Model D

[Petter]

dichotomies

1. people-oriented vs. task-oriented (DMN vs. CEN) ... This is the main dichotomy. DMN ---> LN and mirror network B ... CEN ---> DAN/VAN and mirror network A

2. the external world vs. the internal world (DAN/VAN, mirror networks, the premotor cortex, OFC vs. the precuneus (and the temporal lobe, hippocampus etc)) ... practical vs. theoretical/fact-based ... Se vs. Ni/Si

3. expressive/impulsive vs. inexpressive (dopamine sensitivity ... or SNS vs PSNS ... or short-term memory (in-the-moment processing) vs. long-term memory) ... SEE vs ESI ... 16PF: Liveliness, F

4. the dorsal stream vs. the ventral stream ... "how"/"where" vs. "what" ... spatial rel. vs. patterns ... unambiguous vs. ambiguous (vlPFC, heuristic) ... DAN/mirror network A vs. VAN ... dmPFC/mirror network B vs. LN ... Fi vs. Fe

5. the left hemisphere vs. the right hemisphere ... detail-oriented vs. big picture ... analysis vs. synthesis ... fine motor skills vs. gross motor skills

6. defend vs. care ... or competitive vs. cooperative (vasopressin vs. oxytocin)

7. logical reasoning vs. habits, facts, size/shape (PFC vs. the striatum ... or the anterior brain vs. the posterior brain) ... a comparison between two systems/working memory vs. a comparison between two objects ... Ti vs. Se/Si

8. imagination/prefrontal synthesis vs. memory recall (lateral PFC: high activity vs. low activity) ... DMN: episodic simulation vs. episodic memory ... Ni vs. Si

9. current strategy vs. alternative strategies (medial frontopolar cortex vs. lateral frontopolar cortex) ... anti-Ne vs. Ne

10. (long-term) goals vs. immediate sensory needs (limbic SN vs. sensory SN) ... Ne/Te vs. Si

11. problem-solving vs. decision-making (FPN vs. FPN + CON/SN)

12. structure vs. cause and effect ... mathematics vs. physics (the parietal lobe vs. the temporal lobe)


------


DMN (the default mode network), FPN (the fronto-parietal network), CON (the cingulo-opercular network), SN (the salience network), CEN (the central executive network) ... CEN = FPN + CON,

DAN (the dorsal attention network), VAN (the ventral attention network, LN (the limbic network)

large-scale brain networks 2.png

large-scale brain networks 3.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/Fy7tHEO.png

https://i.imgur.com/9Ux4pFL.png (MPN = the limbic network, LN = the language network ("left VAN"))

https://i.imgur.com/dY7Zmo3.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/LCsFXuA.png

mirror network A: "translates observed actions devoid of any emotional content into motor representations"

mirror network B: social interaction (the external world) and empathy (DMN, the internal world)

SN: "select which stimuli are deserving of our attention" ... "plays a central role in switching between the default mode network (DMN) and central executive network (CEN)"

LN: appraisal of subjective value, emotional expression and recognition of emotion


------


functions

Sldp, Sldt, Slvx, Slvy, Srdp, Srdt, Srvx, Srvy

N, T, F



l = the left hemisphere

r = the right hemisphere

d = the dorsal stream

v = the ventral stream

p = the parietal lobe

t = the temporal lobe

x = problem-solving

y = decision-making


------


attitudes

E = expressive/quick decisions

I = inexpressive

L = alternative strategies ... lateral frontopolar cortex

M = current strategy ... medial frontopolar cortex

C = competitive

A = agreeableness (cooperative)


------


types

Terence Tao: I, L, A ... N, T + Srdp > Sldp > Srdt

Bill Gates: I, M, C ... N, T + Sldp > Sldt > Srdp

Bobby Fischer: I, M, C ... N, T + Srdt > Slvy > Srvx (patterns)


------


method 2

networks = functions


------


previous versions of Model D: see post #41

[seriousguy]

ILI's strongest functions have Fe+ (maximization of positive emotions), but weakest function have Fe- (minimization or avoidance of negative emotions), did you base your findings on your personal observations of different ILIs or it's just hypothetical (based on certain axioms)? In the same manner, IEI's strongest functions would have Te- (business logic of risk and entrepreneurship... which supervisor LIE shares), but weakest functions would have Te+ (logic of use and rational management of resources.... which conflictor LSE shares). In what sense it is strongest / weakest? Ability / Inability to hold a lot of information for a long time or competency / incompetency in its usage when it is required in the environment? How the conscious / unconscious functions are determined here? That is, what makes Fe+ unconscious, but Fe- conscious in an ILI?

What are Bukalov's "Shadow functions"? You said (if I understand correctly) when one strong function is strengthened then every strong functions are strengthened (thus NiTiNeFe would be strengthened), this contradicts the inert/contact subtype system where strengthening of Ni (in an ILI) would lead to the strengthening of NiFiNeFe (notice the Ti vs Fi difference). How do you explain that?

I am lost to understand (and couldn't follow) how you notated the subtypes (e.g., LII-2,7), can you elaborate?

[Petter]

ILI's strongest functions have Fe+ (maximization of positive emotions), but weakest function have Fe- (minimization or avoidance of negative emotions), did you base your findings on your personal observations of different ILIs or it's just hypothetical (based on certain axioms)?

This model is mainly based on my personal observations, but also on research made by various socionists. Yes, ILI's Fe+ is a 4D function. However, it is the most unconscious secondary function. Also, we cannot look at Fe+ in isolation. It is actually the exchange of information (aspects) between Ni and Fe that causes +/-. I agree with Tsypin regarding this.

In the same manner, IEI's strongest functions would have Te- (business logic of risk and entrepreneurship... which supervisor LIE shares), but weakest functions would have Te+ (logic of use and rational management of resources.... which conflictor LSE shares). In what sense it is strongest / weakest?

Yes, IEI's NiTe are strong functions. But it is ILI's Te- that you sometimes see in IEI, not LIE's Te-. Model D uses accepting/producing functions.

'Strongest' corresponds to 4-dimensional, 'weakest' corresponds to 1-dimensional.

Ability / Inability to hold a lot of information for a long time

This is about dimensionality.

or competency / incompetency in its usage when it is required in the environment?

This is not necessarily related to dimensionality.

How the conscious / unconscious functions are determined here? That is, what makes Fe+ unconscious, but Fe- conscious in an ILI?

First of all, ILI's Fe- is actually semi-conscious. Model D is in a sense two Model As. Fe- "pushes" Fi- to unconsciousness, and Fi+ "pushes" Fe+ to unconsciousness.

What are Bukalov's "Shadow functions"?

Read about Model B here (I use Bing machine translation):

http://socionic.info/pdf/as498.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...TIM_and_Socion

You said (if I understand correctly) when one strong function is strengthened then every strong functions are strengthened (thus NiTiNeFe would be strengthened), this contradicts the inert/contact subtype system where strengthening of Ni (in an ILI) would lead to the strengthening of NiFiNeFe (notice the Ti vs Fi difference). How do you explain that?

Yes, my subtype system contradicts the inert/contact subtype system. But I don't think the inert/contact subtype system is accurate.

I am lost to understand (and couldn't follow) how you notated the subtypes (e.g., LII-2,7), can you elaborate?

The first number refers to strong/weak. ILI-1,? has very strong strong functions, but very weak weak functions :-)

The second number refers to extroversion/introversion, and consequently how much someone uses the secondary functions. ILI-?,10 is an ambivert. And ILI-?,1 is very introverted. LIE-?,1 is very extroverted.

[seriousguy]

This model is mainly based on my personal observations, but also on research made by various socionists. Yes, ILI's Fe+ is a 4D function. However, it is the most unconscious secondary function. Also, we cannot look at Fe+ in isolation. It is actually the exchange of information (aspects) between Ni and Fe that causes +/-. I agree with Tsypin regarding this.

I agree about -+ signs, but how is ILI's Fe+ a 4D function is beyond me.

Yes, IEI's NiTe are strong functions. But it is ILI's Te- that you sometimes see in IEI, not LIE's Te-. Model D uses accepting/producing functions.

As you mentioned the link to the Victor's descriptions of -+ signs, I assumed Te- should be same for the quadra, so how is ILI's Te- different from LIE's Te-? What do you mean by "sometimes"? How you know when an IEI is using his unconscious 4D Te-?

'Strongest' corresponds to 4-dimensional, 'weakest' corresponds to 1-dimensional.

Every functions in the "strongest" is 4D and every functions in the "weakest" is 1D? What about 2D and 3D functions? In your ILI's diagram, you mentioned Ni+Te- as the ego functions (and Ne-Fi+ as second Ego), but Te- isn't there in the strongest / weakest list, what's its dimensionality?

This is about dimensionality.

So, an ILI can easily retain the Fe+ information for a long amount of time due to its 4D nature?

First of all, ILI's Fe- is actually semi-conscious. Model D is in a sense two Model As. Fe- "pushes" Fi- to unconsciousness, and Fi+ "pushes" Fe+ to unconsciousness.

Similarly, Ni+ will push Ne- to unconsciousness?

The first number refers to strong/weak. ILI-1,? has very strong strong functions, but very weak weak functions :-)

The second number refers to extroversion/introversion, and consequently how much someone uses the secondary functions. ILI-?,10 is an ambivert. And ILI-?,1 is very introverted. LIE-?,1 is very extroverted.

I would be something like IEI-2,3.

[Petter]

I agree about -+ signs, but how is ILI's Fe+ a 4D function is beyond me.

Fe+ isn't just about "maximizing the positive". Fe+ always interacts with Ni-, which is about scenario thinking and fantasy. ILI's Fe- oversimplifies decisions in "the real world" (Si+), but he or she spends a lot of time speculating about different social scenarios and decisions. For example, LIIs are often completely lost in various social situations. That is not the case with ILIs. We understand the social dynamics (NiFe), but we have no energy to be social in the here and now (SeFi and SiFe).

As you mentioned the link to the Victor's descriptions of -+ signs, I assumed Te- should be same for the quadra, so how is ILI's Te- different from LIE's Te-? What do you mean by "sometimes"? How you know when an IEI is using his unconscious 4D Te-?

The general description of Te- is the same for all types. But a weak Te- is different from a strong Te-, and an accepting Te- is different from producing Te- etc.

"Sometimes" or occasionally you see Te- in IEI. I just meant that it is less often than the conscious functions.

IEI uses Ni+Te- when he or she plays chess, i.e. strategizes about objects (Ni-Fe+ is about subjects).

Every functions in the "strongest" is 4D and every functions in the "weakest" is 1D? What about 2D and 3D functions? In your ILI's diagram, you mentioned Ni+Te- as the ego functions (and Ne-Fi+ as second Ego), but Te- isn't there in the strongest / weakest list, what's its dimensionality?

Yes, there are only 4D (strongest) and 1D (weakest) functions in that diagram. Dimensionality is the same in Model D and Model A, so for example, IEI's Se+ is 2-dimensional. ILI's Te- is 3D, and ILI's Fi+ is also 3D. Neither of those are strongest, in Model D and Model A.

So, an ILI can easily retain the Fe+ information for a long amount of time due to its 4D nature?

The concept of dimensionality in Model D is exactly the same as in Model A. There is no difference between main functions and secondary functions.

Similarly, Ni+ will push Ne- to unconsciousness?

No, because Ne- does not interfere with Ni+. However, all functions that a person is currently not using, are unconscious. That is not the same thing as Ego, Id etc.

[seriousguy]

Fe+ isn't just about "maximizing the positive". Fe+ always interacts with Ni-, which is about scenario thinking and fantasy. ILI's Fe- oversimplifies decisions in "the real world" (Si+), but he or she spends a lot of time speculating about different social scenarios and decisions. For example, LIIs are often completely lost in various social situations. That is not the case with ILIs. We understand the social dynamics (NiFe), but we have no energy to be social in the here and now (SeFi and SiFe).

It seems you are talking about the information exchange without their actual energy spending (or exchange)? (so a 'strong' function would simply mean more 'information' for it without actual energy for it) ILIs are capable of strategizing about the social dynamics (NiFe), but they really don't have the energy to be actively engaged in social world (which you correlates with SeFi and SiFe). By that logic, IEIs would be capable of strategizing about the effects of their actions on objects (NiTe), but they don't have much energy for manipulating the object (or perform day-to-day tasks) here and now (SeTi and SiTe), right? Are you aware that Model G also makes a distinction between information exchange and energy exchange? Did you take some ideas from it?

IEI uses Ni+Te- when he or she plays chess, i.e. strategizes about objects (Ni-Fe+ is about subjects).

Gotcha, but how that Te- would be 4D in this case?

Yes, there are only 4D (strongest) and 1D (weakest) functions in that diagram. Dimensionality is the same in Model D and Model A, so for example, IEI's Se+ is 2-dimensional. ILI's Te- is 3D, and ILI's Fi+ is also 3D. Neither of those are strongest, in Model D and Model A.

Here, IEI's Se+ is 2-dimensional, so Se- would be 1-dimensional? How is the dimensionality same in Model D and Model A? If ILI's Fi+ is 3D, then IEI's Tii+ would be 3D as well? Can you explain a bit how these 3D and 2D functions are distinguished in terms of quality?

The concept of dimensionality in Model D is exactly the same as in Model A. There is no difference between main functions and secondary functions.

But you mentioned that ILI's Fi+ is 3D (which is not the case in Model A), how do you explain that?

I like your model; you seem to explain certain aspects through combined IEs, but you need to reduce the ambiguity (dimensionality issue for example).

[Muddy]

For example, ILI can spend months or years on a new theoretical model (Ti-) but has no patience whatsoever for concrete technical problems, like repairing the car (Ti+).

I can relate to this all to well lol. I can very easily delve in to something abstract like a video game and very quickly learn and master all the mechanics, but when it comes to stuff like figuring out how to use a pallet jack for the first time my brain leaves my head.


Anyway I'm very interested in hearing more tidbits about the types like this if you have anyway.

[Petter]

I can relate to this all to well lol. I can very easily delve in to something abstract like a video game and very quickly learn and master all the mechanics, but when it comes to stuff like figuring out how to use a pallet jack for the first time my brain leaves my head.

lol, very true... I think this is because one needs all the concrete details of a product (Se-) in order to figure out how it works (Ti+). But ILI is almost never in the here and now (Se).

Anyway I'm very interested in hearing more tidbits about the types like this if you have anyway.

Here's an example: Bill Clinton is an SEE law professor (!?). That makes no sense if we use Model A. But if some SEE subtypes use a strong SiTe quite often, then it doesn't seem strange any more.

[Muddy]

Here's an example: Bill Clinton is an SEE law professor (!?). That makes no sense if we use Model A. But if some SEE subtypes use a strong SiTe quite often, then it doesn't seem strange any more.

I actually made this observation too with people whom I've suspected to be SEE, in that a lot of them seem to take interest in careers that deal with law. You could be on to something here.

[seriousguy]

Can you give the simplified descriptions of every function (as Viktor's descriptions are long and even ambiguous)? For example, how is IEI's 2D +Se different from 1D -Se? Poor ability to grasp the concrete details of the world (-Se), but relatively better ability to push themselves for work and force other people (+Se)? For example, I am extremely lost most of the time and live in my head, and my stuff gets lost and I don't remember how that happens, but I have good reactivity / responsiveness and general pushiness.

IEI:
==

4D: -Ni, +Fi, +Ne, -Te
3D: +Fe, -Ne, -Ti, +Ni
2D: -Si, +Ti, +Se, -Fe
1D: +Te, -Se, -Fi, +Si

[Petter]

Can you give the simplified descriptions of every function (as Viktor's descriptions are long and even ambiguous)? For example, how is IEI's 2D +Se different from 1D -Se? Poor ability to grasp the concrete details of the world (-Se), but relatively better ability to push themselves for work and force other people (+Se)? For example, I am extremely lost most of the time and live in my head, and my stuff gets lost and I don't remember how that happens, but I have good reactivity / responsiveness and general pushiness.


IEI:
==


4D: -Ni, +Fi, +Ne, -Te
3D: +Fe, -Ne, -Ti, +Ni
2D: -Si, +Ti, +Se, -Fe
1D: +Te, -Se, -Fi, +Si

Are you referring to these?

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-Gulenko

I think Viktor descriptions are quite good, but they are not perfect. I (and many socionists) claim that +/- is a consequence of the blocking of aspects/functions, so Se+ sees details about subjects: clothes, hairstyle, someone is dancing, someone is flirting etc, and Se- sees details about objects: a nice car, someone is muscular, physical threats, someone is kicking a ball etc. This is the main difference between Se+ and Se-. The difference between 2D and 1D is norm vs. experience.

I think IEI's mental Se+ vs. vital Se- is the most obvious difference. Types with mental Se+ do not talk about the minus aspects of Se, like physical threats.

[seriousguy]

Are you referring to these?

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-Gulenko

I think Viktor descriptions are quite good, but they are not perfect. I (and many socionists) claim that +/- is a consequence of the blocking of aspects/functions, so Se+ sees details about subjects: clothes, hairstyle, someone is dancing, someone is flirting etc, and Se- sees details about objects: a nice car, someone is muscular, physical threats, someone is kicking a ball etc. This is the main difference between Se+ and Se-. The difference between 2D and 1D is norm vs. experience.

I think IEI's mental Se+ vs. vital Se- is the most obvious difference. Types with mental Se+ do not talk about the minus aspects of Se, like physical threats.

Yes, those descriptions are long and seem different to yours, for e.g., Se+ about clothes, hairstyles, etc. it didn't mention this aspect anywhere, so you need to write your short descriptions here.

What about "volitional sensing, how much force, power or pressure is required" aspect of Se? Is it Se+ or Se-? Regarding dimensionality: How is IEI's Ti- and ILI's Fi+ conscious/mental functions and (especially this) 3D? Because I understand the creativity / situation of 3D as the ability to use appropriate information for the required situation (without any prior experience of the situations) and understanding the scope of the information, which IEI clearly don't do it naturally in regards to Ti- as they just indulge in abstract system / models without going anywhere?

[Petter]

Yes, those descriptions are long and seem different to yours, for e.g., Se+ about clothes, hairstyles, etc. it didn't mention this aspect anywhere, so you need to write your short descriptions here. What about "volitional sensing, how much force, power or pressure is required" aspect of Se? Is it Se+ or Se-?

These are approximate descriptions of the functions. However, Model D is based on Jung's/Berens' cognitive processes (with some improvements), so (for example) I think Se+ and Se- are only indirectly related to "psychological space" and "material space".

Sensing of forms (Si-): harmony, aesthetics, beauty
Sensing of perceptions (Si+): cosiness, comfort, pleasant sensations
Material space (Se-): strength, power, control
Psychological (virtual) space (Se+): profit, benefit, gain
Intuition of Time (Ni-): destiny, prevision, fatefulness
Dynamics of actions (Ni+): topicality, timeliness, tendencies
Ethical intuition (Ne-): potential, personality traits, understanding, insight
Object intuition (Ne+): alternatives, possibilities, interpretation, guess, obviousness
Logic of learning or Logic of exploration (Ti-): system, regularity
Logic of management or Logic of control (Ti+): right, rule
Logic of processes (Te-): processes, technologies
Logic of objects (Te+): things, objects
Territorial ethics (Fi-): influence, rapprochement, repulsion
Ethics of understanding (Fi+): sympathy, affection, benevolent relation
Emotions of sensations (Fe-): emotional force, energy boiling, emotions passed over through tactile, taste or other sensor vocabulary (sour expression, sugary voice, he makes me sick...)
Emotions of events (Fe+): play of feelings, absence of sensory component in vocabulary

Regarding dimensionality: How is IEI's Ti- and ILI's Fi+ conscious/mental functions and (especially this) 3D? Because I understand the creativity / situation of 3D as the ability to use appropriate information for the required situation (without any prior experience of the situations) and understanding the scope of the information, which IEI clearly don't do it naturally in regards to Ti- as they just indulge in abstract system / models without going anywhere?

3D: "Situation is applicable to all the strong functions. They are capable of developing new relations, effectively using the exceptions to the rules, generalizing information into patterns - of generating new knowledge and experience. According to Novikova, the mode of perception is the dynamic present - reactions to the situation accounting for trends and possible developments."

The fact that you, an IEI, show an interest in a new theoretical model and ask many questions, is a very strong indication of a 3D Ti-.

What do you mean by "without going anywhere"?

[seriousguy]

The fact that you, an IEI, show an interest in a new theoretical model and ask many questions, is a very strong indication of a 3D Ti-.

How is taking interest in theoretical models the sign of 3D Ti-? It just seems Ti- valuing to me.

What do you mean by "without going anywhere"?

I meant that IEIs tend to take some theory as granted without validating it through actual evidence and facts, and then spit it everywhere. And, their models tend to be highly subjective, coming from their experience (and what they have studied through books / articles) alone. How is that "creativity"? (especially if compared to LII's 4D Ti-)

[Muddy]

Ok so I just make sure I'm understanding this correctly so I'm going to show how I'm interpreting the LIE as an example. I'm going to assume Si=comfort for the sake of this post.

LIE has 4D Si- and 1D Si+, which means the LIE is very good at projecting Si outwards toward the environment but at the same time very lacking when it comes to the deeper essence of Si. I know some people who go to great lengths to try to "craft" comfort by buying expensive furniture and talk a lot about trying to relax, yet at the same time they are some of the most restless people I know and you can never really seem to get in a state of comfort around them. I always assumed these people where Si creative types but I wondering they could be LIEs under this model, since they seem very adept with one aspect of Si (making the physical environment comfortable) yet very lacking in another (having a carefree attitude, not worrying about things).

Let's also look at ILI again. Ti and Ne are ILI's strongest functions that are pushed at outward due to them being minus functions. Does this mean we will get mostly Ti and Ne kinds of topics when talking to an ILI, where they discuss a lot of ideas and theories? LIE in comparison has Te and Si as its strongest outwardly pushed functions, so does that mean we will get a lot of talk on earthy, practical matters when talking to an LIE? It's seems to me that mirror types are far more different then each other under this model then what Model A would suggest.

[Petter]

Ok so I just make sure I'm understanding this correctly so I'm going to show how I'm interpreting the LIE as an example. I'm going to assume Si=comfort for the sake of this post.


LIE has 4D Si- and 1D Si+, which means the LIE is very good at projecting Si outwards toward the environment but at the same time very lacking when it comes to the deeper essence of Si.

Si- sees sensing aspects of objects, and Si+ sees sensing aspects of subjects. That's the main difference.

I know some people who go to great lengths to try to "craft" comfort by buying expensive furniture and talk a lot about trying to relax, yet at the same time they are some of the most restless people I know and you can never really seem to get in a state of comfort around them.

This sounds like the SLI :-) SLI has Ignoring Si+.

I always assumed these people where Si creative types but I wondering they could be LIEs under this model, since they seem very adept with one aspect of Si (making the physical environment comfortable) yet very lacking in another (having a carefree attitude, not worrying about things).

They could be LIEs as well. LIE has PoLR Si+, and a 4D Si-.

Let's also look at ILI again. Ti and Ne are ILI's strongest functions that are pushed at outward due to them being minus functions.

It isn't true that Ti and Ne are ILI's strongest functions. We must use plus and minus functions. ILI's strongest functions are Ni+, Ti-, Ne- and Fe+.

What do you mean by "pushed at outward"?

Does this mean we will get mostly Ti and Ne kinds of topics when talking to an ILI, where they discuss a lot of ideas and theories?

No, you will get NiTe and NeFi topics. Some ILIs, like Dario Nardi (ILI-4,9 or ILI-4,10), will sound remarkably similar to IEEs. I actually typed him as an IEE.

LIE in comparison has Te and Si as its strongest outwardly pushed functions, so does that mean we will get a lot of talk on earthy, practical matters when talking to an LIE?

No, TeNi and TiSe. Business projects and technology.

It's seems to me that mirror types are far more different then each other under this model then what Model A would suggest.

YES! Here is one (of many) example: LIE gets along very well with SLE, but ILI and SLE rub each other the wrong way. ILI's Fi+ annoys the SLE, and SLE's Ti+ annoys the ILI.

[Muddy]

It isn't true that Ti and Ne are ILI's strongest functions. We must use plus and minus functions. ILI's strongest functions are Ni+, Ti-, Ne- and Fe+.

What do you mean by "pushed at outward"?

I already knew that ILI only has 4D Ti- and Ne- and not 4D Ti+ and Ne+. I got lazy and didn't put the minus there since I said earlier I was talking about the minus functions.

In the link that explains the +/- functions it describes minus functions as being applied globally and having an outward direction, which to me sounded like - functions are pushed more visibly outward towards the environment a.k.a extroverted in sense while it says + functions are applied internally. Therefore it seemed to me like the strong - functions would be the kind of subjects a person would must likely talk about while the + functions are what they would think about , since - functions are described as having the direction as outward and + functions outward. Perhaps I need a little more clarification on what exactly the +/- functions are because that's what it sounded like to me.

Edit: I say that you mentioned + functions as applying to subjects while - to objects. Is that the main difference between +/-?

Also I side note I can definitely see myself having better Se- then Se+. You can ask me what was the color of someone's shirt a minute after seeing them and I probably wouldn't remember. I always take note of possible physical threats however.

[Petter]

I already knew that ILI only has 4D Ti- and Ne- and not 4D Ti+ and Ne+. I got lazy and didn't put the minus there since I said earlier I was talking about the minus functions.
In the link that explains the +/- functions it describes minus functions as being applied globally and having an outward direction, which to me sounded like - functions are pushed more visibly outward towards the environment a.k.a extroverted in sense while it says + functions are applied internally. Therefore it seemed to me like the strong - functions would be the kind of subjects a person would must likely talk about while the + functions are what they would think about , since - functions are described as having the direction as outward and + functions outward. Perhaps I need a little more clarification on what exactly the +/- functions are because that's what it sounded like to me.

+/- are related to process/result and positivist/negativist Reinin dichotomies. No, they are not related to extraversion/introversion, but 'minus' is pushed more towards the environment. It is more like general knowledge (-) vs. specific knowledge (+).

Edit: I say that you mentioned + functions as applying to subjects while - to objects. Is that the main difference between +/-?

No, I meant that Feeling/Ethics is about subjects and Thinking/logic is about objects. An IEE's Ne (Ego: NeFi) will focus on possibilities which are related to subjects. An ILE's Ne will focus on possibilities which are related to objects.

Also I side note I can definitely see myself having better Se- then Se+. You can ask me what was the color of someone's shirt a minute after seeing them and I probably wouldn't remember. I always take note of possible physical threats however.

Are you ILI?

[Muddy]

Are you ILI?

I'm a bit hesitant to firmly decide on a type since I can easily change my opinions upon receiving new information, but I would say ILI is definitely one of the more likely types. All I can say for sure is that I'm most likely in introverted perceiver and most likely a logical type.

[Muddy]

So basically the shadow ego is like our "second" type, and therefore we should expect mirage types to share a lot of similarities? Just for convenience I'm going to list them.

ILE is similar to IEI
ESE-EII
SEI-SLE
LII-LSE
EIE-ESI
LSI-LIE
SEE-SLI
ILI-IEE

I'm also curious how the shadow ego would effect other relations. Would this mean look-a-like types get along better then expected since their shadow ego's are dual to one another? How would this impact benefit relations since the beneficiary's shadow ego is conflict to the benefactor's ego?

[Tigerfadder]

I think sometimes people create 'new' theories to justify their own ideas. What is this really then to take +/- signs, remove them from where they originally come fram (model A) to create a new model?

[Petter]

I think sometimes people create 'new' theories to justify their own ideas. What is this really then to take +/- signs, remove them from where they originally come fram (model A) to create a new model?

+/- comes just as much from Model B. The concept was introduced by Gulenko, and he is using it in Model G. +/- was discussed extensively during the '90s, but socionists never agreed on the cause and the placement of the signs in Model A. Does ILI have Ne+ or Ne- as the Ignoring function in Model A? +/- never worked in Model A, and there is a good reason for that: plus and minus is a consequence of the blocking of aspects/functions.

This is my view as well:

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...Plus_and_minus

[Muddy]

I had another thought on this model in regards to the romance styles of the types. I think its possible that the romance style of the shadow might be a type's secondary romance style. LIE for example has Se in it's shadow ego and therefore may have some Aggressor behavior mixed in with its primary Victim behavior. Going down the types you would get:

ILE- Infantile, Victim
SEI- Caregiver, Aggressor
ESE- Caregiver, Infantile
LII- Infantile, Caregiver

EIE- Victim, Aggressor
LSI- Aggressor, Victim
SLE- Aggressor, Caregiver
IEI- Victim, Infantile

SEE- Aggressor, Caregiver
ILI- Victim, Infantile
LIE- Victim, Aggressor
ESI- Aggressor, Victim


LSE- Caregiver, Infantile
EII- Infantile, Caregiver
IEE- Infantile, Victim
SLI- Caregiver, Aggressor

[Petter]

I had another thought on this model in regards to the romance styles of the types. I think its possible that the romance style of the shadow might be a type's secondary romance style. LIE for example has Se in it's shadow ego and therefore may have some Aggressor behavior mixed in with its primary Victim behavior. Going down the types you would get:

ILE- Infantile, Victim
SEI- Caregiver, Aggressor
ESE- Caregiver, Infantile
LII- Infantile, Caregiver

EIE- Victim, Aggressor
LSI- Aggressor, Victim
SLE- Aggressor, Caregiver
IEI- Victim, Infantile

SEE- Aggressor, Caregiver
ILI- Victim, Infantile
LIE- Victim, Aggressor
ESI- Aggressor, Victim


LSE- Caregiver, Infantile
EII- Infantile, Caregiver
IEE- Infantile, Victim
SLI- Caregiver, Aggressor

I agree with you. That's a consequence of Model D. However, I prefer these ones:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...otic-Attitudes

[Muddy]

The idea of there being 2 dual seeking functions and 2 polrs is pretty interesting to me. Lets use IEI for example. IEI has Se- as its primary dual seeking function and Si+ as its secondary dual seeking. What I think this means is that IEI visibly seeks someone who exerts power and control (Se-), but the deeper motivation behind that is that they want feel safe and comfortable (Si+) and to do so they need someone who can protect them physically. ILE has the same dual seeking functions but are they orientated differently. ILE wants someone who outwardly focuses on comfort and harmony, but inwardly what the ILE really dreams of is having power and control.

I think the same can apply to the polr functions. ILI on the surface hates boisterous emotions (Fe-), but on the inside feels oppressed and inhibited by rules (Ti+). I'm going to hypothesize the real "polr" hit for ILI is not just crazy emotions, but when people get emotional at ILI for not following the rules.

[Petter]

The idea of there being 2 dual seeking functions and 2 polrs is pretty interesting to me. Lets use IEI for example. IEI has Se- as its primary dual seeking function and Si+ as its secondary dual seeking. What I think this means is that IEI visibly seeks someone who exerts power and control (Se-), but the deeper motivation behind that is that they want feel safe and comfortable (Si+) and to do so they need someone who can protect them physically. ILE has the same dual seeking functions but are they orientated differently. ILE wants someone who outwardly focuses on comfort and harmony, but inwardly what the ILE really dreams of is having power and control.

Why do you think IEI and ILE are different in this regard?

What do mean by "outwardly" and "inwardly"?

Feeling safe is related to physical threats, which is about Se- (not Si+).

I think the same can apply to the polr functions. ILI on the surface hates boisterous emotions (Fe-), but on the inside feels oppressed and inhibited by rules (Ti+). I'm going to hypothesize the real "polr" hit for ILI is not just crazy emotions, but when people get emotional at ILI for not following the rules.

Fe is not about emotions, not even in Socionics. Fe is about 'ethics of emotions'. ILI often thinks SEI's and ESE's Fe- is used as a weapon in patronizing way, and he or she gets pissed off.

Yes, Ti+ is about rules... but ILIs do like rules. However, ILI can break rules much more easily than SLI. And at the same time, ILI gets very upset when other people break the rules. A 1D function is like a child.

[Muddy]

Why do you think IEI and ILE are different in this regard?

What do mean by "outwardly" and "inwardly"?

Yes, Ti+ is about rules... but ILIs do like rules. However, ILI can break rules much more easily than SLI. And at the same time, ILI gets very upset when other people break the rules. A 1D function is like a child.

What I meant is that ILE "seeks" Si+ in a visible way, while Se- is seeked in a very subtle and primitive way. In other words, every ILE's dream is probably something along the lines of having somebody take care of all their physical needs (Si+ seeking) so they can focus their attention on achieving their goals of world domination (Shadow Se- seeking). IEI on the other hand expects Se- to come directly from others, while Si+ is sought in secret. IEI wants a protector (Se- seeking) so they can feel comfort with their surroundings (Si+ shadow seeking). Keep in mind I'm just brainstorming these ideas so don't take them too seriously.

Also what said about ILI liking rules even though they don't have Ti+ as a valued function has left me confused. Perhaps they like rules because they don't attach any value to them and just use them to get ahead by ignoring rules that don't benefit them and support rules that do? I guess what I should ask is how does 1D Ti+ differ from each other in each of the four 1D functions?

[Petter]

What I meant is that ILE "seeks" Si+ in a visible way, while Se- is seeked in a very subtle and primitive way. In other words, every ILE's dream is probably something along the lines of having somebody take care of all their physical needs (Si+ seeking) so they can focus their attention on achieving their goals of world domination (Shadow Se- seeking). IEI on the other hand expects Se- to come directly from others, while Si+ is sought in secret. IEI wants a protector (Se- seeking) so they can feel comfort with their surroundings (Si+ shadow seeking). Keep in mind I'm just brainstorming these ideas so don't take them too seriously.

Ok. Btw, brainstorming/critical thinking is the right way forward... instead of just accepting Model A.

Also what said about ILI liking rules even though they don't have Ti+ as a valued function has left me confused.

An "unvalued" function does not mean that you don't like aspects of the function. However, ILI does not like to talk about aspects of Ti+. So "verbal" is a much better name than "valued".

Perhaps they like rules because they don't attach any value to them and just use them to get ahead by ignoring rules that don't benefit them and support rules that do? I guess what I should ask is how does 1D Ti+ differ from each other in each of the four 1D functions?

ILI's Ti+ and Fe- are PoLR. Se+ and Si- are suggestive.

[Muddy]

@Petter I would like to hear you opinions on what types are likely for me in this system. I'll explain a little bit about myself so you have something to go on.


I think I am an alpha type because I seem to verbalize Ne+ and Ti- a lot if you look at my post history. I also relate to alpha quadra the most. This would seem to point towards ILE or LII as the most likely types but there are some things that don't make sense about either type. I feel I am way too introverted and reserved for ILE to make any sense. Here on the forums I seem plenty capable of generating thoughts and ideas but in the broader sense I think my Ne is actually quite lacking. By that I mean I have great difficulty breaking out of old habits and trying new things even when I'm bored and dying for something to do. I don't know if that is due to low dimensional Ne or something else.

The problem with LII is that while I can appreciate the importance of learning (Ti-), I don't really see that being my base function. I also resonate much more with being a perceiving then a judger. There is ILI but the problem is I don't relate very much to gamma at all and starting to wonder if SEI is possible. I do place a good bit of emphasis on comfort and doing things as I see fit which seems to match with Si+. Another clue is that I seem to conflict with Te base types the most. The only thing though is that there are a lot of stereotypes about SEI that don't seem to fit, such as SEIs being into interior design, cooking, etc. It seems though that in model D those things may be more attributable to Si- then Si+. Any stereotype about SEI is that they are highly sociable, of which I am not. I usually only talk to people if they talk to me first. I would to hear your take on SEI and if it would be a possible type for me.

[Petter]

@Petter I would like to hear you opinions on what types are likely for me in this system. I'll explain a little bit about myself so you have something to go on.

I think I am an alpha type because I seem to verbalize Ne+ and Ti- a lot if you look at my post history. I also relate to alpha quadra the most. This would seem to point towards ILE or LII as the most likely types but there are some things that don't make sense about either type. I feel I am way too introverted and reserved for ILE to make any sense. Here on the forums I seem plenty capable of generating thoughts and ideas but in the broader sense I think my Ne is actually quite lacking. By that I mean I have great difficulty breaking out of old habits and trying new things even when I'm bored and dying for something to do. I don't know if that is due to low dimensional Ne or something else.

The problem with LII is that while I can appreciate the importance of learning (Ti-), I don't really see that being my base function. I also resonate much more with being a perceiving then a judger. There is ILI but the problem is I don't relate very much to gamma at all and starting to wonder if SEI is possible. I do place a good bit of emphasis on comfort and doing things as I see fit which seems to match with Si+. Another clue is that I seem to conflict with Te base types the most. The only thing though is that there are a lot of stereotypes about SEI that don't seem to fit, such as SEIs being into interior design, cooking, etc. It seems though that in model D those things may be more attributable to Si- then Si+. Any stereotype about SEI is that they are highly sociable, of which I am not. I usually only talk to people if they talk to me first. I would to hear your take on SEI and if it would be a possible type for me.

You can be any one of those types. Model D can be very useful for explaining some "borderline" types and subtypes, but the four Jungian dichotomies (or MBTI) are often more useful when you are typing people. Keep it as simple as possible.

[Capitalist Pig]

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

[seriousguy]

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-).

[Petter]

previous versions of Model D:


EDIT 05-10-2020

This is my current view on the model (if the types are symmetric).

ILI

introversion

Si // Se, PFS > experience ..... most conscious (he or she can temporarily process Se // Si)

Fe // Fi, PFS > experience

Se // Si, experience

Fi // Fe, experience ..... least conscious


extraversion

Fi // Fe, PFS > experience ..... most conscious (super-ego)

Se // Si, PFS > experience

Fe // Fi, experience

Si // Se, experience ..... least conscious



-----



EDIT 27-04-2020

ILI

Si+ (Se-) // Fe+ (Fi-) ... strong (ego)

Se- (Si+) // Fi- (Fe+) ... weak ............................ extroverted (?)
_________________

Fi+ (Fe-) // Se+ (Si-) ... strong (super-ego) ......... extroverted (?)

Fe- (Fi+) // Si- (Se+) ... weak



Fe includes Si and Fi includes Se.

ILI's Fe+, Fi-, Se+ and Si- correspond to the vital functions.

"The second peculiarity: the contents of vital track functions is the result of individual period of psyche development, the period when we are individuals, when we are the hub of the universe, when everything rotates around us, around our interests, when we are still children and we are not interested in the society with all its demands. Socionists say: the vital track is the superblock of individual life activity. This means that vital track functions work for our individual needs and in the way that is customary and comfortable for us."

"Some socionists suppose that the functioning of the superblock of personal life is unconscious. It is incorrect. Founders of psychoanalysis differently considered the concept of the 'unconscious'. The term 'preconscious' is appropriate to the content of processes, which take place in the superblock of personal life. In normal conditions, the preconscious processes function out of consciousness, automatically. But these processes can become conscious, if there is a need. In turn, functioning of the superblock of social life is obviously conscious."



-----



EDIT 30-06-2019

Here's an updated description of Model D (mk5).

Thinking and Intuition are superfluous. They correspond to the prefrontal cortex and working memory, so they are always dependent on Sensing functions. Si+ is about object recognition/patterns and scenarios/mental projections. Se+ is about an object's position in space and similarities/differences between objects. Fe+ and Fi+ are emotional responses to these sensory processes. Si+ and Se+ are detailed and specific, Si- and Se- are general.



EII

Introvert

Fi+ (Se+) // Si+ (Fe+) ..... strong functions

Fe- (Si-) // Se- (Fi-) ..... weak functions




ILI

Introvert

Si+ (Fe+) // Fi+ (Se+) ..... strong functions

Se- (Fi-) // Fe- (Si-) ..... weak functions




ILE

Extrovert

Se+ (Fi+) // Fe+ (Si+) ..... strong functions

Si- (Fe-) // Fi- (Se-) ..... weak functions




SEI

Introvert

Fe- (Si-) // Se- (Fi-) ..... strong functions

Fi+ (Se+) // Si+ (Fe+) ..... weak functions




------


mk4: see post 123

https://imgur.com/ZMJ3J6x (mk3)

https://imgur.com/AfGrdXq (mk3b)

LIE

Primary functions: Te- Ni+ Fe- Si+ // Ne+ Ti- Se+ Fi-

Secondary functions: Ti+ Se- Fi+ Ne- // Si- Te+ Ni- Fe+

ILI

Primary functions: Ni+ Te- Si+ Fe- // Ti- Ne+ Fi- Se+

Secondary functions: Ne- Fi+ Se- Ti+ // Fe+ Ni- Te+ Si-


http://introvertdear.com/news/introv...ng-to-science/

"Everyone’s nervous system has two sides — the sympathetic side, which triggers the “fight, fright, or flight” response, and the parasympathetic side, which is responsible for “rest and digest” mode. Think of the sympathetic side as hitting the gas pedal and the parasympathetic side as slamming on the brakes. When your sympathetic system is activated, your body gears up for action. Adrenaline is released, glucose energizes muscles, and oxygen increases. Areas of your brain that control thinking are turned off, although dopamine increases alertness in the back of your brain. But when you use the parasympathetic side, your muscles relax, energy is stored, and food is metabolized. Acetylcholine increases blood flow and alertness in the front of your brain. Of course, extroverts and introverts use both sides at different times. But which side do we introverts prefer? You’ve probably already guessed: according to Dr. Laney, the parasympathetic side, which slows us down and calms us."

This is why we need two systems of functions (like Model D); one system with a dominant "extroverted" function and another system with a dominant "introverted" function.

Extroverted behavior is a consequence of accepting "extroverted" functions and producing "introverted" functions (and vice versa). This corresponds perfectly with Keirsey's fourth ring, expressive vs. attentive:

"The fourth ring describes how people interact with their environment. Individuals who tend to act before observing are described as expressive, whereas people who tend to observe before acting are described as attentive."


EDIT 20-01-2018 ... Here are 10 important changes and clarifications:

1. There are no valued and unvalued functions. Type compatibility is based on mutual relaxation instead. SEE, ESI and ESE are compatible with ILI. (EDIT 05-03-2018)

Why are SEE and ILI duals? Because ILI is sensitive about Si+ and Fe- (especially SiFe), but he or she is insensitive about Se+ and Fi-. SEE's indirect and childlike Si+ and Fe- match ILI's Si+ and Fe-.

2. There are probably only two basic levels of strong/weak functions. So ILI's Ni+ and Te- are equally strong. But 1D, 2D, 3D and 4D could be relevant in subtypes.

3. ILI's strong functions are Ni+, Te-, Ti-, Ne+ and Ne-, Fi+, Fe+, Ni- ... stronger = more sophisticated (they process more information).

4. One needs high-dimensional sensing in order to process high-dimensional (concrete) logic. For example, Se- (weak) -> Ti+ (strong) is not possible.

5. 'Plus' / 'minus' is a consequence of the blocking of functions.

6. 'Plus' functions are about analysis. They deal with "how", "what", "who" and "where" questions. 'Minus' functions are about synthesis. They deal with "why" questions. This is yet another reason why we need 16 functions.

7. All mental functions are equally conscious, and all vital functions are equally unconscious.

8. 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).

9. The vital functions correspond to Jung's "personal unconscious".

Jung: "more or less superficial layer of the unconscious." ... "they constitute the personal and private side of psychic life."

Yermak: "Some socionists suppose that the functioning of the superblock of personal life is unconscious. It is incorrect. Founders of psychoanalysis differently considered the concept of the 'unconscious'. The term 'preconscious' is appropriate to the content of processes, which take place in the superblock of personal life. In normal conditions, the preconscious processes function out of consciousness, automatically. But these processes can become conscious, if there is a need. In turn, functioning of the superblock of social life is obviously conscious."

"the contents of vital track functions is the result of individual period of psyche development, the period when we are individuals, when we are the hub of the universe, when everything rotates around us, around our interests, when we are still children and we are not interested in the society with all its demands. Socionists say: the vital track is the superblock of individual life activity. This means that vital track functions work for our individual needs and in the way that is customary and comfortable for us."

10. ILI's SiFe is not just about people and social relationships. It supports NiTe as well. ILI's intense study of certain subjects/facts is dependent on Si+ (...Fe- evaluates if it is good or bad behavior/action). The same thing applies to NeFi. This is why Model D mk3 makes sense. Te- speculates about something (i.e. induction and abduction... Te+ is about deduction). If the ILI is confident then the information is confirmed by Si+. If he (or she) isn't confident then the information goes to Ne-, which sees alternative conclusions.


EDIT 07-02-2018

Why does ILI have NeFi as a second ego? My current view is that NiTe and NeFi complement each other (see previous comments). But there is another way of looking at it. Maybe NeFi counterbalances NiTe instead. IEE is the most open and trusting type, and ILI is the most suspicious, skeptical and independent type. If ILI's NeFi is always somewhat present, then it cannot be completely ignored. This could prevent the ILI from being too single-minded, arrogant, insensitive etc.

A third alternative: NeFi is both a complement and a counterbalance.

INFJ (Ni Fe Ti Se): "With our extraverted feeling function, INFJs tend to avoid conflicts. We need our introverted thinking to remind us that pleasing others doesn’t always resolve the issue. Sometimes it’s best, to tell the truth even if it hurts the other person and ourselves (we feel the pain when someone is hurt). Our introverted thinking also allows our extraverted feeling to take a break. Always thinking in terms of the group is rather taxing on us.

INFJs also have a tough time making decisions because of this constant tug-of-war between the brain and the heart. Even though we understand logically (Ti) that some decision isn’t the best for us, we are still very concerned about the implications of our decision on other people (Fe)."

I experience Fi+ in a similar way.


EDIT 05-04-2018

LII's TiNe is counterbalanced and/or complemented by TeSi, but ILI's TiNe is counterbalanced and/or complemented by FeNi. How is that possible? I am not completely sure yet, but it is probably because ILI's TiNe is more concrete, so it doesn't need a strong TeSi.


EDIT 12-04-2018

"A second, or auxiliary, function complements the dominant function in two ways. First, the auxiliary function is always from the other pair of functions—that is, if the dominant function is a judging function, then the auxiliary function will be the preferred perceiving function; if the dominant function is a perceiving function, then the auxiliary function will be the preferred judging function. Second, the auxiliary function will tend to operate primarily in the less-preferred attitude—either Extraversion or Introversion. Thus, if the dominant function is extraverted, then the auxiliary function will be introverted; if the dominant function is introverted, then the auxiliary function will be extraverted.

So, if your dominant function is Extraverted Thinking, your auxiliary function will be either Introverted Sensing or Introverted Intuition, whichever function you prefer. If your auxiliary preference is Introverted Intuition, the information you gather is likely to emphasize internal ideas, hypotheses, and theories.

Your dominant Extraverted Thinking judgment will focus on that kind of internal information in order to create models and systems and ways to implement them in the world. Because your dominant, driving function, Extraverted Thinking, attracts you to accomplishing things in the world, implementing your ideas will be more appealing to you than the ideas themselves."

This is inaccurate. If "introverted" Intuition gathers internal information then the "extroverted" Thinking judgement must also be internal, since there is no additional information. NB It is possible to project (Ni) objects onto a scene "in the world" (see my definitions of the functions).

An LSI / ISTP mechanic compares (i.e. judges) the sizes of two objects "in the world" (they are right in front of him). This "introverted" Thinking judgement must also be "in the world".


EDIT 05-03-2018

How to Find Yourself and Your Best Match. Socionics. The Modern Approach to Psychological Types ... by Rod Novichkov and Julia Varabyova:

"Complementary (C). All Intellectual Intuitive types are Complementary to the Emotional Sensory group and vice versa. All Intellectual Sensory types are Comlementary to the Emotional Intuitive group. Relationships between these groups are best for marriage and romance. The subconscious of Intellectual Intuitive types is Emotional and Sensing. Partners in these relationships "cover each other's back". Together they cover all aspects of Informational Metabolism. They have the same type of emotionality, same type of sexuality, same type of thinking and understanding. Partners make each other comfortable and relaxed. These relationships do not contribute to personal growth. Although C1 is the best type of relationship, it's not that easy to establish. In the beginning, partners don't seem to see each other or attract to each other. It almost takes knowledge of Socionics to even enter in such relationship. Only as the time goes along, when partners engage in common activity and spend some time with each other, they start seeing each other's qualities and get attracted to each other. Once you've been in C1, you'll never want anything else. The types of relationships where partners easily get attracted to each other are C2 and C3. These are the most common of all happy marriages. Keep in mind that even complementary types may have problems with each other because of issues outside of Socionics."

R.K. Sedih, "Informational psychoanalysis" (Conflict Relations):

"Partners usually find each other quite interesting. Among socionists the most wide-spread name for this type of relations is "conflict". This is justified only on low level of interaction when both partners are poorly developed and un-dualized. In this case, partners not realizing it will hit each other's weakest spots. This is a very difficult situation if both of them have to live together, sharing a room for example. Situation improves if even one partner is dualized. In this case partners can affect each other positively and even derive benefit from these relations. This aspect of interaction is satisfactory only if there is tolerance between partners. In socionics, there is a tradition to consider this interaction as the most harsh and uncomfortable for the individual. My own research has shown, however, that it is almost always not the case. Over many years of studying socionics, I have not found any cases of such classic conflict as described by A. Augustinavichiute. Our observations and some recent theoretical developments suggest that in general this type of relation falls into the same level of comfort as semi-duality and activation relations."


EDIT 25-04-2018

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/showthread.php/53149-Definitions-of-the-Cognitive-Functions-(or-IM-elements)

I think Ni is strongly related to episodic future thinking and episodic counterfactual thinking.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4071128/

https://socialsciences.uottawa.ca/ch...inking_000.pdf

"Thinking about the future is an integral component of human cognition – one that has been claimed to distinguish us from other species. Building on the construct of episodic memory, we introduce the concept of ‘episodic future thinking’: a projection of the self into the future to pre-experience an event. We argue that episodic future thinking has explanatory value when considering recent work in many areas of psychology: cognitive, social and personality, developmental, clinical and neuropsychology. Episodic future thinking can serve as a unifying concept, connecting aspects of diverse research findings and identifying key questions requiring further reflection and study."


-----

http://imgur.com/qnmDCiu (mk2 Super-Id block contains 3D and 4D functions)

Why is ILI's Ti- (and Fe+) the 5th function? Because it is obvious that ILI's Ti- is an accepting function. This order is also logical: Ni+ Te- Si+ Fe- // Ti- Ne+ Fi- Se+ ... For example, Ni+ is the most conscious function, so Se+ is the most unconscious function. Furthermore, it is very likely that Se+, Fi-, Te+ and Si- are the most unconscious functions (Id), since ILI often neglects social relations, health and material wealth.

Also, a person cannot get energy from within and from other people, so there are no real ambiverts. Hence, my subtype system had to be modified.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...subtype-system

-----


This is my new model.

http://imgur.com/5M4UGLo (mk1 has the same structure as Model A)

Model D builds on Socionics Model A and Model B, and to some extent on Harold Grant's model. It consists of two sets of functions; main functions and secondary functions. These are separate systems (of functions), but for the most part it is only the main system that works independently. For example, information can go from ILI's Ni+ directly to Se-, then to Ti+ and finally back to the main system (Fe-). This is why we often don't see typical IEE behavior in ILI. But if an ILI extroverts a lot, then he or she occasionally uses the complete secondary system.

The basic structure of Model A, Vladimir Yermak's definitions of +/- functions and Viktor Gulenko's approximate descriptions of +/- functions apply to Model D:

http://imgur.com/w8bjRc5

http://imgur.com/qMx4hLk

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-Gulenko

Model D is different from Model B in three ways:

1) The model does not use information aspects/IM elements. It uses Jung's/Berens' cognitive processes with some improvements: Te is about logical deductions, EDIT: Te is indirectly related to facts, Si is related to comfort, EDIT: Si notices details of objects, EDIT: Ni is about scenario thinking etc. However, it is possible to replace the Jungian cognitive processes with information aspects/IM elements. It would still be a very accurate model.

2) The secondary functions are noticeable almost every day, unlike Bukalov's "Shadow functions" which are noticeable in some special situations. The conscious/mental functions in the secondary system are much more obvious than the unconscious/vital functions in the main system. This corresponds with Irina Eglit's and Vladimir Yermak's research on plus and minus functions.

3) Aleksandr Bukalov claims that ILI's Shadow Ego is NiFe. I claim that ILI's second Ego is NeFi.

Is there any evidence that supports Model D? Yes. For example, ILI can spend months or years on a new theoretical model (Ti-) but has no patience whatsoever for concrete technical problems, like repairing the car (Ti+). Also, ILI oversimplifies any solutions (Ti+) to physical threats (Se-). ILI's Ti+ is obviously very weak. Another example is IEI who is more creative than ILI. This makes no sense if both IEI and ILI have Ne as Ignoring function in Model A. A third example is LII who sometimes has surprisingly high emotional intelligence (Tina Fey).

A key advantage of Model D is that it explains why people of the same type can be so different from each other. This is my new subtype system:

1) Strengthening one function produces a domino effect across the entire functional layout, so all strong (or weak) functions are strengthened and all weak (or strong) functions are weakened.

2) Some subtypes use their secondary functions more than others due to variations in extraversion/introversion.

3) 100 subtypes are needed in order to accurately describe all kinds of personalities. Hence, a very introverted or extroverted person with very strong Ego and Id functions is subtype 1,1. An ambivert with very strong Ego and Id functions is subtype 1,10. Here are some examples: David Keirsey Jr is LII-8,2. Tina Fey is LII-7,8. Bill Gates is LII-2,7. Seth Lloyd is LII-1,4. And Terence Tao is LII-1,1.


******

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+.

[seriousguy]

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?

[seriousguy]

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

[Muddy]

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).

[Petter]

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.

[Petter]

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-.

[Petter]

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.

[Petter]

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