• Defining Specialized Logical Functions by V. Gulenko

    Original article.
    References to dichotomies referenced in this article: Process/Result, Negativist/Positivist, Static/Dynamic

    ModalLogic1.png
    Defining Specialized Logical Functions by V. Gulenko

    Notes: This is Gulenko's early work that preceded his writing on cognitive styles.

    Introduction

    General logic, structuring, will be denoted by function L. Its varieties will then be called specialized logical functions. If one considers that not a single sociotype is same as the other in its logical thinking, from this follows that there must be as many specialized functions as there are sociotypes - sixteen. Specialized functions I will denote with + and - signs as well as make use of operations from propositional logic. In this article when the word "logic" carries the meaning of structural logic rather than business logic.

    1. Sign dichotomies

    Originally I have assigned the positive and negative signs of communicative functions, including logic, to the dichotomy "left/right" [also known as process/result]. "Right" logic I have denoted with symbol +L and left logic by -L. What is the difference between these two logic types?

    Right/Process/Evolutionary logic: straight and absolute, has no reverse feedback. This type of logic as if delineates contours of forms on some background that is then discarded as insignificant. It is characterized by absence of context and is categorical, explicit in judgements.

    Left/Result/Involutionary logic: inversive, derived from straight logic using the operation of subtraction. It is reflexive and considers not the upfront side as much as the back side of the coin. It underlines the background, contextual dependencies of judgements.

    Right logic (process): ILE, SEI, EIE, LSI, SEE, ILI, LSE, EII
    Left logic (result): ESE, LII, SLE, IEI, LIE, ESI, IEE, SLI

    However, there is another way of assign + and - signs that is no less substantiated: using the dichotomy of negativism/positivism. Then +L will denote the logic of positivists while -L will denote the logic of negativists.

    Positivist logic: unified, accordant in all parts. This kind of logic comes closest to what is known as formal logic. An example of this kind of logic is syllogism - inferential sequence of arguments described by Aristotle in "Organon".

    Negativist logic: logic of contradictions. Dialectic, containing in itself oppositions and contradictions. This logical instrument works best when analyzing complicated multilayered systems.

    Positivists: ILE, ESE, LSI, IEI, SEE, LIE, EII, SLI
    Negativists: SEI, LII, EIE, SLE, ILI, ESI, LSE, IEE

    For further in depth analysis of logical processes of different types we will also need another dichotomy that differentiates static logic from dynamic logic.

    Static logic: logic of fixed structures, frozen logic. Logic of the evolved i.e. final state of system.

    Dynamic logic: logic of becoming. This kind of logic deals with transitions that exist within the process of transformation of structures.

    Static types: ILE, LII, EII, IEE, ESI, SEE, LSI, SLE
    Dynamic types: SEI, ESE, LSE, SLI, ILI, EIE, IEI


    2. Four classes of logic

    Recognizing that both of these assignments of plus and minus signs are equally valid, lets try to combine them. If we combine the left/right dichotomy with dichotomy of positivism/negativism, we will get four groups of sociotypes each possessing its own specialized logic. Lets omit the static/dynamic factor out of sign denotation.

    Right-static positivists: Their logic is assigned two plus signs ++L. First plus sign corresponds to "right", second - to "positivist". Deterministic logic. It embodies the classical notion of logic. If-then logic. Logic of subordination, strict hierarchy. This logic is characteristic for written instructions, laws, resolutions. This logic is characteristic for sociotypes ILE, LSI, SEE, EII.

    Right-dynamic negativists: Plus-minus logic +-L. Logic of genesis. It analyzes conception, the birth of one function from another. Reflects continuity of development, unity and struggle of the opposites. And-or logic. Has the most obfuscated style of expression. This logic is characteristic for sociotypes SEI, EIE, ILI, LSE.

    Left-dynamic positivists: Minus-plus logic -+L. Stochastic logic. Logic of probabilities, contingencies and exceptions, of mechanical sums rather than derivatives. Violation of hierarchy. Expression is "conglomerative" as if artificially composed from different styles. This logic is characteristic for sociotypes ESE, LIE, SLI, IEI.

    Left-static negativists: Minus-minus logic --L. Holographic logic. Types that think holographically are able to encompass the entire structure as whole but without specifics. This logic is compensatory - it fills in missing links in a structure. Logic of resolution of contradictions, of correction of mistakes while the system is kept intact. This logic is characteristic for sociotypes LII, SLE, ESI, IEE.

    To summarize:
    Process Logic(+) Positive Logic(+) - Deterministic logic
    Result Logic(-) Positive Logic(+) - Stochastic logic
    Process Logic(+) Negative Logic(-) - Genesis logic
    Result Logic(-) Negative Logic(-) - Hologprahic logic

    These groups coincide with already known in socionics rings of revision [supervision]. This fact confirms the assumption that relations of revision have the maximal structure-forming capacity.


    3. Analysis of individual logic functions

    Deterministic Logic:
    - ILE: Logic of isomorphism, analogies, transfer of structures from one area to another. Lets denote this logic function with sign of identity: =
    - LSI: The logic of subordination, of strict hierarchy. The logic of progression, of implication: if A, then must be B. Lets denote this logic function with arrow pointing to the right: ->
    - SEE: The logic of co-subordination. It carries over the equivalence of two objects: if A, then B, and vice versa. Lets denote this logic function with arrow pointing both ways: <->
    - EII: The logic of being subordinate. Inclusion of some elements into some class. Following the goals of oversystem. Logic of reverse implication: A, because B. Lets denote this logic function with arrow pointing to the left: <-

    Genesis Logic:
    - SEI: Logic of synthesis. It extinguishes differences and underlines similarities. Union of the opposites. Operation of conjunction. Lets denote this logic with sign /\
    [Conjunction: The statement A /\ B is true if A and B are both true; else it is false.]
    - EIE: The logic of differentiation, of discovery of derivative functions. Convergence to the limit. Measurement of rate of change of a variable. Isolation of constants in that which is changing. Lets denote this logic with sign >-
    - ILI: Logic of parallel progression. Branching. Disjunctive logic that separates the opposites. Logic of safeguards, of spare exits. Lets denote this logic with sign \/
    [Disjunction: The statement A \/ B is true if A or B (or both) are true; if both are false, the statement is false.]
    - LSE: The logic of integration, of discovery of the original, archetypal function. The logic of propulsion. The changing constantly. Lets denote this logic with sign -<


    Stochastic Logic:
    - IEI: Logic of chance, lack of causalities. Anti-determinism. Natural violations of the hierarchy. Logic of associations. Function of anti-implication. Lets denote it as <+
    - ESE: The logic of inequalities, of lack of analogies and correspondences. Logic of heterogeneity that expresses the separateness of the two classes of phenomena. Lets denote this logical function with sign of crossed identities =/=
    - SLI: Logic of insubordination, lack of inclusion into the system. Exit from subordination. Violation of the hierarchy from the bottom. The logic of independence. Lets denote this logical function with sign of crossed reverse implication +>
    - LIE: Logic of choice between two alternatives. Mutual exclusion. Risk, which leads to success. The logic of finding a way into oversystem, formation of emergent properties. Or-or logic. Strict disjunction. Lets denote it with <+>

    Holographic Logic:
    - ESI: The logic of self-preservation, of avoidance of collision. Movement via anti-parallel courses. Or-not function. Lets denote it by downwards arrow (Peirce arrow) ↓
    - SLE: The logic of negation of differentiation. Overcoming of the limit, of the barrier. Concentration, contraction. Focus on that which is least stable, most fragile. The logic of elimination, of destruction. Lets denote it by >+
    - 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 ↑
    - IEE: Logic of anti-intergration. Dysfunctionality. Lets denote it by +<

    .
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Four Classes of Logic - V. Gulenko (Translation) started by EyeSeeCold View original post
    Comments 9 Comments
    1. Xpauzed's Avatar
      Xpauzed -
      Does anyone want to help me define these more in depth?
      I believe that this information can be very useful to type people adequately.
    1. Sol's Avatar
      Sol -
      Quote Originally Posted by Xpauzed View Post
      Does anyone want to help me define these more in depth?
      Jung's and Augustinavichiute's hypotheses are the only what you should trust to. A part of this as Reinin's traits is baseless there.

      > I believe that this information can be very useful to type people adequately.

      The usage of doubtful baseless fantasies which high probably are incorrect will reduce the chance to identify types correctly. While basic theory should be enough to identify types good - it just needs practical training in this like in anything.

      Make a typing theme. To understand correctly own type is useful to understand the theory.
    1. Eliza Thomason's Avatar
      Eliza Thomason -
      @Xpauzed, thanks for bringing up an excellent article I had not seen! I have very little time to analyze it or write about it though right now though, so I can't help there. Sol is quite sour on Reinins; my view is completely different. I have found Reinins consistently useful. I favor pretty much everything Gulenko writes anyway. (Sol, not so much - and he has other favorites).

      [I updated my profile name as that sure describes me.

      "Types that think holographically are able to encompass the entire structure as whole but without specifics. This logic is compensatory - it fills in missing links in a structure."

      Exactly.

      _____
      I was inspired by Gulenko to edit my profile name!
    1. Eliza Thomason's Avatar
      Eliza Thomason -
      @Sol: you are truly this, and it shows in your writing: "The logic of subordination, of strict hierarchy. The logic of progression, of implication: if A, then must be B."

      You are NOT this: "The logic of integration, of discovery of the original, archetypal function. The logic of propulsion. The changing constantly." Nope. Definitely not. No wonder you think Reinins makes no sense, if you think that is supposed to describe you.
    1. BrightDemonSheep96's Avatar
      BrightDemonSheep96 -
      Somehow @Sol's answer seemed predetermined... I rest my case.
    1. BrightDemonSheep96's Avatar
      BrightDemonSheep96 -
      Well, main problem here is that the author himself is logic base. This means that it also neglets varieties in perspectives. Logical statement is where they listen most attentively.
    1. BrightDemonSheep96's Avatar
      BrightDemonSheep96 -
    1. Sol's Avatar
      Sol -
      Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
      you are truly this, and it shows in your writing: "The logic of subordination
      Gulenko writes a lot of baseless heretical nonsense. Partly there is a fiting.

      My subordination on the forum mainly follows from objective relation to knowledge in its theme. I have the experience higher than most you may meet here and read better sources than English talkers. While I have no high respect to formal subordination and prefer the truth above that - not what Ti valued types do, in common. Not much I like any rules - as prefer the reason and the usefulness, notice how rules are inappropriate in some situations. I never liked math, so had grades in it. I'm not attracted to finding laws to link anything with anything, I'm accented on more practical.
      Also I'm not shy and quiet introvert. I easily make contacts with people and mostly open to talk with them.
      And most important are IR - I do not fit to Fe valued types as feel better from Fi valued people while Fe annoy me often and make tired. I recommend to check my bloggers lists to understand what people I like more - you may suppose their types yourself and I suspect it will not be that most my Fi are Fe in your perception (I typed them by nonverbal VI, you may try it too). Without IR I'd could to have doubts too as types are close and tests gave me LSI mostly.
      Anyway, VI is very important to understand the type - it would be useful to talk with me IRL or to see a video to understand better my types related traits. And good to have not far LSI to compare us.

      > The logic of integration

      I like to gather many facts to understand the whole picture or to choose the best.

      > discovery of the original

      new discoveries is closer to N, but not T

      > The logic of propulsion.

      I have no problem or aversion to describe algorithms and a process - how to do something. For example, I wrote short texts how to use some technics for my relatives: step by step manuals.

      > The changing constantly

      significantly relates to Ni

      > No wonder you think Reinins makes no sense

      Reinin's traits are baseless.
      And partly contradict to normal theory. For example, a fact relates to Te - objective trait of the reality. But fact is static info - it's not about dynamic or something in a process.

      -

      I think your type as J and hope to see your video to understand it better. You may pm your video sometimes. Mb you are base Fi and I'd found you charming. Your texts seem some casual so ESI has higher chance among those.
    1. Eliza Thomason's Avatar
      Eliza Thomason -
      Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
      Gulenko writes a lot of baseless heretical nonsense. Partly there is a fiting.

      My subordination on the forum mainly follows from objective relation to knowledge in its theme. I have the experience higher than most you may meet here and read better sources than English talkers. While I have no high respect to formal subordination and prefer the truth above that - not what Ti valued types do, in common. Not much I like any rules - as prefer the reason and the usefulness, notice how rules are inappropriate in some situations. I never liked math, so had grades in it. I'm not attracted to finding laws to link anything with anything, I'm accented on more practical.
      Also I'm not shy and quiet introvert. I easily make contacts with people and mostly open to talk with them.
      And most important are IR - I do not fit to Fe valued types as feel better from Fi valued people while Fe annoy me often and make tired. I recommend to check my bloggers lists to understand what people I like more - you may suppose their types yourself and I suspect it will not be that most my Fi are Fe in your perception (I typed them by nonverbal VI, you may try it too). Without IR I'd could to have doubts too as types are close and tests gave me LSI mostly.
      Anyway, VI is very important to understand the type - it would be useful to talk with me IRL or to see a video to understand better my types related traits. And good to have not far LSI to compare us.

      > The logic of integration

      I like to gather many facts to understand the whole picture or to choose the best.

      > discovery of the original

      new discoveries is closer to N, but not T

      > The logic of propulsion.

      I have no problem or aversion to describe algorithms and a process - how to do something. For example, I wrote short texts how to use some technics for my relatives: step by step manuals.

      > The changing constantly

      significantly relates to Ni

      > No wonder you think Reinins makes no sense

      Reinin's traits are baseless.
      And partly contradict to normal theory. For example, a fact relates to Te - objective trait of the reality. But fact is static info - it's not about dynamic or something in a process.

      -

      I think your type as J and hope to see your video to understand it better. You may pm your video sometimes. Mb you are base Fi and I'd found you charming. Your texts seem some casual so ESI has higher chance among those.
      Charming, I'll take that! : ) My mom was ESI and I took care of her some years til the end and I often reminded myself I was handicapped at understanding her, so I tried harder. In Heaven I will fully "see" her and understand her and I am looking forward to that. There were many things I admired about her, especially that she gave me and my brothers a stable childhood and a secure home.

      I can see why you might say J because that has to be very developed in my work as a teacher... and my Mom instilled J values... But truly I am a P and it is a struggle constantly trying to live J values... but my husband helps a lot! And I need daily help. Not only with my functioning, my getting out the door with everything I need at an early hour, but work stuff I bring home. He is all in. Tonight I was rather freaking out about stuff I have to download and update and he was doing it for me. Also he organizes my student work online. I need support to do it all. He is retired so that is his "job".... that, and working on our house, a never-ending project. But it works. Apparently, 2 P's = 1 J