Delta descriptions of information elements and functions

[nanashi]

INTp requesting delta quadra descriptions of functions for INFj mother. She said last night that no one has written explanations which make sense to her.

Thank you

[Beautiful sky]

-instructs other to look at their own personal subjective morals and to cooperate or examine their behavior with regards to good/bad moral boundaries, holds close relations, tries to form bonds and works on these bonds to bring people close to their own understanding of what an ideal person should act, look, and think like. Can look and be rigid because it makes judgements and calls that aren't often realistically outside their subjective understanding; emotional, highly sensitive and gets easily offended as well as holds on to hurt emotions, does not easily let go of other's offenses towards them, but forgives their partner and tries not to remind them of the offense again.
-looks at ideas, possibilities, filters and looks for ideas, interested in mass amount of information and filters things down to the large pictures, makes connections and patterns when people ask them to help them;


Does this help or do you want more?

[UDP]

he probably could use wikisocionics male female portraits, the erotic roles, and agustas works. or that stuff like from starfall in beta about socionics.org profiles.

[Galen]

I'll give it a shot:

: The only real way I can describe in a way that makes sense to me is a sort of view of "essences" in things/people. Within the first few minutes if not seconds of interaction, valuers can pick up on a sort of essential nature of a person. The nature of such essences are inherently static in nature, and thus the liking or disliking of someone is not situational, rather that essence is seen as a constant and not a variable. This is a very inexplicable process, at least in my personal experience: how I come to understand this nature of another person is relatively unknown to me, and instead it simply happens. Even when I try to ponder why I like or dislike something or someone, I can never find a satisfying conclusion. To valuers, to say what they like or dislike about somebody does not adequately explain why they like or dislike the person in question. This can be very annoying to / valuers who typically seek discrete characteristics in people upon which judgments are made.

: In a sense, valuers see the world as abstracted from itself. They retain the ideas of the objects they see or view or understand in the world, but these ideas are not seen as necessarily tied to or specifically intrinsic to the objects in which they manifest. Of course valuers are capable of viewing or experiencing the external world, but the information retained from the outside world manifests in ideas of what the external world is like and not necessarily how the physical world actually exists. This is a difficult sort of thing to describe, but it's like the world and the objects in the world are seen as a conglomeration of discrete patterns, where the concept of the pattern at hand is more readily emphasized than the physicality of the expressions of such patterns. With this sort of information at hand, valuers can seemingly manipulate their ideas of the world via manipulating these ideas that they retain from the physical world, and the physical manifestations of these manipulations are seen as a secondary act, if it's something considered at all. Since so little attention is paid to the physical world, valuers find it very easy to lose track of either the physical states of foreign objects or the locations of such objects, often resulting in the loss of such objects.

[nanashi]

I'm a she. I'm a she. I'm a she.

[nanashi]

I heartily thank the three of you. Very helpful.

[Beautiful sky]

I heartily thank the three of you. Very helpful.

You're superly welcome

[nanashi]

Oh! Oh! Could you possibly provide your answers about all of the functions? That would be great

[Beautiful sky]

Sure, but it will be a subjective version:

-function that determines the methods of how to do things, NOT simply stating the rules of things, but providing a step by step plan of action, so to say. They emphasize on efficiency, so they do come up with a method that saves energy in the process of the work flow; their objective is to eliminate unnecessary and direction less work that their duals will sometimes then to do (when they are distracted and unorganized).

-function looks to comfortable state of being, whether that's relaxing or taking part in a person's subjective understanding of that state. One example is enjoying things of hedonistic nature, like pleasant surroundings, good company, person's subjective feelings derived from the specific food(s) that they may enjoy. The person derives pleasures not from objects as would but from their subjective feelings produced by these objects...like the object may not look physically pretty, but this person likes the objects for the sensations they get from that object. Since this is a subjective function, I may be pretty to some types with this function ego block holders, but unattractive or unpleasant to others...their experiences with this function are subjective.

[Suz]

I can try

My understanding of Si is that it's one's perception of the physical world via how that person experiences it. So, the distinction from Se would be that Se is looking at an object and just seeing it as it is. Nothing else contaminating that use of senses. Perceiving the object through Si would be using the senses to perceive how the object is affecting them.

Example:
To an Si-ego, a couch is not just a couch as it would be to an Se-ego. Through Si, a couch is a haven of cushy softness with a pleasantly silky covering that is oh-so-relaxing to lounge in. Of course I dont think an SLI would say it like that (an SEI would though).

also applies to bad sensations and neutral sensations like exercise. Well actually it seems that exercise is a good sensation to Si-egos. They have a really good sense of what state their bodies are in and how to keep the body in tip top working condition.

Along those same lines, I think Si also applies to appreciation for health, and a great ability to work with the hands and generally not be clumsy in anything involving physical movement. The way i understand it is, they are hyperaware of every little motion of their bodies in space, sort of like in the movies, the slow-motion shots of some guy evading a bullet. though that would be more Se probably, being hyperaware of objects in space. I guess Se and Si sort of work together anyway, so it's both i think.

[Suz]

Briefly my understanding of :

Te-valuing is an appreciation for information. ACCURATE information. Lots of it.

as opposed to Ti-valuing which is an appreciation for things being logical and systematic.


Te egos will be very adept at acquiring information, and very much enjoy sharing it with others. This works well for people with Te-HA (IEE and SEE) whose mission it is to be knowledgeable but have difficulty acquiring knowledge, as well as people with Te-DS (EII and SEI) who just loooooooooove listening to a knowledgeable person and have lots of admiration and respect for people like that.

Te also involves an ability to be efficient and practical, but i'm not sure how to explain this part too well.

[Beautiful sky]

The storehouse of information that and types can amass in their brain gives us interesting

[Galen]

: From what I've been able to understand, is sort of a view of the world as possessing an infinite number of discrete variables or different states, ones that are constantly changing in value. I've always sort of equated with "trivia," even though a ton of renowned trivia buffs are Ti valuers (see John Carpenter of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire fame). I'm sort of hypothesizing that valuers, or at least those who are strong in , instinctively feel some sort of need to keep themselves up-to-date with the current condition of the various variables of interest, although I'll need to hear from valuers if this is an apt description. I'll try to update this later after I do a bit more pondering on the subject.


: I tried to teach socionics to my ESFj and ISFp relatives about a month ago, and once we got to we hit a bit of a snag. I didn't feel really able to explain it well, and they didn't really understand what I was saying as a result. Then I stole a page out of Ashton's book and described it as "homeostasis," and instantly their minds clicked and connected with that idea.

To the best of my ability, I can describe as a sort of awareness of a "balance" between things in the physical world. sees the physical world as containing a continuum by which a homeostatic state can be observed or reached. While this next part isn't really a literal view of how valuers see the world, valuers are sort of in observance of a field or plane, one that's constantly encountering dips and bumps that are seen as disrupting a desired balanced, level nature. As such, once a disruption in their field has become noticed, valuers attempt to correct this seeming imbalance via whatever means they see fit to do so. As opposed to valuers, whose focus is on the specific objects themselves, valuers are more bent on their own subjective reactions to the objects at hand. In that sense Workaholics was sort of correct in asserting that a couch is more than "just a couch" to people.

[silverchris9]

Yuck. I don't like these descriptions, even though they're probably accurate.

[UDP]

This post is a bit of a tangent but something that came up for me

: From what I've been able to understand, is sort of a view of the world as possessing an infinite number of discrete variables or different states, ones that are constantly changing in value. I've always sort of equated with "trivia," even though a ton of renowned trivia buffs are Ti valuers (see John Carpenter of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire fame). I'm sort of hypothesizing that valuers, or at least those who are strong in , instinctively feel some sort of need to keep themselves up-to-date with the current condition of the various variables of interest, although I'll need to hear from valuers if this is an apt description. I'll try to update this later after I do a bit more pondering on the subject.


: I tried to teach socionics to my ESFj and ISFp relatives about a month ago, and once we got to we hit a bit of a snag. I didn't feel really able to explain it well, and they didn't really understand what I was saying as a result. Then I stole a page out of Ashton's book and described it as "homeostasis," and instantly their minds clicked and connected with that idea.

To the best of my ability, I can describe as a sort of awareness of a "balance" between things in the physical world. sees the physical world as containing a continuum by which a homeostatic state can be observed or reached. While this next part isn't really a literal view of how valuers see the world, valuers are sort of in observance of a field or plane, one that's constantly encountering dips and bumps that are seen as disrupting a desired balanced, level nature. As such, once a disruption in their field has become noticed, valuers attempt to correct this seeming imbalance via whatever means they see fit to do so. As opposed to valuers, whose focus is on the specific objects themselves, valuers are more bent on their own subjective reactions to the objects at hand. In that sense Workaholics was sort of correct in asserting that a couch is more than "just a couch" to people.

Heh heh heh, and before Ashton said it, Expat said it.

Wayyyyyy back in the day.

That's not a bad description of Si that you just wrote, though, Galen. Homeostasis, yes, but to me it goes even further than that. But I suppose that is likely because it's Te+Si for me.

There's something about Si to me that is sort of like inverted intuition; instead of seeing a bunch of possibilities or ideas or paths I would or could follow, I see what can happen, I see capabilities. Yes, true, sometimes I don't think of all the various different ways something could be applied, but I know what something can or cannot do. I think this is something overlooked about Si.

IT's probably related to having both strong Si and Se, though. (as, at least in my book and model A, you have to have both of those elements strong or weak at the same time). But what I'm getting at is this sort of internal manipulation of an object or something else, in a very physical way.

Someone with "weak S" said they were in awe of how I could balance certain things or do certain complex tasks. I don't think "balance" is related to socionics per se, but, there's something about it. Notice how Si porl types can be sort of naturally very clumsy or trip over themselves, their body flows in a certain, albeit graceful way. Something like that.


But again, what I'm getting at is this sort of 'internal control', or knowing what something can or cannot do and how to do it. Take that and apply it to objects, even food sometimes, or the body. I feel like N-ego types can only try to compensate for what I naturally know or feel by a lot of "reading" and their advice or ideas about things always seem very technical, heh, or theoretical.

So IDK, there's something other than just "homeostasis" going on; more than just balance. It has to do with awareness about what leads to balance or affects balance. What influences such an internal state.

By nature of who I am, I probably am (over?) emphasizing the power-aspect of it, or what it controls, or how it could be used for different ends. But it's there.

[Suz]

wow ryu, thanks for the insight!!!

[Cyrano]

: From what I've been able to understand, is sort of a view of the world as possessing an infinite number of discrete variables or different states, ones that are constantly changing in value. I've always sort of equated with "trivia," even though a ton of renowned trivia buffs are Ti valuers (see John Carpenter of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire fame). I'm sort of hypothesizing that valuers, or at least those who are strong in , instinctively feel some sort of need to keep themselves up-to-date with the current condition of the various variables of interest, although I'll need to hear from valuers if this is an apt description. I'll try to update this later after I do a bit more pondering on the subject.


: I tried to teach socionics to my ESFj and ISFp relatives about a month ago, and once we got to we hit a bit of a snag. I didn't feel really able to explain it well, and they didn't really understand what I was saying as a result. Then I stole a page out of Ashton's book and described it as "homeostasis," and instantly their minds clicked and connected with that idea.

To the best of my ability, I can describe as a sort of awareness of a "balance" between things in the physical world. sees the physical world as containing a continuum by which a homeostatic state can be observed or reached. While this next part isn't really a literal view of how valuers see the world, valuers are sort of in observance of a field or plane, one that's constantly encountering dips and bumps that are seen as disrupting a desired balanced, level nature. As such, once a disruption in their field has become noticed, valuers attempt to correct this seeming imbalance via whatever means they see fit to do so. As opposed to valuers, whose focus is on the specific objects themselves, valuers are more bent on their own subjective reactions to the objects at hand. In that sense Workaholics was sort of correct in asserting that a couch is more than "just a couch" to people.

As a (SLI, ISTp) I can tell you that for me, means that if I can see or touch it, I know it's real. Everything else is conjecture and not yet "certified" in my mind. So intuition and emotional thoughts are held in lower regard, as unproven or subject to change. This pass/fail filter helps us to have clarity, but also limits our ability to draw inferences and anticipate. We counter that weakness by sharpening our ability to adapt to new information on the fly. This is why we are poor strategists, but excellent tacticians. We don't know what you are going to do next, but we are ready to react to what we see you do.

By the way, my intuitive friends are amazing in their ability to think ahead. They absorb everything. For example, I have an INTJ friend, absolutely brilliant. Absorbs all facts and details and anticipates the reactions of others. Understand emotions, and how to serve them. He can predict events with uncanny prescience. I'm left in awe of the depth and breadth of his understanding of all seen and unseen things.

His weakness is that he can't separate the important bits from the trivia. He actually reads the instruction manuals, gets overwhelmed by timed party games, He is slow to react, and unwilling to take calculated risks. He takes everything seriously and is all-or-nothing in everything. There is no, "let's just do it and see what happens," in his vocabulary.

[duality is cringe]

Heh heh heh, and before Ashton said it, Expat said it.

Link your source.

A 16types search history concludes that there is no known instance of user Expat ever using the word homeostasis either in isolation or in reference to .

Keep your political bs out of here, UDP.

[duality is cringe]

: I tried to teach socionics to my ESFj and ISFp relatives about a month ago, and once we got to we hit a bit of a snag. I didn't feel really able to explain it well, and they didn't really understand what I was saying as a result. Then I stole a page out of Ashton's book and described it as "homeostasis," and instantly their minds clicked and connected with that idea.

To the best of my ability, I can describe as a sort of awareness of a "balance" between things in the physical world. sees the physical world as containing a continuum by which a homeostatic state can be observed or reached. While this next part isn't really a literal view of how valuers see the world, valuers are sort of in observance of a field or plane, one that's constantly encountering dips and bumps that are seen as disrupting a desired balanced, level nature. As such, once a disruption in their field has become noticed, valuers attempt to correct this seeming imbalance via whatever means they see fit to do so. As opposed to valuers, whose focus is on the specific objects themselves, valuers are more bent on their own subjective reactions to the objects at hand.

: The only real way I can describe in a way that makes sense to me is a sort of view of "essences" in things/people. Within the first few minutes if not seconds of interaction, valuers can pick up on a sort of essential nature of a person. The nature of such essences are inherently static in nature, and thus the liking or disliking of someone is not situational, rather that essence is seen as a constant and not a variable. This is a very inexplicable process, at least in my personal experience: how I come to understand this nature of another person is relatively unknown to me, and instead it simply happens. Even when I try to ponder why I like or dislike something or someone, I can never find a satisfying conclusion. To valuers, to say what they like or dislike about somebody does not adequately explain why they like or dislike the person in question. This can be very annoying to / valuers who typically seek discrete characteristics in people upon which judgments are made.

:boner:

[UDP]

Link your source.

A 16types search history concludes that there is no known instance of user Expat ever using the word homeostasis either in isolation or in reference to .

Keep your political bs out of here, UDP.

Hm. "Searching" as being conclusive is a bit odd. The search function is definitely not the end-all to such things. (not to mention that chunks of the forum are simply lost). Anyway, If you're that concerned about it, you could be more convincing in your 'evidence'. If you want to search of all of Expat's posts and Ashton's posts, go ahead right ahead. I'll pass, myself.

Politics? Apparently using my former username is some sort of big deal in this whole political arena. Do you have a lot to defend - Are you an Ashton worshiper, a proud Socionix boy?

I wouldn't say homeostasis is a legacy term or concept for either of those two (is it?). To me that concept has been around for a long time, like way back when I first joined this forum.

[duality is cringe]

Hm. "Searching" as being conclusive is a bit odd. The search function is definitely not the end-all to such things. (not to mention that chunks of the forum are simply lost). Anyway, If you're that concerned about it, you could be more convincing in your 'evidence'.

What "evidence" would I need to convince with? You're the one making claims about who said what, with no citation of sources.

If you want to search of all of Expat's posts and Ashton's posts, go ahead right ahead. I'll pass, myself.

I'll pass as well. Why bother attempting to search all of both forum users' posts when I can just do a quick search of the word 'homeostasis' on both forums and see which users have used it on what dates?

Politics? Apparently using my former username is some sort of big deal in this whole political arena.

No, but it's the name that comes to mind when I skim your posts. You aren't a siginifigant enough figure in any socionics political arena.

Do you have a lot to defend - Are you an Ashton worshiper, a proud Socionix boy?

lame.

I wouldn't say homeostasis is a legacy term or concept for either of those two (is it?). To me that concept has been around for a long time, like way back when I first joined this forum.

Personally, I really couldn't care less where the term originated. As I last recall, you were the one making irrelevant (and apparently unsupportable) claims about who deserved credit for it.

Should I take this to mean that you 'worship' Expat?

EDIT: The rest of this conversation should either be moved elsewhere or taken to PMs, should it continue. No to need further ruin this thread with it.

[Park]

This is a very old description of Si, but I quite like it:

Introverted sensing gets caught up in activities it enjoys. If you have a hobbie of carving out models, then you can get lost in your workshop for hours. If you enjoy a sport, you can practice it in your solitaire until fatigue kicks in; and you enjoy it. Working with something you love is where you get your energy and confidence from. You also dislike it when people try and predict what will happen; such as while watching a movie. You prefer to watch and enjoy what happens. You love details and specifics and vivid explanations. You prefer to see things in clarity rather than vagueness. You prefer useful, practical things. You can sometimes ignore the problems of the future, deaming them as unimportant. Your comfort and personal space always take priority number one. You might have something important that you will have to take care of, but ignore it if you are not in the right mood. Losing track of time is a common problem for Introverted Sensing. This can lead to you either being late, or becoming overly neurotic about losing track of time. You might try to be early when you are going somewhere so you don't have to worry about time. Your body also has an ability of "taking care of itself". This means that if something doesn't feel right to you, such as being tired, you will naturally fall asleep ignoring other obligations or tasks. You also dislike it when people suggest to you how to take care of yourself; you feel everyone should take care of their own personal space. Introverted Sensing also focuses on the experiences of the past a lot. This means that you can play back a past moment in your head, reliving it. You also observe often; when you are interested in something. This means that you can analyze people, their body language, etc.. You are conscious of your own body and can usually adapt and control it; such as you'd do while playing a sport. You are sensitive to touch and may not like it when people touch you who you want to push away from. You can also get into a comfort zone because of this. Ted Williams would always order his baseball bats the same exact width. One day, he got a bundle and grasped one of the bats in his hand. He immediately said, "too thin" and sent the bats back. Sure enough, the bats that were sent to him were 1/8th" too thin. Introverted Sensing does have to do with appearance, but when you see no need to socialize or are not around people, you can ignore this.

[DirectorAbbie]

I don't believe in introducing socionics in paragraphs. So here are some threads I've picked out in order of value. I just went through my subscription list and found the simple ones your mom may like to read.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...they-talk.html
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-function.html
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...er-people.html
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...criptions.html
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...each-type.html
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...s-duality.html
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-re-names.html
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...hing-te-y.html

Here are the descriptions I learned with:
Structure, Internal Consistency, Strategy
Productivity, Efficiency, Gathering Information
Relationships, Hidden Feelings
Visible Emotions
Understanding Physical Surroundings
Power, Force, Reacting Quickly
Making Predictions, Good Guesses, Procrastination
Possibilities, Crazy Ideas, Variety

[Galen]

Visible Emotions

Ugh, I get so annoyed when people equate with overt emotionality. There are bunches of cases of EXFjs who aren't overtly emotional and yet are still definitely Fe: Neil Diamond, Geoffrey Rush, Alan Rickman, my uncle, my ex's dad, etc etc etc.