI), who most of all other types needs interaction precisely of this style and nature.

    Most of all, Hamlet is irritated by the absence of interest in his "play", someone's intentional unwillingness to be a "character" in it, or just a "spectator". Impenetrable indifference, inaction and apathy towards his ethical games – this is the only thing before which Hamlet is powerless, and this the very thing that he fears most of all. He is especially wary of those who "keep a mind of their own" * (although it is difficult to be more "self-minded" than Hamlet himself).

    Any of the representatives of this type, independent of age and occupation, magnificently coordinates and manages his mimicry, tone of voice, intonation, and because of these qualities he can predispose his conversation partner favorably, and obtain from him necessary information. If he considers it worthwhile, he can relax a person, try to bring him to sincerity, and persuade him in his own ideas. Sometimes, on the contrary, he will literally restrain his partner by fear and anxiety, trying to completely subordinate him to his will, necessitating completely entrust him.

    Hamlet – is a director of human emotions, a director of moods. To any person Hamlet "will assign" precisely the mood, which he considers necessary to assign. Emotional "management" of Hamlet is usually enacted from his own considerations, his interests, his suspicions and assumptions.

    Regardless of which scale a representative of this type unravels his activity, whether he is a politician or a common employee, he in perfection wields an entire arsenal of methods and tools necessary for forging a public opinion, with the aid of which he intends to assign a specific direction to the actions of surrounding people. The creation of a formal or informal group within the framework of an already existing system, the emergence of a formal or informal leader, the displacement of the existing leader, the changes in hierarchical layers of the system, exclusion from the group of those, who interfere in his rearrangement of forces – all this constitute a sphere of his constant activity independent of his age, occupation, location, and current social position..

    Arrangement of forces in a hierarchical system – this is the main orientation of his ethical and business interests and the most significant sphere of his activity. To Hamlet it is extremely important not only to reveal the already existing informal leader, but also a potential one. And, relative to this future potential arrangement of forces, to build his relations under the current system. For this reason, representatives of this type strive to learn what this or that person has "on his mind". (Especially Hamlet is interested in and wary of people who are internally independent, who place themselves outside of career, outside of gossip, outside the "interests of the collective", outside of "public opinion": such people for Hamlet are difficult to understand, and precisely for this very reason they they seem to him particularly suspicious.)

    Hamlet cannot imagine a life without a struggle. More precisely, Hamlet cannot imagine life outside of a state of a struggle. Ha always has something to fight for, to strive towards, and always someone to do this with. If there is no goal – he will come up with one, if there is no enemy – he will find him. In any case, he won't sit around without a purpose. For example, for representatives of this type it is typical to create obstacles for no reason solely in order to overcome them. Life immediately becomes more interesting and eventful.

    Moreover, these "obstacles" are most often of social and ethical nature – some intrigue is initiated, based on fictional gossip, or on his, Hamlet's, subjective suspicions and assumptions; a process of "fermentation" starts in the collective, some slipping into groups, into "camps" of "enemies" and "friends", of "like-minded people" and "dissidents", those who are "with us" and those who are "against us." Additionally, Hamlet will not allow anyone to avoid this "splitting"; those who have absented or adopted a position of non-alignment, he will not tolerate for one simple reason – Hamlet is intolerant of indifference (to his problems, his interests and activities). He does not suffer apathy and disregard. At least because he, himse, does not in principle understand such a state of mind, and does not accept it from others. For him this is too unnatural.

    Hamlet – is always a rebel and a restless soul. But not only Gorky's Danko, lighting the way for the people with his glowing heart, it is also a "stormy petrel", heralding a storm, and the "lone sail" searching for a storm. (Many members of this type, without being aware of this themselves, behave and hold themselves in a very provoking and cocky manner, especially this is evident in childhood and adolescence.)

    For example, Hamlet sometimes looks for a quarrel simply because everything is "too calm and quiet", and this for him is alarming, and frightening, and annoying. By and large, Hamlet does not believe in peace and quiet. If the "pool has gone quiet" then there are bound to be "water gremlins" there, and they have to be identified. It is exactly in such orientation and attitude that Hamlet sees the highest manifestation of civic duty and loyalty to the existing regime. (It should be noted is that this type of mind has been "programmed" for viability and effectiveness in extreme situations – in the period of totalitarian systems, in the era of violent upheavals in history. To survive in such troubled times, and to get through them – this is the most important social and biological challenge for this type of personality. This is why he is characterized by qualities of ethical maneuvering, foresight, prudence, loyalty and political "farsightedness", as well as the desire to get into the higher hierarchical layers, such that in critical situations he will obtain certain advantages.)

    Hamlet is always politically active, always attentive towards his rights and stances as a citizen. He is irritated by an attitude of indifference towards matters of social importance. He is annoyed by the type of person who simply exists, moreover who wants to simply preserve his peace of mind. Hamlet hates "philistinism" and commonality. He can for some time "play" in family comfort and idyllic atmosphere, but to "get caught up in everyday life," this he will not allow for himself. Moreover, he will consider this to be his personal degradation. (Some female representatives of this type are very annoyed by society's requirement for women to get "closed into" their family circle. This sometimes adversely affect their character, and leads to them creating conflicts in midst of family relationships, making their family be the arena of the "military-political struggle.")

    Anyone most insignificant domestic episode Hamlet is able to give "ideological and political" color and on this basis to develop an active social life. Someone anniversary date or someone is ill - and that Hamlet has organized a wide-ranging collection of money, has all the necessary services, is busy and bustling around the most, and most importantly, always advertise the fact of their own initiative, that is exactly what he heads this initiative. ("Here we're all ..." After some discussion, decided, decided, condemned, endorsed, supported ... and so on and so forth)

    At any age, in any medium, in any situation Hamlet claim leadership. Always, when necessary, Hamlet finds a suitable audience. Give him just a pretext, and that he feels at the podium, he was not just saying, a "speech." Moreover, it can hold a meeting without any reason - for this he needs only the right mood (if "soul burns" or "straight evil takes") and then had an audience there, and the topic will be selected. (Unlike Don Quixote, who rally anytime, where she pleased, and not always in the language of the people around him Hamlet very carefully chooses his listeners. Always know who and what can and should agitate.) Reprove, condemn, " hang tags, "to point fingers - this is not only a form of its expression, but also a way to create community spirit, to shape public opinion. And on a larger scale - a way of "doing politics", "make history."

    Become the initiator of any undertaking, bring it to new people, organize them, lead them - all these Hamlet engaged willingly. And for that he does not have to be a politician: simply "to get into the stream," guess "right" direction, take "necessary" initiative.

    It should be noted that, in its social initiative Hamlet very shrewd and prudent, when something started - this is no accident, it is a long-term view, the calculation is not just for the goodness of his heart. (The fact that Hamlet does just out of the goodness of his heart, he does not advertise: you never know how others would react to this? What if because of these "good deeds" he ever get in trouble? Example: The representative of this type for many years in secret his wife helped financially all his relatives - little bit of everything, from the salary of someone to whom to award. But every once warned: "Just do not let it slip to his wife, she should have nothing to know about it!" And was not the case, that he forgot to mention it or prevented.)

    Leadership Hamlet contributes more and the fact that he was always a born talented actor - and this is his most valuable quality. He is an actor in life, and in the theater (and in the history and politics). When Hamlet comes on stage, the audience and cries and laughs with him. (When Hamlet "comes to politics," laughing is less and less.)

    Many members of this type are the most distinguished actors, directors, poets and musicians of his time. As long as the audience is Hamlet, his inspiration is inexhaustible.


    Filatova:

    Life for EIE is the sphere of emotions, which he, as a conductor, skillfully orchestrates. He is capable to act on his surroundings by a wide range of his own feelings – from powerful explosions saturated by his dramatic nature, by tragedy or by enthusiasm, by the ability to keep silent for several days and go about with a stone face; his entire form despising and “punishing”, in an unmistakable way, the person whom insulted him. People admire his bright emotionalism, the dramatic nature of his experiences, and his ability to responsd to the most trivial changes in the moods of those around him. His rich world of feelings contains different hues of emotions, which in observing this psycho-type are immediately demonstrated by those surrounding.

    If others act indignantly towards him they qualify themselves as loathesome, malicious, and envious, and action is taken. His source of enthusiasm and delight, without fail, is anything directed to the highest spiritual ideals… In the emotional sphere EIE has a certain standard of expression he uses to discover how the public reacts, to him, emotionally.

    In connection with this the EIE places an important role on morality, taken aback by society he himself strives into those spheres, where, in his opinion, this criteria is best matched. Being a very emotional man he easily may be made victim of strange misfortunes. Towards others he is capable of exemplifying warmth and sincere sympathy, he is very courteous and inclined to prove to be of service, at least when prolonged participation is not required. Wonderfully knows how to manipulate others by their feelings. At the same time feels greatly wounded himself, sometimes seeming like “a man without skin”. He strongly depends on the opinion of those that surround him, they, without fail, take the role of student or spectator.

    In reacting to something he always feels himself to be an actor, located on set. Because of this his behaviour frequently contains a noticable theatricality about it, an increasing excitability, enthusiasm, exaggerated gestures, poses. His behaviour contains a demonstrative nature, which seemingly signals to those surrounding him whether he is unhappy, sick, insulted, sincere, flattered, ingenious, needy of nourishment…

    He knows how to magnificently appear before an audience, to ignite and fascinate the crowd through his ideas, which he preaches. He requires interaction with someone at least everyday in order to satisfy his everyday emotional manifestations.

  36. #36
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default the explicit socionical fields; limitation, empowerment, and ionization

     
     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    The comfort and convenience of things and living space is very important to LSEs. Living spaces need to be conducive to rest, work, or recreation. LSEs take it into their own hands to reorganize or redesign living spaces to make them more comfortable and convenient.

    LSEs typically love recreation with a physical element, such as picnics, walking, hiking, sports, etc. They recognize the need to relax and unwind and typically plan these activities into their schedule at regular intervals and involve other people in the activities. Nonetheless, relaxation is secondary to the LSE's main pursuits, which is generally their work. LSEs with families typically organize recreation with their families to combine quality family time with relaxation.

    Unlike leading Si types, LSEs usually cannot switch into relaxation mode at the drop of a hat. They need to finish tasks that they expected to accomplish before they can consciously allow themselves to relax. Relaxation, like their other activities, must be approached rationally with an eye to the overall results, rather than allowing oneself to be guided by the impulses of the moment. When they willingly switch to a "vacation" mode and know that they have adequate leisure time, LSEs will delve into relaxation with gusto. Without adequate time, they tend to avoid relaxing too much, as it jeopardizes their productivity.

    Aesthetic appeal is very important to LSEs. This applies to all aspects of their lives — clothes, work tools, living environment, etc. Most LSEs have an orderly home and work area and select their clothes carefully. They have a relatively easy time matching clothes, colors, textures, and other aesthetic properties. Many LSEs are conneisseurs of good food, good clothes, household products, and hygienic products.

    LSEs typically have a strong caretaking streak; they enjoy having others to care or provide for who are dependent on their assistance.


    Stratievskaya:

    Aesthetics holds enormous value to representatives of this type. Everything must be flawlessly beautiful. Technology and fine craftsmanship are ground by it to infinity.

    They create the impression that they exist to beat all records of beauty and are greatly disturbed if the quality of their work does not correspond to their own creative concepts: "not one human hand cannot bring work to the complete perfection" (Leonardo DaVinci). A tendency toward aesthetic perfection is characteristic for all representatives of this type.

    They place an enormous deal of value on the aesthetics in their own life. Regardless of the fact, as whom it works - by unskilled worker or by minister, their clothing is always neat and put-together.

    Representatives of this type know how to wear clothing exceptionally accurately - so that one and the same thing serves as them many years and appears to remain in mint condition forever. They dress elegantly, exhibiting high-quality, but without any pretentiousness or excessive gaudiness. To always be perfectly fashionable is not a strictly-followed rule. In their tastes, they are quite conservative, preferring to adhere to their own aesthetic standards.

    Their basic style of clothing is classical and characterized by quality and good tailoring ("expensive modesty"). Many women of this type love the business style with inconspicuous but expensive adornments. Their cosmetics and perfumes are selected with the utmost attention to taste. A distinguishing feature of this type is an ability to preserve a youthful appearance well into old age.

    Their tastes, as a rule, change rather unwillingly. They tend to react suspiciously and sometimes with extreme distaste to new sensory experiences. Each time, trying unknown dish, it preliminarily is interested, which this such and from what is prepared. If, in its understanding, this not is edible, he tries to refuse in the delicate form. The dear and customary food To shtirlitsu never annoys, and its monotony does not confuse.

    All representatives of this type are distinguished by a straight posture and straightened arms. They walk with a proudly raised head and if they turn around, they usually turn most of their body. Men of this type are characterized by a military rigidity, even if they never served in the army.

    They are just as exacting of others' appearances as they are of their own: they can refuse work to someone who arrived to an interview inappropriately dressed, even if they are a specialist in their field with outstanding recommendations.

    Beauty, refinement, aesthetics, and splendid taste constantly accompany representatives of this type. They endeavor to surround themselves with such things, which they create and arrange with their own hands.

    For family dinners and holiday get-togethers, the best dishes are brought to the table - everything must be prepared perfectly. For some, even the everyday dinner is a kind of ceremony.

    Superfluously to speak about what splendid kulinarki, forewoman and umelitsy of a representative of this type. Moreover To shtirlitsu it is usually insufficient that taste, by which it is allotted from nature: many of them additionally learn some artistic crafts that sharply change their professional orientation: a math teacher began to take drawing lessons, then learned to compose bouquets, then went to learn how to craft ceramics and pottery, then developed and patented her own ceramic technology, then opened a ceramic factory which produced dishes, after which she was trained for a new profession in the production of ceramic sculpture and souvenirs.

    Cleanliness, order, and high-quality comfort is considered required for their home. In their house they must have everything which may be required in any life situation. ("my house is my fortress".) Neither empty shelves nor an empty refrigerator occurs in their home. They always remember what they've reserved in case it is needed. Their surpluses, even if they go without use for a long time, will only be discarded if there is no possibility that they will ever be needed. The only purchase products of the best quality, sometimes without regards to the price, but in small quantities so that they do not merely end up throwing something away.

    Economy conducts very economically and prudently.

    Its health tries not to start. Great significance is attached to preventive maintenance and sport.

    To be ill not to love - usually it leaves to the work, hardly after beginning to get better. (if its subordinated more than three-four days they sit too long on the hospital, it receives this as desertion from the working front)

    Representatives of this type are characterized by exceptional endurance and preserve splendid physical form, also, at the oldest age. (Shtirlits, which is complained about its health, very rare phenomenon and only in the case of actually serious problems.)

    They love to travel, and enjoy active and comfortable leisure, often outdoors. They may regularly attends shows and theatrical premiers, and they try to always be culturally active and involved in public life.


    Filatova:

    In order to assume as much qualitative production as possible it is necessary to make labor efficient. It is only possible to achieve this through the excellent organization of labor, and this is constantly the aim of the LSE. She considers that there always and everywhere must be order, at work and in the home. Any object prepared by her hands is completed, as a rule, conscientiously and accurately, be it a knitted blouse or a computer program it is reduced to the level of an art.

    As a sensor, LSE is concrete in everything, however, in connection with her rationality, which stipulates the difficulty of her switching to another activity, this concrete style of behaviour can develop into obstinacy. People of this psycho-type are capable of maintaining an identical viewpoint of something over a long period of time. It is difficult for her to disconnect from such a state of mind.

    Her ability to concentrate all her resources on the work by which she is occupied, and to be untiring and firm in such work, requires that she relax. Relaxation for LSE is often found in sports. She prefers team activities: football, volleyball, tourism… These wonderfully combine the ability to live in a group whilst at the same time retaining her individuality.

    She does not impose excessive requirements on reality, she is inclined to look on things reasonably and also with optimism. Hence she meets any anomaly, which destroys her order (i.e. disease) with full-forced internal protest; such must not enter her life! Her entire mental system gravitates towards sincere health and a clear logic of interrelations with the object world.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    The ESE is naturally good at organizing recreation, and getting people to chill out and enjoy themselves—but only does so when he sees a specific need for it, rather than initiating relaxing activities all the time. Neither does a meandering, leisurely pace suit his natural temperament; he can engage it only for a limited amount of time, since he knows there are always things to be done and people to see.

    ESEs are aware of and attuned to people's tastes and personal preferences and they like to do things or give things to friends and family members that will let them enjoy themselves, such as creating a comfortable, clean, and spacious setting in the home, taking them out to do something they enjoy, or finding opportunities and people with whom they can pursue their hobbies.

    The ESE is always cognizant of what needs are going unfulfilled, and likes to find the most refreshingly straightforward way to meet them. He is frequently a master of the sensual arts, and takes joy in finding new and exciting ways to make sexual and otherwise pleasurable experiences even more intense. Much like the SEI, the ESE can only enjoy an activity when everyone else is enjoying it too, so he always tries his best to make sure that everyone is having a good time.


    Stratievskaya:

    The emotional activity of Hugo finds the most complete and brightest expression in the skill to precisely give happiness to his surrounding close people. In the skill to create by them comfort, cosiness, in the skill to be a guardian them. On the cordiality, on the hospitality, on the skill to accept guests and to organize celebratory meal Hugo does not have equal. The celebratory meal arranged by it always reflects entire flame of its soul, entire its happiness from the contact with the friends.

    No one will be compared with Hugo on the skill to create the atmosphere of holiday under the conditions of the most ordinary working days. Hugo can, for example, bring to the work an enormous quantity of diverse food in the saucepans and sudochkakh and arrange for its colleagues "feast to entire peace" - it is simple so, on occasion of a good mood. On the holidays on the work already and to speak something: Hugo from those, who actively organize them, moreover with the pleasure beret to itself the large part of the work. Holiday for Hugo - holy matter.

    The best organizer of holidays it is not possible to visualize. Within the shortest period of Hugo it can prepare holiday table to any quantity of guests. (it prepares very rapidly - only manage to bring clean dishes.) It adores to treat its guests. There are no guests - it entertains neighbors. (Hugo greatly it loves to associate, especially at the elderly age, when there are much free time, and frequently it goes on the neighbors with the jar of jam or with the patty of its own production, well and will sit with them after the cup of tea, and it will meet.) Hugo adores to prepare in order someone to treat. Being its guest, it is possible to pronablyudat', as it prepares food and it sentences: "Oy, as this will be tastefully! M-m! Oy, something will now be!.. Oy, this will be something!" And actually it is obtained "something".

    All without the exception representatives of this type - splendid culinary specialists independent of the kind of occupations. But already if Hugo - professional culinary specialist, to be his guest - pleasure, which can be memorized for life. Questions of nourishment - theme, which Hugo more willingly anything discusses and which has for it the pervostepenneysheye value, especially the nourishment of his children. If a representative of this type learns, that his child in the school they feed monotonous and unsavoury, it can go to the director and arrange present scandal. Hugo - aesthete from nature.

    He about itself this knows and considers it its strong quality. To each person will exceptionally clothing, hair-do and makiyazh, his appropriate appearances and to nature. Even "sensorikam" (not to mention "intuitakh") has sense to listen to the advice to Hugo. Splendid designers are obtained from the representatives of this type. As consultant in Hugo's aesthetics out of the competition: "I asked its colleague (Hugo) soak to me to renew cloakroom. That this was! We after half-hour bypassed five stores. And wherever they appeared - clothing literally began to fly through the salon: "so, give to us here this sweater, now still this sharfik and also here this cap!" And all without the fitting, and everything by rule of thumb! I arrived home, it fitted - everything is noticeable! After half-hour it me dressed from top to bottom!" Its cloakroom of Hugo changes constantly. To it rapidly annoys the fact that it purchased. It eternally something alters, it alters, it peredarivayet.

    Hugo constantly something changes in his clothing and hair-do. Before the output to the work it can into the schitannye minutes convert dress into the blouse, it can make to itself hair-cutting or recolor hair, all this only because its yesterday's hair-cutting and yesterday's color of hair do not correspond to its today's mood. Hugo constantly changes interior in his house. Furniture frequently renews, it it constantly moves. It is eternally in it some new cases, portieres, new home-made lampshades. After arriving in guests to the friends or good familiar, Hugo frequently on the private venture begins something to change in the interior their apartments.

    Hugo (in contrast to the Dumases), if it sees some aesthetical imperfections, always considers itself as that obliged about this to speak. Moreover, the nearer the relation, the more active it comes out with its observations: "me does not please itself your hair-do!", "this dress must be taken in!", to "this cabinet here not place!". And this is done not because it such rough or unceremonious: simply it is actually very receptive to any manifestation of disharmony, which always so irritates it that it cannot suffer this. Hugo is simply obligated to turn on this attention - even if it about this they do not ask, he cannot keep silent.

    Hugo adores to give gifts. He can last money spend on gift, it would seem, completely outside person. He can make a gift apropos and without the occasion. Sometimes - it is simple so, "in the emotional outburst", while sometimes because to it was encountered some thing, which to someone of its close ones greatly will approach: "here, 4 to you it purchased new pomade, and this, orange, reject so that 4 it in you no longer it would see!". Hugo always in the course of the last movements of mode, and although his house is literally covered with the most fashionable catalogs, its own aesthetical style always out of the mode, it is always vividly individual.

    It develops the exceptional activity of Hugo, when the matter concerns the health of its close ones. It storms the offices of doctors, it is torn away from the work and runs on the drugstores, it breaks through to the method to the znameniteyshim specialists. All its colleagues, friends and familiar regularly listen summary about the status of the health of its sick relative. Hugo literally attacks disease, since he always fears, that it will tighten itself or will give complication. Its activity begins to weaken only if in the state of patient noticeable improvement begins. To the state of its health of Hugo it pays considerably less attention.

    Rarely it complains about the poor health, usually itself manages its own ailments. He tries to be occupied by the preventive maintenance of his health, by sport. It follows the quality of nourishment, it soblyudayet diet. Many women of this type preserve youth and attractiveness to the oldest age.


    Filatova:

    ESE: the romantic and esthete, loves to create a warm social atmosphere. This is noticeable in the external manner of her behaviour: after meeting a familiar she will stop and give the gift of her radiant smile. One of ESE’s greatest pleasures is in entrusting gifts to others. Their principal goal, by this, is to provide another with pleasure, to become witness to their happiness. The price of the gift is considered unimportant: it’s not without reason that ESE is famous, amongst her friends, for her generosity and kindred spirit.

    She quickly answers to any request for help, in such cases she’ll even abandon her work, deemed less important. By helping others she’s compensated with the reward of knowing she did a good deed.

    ESE willingly participates in the non formal organization of different events – of birthdays, anniversaries, Christmas for the children of coworkers, holiday expeditions, excursions; so long as she’s around interesting people she considers such her pleasure.

    She’s very active and loves productive leisure. In sports she favours enjoying the activity itself rather than just victory over others. Many representatives of this type love nature – the forest, sea, leisurely hikes, but it’s necessary in each case that she is in the company of good friends.

    Like no one else, ESE is capable of organizing her surrounding space in the best way, to make it comfortable and convenient. Frequently she possesses excellent artistic taste. She wants everything around her to be beautiful; for happy eyes answer to people’s prosaic needs.

    Quality is noticeable in the ESE’s clothing (especially amongst women): refinement, elegance, faultless style, the ability to use the inexpensive yet just as adequate dressing accessories is one of her distinguishing features. But she never forgets about the functionality of clothing, its convenience.

    One should also note that ESEs make splendid culinary specialists. Everything prepared by them is, as a rule, of superior taste. Even with limited ingredients at her disposal she’ll devise something new and “finger-licking good”!


     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    SLIs are naturally good at knowing what kinds of activities and stimuli will produce which sensations and physical states in themselves and the people around them. They are highly sensitive to sensations of internal discomfort and dissonance, or when someone or something is aesthetically out of place. They usually take quick action to remove the discomfort, dissonance, or misplacement so that things "feel right." They are attracted to material (concrete) objects which produce the "right" sensations and physical states, such as stereo systems which produce the best sounds or clothes that produce the best feelings either through their pleasant texture and ease of use or through their aesthetic appeal. They dislike it when others deny them of pleasurable material objects and can get quite possessive and territorial when claiming or re-claiming them.

    SLIs are skilled at recognizing and remembering their own and others' internal physical states and at imagining how different things would affect that state. When analyzing the behavior of themselves and others, they focus on these physical states and see them as determining much of a person's actions. They prefer to keep their lifestyle and living space simple and to avoid excessive, gaudy possessions and excessively complex living habits and duties. SLIs encourage those they care about to take the time to experience pleasurable and soothing sensations, avoid getting caught up in the hustle and bustle of everyday life, and to listen to their bodies and their sincere inner desires. They can be concerned with their own health and those they know.

    SLIs are drawn to situations which allow them to maximize these physical states and like to dwell on soothing, pleasurable sensations, or the enjoyment of physical motion. They often seek physical and manual involvement in work activities. SLIs prefer to get involved in business projects rather than sit back and let things happen on their own (weak Ni too). SLIs are adept at portraying excitement and disgust through their physical gestures.


    Stratievskaya:

    The tendency to guard themselves from unpleasant and uncomfortable sensations is characteristic of representatives of this type – to depart and head towards cozy, comfortable solitude, towards pleasant society and "warm company", which permits light relations that don't oblige to anything; to depart into recollections that vividly and accurately re-create pleasant impressions, once experienced and remembered for a long time. ("As now I remember the smell of freshly cut grass of the football field, on which I walked for the first time in my life...")

    Gabins are endowed with exceptional memory for pleasant sensations. They are capable of recreating and describing sensation of colors, smell, taste, to fully relay their personal impression of some experience with all the accompanying sensory aspects. (In movies of Andrey Tarkovsky (SLI), the recollections of sounds are used as a kind of "sensory symbolism" i.e. depicted sensory experiences hold a specific semantic significance.)

    Gabin knows how to observe sensing experiences of another person. He is especially keen on noticing the unpleasant and uncomfortable ones. (In movies of Tarkovsky, some of the unpleasant experiences of characters' discomfort are filmed up close and at a slow rate, so that the viewer would have time to devote his attention to this detail, since it has a semantic value.)

    Gabin sensitively takes note of these most personal sensations and needs, which not everyone will even note and acknowledge in themselves. Moreover, he can approach an unfamiliar person and tell him about his observations, offering advice on how to eliminate his or her discomfort. He can by the look in someone's eyes determine that this person is hungry, then invite them to his place and offer them something to eat. Physical dissatisfaction he assesses faultlessly and does not remain indifferent to it. Gabin feels irritated even by an involuntary observation of another's sufferings.

    Gabin greatly values the physical and soulful comfort that he creates. Therefore he tries to avoid any unpleasant, irritating stimuli, which destroy his internal emotional harmony. Such unpleasant stimuli can include lacking aesthetics in someone's appearance, sharp smells or sounds, dim illumination, excessively furnished interior, ragged wallpaper and beaten corners, unpleasant intonations in someone's voice. Any manifestations of physical and emotional discomfort influence his mood and levels of his motivation, cause internal protest, bring about an urgent desire to change the situation. Gabin always tries to insulate himself from the surrounding unpleasant stimuli. For example, being at home he can turn off his phone so that nothing would interfere with his pleasant solitude.

    Following his system of sensory interrelations, Gabin prefers to receive harmonious sensations in association: object simultaneously must have an aesthetical pleasing form and be pleasant by color, and to taste, to smell, to touch. That these sensations evoke a sense of internal harmony is the main requirement that representatives of this type impose on their surrounding reality.

    Gabin's movements are usually calm, measured, and smooth – a combination of externally calm look with internal restraint.

    Gabins prefer to dress simply, comfortably, and tastefully. They enjoy a practical, casual style. Any, even working clothes, they know how to wear with unconstrained ease. Independent of the occasion, Gabins always feel themselves comfortable in what they are wearing. They are usually not interested in following the latest fashion and somewhat conservative in their tastes. Gabin prefers to look tidy and well-kept, although he isn't shy of appearing in working clothing wherever he needs to be.

    Gabin knows how to listen to his sensations. He loves to talk about them, to analyze them. He values natural beauty and sharpness of sensations. Receiving insufficient sensory stimulation, just as satiety of senses, irritates him, sometimes even causes aversion.

    He loves and values pleasure in all of its manifestations and will not reject it; knows how to prolong it by his ability to again and again reproduce pleasant sensations in his memory. Orientation toward pleasing sensation for Gabin is the norm of life: "And who doesn't wish to enjoy themselves? Is it really necessary for one to live a life and suffer? If I had ten lives, I would live one in the manner that my mother wants for me, another – as my wife wants for me... But I have only one life and I will live it the way I want."

    With the assertion that "any pleasure in this life has a price" Gabin categorically will not agree. Questions posed in this manner are unacceptable to him. Pleasure in his understanding is the individual composition of subjective sensations. The ability to tune to obtaining pleasure is this type's individual ability, its individual merit, so why is it necessary to pay for this?

    Under no conditions will Gabin subject his personal prosperity, well-being and convenience to a blow. He tries to avoid such turn of events, but if the present circumstances are unfavorable to him, he will try to come out of this situation with minimal losses for himself.

    As a result of such orientation, Gabin can make an impression of an egotistical and self-indulgent person. Such opinion of those around him does actually substantially complicate his life. However, Gabins will stubbornly and persistently defend their right to live in the manner that they best see fit, justifying by the fact that they don't intend to cause trouble for anyone else and sincerely feel upset if their way of life causes suffering and inconvenience for someone else.

    Gabins derive pleasure first of all from sensing the force of their own constitution and good physical condition. Many of them try to lead a healthy way of life. They prefer the types of spot which are saturated by vivid impressions and strong sensations: mountain climbing, tourism, underwater swimming. Sport for Gabin doesn't only test his endurance but also allow him to feel the completeness of life and provides for fresh bright impressions. (The image of a courageous traveler-trailblazer is very appealing to representatives of this type.)

    Many Gabins with pleasure follow diets, enjoy eating vegetarian or uncooked food. Many representatives of this type know how to prepare food, and know this well, without having to spend much time learning it. They value the natural gustatory senses, therefore they may adhere to spice-free and salt-free diets.

    They are seriously occupied by the preventive maintenance of their health, by diets, gymnastics some of them in the tendency to leave to a maximally effective bioenergetic regime and to attain the complete concentration of sensations be fascinated by yogoy, are occupied by meditation, they attempt to get to know the limits of their sensory possibilities.

    They love to walk on foot, moreover in their gait the coordination and the measured off automatism of motions are felt. For the elongation of entire walking Of gabeny they hold the flat, once assigned rate. They do not love to stop, waiting until remained Therefore they prefer to walk on foot in the solitude walking for Gabenov - even and the method to be concentrated on its thoughts the process of walking for them sometimes it is more important than the purpose of movement.

    Gabeny are allotted by the thin sensation of the accordion of color, line and form thinly feel color combinations, oshchushchayut the measure of the saturation of color, the dynamics of line, ease and nezagromazhdennost' of forms.

    Do not love the suppressing monumentality by them they please themselves the simple forms, deprived of decorative excesses they know how to rationally use space, even in the close accomodation they can create the illusion of space and the sensation of the neperegruzhennogo space. (model of gabenovskoy aesthetics most precisely it is the aesthetical traditions of Japan, the combination of accordion and functionality of simple and natural forms)

    In the house they do not suffer excess things and without their regret eject. In private life they know how to bypass with small. They know how to organize comfort by quite minimum means. They know how to create the sensation of cosiness and comfort with any conditions and circumstances.


    Filatova:

    Represented by the sensation of harmony, beauty and health. Everything must be balanced. This is applied to his work, relations with people, selection of household articles, and in the comprehensive development of a physically healthy body.

    SLI capably remembers colours, odours, and somatic sensations; and can easily draw pictures of these in his memory. He remembers the taste of a delicious meal for years. In many respects he’s an aesthete. He often possesses a good artistic taste. Such, for him, is characteristically steady and contemplative, deprived of emotionalism. He does not relate to people that, by means of sensual energy, immediately give in to the very basic sensory pleasures: he prefers to leisurely “relish” his experiences, to in time separate the pleasant from the unpleasant. The surrounding world provides him a large range of sensations to which he’s very attentive. He magnificently realizes his physical state, understands his body’s possibilities and, therefore, may successfully occupy himself with sports – of predominately individual forms. But even in view of these things SLI often distances himself from sports in favour of a healthy mode of life, which provides him with the general feeling of being harmonious and balanced.

    This function’s manifestation makes itself noticed in regards to the SLI’s exterior appearance: he always dresses appropriately in a simple, elegant, sporty style: his clothing is primarily chosen based on convenience.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    SEIs have a strong connection to and ability to recognize internal physical states in themselves and others. They understand how these states are reached and are able to easily recreate or avoid them if desired. They are innately drawn to situations that satisfy their inner physical needs and experience. They are usually skilled at the art of recreation, enjoyment, and positive aesthetic experience.

    SEIs often feel that they are in a rush, both mentally and physically. Therefore, they can sometimes feel like they need to get everything done at once (which can be explained by the SEIs base and role functions). When an SEI starts a personal project, they often have the tendency to try to get concrete results in the shortest amount of time, which can lead to rushing and carelessness. This could lead to the SEI becoming stressed and overworked.

    Often unable to express their feelings well using words, the SEI will instead create "art" (artwork, food, writing, or any other aesthetic situations) to illustrate the comfort or discomfort that they are experiencing internally.

    SEIs try to make their living space comforting and appealing to the senses and strive to improve the lives of those they are close to.


    Stratievskaya:

    The core values inherent in representatives of this type are: Beauty and harmony in all their manifestations, a bright life abounding with pleasant impressions and a tendency towards pleasure in its most aesthetic and refined forms. For Dumas, it is not only characteristic for him to create a pleasant atmosphere through all his forms and manifestations; he also takes care to maintain an already existing harmony.

    Dumas will never allow himself to spoil someone’s mood, nor will he introduce dullness into a holiday atmosphere. He is knowledgeable about all that which brings happiness and gives pleasure.

    Dumas loves and appreciates life in all its manifestations. For him, it is very important to feel a zest for life. It is vital to make life beautiful, nice, easy; the feeling of "life as a celebration" is important. For Dumas, providing fun is as pleasant as obtaining it.

    Dumas is the realist (otherwise, how would they complement the dreamer and fantasist, Don Quixote?). Dumas is orientated to the simplest and most natural values: the well-being of family, a cosy home, and good relations.

    He tries not to concern others with his troubles. He delights in life, and does not intend to complicate somebody else’s.

    For Dumas, the sensation of comfort, a peace of mind, a good state of health, and a good mood are all important. The absence of any of these sensations will seriously perturb him. For example, if circumstances develop so that he is unable to go dine somewhere during a lunch break, and hence, he is forced to eat junk food (Russian: vsukhomyatku) on a regular basis, this will disturb him greatly: "It won’t be long before I get gastritis and become stressed").

    Comfort and discomfort, health and disease, happiness and misfortune, life and death – these are the basic themes of his reasonings.

    Often he reflects on what conditions he would like to exist. He likes to criticise badly thought out or inconveniently organised conditions for work, studies, and leisure.

    Dumas possesses the ability to memorise and recreate anew the once experienced sensations. Sounds, colour, and smells are remembered by him as a complete impression, and he can recall the associations connected with past feelings, in order to remind himself of any person and any event - about any relations.

    He is able to notice the unpleasant sensations experienced by other people. For example, he will immediately notice when someone is enduring conditions which are too hot, too cold, too tight or too stuffy – he would notice if someone was wearing shoes which are too tight. He knows when someone experiences painful sensations. He always knows how they are caused, and aspires to eliminate the cause of the problem. He tries to do this in a tactful manner, as he considers sensations to be especially personal and intimate – therefore, a delicate and unobtrusive approach is followed. (Representatives of this type work well in medicine).

    Dumas is able to feel pity for another’s indisposition, since his own poor health is a cause for great concern. In such an instance, he is completely absorbed by the condition and the sensations. Dialogue with his associates during this period only irritates him, especially if they have indifferent concern for his condition and do not show any sympathy or care. Dumas perceives insufficiently expressed compassion as a display of indifference and a sign of poor relations. If, for example, he sees that his complaints only irritate associates, he tries to limit contact with them till a better time.

    Formally expressed sympathies do not improve his condition one bit. During an illness, Dumas does not require encouragement, but comfort.

    He does not consider himself able to cope with physical overloads, therefore he does not like to work under conditions involving physical endurance, especially when this concerns leisure. He likes to have a rest in conditions of modest and unpretentious comfort in the company of pleasant and interesting people. Tourism involving physical pressure and an element of risk and danger as well as the absence of luxuries, he does comparatively little.

    He loves leisure involving nature. He subtly feels its beauty. Any display of finery, he tries to remember, as in general, he tries to remember all good, as "that is what to recollect". ("Life is not what was lived, but what was remembered").

    Dumas knows how to receive guests, and loves to do so. Dumas is glad to have opportunities to show his sense of taste and his culinary talents. The very preparation for the reception gives him pleasure. Dumas usually arranges for his guests a "sensory feast": a cozy setting, pleasant music, soft lighting, a beautiful tablespread, the tastiest food - all are done so that the pleasure from the holiday is comprehensive and most complete.

    Dumas thoroughly thinks over all details of upcoming celebratory meals: the selection of guests, the laying of the table, the combination of dishes, the choice of wine. If, for example, it is the New Year holiday, they consider the arrangement of the room, carnival suits, gifts, surprises... It is very angry when someone interferes with the realization of its holiday undertaking: "Well fancy that, I introduce the cake with its candles, and my mother-in-law includes the skylight! She does not understand that this will spoil the entire mood of the holiday ... And further still: she began to give out the gifts! …She does not understand that these gifts are not from her, but - they must be from Grandfather Moroz (Father Frost - the "Eastern" version of Santa Claus) and also be found under the fir tree. Thus she spoiled the holiday for the children!"

    Dumas distinguishes splendid taste in everything concerning the harmony of sensations. They are unsurpassed culinary specialists, capable according to smell of determining the gustatory qualities of food and the degree of its readiness. Dumas does not simply prepare the food: it creates, it packs soul, it represents, what pleasure its food must provide.

    It takes the subject of nutrition very seriously, and is extremely fussy and fastidious in matters concerning food. Food which does not give cause for confidence will not be eaten by it, even if it is requested. It is very conservative in matters of taste.

    Under any conditions Dumas knows how to create the sensation of comfort, the sensation of heat and cosiness. Whatever modest means it has available, it will always devise to decorate its house. It can use its handiwork, its drawings or pictures of its children for this. It is able to make even temporary dwellings appear comfortable and settled.

    In the formulation of an interior, Dumas prefers an intricate-elegant style, frequently with decorative additions. It uses space very efficiently, and knows how to make even the smallest area comfortable.

    Order in the house of a Dumas (especially if in a dual relationship) is usually maintained within a very non-intrusive and burdenless form: things become scattered, Dumas patiently collects and sorts them as long as the rest of the household does not start to automatically put things in place. If Dumas did not have the strength to impose order on a regular basis throughout the entire house, there will nonetheless always be some area where the procedure is strictly observed, and another where everything is tastefully arranged.


    Articles of daily life in the scrap of the Dumases are always beautiful and are convenient, always very beautiful dishes. Not only that that for the holidays, but also that that on each day. Beautiful dishes and beautiful bed linen - "small weakness" of representatives of this type. Soft, convenient furniture, carpets, pillows, salfetochki - everything which gladdens eye and it locates to leisure, without fail it is present in the house of the Dumases.

    The aesthetics of the Dumases is calculated for the perception by small forms. The beauty of each thing must be received individually - hence certain decorative supersaturation, characteristic of the aesthetics of the Dumases. (characteristic also of the aesthetics of all irrational "sensorikov-etikov" - and the Dumases, and Caesar.)

    Dumas possesses many artistic talents and with their pleasure realizes. Thus, without being trained specially the profession of barber or tailor, frequently is carried out work not worse, but sometimes also it is better than another professional. Dumas, who is professionally by design (clothing, hair-dos, foot-wear, furniture), out of the competition.

    It magnificently feels the accordion of color, lines, forms, it is sonic, odor the best perfumers and the best tasters are obtained precisely from the representatives of this type. It knows how to select the associative combinations of smell and color, color and sound. It can invent perfumes, correspond to the specific music, the mood, determined to the color combination, determined to artistic direction and to the style of clothing.

    Dumas knows how to create his mode, knows how itself to be adapted to any direction of it. Never will put on that is inconvenient to bear, or that which disadvantageously emphasizes deficiencies in its appearance. By this the ability of the Dumases in any clothing to appear exceptionally attractively is explained. By nature inclined to the completeness, they magnificently manage this problem, because of the skill with the taste to dress, it is easy to move and is conveniently themselves felt in any situation. Krome.togo, Dyuma cannot allow so that his completeness would reach some inconveniences to it. Therefore begins to soblyudat' diet each time, when he feels, that this is necessary.

    The Dumases it is always confident in its attractiveness, and surrounding, especially the representatives of opposite floor, this they always feel well. Dumas usually enjoys success, moreover by that deserved, and this it greatly gladdens. Never it speculates on its beauty, since it considers as the its normal and natural entity. To it it is pleasant to provide pleasure by its exterior view. Moreover, Dyumo willingly helps and by council and by the matter all, who want to make their appearance of of more attractive than renders the invaluable service to its dualu Don Quixote, who usually gives insufficient attention to its exterior view. (as it loved to tell in one student- Dumases about its instructor - Don Quixote: "each time, when 4 it I see, to me so is desirable him to wash clean!..")

    There is nothing more natural for the Dumases, than the concern about its close ones, about its households - this is one of its vital orientators. Its households are always ukhozheny and are fed. Dumas can his needs reduce to the minimum, but he will try so that his family would experience not the least inconveniences.

    The aesthetical training of children is considered the matter paramount and naivazhneyshim. For example, liveing on assistance on the unemployment, it can purchase to its children of piano and to pay to them the lessons of music.


    Filatova:

    For the SEI this function is principally focused on health, in the broadest sense of the word. Into this concept enters the sensations of his body, his health or illness. Also concerns food and its preparation, the sensation of comfort in his environment (including at work), clothing (its aesthetic value and convenience).

    SEI comprehends well the characteristics of a living organism, its needs. Physicians, despite having authority that he lacks, will not be able to bring sense down to the SEI should they supply a diagnosis that does not coincide with his inherent sensations. Generally he considers being ill as something almost indecent: it is foolish, in fact, not to take care of oneself!

    He understands sensations so well that he is capable of noting barely perceptible signs in others that they are not aware of. However, in these cases he does not consider it proper to interfere with another person, to offer his indications or recommendations. In the area of health one must take personal responsibility.

    SEI knows how to wonderfully prepare, and tastefully eat up, food. An excellent culinary specialist, he often invents something new and original. He also decorates his environment to make it aesthetically attractive – so that both his eyes and stomach may be on holiday.

    SEI approaches his environment from a very sensory dimension. In furnishing a room he focuses on coziness, convenience, proper selection of furniture, the shades of colour – all of this is important and thus frequently serves as the object of concern and attention.

    In regards to clothing the SEI desires harmony but also realizes that articles must be convenient, functionally justified and beautiful. However, he will not dress for an occasion in accordance with prestige; such makes him uncomfortable – convenience is considered first of all!


     
     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    The LII naturally assesses statements, opinions, and actions in terms of conformance to certain principles. These principles may in practice be rules of thumb based on experience, but LIIs will usually appeal to more general, self-evident reasons, if the need arises. The LII is most engaged in communication when they are critically analyzing people's decisions and actions as well as how they generally are or are not consistent with certain pre-established goals. their dual, the ESE, likes hearing the LII's judgment, and simultaneously softens its edge by shifting their focus to how they are communicating their ideas, letting them see the intellectual thought process from the outside. The ESE appreciates and praises their ability to take the information seriously, but the ESE will find funny ways of reminding the LII of how they are coming across when they seem more serious than they realize.

    "Just because" is not in an LII's vocabulary. If there is a reason for something, the LII will probably want to find it. The LII strives to reduce things to their most essential aspects, and mentally recreate the whole from the bottom up. The LII's theoretical tendencies can often leave him out of touch with reality, and if unchecked may lead to abstract theories that make logical sense but have little bearing on the real world.

    The LII may explore many avenues of thought, but in the end only tell others his refined conclusions, because he sees the intermediate steps as irrelevant. He is often too concise for his own good, making it difficult for others to understand his ideas.


    Stratievskaya:

    "validity - my craft" "a representative of this type always passionate champion for the validity. It considers that everything in the world must be logically and, therefore, it is correct. Frequently it reflects about the creation of the state of absolute validity, about the establishment of authority, which must begin its activity from the severe penalty of all, who conduct unrighteous life, i.e., he disrupts the principles of validity. (idea of "terrible law court"). Any of the representatives of this type divides the thought, expressed in the American Declaration of Independence,: "all people are created equal, they are allotted by god by some inherent rights, among which life, freedom, tendency toward the happiness".

    It is deeply democratic on the nature, since democracy as the possibility of selection is understood. It considers that only then the society has the right to require of the man of full responsibility for his behavior, when each member of society obtains the complete right of freedom of choice his actions. It considers that discipline in the society must be based not on the fear, but on the conscience. Therefore the punishment of "law-breaker" considers as training his conscience, i.e. - for its good. Robesp'er usually entertains idea itself that any punishment only then acts effectively, when man realizes his fault.

    Robesp'er tries produmanno and tselenapravlenno to select the measures for disciplinary action. Usually its punishment includes the element of the training: misbehaved compulsorily must be convincing proven its fault. The proof of the fault Of robesp'er usually erects so it it logically and so clearly argues which, as a rule, is very difficult to it in this to object. (at least because all proofs Of robesp'era, in the essence, are reduced to the idea of the "highest validity" and the concept of "objective truth", and to reconvince it and to prove that its idea - altogether only of the abstract notion, on which it is not possible to measure specific conditions and circumstances of situation, impossibly, since this point of view, in his opinion, leads to confusion and chaos, that it considers it very dangerous for the society) its rightness it always only proves.

    To persuade, but those more to request - does not love. The increased requirements on others it usually imposes only if itself corresponds to them. "I think - consequently, there exist". Robesp'er from nature is allotted by strongly developed logic and capabilities for analytical thinking it loves to discuss about different models, structures, diagrams and classifications. In any phenomena it searches for and the original causes of the existing contradictions and illogicalities find. Is approached logical accordion and logical order - the main requirement of its logical program - the objective truth, criterion of which considers not so much practice, as integrity and logical order. "truth - this whole" (Hegel).

    All everyday and ethical situations are examined from the point of view of logic. Moreover it usually rejects excess (in his opinion) details, focusing larger attention on general regularities "global logic"). A feeling of the protection of validity is highly developed. Protecting incorrectly obizhennogo, it frequently disregards its own benefit and safety. From the considerations of the protection of validity it can forego the bright professional career and be switched to the public activity (academician A d. Saxarov).

    Of robesp'eru to characteristically place the interests of truth and validity it is higher than its personal interests and the interests of its family. Making decision, Robesp'er first of all is counted its own conscience and least of all it is inclined to depend on strange opinion and authorities acknowledged in the society. Assuming for itself any idea. Robesp'er becomes its sequential supporter and it serves as it in a most fanatic manner: it subordinates all its thoughts and actions to this idea, subordinates to it entire its means of life.

    It, as a rule, least of all is inclined to be counted with the public opinion in this situation. If as a result of fight for the idea it falls into conditions, with which its idea coincides with the predominant opinion of society (for example, Robesp6er- dissident at long last it falls into the "free country"), in this case it experiences a certain disappointment with the need for living "as all". Robesp'er feels itself by somewhat devastated, when from its life departs the element of "fight for the idea".

    The state of fight for it already becomes too customary, it it is already necessary as the standard of life. In this case Robesp'er is prepared for the search for the new, progressive idea, capable "of pleasing" society. And even if new idea then is not immense as previous, and it does not require such renunciation, it with the readiness fills the formed void with it. (Robesp'er, as a rule, is not distracted to the small "toy" ideas. If it does not find for itself sufficiently "scale" idea, it makes possible for itself to live "as all".)

    Robesp'er is always politically active (quality, inherent in all representatives of first and second kvadry). It always disturb the problems of society, in which it lives, disturb the social- humanitarian problems of its environment.

    Robesp'er is usually firm in its judgments. It is confident, that reasonable cannot be poor, "knowledge will save peace". Robesp'er - specialist not so much in the expansion of human knowledge, as on their deepening. Constantly it find in retrieval for new information, attention on the authenticity of information sources is focused. If it is necessary to learn something important, then it prefers not to question familiar, but to turn to the reference book, the book, the timetable and the like fears to use doubtful information. "foresight created me for the quiet office work" (Thomas Jefferson). Contact with the book for it sometimes is more preferable than contact with the friends.


    Filatova:

    LII’s ideology is founded upon the idea of the interdependence of phenomena in the surrounding world; everything that occurs is subordinate to laws and structure.

    Her thinking takes an analytic nature. She gathers knowledge and, investigating it, analyzes the facts. She understands the essence of a situation by creating a model for this knowledge in her consciousness that corresponds with her experiences. She’s guided by the universal ideas she’s found and comprehended, regardless of others’ opposition. By no means will she be distracted from what she deems the principal purpose in her life and will only forsake something she’s started if convinced, on her own, of its error. Her work frequently becomes the focal point of her existence.

    LII loves precision and order in everything; she is scrupulous and meticulous. Finds pleasure in systematizing, organizing everything “on the shelf.” Everything is done according to plan. Considers that the behaviour of people, especially at work, must be subordinate to a logical and definite system. Immediately notes the illogicality and contradictions present in the actions of people and, as much as possible, attempts to introduce corrections: depending on whom she’s dealing with can express criticism or propose assistance. Generally is irritated by chaotic, disorderly, inconsiderate people.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    LSIs have a strong command of how various systems, structures, and hierarchies around them work, and always have a clear idea of how to implement them and improve them. LSIs quickly and easily determine what is correct and incorrect according to the systems they are familiar with.

    LSIs tend to logically analyze just about everything — even close relationships. LSIs view their partners and other members of their household as part of a system which should have a certain structure and order to it. Everything in this system should run like clockwork — scheduling, daily routines, responsibilities in the relationship, and household management.

    LSIs seek to attain an important role in an important system and to maintain and perfect it — often becoming the guardian or watchdog of the system.

    LSIs do not often think about the ethics of the systems they maintain. Instead, they discuss the ethics of other systems using the language and customs of their own systems as truth, and make value judgments accordingly.


    Stratievskaya:

    Maxim internally is approached for the stability, the peace, which does not change, to the relations, which do not change, by logically ordered, counted, thought out. For this very reason of all types of intellect Maxim - most social- oriented. Since its social directivity is assumed the very program of its intellect - logic of concrete systems (just as by that method of introduction, to which can be oriented this program, by volitional administrative pressure).

    The logical program of Maxim on its social essence is called to be the alternative of any kind of the destabilization of his environment, its surrounding structures - social, political, physical, biological, etc.

    For this very reason idea about the consistency, the rationality, the rationality in Maxim is connected first of all with the organization of structural order (the "order of things") within the framework of the concretely existing system.

    Maxim never and nothing examines out of the system - is such the storage of his intellect. Any phenomenon is considered by it as the part of certain existing system, in which the specific regularities and the determined logical order, to understand which Maxim considers himself as that obliged, act.

    Receiving his surrounding reality from the point of view of its systematization, logical thorough consideration, Maxim constantly analyzes the systems existing around it - the system of logical and ethical interrelations, system of social structures, system of views, system of vital values.

    The sense of any phenomenon Maxim understands through the realization of its "systematization", as if assigning to himself the question: this is single fact or it is assigned to some to system? This is particular act or this the model of behavior? If this is particular act, then what motives after it do stand? This single, random motives or after them does stand some system of views and relations?

    To understand the deep essence of phenomena, to establish the cause-effect connections between the phenomena of the most varied order, to analyze the observed phenomenon, to systematize conclusions, to derive some more common determination and to enter it in the already existing system of views, to select from all existing systems most suitable for the specific goals and tasks and to improve it, to adapt to the specific social conditions, after thinking over and after working it in the least details. All this is sphere of the most active intellectual activity of any of the representatives of this type.

    In view of the defined storage of intellect to a representative of this type to more easily receive the surrounding his reality as certain centralized system. ("one sun it lights up us, one god before the sky, one church on the earth and the Pope - its deputy!") But even if this perception substantially limits method and form of its thinking, it at the same time expresses the specific directivity of its type intellect, namely - social orientation, the arrangement of forces in the social system.

    Maxim never exists out of the system of social relations, since circle and nature of its personal interrelations already by itself is systematized and assumes clear hierarchical subdivision, since such more easily in all is entered in its idea about the logical order and the original "order of things". It is generally difficult to itself to present to a representative of this type another point of view, it simply is not plotted in its own mental structure, in its system of views.

    Under no circumstances Maxim cannot be "by itself", "itself to whiskers", "itself only for itself" - this too deeply contradicts the program of his intellect. (which just as the program of its duala of Hamlet places by its task to survive vague time, to regulate him, to survive under the extreme conditions. And for this very reason Maxim always very konformen is loyal with respect to the existing regime, sincerely he tries to have an application in the conditions of the ruling social system. Even if we imagine a representative of this type as the "antisocial" element, nevertheless it cannot be "by itself". To Maxim it is difficult to be "lone wolf", in it for this insufficiently strong intuition; therefore it will be compulsorily organized within the framework some of another social structure, where it will fulfill all entrusted to it duties and bear responsibility for its behavior - another form of behavior for Maxim simply there does not exist.)

    Specifically, because representatives of this type examine themselves (just as each individual) as the part of the existing system of relations. Any manifestation of individualism they consider for themselves in principle unacceptable as the phenomenon, which emerges beyond the framework of that permitted, which shakes loose public abutments and introducing chaos and anarchy into the existing structure. Therefore they see special social significance in this activity as the composition of rules, conditions, procedures, instructions, public and juridical laws, establishment of standards and standards. To the work in this field the Maxims relate with the great responsibility and therefore especially in it they succeed.

    The arrangement of forces in the system, in the opinion of Maxim, must be ordered, logical, thought out, valid. It must assume the clear distribution of responsibilities and the measures of responsibility corresponding to them.

    Just as Robesp'er by, Maxim considers as necessary training the public consciousness, whose direction is determined by purposes and tasks of the existing social system. For this very reason of representatives of this type is characteristic not only social, but also ideological orientation. For this very reason just as its duala of Hamlet, Maxim distinguishes active civic stand. Representatives of this type are inclined to see their social destination in the ideological and educational work, in training necessary, ordered of social consciousness in the growing up generation (a. M. Gor'kiy, A. S. makarenko).

    By the index of quality and viability of any system, just as by the guarantee of its stability, Maxim counts the interchangeability of all its parts. Man, as the part of the social system, also must be interchanged: with such conditions each will be able to find its place in the already existing social system. And system itself will be already that good, which will ensure full employment to each person. (last position to Maxim especially conveniently in view of his weak intuition of possibilities.)

    In the opinion of Maxim, in the perfect system there must not be of unique, irreplaceable elements. (in this once more is manifested the critical attitude of Maxim toward the frankly individualistic position: man can be as much as desired bright individuality, but this yet does not give to it the right to consider itself in principle irreplaceable.) In the working association there must not be of irreplaceable specialists, just as the clearly expressed individualities, since this generates inequality in the interrelations, introduces in them confusion and uncertainty, and for this very reason in the critical situation it becomes dangerous for the vital activity of the association.

    Thinking Maxim is very systematized. Entire proceeding attempts to explain only from a logical point of view. (in questions of logic it not easy to reconvince and it cannot be confused.)

    Maxim knows how to estimate the intellectual potential of collocutor, although his estimations frequently have critical tendency. In the debates he tries to take initiative - last argument it must be without fail after it. (Sensorik!)

    It magnificently develops procedures, calculates tables, drawings, is textbooks and t; d.

    Good speaker; material presents step by step, so that entire logical chain of his conclusion would be outlined. Coming out before the audience, are raised the question itself on them answers.

    In the expression of its point of view it is extremely pedantic. It defends its system of views, speaking out with the extreme maximalism. To little say that Maxim with respect relates for the hierarchical social systems, where each is obligated to know its place: other systems it simply not priyemlet.

    In the opinion of Maxim, the behavior of man is obligated to correspond to his position, otherwise public consciousness will be disoriented by the models of the "unbecoming" behavior, which, in addition will lead to the destabilization of social system. Respect for authorities - one of the most important values of its intellectual structure. Orientation on authority - important motive of his many behavior, in many respects the determining nature of its interrelations and behavior.

    From nature that allotted by phenomenal power of observation, Maxim thoroughly gathers and scrupulously processes facts, knowing how to find that which to it is necessary in the information flow precisely. It is very pedantic: it does not approve, when are ignored allegedly "unessential" small facts and even insignificant logical errors allow - in this Maxim is very punctilious and nagging.

    People, which do not know how to logically ordered present their thoughts, which are brought down on the detail and which are distracted from the basic theme, irritate a representative of this type. Them irritates negligent relation to the account of formulations, confusion in the terms, in the definitions; and the most terrible - confusion in the account of thought.


    Filatova:

    Logic is a beautiful structure. The LSI attempts to find logical structure, to follow it, be incorporated into it, and to perfect it. He systematizes everything that surrounds him with classifications, established hierarchies and laws. Everything can be fixed with different rules and instructions and this helps to organize life.

    He encourages that instructions are strictly followed and is prepared to assume a higher role in any hierarchy. It is necessary for him to work hard and achieve good results for that will lead him to occupying a more worthy place in society.

    He is proud of his ability and this is the primary way in which he realizes himself. His pride suffers if another person is capable of making something better than he is. In such situations LSI is capable of assuming work with thrice the force in order to not fall behind for he finds it absolutely unacceptable to fall to a lower place within the conceptualized hierarchy within his mind.

    He can act very efficiently in production. Is very conscientious: he considers it paramount that he work systematically and qualitatively. LSI is always concrete; he’s interested in vital problems rather than abstract theories. When he thinks deeply about a problem he tries to dismantle the root of it. When he doesn’t understand something he refers to multiple directories of information and makes everything correspond to established data. In such situations his thinking is comparable to that of a computer, which executes a program without ever skipping a line.


     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    ILEs are obsessed with how things work, and how they will work together. Understanding how something works is merely the baseline for the ILE. When the ILE finds something new or interesting he thinks about how it could be used in conjunction with other objects he has come into contact with in the past.

    The ILE will freely voice comments on whether a rule (especially one imposed on him by society) makes sense to him. If it does not, he will break the rule or find a creative way of mocking it to express his dissent, rather than working within the system itself to change the rule. Unlike a Ti-leading type, he will often not replace the rule with one of his own.

    The ILE is not afraid of discussing and arguing his views, and may appear to take them more seriously than he actually does. The ILE only makes use of structural frameworks if he can see some kind of intuitive relevance in them, e.g. to make sense of and solve a problem he is interested in. Thus his thoughts may often appear unstructured. Especially if his actions affect others, the ILE will make sure that they are logically consistent and fair.


    Stratievskaya:

    In order to adopt any system of values, Don Quixote needs to first logically understand it, to grasp it logically.

    Don Quixote must have a clear, logical image of every phenomenon and “super-phenomenon.” In a bad case, he starts to be overcome with different superstitions. He will feel very bad until he can logically explain to himself those phenomenon.

    Don Quixote prefers to arrive at everything with his own reason. For example, if during an exam, he does not know the proof for whatever theorem, then he may prove it again without any problems, in fact with his own method.

    Don Quixote considers an ability to reason as the most valuable characteristic in both himself and others. He gives huge significance to intellectual creativity and the intellectual development of skills. If he is a teacher, he considers it his duty to, first of all, to cultivate in his students an ability to reason. In a bad case, he cannot imagine how he can explain something to them.

    Don Quixote has a strongly developed associative thinking. In fact, the associations could be the most unexpected. During its intuitive flight, the thoughts of Don Quixote can carry away to the most distant, and in no way compatible with each other, spheres.

    Arguments and debate are a type of intellectual entertainment for Don Quixote, an opportunity to deliberate, say his views, attract attention to his theory. Nobody knows how to involve someone in an argument or pull them into a discussion like Don Quixote. Here he has no equals.

    He is magnificent at provoking an argument; it is enough for him to only deliberate aloud in a peopled place, and everything else will be taken care of by the extravagance of his deliberation, which rarely leaves anybody indifferent.

    He does not always make it his aim to impose his own opinion no matter the cost (although, he will be very disappointed, if he does not succeed in this). He often joins an argument not only because the process of argumentation gives him pleasure, but also to acquaint “the masses” with his views and ideas.

    He wins debates not only through erudition, but also through his ability to pose the most unexpected arguments. Here, too, he has no equals. Don Quixote’s logic is so free, so active and flexible that Don Quixote can drive anyone into a dead-end with his counterarguments, regardless of the level of his own education or the authority and erudition of his opponent. He can prove anything that he wants to or that occurs to him to prove. He can easily compare things that nobody will think to compare. And why not? And who said that it cannot be compared? (Sometimes it is harder to argue with a Don Quixote, the less educated he is.)

    With Don Quixote, new ideas emerge suddenly, at the most unexpected moment, in the process of any activity: during a meal, during a conversation, while listening to music, watching a movie—they emerge as the result of the activity of his subconscious. Don Quixote can generate ideas even in his sleep. In fact, they can also be worked out there as well. Sometimes upon waking, Don Quixote remembers the “starting data” he dreamed up and thinks: where did he get them from? By analogy with what did they occur? Don Quixote takes his “dream work” exceptionally seriously, as completely realistic projects.

    Don Quixote can develop any, even the most unbelievable, idea into an accurately formulated and logically constructed theory. In fact, on the basis of the facts and assumptions he has, he already can see and figure out this theory’s hidden laws.

    The result of Don Quixote’s scientific activity is often expressed in the establishment of diverse logical structures and classifications. In fact, these structures are not static, but dynamic and flexible, and thus easily modified with the emergence of new factors and circumstances.


    Filatova:

    The ILE’s ability to think represents his strong side. In solving problems he always attempts to see the connection between the specific problem and the general situation; he tries to estimate his response on the basis of general consideration. If he estimates the essence/root, then the logical description becomes obvious; consequences derive themselves from their general conformity with the laws.

    In work he is attracted to the development of strategic tasks, but not to the scrupulous study of fine details. The ILE’s principal difficulty is to settle down and concentrate on one area [of study/work]. To do this he needs to have a genuine need or especially strong interest.

    After regarding and studying all of the data, which interests him, he is able to conclude facts where others haven’t, and to create a generalized theory of nature.

    When only one aspect of his work fascinates him it sometimes occurs that he will inadequately perceive the situation. In such cases he will be defeated. However, this does not overly distress him: he can rapidly move away from an unsuccessful enterprise and direct himself towards anything new.

    The ILE usually does not attempt to plan his activities in advance, but in a crisis situation he is capable of concentrating, of finding the set of variants for overcoming the deadlock, he knows how to yield to panic. ILE is able to inspire others with his enthusiasm, he may promise much but he is not always able to follow through: this is not because he refuses to acknowledge his shortcomings but because his euphoric, and enthusiastic, states may lead him to overestimate the possibilities of a new idea.

    His basic interest often lies within the sphere of natural sciences, but is not excluded from humanitarian activity. If the idea of something suddenly lights up, in his mind, he will offer leisure time to it. He frequently varies the course of his life, from one profession to another.

    He finds it difficult to subordinate himself to routine, to strictly regulate his work conditions; his impulsiveness may lead him to conflict with the authorities. However, should he find work that quenches the thirst of his creativity, he is able to bring himself to exhaustion whilst at the same time deriving great pleasure from his work.

    Physical work may also inspire him, especially when it gives him the chance to comprehend something new, to discover the unexpected sides of his abilities. The possibility of learning something is sometimes more important than the eventual result.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    SLEs are inquisitive people. They are generally clear, consistent and systematic in their actions. They value competency and have an appreciation for method, viewing these things as vehicles through which strength, power and influence are demonstrated, values that SLEs consider important.

    While SLEs see logical systems and structured views as necessary in life, they will often view said systems and views as changeable or expendable. Their use of Ti is flexible. They tend to gather - either legitimately or illegitimately - and retain information which they deem useful in attaining their goals.

    SLEs come to their own conclusions about the world, although they tend towards simple generalizations. Because the SLE's ideas are influenced by their own agenda, they can be more subjective than they claim to be; they are skilled at using objective truths to help them achieve their goals. It can be very difficult to argue with an SLE; rarely will they submit to another's logic, since they believe that their own logic is so well developed. SLEs will often refuse to take others' advice - even to their own detriment - as they can have difficulty seeing viewpoints that differ from their own (though this may also be a matter of pride). They also have the tendency to compare others' plans to their own, and because of their confidence, will often consider them inferior or offer critique from their own point of view.


    Stratievskaya:

    "Knowledge is power." In the system of fundamental values inherent to the intellect of this type, the aspect of the logic of relationships is one of the important - it realizes the program of the intellect, and consequently, naturally integrates into it. One who is informed and in the know, in the opinion of Zhukov, is protected. One, who does not have the necessary information, is defenseless. Therefore the collection of necessary information for Zhukov is as important as the development of power potential. (For Zhukov, in many instances, this one and the same thing.) Especially important information he can even purchase or obtain through guile, or apply a small amount of volitional pressure to obtain what he seeks "by fright".

    Information is always valuable, regardless of whether you need it or not: "Traveling to an unfamiliar town, one should learn it well - just in case he will ever need to conquer it." (Napoleon Bonaparte). Much help in gathering information Zhukov gets from dual Esenin, who strives to be in the "course of events, has numerous useful and useless contacts, is able to unobtrusively involve in the conversation even the most uncommunicative person, and with his extraordinary curiosity inquired of everything that interest him.

    Volitional pressure of Zhukova is often realized by method of logical persuasion. To accomplish this, nature has endowed him with flexible, adaptive logic, which primarily serves the purposes of his volitional program.

    In making a judgment on any subject, Zhukov is not always objective, because, first of all, he is coming from his own, "program" distribution of forces, from his personal interests and goals. Therefore, debating with Zhukov, you should always keep in mind that some of the facts cited by him may not be objective truth, but get voiced to support undeniable recognition of his personal point of view and his belief system. Arguing with Zhukov is often a pointless endeavor. Immediately one can see the bias and speculative nature of his arguments, the tendency towards simplistic conclusions, to resolving problems by method of "yes – no". An impression arises that for him there exists no shades of grey. There are only "black" and "white."

    For example, it is not always feasible to discuss some personal plans with Zhukov, because he will start to compare them with his own goals and base his advice on his own abilities and capacity for carrying out a successful resolution.

    Zhukov will not allow anyone to outdo him, to "stake out" that "gold mine" which he himself had not yet reached. All his logic, all his arguments, the whole force of his beliefs will be aimed to prove to the person that this should not be done. He will not give advice to the detriment of their own interests.

    Objective truths are not utilized by him only for abstract thinking and detached mental ruminations, but as a means to build a purposeful argument.

    His point of view he will forward and try to prove even against the general public opinion, using all the permitted and not permitted forms of debate: he can raise his voice, use emotional or physical pressuring: in a dispute he is not seeking truth but victory.

    When he doesn't have the means of persuading his opponent, he refers to the other participants and observers of the dispute to try to mock and discredit his enemy; he feels the need to triumph in any way possible.

    Often is able to have the last word decimating his opponent with his replicas or just a single phrase said at the right moment.

    Zhukov is frequently gifted by nature with a good memory. He forms his own opinion about every issue and knows how to justify it if needed. Widely applies known facts, statistics, examples from history. In considering an issues, he remains attentive even to the smallest details. If he is preparing for a dispute, he pre-selects the best evidence, tries to foresee and think over everything in advance, even mathematically calculate it out. He pays a lot of attention to the validity of information sources. If necessary, can select and pick out information carefully and meticulously. Dubious sources he prefers not to use.

    Of course, representatives of this type need knowledge not only to win arguments and gain credibility. Ability to think logically is the most important tool of his intellect.

    Representatives of this type willingly and gladly learn their entire lives - always and everywhere. Any undertaking they approach very thoroughly and collectedly, analyzing all relevant information, increasing their skills and level of qualification. They enjoy working on themselves and do so extensively. Often they have a wide range of interests. The scientific research conducted by Zhukovs is not done in expectation of ranks and awards, although documented evidence of his competence and achievements - diplomas, certificates and other distinctions, of course, are very important. (Zhukov is very inspired by recognized authority figures and likes being able to prove his own capabilities in a concrete manner, although the quality of education for him is much more important than the testimony of the diploma.)


    Filatova:

    In order that she emerge victorious in her struggles it is necessary for her to be able to select a principal direction in which to orient herself. This serves to, in time, aid her in recognizing the key links that connect different situations together. The SLE is the most sober realist of all the psycho-types: her sensory recognition, combined with logical analysis reliant on all sets of information, allows her to precisely reproduce a realistic picture of the world in her mind.

    The SLE logically, and sensibly, interprets situations, checking for far reaching aftereffects of various events. Nothing is assumed upon blind faith. In beginning to work she fixedly considers all the possibilities, collects all the necessary information about all the aspects of the task at hand, and examines the opinions of all the people that surround her, but she always makes the final decision herself.

    She wonderfully understands how to best organize her work whilst making note of the inability of others to act on such an optimal level. Thus the SLE will often take upon herself not only her own responsibilities but also the affairs of people surrounding her, with whom she relates with sympathy and respect. Even should her (sometimes nitpicking) supervision begin to irritate another, that person will nevertheless take comfort in the possibility of feeling protected next to the SLE.

    In every area of activity a rapid and perceptible return is paramount. She wishes to see the result of her work, as far as possible, in a concrete-material sense: the constructed building, the launched rocket, the earned strategic success, the appreciation of a gift, the acquisition of an apartment, the completion of a machine...

  37. #37
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default the unfathomable depths of the internals

     
     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    EIEs have a keen sense of the significance of the moment, life's flow of events, and the past and future evolution of things. The excitement they stimulate generally has to do with insensible things that can only be perceived over time, rather than with experiences that are captured in a specific moment. For example, they love to instill confidence in people by taking great detail to their problems and envisioning ways of handling them. EIEs are quite able to "paint pictures with words", so to speak. They enjoy having objects around them that provide a connection to the past, such as ancient trinkets or souvenirs, old-fashioned things, and items from another time and place. They like to be aware of and talk about their place in history, as the EIE's concept of humanity itself is largely perceived through the sensation of trends over time. As a result, they like to imagine scenarios of different ways a situation can unfold with their imagination; such actions give them a sense of security about what is to come.

    EIEs are very open about their feelings of hesitation, apprehension, anticipation, and anxiety regarding events. Sometimes they are melodramatic about risks and dangers, but this helps them and those around them to be aware of and to prepare for possible negative turns of events. It disappoints the EIE greatly when advice given to another is rejected, but not much weighs a helpful EIE down more than to see people wasting their potential by dwelling in their past problems. They tend to believe that people, regardless of long-term psychological mistreatment, can improve their lives to some extent.

    EIEs reject the idea that life is just a sequence of ho-hum everyday events with no particular meaning. They see everything to having a grand or symbolic purpose that arouses the imagination and passions. For that matter, EIEs seek to define their unique purpose in life, and orient goals around the meaning they infer from their experiences across time. They constantly seek to improve the negative conditions surrounding them, and so tend to look for problems even when it isn't necessary.

    EIEs also frequently reflect on their dreams, making symoblizations of the events that occur in dreams and relating them to external reality. They enjoy contemplating on what their subconscious psyche is displaying to them.


    Stratievskaya:

    If we consider human emotions as material in the "creative laboratory" of Hamlet, then time, in his understanding, is a tool, it is that "technological sovereignty" in which this material is seasoned and processed. For Hamlet it is not enough to mold an "emotional model" – it is also necessary that it would mature "in the time", it is necessary to show the nature of man (or the model of his behavior) in the course of development. To show how it was in past and what it will be in the future.

    A quantity of emotions, experienced per unit time – this is the formula, which mirrors his method of existence, his "technological regime".

    An impression is created, that Hamlet knows how to physically feel the duration of any unit of time: for him it's like a living cell lives which lives the life of whatever emotions fill it for the duration. Hamlet-musician, has his own idea about the rhythms and the tempos. For him there are micro-rhythms and micro-rates, and in this lies the secret of his creative expressiveness. Concept "duration of note" for him means "the lifetime of a note", to such an extent each note in his performance is saturated by the finest nuances and lives a bright emotional life in a specific, assigned to it moment.

    Hamlet-performer is always recognizable by his skill to maintain note and pause, by his ability to create his performance on the interplay of tempos and nuances of emotions. (Just as Hamlet-dancer is distinguished by his precise coordination of movements, which correspond to the finest musical plasticity, and also by the exceptional expressiveness of gestures. This gestures "unravel" as a bud of a flower, his expressiveness develops over the time, so that spectator is able to see him, and to understand him, and to empathize with him.)

    Hamlet-politician magnificently knows how to manipulate with time: he sees the advantages of the development of a situation in time, knows how "to heal" a problem by time, knows how "to grow" a problem over time i.e. he knows how to use time as unique garden, where the problem "ripens" to that moment, when it can be presented to society in the most convincing form. Hamlet knows how to materialize time, to make it tangible. He knows how to make others feel the significance of the moment, even if this moment lasts a decade.

    He knows very well how to use advantages in time, which are granted to him by this or that situation. For example, under the conditions of military actions, Hamlet-politician can request an armistice only in order to obtain a temporary respite, and to use it with the benefit for his side: to relocate troops, to build up new forces, etc. After resting and collecting forces, he can arrange for a new "tumult" and thus obtain a reason to renew military activities.

    Hamlet very well knows how to coordinate his behavior in the time. That he not did, this always entire very in proper time. Any of the representatives of this type - always splendid strategist; therefore each of his intelligent actions is determined by purposes and tasks of his final plans, which in turn can be sufficiently flexible. (for example, to other to Hamlet -poltiku state of war is sometimes more necessary than victory in it. Moreover, Hamlet frequently feels himself disappointed precisely when the final goal of his actions is already achieved. Having already become accustomed to the the hyper-active, oversaturated the events of life, to Hamlet it is difficult to be switched to another, less active mode of operation - in it appear the sensation of the incompleteness of life, the sensation of the missed or not completely realized possibilities.)

    For Hamlet it is very important to be confident in the opportuneness of own actions. And for this very reason it always must be in proper time about everything informed.

    Hamlet fears to be uninformed in the fact that is important for it, since this can lead it to the late actions, to the delay, but he in principle tries not to allow this. In the critical situation Hamlet especially accurately coordinates his actions in the time: usually it attempts to deliver its impact by the first, moreover this must be completely not expected, oshelomlyayushche the smashing attack: too much is set on the map. It is here because to Hamlet and it is necessary that that surrounding to it would entrust and would share with it by their plans and information. For this very reason it is scared reserved and passive people, apathetic to the fact that disturbs it: and, can, they it did already go around? Maybe, they did already obtain that, what it does now attain, and therefore it is so calm and assured in itself?

    To Hamlet is always interesting the experience of strange errors. He thoroughly studies it, draws useful conclusions in order very of poosterech'sya and others to warn. But, whatever was its own negative experience, in the decisive situation Hamlet acts in the manner that his feelings prompt to it and its intuition, even if this goes in spite of the common sense. Possibly therefore fanaticism and fanatic renunciation is very characteristic of described type representatives. Many terrorists -"kamikadze" leave precisely from the representatives of this type. ("mercifully to the match, sgorevshey, but which carved flame".) Hamlet in any epoch, in any period of history can see the highest sense in returning of its life "for the idea", even if this idea was borne in the narrow to the circle of its adherents and unite a total of several men. For this very reason in the extreme situation the fanatically disposed representative of this type will not see large sin in taking of in hostages innocent civilians, even if it from its its own camp: there is no great honor than to die for the idea (so let from their "average man's" life it will be although some benefit).

    Hamlet cannot be the passive observer of the most important historical events. Even working as journalist, by international reviewer or by that leading of social and political telecasts, a representative of this type will give material very tendentiously and tselenapravlenno, as if attempting to create around the illuminated with it question the defined public opinion, with the aid of which he as if expects to coordinate the actions of the chief politicians and to direct them into the specific river bed.

    The sensation of its historical destination is characteristic for Hamlet. It can itself feel partly historical process, by the part of the epoch, by carrier and by the spokesman of its ideas. (political civil activity - one additional reason, for which it can sincerely offend whose- that fundamental indifference to politics or unprincipled loyalty.) Hamlet frequently can be met by worker at the "ideological front", moreover with the sincere enthusiasm and the return, that, however, it does not prevent it from sometimes sincerely being indignant apropos of the historical errors, accomplished by its government, foreseeing the most unfavorable outcome of events in the "political arena", seeing some unhappy tendencies in the political and social life of society.

    In Hamlet there can be the periods of the bright, emotionally saturated life, filled with the interesting, "scale" matters; there can be the periods of the prolonged duration of their "sidereal hour"; moreover this period not is less important for Hamlet than the first, and it in reality not is less saturated with the external idleness. This can be the period of its invisible activity, the period of its "preparation" for the decisive moment. It is completely unimportant, what matter it will precisely complete in its "sidereal hour": this can be and coup d'etat, and the bright speech in the parliament, and the magnificently played play, and the terrorist act, which signifies the beginning of new historical epoch. The main thing, in this his "sidereal hour" Hamlet "will enter into the history".

    Hamlet "sees" time "on- large" and plays by time to also "on- large". To him is far from always important small, immediate punctuality; it can carry out the outlined order of day, and can and no. Not this is important for it. For it where more interesting planned global changes, and also historical accuracy and the opportuneness of its own actions. To it is importantly to organically be entered in the epoch, in order "not to be the log, which lies across the history".

    Hamlet understands well the nature of one or other epoch or another, he knows how to feel her slogan. It knows how to see analogies and regularities in the alternation of historical epochs.

    Frequently feels nostalgia for that epoch, which is consonant to its ideology, in which were popular the ideas, close to it in the spirit. If place in today's bottom of history does not find for itself, it lives in its past.


    Filatova:

    To take the attention of those that surround him, to hold it in himself; leading others aids him in experiencing an indefatigable fantasy. He is able to dedicate himself to serving a high ideal, especially if such activity aids him in recognizing his own sense of nobility and uniqueness. The demonstration of his uniqueness serves to stimulate and inspire him.

    As a rule he reads a lot. Not alien to having a literary gift, loves poetry, music, painting, and cinematography. Holds close to himself the ideas of humanism and general human values. He’s drawn towards the image of a noble person; sometimes he’ll be tempted by the desire to enter into a “secular society” where his talents would be properly noticed and his value properly evaluated.

    The fact that his own imagination is what makes him appealing to the world leads to his attention being primarily directed towards global problems. Thus flashes of mutual anxiety and sympathy to those close by can just as easily “come to naught”. He may suddenly involuntarily insult another without understanding this. His heightened sense of vulnerability forces him into adopting a self-defensive stance; in which case through his sharpness and intolerance he can easily deliver (with words) a calculated “strike” against his target.

    His strong intuition of time permits him to foresee the course of events, and in time to feel as well as conduct himself as one man or another. He thus has the ability to operate in the political arena. He eagerly alerts those, whom he respects, of threatening situations and other dangers. He straightforwardly states possible troubles to others for it is always deemed preferable to act in an already established situation.

    EIE is magnificently capable of detecting the psychological characteristics in others, to comprehend their strengths and weaknesses. Makes an excellent psychologist, however, he does not always use this talent for good. Frequently there appears a desire, in EIE, to manipulate close ones, and the nature of this manipulation depends on his concrete relations he has with the individual.

    EIE finds it boring to live the measured, routine life, he is motivated and inspired by extreme situations. If such situations fail to present themselves, for long enough, he will create tension around himself, forcing something to happen.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    Whenever occupied with a task, LIEs are already thinking ahead. Their attention tends to be less focused on their immediate surroundings and the specific details of an activity, than on their longer-term implications, consequences, and usefulness. More present-focused people may see that as laziness: they are not really dedicated to doing something immediately because they are already realizing that it may be pointless in the longer term, so why even do it. They very easily focus their minds in following sequential cause-and-effect scenarios and on their personal senses of vision, but always in the service of actions towards achieving their goals, specifically as to the optimal timing for taking specific actions. The other side of the coin is an inclination to think too much of the consequences and of timing of decisions, rather than actually act on them, although to a lesser extent than in the case of Symbol t.gif dominants. Similarly, LIEs are concerned with covering all possible long-term outcomes, and will often make a suggestion to do something "just in case". This sometimes leads them to do what is useful only theoretically, and not actually.


    Stratievskaya:

    The LIE is perceptive of advantages that time provides him with.

    His talents and qualities manifest most vividly under the conditions for convenient and advantageous for him processes in time. He knows how to see the benefit of future changes, just as as much as he can see the hopelessness and lack of promise of "stagnant periods".

    The LIE knows how to see and to estimate the moment, in which possibilities will open up to him, and knows how to use all the benefits and advantages they offer. He knows how to adapt to difficult times and to endure through them with least losses and damages to himself.

    He knows how to make time work for him. He is very precisely aware what to do and when there is a purpose to do it. He knows when to hurry and when to wait. He knows when it is necessary to act decisively, and when it is necessary to patiently endure (though while he's waiting, he sometimes misses opportunities).

    The LIE possesses all necessary qualities in order to adapt to the conditions of uncertain and unstable life. For example, he knows how not to reveal that he is interested in some deal or transaction – in order not to place himself in unfavorable position. He knows how to be self-possessed and patient, however straining this may be for him. He knows how not to reveal his incompetence – in order to not lower his prestige. He knows how not to encourage in vain – in order not to create a reputation for himself of an irresponsible person (although in this, unfortunately, he does not always succeed).

    Under unfavorable circumstances, decisive actions alternate with doubts and idleness.

    In the period of waiting, it is difficult for him to switch to any other activity; therefore sometimes there is impression that he is idling, loafing. (Many LIEs consider themselves lazy, although in reality they really love being active and working).

    The LIE hates periods of forced idleness that are due to reasons that do not depend on him: this literally knocks him of the track. In such periods he is not always able to switch to another work – for him, as for any rational type person, all the confusion and mix-ups in affairs are rather inconvenient.

    The LIE prefers a saturated rhythm of life and feels himself well when his day is filled to the limit and by every hour with interesting and urgent matters.

    And at the same time it would be naïve to assume that with all of his rationality, the LIE would adhere to a strict timetable - he is sufficiently dynamic and intuitive and easily adapts to changes in circumstances. His intuition of time is subordinated to the interests of the matter at hand, to the interests of expediency; therefore he often introduces correctives and adjustments into his plans (which in turn can be expressed in such incidents as arriving late to a meeting, or scheduling two meeting narrowly spaced in time in two distant places.)

    It does not make sense to ask LIE when he plans to return hom or about his plans for the evening. He for sure will not answer such questions with much specificity (moreover, such questions usually irritate him.) Leaving the house, he automatically transforms into the "hunter after success" who orients by his intuition. Therefore, even LIE himself doesn't know approximately how long will be his work day (which has the effect of complicating the lives of the members of his household).

    It is not characteristic for LIE to subordinate his affairs to some schedule. For example, to put aside unfinished work and run to a meeting - he can only do in the cases when the relationship is of much significance for him. (Precisely such a "sacrifice" is required from him on first stages of dualization with Dreiser.)

    In the childhood, LIEs also don't like drafting for themselves an strict schedule for the day: maybe while he's sitting sitting at home and doing homework, something very interesting will happen in the yard, which requires his participation. Practice shows that daily schedules that Jacks make in childhood, are not observed by them for longer than a couple of days.

    Under favorable circumstances, LIE's plan for the day is frequently condensed: he can get marked off at a lecture in his college, then run to a coin-operated telephone to settle some matter, then run somewhere else to earn extra credit, and after this return back to continue listening to the lecture. Alternatively: he can ask for a leave for a week from his studies, travel to another country, complete a heap of tasks and matters, visit his relatives, make new professional connections, return back to his studies, and in two days make up what he has missed.

    If the day of LIE is not filled sufficiently with at least somewhat serious matters, this is a sure sign that he is going through difficult times. (Jacks hate idleness, but unproductive expenditure of time and energy he hates even more).

    He feels irritated by any unforeseen expenditure of time. Sluggishness, in all its manifestations, is irritating to him; for example, when someone is talking slowly. Most of all, he is irritated when someone ahead of him is moving or driving slowly. Traffic jams are a kind of monstrous torture for him.

    LIE can’t stand having to wait (although frequently he forces others to wait). For him, there is nothing more stupid than to stand at a bus stop waiting for bus to arrive. Therefore, LIEs often try to have their own means of transportation, even if this is only an old bicycle. In the absence of personal transport, they may prefer to get around by foot.

    LIEs adore fast rides. And it is useless to counter this. In spite of their pragmatic bent, they are ready to pay whatever fines, but they won't refuse themselves in this pleasure.

    Jack loves quick pace of work, and in general prefers to do everything quickly, preferably in a single session. He prefers the process of preparation to take the minimum of time - otherwise he will no longer want to work. LIE likes to do all his work quickly and qualitatively and then with pleasure spend time in a pleasant company.

    He doesn't like going to the stores and to making purchases, since he doesn't like standing in lines and, furthermore, he finds it difficult to evaluate the quality of things. Paying visits to different offices and sitting waiting in lines* is not for him (for the same reason that he doesn't like visiting doctors).

    *translator's note: This passage about "standing in lines" is a relic from Soviet times, when standing and waiting in lines for hours to obtain basic products and services was one of defining features of everyday life.

    LIE also dislikes being distracted from work to provide explanations, which he has already given many times before; it irritates him when he is unexpectedly assigned someone else's work which interferes with his own plans. (LIE in general dislikes when someone else frustrates his plans and objectives – it's another matter, when he himself changes them.)

    His mottoes are "Time doesn't wait" and "Time is money". He values his time a lot. Thus LIEs plans are usually flexible and dynamic enough to save him on this valuable "commodity". For him the most convenient partner would be someone who is considerate of his plans and capable of adjusting slightly to them. (This is subconsciously accomplished by his dual, ESI.)


    Filatova:

    In order to work rationally it is especially important to plan beforehand so as not to waste any time in vain. A combination of practicality and romanticism is noticeably characteristic in LIE.

    Introverted intuition manifests itself in his irrepressible imagination, the ability to consciously combine events and facts, within his mind, which are incompatible with reality. Possessing a rich imagination allows LIE to habitually view things from a different, unexpected angle. Inventors and rationalizers are often representative of this psycho-type. Such a person can foresee the optimum solution in deciding how to solve a problem; can often find a way out of unusual situations.

    He very much enjoys experimenting with mental and practical activities. He approaches situations as if playing a game, which itself is more important than the task in which he’s engaged. Though something may be more “interesting” than “convenient”, he will try to combine the two whenever such is possible.

    His extroverted intuition is also rather active, he is attracted to novelty in various different areas – mechanics, electronics, sports, new ways of learning... Thus he makes sure that these activities are not assumed in vain: tries to apply, whenever possible, novel ideas to a field of interest. It occurs that even from the unprofitable situations, that he cannot avoid, he will nonetheless manage to benefit.

    The aspiration to allocate resources, in time, in the most rational way is characteristic of LIE. He constantly analyzes everything, which has occurred, predicts relations with different people, and tries to predict the consequences of his actions. Each missed opportunity is felt sharply by him: he applies his best efforts to insure such does not repeat itself again.

    His ability to sense the slightest change in a situation, his fast reactions, his initiative, and his practicality, combined with his creative vein, make him a good businessman and manager. He is able to be prudent and economical in his means, but also to take risks. However, it should be noted that risks, for him, are always thought over and calculated in advance.


     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    IEIs perceive, process, and produce information concerning trends and patterns over time most intensively. They constantly and inadvertently make judgments, assessments, and assumptions about relationships based on what they see as recurring trends from past behavior. They tend to understand the underlying dynamics of situations, people, etc., but may not be able to readily verbalize these insights since they are so internal and conceptual.

    The temporal world of the IEI is vivid and complex. IEIs are very imaginative people who tend to be more mystical and dreamy, thus possibly annoying Symbol i.gif-seeking Logical types (LSEs and SLIs), who require practical applications for their ideas. Their gentle demeanor does not cast them as particularly rebellious, but their obscure desires are often a far cry from those of the typical person.


    Stratievskaya:

    Romantic and dreamer. Time for the IEI is an elastic, creative material, which can be "compressed" or "extended" at his discretion. Esenin can stop an instant, because it "is wonderful", and to admire it for as long as he desires.

    IEI greatly values his time, especially if it was spent on pleasant experiences. The time spent insufficiently interestingly and pleasantly is not simply lost time, this, in his understanding, is a kind of irritating oversight which as much as possible should not be permitted.

    He prefers to live according to a flexible schedule that would allow him to manage his time conveniently and spontaneously. Feels upset if his plans do not actuate due to someone else’s fault, if he is invited over for a holiday or celebration this is already occasion for the serious irritation. Still more painful for him are breakdowns in positive plans of global nature: for example, when his calculations collapse and his hopes are not justified, when the close and desired goal suddenly proves to be distant and unattainable, when someone refuses his support and patronage and shakes him out from under "his wing" - all this for Esenin are unfortunate turns of events, with which he in no way can be reconciled and which he will try by all forces not to allow (and in the majority of the cases – he will not).

    In spite of his seemingly detached relation to life, IEI is capable of sufficiently realistically evaluating what’s transpiring around him. He knows how to foresee the course of events that is undesirable, knows how to avoid their impact and how "to freeze" this impact in the time and thus to mute its full force. He knows how to draw off the time point when the conflict will ripen and the need for decisive discourse and explanations will come. He will change his tactics and will try to take situation into his hands so as to have time to be prepared for the outcome (for example, he will find another source of sponsorship and assistance).

    Esenin sets the pace of development of relations to his own accord. He serves as a "director" of time, his own and that of others. He subordinates events to his own tempos, draws everyone into his own rhythm of life. If there is no hurry to him personally, then his conversation partner will not hurry anywhere either: he will simply get stuck in the measured pace of conversation. Esenin is like that fairy from folklore tales, which is able to turn the life of any person in a "sweet dream", upon "waking up" from which the person may feel thrown out far back in time, with a sense of irremediably lost opportunities. This makes Esenin a good partner for someone who is constantly moving forward, towards their goals and concrete targets – such as his dual Zhukov (SLE).

    It frustrates Esenin when someone or something does not transpire according to his "orchestration". Especially, when the "critical moment" comes which he usually sees well: here he will "wake up" anyone from their "hibernation" and will make it clear that it is necessary to take action.

    Esenin always has exactly as much time as he needs it. He does not set before himself goals that are too difficult and unrealistic, his day is not overloaded by matters. He always manages to arrive at the point which is necessary for him. He does not like to rigidly plan his day, to be "in captivity" of strict schedule or plans, neither immediate nor distant. To Esenin it is not compulsory to be punctual, especially if for him it is not necessary, however, if he wishes he will come in time.

    Esenin knows how to put time to his benefit. He knows when to wait out a tumultuous period in a "quiet harbor", to go into "hibernation" under somebody’s protection (most comfortably Esenin feels under the "wing" of his dual Zhukov).

    Esenin frequently produces the impression of man for whom success "walks right into his hands". With his acute intuitive sense, he tries to choose the right time to "catch" his chance - a quality which many may envy and which allows representatives of this type to successfully arrange their lives.

    He tries to keep in the course of news and events, from which he assesses the general direction of public opinion to know "where the wind is blowing". All new trends, all new developments and directions catch his attention.

    He does not believe in continuance and stability of hardships, sees them as passing and alternating in time. He welcomes the arrival of critical moments. Therefore even, it would seem, gloomy and depressing events Esenin may relay with a smile. Doesn’t lose hopes and expects much from changes, which comes after a crisis, tries to put them to benefit.

    Vehemently resists when someone imposes on him inadvisable, inexpedient, in his opinion, expenditure of time. Tries to prove the needlessness of such a time investment. In these situations convincing him otherwise is very difficultly, sometimes pointless, because in such cases he is inclined to do as he wishes. (For example, an accompanist-Esenin during the play decided to arbitrarily shorten the musical break, which was an unpleasant surprise to both the actors and the director, because it seemed to him that the time of play was too prolonged.)

    Esenin's time always belongs only to him. Even working time he considers to be his own: he works if he wants and he wishes distracts himself on private affairs or conversations. Esenin greatly values his time, even when he is sharing it with others, and considers it a generous gift for which one must be grateful.


    Filatova:

    Introverted intuition, in the IEI, dictates that his consciousness is submerged in modeling time-related processes. He sails and flows, going both forward and backwards in time. His consciousness, in contrast to the ILI, is focused on ethics. He therefore focuses less on problems concerning the material world and production, preferring instead the development, in time, of human emotions and relations between people.

    Internally he observes that everything is in constant motion: the children run, the adults work, behaviors display patterns, rivers flow, the heavenly bodies move in the sky… time has an identifiable essence about it. A dreamer and romantic, the IEI is easily separated from reality and taken away, by his thoughts, into the vastness of his dreams where he scoops up happiness and ponders the meaning of his existence. He’s often drawn towards novels containing fantasy and adventure. In these he participates with imaginary heroes in their adventures. The IEI loves to give himself up, for long periods, to dreaming. His dreams, as a rule, focus on beautiful and elegant things: i.e. a round-the-world journey aboard a lavish ocean liner alongside a refined public, the luxurious cottage with a fireplace and white piano, the excellent love…

    However, the IEI also knows how to sense the ripening of events, to catch the barely noticeable fluidity and dynamics of moods within society. He precisely senses the moment, in time, in which he must act; he especially senses the approximation of crisis situations and danger, at which time he will appear visibly disturbed.

    He quite successfully catches on to other people’s characteristics, abilities and potentials. Thus he is sometimes drawn to people with the purpose of using them. In respect to his own abilities and talents there is an internal, frequently secret, conviction that he exceeds others in his spiritual aristocratism, considering himself as a member of an elite. However, as a rule he tries not to demonstrate this conviction.

    Introverted intuition, as the primary function, impedes others from observing the IEI. It is difficult to analyze his behavior and he is inclined to justify himself in everything. His tendency to ignore reality, and his difficulty in self-appraisal, may lead him to egocentrism and an excessive indulgence in his own imagined world.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    Introverted intuition in ILIs is often characterized by well-developed imaginative abilities and mental wanderings. They can spend a great deal of time simply thinking and may appear to live 'in their heads'. This mental focus is demonstrated through reflection on scenarios, pondering bodies of information, etc. They can be prone to excessive daydreaming, creation of intricate inner worlds or universes, or considering the past or future. ILIs may even have novelistic tendencies with the ability to create intricate plots, characters and places. ILIs, however, are not necessarily inclined to share their imagination with others.

    ILIs are naturally attuned to hidden connections between things as well as hints of greater implications in everyday reality. They easily recognize patterns of events, repeating outcomes and contradictory messages. This overarching understanding of patterns and behavior allows ILIs to critically analyze present situations and determine both immediate and far-reaching consequences of certain actions. The mind of an ILI is an oasis of sorts where knowledge is treated as a toy or even a vehicle that allows them to visit complex mental landscapes that are continually shaped and revised by new information. Nonetheless, they are likely to find the process of gathering new information tiresome compared to their mental explorations; new information is often accumulated and updated in a rather lethargic, periodic, and occasionally incomplete fashion.

    ILIs are often stereotypically represented as reclusive scholars, philosophers, scientists, artists, seers, and sages. With their often unusual perceptions, they may come across as unreachable, esoteric eccentrics. Because of their confidence about analyzing the implications of their gathered knowledge, ILIs often appear perceptive, especially in fields of interest, and commonly tend to view the ideas of others with skepticism and scrutiny. They may even see others' intellectual contributions as deeply misguided or limited in scope.

    ILIs often predict inevitable disasters. This type of fatalism is fueled by their ability to see the negative in anything, which has its roots in the ILI's general dislike of expressing or reinforcing positive emotions. For an ILI, it may be easier to predict pessimistic results in order to avoid unpleasant emotional reactions. Likewise, the ILI's sense of self doubt leads him to be very conservative in his general outlook; why unnecessarily subject oneself to the uncertainty of possible disappointment?

    ILIs typically exhibit a general detachment from day-to-day affairs. While an ILI might devote a great deal of time to pondering the possible consequences of some political decision, very little attention is likely to be paid to such tasks as household maintenance or cleanliness, which the ILI sees as trivial matters undeserving of his time or effort.

    ILIs can, in certain situations, act very tentatively. In many situations they are inclined to hesitate prior to taking any action or making important decisions. They often prefer to observe and gather an understanding of a situation rather than actively participate. The ILI's restraint complements the hyperactivity of his dual, the SEE.


    Stratievskaya:

    ILI lives according to the principle "hurry unhurriedly" and does not like it when others try to assign him any other pace. One can only envy his manner to not hurry anywhere and yet rarely be late for anything (even intentionally he cannot make himself be late.) Traffic jams on the roads, similarly, in no way complicate his life: despite everything, he still arrives on time.

    This is partially so because in his life there is rarely anything that is unforeseen – Balzac knows how to foresee everything. The realization of his own talent for forecasts very early ceases to surprise and excite the ILI. He was as if born knowing all that will occur with him in the future, and all that which has already occurred in the distant past. This, it would seem, enormous advantage turns into a fundamental problem for him – sometimes he feels too bored to live; he foresees everything so well that there remain too few exciting surprises in his life.

    ILI does not hurry to share his predictions with everyone; he doesn't work as a "fortune teller". The ability to see "through time" for him is all too natural to present this as an "attraction". He prefers the role of a mentor or a counselor, who analyzes past mistakes, failings, and omissions and admonishes about their repetition. ILI possesses the ability to spot the weakest link in any chain of events and occurrences. He concurrently analyzes which hidden dangers are involved, which future difficulties and troubles may come. With this characteristic for him negativism, he frequently fulfills the role of that enchanted stone from a folktale, which tells the hero: "If you go to the right – you will lose your horse, if you go to the left – you will lay down your head..." And seemingly there remain no other options except to turn back.

    ILI does not glorify and "sing odes" to the brave. To the contrary, he will consider it to be his responsibility to timely warm others against rash decisions and actions, to counsel them about all the possible deficits and dangers, to point out all the unfavorable courses of events. He, as no one another, sees the original hopelessness of many enterprises and the foolishness of poorly timed undertakings. Nevertheless, even with all these expectations of the worst, ILI, in contrast to some other intuitive types, does not foretell of an imminent end of the world; he is generally against causing public hysteria by means of bleak predictions.

    Balzac likes to look at everything that is occurring around him philosophically; therefore he finds "comfort" in sayings of the kind: "everything passes", "we'll all be there", "tomorrow is not the end of the world", "this, too, shall pass"...

    He considers that everything will come in time to a person who knows how to wait. And Balzac knows how to await. He also knows how to fill this waiting time such that it can last his entire life, and still not have any negative impact on his plans.

    He usually knows how to manage and "own" his time – this enables him to feel independent. He does not subordinate himself to the circumstances, rather he utilizes them to his benefit. He is not in a habit of harboring any flattering delusions concerning himself and thus capable of realistically estimating his own possibilities under the specific circumstances at some stage in time.

    Balzac is able to see the most subtle, hidden, and imperceptible tendencies of the historical development of a society. He is perceptive of the interrelation of events in time and understands how the proceedings of today will influence the future unfolding of history. Whichever event he is reflecting on, he sees it simultaneously in the present, past, and future. And this for him is nothing more than his natural perception of all that occurs around him.

    Following his perpetual desire to avoid possible errors, Balzac frequently takes on the role of an outside observer. This at time spurs accusations in ILI's address that he relates to life in a manner that is too passive.

    A drawback of Balzac's warnings and admonishments is the absence of positive alternatives within them, in consequence of which they frequently have the effect of "freezing" or "stopping" some activity. With all of Balzac's efforts to prevent all the errors committed in this world, their quantity does not diminish. For one this is because rejection of an accepted plan of action in order to avoid some danger which is associated with its realization can in itself be a mistake.


    Filatova:

    The consciousness of any introvert always works with internally constructed imaginary models. The external world, for the ILI, serves merely to jolt the onset of internal states. The intuition of time allows him to successfully model such temporary processes.

    The consciousness of the ILI easily encompasses countless moments in time. It dynamically views the world, and all the processes, which occur in it, in a complete and systematic fashion. His ability for mental mobility, by traversing the time axis, permits him to see distant prospects, and consequently few can be compared to him in the realm of strategic forecasts.

    The imagination, of the ILI, takes in the dynamics of the world – within it everything is in motion, he moves, he interacts, people work, display behaviours, and at the foundation of all these, amongst other, things there lies a reason. He easily appears to model the behaviour of people, examining what he can predict in the future as consequence of the aftereffects of activities that people complete in the present. Possessing the gift of foresight he often already knows what he is going to say or do prior to the definite situation – frequently it seems that he knows, and sees straight through, everything (and in a certain sense this is correct).

    The ability to penetrate right to the essence of a problem and to see the eventual result represents the nature of enlightenment. Indeed the ILI will sometimes, in speaking, cite wise historical figures and philosophers. His forecasts, as a rule, are painted with skepticism, thus he primarily voices his fears when necessary (i.e. to safeguard those close to him from acting rashly). He himself repeatedly, and scrupulously, checks on everything before beginning to act. He addresses those, whose activities or thoughts are made too hastily (not thought thoroughly through), of his critical observations.

    One of the principal attributes of the ILI is his pride, connected with his self assertion. Frequently he obtains happiness in observing abilities unfounded in others, which come naturally to him. Many of his mental abilities are relatively superior to others. I.E. People with this psycho-type often have a splendid memory. He puts to use his powerful base of knowledge to identify the source of a question and to comprehend all facets of problems. Individuals of this psycho-type seem encyclopedically formed. However, also characteristic of them, is that they harbour conservative qualities relating with their distrust of anything new, which has not survived sufficient criticism or any sort of process with an unknown conclusion.

    His tendency to feel himself significant does not, in any way, mean that he will attempt to find a higher placement/status in society. He rather prefers to raise himself as high as possible in the field of knowledge. Such represents a deeper degree of insight and through this he is able to feel superior to others.


     
     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    The ESI sees reality primarily through static personal ethics and stable interpersonal bonds between individuals, including himself, where the status of such interpersonal bonds is determined by his personal ethics. The ESI is very confident in evaluating the ethical or moral qualities, and their consistency, of other people as well of himself. This makes ESIs seem "judgmental" or "self-righteous" to people less so inclined. If an ESI has difficulty in deciding the status of a personal relationship, he will take action to try to reach a conclusion, but if that continues to elude him, he will regard the relationship as not worth it. His own sense of constancy in personal ethics and in his relationships with others is a very strong factor in his sense of self-worth.

    This is manifested as a very high regard for personal loyalty and integrity, both on the part of the ESI and of others towards each other and towards the ESI. The idea that he failed on that is extremely upsetting to an ESI, and such a suggestion, made by others, is seen as the ultimate insult if the ESI himself does not agree. The same goes for accusations of unethical or unprincipled behavior that the ESI regards as unjustified.

    ESIs are very often more confident of the status of a personal relationship - and of what it should be in their view - than other persons; therefore ESIs often take it upon themselves to establish, maintain, preserve, or change the status of such relationships.


    Stratievskaya:

    The main program of Dreiser is to reveal all the existing negative ethical qualities and tendencies and to fight for their removal, exclusion, and elimination to the point of their complete eradication. In light of this, what constitutes acceptable relations for Dreiser are relations in which he sees the smallest potential for trouble for his himself, his close ones, and his community.

    Possibly, it is for this reason that all of Dreiser's "commandments" and directives are so categorical, and state primarily and precisely what person should not do.

    Representatives of this type early on realize their natural advantage (and do not allow anyone else to dispute it) – their talent to see in any person his or her latent ethical qualities and potential predisposition to harmful and malicious behaviors. Using this talent his natural shield, ESI builds relations with people very carefully and observantly. He is very perceptive of how others relate to him and always feels other people's disposition towards himself. He readily notices lies, falsity, hypocrisy, both in respect to himself and in respect to others. With characteristic of him maximalism, which reflects his firm ethical stances, Dreiser prefers to maintain relations only with those who completely correspond to his personal criteria. Even if this creates an impression that he places very high demands on people in his environment, ESI is not capable of lowering them, regardless or who and how asks him for it.

    ESI often produces an impression of a person who is constantly guarded, tactful and communicative, but at the same time reserved. He doesn't readily close the interpersonal distance with an unfamiliar person. Indeed, he feels much better among familiar "tried and true" people. Only under pressure of present circumstances does he literally force himself to expand his social circle. He feels irritated, when this native to him attitude is opposed by an alternative one: "Be friendly with everyone from the start - without exceptions!" Such propositions disorient ESI for they don't contradict his main ethical orientation, and are thus dangerous for him, since they call on him to ignore his strong qualities and expose his weak sides.

    Most frequently, ESI builds his relations with other people on two commandments: "Don't do unto others that which you wouldn't wish done to yourself" and "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth". That is, if a person hasn't done anything bad to you, you don't have the right to treat him poorly. However, if you suspect that he is capable of malice and poor behavior, then it is your right to distrust him, and, moreover, your responsibility to warn others. If this motivation is not taken into account, then it is easy to form an opinion about ESI as a gossiper who "loves to judge and nitpick other people". Although representatives of this type with their innate understanding of what is "good" and what is "bad" don't like to gossip, considering it to be a matter unworthy and dangerous, providing warnings they consider to be their sacred right and responsibility, which they are always ready to exercise and defend it.

    Sometimes, due to weakness in intuition and logic, Dreiser himself suffers from the narrowness of his own ethical program. For example, if he is told: "I haven't harmed you in any way - why do you distrust me?", he begins to realize that his behavior contradicts his own principles i.e. he is "punishing" a person prior to the misdeed. After realizing this, Dreiser may act very imprudently – he may allow himself to be honest with a person who has not earned his confidence (which may result in troubles for him in the future).

    In an already formed and established opinion ESI, as a rule, does not make mistakes. Even if he agrees to forego his first impressions, then he only does so to double-check himself. Endowing him with this valuable quality, nature seemingly tried to apologize for the fact that it wasn't as generous with intuition and logic.

    ESI is often an excellent physiognomist. He is exceptionally observant; orienting by barely perceptible and only visible to him visual cues, he is able to formulate a precise idea of the character traits and overall nature of a person. Each person who appears in his field of view for the first time, ESI as if "dissects" by his penetrating "X-ray" gaze, being subjected to which leaves most feeling uncomfortable. Dreiser immediately forms an opinion about the ethical qualities of the individual before him. His most accurate and astute insights about the nature and motives of a person arise from such first snap impressions.

    ESI does not see and cannot even envision himself outside the system of his own ethical values. Advice "Be simpler!" – is not for him. The situation of "love triangle" for him is absolutely unacceptable. The thought of cheating on his significant other seems blasphemous, neither will he allow disloyalty with respect to himself. He won't permit himself to fight off a partner of another. The concept of "sexual freedoms" is permissible for him only in form of erotic fantasies (and even then, not for himself), but in real life, he won't allow this neither for himself nor for his partner: he is too proud to share his partner with someone else. In his relations, ESI is very thorough and principled. [translator's note: such notions about ESIs have been largely dispelled on Russian socionics forums where a number of male and female ESIs have admitted to cheating while they were in a relationship with someone else as well as building relations with those whom they knew to be married.]

    ESI is a maximalist – in love and friendship he gives himself completely. He gives everything that he has, and even that which he doesn't have (for example, he may take out a loan to pay for the debts of his friend).

    He is touchingly responsive to sincere interest in himself. And this is understandable: others often react negatively to his piercing "X-ray" look, and of this he is always acutely aware and in the course of his life he becomes accustomed to such reactions from others. Therefore, when he meets someone with a sincere disposition towards himself, he considers that he should reciprocate. However, if he notes that this person misuses his trust and takes advantage of him, without regret he will part with this person. ESI remembers evil-doings for a long time and tries to end relations with someone who has caused him grief or trouble. He can sometimes keep up a surface impression of interaction, although in reality this person no longer exists for him.

    In his constant initiative "to eradicate all evil on earth", which in states of psychological discomfort becomes focused on and directed at his nearest and dearest, ESI is often too quick to commit "ethical violence". ESI, like no other type, knows how to "pin to the wall" the subject of his accusation upon the very first offense, not leaving this person even the smallest leeway to justify himself. With this, he often deprives himself of the opportunity to positively develop relations.

    ESI loves to "sort out relations" (which is a consequence of his weakness in intuition). In cases of psychological discomfort or protracted crises, he can purposefully start a quarrel and cause distress in order to obtain additional information – to recheck his own observations, and to confirm his suspicions, that others relate to him exactly in the manner that he has suspected.

    Distrustful by his nature, ESI is not easily "charmed". No matter how much he loves someone, no matter how much he grows attached, ESI never fully closes his eyes to the deficiencies in a person – for this is a possible source of future troubles. Even if he willingly allows himself to trust someone, he never excludes the possibility that this person may abuse his trust and sincerity, but he understands that mutual honesty is an indispensable condition for friendship. Furthermore, he fears to offend a person with such distrust. He may also feel like he is sufficiently strong and capable to stand his own ground if any complex ethical situation arises (in case if he is betrayer and his "secrets" are revealed to others).

    ESI, in general, sympathizes very little with anyone (for he sees too much). It is sufficiently difficult to earn his trust and make him open up. Even though sometimes he "blabbers" too much and says things that are in excess, being unaware of this himself, since, as all other sensing types, imperceptibly to himself he speaks with maximum concreteness.

    In everyday contact, ESI keeps at an extended interpersonal distance almost with everyone in his vicinity. Trying to avoid unpleasant company, he can go on to insulate himself from the "hostile" world, voluntarily locking himself into a "monastery" of his own creation (sometimes for years and even decades).

    He is usually not interested in negative opinions of himself, since he always faultlessly knows who and how relates to him. Furthermore, ESI does not presuppose any poor behavior in his own respect, since in everything he sees himself following his first "program" ethical decree. Situations, where someone tries to incriminate him in some mythical, in his opinion, misdeeds and in which he is forced to justify himself from "sins" he cannot comprehend, are terrible for him; such situations for Dreiser are completely intolerable and leads to his extreme irritation. He tries to ignore gossip – this is "ethical rubbish", which does not deserve his attention. He grows extremely irritated, when he is forced to listen to negative opinions of himself and considers such behavior to be callous, stupid, and straight up abusive ("Anyone can talk ill!").

    ESI prefers to associate only with a small circle of close and trusted friends, but this concerns only his personal interactions, sympathies, and preferences. For him "strangers" are those people who do not evoke trust in him, and in whose company he thus feels psychological discomfort. In view of weak intuition of possibilities and narrowness of life experience, Dreiser sometimes characteristically divides people into "his own" and "strangers" according to their personal or mental traits. The more terrible is his disappointment when within his "own" familiar circle he discovers "strangers" - people who in actuality relate poorly to him and abuse his trust. Thus, this division of "own" and "others" for Dreiser undergoes many changes during his lifetime.

    ESI does not like it when his friendship is solicited by imposition of forcefully. He is wary of people who try to "get into his soul using a master key" (although most frequently he opens up precisely to such a "key"). He doesn't like it when someone else takes on initiative in realm of ethics and personal relationships. Relations between people is the fundamental sphere of his interests and observations, the object of constant reflections and analysis. For this very reason he is so picky in the selection of friends and partners. Only his dual, Jack (LIE), who is subconsciously oriented at analogous ethical positions, corresponds to Dreiser's ideal of friendship (and even then, this is not always the case).


    Filatova:

    As an introvert she is primarily orientated toward her own installations and stimulations. Her consciousness keynotes the norms of morals, the rules of hospitality, the need for conducting a definite mode of life, which , from her point of view, is the only one worthy.

    Ethics of relations is her strongest function. She understands, from the earliest age, what is good and what is bad. As a moralist she considers it necessary that the laws of behavior, the moral norms, be clearly formulated and strictly observed.

    Especially important to her are deemed the traditions and structure, which, throughout centuries, have been accumulated by humanity. She is confident that these traditions, and also the rituals that serve as necessary reference points, are there to help people in any situation in life. ESI assumes that these traditions must never be stored away or violated but with great care be transmitted from one generation to another.

    She usually adheres to the norms of behavior and morals taken up in society. If she sees someone disregard them she may openly express negative judgment towards them. Considers herself obligated to fight the bad inclinations and defects of the people nearest to her. She can carry on with this firmly for a long time, using all resources accessible to her. The ESI is very emotional but usually forces herself to hide her feelings, in view of this she sometimes is perceived as steady, even cold, by strangers. The nearer someone gets to her the more her emotionality is revealed. If she is confident that the small circle of people, close to her, love and value her then she can feel completely happy.

    It is generally very important that she has someone next to her to which she can readily dedicate herself, but in this case wishes that her efforts be valued, otherwise she can fall into depression, or even cause an argument. She remembers goodness, tries without fail to express appreciation towards those that are good to her, but she also remembers evil. In regards to such offenders ESI takes an irreconcilable position and tries at any cost to punish and take vengeance on them.

    Emotionalism, in the ESI, is developed also in her love of art, especially of music. Frequently she loves to play a musical instrument, with pleasure attends concerts, and herself loves to sing.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    EIIs are very attuned to the psychological atmosphere of interaction and to their own feelings towards people and things. They treasure deep feelings of attachment and strive to deepen emotional bonds between people and harmonize relationships. When those people that the EII is close to suffer emotionally, the EII will do everything in her power to raise the emotional condition in the individual, often at the EII's expense.

    EIIs are very capable of "sizing people up". They rely heavily on their instincts to understand the inner feelings of an individual. They are very empathetic people and find it very easy to feel with others. This makes them very sensitive to the moods of people, and they treat them the way they want to be treated, that is, with respect.


    Stratievskaya:

    The EII attempts to create the most harmonious, most humane, in his opinion, form of ethical relations, which would exclude the suppression of one personality by another, conflicts, discord, lack of understanding, and mutual distrust.

    "Poor peace is better than a good quarrel" – this is the basic form of his ethical strategy.

    His entire life is a search for means and possibilities to realize his idealistic system of relations. Moreover, his own behavior usually serves as a positive example of this.

    The consequence of such orientation are increased introspection and self-analysis, self-criticism and constant ethical self-improvement characteristic of people of this type. And while highly demanding of himself, the EII is unusually tolerant of weaknesses of others.

    EII mends conflicts in his relationships by means of making concessions and compromises. However, he counts on the other person to take note of his agreeableness and to adequately value it. In essence, his agreeableness is a kind of an ethical tactic intended to predispose others to good favor and compromises. While EII presents himself as kind and agreeable, in reality there are reasonable limits to these qualities in him. If the demands of his partner go past what is permissible for him, he will show resistance and stubbornness and erect between himself and the source of his disappointment an psychological barrier that is difficult to penetrate.

    The break-ups and conflicts in his personal relations EII usually experiences very painfully, especially, when he sees no possibility of fixing and restoring them. For example, if someone close to him forces him to lose a friend, EII ends up in a situation that contradicts his main ethical orientation: from one side, he is betraying his friend, from another – he does not want to disappoint another dear person.

    The EII can maintain relations with an incompatible partner for a long time, relying on feeling of debt and responsibility before family and relatives. However, in cases of especially unfavorable relations and, when he is absolutely confident in the impossibility to fix and improve anything, he irrevocably and unconditionally leaves his partner. (This quality is also characteristic of ESI.) A representative of this type who personally has not gone through a breakup in the past, may attempt to prevent the dissolution of relationships of people who are close to him. He will try to reconcile them until he personally becomes absolutely convinced that they cannot coexist together.

    The commandment "Do not do unto others what you wouldn't wish for yourself" EII takes with exceptional seriousness: he in principle does not wish to cause hurt and grievance for anyone else. He tries to endow each person with a grain of his personal warmth and kindness and create the conditions of maximum psychological comfort for other people. Gentleness, subtleness, tolerance for weaknesses in strangers, inner soulful sensitivity, "opening bid" of benevolence – all of these are basic values of EII's ethical program.

    Building his relationships, EII tries to be sensitive, tactful, and responsive. For example, he will not allow himself to categorically reject advice or help that was offered to him, even if it is clearly ineffective or even harmful. After all, he cannot dismiss a person who has offered aid from the depths of his heart and from the best motives. EII treats absurd advice that has been given to him in exactly the same manner – most often, he will be delicate and tactful with the adviser, listen attentively, then thank him for his care and act in accordance to his own discretion and circumstances. ("Why not listen to well-wishing counsel?" – especially since not every "well-wisher" will check if his advice has been followed.) EII thinks of such advice not only as instructions, but also as an expression of sympathy for his hardships.

    EII is usually sensitive and responsive to the misfortune of strangers. He readily sympathizes even with people who are not very close to him. He has the ability to literally dissolve in problems of others. Developed ability to sympathize with another's grief is one of the basic values of EII's system of relations. In his understanding, the act of comforting by itself is already very telling. Such demonstratively sympathetic and sensitive attitude usually makes the EII become liked and valued by others.

    The EII builds his relations with others by readily closing the psychological distance with them, which has the effect of warming people up and positively predisposing them towards him. Sometimes, however, such desire to get close may seem ingratiating and intrusive to others; however, any hint that he has been too imposing EII receives rather painfully, since he did not intend to burden others by his company. He tries to be kind and sensitive, whatever it costs him, and does everything possible and impossible not to offend, as to not make enemies for himself and create precedents for open expressions of hostility. The psychological barrier that he sometimes creates he does not consider to be a sign hostility, but as his right to keep distance from someone whom he doesn't like. If further relations develop unfavorably, he distances from such a person.

    If someone from his environment falls ill, EII will care for the sick person with exceptional selflessness, not considering the effect this has on his own health and state of mind, nor the danger of possible infection. Any family with an EII member can be confident in its health: whenever someone falls ill, the EII, as a rule, will take a leave from work and care for those who are ill. The degree and closeness of relations, in this case, do not matter to him.

    EII is unlikely to commit treachery in respect to his close ones, and condemns these qualities in others. He never forgives the abuse of his trust, although he prefers not to focus on upsetting memories and is not rancorous by nature. Being implicated in some intrigue, or finding himself in a system of relations which contradicts his ethical values, EII feels lost and disoriented, but in each separate case he tries to behave such that his behavior would not contradict his own values. Precautionary distrust and suspiciousness he takes as something unethical and heartless. For this very same reason, it is sometimes impossible to convince him of someone's misdeeds and poor intents, even if it has been already proven and is obvious to everyone else. EIi's actions are to a significant extent determined by his personal sympathies and antipathies i.e. if he sympathizes with someone he may simply ignore many of this person's faults. And he is capable of self-sacrifice in the name of love and friendship. For example, he can take upon himself the blame in place of someone else, thus protecting his friend from troubles and suffering.

    EII is usually not resentful and vengeful (to be rancorous, in his understanding, is unethical), but he will not seek to mend damaged relations until he is confident that his offender has realized his own transgressions. In order to obtain EII's forgiveness, it is sufficient to demonstrate your positive disposition to him. Moreover, making profuse apologies is unnecessarily. The world of EII's feelings is so refined and rich, that he does not need verbal explications of emotions and experiences in order to intuitively understand what is going on in his relations.

    EII knows how to keep secrets. Therefore, he can often be entrusted without reservations and without reminders that "this must remain between us", since it would violate the assumption itself, that he is even capable of such a deed. Himself, he also assumes that his "secret confessions" will be piously observed and safeguarded, for he fears to offend someone by distrust because he considers distrust to be something insulting for everyone, including himself. The EII considers good intentions to be the standard of human relationships; therefore initially he tries not to assume any poor motives. If his own secrets are nevertheless divulged, this becomes the heaviest of disappointments for him.

    EII is constantly searching for some original forms of the expression of sympathy and solidarity with the emotional state of another (or his environment). For example, a representative of this type, on the occasion of the end of the divorce of her friend presented her with a bouquet of flowers – in this manner she congratulated her friend with the beginnings of a new, "free" life.

    It is very important for the EII that the motivation of his behavior would be correctly understood and appropriately evaluated by other people. For him, any gift, any service presents enormous value as a form of expression of good intentions. At the same time, the real cost of this service for him means much less. (His dual, Stierlitz (LSE) also attributes purely symbolic value to gifts, at least to those which he gives himself.)

    The EII never forgets the good that was done for him, and considers that ingratitude is a quality, which deserves most severe criticism. Kindness and the sympathy – these are consistent values of EII's ethical program. He knows how to demonstrate them as no one else. Representatives of this type are inclined to deep ethical analysis and introspection.


    Filatova:

    Introverted ethics determines that the EII focuses her attention on judgments about good and evil, morals and depravity, decency and dihonourableness. She precisely senses the norms of behaviour, which govern different groups of people, and she tries to follow these norms in order not to insult the feelings and morality of those that surround her. When she first arrives amongst a group of people she holds herself back. Once she has established a degree of control in regards to the psychological atmosphere of occurences within the group, and only then, after she has soaked herself in the atmosphere, will she consider becoming a full-fledged member of the collective.

    EII often makes acquaintence with those that are weak or unhappy. These people serve to incite the desire to help, to support, and to comfort others, within her. To her others will frequently turn for help and she accepts them by examining their confessions for hours on end. She attempts to get accustomed to the psychological difficulties being experienced by the collocutor and she tries to take their side and support them.

    EII is often wounded and always emotional, however, she turns all her experiences inward; thus these qualities are not always observable from a distance. She sometimes appears as a steady, even cold person, but this impression is illusory. Every event, even those popularly deemed insignificant, leaves in her soul a deep track that survives for a long time. As a rule she represses in herself anger, irritation, and the desire to reproach. One of the EII’s characteristic manifestations of offense is the creation of a psychological barrier between themselves and the offender. In such cases she’ll assume a position emanating stressed, cold, politeness. She’ll answer all questions monosyllabically. This style of behaviour, characteristic of this psycho-type, is very difficult to deal with for some people; they’d prefer that the EII shouted or somehow otherwise expressed her indignation. It is not even easy for her to exist in such a state. However, if the offender asks for forgiveness and manifests the desire to change the situation than this state of offense may rapidly pass.

    High emotionalism, in combination with rationality, frequently leads the EII to replay their role in a past situation over and over. The center of excitation, in their consciousness, darkens all other aspect of life when this occurs. She finds it difficult to focus on anything different. Mentally, again and again, she returns to one and the same; she may speak about this lest it occur that others, around her, find it irritating.


     
     
    Main Wikisocion:

    An SEE usually knows exactly how to make other people feel a certain way. This ability increases its power dramatically the more time he spends with a person. He can offer genuine, believable praise to an individual he wants to reward, and likewise can make a person very upset and/or ashamed in themselves. However, if an offender changes their ways in favor of the SEEs point of view, the SEE will be quick to reward the offender with praise, and appreciation, treating them like a good friend. Moral ground to an SEE completely depends on the situation and is anything but set in stone (hence the creative function).

    "Fake niceness" rarely fools an SEE. The SEE can easily tell whether a person is being genuine or just selfishly trying to fulfill their own needs.

    The SEE can easily create sentiments of closeness and kinship, only to completely change these sentiments down the road. An SEE could be hanging out with a person (A) and act like the person's best friend, yet talk with another friend (B) and show sentiments of extreme distaste towards person 'A' in order to gain acceptance with 'B'. Sometimes if person 'A' and 'B' are together at a social function, the SEE will either have to pick sides or can treat both relations with acceptance and feelings of kinship. This can cause quite a bit of confusion in regards to the SEE's "true loyalties." The SEE prefers to maintain the respect and appreciation of his relations if at all possible. He knows that if he has an ally in many different groups, it will be harder for his enemies in said groups to act against him for fear of retribution from his other allies.

    An SEE has the ability show up in a group of strangers and act like a long lost friend, gaining acceptance and trust of the group very quickly. He can quickly charm this group with his well-bred manners, genuine displays of like/dislike, and sometimes risky humor. When the SEE leaves, he can find out through his inside sources that he was the "talk of the town" after he left, much to the delight of the SEE.


    Stratievskaya:

    Any ethical relations Caesar first of all constructs from the positions of volitional sensoriki. I.e., however they were developed, Caesar in any event must remain leader. Caesar is deeply convinced that also the first and last word in the development of relations they must remain after it. It is always absolutely confident in its right to check any ethical situation, regardless of the fact, it is in it main face or secondary.

    In spite of comparatively strong ethical installations, and besides, that the ethics of relations - its strong creative function, it cannot be said so that the ethical relations in Caesar would be added easily. To Caesar generally nothing it is given easily, because it everything always conquers. The problem of Caesar in the fact that it frequently conquers that the fact that in it no one disputes. It, to its misfortune, has a habit to conquer that that also so belongs to it precisely rightfully.

    It would seem that it interfere withs Caesar simply and natural to receive its natural attractiveness, its charm, ease and freedom in the contact. But in that and misfortune, that to Caesar is necessary a constant and general acknowledgement of these qualities. Moreover, for it are necessary the proofs of the acknowledged superiority, proof of its unquestionable influence moreover precisely in pursuit of these proofs it and teaches to lose entire its "kingly" sublimity sometimes it is created impression, that it precisely asserts itself to the compliments, by force and inappropriately "pulls" to itself attention, is fascinated by the egotism

    And in the region of ethics to Caesar having insufficiently polupobed only appeared, it must charm all, obayat' all, "light" all, interest all or, if it is necessary, to intrigue all.

    But even if is located someone, whom it is in no way interested to itself to arrange, then only because this person it simply for itself in no way examines, it for it, simply speaking, "empty place".

    It is not surprising that Caesar teaches with this ethics of behavior (independent of the scales of his activity) to gain to itself is numerous enemies. Moreover relations according to diagram friend - enemy in it are also constructed very contrastingly and inconsistently: yesterday's enemy today "gracious" starts into the number of friends, because "so it is must", today's friend, who pays more attention to another subject, no longer friend, but "traitor". (Caesar, perhaps, only, who in third kvadre divides relations into the "enemies" and "friends" - Dreiser it divides into "its" and "strangers", but intuity- logicians about this not at all think)

    Specifically, because the ethics of relations in Caesar is formed under the effect of volitional sensoriki (more precise, it it realizes), maximalism is its distinguishing feature. But, self-evidently, the ethics of Caesar cannot and it must not be sequential: realization function - always manipulation, always such, what is necessary to the program of intellect. In the case of Caesar volitional sensorika - aspect firm, program, and ethics of relations only shapes the "arrangement of forces": changes power relationship - it changes and ethics. To those, whom Caesar respects and whose arrangement attains, one relation, to those, whom "in the half copeck coin it does not place", another. In that and the problem of the ethics of Caesar, the secret of fastest nazhivaniya by them enemies - in its inconsistent ethical maximalism.

    As for a long time Caesar "zastrevayet" in the phase of hostility or friendship, he depends only on concrete situation. But of course Caesar will not step back, until he explains it for himself finally, it is more precise, it will step back, only being convinced that the relations finally were pulled down also he does not have chances to correct them. (to correct, in understanding of Caesar, means again to conquer authority. It is unimportant that precisely it makes - it does request forgiveness or is arranged the scandal: this is not more than means "to straighten" situation in any manner.)

    Etichnost' of Caesar, already in view of its manipulativeness, always relative, in spite of strong ethical installations. I.e., Caesar completely can realize into some of the defined situation, which enters badly (moreover, it it always knows, how it is necessary to enter), but in it is always located "convincing" justification to its own unethical behavior. Neetichnost' in behavior of others Caesar always notes, but far from always he condemns and even in regard to this it does not always speak out. To the honor of Caesar it is necessary to recognize that it is capable to relate with the humor to the strange ethical imperfections.

    Constantly it fights for the expansion of the sphere of its ethical influence. It it is possible to consider its kind by "ethical aggressor". But the actions of Caesar in the zone of their influence are confused, inconsistent and it is often unethical. Constantly changes ethical tactics, change "agents", change friend- enemies, the centers of volitional pressure and emotional action constantly displace. Caesar least of all realizes, that entire proceeding - this is only reaction to its some concrete actions. The more it fusses, the more the situation incandesces, the more it loses strategic orientators in its ethical relations. Finally it entirely is tangled, who to it is now whom, and here he already conducts his ethical "close battle", his some narrow-gauge "shuttle" diplomacy, some primitive poludetskiye intrigues. It is similar, no one knows how so "creatively" to spoil its relations, as this succeeds for Caesar himself.

    In any event, no matter how estimated its behavior, Caesar sincerely wants "so that all would be as better". He actually tries as possible better everything to settle so that all would be contented by him, he tries for all to be good. This position leads either to the contradictory actions from its side or to the absence of any decisive actions, which only aggravates its ethical problems.


    Filatova:

    SEE magnificently manipulates people by their moods and desires. He loves to be the center of attention, to fascinate others with his ideas. He easily provokes quarrels but just as easily reconciles them, as if playing; pulling the strings. It is important for him to preserve the good opinion of other towards him, not to let himself fall, to stress his talent and exclusiveness. He’s a great actor and can manifest outstanding diplomatic inclinations, well cultured.

    Sensing well the moods of others, SEE can support a comrade through a difficult moment; manifest his participation, his sympathy. By being naturally volitional and cheerful he impels other to act, not to fall apart or whine.

    The SEE – men with bright and intense emotional range – from angry indignation to noisy enthusiasm. He thus always finds himself included in the emotional situation, he is ready to act: to help, to sympathize, to fight, to condemn, - and no matter how he expresses his relation to that occurring he is always absolutely confident in the correctness of his sentence.

    With the opposite sex he readily displays initiative. Though to suffer rejection may be tragic he knows to move on.

    Strong excitability and emotionalism give rise to increased sexuality. Especially in the younger years it is difficult to settle down.

    SEE is prone to jealousy, may frequently suspect partner of treason, and does not pardon innocent flirtation.

    Bright emotionalism also develops in the love of arts; SEE especially loves music and singing. Frequently he has some of his own music, demonstrates to all his talent and ability.


     
    Main Wikisocion:

    IEEs are naturally sensitive to mood, atmosphere, and feelings. They rarely say or do anything that would worsen people's feelings, preferring instead to distance themselves from people and social situations that produce negative feelings. IEEs are naturally skilled at regulating the degree of emotional intimacy between people, which can mean being businesslike (yet polite) as well as warm and inviting.

    When faced with a sad individual, the IEE will usually try to understand what is wrong, and will often try to coax the individual with kind words and actions. The IEE often displays a straight face even when faced with strong negative feelings.

    Always on the IEE's mind are the feelings of his or her friends. If the IEE does not know whether an individual is feeling good or ill will, the IEE will prod the individual until he or she displays their attitude.

    IEEs are concerned with the opinions and feelings of those around them and try to avoid saying things that would cause arguments and bad feelings. He does this effortlessly. In fact, IEEs will often choose to follow a very open and accepting life philosophy in order to reconcile his own views with those of others.

    When interacting with others, IEEs are naturally aware of the flow of emotion present and strive to interpret meanings out of individual emotional states. When they feel they've realized an accurate potentiality of the cause of someone's behavior, IEEs commonly clarify their perceptions to ensure their understanding of another person. To actually aid the person in finding positive potential, however, depends on if the subject is important to the IEE (for example, they determine how close of a friend the person actually is to them).


    Stratievskaya:

    Characteristic feature of the ethics of the attitudes of Huxley the skill to be adapted to the collocutor, the skill "to be disposed to his wave": the quality, which helps to it to attain the arrangement of practically any, even quite nekommunikabel'nogo person makes it possible "to glance into the soul" as deeply, as this necessarily for the satisfaction of its own interest.

    Huxley is allotted by property "to select master keys" to each person and to each soul even of most of that closed and mysterious. And for this he has a mass of means and methods.

    Ability stormily to be enraptured and to be charmed by each interested its person. To learn everything about its habits, interests, enthusiasm and with the readiness to imitate its style of behavior and the means of life.

    Ability to agree with the opinion of majority (and "seniority"), to adapt to different circumstances and movements its point of view.

    Skill to see in each person the degree of his confidence and uncertainty in itself - the quality, which makes possible for it to magnificently manipulate by people, to play on their ambitions and complexes.

    Skill to propose its services and skill to impose them: to interest man in its possibilities, influence and connections. (although in reality, Huxley no one to its connections and closely it will allow to approach - greatly it fears, which someone another will intercept its happy case, its winning ticket.)

    And it would be nevertheless error present Huxley by such insidious intrigant, who deftly uses his abilities for mercenary purposes. This form of the relations of altogether only realizes its program and provides success to the measure planned by it.

    Can Huxley propose his aid simply so, from the good motives? - can! And very frequently this makes. Moreover the proposal of its aid it is necessary to understand precisely as the demonstration of sympathies and benevolence to the man as the expression of sympathy to his problems. But it does not hurry to render real aid of Huxley. Moreover, it already begins to be nervous, when man only agrees to accept his proposal. In this case Huxley immediately is frightened the undertaken himself obligation, he begins to think about the difficulties, with which it will be cmbined, it begins to fear the superfluous expenditure of time and forces, it no longer is glad, that proposed its aid and, in turn, it is offended to the man for the fact that that so literally understood its proposal. Now already it begins to seem it that this outside person from it too wants much. Trying to somehow correct the created awkwardness, Huxley frequently sets distance between themselves and this person: haughty form fills to itself how especially emphasizes the value of future service and gives thus to understand that they will be too obliged for this service to it - the shorter, it behaves so that man would begin inconveniently to use his proposal and it either will forego its request or never more about it it will resemble. However, Huxley from his side does not forget about the service proposed and whereas is carried out it with the first opportunity, i.e., when for it is succeeded in podgadat' for this the suitable moment, when it this costs not the least labor and seemingly is obtained by itself.

    One more, characteristic for the representatives of this type the ethical property: Huxley is the unsurpassed master "to turn dynamo", and, in addition, no intentional insidiousness in this it follows to perceive - this not is more than the method to adjust psychological distance in the formed with it relations for the purpose to generate to itself stable interest from the side of partner and to test the depth of his feelings. Moreover, the need for this ethical approach is determined by the fact that Huxley is oriented to this duala as Gaben, often too rapidly transferring a relation from the region of ethical to the region of the sensual pleasures, after satisfying which he sufficiently rapidly loses interest in the partner. Therefore this tactics is necessary first of all precisely To gabenu, since constantly makes up its interest and are stabilized its relations. (otherwise, Gaben generally risks to remain without the partner. Only penetrating and foresighted Huxley is capable to compose to it in every respect worthy pair.)

    One ought not to perceive the fraudulent intent in Huxley's behavior still and because the original benevolence enters into the system of its ethical values (as, however, and all representatives of fourth kvadry). Huxley becomes acquainted with the man, he associates and are maintained relations with it inasmuch as this person to it is interesting and attractive. Problems begin when Huxley loses interest in his partner, which sometimes occurs almost at the very beginning of his interrelations. It does ask itself, as must leave the ticklish situation foresighted and farsighted Huxley, who strives for the verst go around any scandals, not desiring to acquire to himself enemies and to draw on himself someone's anger?

    The first and sole purpose, which it immediately to itself places, by all possible means to soften the created awkwardness, to suppress it. In any manner to calm down man, to scatter his suspicions, to promise to it everything which only will come to mind, and to try to convince it of best its intentions. By any way to avoid quarrel and to put off the explanation of relations for the indeterminate period, hoping that subsequently the need for dismantling will be eliminated by itself or future will introduce into this situation its correctives. (Huxley's tendency to soften emotional stress is subconsiously connected with the orientation to the weak and vulnerable emotionalism of his duala Of gabena. For this very reason he usually tries not to lead relation to the frank discords and conflicts.)

    But situation is not contained by on this: the absence of interest in the partner in Huxley is also inconstant. Therefore it never and no one makes possible "to disappear nasovsem". Regardless of the fact, to whatever distant distance rejected Huxley his partner, he will always find occasion to resemble about himself and to renew relations in that form, in which precisely to him this most comfortably. For it this is is one additional method to adjust distance. (by analogous method "are regulated distance" and Gaben - to it this is necessary in order to balance the emotional pressure of its partner)

    Huxley tries under no circumstances not to remain in the solitude (lonely person he appears by unlucky wretch, but this it repulses from it all those surrounding, and, correspondingly, it deprives of chances to the success). In view of these reasons, and also in view of his exceptional communicability, Huxley prefers to have the fallback positions of partners for any form of relations. ("the fallback positions" partners in the ethical game of Huxley with his dualom Gabenom fulfill the function of "evasive maneuver": To gabenu is inconvenient partner, completely zatsiklivayushchiysya on it. This form of relations to him seems too burdensome, while relations with the "fallback position" him, from one side, somewhat calm, and from other side they lull to sleep his vigilance, than prepare it for the new ethical tricks of Huxley.)

    For the same reason for Huxley sometimes is created the myth about the "fallback position", it creates the "spectre of rival". For example, it loves to acquaint its "worshippers" with each other ("to encounter by their foreheads"), after arriving to the meeting at one, to say about its feelings and relation to another. Why? - since is, in addition it programmed to the interrelations Gabenom, which precisely this ethical "game" pleasantly tones up, intrigues and excites; which questions of the ethics of relations sometimes approaches also with this reasoning: "if this woman of anyone does not have any, which means, it no one is necessary, but once then, why it to me?"

    And one additional occasion, which makes it necessary of Huxley to start simultaneously several worshippers: with any circumstances, Huxley tries not to sosredotachivat' entire his attention in one partner (let us recall, Gaben it does not love so that they would be recycled on it). Therefore Huxley starts several partners so that each of them would feel itself a little "shared unfairly". If, for example, Huxley succeeded himself in bringing only one partner, rest are devised, but real partner, in addition must feel a certain deficiency in the attention.

    Representatives of this type frequently produce the impression of extremely frivolous and inconstant in their attachments people, which provoke the rapprochement of relations, but at the last moment of those being trying to avoid physical proximity. This inconsistency also of ob"yasnima: Of Huxley does not assign clear distance to its relations - it as simultaneously and it is close and distant, creating thus a certain uncertainty and incompleteness in the relations. This form of behavior creates convenient psychological regime to its dualu To gabenu, which does not transfer the rigid, limited by the assigned distance relations.

    Furthermore, Huxley adore risky- adventures, they love to complicate ethical situation to the limit and to leave from it by the most unexpected means. Why by them this is necessary? - this one of the requirements of their program function, their intuitive program - search for the boundaries of its own ethical possibilities, and also the expansion of these boundaries. And this that, than by Huxley they are occupied constantly in any ethical (and not only ethical) situation.

    But how is explained Huxley's tendency in certain cases to avoid physical proximity? -, in addition subconsious orientation to Gabena, sufficiently which is rapidly satiated by the immoderate sensual relations (but, as is known, the state of surfeit causes Gabena has the discomfort, which it it attempts in every way possible to avoid). Krome.togo, Huxley - intuit, foresighted and farsighted. Therefore the promising development of relations in the necessary direction for it is more important than the satisfaction of its today's needs for sensations and feelings.

    Hence and some stereotypes of its behavior: "woman must be mysterious and inaccessible. If she too rapidly yields to man, he will lose to it any interest and it will again remain one ". (A of this Huxley it always fears.)

    The ethics of the attitudes of Huxley in any event and with any circumstances first of all carries out one of the basic requirements of his intuitive program - search for new best and promising possibilities, for which to it it is very important not to remain in the solitude and not to chop off the already tied contacts and relation, but to use them for the searches for the different versions and for the new possibilities. This is is one additional reason, for which Huxley tries not to lead relation to the final break, but to remain with his former partners in the "comradely" relations: they are turned to them for help, if the same is required, at the moment of the complication of relations with the sequential partner - tyuey vyplakivayutsya by them into the "waistcoat", they assign them on the solution of their current problems, use their connections, they associate with their friends and familiar. (one of the representatives of this type they asked: could it return life within the night, carry ouied with the dear woman? - no, it not could, it answered, because then I changed its major principle: to remain with former beloveds in the friendly relations. But what I will be friend, if I die?")

    By Huxley they do not exclude "friendship" between the man and the woman. The proposal of its "friendship" for Huxley, in reality, very thin and prudent "ethical game", whose essence consists, in addition in establishing of necessary psychological distance with the partner. By Huxley's "friendship" usually are implied the specific ethical prospects, giving at the same time hint to the promising and far reaching relations. This ethical game, as, however, and entire ethics of Huxley, is constructed in the subconsious calculation for the weak and vulnerable ethics of his duala Of gabena, which any open and rectilinear form of relations frightens and repulses.

    Specifically, that "ethical cobweb," which will braid Huxley, is presented To gabenu most attractive, tempting, that intrigues and at the same time to nothing by the not forcing form of relations. (A that that into this "cobweb" fall the representatives of other psychological types, Huxley, certainly, by no means it is not guilty.)


    Filatova:

    All possibilities must be made aware to others so that they may act on them. IEE easily makes contact with others and rapidly becomes the soul of the company. Is able to connect with spectators and students, and is ready to play with their attention. Her behaviour is noticeably impulsive, her mood frequently varies, but she tries to hide all of her negative experiences from others to avoid their judgments.

    IEE possesses the gift of inspiring those that surround her towards activities, which can be considered promising and revealing in the long-term. She finds it rather interesting to manipulate – literally to juggle with the moods of others. Here she is an experimenter, curiously observing the reactions of others to her emotional provocations. She wonderfully manages the emotional sphere, she gives compliments to others and is sincere for she is always ready to notice the positive traits inherent in others, but she may sometimes begin to tease people or even try to make them mad… This is never done with actual spite but in a playful manner, as if it’s a game.

    Benevolence and optimism are generally inherent in people of this psycho-type. They are eager to offer aid, but one ought not to rely too heavily on their promises for they are often forgetful, and easily distracted by other people.

    By wonderfully understanding the moods of people IEE knows how to deftly avoid conflict, to extinguish such with a joke. But when the reason for conflict aligns with her inherent interests she may get caught up in the conflict, in such situations she acts actively and decisively.

  38. #38
    Erk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    287
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Jung makes more sense than this thread.

  39. #39
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Erk View Post
    Jung makes more sense than this thread.
    If you don't have anything useful to say, then get the fuck out of my thread.

  40. #40
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,908
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default the concept of Uncle Fester

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    I'm speculating ppl may not use all cog styles after all. It's more like result-types are maintaining the equilibrium by creating a disruption in eventual processes while process types do the opposite, kinda. I've written about nervous system being connected to type before, so unless it's really complicated, ppl would physiologically only have access to 1 cogstyle.
    I'm putting my bet on "really complicated", and the tremendous theory wank in the refi type thread is just the beginning. I'm ready to blow the socion wide open.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    woof, you said you wanna fight the process/+ bias in socionics typology in chat. However, can you do that if you're process yourself? I wonder if your judgement is biased somehow. I'll make another post later, one less about you & more about socionics.
    Given SEE, I'd expect my workings with Ti to be more in line with SLE than ILE, same with Ne and IEE > ILE. Both Result and HPcog. And of course my judgements are biased. I expect my biases to be out of step with any biases inherent in the system as is/was.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    I got numerous observations for why I believe you're ESfp, not "universal Sp" or w/e:

    You once said life is about the journey, not the destination, which seems process>result (I vguely recall some old post saying such too) similar to what @William/Snaps said in this old thread (lets see if he has changed his sentiment since):
    Quote Originally Posted by Snaps View Post
    I respect your drive, your determination. Your amazing ability to identify what you want and go get it. Sometimes I wish I were more motivated myself. But for Pete's sake (and the sake of those around you), lighten up a little. Relax.

    Life isn't about career or reaching goals. It's the journey along the way... go to a party, spend more time with friends. You don't need to work non-stop... it's ok to take a break.
    I recall saying "it's a journey", with "it" referring to "life"; never said the "not the destination" part. For this to point to Positivism in addition to Process makes sense; points to all of the CD types, SEE being one of them; as for how strongly it points? No idea.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    +Se:
    Quote Originally Posted by me
    LSE vs ESE. Any LSEs here; if you know ahead of time that you gotta fight an ESE, I'll walk through hell and back with you and train the shit out of you until you can absolutely steamroll the fucker without even quickening your pulse.
    As for this half-joke-and-half-not, pretty sure the fellow who inspired this stance would be best served by an undetermined Fe-Base typing, likely 3w2 so/sx. +Se works well for the above.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    labcoat is HP, he gives short, direct replies. In some old post he said he dislikes stating sth is both Se-creative & Ne-polr, cuz both imply the other. Compare this to you, woof, who idiot-proofs this thread. Also, you seem to favour the indecisiveness of Dialectical-algorithmic cognition; its focus on changing patterns instead of what's already minimalistically / strictly implicit. Example: I asked you in tc: the17th whether you're a blue or red oni, you answered with "that depends on etc" (you're red, btw).
    Any of the cool reds would be de facto blue while against eye-bleeding ff0000, and a ball of lead might as well be a popcorn ball when up against an equally voluminous ball of neutronium.

    In a choice between stating Se-Cre and Ne-PolR, the connotations are vastly different; due to that, I'd go for the former. Moving away from looking at the 4th fxn as some sort of magical Achilles' Heel inherent in every person is a huge goal of mine; two among many reasons being that that view of the 4th fxn leads to stereotyponics and stupid towel-to-ass-slapping fratboy shit.

     
    I also recall The Addams Family; one written summary of this movie took a speculative leap into the banal, saying that the impostor was Uncle Fester all along. I saw a guy who generally resembled Uncle Fester in the visual realm as the impostor, and his time with the Addams family transformed him, and all of the naysaying by the people who wanted to raid the Addams' vault were for naught; through his actions and his immersion in his new environment, it became his home as he became family, and one final lightning strike to the head was the final touch to transform him completely into Uncle Fester. Actions of the family proceeded as they would with Uncle Fester, and external accounts were written as if Uncle Fester had been found instead of created, that this was simply a person who was lost and found, and not a concept so powerful that, in its absence, had to be birthed into existence in the body of a grown human being, from the urges of the Addams family and their physical home itself who wanted Uncle Fester, who needed Uncle Fester, to exist in the realm of the corporeal to be complete.


    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    Another: you said subtypes accentuating certain functions at cost of others. Kinda like each action has an opposite reaction, like a pendulum, oscillation between 2 poles (& thesis antithesis); a very DA thing. OTOH, socionics itself is very CD so maybe it's natural for ppl to think such in regards to it.
    My view of accentuation has more to do with the accentuation of one fxn would supress some unknown quantity of the other seven. The most common view is that the accentuation of one fxn would suppress a certain opposite fxn as follows; Ne/Se, Fe/Te, Si/Ni, Ti/Fi. Vertical subtypes do this along club boundaries of adjacent quadras; for example, Ne-ILE would have accentuated NF fxns, and Ti-ILE would have accentuated ST fxns.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    It'd make sense for ILI TO be your dual, yea? You were into mysticism when you ran socioforum.
    Right intuitives: ILE, ILI, EIE, EII - group of ideational processes

    This group carries out translation of specific observations into overall theory. Generalists and synthesists. This group is inclined towards philosophical and religious conceptions. Often they have goals of synthesizing religion and science, rationalism and mysticism. Among their favorite topics are bioenergetics and extrasensory perception. This group works on the crossroads of scientism and humanitarianism.

    EIE and ILI are inclined to set unreal, impossible, idealized goals. ILE and EII gravitate more towards theories that have a chance of being implemented.
    still am! It's all connected, and severing the mystical from the socionical would be lethal to the latter.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    Passionate communication style fits better than coldblooded overall.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ankh
    Sexy story, Maritsa. Like a dream. Maybe I really am SLE, cause I related to it a lot. My very first memory : autumn leaves. Bright red maples leaves on the ground. The sound they made when I walked through them. Dry sound. The sun hitting them in stripes from behind the trees surrounding the path I walk on. So bright. Awesome light! I lift my head a bit, and see the dark blue boots of my aunt in front of me. She has no idea I have such a strong experience. I realize she can't read my mind. Laughter. My laughter. I am alive! Awesome moment! I was 2 years and 2 days old. I can still hear the sound. I drag my feet faster and deeper to make more sound. To feel the leaves move so easily, almost like air, when I shuffle through them. My chest feels open. So happy. I run. No memories from before that, and only vague memories from things happening later and much later. But such films are stuck in my head forever and ever and overwhelm me totally when I think of them. I love leaves and they way they interact with the sun. OMG. I could talk like this forever.
    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    compare that by Ananke to this:
    Quote Originally Posted by me
    this is the verbal equivalent of painting a quarry full of gravels with slate grey paint and watching each stone dry one by one, I've never witnessed anything so outstandingly bland and this is not an insult, I am amazed and a bit horrified
    SLE would be "business-minded", not "coldblooded"; anyways, me and Ankh had a particularly awesome run in the chatbox a while back for around an hour, more on that later maybe.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    You're a sensor. Double-involved (SF) makes sense. Just look at your signature too. & the user titles you've had, "magma elemental".
    Sensor is definitely the one thing I'd nail down solid. Even LIE, the one non-sensate external object base, doesn't cut it. A huge overview of my everything, my musical output as well; airless, sensuous, murky roaring and echoes of rusted-over, complex, mildly dissonant chording that creates an inhabitable space moreso than actively moves a person; all of this, and a lot more unsaid, points me to an sp/sx stacking moreso than anything else.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    Your Fi is of - variety. You actuely feel who you wanna get away from. Like the wishy-washy IEE mcdonalds girl. Or the EIE you wanna beat up. Or that time hatefucks were discussed in chatbox.
    Definitely, definitely, definitely.

    I can't remember anything about the first two of those three. Mission accomplished.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    You said in your war-rock on bus story, you wanted to retaliate, not initiate, so +Se again.
    Se definitely, though this one's a tough call; there was no mere appearance of strength, I brought a huge bag of pea gravels and golfball-sized chunks of gravel with last names written in blood red on them, passed the pea gravels around to kids on the front of the bus, and we rained hell on those sons of bitches in the back. Saw the fuckers in the back of the bus turn ghost white, duck under seats, make incoherent threats about "going AWOL on them"; there was nothing more real than them trying with all their might not to take a peppering of stones to the head. It ruled.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    gummibearz once in chatbox said "it's play time that's why he acts lik that" or sth like that. You replied "as far as I know, there's only one time". According to wikisocion, Fe/Ti sees work & fun as separate, separating using Ti contextual lines I guess. So again Fi/Te for you.
    Outside of the unwanted intrusiveness of those wild guesses from the guy, I am where I am, and I get done what needs to get done; this never changes. A lack of compartmentalization between created constructs of "work" and "play", and furthermore any notion of their existence altogether, means a lack of something; probably some form of rationality, likely Fe. As +fxns deal in construction, and Ni is linked to time, this works incredibly well with the Fe-EIE typing I've got for g.bearz.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    There was a thread about a father shooting his kid's laptop with a gun. Leader/agee said ppl should do what they want, you said objectively an object of value was lost, indicating +Se for you.
    A laptop and a bullet were lost. Re: people doing what they want, the kid counts as a person, and a gun is well within his physical capacity to pull. A network of laws, and the existence of large quantities of people who believe in them, are largely what keep guns physically located where they are now.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    You gave advice on how to arrange one's socks; sensor:
    Quote Originally Posted by me
    First off, leave your socks free and don't bundle them - it's unnecessary effort to bundle socks, and it stresses the material, causing them to last less long. I organize my clothes in them, and it's a perfect system I always fold shirts, for similar reasons; if they're hung, then the neck hole gets stretched... as for dressy stuff? That goes in the closet!
    Quote Originally Posted by me
    so in the type field, I did what I oftentimes do; obscure notation that leaves a few types open in ways never done before, hopefully leading a few people into some crazy exploration about shit, hopefully doing that instead of making another stupid "is Socionics real?" thread haha
    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    Seems to fit with:
    - ILI: Logic of parallel progression. Branching. Disjunctive logic that separates the opposites. Logic of safeguards, of spare exits. Lets denote this logic with sign \/
    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    Yup, you're effectively leaving backdoors open so as to avoid commitment.
    Afaik it's more to do with gaining precision. Sixteen compartmentalized stereotypes isn't enough. Absolute tons of dichotomies, coarsely applied, overlaying each other in specific ways, in varying levels of supposed potency or certainty; that's more like it. Finding out how to adequately notate the results is the rough part.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    I see how this ILI logic fits with the Fi/Te tendency to anti-differentiate, point out exceptions as to invalidate trends the trends merries purport. I see this pattern again & again, e.g. FDG vs silke in a recent thread about earnings & type, mfckr's general mentality, etc... It's especially obvious in gammas who are resolute democrats, thus maximum of non-experimentality/ establishment-oriented thinking. It's the most strictly individualistic quadra after all, & the most adult. This opposes the merry thinking which sees broad trends thus necessitating change, esp LII's:
    - LII: Logic of anti-synthesis, of finalized stable systems. Finding the counterweight, the opposite pole. Isolation of "pure", non-overlapping parts. Anti-conjuction. And-not function. Denoted by upwards arrow ↑
    Finalizing the invalidation of trends into a concrete "NTR", or doing anything of the sort in any field is, if not rare for me, then secondary to looking for a more refined approach; if I'm gonna tear something down, then I would do well to leave something usable in its wake, preferably something better.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    I once asked you about Ne/Si in chatbox. You recounted a story of a SLI plumber(?) whom you had asked if had a certain tool. He replied he didn't, cuz it was outside of his career. You saw this as relating to some kinda Ne/Si context-orientation on is part. You seem to not take things for granted (implicitly expecting there to be a backdoor, as your dual would provide?):
    I recall this; I don't recall anyone being under the sink, but a new toilet was installed; guy could have been a plumber, and this rationale is familiar to me, and it's one I've been aware of in the context of certain video games; instead of, say, a chair being a specific physical arrangement of metal, wood, plastic, etc., with at least three and usually four stems that connect the entire configuration to whatever ground it may be upon, oftentimes using wheels as an intermediary, a flat surface strong enough to support hundreds of pounds of weight being a distance above those stems, usually on them, sometimes with one central stem between the other stems and the flat surface, another flat surface being perpendicular to the primary flat surface, with some sort of material attaching them together, and sometimes the surfaces will have foam atop them, with fabric, plastic, or any combination of the two as an outer shell; to some people, I suspect a chair is none of this. To them, a chair is a magical device that grants people the power of sitting down.

    - The Politician (SEE): world is governed by connections, fame and prestige. Most cautious one of all sociotypes, as it learns everything through mistakes that have been made. It moves forward exploring its way by touch and trusting only its senses. Words, concepts, ideas – all of these are only instruments for exerting influence on people.
    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    That seems compatible with the following...
    SEE - artificial strength, which allows to exert influence over those who are more powerful.
    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    Your tendency to bluff (vs MTG blue players) may also relate to this; by bluffing one may defeat those who are naturally stronger.
    As I played against it back then, blue dealt primarily in bluffing; two untapped Islands is all it took to realize that a spell cast against their owners and controllers may not go through. The likelihood of this happening was dependent on multiple factors, one of them being the judgement of the blue player, one of them being the luck of the draw, which I could estimate by that extra split-second lingered before they said "go", their hammering of their handheld cards' edges and corners on the desk, a duck of the head; from my field of vision, all I saw of the opponent's cards were their backs, not the information-rich fronts of them; the less of those cards present, the better, so I went for raw power in making them discard everything. I put latent threats on the board, encouraging the opponent to either dump their hand and tap their land to deal with them, which meant I could tear more of their hand out with unanswered discard, or they could do nothing and get overrun. Lots of my creatures forced the opponent to discard whenever their attacks got through.

    All of that, combined with my tendency to build decks containing multiple cards that blew up the entire play area. I also looked at card arts, using Revised-era Swamps, white bordered and washed out in color, written text in the box instead of a mana symbol; at the time, I would have went for the old-school Swamps that looked meaner than all hell, but these ghostly things worked just fine. All uniform in art.

    A field that was swarming in Enchantments was a field I wanted to explode to hell. Full set of Nevinyrral's Disks in every deck, maindeck or sideboard.

    After the local card shop closed down years ago, the old crew never could rally together to any centralized spot, and we dissipated into the great beyond of our individual worlds. A credit and loan place inhabits the building which once housed the MtG games, housed the huge loud guy who yelled about where his farts were on the Richter scale, the other huge loud guy who maced himself in the face, a small portable box TV with an Xbox hooked to it, on which people played a new game called "Halo", and later, people brought their own Xboxes to one person's house, ran Ethernet cable or something close to it through rooms, over carpets, down hallways, and though we all sat in different rooms, we were all together, and we each had a screen to ourselves for the first time ever, no more having to deal with the split-screens of Goldeneye, which always gave one player a disproportionately wide field of vision if there were three people playing. Much like the road systems in suburbia end in cul-de-sacs as if to avoid any sort of interconnection, the future model would be for everyone to inhabit their individual houses, with the information superhighway doing what the Ethernet cable used to do from a technical standpoint mostly, but now with more lag, less of a pressing need to physically get together, to cook pizza for the whole crew while they drink their two liters even though I'd pick water, to segue video game time into us all playing one of those wild and cheap board games once tucked away in the card shop, my self-laminated copy of Ebola Monkey Hunt, with dice and cards housed in a fishing tackle box.

    Quote Originally Posted by zap View Post
    You're opposed to strict hierarchies, so LSI could indeed be your supervisor.However, due to XEE being tied in the poll about your type upon your arrival & Stratiyevskaya having IEEs as chameleons...I guess there's a tiny chance of IEE for you, but I don't believe it myself, I'd rather converge on SEE. Finally, you don't resemble any of the Si-egos on here. Here's a list of em, several are listed in Subteigh's excellent History of the forum thread: jellygrass, chameleon, Charismatik, bg, ProcrastinateTomorrow, electric sheep, blackcat, Link, Rylix, taz, playerof604, lemontrees, iannau, jessica, force my hand, rocky, stray, meals, strider, flowers, esq, lokivanguard, icepick, deante, betterthandead, Red Villain, them, snegledmaca.
    IEEs are amazing.

    I can't see the invisible, and ime they can, and they can see it so much, and something about me knows to listen.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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