How do we use all 8 functions?

[ArchonAlarion]

Dear Polikujm,

I'm gonna use Fi to determine if I value killing you because I hate you.
I'm gonna use Te to prepare a plan to kill you.
I'm gonna use Si to take a refreshing bath before I kill you.
I'm gonna use Ti to engineer a weapon to kill you.
I'm gonna use Ne to consider all the possible ways my plan to kill you might go down.
I'm gonna use Fe to make it appear as if I have no intention of killing you.
I'm gonna use Se to make you scream like a bitch before I kill you.
I know I'm going to kill you because of Ni.

[OnePiece]

Dear Polikujm,

I'm gonna use Fi to determine if I value killing you because I hate you.
I'm gonna use Te to prepare a plan to kill you.
I'm gonna use Si to take a refreshing bath before I kill you.
I'm gonna use Ti to engineer a weapon to kill you.
I'm gonna use Ne to consider all the possible ways my plan to kill you might go down.
I'm gonna use Fe to make it appear as if I have no intention of killing you.
I'm gonna use Se to make you scream like a bitch before I kill you.
I know I'm going to kill you because of Ni.

Can you expand on your standing about this by any chance?

[ArchonAlarion]

The IE's are not inherent in information. They are filters and formats that information is translated into.

If they were external, then you would need all 8, otherwise you'd be incompetent. if they are internal, then you would not.

The IE's are not some intangible essenses embedded arbitrarily in sensory inputs, but are instead metrics and formats of perception. The formal name for this is called perceptual habituation.

The ensuing communications of information would then (and only then) be "embedded" with IE's, but only because they have passed into a human psyche and thus formatted by that person's elements. Art, architecture, expressions, literature, cultures, etc can therefore have integral types/quadras, but fundamental phenomenon such as time, space, emotion (in a broad, non-specific sense), possibilities, etc cannot.

Ti/Fe is antithetical to Fi/Te at a perceptual level. If you are Ti/Fe you cannot accept Fi/Te in its original form. You'd try to format it automatically into Ti/Fe and it would not make sense or in the least seem dull and un-insightful.

[Slacker]

The Socionist: Blocks of Model A

[strrrng]

OP: Was the person you quoted, Steve?

*words*

Yep

[xerx]

I'll play devil's advocate here...

The IE's are not some intangible essenses embedded arbitrarily in sensory inputs, but are instead metrics and formats of perception. The formal name for this is called perceptual habituation.

The ensuing communications of information would then (and only then) be "embedded" with IE's, but only because they have passed into a human psyche and thus formatted by that person's elements.

I'm pretty sure that's completely consistent with Model A.

Art, architecture, expressions, literature, cultures, etc can therefore have integral types/quadras, but fundamental phenomenon such as time, space, emotion (in a broad, non-specific sense), possibilities, etc cannot.

How do you know that it's not the other way around?

What if...

Art, architecture and expression are such complex statistical entities that it's impossible to assign them IM elements.

OTOH: Time, space and possibilities are such simple concepts that they can be assigned elements. (Note: I'm not using time to denote linear "clock" time. I'm using it in the socionics sense.)

Physical phenomena are both more etheric and more fundamental than economics phenomena. Economics is closer to our level than physics, but physics is more accurately modeled using mathematics. Even if the physical models are theoretical, they've proven empirically reliable.

Ti/Fe is antithetical to Fi/Te at a perceptual level. If you are Ti/Fe you cannot accept Fi/Te in its original form. You'd try to format it automatically into Ti/Fe and it would not make sense or in the least seem dull and un-insightful.

That's a contradiction. If you're aware that someone is using Fi/Te, then it means that you are aware of it on some perceptual level.

You're also grouping all the unvalued functions together, which is an egregious generalization. The POLR is not the same as the 8th function. You don't have much room to interpret your POLR except through the valued HA. You have more flexibility with your 8th function since it is stronger.


If you want to convince me, you should generate a stronger proof!

[crazedrat]

it's the mistake on how archon is thinking about the word use; and especially what he thinks model A means by it. He is considering model A mixes together two forms of the word use: in the way a type uses its dominant functions creatively and expressively with how one uses the other functions like demonstrative or ignoring. In model A you use those sorts of functions when you look back on what you've created and you critique it. You can feel the flaws in what you've done through them. They aren't used creatively. In this way demonstrative Ti is something completely distinct from ignoring Ti or dominant Ti.
Now you come up with the term 'shadow functions' to acknowledge some level of difference between a functions operation depending on its placement, but refuse to acknowledge this is actually a part of model A already. And then I see you're playing revolutionary and confusing everyone here. You need to cut the shit and shut up about this.

[xerx]

it's the mistake on how archon is thinking about the word 'use'. Crossing use in the way a type uses its dominant functions with how one uses the other functions like demonstrative or ignoring. In model A you use these sorts of functions when you look back on what you've created and you critique it. You can feel the flaws in what you've done through them. They aren't used creatively.

My sentiment exactly. For some reason he believes that all perception has to be valued.

[xerx]

I wonder if the Model X crew has ever been diagnosed with depression? To come to Model X conclusions you'd have to be taking happy pills. (no offense I still love you archon )

[ArchonAlarion]

I'll play devil's advocate here...



I'm pretty sure that's completely consistent with Model A.

How do you know that it's not the other way around?

What if...

Art, architecture and expression are such complex statistical entities that it's impossible to assign them IM elements.

OTOH: Time, space and possibilities are such simple concepts that they can be assigned elements. (Note: I'm not using time to denote linear "clock" time. I'm using it in the socionics sense.)

Physical phenomena are both more etheric and more fundamental than economics phenomena. Economics is closer to our level than physics, but physics is more accurately modeled using mathematics. Even if the physical models are theoretical, they've proven empirically reliable.

Space, time, possibilities, logic, sensation are basically things that exist to everyone. If you were to experience these things and then communicate your thoughts about them, the information you'd convey would be "colored" by your elements.

Either way, it can't yet be proven that we use 8 or 4, but I think the 8 idea isn't even understandable.

When, for instance, is information Te? Is a wheel rolling down a hill "external object dynamics"? Does a Te polr have trouble watching a wheel roll down a hill?

And no it would not be more plausible if the info was more complex! The more complex, the more likely other elements would have to be involved.

Also, why is Te complementary to Fi? Fluid algorithms are complementary to... relationships/value systems? Wtf? Are elephants complementary to trashbins?

How can you tell when information is of some elements or the others?

Oh I'm sure you can feel it, right? But is the info you're thinking of post human psyche? Like a piece of art? That WOULD have integral IE's.

That's a contradiction. If you're aware that someone is using Fi/Te, then it means that you are aware of it on some perceptual level.

You can be aware of something and still not use it. If you cannot escape the confines of your perception, then you could observe the behaviors of someone with Fi/Te, but still not understand the complex perceptual patterns behind them. And even if you were to use neuroscience to figure it out, then the information you got from your findings would of course be formatted via your Ti/Fe! So you would still not experience Fi/Te directly.

My sentiment exactly. For some reason he believes that all perception has to be valued.

No I only use the word "valued" because it is traditional. You have elements or you don't.

[strrrng]

Well, it can surely be said, without an ounce of doubt, that Jung's Psychological Types very clearly yields vast insight into the essences of functions, I am certain.

[xerx]

Now you come up with the term 'shadow functions' to acknowledge some level of difference between a functions operation depending on its placement, but refuse to acknowledge this is actually a part of model A already. And then I see you're playing revolutionary and confusing everyone here. You need to cut the shit and shut up about this.

Gulenko integrates a concept like the "shadow" directly into his +/- model.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

A lot of people try to make functions mean what they want them to mean, instead of accepting what they really are: It's just another form of energy. We haven't quite yet figured out this energy works in a scientific process, because too many people I guess are 'left-brained' folks and care more about boring shit like sports and cars and geographical distances and raw mathematics, instead of sociological energy. Of course I believe socionics is a math/science as well, it's just nobody has really found the best way to objectively explain just what is going on.

It's basic social and psychology energy. Other people drain you and get on your nerves, likewise other people cure your neurosis, make you grounded, whole sane and have hot sex with. It's more complicated than this, but that is basically what is happening. We all experience in a social setting, those people who we can just be ourselves around.

We are still stunted socially as a nation, as a world- we have made great technological progress, but it's time to work on understanding ourselves as social beings too. Which requires introspection, which most people find 'emo' and 'gay' and they'd much rather waste their time with other shit. Oh well.

[Jarno]

The IE's are not inherent in information. They are filters and formats that information is translated into.

If they were external, then you would need all 8, otherwise you'd be incompetent. if they are internal, then you would not.

The IE's are not some intangible essenses embedded arbitrarily in sensory inputs, but are instead metrics and formats of perception. The formal name for this is called perceptual habituation.

The ensuing communications of information would then (and only then) be "embedded" with IE's, but only because they have passed into a human psyche and thus formatted by that person's elements. Art, architecture, expressions, literature, cultures, etc can therefore have integral types/quadras, but fundamental phenomenon such as time, space, emotion (in a broad, non-specific sense), possibilities, etc cannot.

Ti/Fe is antithetical to Fi/Te at a perceptual level. If you are Ti/Fe you cannot accept Fi/Te in its original form. You'd try to format it automatically into Ti/Fe and it would not make sense or in the least seem dull and un-insightful.

awesome. but where do you read this stuff?