Originally Posted by hitta
Have you ever heard of symbolic logic?
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Yeah, the shit that you wrote?Um, if you read about information metabolism on wikisocion you would feel stupid.Bleh, this is why WikiSocion is going to be so useful when fully operational. Instead of having to teach them everything every time some newby with "new ideas" shows up, we can just tell them to shuttup and read WikiSocion when they don't know what they're talking about
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...ion_metabolismYeah, the shit that you wrote?Um, if you read about information metabolism on wikisocion you would feel stupid.Bleh, this is why WikiSocion is going to be so useful when fully operational. Instead of having to teach them everything every time some newby with "new ideas" shows up, we can just tell them to shuttup and read WikiSocion when they don't know what they're talking about
The idea that an introverted function cannot express itself without an extroverted function is basic socionics. Thats not my theory, although I feel it holds true.
I'll read that, again, after I've had sleep.
For now, answer me this: how can a Static and Dynamic function do the same thing?
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Now that is a good question, using Ni as an example, I'm still debating on whether both +Ni and -Ni are both dynamic, or are is +Ni and -Ne dynamic and +Ne and -Ni static. To be honest, I don't know yet.
My true opinion is types exhibit both dynamic and static qualities.
Of course we do; we all have 8 functions, right? We just use the "unconscious" ones through the "conscious" ones; that's really what you're looking to explain, it seems.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
No, I'm explaining that traditionally its accepted that an INTj has -Ti, but they actually have both -Ti and +Te. INTjs use the +Te to express itself to the outside world. The big difference between an ESTj and an INTj is the creative function. ESTjs create things like companies and businesses that create are manage and set them up for the best results, and INTjs create systems based on abstract logic. Its the same thinking function, they are just used differently.
In information metabolism and introverted function must express itself through an extroverted function. Introverted means internal. It has to be internal. It can't be external. As soon as it becomes external its extroverted.
Well, first of all, Ti is not an "internal" function. Internal functions are
, because they deal with things that are not represented in observable concrete reality: concepts and emotions.
Introverted functions, which Ti is, are referred to as "introverted" not because of the "mental state" or whatever, but because they don't have to do with the "obvious" qualities of something. Introverted qualities imply a relationship between two things. Now, the idea of introversion you seem to be working with implies the relationship of a person with an idea; this is not Socionics introversion. Socionics introversion deals with relationships between objects; hence the term "fields" used to describe introverted IM elements. That's what you're missing, perhaps.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
The internal qualities of the information elements is not what I'm referring to. Introversion is from within, extroversion is pertaining to the outside. It can not be the other way. Introversion must stay within, and extroversion must stay outside. That is the basics of information metabolism. An introverted function is called a subjective function. An extroverted function is called an objective function.Well, first of all, Ti is not an "internal" function. Internal functions are
Introverted functions, which Ti is, are referred to as "introverted" not because of the "mental state" or whatever, but because they don't have to do with the "obvious" qualities of something. Introverted qualities imply a relationship between two things. Now, the idea of introversion you seem to be working with implies the relationship of a person with an idea; this is not Socionics introversion. Socionics introversion deals with relationships between objects; hence the term "fields" used to describe introverted IM elements. That's what you're missing, perhaps.
Which would be mostly Ne for intj, following the socionic theory of course.
In information metabolism and introverted function must express itself through an extroverted function. Introverted means internal. It has to be internal. It can't be external. As soon as it becomes external its extroverted.
Don't twist things around.
If a person were to express themselves only through +Ne, they would be pretty out there. You're telling me that INTjs do not use expressive logic without Ne.Which would be mostly Ne for intj, following the socionic theory of course.
In information metabolism and introverted function must express itself through an extroverted function. Introverted means internal. It has to be internal. It can't be external. As soon as it becomes external its extroverted.
Don't twist things around.
Rocky what type are you, I'll give you a functional example of your type. ISTp?Which would be mostly Ne for intj, following the socionic theory of course.
In information metabolism and introverted function must express itself through an extroverted function. Introverted means internal. It has to be internal. It can't be external. As soon as it becomes external its extroverted.
Don't twist things around.
You have to believe one function is used more then then others. For some types, that would be Te, others Ne. If you're so adamant about being expressive Te, and more Te this, and Te that, I'm betting you fit the MBTI intj perfectly, so assumed you were the same socionic type. Doesn't work that way.If a person were to express themselves only through +Ne, they would be pretty out there. You're telling me that INTjs do not use expressive logic without Ne.Which would be mostly Ne for intj, following the socionic theory of course.
In information metabolism and introverted function must express itself through an extroverted function. Introverted means internal. It has to be internal. It can't be external. As soon as it becomes external its extroverted.
Don't twist things around.
As I said, reevaluate your system, come back later with a fresh start.
Well, I've already said that there is subtypes based on this system, do this for me, explain to me why ISTps retaliate quickly. ISTps don't take shit from anyone. Explain to me functionally why that happens.You have to believe one function is used more then then others. For some types, that would be Te, others Ne. If you're so adamant about being expressive Te, and more Te this, and Te that, I'm betting you fit the MBTI intj perfectly, so assumed you were the same socionic type. Doesn't work that way.If a person were to express themselves only through +Ne, they would be pretty out there. You're telling me that INTjs do not use expressive logic without Ne.Which would be mostly Ne for intj, following the socionic theory of course.
In information metabolism and introverted function must express itself through an extroverted function. Introverted means internal. It has to be internal. It can't be external. As soon as it becomes external its extroverted.
Don't twist things around.
As I said, reevaluate your system, come back later with a fresh start.
Also, ISTps lack negative emotions due to having +Fe/-Fi in their PoLR. ISTps should have a hard time feeling hatred or any other emotions like feeling bad for a victim of some traumatic experience like a rape or something. ISTps should be very cold in that regard. That couldn't be explain by just having "Fe" in the PoLR functional sub-block. There are a lot of things that people aren't seeing, there is no functional reason on the normal model A that should say that ENTjs and INTps should lack initiative. Initiative is an Se thing. How do you explain the fact that ESFjs have a strong drive to do things? How do you explain that INTjs attempt to overthrow authority? How do you explain my quadras. My quadras make perfect sense. ISTps are people that go around the world seeking "experiences". This is an Se thing again. Normal Model A doesn't explain this.
Holy crap, I might have found people that back up my theory from Russia. Theres articles on my topic.
Holy crap, Gulenko even wrote a book on it.
Settle down there.
You should go back and read this. The whole point, that I said before, is that none of these can be take as law, none of them obvious, because functional typing systems, like all systems of grouping things together, are the creation of your mind. This means that what ever you believe, you have to be right. So make statements like you did above isn't going to impress anyone, since people would surely disagree with the labeling to begin with. The only way to have some agreement on this type of thing is if there were some objective measurement that we could base typings on (DNA tests, etc...) but that kind of thing doesn't exist yet. So saying "ENTJs lack initiative" is just a matter of your opinion as, "The Smashing Pumkins is a great band". Again, stop thinking the statements you make about certain types, or certain descriptions about those types, are objective law. They're not.
I don't really believe in objective law.
Then your last few posts are meaningless.
agreed in that extent, I'm just happy that someone is on the same page as meThen your last few posts are meaningless.
But see, they don't actively use +Te; they use it in the "service" of -Ti, which is expressed through Ne. They are, of course, capable of using +Te, but that doesn't mean that +Te servg two totally discrete aspects of reality, they can't, by definition, be the "same thing." They are used simultaneously and in conjunction, but they are not the same.If a person were to express themselves only through +Ne, they would be pretty out there. You're telling me that INTjs do not use expressive logic without Ne.Which would be mostly Ne for intj, following the socionic theory of course.
In information metabolism and introverted function must express itself through an extroverted function. Introverted means internal. It has to be internal. It can't be external. As soon as it becomes external its extroverted.
Don't twist things around.
In short, LIIs use both +Te and -Ti, but they aren't the "same." If they were, then there would only be one function used to describe them both. And there would be no Id block.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Well basically what I'm saying is that when you thought you were an INTj, it was because you had the same base function as an INTj. ESTjs ISTps INTjs , and ENTps share the same thinking function in the ego block. Now the biggest difference between an INTj and ESTj comes from the creative function, which for INTjs usually leads them to science or some type of philosophy, and for ESTjs usually leads them to systemize a business or something. Also note from ESTjs that their creative function is -Si/+Se. This would mean that ESTjs share a function with ESFps(which is their base). +Se is the enjoy the world function. ESFps, ISFjs, ESTjs, ISTps, are all in my experiencers quadrant.I read the first 3 pages of this topic - did anything useful come of this thread? Anyone can respond.
What does experiencer quadrant mean?
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
It means that they are the people that like to see the world. They go around the world and experience it.Well basically what I'm saying is that when you thought you were an INTj, it was because you had the same base function as an INTj. ESTjs ISTps INTjs , and ENTps share the same thinking function in the ego block. Now the biggest difference between an INTj and ESTj comes from the creative function, which for INTjs usually leads them to science or some type of philosophy, and for ESTjs usually leads them to systemize a business or something. Also note from ESTjs that their creative function is -Si/+Se. This would mean that ESTjs share a function with ESFps(which is their base). +Se is the enjoy the world function. ESFps, ISFjs, ESTjs, ISTps, are all in my experiencers quadrant.I read the first 3 pages of this topic - did anything useful come of this thread? Anyone can respond.
What does experiencer quadrant mean?
+Te is not in the ID block, -Te is. INTjs actively use +Te. They have to, otherswise INTjs would be extremely(and when I say extremely I mean extremely) out-there. If ENTps and INTjs only expressed themselves through Ne, then both ENTps and INTjs would seem like extreme Ne subtypes to everyone. There has to be +Te to transmit logic. INTjs are both externally logical and internally logical.But see, they don't actively use +Te; they use it in the "service" of -Ti, which is expressed through Ne. They are, of course, capable of using +Te, but that doesn't mean that +Te servg two totally discrete aspects of reality, they can't, by definition, be the "same thing." They are used simultaneously and in conjunction, but they are not the same.If a person were to express themselves only through +Ne, they would be pretty out there. You're telling me that INTjs do not use expressive logic without Ne.Which would be mostly Ne for intj, following the socionic theory of course.
In information metabolism and introverted function must express itself through an extroverted function. Introverted means internal. It has to be internal. It can't be external. As soon as it becomes external its extroverted.
Don't twist things around.
In short, LIIs use both +Te and -Ti, but they aren't the "same." If they were, then there would only be one function used to describe them both. And there would be no Id block.
* Business logic (P):
negative: economy, savings, the cautious operation of existing, the reduction of consumption. Minimization of expenditures.
positive: expenditure, investment, mark, combination, the running-in of new. Maximization of profit.
* Structural logic (L):
positive: implicative, if- that - logic, the construction of the chains of cause and effect, linear, unidirectional. It strengthens correspondences. Confident in its infallibility. Logic of proofs.
negative: disjunctive, OR-ILI - logic, directed differently, volumetric, holographic. Logic of contradictions, doubts. Paradoxical logic. Logic of refutations.
* Ethics of emotions (E):
positive: the hospitable emotions, open-hearted, single-plot, without the dual bottom.
negative: the shocking emotions, tragicomism, sarcasm, vysmeivaniye, ambiguity.
* Ethics of relations (R):
positive: the ethics of forgiveness, attraction, maximization of good;
negative: the ethics of censure, distantsirovaniya, repulsion, minimization of evil.
2. Irrational functions.
* Power sensorika (F):
positive: the maintenance of balance; tendency toward the strong, that searches for ally, that is defended. Maximization of force.
negative: the opposing force, confrontational, napadayushchaya, which threatens. Minimization of weakness.
* Sensorika of sensations (S):
positive: the slack, smoothed sensations, the maximization of comfort;
negative: the sharp, vzbadrivayushchiye, contrasting sensations, the minimization of discomfort.
* Intuition of possibilities (I):
positive: prospect, the search for new ways, the maximization of possibilities;
negative: alternating nature, the minimization of impossible, the concealed talents, the concealed inclinations.
* Intuition of time (T):
positive: the intuition of novelty, hopes, curiosity, tendency in the future;
negative: the intuition of the avoidance of danger, errors of the past, contradictory tendencies.
Take an ENTps intuitions for example, ENTps should look for news ways for doing things, ENTps look at all the possibilities of a given situation. ENTps also try to avoid danger to an extreme degree (this is also due to the sensing agenda as well). ENTps have great ties to the past. They tend to think about all the mistakes they have made in the past and such.
bumping this thread because of its awesomeness and because I just saw the +/- chart and was wondering where it came from.
(And I saw some people had a particular person as an IEI on the spreadsheet, but this thread's posts look like an alpha NT.)
well, why I think that the ideas I had in this thread were accurate, my method of explaining it was terrible. I was on anti-psychotics at the time and they were fucking with my ability to concentrate and relate
Model X Will Save Us!
*randomwarelinkremoved
The full point of what I was trying to explain is this:
It had nothing to really do with what the dichotomies were and how they were split. It had more to do with the idea that Kempinski had about information metabolism. With the 8 component model that is put forth by model A, there is a "hole" so to speak in the logical framework of it. The way that I've always thought of functions in the past didn't make them mutually exclusive like many have thought about the functions in the past. I've never thought of the functions as being special on their own, just aspects of existence. Take Si for example, everyone takes in sensual information; what matters more is how that information is encoded and on what level of the metabolism that the function exists.
The way that I eventually rationalized the functional traits was much different than I did at the beginning, as eventually I diverged off from Gulenko, then oddly I found more recent articles of Gulenko that oddly followed right along with where I was going with the functions. Though I've never actually seen Gulenko take to leap into a 16 component model, as that was all Bukalov.
The point I was trying to make with the 16 component model in this thread is this. Take someone that is supposedly Si dominant for example. Their main mental objects revolve around their bodily senses. They feel and act in terms of how their body is situated. There is actually two scenarios to this equation(based on how the functions are split in to dichotomous +/-). The person could either be extremely adventurous with their sensitive information. They would think of their body in terms of acquiring euphoria and experiencing new events. The person could also be on the opposite end of the spectrum, more of a stabilizing view of the body. The person would feel and interpret their senses based on the idealization of balance and how to reach a stabilization point.
Now the point that was attempted to be conveyed in the 16 component model was this. With every sensation that the body experiences and the mind interprets, their is an action based response. This is where Se comes from. A person that is attempting to experience change and euphoric emotions internally, would act in a very aggressive and action first mentality. A person that is seeking to maintain balance and create homeostasis would have actions that revolve around staying power and how to maintain balance in the outside world. So the point of what I was trying to convey with the information metabolism model is this. What goes in must come out. Si and Se cannot have separate functioning and they are entirely dependent on each other at the conscious level. It's kind of like breathing.
I did an extremely poor job of explaining this in this thread, and now looking back at this thread I wish I'd handled it a little differently; though at the time I kind of felt as it didn't matter what I would say as nobody was remotely open to it.
Model X Will Save Us!
*randomwarelinkremoved
Astute observation. Interesting... Obama is an SLI who tries to maintain homeostasis, and he talks about fighting a lot, but all he really fights for is maintaining the homeostasis. He doesn't fight from improvement.
Oh, thanks for telling me, if I see anything that seems odd or confusing I'll keep in mind that that's what was going on at the time. I haven't had time to read the entire thread yet since it's not yet my weekend. The idea is intriguing to me still.
Actually, I've struggled to describe something like this too, the idea that in order to experience anything, you have to 'reach out' to it somehow, which is an assertive sort of act. That can be interpreted as using Se, or else it could be included as something that still belongs to Si, and I'm not sure which, but I get the idea. I still want to think about it some more.
You know, I feel really bad for hitta. I think his model is really great and even if the criticism it got was accurate, and I'm not saying it was; the criticism I've observed has mostly been unobjective, aggressive, offensive and basically unfair.
__________
Here's what I understand:
ETN has -Te +Ti.
ITS has +Ti -Te.
Expat's objection to this was somewhere along the lines of "BUT DOESN'T THAT MAKE ENTJ AND ISTJ THE SAME THIGN?!?!?!?????!!11!!11!111111ONE1111ELEVEN!"
By that logic, in Model A, ITN and ITS would be the same thing, since their leading functions are both Ti. But you're forgetting that they have creative functions.
In this system, -Te+Ti is like it's own dichotomous function, just like ETN's +Ni-Ne and ITS's -Se+Si are their own dichotomous functions, and these functions are what make ETN and ITS different in this model.
But then, one could conclude that there is a +ETN (who uses +Ti) and a -ENT (who uses -Te), thus creating 32 types in total.
Is this analysis accurate?
Last edited by Wallon; 12-18-2013 at 11:08 PM. Reason: Added signature
Within prudence.
hitta makes some good points and has an interesting model. he was treated like crap, more so than he deserved (he deserves a little), esp. by Expat and niffweed.
So, in summary:
Model G: Process: +Ji, +Pe (vice versa)
Result: +Je, +Pi (vice versa)
Model A:
Process:
Bold functions: +ve,
Cautious functions: -ve
Result:
Bold functions: -ve,
Cautious functions: +ve
I'm inclined to believe Model A has always been the correct one all this time.
Last edited by welcometomania; 09-11-2022 at 10:14 AM. Reason: mistakee
for references..
Last edited by welcometomania; 09-14-2022 at 05:59 PM. Reason: added a link
Meh, not really the correct one but at least, it's the archetypal interpretation of Socio Bionics, while Model G added more simplicity to it.
I'd be more interested seeing Model T with the +/- signs though.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
:" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"
