Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Explanation required:

  1. #1
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Explanation required:

    http://the16types.no-ip.info/functions.php?function=Se


    ? I don't fully understand these pages...

    Positive(short range):
    Deduction of authority, insubordination, protection, defense, retaliation, counterattack, hardness, upholding of the interests, strong-willed pressure from below upwards, will power, possession;
    Negative (long range):
    Capture of authority, submission, attack, aggression, attack, the initiative, persistence, insistence, strong-willed pressure from top to down, the statement of the interests due to others, overthrow, weakness, lack of will, mastering.
    What is the difference between 'positive' and 'negative'

    and, specifically, in the 'negative' list: is there any meaning to the order? --- "overthrow, weakness, lack of will, mastering" ... submission, attack, aggression....

    ? How are all of those in the same category?
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Neither do I.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    it has to do with the +/- model

    http://the16types.no-ip.info/groups.php?groupid=5

    - = long range
    + = short range

    basically +Pe -Ji +Je -Pi = alpha/gamma and -Pe +Ji -Je +Pi = beta/delta

  4. #4
    Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Former USSR (global nomad)
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    2,050
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Explanation required:

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP
    http://the16types.no-ip.info/functions.php?function=Se


    ? I don't fully understand these pages...

    Positive(short range):
    Deduction of authority, insubordination, protection, defense, retaliation, counterattack, hardness, upholding of the interests, strong-willed pressure from below upwards, will power, possession;
    Negative (long range):
    Capture of authority, submission, attack, aggression, attack, the initiative, persistence, insistence, strong-willed pressure from top to down, the statement of the interests due to others, overthrow, weakness, lack of will, mastering.
    What is the difference between 'positive' and 'negative'

    and, specifically, in the 'negative' list: is there any meaning to the order? --- "overthrow, weakness, lack of will, mastering" ... submission, attack, aggression....

    ? How are all of those in the same category?
    That's okay... you don't have to use the + and - categories to be a 'good' socionist . Many don't like them or use them because they are logically superfluous (you can say " blocked with " and " blocked with " instead).

  5. #5
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There's really nothing to understand - it's only a nomenclature.

    If you prefer, - means that the renin dichotomies associated with the function are ascending, and + means that they are descending. But it's nothing important.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  6. #6
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Knowing about them is useful to remind yourself that a type is not a sum of independent functions, that, as Rick said, the in works differently from the one in . But if you're already aware of that, you don't have to pay much attention to them.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

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

    Default

    Well now from what I understand, the same guy who came up with the positive/negative nomenclature also said something about the IM order for incoming information being different from the actual function order. i.e. Se->Fi->Ti->Ne for INTjs as opposed to Ti->Ne->Fi->Se. Is there any truth to that?

  8. #8
    Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Former USSR (global nomad)
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    2,050
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Well now from what I understand, the same guy who came up with the positive/negative nomenclature also said something about the IM order for incoming information being different from the actual function order. i.e. Se->Fi->Ti->Ne for INTjs as opposed to Ti->Ne->Fi->Se. Is there any truth to that?
    Sounds bogus to me!

  9. #9
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It has to do with the milestones found in between of quadra transitions. - functions work toward such milestones, and rarely past them, whereas + functions build up from what was learned at the milestone, with little patience to finding and reaching more of such milestones ('let others do it').

    Ne->Ti->Se->Fi is the only cycle that makes sense to me, as it is the one seen in idea transitions between quadra's. It has to be admitted that it is a leap of faith to suppose that something similar happens at a smaller scale to the stuff 'found' in our brains.

  10. #10
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Explanation required:

    Positive(short range):
    Deduction of authority, insubordination, protection, defense, retaliation, counterattack, hardness, upholding of the interests, strong-willed pressure from below upwards, will power, possession;
    Negative (long range):
    Capture of authority, submission, attack, aggression, attack, the initiative, persistence, insistence, strong-willed pressure from top to down, the statement of the interests due to others, overthrow, weakness, lack of will, mastering.
    [table:0c4ee76b20][mrow:0c4ee76b20] + (short range)[mcol:0c4ee76b20] - (long range)[row:0c4ee76b20]Deduction of authority[col:0c4ee76b20]Capture of authority
    [row:0c4ee76b20]insubordination[col:0c4ee76b20]submission[row:0c4ee76b20]protection[col:0c4ee76b20]attack[row:0c4ee76b20]defense[col:0c4ee76b20]aggression[row:0c4ee76b20]retaliation[col:0c4ee76b20]attack[row:0c4ee76b20]counterattack[col:0c4ee76b20]the initiative[row:0c4ee76b20]hardness[col:0c4ee76b20]persistence[row:0c4ee76b20]upholding of the interests[col:0c4ee76b20]insistence[row:0c4ee76b20]strong-willed pressure from below upwards[col:0c4ee76b20]strong-willed pressure from top to down[row:0c4ee76b20]will power[col:0c4ee76b20]the statement of the interests due to others[row:0c4ee76b20]possession[col:0c4ee76b20]overthrow[row:0c4ee76b20][col:0c4ee76b20]weakness[row:0c4ee76b20][col:0c4ee76b20]lack of will[row:0c4ee76b20][col:0c4ee76b20]mastering
    [/table:0c4ee76b20]
    ? It seems like they match up... but then......

    I'm trying to figure out if the order is supposed to be comparison, of if the order is completely irrelevant.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  11. #11
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    - is beta-se
    + is gamma-se

    if somebody takes authority, only then there can be insubordination
    if somebody attacks, only then there can be a counterattack

    so on
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Actually from my PoV the 4,3,1,2 order seems to describe my thought better. It makes a lot more sense to imagine the eighth function laying the foundation for the PoLR than for the base. Secondly, I don't see the necessity for a connection between the representation orders of the functions in information processing and their relative strength levels. I think the notion that the order must progress from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 is guesswork at best. For one thing, 8 to 4 means that the creative art "eureka moments" set the stage for the comprehension of a 4th function reality. If you think about it, it actually makes much more sense.

  13. #13
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think the notion that the order must progress from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 is guesswork at best.
    Whose guesswork are you talking about here..? The Ne->Ti->Se->Fi succession is not based on any type's function orderings. It applies to every type in the static group, for each of which the orderings are naturally different.

    Also the quadra succesions in regard to ideas are gleaned from observation (or the closest thing to it you'll find in typology), so there is no challenging that the ordering exists. There is only room for judging what it does and does not apply to.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    I think the notion that the order must progress from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 is guesswork at best.
    Whose guesswork are you talking about here..? The Ne->Ti->Se->Fi succession is not based on any type's function orderings. It applies to every type in the static group, for each of which the orderings are naturally different.

    Also the quadra succesions in regard to ideas are gleaned from observation (or the closest thing to it you'll find in typology), so there is no challenging that the ordering exists. There is only room for judging what it does and does not apply to.
    I think I need more information. Do you have links to these discoveries? (I looked on Rick's site and found nothing....)

  15. #15
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ok. I have to admit I'm making a few assumptions here, though I believe they are well-founded ones. The notion of a succession of quadras in the devolopment of ideas surfaces on pretty much every socionics site. It is a concept so taken for granted that I can only imagine that it has to have been observed at some point. I have been witness to parts of its workings myself.

    This is annoying... Convinced as I am that what I said was true I can not find materials to proove it. If you're not convinced by smilingeyes' posts you could ask him which of Reinin/Gulenko's works he based his writings on... I'm sure those would be convincing.

    - More to follow on this.

  16. #16
    Smilingeyes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,228
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @labcoat:

    The cyclical order of functions is all the way from Jung.

    N - T - S - F -

    You quoted him on this yourself recently I think. "T can be supported by S or N but never F." Or text to that effect.

    I don't know whether Jung had direction for this movement and I expect he wouldn't since the cycle can go to either direction. The progression of functions being N->T->S->F is from quadra progression, that being the direction of a developing idea or process.
    First eliminate every possible source of error. Thence success is inevitable.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is a note about that in the Jung lexicon. I'd never imagined that it was universal, although I was struck by its familiarity.

    What about their orientations? Is there any dictum on that point?

Posting Permissions

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