Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 226

Thread: Model D

  1. #41
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    According to your model, an IEI is ethical because he has strong conscious 3D +Fe (along with strong unconscious 4D Fi+) so it is verbalized more to the outside, similarly, an ILI is logical only because he has strong conscious 3D -Te (along with strong unconscious 4D -Ti), as both have the 4D and 3D version of ethical/logical functions. How does LIE supervise an IEI? (if both share 4D Te-). Does supervision happen between LIE's 3D Te+ and IEI's 1D Te+?
    An IEI would be a potential businessman, except he doesn't have any energy for managing any business at all, but he may direct people what needs to be done (due to strong Ni- and Te-).
    Is the Socionics intertype relations chart accurate? Yes and no. Model D shows that it has to be modified. LIE's Te- does not supervise IEI's Te+ directly. But at the same time, minus aspects of Te are sometimes connected with plus aspects of Te, so LIEs Te+ can be more obvious than LSI's Te+.

  2. #42
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    Te+ or Te-? Because Te+ is unconscious for me in this model, so I won't be able to easily order whenever I want?
    It depends on the situation. It could be Te+ or Te-. Orders about specific things is Te+ . IEI's Te+ is a weak mental function in Model D.

    You can use the vital functions whenever you want as well. The problem is that you start thinking about Te- and 30 seconds (or perhaps a bit more) later you have automatically switched to Ti-, without you even noticing it.

    Give the examples. Would emotional pressure also requires other functions (such as Se-)?
    All cognitions (and thereby cognitive functions) interact with emotions, so Se- could indirectly be used to change the emotional state in someone. Fe is different though, since the function itself considers emotional responses.

    If I am able to "pass" some information or act on it whenever I want, then I consider it conscious. If I need something from someone, then I can order them (Te+ or Te-?), and I don't need to "think" about it or expecting it from someone. Does "not thinking about it, but doing it naturally" makes something unconscious (even when it is doing the job just fine)?
    I think both the mental and vital functions can be used unconsciously. The Leading function could be an exception.

    My view on conscious and unconscious functions correponds with SSS's view. The vital functions are actually semi-conscious and we are able to use them consciously. But... see comment above.

    I am referring to Model A's mental/vital theory, but your theory doesn't seem to differ either, especially as you said mental functions are verbalized.
    Yes, Model D is the same as Model A in this respect.

    I also fear people getting physically close to me but I don't exaggerate about physical threats openly. Does that make my Se- unconscious? (because I am not "verbalizing" the information)
    Yes, you are describing a weak and unconscious Se-. ILI openly complains about immigrants, criminals...

    But then wouldn't it be a matter of degree of consciousness/unconsciousness rather than calling one function entirely conscious/unconscious?
    Correct. I prefer mental/vital.

    No, I am referring to Socionics' understanding of Se. And, yes, I don't see much SLEs pushing people around, rather they give orders.
    Hmm? SLEs giving orders? My experience is different. I think they influence people either directly via physical dominance or indirectly via "salesman tactics".

    (I always thought it was due to Se accepting, as Se producing push people directly) Indirect consequence? You mean Se is kind of verbalized through Fe/Te when someone orders others? (so in my case I am using Te/Fe and indirectly Se when I am ordering someone? Either way, I have offended LII with it... thought it was due to their Se PoLR)
    My point is that there is no special "force" that SLE uses. SLE is mostly in the here and now, so he/she will be automatically be dominant. When IEI is in "NiFe land" the SLE has seized an opportunity in the real/physical world.

    In that manner, IEI would be perfectly capable of taking the best / most accurate action due to 4D Te-? But IEIs report taking the wrong routes / methods and just "go with the flow", like even when they can easily see the consequences of something, they have trouble deciding the most efficient way to reach there. How do you explain that? Is it due to their 2D Ti+ (or 1D Te+)?
    That's 1D Te+. Te- is about the best/most efficient way when you are strategizing/visualizing (Ni+) something.

    It appeared to me that you were referring to that theory to prove your point, so I asked how it applies in your theory / understanding of dimensionality.
    It could be useful for understanding subtypes in Model D. ILI-1,x could have level 8 Ni+, Ti-, Fe+ and Ne-... while ILI-10,x could have level 7 Ni+, Ti-, Fe+ and Ne-.

    If I give an advice on the best possible option to take to achieve something or whether it is possible or not, would I be using Ni+ (as you said it is blocked with Te) or Ni-Te-?
    This is too general. It could be other functions as well.

    How to separately apply the dimensionality here without taking the nature of combined functions? So, for example, it doesn't make sense to call Te- 4D, but rather better to call Ni-Te- 4D (and make it explicitly clear that we are talking about this particular aspect of information).
    Can you explain this part a bit further?

    -+ signs were added later as far as I know, and I don't know how these IEIs differ from each others. What exactly you are asking?
    You: "your model is nothing but an alternative perspective to Model A"

    What do you mean by this?

    I get the sense from you that you are putting your personal understanding on conscious/unconscious, dimensionality, etc. rather than what is agreed by most socionists, but I could be wrong.
    How do you think my view differs from socionists' views.

    But, it's more like they have a different understanding of valued/unvalued functions, so you are ought to explain your understanding, so they don't get confused by your model. You need to understand that these are separate language game (especially if people who are coming from MBTI / Socionics, they would get confused or get the wrong understanding, which means you won't achieve your purpose rather increase their misunderstanding. Got my point?). Do you have arguments for why Hitchens is ILI?
    How do you describe a "valued" function?

    Hitchens... well, he's an intellectual with strong opinions, but let's stay on topic.

    But you said that Te- is 4D? Basically, they are not interested in chess (because Te- is unconscious), but if they play it, then they can naturally start using Te-? (and then they would be great at it due to the logical deduction nature of Te?) In the similar manner, every unconscious function can be "used" for good purpose, but they need to be "forced" from the outside? For example, in Model G, Se- is considered a strong function for an IEI (in terms of energy), but it needs to be supplied from the outside, this is why they can be very pushy when drive by strong emotions.
    Id functions are private and they are used sporadically. IEI can play chess just as well as ILI can strategize about social relations. However, IEI's Ni+ is one of the Ignoring functions.

    I am very skeptical of Model G. Gulenko needs to convince his fellow socionists first.

    Te- or Te+? Do you put the shared aspect of functions in both -+ signs, or you consider them entirely separate functions?
    Both. It doesn't matter... both. And it is actually the aspects rather than the functions that causes +/-.

    If logical deductions belong to both Te- or Te+, then the difference between Te- and Te+ would be that the former is about taking the most efficient route (through logical deduction) and latter would be deducting the conclusion using the factual information / evidence? I can see IEIs lacking in both areas to be honest.
    Both are about logical deduction. Te- makes decisions about prior Ni+ thoughts. Come up with a scenario at work/in school where you try to "outsmart" your colleagues. Those decisions will be sophisticated (3D/4D).

    Dimensionality is the same as Model A. What I don't understand how you associate 1D-4D with isolated functions when they can't be talked in isolation? Why not simply say IEI's NiFe is 4D, NiTe is 3D? To me it seems like you are putting symmetry where it doesn't exist or they don't matter anymore.
    Okay, now I see what you mean. I should not have used "in isolation". I just meant that you cannot discuss Ni+ without recognizing that Te causes '+'. Hence, saying that IEI's Ni in Model A has both '+' and '-' is incorrect.

    So, you are trying to defy the stereotypes that have arisen due to the blind faith in Model A (and other factors)?
    Yes... but I just want an accurate model.

    Are you confident enough that Model D isn't crude approximation either and the dimensionality/conscious/unconscious would apply to every subtype? Dimensionality and conscious/unconscious can't be changed due to environmental factors? Did you base your model on hypothetical scenarios or you have actually observed people in real-life? For example, in order to validate it, I need to meet at least 10 people of all the types (with subtype variations).
    I am convinced that Model D is accurate, but it takes time to validate a new model. First things first, people should begin to estimate the strength/sophistication of NiFe vs. NiTe, SiTe vs. SiFe etc.
    Last edited by Petter; 07-28-2016 at 05:28 PM.

  3. #43
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    It depends on the situation. It could be Te+ or Te-. Orders about specific things is Te+ . IEI's Te+ is a weak mental function in Model D.
    Specific things? If I tell someone to give me the glass of water, it will be Te+ and if I explain the steps then it will be Ti+? What about Te- then? Which kinds of orders require Te-? General orders? Give me examples.

    You can use the vital functions whenever you want as well. The problem is that you start thinking about Te- and 30 seconds (or perhaps a bit more) later you have automatically switched to Ti-, without you even noticing it.
    I see what you mean, and I can relate to the forgetting about Te- after few seconds or minutes. Maybe one can use the vital function if forced from the outside? (in an example of chess, because in this case one MUST use Ni+Te- considering that these two functions are required for strategizing and taking the best action)

    I think both the mental and vital functions can be used unconsciously. The Leading function could be an exception.
    Using mental functions unconsciously? How?

    Yes, you are describing a weak and unconscious Se-. ILI openly complains about immigrants, criminals...
    What about ILI's 1D Se+? How it differs from IEI's 2D Se+? Give me examples. Also, in your Model D, an LII would have 4D Se+, but 1D Se-? They would know which person can benefit them, but they have zero skills when it comes to pushing people, right?

    Hmm? SLEs giving orders? My experience is different. I think they influence people either directly via physical dominance or indirectly via "salesman tactics".
    My point is that there is no special "force" that SLE uses. SLE is mostly in the here and now, so he/she will be automatically be dominant. When IEI is in "NiFe land" the SLE has seized an opportunity in the real/physical world.
    Yes, I meant they naturally use the aggressive tactics to get what they want, and live in here and now.

    That's 1D Te+. Te- is about the best/most efficient way when you are strategizing/visualizing (Ni+) something.
    So... you are saying IEIs are capable to strategize or know about the best/most efficient methods, but unable to follow through?

    This is too general. It could be other functions as well.
    Let's say I am advising my colleagues that they should study from xyz books in the given time as that will help them "outsmart" other colleagues. What functions would I be using?


    Can you explain this part a bit further?
    How are you calling Te- a 4D function for an IEI when the dimensionality is supposed to be applied to an isolated function?

    You: "your model is nothing but an alternative perspective to Model A"

    What do you mean by this?
    Model A doesn't have -+ signs, but dimensionality and consciousness/unconsciousness, if you map functions to Model A's position / blocks, you would get (for an IEI):

    4D: Ni- (ego), Fi+ (id)
    3D: Fe+ (ego) Ne- (id)
    2D: Si- (super-ego) Ti+ (super-id)
    1D: Te+ (super-ego) Se- (super-id)

    So, basically you further distributed the 1D-4D dimensionality to -+ signs, making it two Model As. Btw, are you sure that Ne+ is 4D and conscious, and Ne- is 3D and unconscious for an IEI? Can you give me real-life examples? In Model A, for example, it is assumed that Ignoring function is used along with Demonstrative, so Ne- belongs to super-id. Conscious here would mean able to use it constantly (and not for just a moment or "30 seconds" as you put it earlier). Ne+Ti- belongs to ego block, right? (this is why IEI can look very much like an LII or ILE)

    By "an alternative perspective", I mean that your Model doesn't necessarily contradicts Model A (similarly how Model G doesn't contradict it and seems to explain functions in a different manner... internalities, externatilies, etc.,) or am I wrong?

    How do you think my view differs from socionists' views.
    Because it seems to me that dimensionality was supposed to apply on isolated functions not the -+ signs formed through combination of functions, so here applying the dimensionality to -+ signs would only lead to confusion, for example, you haven't explained yet how Te- is 4D for an IEI... in comparison to which type? You said strategizing requires taking decisions, thus Te- would be used, but how that's the sign of 4D? How to quantify it? For example, I can see how Fe is 4D for an SEE and 1D for an ILI who are unable to make facial expressions in a normative way. How +Fe is 4D for an ILI? If it's just a matter of strategizing about social issues, then it doesn't make sense to call Fe+ 4D at all, just say that Ni- (or Ni+) is 4D. It just seems to me you arbitrary applied this dimensionality to functions in order to either create the symmetry or just to match the standard.

    How do you describe a "valued" function?
    A "valued" function would be the one we can use with psychological comfort and has positive effects on our psyche, so the weak valued functions, even if they are hard to use on our own (unless we put so much efforts), if supplied from the outside, we feel good about it.


    Id functions are private and they are used sporadically. IEI can play chess just as well as ILI can strategize about social relations. However, IEI's Ni+ is one of the Ignoring functions.
    Ni+ is ignoring because it's unconscious (or subconscious)? Did Ni+ get the + sign because it is formed by the combination of NiTe?

    Both are about logical deduction. Te- makes decisions about prior Ni+ thoughts. Come up with a scenario at work/in school where you try to "outsmart" your colleagues. Those decisions will be sophisticated (3D/4D).
    "Scenario" seems to be coming from Ni+. Also, Te- is used with Ni+, right? So, when an IEI is playing the chess, he is basically relying on the vital functions?
    Last edited by seriousguy; 07-30-2016 at 01:00 AM.

  4. #44
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    Is the Socionics intertype relations chart accurate? Yes and no. Model D shows that it has to be modified. LIE's Te- does not supervise IEI's Te+ directly. But at the same time, minus aspects of Te are sometimes connected with plus aspects of Te, so LIEs Te+ can be more obvious than LSI's Te+.
    What about duality? SLE ego block would be Se- Ti+, second ego would be Si+ Fe-, right? So, they would give 3D Ti+ (practical "how tos", rules) to an IEI and get 3D Ti- in return? (because their Ti-... abstract models... would be 2D) SLE do not have their Ti- models as sophisticated as an IEI?
    Last edited by seriousguy; 07-29-2016 at 05:37 PM.

  5. #45
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also, tell me which functions are accepting/producing according to you, is Ne+ producing for an IEI?

  6. #46
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    Specific things? If I tell someone to give me the glass of water, it will be Te+ and if I explain the steps then it will be Ti+? What about Te- then? Which kinds of orders require Te-? General orders? Give me examples.
    Weighing/speculating pros and cons when you are going to buy a product. "Do I a really need it? Will it be useful? What's the quality of the product..."

    A programmer gives instructions

    Thinking about a scenario at work, and then deciding what aspects are favorable

    I see what you mean, and I can relate to the forgetting about Te- after few seconds or minutes. Maybe one can use the vital function if forced from the outside? (in an example of chess, because in this case one MUST use Ni+Te- considering that these two functions are required for strategizing and taking the best action)
    What do you mean by "force from the outside"?

    Using mental functions unconsciously? How?
    I am not sure... this is speculation... but i think IEI uses some aspects of Fe+ unconsciously while being focused on Ni-.

    What about ILI's 1D Se+? How it differs from IEI's 2D Se+? Give me examples.
    ... and IEI's Se+ is conscious, which is also an important factor. SeFi is about actually meeting and interacting with people. There is no doubt that IEI is more socially active than ILI. A 1D function oversimplifies... it is black and white, so ILI either pays no attention at all to his girlfriend/friend or he is very intense/thoughtful. IEI is not extreme in this way when it comes to relationships.

    Also, in your Model D, an LII would have 4D Se+, but 1D Se-?
    No, LII has 1D Se+ and 4D Se-.

    They would know which person can benefit them, but they have zero skills when it comes to pushing people, right?
    I don't think Se- is about pushing people. A type with 3D/4D Se- uses appropriate defensive methods in the physical world. LII's Se- looks like LSE's Se-.

    Yes, I meant they naturally use the aggressive tactics to get what they want, and live in here and now.
    ok

    So... you are saying IEIs are capable to strategize or know about the best/most efficient methods, but unable to follow through?
    yes... in most cases.

    Let's say I am advising my colleagues that they should study from xyz books in the given time as that will help them "outsmart" other colleagues. What functions would I be using?
    You are constantly using many different functions, so it is not always that easy to discern a particular function. But you giving them some books and saying "read this", that would be Te+.

    How are you calling Te- a 4D function for an IEI when the dimensionality is supposed to be applied to an isolated function?
    Because Te- IS an isolated function. I didn't mean it like that. See my previous comment regarding this.

    Model A doesn't have -+ signs,
    "your model is nothing but an alternative perspective to Model A"
    This is contradictory.

    but dimensionality and consciousness/unconsciousness, if you map functions to Model A's position / blocks, you would get (for an IEI):
    So, basically you further distributed the 1D-4D dimensionality to -+ signs, making it two Model As.
    4D: Ni- (ego), Fi+ (id)
    3D: Fe+ (ego) Ne- (id)
    2D: Si- (super-ego) Ti+ (super-id)
    1D: Te+ (super-ego) Se- (super-id)
    No, because IEI´s Ne+ is more obvious than Ne-. +/- doesn't work in Model A.

    Btw, are you sure that Ne+ is 4D and conscious, and Ne- is 3D and unconscious for an IEI? Can you give me real-life examples?
    You must also distinguish between main functions and secondary functions. You are a very introverted subtype, right?

    Ne is about humor. IEI and ILE get along very well for a reason. They share the same sense of humor. You usually don't see "ENFp-ness" in the IEI. For example, Craig Ferguson's humor probably doesn't attract you.

    In Model A, for example, it is assumed that Ignoring function is used along with Demonstrative, so Ne- belongs to super-id.
    No, see comment above about +/-.

    Conscious here would mean able to use it constantly (and not for just a moment or "30 seconds" as you put it earlier). Ne+Ti- belongs to ego block, right? (this is why IEI can look very much like an LII or ILE)
    Yes.

    By "an alternative perspective", I mean that your Model doesn't necessarily contradicts Model A (similarly how Model G doesn't contradict it and seems to explain functions in a different manner... internalities, externatilies, etc.,) or am I wrong?
    It doesn't contradict the basic structure of Model A. However, Model D contradicts some aspects of Model A. IEI's Fi is not always 4D, and it is not always Id etc.

    Because it seems to me that dimensionality was supposed to apply on isolated functions not the -+ signs formed through combination of functions, so here applying the dimensionality to -+ signs would only lead to confusion, for example, you haven't explained yet how Te- is 4D for an IEI... in comparison to which type? You said strategizing requires taking decisions, thus Te- would be used, but how that's the sign of 4D? How to quantify it? For example, I can see how Fe is 4D for an SEE and 1D for an ILI who are unable to make facial expressions in a normative way. How +Fe is 4D for an ILI? If it's just a matter of strategizing about social issues, then it doesn't make sense to call Fe+ 4D at all, just say that Ni- (or Ni+) is 4D. It just seems to me you arbitrary applied this dimensionality to functions in order to either create the symmetry or just to match the standard.
    Facial expressions is related to Fe-.

    No, because strategy is not solely about Ni. Any strategy involves decisions. You cannot just visualize a scenario/problem (Ni). If the strategy is about subjects/people then it is NiFe or FeNi.

    A "valued" function would be the one we can use with psychological comfort and has positive effects on our psyche, so the weak valued functions, even if they are hard to use on our own (unless we put so much efforts), if supplied from the outside, we feel good about it.
    I disagree strongly with this. It is simply not true that IEI's OWN usage of Fi (in Model A) or Fi+ (in Model D) causes negative effects on our psyche. It is other people's excessive usage (from your point of view) that causes irritation. Especially when aspects of (your) Super-Ego functions are expressed verbally.

    Ni+ is ignoring because it's unconscious (or subconscious)?
    It is called Ignoring because IEI tends to igore it. (Some subtypes of) IEI uses Ne+ a lot, so Ni+ must be ignored. They "disturb" each other. And consequently Ni+ is pushed into unconsciousness.

    Did Ni+ get the + sign because it is formed by the combination of NiTe?
    Yes. The information aspects.

    "Scenario" seems to be coming from Ni+. Also, Te- is used with Ni+, right? So, when an IEI is playing the chess, he is basically relying on the vital functions?
    Yes.

    What about duality? SLE ego block would be Se- Ti+, second ego would be Si+ Fe-, right? So, they would give 3D Ti+ (practical "how tos", rules) to an IEI and get 3D Ti- in return? (because their Ti-... abstract models... would be 2D) SLE do not have their Ti- models as sophisticated as an IEI?
    That's accurate.

    Also, tell me which functions are accepting/producing according to you, is Ne+ producing for an IEI?
    No. Ne+, Se+, Si+ and Ni+ are accepting functions for an IEI.

  7. #47
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    Weighing/speculating pros and cons when you are going to buy a product. "Do I a really need it? Will it be useful? What's the quality of the product..."

    A programmer gives instructions

    Thinking about a scenario at work, and then deciding what aspects are favorable
    But, I think most agree that IEIs lack the decisiveness in such matters, for example, they may spend too much money on something useless on the fly.

    What do you mean by "force from the outside"?
    We both agree that we can use vital function consciously for a moment, what I meant is that we can't use it for a long time unless there is an absolute reason for it, kind of requiring the external stimulus (i.e., certain activities require one to use certain functions). In the case of Ni+Te- example, I don't think such aspects would be enjoyable for an IEI unless they MUST do these things, then they may be able to restrain for a longer time without resorting to the approach of Ni-, Ti- or other mental functions.

    I am not sure... this is speculation... but i think IEI uses some aspects of Fe+ unconsciously while being focused on Ni-.
    Yes, for example, if they focus too much on Ni-, then they may start losing the sense of emotional atmosphere and Fe+ goes into subconscious.

    No, LII has 1D Se+ and 4D Se-.
    I don't think Se- is about pushing people. A type with 3D/4D Se- uses appropriate defensive methods in the physical world. LII's Se- looks like LSE's Se-.
    You are contradicting yourself, you said earlier that Se- is used in pushing people. How 4D Se- looks in LII?

    yes... in most cases.
    In most cases? Are there exceptions?

    You are constantly using many different functions, so it is not always that easy to discern a particular function. But you giving them some books and saying "read this", that would be Te+.
    No, if I actually sense naturally that reading certain books will help them achieve something (perhaps those books have helped me in the past), and I tell them categorically, then I think that would be Ni+Te- (and the categories would be created through either Ti- or Ti+).

    This is contradictory.
    How? You added signs to your Model, but still using a Model A as the basis.

    You must also distinguish between main functions and secondary functions. You are a very introverted subtype, right?
    Not really, but not fully ambiverted either. I think my weak functions are stronger, particularly Ti- (fair understanding on how concrete objects work, able to isolate the parts from something and fix it), Fe- (negative emotions, vulgar vocabulary, swearing...), Te+ (able to order, work and manipulate objects somewhat), Se- (able to understand who can benefit me or what people want from me) and Se+ (a bit pushy, understanding of certain aggressive tactics). Ni- and Fi+ is in the background (not verbalized) most of the time. Ne+ is verbalized a lot though (especially in close distance when I am feeling comfortable). Ti+ is good enough, Fe+ is not good (though tell me which function is used in the "acting"? I think I am good at acting or playing a role for a while, but not empathizing with people, feeling the emotions of other people and understanding social navigation). I would be something like IEI-8,5. Do you find any correlation between your subtype system to DCNH? (and Big Five traits, for example, I am incredibly neurotic and feel that I use weak functions all the time)

    Ne is about humor. IEI and ILE get along very well for a reason. They share the same sense of humor. You usually don't see "ENFp-ness" in the IEI. For example, Craig Ferguson's humor probably doesn't attract you.
    I do love Ne humor, but I don't understand the distinction between ENTp's humor and ENFp's humor. For example, I really love Bill Maher's humor (see this video). Is he ENTp or ENFp?

    Facial expressions is related to Fe-.
    For this reason, LII's and LII's Fe- would be 2D? (because they seem to have better facial expressions)

    I disagree strongly with this. It is simply not true that IEI's OWN usage of Fi (in Model A) or Fi+ (in Model D) causes negative effects on our psyche. It is other people's excessive usage (from your point of view) that causes irritation. Especially when aspects of (your) Super-Ego functions are expressed verbally.
    I see what you mean here (will come back later on it).

  8. #48
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,791
    Mentioned
    149 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    So after some thought on this I think it is more likely the shadow ego is one's beneficiary, rather the one's mirage. I can very easily see SEI within EII, SLE within LIE, LII within IEI, etc. If you look around on these forums you will a lot people having trouble typing themselves with their benefit types. I myself could much more easily see myself as LII if SLI was my shadow ego as I relate a lot to some SLI descriptions, yet feel I relate more to alpha then delta. I also see a lot of people switching or having trouble deciding between benefit types on these forums, a few quick examples off the top of head being @jason_m (LII and IEI) @Joy (SEE and LSE) and @Suz (ESE amd IEE).

  9. #49
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    But, I think most agree that IEIs lack the decisiveness in such matters, for example, they may spend too much money on something useless on the fly.
    Lacking decisiveness corresponds to a strong Te-. ILI weighs pros and cons forever :-) Both negative and positive aspects of a product. Spending too much money corresponds to a weak Te+.

    We both agree that we can use vital function consciously for a moment, what I meant is that we can't use it for a long time unless there is an absolute reason for it, kind of requiring the external stimulus (i.e., certain activities require one to use certain functions). In the case of Ni+Te- example, I don't think such aspects would be enjoyable for an IEI unless they MUST do these things, then they may be able to restrain for a longer time without resorting to the approach of Ni-, Ti- or other mental functions.
    I think it is the other way around; the fact that IEI must do these things makes it not enjoyable. Id functions are private and sporadic. But there are, for example, lots of ILI mathematicians (TiNe), so let's not exaggerate the unusefulness of the Id functions.

    You are contradicting yourself, you said earlier that Se- is used in pushing people. How 4D Se- looks in LII?
    Well, it depends on what we mean by "pushing people". It can refer to many different kinds of behavior. SLEs don't give orders as you suggested. But they do influence people with "salesman tactics" and physical dominance.

    Se- is definitely 4D in LII. They do not act "hysterically" when faced with physical threats. And just like SLI and LSE, they avoid these kinds of situations. A 4D Id function has (usually) nothing to prove for itself.

    No, if I actually sense naturally that reading certain books will help them achieve something (perhaps those books have helped me in the past), and I tell them categorically, then I think that would be Ni+Te- (and the categories would be created through either Ti- or Ti+).
    It could be Te- as well. It depends on what exactly you are referring to.

    How? You added signs to your Model, but still using a Model A as the basis.
    You: "Model A doesn't have -+ signs" "your model is nothing but an alternative perspective to Model A"

    I: "The basic structure of Model A ... applies to Model D"

    I don't claim that Model D is an alternative Model A. +/- is impossible with eight functions (if defined as in Model D and Model B).

    Not really, but not fully ambiverted either. I think my weak functions are stronger, particularly Ti- (fair understanding on how concrete objects work, able to isolate the parts from something and fix it), Fe- (negative emotions, vulgar vocabulary, swearing...), Te+ (able to order, work and manipulate objects somewhat), Se- (able to understand who can benefit me or what people want from me) and Se+ (a bit pushy, understanding of certain aggressive tactics). Ni- and Fi+ is in the background (not verbalized) most of the time. Ne+ is verbalized a lot though (especially in close distance when I am feeling comfortable). Ti+ is good enough, Fe+ is not good (though tell me which function is used in the "acting"? I think I am good at acting or playing a role for a while, but not empathizing with people, feeling the emotions of other people and understanding social navigation). I would be something like IEI-8,5. Do you find any correlation between your subtype system to DCNH? (and Big Five traits, for example, I am incredibly neurotic and feel that I use weak functions all the time)
    You: "I would be something like IEI-2,3."

    Both ILE and IEI seem to have vulgar vocabulary. And IEE and ILI don't. This is probably related to a verbal ("valued") and weak Se- in ILE and IEI. I think this is a way of projecting toughness.

    I don't agree with your interpretation of Se- and Se+. Fe- is not about negative emotions. It's about both positive and negative aspects of ETHICS of emotions.

    Fe+ is about acting, i.e. playing with emotions, or speculating about relationships etc. EIE's and IEI's Fe+ is definitely strong. Hence, your Ti+ is weak. SLE is your dual!


    I do love Ne humor, but I don't understand the distinction between ENTp's humor and ENFp's humor. For example, I really love Bill Maher's humor (see this video). Is he ENTp or ENFp?
    He is most likely ENTp / ILE. He is absolutely not IEE.

    Ne- humor is black and bizarre.

    Ne+ humor is provocative. Russel Brand is a good example.

    For this reason, LII's and LII's Fe- would be 2D? (because they seem to have better facial expressions)
    No, I meant that LIIs are usually not good at facial expressions. LII's Fe- is 1D, vital... i.e. the Suggestive function.
    Last edited by Petter; 08-07-2016 at 06:25 AM.

  10. #50
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddytextures View Post
    So after some thought on this I think it is more likely the shadow ego is one's beneficiary, rather the one's mirage. I can very easily see SEI within EII, SLE within LIE, LII within IEI, etc. If you look around on these forums you will a lot people having trouble typing themselves with their benefit types. I myself could much more easily see myself as LII if SLI was my shadow ego as I relate a lot to some SLI descriptions, yet feel I relate more to alpha then delta. I also see a lot of people switching or having trouble deciding between benefit types on these forums, a few quick examples off the top of head being @jason_m (LII and IEI) @Joy (SEE and LSE) and @Suz (ESE amd IEE).
    You are suggesting that LIE's egos are TeNi and SeTi. This does not work for many reasons. First of all, SeTi is also extroverted so we cannot explain why some subtypes are more introverted. Secondly, LIEs are interested in technology (and SLEs are not), which is related to an accepting Ti. Thirdly, TeNi is a judging type and SeTi is a perceiving type. Fourthly, it is possible to confuse Te- with Ti+, but it is not possible to confuse Te- with Se-, i.e. typologists would have noticed a dominant Se- in LIE. And I don't agree with you that we see SEI in EII and LII in IEI etc etc.

    BTW, I think it would be useful if you figure out your own type first. Everybody needs a personal reference when analyzing the functions.
    Last edited by Petter; 08-11-2016 at 04:53 AM.

  11. #51
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am considering (not sure yet) a new order for the vital functions in Model D.

    ILI, main functions: Ni+, Te-, Si+, Fe- // Ti-, Ne+, Fi-, Se+

    Why?

    1) It makes more sense that Se+ is the most unconscious function if Ni+ is the most conscious function. The other functions follow this pattern as well (Te- and Fi- etc.)

    2) Many ILIs are interested in mathematics, and LIEs are not. It makes more sense that ILI's Ti- is an accepting function.

    3) This explains why ILI's Ne+ often is ignored, instead of Ti-.

  12. #52
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is a good non-observational / logical argument for Model D:

    We know that many LSIs are good mechanics and many LIIs are good mathematicians. Ti is obviously important in both professions. But what about Se/Si and Ne/Ni? Are the perceiving functions also important? Yes, of course they are. The LSI mechanic (Ti+Se-) must be able to process (i.e. have patience / an interest) the logic of different parts in a machine, AND he/she must also be able process all the details of the machine (Si-), AND he/she must also be able to process the behavior of different parts of the machine (Se-). The LSI cannot make a sophisticated logical evaluation of the machine without sophisiticated information from the perceiving functions!

    Hence, some aspects of ILI's Ti will not be strong/sophisticated since it does not get enough support from the weak Se- and Si-. And a strong Ne- will not make a difference in these situations, since he/she needs concrete and obvious knowledge/information about (for example) the machine. Therefore, we must separate ILI's Ti+ from Ti-!

    It is also important to distinguish between subjects/areas that the ILI never will find interesting and subjects that the ILI potentially could find interesting, but he/she currently does not find them interesting.

  13. #53
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Most socionists agree with me that + and - are caused by the blocking of information aspects or functions. SSS socionists disagree with this, but they cannot explain the phenomenon. Their vital functions are blocked like this: ILI, Se-Fi+ ...Ne-Ti+. This is not possible according to me. Here, I will explain why. (N.B. ILI's most obvious functions are Ni+, Te-, Si+, Fe-, Se-, Fi+, Ne-, Ti+).

    N blocked with T ---> N+ and T-
    N blocked with F ---> N- and F+
    S blocked with T ---> S- and T+
    S blocked with F ---> S+ and F-

    These perceiving and judging functions process two very different "things"; objects and subjects/people. Objects are physical things which are measured by length, weight, size etc. People are measured (mainly) by emotional responses. And we are emotionally connected with many people and events, in both the past and the future. So most of the emotional content of our lives is not found in the current social interaction. This means that we need to look beyond obviously visible and audible causes in order to get the details of behavior and emotional states (F+). We need to see people's potential behavior (Ne-) and different contexts (Ni-). In contrast, objects are not connected with each other like that. Most of the information about objects is clearly visible and audible in here and now. So a detailed evaluation of objects (T+) requires attention to concrete details (S).

    We can explain the other functions in a similar way. It is easy to perceive information about concrete objects, so we don't have to focus on the details. Instead, we naturally get bored and move on to something else (S-). But there is a lack of emotional information in language, body language, facial expressions and tone of voice. Therefore we need to focus on the details (S+).

    There are no clear connections between objects, so we must focus on the details if we want to see "hidden" information (N+). But there are many and (often) clear connections between people, so it makes more sense to scan over a large number of relationships to get the relevant information (N-)

    There is not enough emotional information in (ordinary) social interactions, and we (often) quickly move on to new comments etc. Therefore, we need a general approach (F-). There is not enough (logical) content in connections between objects, so we easily get bored and move on to something else (T-).

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This is an updated version of Model D. I think it is obvious that IEE's Fe+ and ILI's Ti- are accepting functions. This also explains positivism/negativism; negativists have accepting Ti- and Fi-.

    http://imgur.com/QUOggGu

  14. #54
    meme hotline Chae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    ethic 3
    Posts
    9,085
    Mentioned
    711 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    And... how to use all of that in a concise way?

  15. #55
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chae View Post
    And... how to use all of that in a concise way?
    What do you mean?

    If you agree with post 52 and/or post 53, then you can only draw one conclusion: each type has two Egos. Ti+Se- is your second Ego.

  16. #56
    meme hotline Chae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    ethic 3
    Posts
    9,085
    Mentioned
    711 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    What do you mean?

    If you agree with post 52 and/or post 53, then you can only draw one conclusion: each type has two Egos. Ti+Se- is your second Ego.
    By use I mean, how to apply it when typing? How tangible is the method? Knowing that each type has two egos doesn't really help, there has to be a strategy on how to spot how it manifests. Your model, as well thought out as it is, is useless when you can't take it to figure out something in an effective and realistic way.

  17. #57
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chae View Post
    By use I mean, how to apply it when typing? How tangible is the method? Knowing that each type has two egos doesn't really help, there has to be a strategy on how to spot how it manifests. Your model, as well thought out as it is, is useless when you can't take it to figure out something in an effective and realistic way.
    You can apply it the same way as Model A. Model D will actually make typing easier, since you now know that LIE sometimes looks like LSI. You will also be able to distinguish between clearly extroverted LIEs and ambiverted LIEs.

    If the LIE is in an introverted environment then the "LSI-ness" is noticeable, just like my "ENFp-ness" is noticeable in an extroverted environment.

  18. #58
    meme hotline Chae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    ethic 3
    Posts
    9,085
    Mentioned
    711 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    You can apply it the same way as Model A. Model D will actually make typing easier, since you now know that LIE sometimes looks like LSI. You will also be able to distinguish between clearly extroverted LIEs and ambiverted LIEs.

    If the LIE is in an introverted environment then the "LSI-ness" is noticeable, just like my "ENFp-ness" is noticeable in an extroverted environment.
    Ah, perfect! Thanks for explaining it.

  19. #59
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Durmstrang School
    Posts
    2,851
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think this model is well-thought-out enough to not be completely silly but I still think it's sort of overcomplicating things at this point. Could you explain the subtypes more please? Thanks!


    Anyways, I think SEEs being into law is quite obvious just from Model A. They have a hidden agenda, so external facts () combined with power () lends itself well to law. It's the same as how xII tend to have complicated personal care routines, xSI like sci-Fi and fantasy, or xIE are into weapons and martial arts often. HA also explains pretty well why people can get mistaken for their benefactor: people see the HA function, and then the creative for the benefactor is one of the strong Id functions on the actual type. That doesn't mean Model D is wrong, just that it's not necessary to explain that.
    Last edited by Pallas; 10-12-2016 at 09:34 PM.

  20. #60
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Verbrannte View Post
    I think this model is well-thought-out enough to not be completely silly but I still think it's sort of overcomplicating things at this point. Could you explain the subtypes more please? Thanks!
    There are 100 subtypes in my system. A very extroverted LIE is subtype LIE-x,1. A very introverted ILI is subtype ILI-x,1. An ambiverted LIE is subtype LIE-x,10. An ambiverted ILI is subtype ILI-x,10. Ambiverted subtypes use their secondary functions much more often than clearly introverted or extroverted subtypes.

    An LIE with very strong strong functions and very weak weak functions (which is the only way functions can be accentuated according to me) is subtype LIE-1,x. An LIE with very weak strong functions and very strong weak functions is subtype LIE-10,x.

    Anyways, I think SEEs being into law is quite obvious just from Model A. They have a hidden agenda, so external facts () combined with power () lends itself well to law. It's the same as how xII tend to have complicated personal care routines, xSI like sci-Fi and fantasy, or xIE are into weapons and martial arts often. HA also explains pretty well why people can get mistaken for their benefactor: people see the HA function, and then the creative for the benefactor is one of the strong Id functions on the actual type. That doesn't mean Model D is wrong, just that it's not necessary to explain that.
    I don't agree with the notion of "valued" functions. High dimensional functions are preferred. Low dimensional functions are not preferred. Weak "valued" or verbal functions correspond to "I want". This is not what we actually do.

    My view on Se is closer to Berens' descriptions than Socionics' descriptions, so Se is not just about "power" (according to me).

    http://www.socionics.com/rel/bn.htm

    "The Beneficiary thinks of the Benefactor as an interesting and meaningful person, usually over-evaluating them in the beginning. " So ILI thinks LSI is interesting etc... really? Model D shows that the intertype relations chart must be modified.

    If you argue that one sees Ne because it is a strong Id function, then you must also argue that one doesn't see Fi because it is weak, right?
    Last edited by Petter; 10-13-2016 at 08:51 AM.

  21. #61
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is an indirect argument for Model D (with ILI's Ti-, Fi-, Fe+ and Te+ being accepting functions):

    https://translate.yandex.ru/translat...i-a&lang=ru-en

  22. #62
    :popcorn: Capitalist Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,207
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hold on there, pal. Pretty sure my D is the model D. Ladies...

  23. #63
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    This is an indirect argument for Model D (with ILI's Ti-, Fi-, Fe+ and Te+ being accepting functions):

    https://translate.yandex.ru/translat...i-a&lang=ru-en
    How? (I have trouble following the article)

  24. #64
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    How? (I have trouble following the article)
    Their research shows that IEI's Ni (and other functions as well) is both accepting and producing in Model A. If that actually was true in Model A, then we would not see the difference between IEI and EIE.

    This indirectly supports Model D since all functions have an accepting + and a producing - , and vice versa.

  25. #65
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It is a fact that at least 10-15% of all mathematicians are ILI.

    It is a fact that mathematicians sometimes review theorems.

    Ti+ (L+) means maximizing the positive (logical) and avoiding the negative (illogical).

    Conclusion: SSS Model A does not work!


    SSS:

    +L — logicality, compliance with logicality in any details, strict logic, non-recognition of illogicality, orientation on clarification of details, aspiration to split up, detail, concretize. Concrete usage of rules, order, consistency (legislation, resolution, regulations, rules, instructions, etc.).

    −L — illogicality and logicality, compliance with orderliness and logicality in the broad sense, lax logic; global, universal, abstract logic, general regularities.


  26. #66
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is why I think Model D is accurate.

    All types have two egos according to this model, so LIE has TeNi and TiSe. But most of the time the LIE does not look like an LSI. Instead, he (or she) uses TiSe to support TeNi. Te- is about imaginary organizations (in its broadest sense). For example, an LIE sees organizational improvements at a workplace. If the LIE wants to specify or concretize these ideas, he needs to apply some kind of logical structure. That is Ti+ (... it doesn't matter if it is in his head or on paper). And it is not Ti- since that's an imaginary logical structure. So drawing a new flowchart involves Ti+.

    LII has these egos: TiNe and TeSi. An LII sees new logical structures. If the LII wants to simplify or modify these structures, he needs Te+ (and Si-). For example, a mathematical object is Ti- and a calculation that follows from it is Te+.

    ILI has these egos: NiTe and NeFi. An ILI sees new scenarios (and patterns). The problem is that animate objects are unpredictable. So if the ILI wants to specify the scenarios, he needs to consider potential reactions from people, animals etc. That is Ne-.

    A conscious NiFe or FeNi does not complement ILI's NiTe. NiFe visualizes a different scenario and FeNi focuses on emotional presentations, which don't affect NiTe directly. NiTe is affected by (potential) words and action.
    Last edited by Petter; 01-12-2018 at 10:26 PM.

  27. #67
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here's an example which illustrates 'plus' and 'minus'. (We need 16 functions!)

    A woman is crying. (Another person's) Si+ notices her tear-stained eyes etc. Si+ is good at details, like facial features. A 'plus' function deals with 'how' and 'what' questions.

    Fe- wants to know why the woman is crying. Therefore Fe- makes an emotional evaluation of this event and other events (in the real world). Maybe there was a row. N.B. Ni- (and Ne-) is useless here. A 'minus' functions deals with 'why' questions.

    Fe+ wants to define emotional behaviors. She is crying, but is it justified? Fe+ starts speculating about this event.

    Ni- visualizes different scenarios which support the Fe+ judgement. For example, the woman had a row with her 4 year old child and she started crying. This seems ridiculous. Are there any scenarios which could explain this behavior?
    Last edited by Petter; 01-15-2018 at 09:17 AM.

  28. #68
    an object in motion woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    2,086
    Mentioned
    295 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default eat donkey meat everyday

    Cool + rad I made Model W based on asking/declaring rings, and afaik Model D's onto the same stuff, but cleaner and more fleshed out. Ran into this @ PerC, I got reading to do.

    I've settled on vital ring being free of definite permutation. Element soup. A and D-primary have vital ring deadlocked against mental ring. D-secondary is major, maybe main way forward. Ask/decl w posi/nega align for intra-person benefit ring analogue thingy, the good stuff flows, and super-ego bounds become less imprisoning.

     
    Hey I remembered I have a shit ton of drummers @ LII! And the timing is unreal irt precision in all cases. Kant @ LII ≈ cemented/benchmark. Ultra-precise w time. LSE afaik subdivides time into bricks. LII, pseudo-LSE, has this urge w/o enslavement to it, and more powerful ability.

    something something, super-ego pipeline to pseudo-ident, conflict pipeline to benefit ring, supervisor pipeline to activation, supervisee being better teacher to supervisor than reverse, blah blah
    p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
    trad metalz | (more coming)

  29. #69
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woofwoofl View Post
    Cool + rad I made Model W based on asking/declaring rings, and afaik Model D's onto the same stuff, but cleaner and more fleshed out. Ran into this @ PerC, I got reading to do.

    I've settled on vital ring being free of definite permutation. Element soup. A and D-primary have vital ring deadlocked against mental ring. D-secondary is major, maybe main way forward. Ask/decl w posi/nega align for intra-person benefit ring analogue thingy, the good stuff flows, and super-ego bounds become less imprisoning.

     
    Hey I remembered I have a shit ton of drummers @ LII! And the timing is unreal irt precision in all cases. Kant @ LII ≈ cemented/benchmark. Ultra-precise w time. LSE afaik subdivides time into bricks. LII, pseudo-LSE, has this urge w/o enslavement to it, and more powerful ability.

    something something, super-ego pipeline to pseudo-ident, conflict pipeline to benefit ring, supervisor pipeline to activation, supervisee being better teacher to supervisor than reverse, blah blah
    Have you posted your Model W on PerC or here?

  30. #70
    an object in motion woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    2,086
    Mentioned
    295 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    Have you posted your Model W on PerC or here?
    Yarr lemme link, plz pardon mess:

    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...FIAN-SOCIONICS
    p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
    trad metalz | (more coming)

  31. #71
    a two horned unicorn renegade COVID 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    sniffing your butt
    TIM
    ILE-α/H, LEVF
    Posts
    5,391
    Mentioned
    234 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    More contradictory models, yea! Or semi-contradictory.
    Sometimes, it all boils down to: show me the data.

    Model T is completely different. It comes from ego.

    In a way when you have thrown enough time to socionics you need to build something seemingly concrete, I think.

    I'm still waiting for better described methodology for Model S, @Sol.

    It would be nice to have chart of model makers about their education and interests.
    Measuring you right now

    Winning is for losers

  32. #72

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,835
    Mentioned
    1083 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    I'm still waiting for better described methodology for Model S
    What I'm using fits to model A.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  33. #73
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    More contradictory models, yea! Or semi-contradictory.
    Sometimes, it all boils down to: show me the data.

    Model T is completely different. It comes from ego.

    In a way when you have thrown enough time to socionics you need to build something seemingly concrete, I think.

    I'm still waiting for better described methodology for Model S, @Sol.

    It would be nice to have chart of model makers about their education and interests.
    Model D contradicts Model A, but I think Model A is inaccurate and incomplete.

  34. #74
    nyessss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    female
    Posts
    160
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    + and - signs are a situational subset akin to Reinen dichotomies. They generally just get in the way

  35. #75
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    800
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You are making a nice effort with this model, and are on the right track on some issues, but you are attributing causes incorrectly, and muddling up things a bit. For example, LIE and LSI are similar because their base and DS are the same but inverted, whereas LIEs are also similar (more so I think) to EII because their creative and HA are the same (but inverted). The creative of LSI, is in LIE's PoLR, so the similarities end there.

    The first step towards developing sign-related theories is agreeing on what each +/- version of each IM actually means. Then, it will be very easy to observe when someone is using one or another, and the rest of the theory can be developed.

  36. #76
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by muhtempus View Post
    + and - signs are a situational subset akin to Reinen dichotomies. They generally just get in the way
    Positivist and negativist types could perhaps be explained by +/-. But a Reinin trait does not cause +/-. And I disagree with you, +/- is important ... it is caused by the blocking of functions and all types need both versions. For example, inductive reasoning is not possible without intuition.

    Btw, I am skeptical of Reinin dichotomies (and so is SSS).

  37. #77
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    You are making a nice effort with this model, and are on the right track on some issues, but you are attributing causes incorrectly, and muddling up things a bit. For example, LIE and LSI are similar because their base and DS are the same but inverted, whereas LIEs are also similar (more so I think) to EII because their creative and HA are the same (but inverted). The creative of LSI, is in LIE's PoLR, so the similarities end there.
    Well, it depends on how you define the functions/IM elements. This is my view:

    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...r-IM-elements)

    Te and Ti are not the extroverted and the introverted versions of the same kind of logic.

    I don't think the vital functions are obvious in a type. Do you? How do you notice ILI's and LIE's vital Ti?

    The first step towards developing sign-related theories is agreeing on what each +/- version of each IM actually means. Then, it will be very easy to observe when someone is using one or another, and the rest of the theory can be developed.
    I agree with you. What does +/- mean according to you?
    Last edited by Petter; 01-17-2018 at 09:19 AM.

  38. #78
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    800
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    I don't think the vital functions are obvious in a type. Do you? How do you notice ILI's and LIE's vital Ti?
    The demonstrative is easy to spot, but ignoring is not so easy usually.

    I agree with you. What does +/- mean according to you?
    Not sure, but none of the definitions I've come across have been entirely satisfactory.

  39. #79
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    The demonstrative is easy to spot, but ignoring is not so easy usually.
    Can you give me an example of ILI's vital Ti?

  40. #80
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Why are there mental and vital functions? Because two functions must process information simultaneously. You cannot observe structural differences (Ti: longer, bigger, more...) without being somewhat aware of the object (Si or Ni).

    This means that ILI's vital Ti- is usually not easy to spot, since it is overshadowed by Ni+.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •