@mu4 @chemical @woofwoofl
Thread Necromancy: +1.
Helllllooooooo…. I bring tidings and salutations from Delta. Huzzah!
I previously did computer science stuff some, so using computing concepts is something I can do moderately (don’t expect it to be right, just “translatable”). Anyways, I have some information that I have compiled in my head from various sources.
Mental/Vital:
The Mental track is how we process new information. Sometimes, the information is not “so new or different” that we will even use the Mental much. Other times, it will be so radically different that we are forced to place tons of conscious thought into it (ala, sp/so and so/sp facial expressions, which correlate to super-ego/ego and ego/super-ego). As this information is processed and “solved” in the Mental conscious thought, it is then transferred into the Vital automatic processes. Within the Vital, all previously acquired information is used on an automatic basis, and forms the overall basis of the individual’s displayed personality. As the Vital processes incur new information, which it knows not where nor how to store such, the Mental is activated to “solve,” “debug,” what-have-you this new information for proper filing into the individual.
Information received within the Social sphere may have varying degrees of “new” to it. In example: Information Received = 93% Existing, 7% New = 93% Vital, 7% Mental. The greater the degree of new information, the greater the strain put on the Mental.
In computing concepts, we can correlate such to the following:
Run Vital
v_Information Received
Find v_Information In Vital
If v_Information Not In Vital
Run Mental.v_Information
n_Information = Mental.v_Information
Insert n_Information Into Vital
Else
Nothing. You got dis, dawg.
EndIf
Some concepts for consideration:
Mental Super-block: Conscious thought in Social (new information outside the self)
Vital Super-block: Existing information for automatic processing
Information: Must be checked for existence within Vital
New Information: Must be consciously filed by Mental Super-block into Vital Super-Block
Judging: Dichotomous descriptions most similar to Mental
Perceiving: Dichotomous descriptions most similar to Vital
So: Description most similar to Ego
Sp: Description near identical to Super-Ego
Sx: Description most similar to Super-Id
Insert random Yermak quote:
Routines and Sub-Routines:Originally Posted by yermak
When considering the models and TIM’s, it is important to recognize that not only does the individual contain a Routine that is his TIM and contains the information processing, but it also contains sub-routines. As seen in the this link, each element within the TIM is actually equally a sub-routine. When using an element, what will be displayed is actually the Routine of another TIM residing within the TIM of the individual. Some of these happen so quickly that they are not perceived by the self nor others.
Bukalov maintains that Signs of elements are by functional blocking; e.g., +Fi is always blocked with –Ne. When crossing blocks, the element pairing is changed, thus changing the Signs; e.g, Leading +Fi becomes –Fi when PoLR and Leading are processing information. Due to such, all 16 TIM’s are used as sub-routines within the base TIM as information processing takes place.
In example, the OP mentioned cognition styles. I am EII/CD. However, CD only applies on the macro-level that is the Base Routine: +Fi. As the Base Routine operates, it runs sub-routines as the information is processed. In this way, when utilizing Role + Creative (-Ti/+Ne), my cognition will be using the Holographic Cognition Style.
Going from Leading to PoLR and back, we thus have…
CD (+Fi/-Ne) (EII)
HG (-Ne/+Fi) (IEE)
CD (+Ne/-Ti) (ILE)
HG (-Ti/+Ne) (LII)
CD (+Ti/-Se) (LSI)
HG (-Se/+Ti) (SLE)
CD (+Se/-Fi) (SEE)
HG (-Fi/+Se) (ESI)
CD (+Fi/-Ne) (EII)
And the Vital follows suit.
”Intelligence”
In context of the TIM being the Routine composed of the various Sub-Routines, it is important to note that the Routine, that is, the Individual, is himself a Sub-Routine.
So, what does this mean? This means that the activation of the Mental is actually the macro-system passing us new information for us to “solve” and integrate into the Vital, to automatously use in the greater macro system / organism of ‘humanity’. I am not “Jeremy” because of preference, sheer genetics, or chance… but rather, humanity required for the “Jeremy” that currently exists to come into being. “Humanity” needed information “solved”, and created/ran a sub-routine, “Jeremy,” to accomplish such.
Although, the concept of biologically having greater processing capacity than others, or a norm/average, is most certainly true, this does not explain “Intelligence.” Individuals such as Plato, Newton, some random other people I don’t bother thinking of, are seen as highly intelligent people from human history. On another end of the spectrum, individuals such as Nero, ******, some ancient evil people, also had a major impact on the events of human history. Why? Because, for whatever the reason, the macro-system of “humanity” required information be processed through them. In this light, the concept of “Intelligence” may be better equated to “anomaly” or, as Yermak writes, “peculiarity.” Although, I.Q. is typically referred to as intelligence, other similar concepts are used for emotions, blah blah blah, etc. In the greater context of “Intelligence,” the “great intelligences” of human history are simply vessels of information processing created by humanity for the purpose of “solving” critical new information / flaws / whatever-floats-your-boat that was required for the Vital of the macro-system of humanity.
Fundamental Concepts of Information Aspects
Although Thinking/Feeling/Sensing/Intuition are colloquially (I don’t actually know what that word means, but I am guessing it means “normally” or something, and it sounds nice) considered Matter/Energy/Space/Time, it is important to understand that these ways of processing information are just the shadows of reality that we are capable of dealing with, and not the actual Information, referred to as Information Aspects in Socionics, which has conveniently already been broken down (somewhat).
Information Aspects:
Te: External Dynamics of Objects
Fe: Internal Dynamics of Objects
Se: External Statics of Objects
Ne: Internal Statics of Objects
Ti: External Statics of Fields
Fi: Internal Statics of Fields
Si: External Dynamics of Fields
Ni: Internal Dynamics of Fields
Okay… Well that wasn’t very helpful…
To the Batmobile! No, wait… To the Batcave!
Using computing principles, I’ll try and label each…
Information Aspects Dichotomies:
External: Variable, a group of variables viewed as a single variable
Internal: Array/List, a variable viewed as a group of variables
Statics: Time Independent, Snapshot of moment, non-running program (like a pause during debugging), similar junk
Dynamics: Time Dependent, Video of some timeframe, running program (like viewing code process during debugging), similar junk
Objects: It’s an object… You can look at it… You can do stuff with it… …. It’s an object…
Fields: A comparison of objects, Boolean operators
So, let’s say you have the following…
X = [1,2,3]
Y = [4,5,6]
X and Y would both be the “External” and the “[1,2,3]” and “[4,5,6]” would be their “Internal,” respectively. Since they are both the same thing, the only difference is the frame of reference you are using. Do you view them as a single entity? Or do you view them as a collection of entities? I believe it is called “nesting” or something, but if you have the variables on one level, and the arrays on another, the only difference between the External and Internal is the level on which you are viewing. What if you choose Internal and view the numbers level? Well, what are the numbers in computing? Isn’t each one really an External on this level, and the Internal is now machine language?
Fleshing this out some more…
Bill (External) = [short,male,kind,stupid,loves music] (Internal)
Ted (External) = [tall,male,kind,stupid,loves music] (Internal)
Down a level…
Short (External) = [5’4”,5’5”,5’6”,5’7”,5’8”] (Internal)
Tall (External) = [5’9”,5’10”,5’11”,6’0”,6’1”] (Internal)
Kind (External) = [non-aggressive,charitable,seeks unity,empathetic,sympathetic] (Internal)
Moving on…
Now we have “Bill” and “Ted.”
We can look at “Bill” and have our External of Objects. We can look at “Ted” and have our External of Objects. But, what do we do with such? Well, we can compare (of Fields) them. If we do it based upon external similarities, we would be using External of Fields. If we do it based upon internal similarities, we would be using Internal of Fields.
IF Bill IS LIKE Ted THEN (External of Fields) SET SocialGroup = “Bill and Ted” (<-second half maybe External of Objects for higher level?)
IF [short,male,kind,stupid,loves music] IS LIKE [tall,male,kind,stupid,loves music] (Internal of Fields) SET SocialGroup = “Bill and Ted”
That’s about as far as I thought about it, as I don’t actually enjoy programming lol.
Static/Dynamic would just be if you were considering a moment in time, or something ongoing. For instance, when you start Bill and Teds Excellent Adventure, they are good friends (Statics of Fields); however, later on they get in an argument at some point and they are then not good friends (Statics of Fields again). Even if you went to a very small time sequence, say a single conversation, there would be ups and downs within a single minute. They could be “good friends” every time they are agreeing and “not good friends” every time they aren’t agreeing. Whichever moment in time you pick during that conversation determines which of “good friends” or “not good friends” the Statics of Fields is going to be. If we use Dynamics of Fields, though, this single conversation would still be “good friends.” If during the time period when they are not friends, you choose the point in time where Ted says “I miss Bill,” then boom! Statics of Fields calls them “good friends.” However, if Dynamics of Fields considers this same time period, then it will say “not good friends.” If the movie ended with them being “good friends” by Statics of Fields, but the rest of their unseen story had them stop being friends a year after the movie, then the Dynamics of Fields of their lives would be “not good friends.” Such is the nature of a Static Moment in Time and a Dynamic Process in Time.
Because the previous paragraph requires the Routine to view dynamic processes in time simply to be able to make a conscious Statics of Fields comparison, the unconscious is necessitated to follow the viewing of the dynamic processes. On the flip side, it’s hard to even view this dynamic process movie, if you don’t have individual frames to make it up. In this way, the Static/Dynamic manifests itself in the Mental/Vital. You either consciously look at snapshots and unconsciously look at movies, or you consciously look at movies and unconsciously look at snapshots.
How does all of this fit into the TIM Routine?
EII example from PoLR (Ex dimension) through Leading:
View Externals of Object
Compare Externals of Object to other Objects
View Internals of Object
Compare Internals of Object to other Objects
Another for EII:
See how Bill looks (External Statics of Objects)
See how Ted looks (External Statics of Objects)
Compare how Bill looks to how Ted looks (External Statics of Fields)
Use this to determine “who Bill is,” his “essence” (Internal Statics of Objects)
Use this to determine “who Ted is,” his “essence” (Internal Statics of Objects)
Compare “who Bill is” to “who Ted is” (Internal Statics of Fields)
Awwww, they best fwends… (into the Vital this goes)
Leaving information aspects and going back to the information elements…
Information and Energy
For any computer to process and produce corresponding information, it requires energy. Bukalov blah blah blah with Libido blah blah blah… This is what I figure for Information and Energy.
Extroverted Elements: Energy Sender, Information Requestor
Introverted Elements: Energy Receiver, Information Supplier
Using this, we have the following for EII:
Someone: Extroverts energy to EII…
Fi: Receives Energy, Processes Information, Supplies Information to…
Ne: Receives Information, Metabolizes (Nom nom nom kind) Information, Supplies Energy to…
Ti: Receives Energy, Processes Information, Supplies Information to…
Se: Receives Information, Metabolizes (Nom) Information, Supplies Energy to…
Ti: Receives Energy, Processes Information, Supplies Information to…
Ne: Receives Information, Metabolizes (Nom) Information, Supplies Energy to…
Fi: Receives Energy, Processes Information, Supplies Information to…
Someone: I don’t know, how bout ILE since they are goofy
Taken from another post of mine, reconciling Jung chapter 10 back into everything, including Libido, and answering about Gulenko (Libido is energy, try not to make your version so goofy like Jung did)
Polarities and Bits and Stuff
When applying polarities and various other concepts of Socionics, it’s important to treat change as what it would be in computing: a bit change. (or whatever 0 turning into 1 is)
From Leading to Creative: + changes to -, and vice versa
From Creative to Role: + changes to -, and vice versa
From Mental to Vital: + changes to -, and vice versa
From Leading to Creative: extroverted changes to introverted, and vice versa
From Leading to Creative: energy out changes to energy in, and vice versa
From Leading to Creative: information out changes to information in, and vice versa
From Mental to Vital: extroverted changes to introverted, and vice versa
From Mental to Vital: information out changes to information in, and vice versa
Etc.
No matter what parameters you place on anything, there needs to be an appropriate bit switch upon changing locations, be it a function, a block, a super-block, (probably gender, I dunno), whatever… or there is a logic break.
Closing Thoughts
Anywayssss….. That’s my information. Use it. Derp on it. Take bits and pieces. Whatever you feel like doing with it.
Also, try not to break the universe. I’d rather not be cornholed and annihilated by a sentient robot species, or have people running around jedi mind-hacking people. Seriously, don’t jedi mind-hack people. World and people and their relationships exist for a reason. If you do it, you’re essentially corrupting data and run the risk of breaking the macro systems up to infinity. Also, the universal information paradigm, God, gets pissed and will probably delete you.
Reply With Quote