Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: orders in model A

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    559
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default orders in model A

    I am interested in the orders associated to the lesser-dimensional/weaker information elements.What I am mainly hoping for some perspective on is the choice of ordering the information elements 3 and 4, basically why the third is the third and why the fourth is the fourth, as opposed to the other way around. It seems the premise of socionics model A is that an irrational base will have a stronger mental functioning in the realm of the non-preferred irrational information element of the same static/dynamic type as the base, than in the weakest rational.
    For instance, http://www.socioniko.net/en/articles/gulenko-mbti.html discusses the weakest information elements of INTj and ENTp and the so-called analogues in the Myers-Briggs system, and notes how in socionics, ENTp has feeling the weakest function, rather than sensation: "The same problem arises with defining the weakest function. It must stand at the 4 th position. Therefore, it is sensing for both INTJ and ENTP. According to socionics, it is only half true: ENTP's weakest function is feeling."

    It is, however, a common assumption of the Myers-Briggs typology and certain Jungian equivalent interpretations, that the fourth function will actually be rational in the rationally dominating type and irrational in the irrational type. Not that I accept this or anything as gospel, but their interpretation is that two separate forms of rationality oppose each other.

    Actually I must say that this (the Myers-Briggs principle) appears to not make full sense as is, for while it may be true that the rational mind must focus its energies in one direction or another, the separate kinds of rationality concern different spheres, hence should be employed generally towards somewhat different contents. They would conflict only when apparently addressing the same issue, but at most this could lead to misunderstanding rather than there being a real issue, in so much as the spheres of activity should be separate.
    What I can justify though in this Jungian model is that where one form of rationality is held supreme, the other will tend to function only within the associations permissible by and comprehensible to the other (so they may function in similar spheres while one may be subservient to the mechanisms of the other).

    I think socionics model A also does however make an equally precise/rigid proposition, and my aim here is to get some justification for it. My best estimate is that the socionics analysis says for instance, with a rational base, the only obstruction to the other rational information element in the mental sphere is simultaneity, whereas perhaps it is surmised the unpreferred irrational is both irrational (hence of the not preferred orientation) and not the preferred one of the two, hence the pressure point.

    On a side note, it would appear Immanuel Kant is often regarded as one of the classic Robespierre types, and he did indeed devise much theory in the realm of ethics. It was conducted entirely theoretically and attempted to render explicit and logical something which ultimately depends on people, but it does seem the ethics function might have been instrumental in part, even if his ultimate theories were full of introverted logic.

  2. #2
    Metaphysician thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    7,093
    Mentioned
    194 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The role function has a similar kind of "movement" as the leading function. The vulnerable function is Cautious meaning that it has lower energy (the opposite "version" of the leading function). It's pretty much the exact opposite of the leading function in all relevant aspects.

    Also "ethics" in socionics terminology is not really about ethics in the normal sense. Kant's theories were likely constructed with very little actual use of Fi.
    (Also note that the suggestive function is the same domain as the role function, yet it is weaker in practice than the mobilizing function, also due to the Bold/Cautious dichotomy.)
    The higher, the fewer

    Articles - Questionnaire - Typology Network - Blog

  3. #3
    heretic artificial hyena Troll Nr 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    surrounded by normal people! Help!
    TIM
    ILE-H 7(93?) sp/sx?
    Posts
    2,810
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    IMO
    Suggestive is the lowest functioning IE but person is kind of receptive to it.
    PoLR may come with different flavors and it is bit one sided one aspect might be well accepted while person doesn't give lots of importance in other parts of it and a person might dismiss it completely.

    ILE's Sensation as in sensing is inferior to LII's but action part would be better than LII's.
    extrospection > introspection

    Head type as in being truly head type and probably 7>5. Too divergent, scattered and expressive for typical 5 and that is the preferred way although long term focus usually helps.

Posting Permissions

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