Results 1 to 40 of 733

Thread: Model D

Threaded View

  1. #11
    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
    There is a difference between what you want to talk about and what you actually talk about.

    Ego: you want to talk about these things, and you do

    Super-Ego: you don't want to talk..., but you do

    Super-Id: you want to talk..., but you don't

    Id: you don't want to talk..., and you don't


    IEI: Ni-, Fe+, Si-, Te+ and Ne+, Ti-, Se+, Fi- ... these are conscious or mental functions.
    I will come back to it later.

    This is about Te and/or Fi-
    Te- or Te+? How are you taking it in isolation when you said yourself that functions can't be discussed in isolation? When someone orders or push someone to do what they want, what functions (or combinations) they use? What about emotional pressure? Fe-Se-? Physical fight / violence? Se-Ti+?

    If you find a conscious 1D Se-, then you should also be able to find a 3D conscious Ne-. Do you?
    No. I find somewhat Ne+ conscious (i.e., finding possibilities in the objects, using metaphors to explain, etc.), but I am skeptical about your conscious / unconscious theory.

    How? When? To whom?
    General threats of violence / aggression if I find someone pushing me or showing aggression or telling me things to do I fucking hate already.

    In what sense?
    I can "feel" the energy around people without their actual demonstration of the strength, for example, if someone moves fast, talk loudly, give orders, have manly voice, etc. I would perceive him as stronger than someone who seems timid and languid, failing to assert themselves and getting lost in the physical space, etc. I would find them weak.

    Do you see more "SLE" than "SEE" in IEI?

    How is Se+ in the ILE according to you?
    Not sure about IEIs, but I see more "SLE" than "SEE" in me. Better Se- Ti- (able to order people what to do for me, push them and become persistent), and poor Se+ Fi- (bad social skills, not good social navigation, not able to talk about personal things)... my Fi+ is good though (good manners / ethics, able to understand who likes / dislikes me). How does Model D explain that? What would be my subtype?

    I don't know anything about Se+ in ILE.

    First of all, there is a difference between an accepting function and a producing function.
    Can you mention your own understanding of accepting and producing, and how it is relevant here? (don't give me the links, I have already read them, but failed to understand how it applies in "real" people) To be specific, tell me the difference in Te- producing (as in IEI) and Te- accepting (as in LIE).

    Here's one way of looking at it:

    Issue 1/2015 of the 'Socionics, Mentology and Personality Psychology' journal

    http://socioinfo.ru /article/48-obrabotka-informatsii

    This article connects Bukalov's concept of dimensionality with J. Feldman's levels of intelligence. 1D, 2D, 3D and 4D correspond to levels 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 and 7-8.

    1: one object
    2: many objects
    3: one process
    4: many processes
    5: one map
    6: many maps
    7: one system
    8: many systems
    I have heard of this theory before, but how it applies in real life? Is it even possible to empirically validate it?

    Are you comparing with ESI's/LSI's FeNi or TeNi? If someone has a weak FeNi, then he or she is not aware of social dynamics (backstabbing etc). That is not the case with ESI.
    I find it funny how you see these functions. In some instances, you talk about functions in isolation, and yet you explain in terms of combined functions. To me, your model is nothing but an alternative perspective to Model A, but you are screwing the original definitions (i.e., conscious / unconscious, dimensionality, etc.) to fit your theory, as if you don't agree with the basic terminologies of Socionics, i.e, you explained how NiTe is strategizing about the objects and then you said Te- is 4D for an IEI just because they are capable of doing that, but you failed to explain how you reached at this point and how this necessarily make Te- a 4D function when "strategizing" could simply be attributed to Ni, plus you have mentioned initially that Te is about "facts and logical deductions"... how so? How it changes the opinions of the majority who think that IEIs tend to have poor grasp on factual information? (due to Te PoLR, which is clearly 4D in your model). You kept saying that the concept of dimensionality is same in your model and Model A, yet it's impossible for me to validate the new dimensionality that you have associated with functions, because I have a different prior knowledge of dimensionality, conscious / unconscious, etc. Basically, I want to know what you are trying to gain from this model, and how it will help people in further polishing their understanding on typology,
    Last edited by seriousguy; 07-23-2016 at 04:34 PM.

Posting Permissions

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