I thought people have got a lot of imagination here...and hope for replies! It would be good to develop an alternative (associative) description of functions so that people could understand/feel functions better.
I give an example:
- abstract/fine/exact matter/materia, concentration/thinking (only possible in content and quiet/"passive" state/mode), rigid/structural/systemic......geometric form/maths...technical intellect/progress, ( I am a bit struglling to find the word from the real world of nature, may be because it is a product of mind?!) -rationality
- quiet emotion/feeling, deep quiet waters, slow motion/river, contentment/concentration, contemplation/reflection, mirror, deep understanding, sensitivity of feelings...What else?
- sensitivity of touch, softness of materia, clear and tidy space, lots of it, beauty and taste, coordination, conformity,indulgence (somebody mentioned it before...), pumpering, content/concentrated pleasure,colour -irrationality...anything else?
- content/controlled, dimensional direction of fire (candle, fireplace), piercing sound, the light from the lighthouse, ray, tune,dissolve, illusion....irrationality. What else?
- solid/material rigid structure, building, practicality and usefullness, resoursful, active mode, conformity of material forms, architecture...rationality. What else?
- dynamic, powerful emotions/waterstream, waterfall, stormy sea, flooding or relaxing sound of waterspring in the forest.....rationality.
-strong wind, tornado, power to move and change, action, earthquake, vibrant colours and loud sounds, hit of the sun, extreame joy/anger, optimism, abundance, distruction and the power of life, sensuality, sex, money, adrenalin -irrationality
- explosion, uncontrolled fire, active vulcano, burning house, reaction, transformation,revival, regeneration - irrationality
If we assume that functions are dimensions they may have include some positive and negative charateristics. I was struggling to do it on my own.
I am sure there are mistakes in those descriptions as it is difficult (or impossible to be objective).
My idea is to understand better the interaction of functions and compatibility of types. I argue that compatibility of types is different to what socionics suggest.
1. I believe that for the "perfect" compatibility, Entroversion/Extraversion dimension is not that important and can be compensated by a second strong function. The question is what introverted types can easily appear/play extraverts and what extraverted types can appear as introverts?
2. I also believe that the key to compatibility is in rationality/irrationality dimension of the same Extraversion / Introversion dimension. It is easy to demonstrate if you look at the first and the last function of
INTJ - my husband
ISFJ - me
We do not irritate each other, we are similar in many ways: he is into builiding structures in his mind and I am into my "deep waters" -internal feelings. However, when I start to use my creative/second function excessively - he get's irritated as it stirs his second creative/function. Sometimes he gets irritated but does not show it and suddently he "explode" than I try to come him down and poor a lot of quiet water on his suddenly eraised vulcano.
At last, can you compare quadras and assign a particular base function or strong two functions to it?
For example: Gamma - , Beta- , Alfa- , Delta- .
It would be interesting to know what you think. WEll, if we shall put them in a row: . May be together we shall come out with something totally different?
I guess, a lot of things could be understood and explained if we would create an alternative langauge to symbols of socionics.