An alternative view on information aspects

[Petter]

I think these combinations of external/internal, dynamics/statics and objects/relationships (of objects) correspond more accurately with reality. Dynamics/statics is used in a slightly different way here, and objects/relationships is used in a completely different way. Object/relationships is not related to extraversion/introversion. Instead, extroverts naturally prefer a dynamic IM element. And all judgements are comparisons (i.e. relationships) between two or more objects.

Te = external dynamics of relationships

Fe = internal dynamics of relationships

Se = external dynamics of objects

Ne = internal dynamics of objects

Ti = external statics of relationships

Fi = internal statics of relationships

Si = external statics of objects

Ni = internal statics of objects


http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...s-in-Socionics

"Dynamics of objects. If we look at an object in dynamics we should speak about a process, about the things happening to the object. A. Augustinavichuite suggests the following division of the process features. She refers movements, objects’ actions and work done by them to outer (evident) process features. And to inner (implicit) ones – inner changes, stimulus for actions which happen in the inner world of a person, inner energy, emotional state of people. These two groups of informational signals are dynamics signals: outer (evident) and inner (implicit, hidden) ones.

- Information aspect of the object’s evident dynamics: actions, movements is called logics of actions."

There is a difference between perceiving motion and judging/evaluating motion. Football players (often SLE) are good at perceiving motion. Business leaders (often LIE) are good at evaluating processes.



"And to inner (implicit) ones – inner changes, stimulus for actions which happen in the inner world of a person, inner energy, emotional state of people. These two groups of informational signals are dynamics signals: outer (evident) and inner (implicit, hidden) ones.

[...] - Information aspect of the object’s implicit dynamics: inner energy, activation, stimulus for action and emotional state, mood is called ethics ofemotions.

[...] The second sub-group – ethics – will sooner be interested in emotional state of these people, their energy: the vigorous mother fearlessly starts new activities, solves arising problems, the emotional child likes music, merry games, but often becomes capricious."

Why is Fe about relationships? Because we are not evaluating the emotional states of people directly. Instead, we are evaluating our own (emotional) experiences of the emotional states of people.



"Statics of objects. This is the information about the features of the object itself. A. Augustinavichuite has picked out the object’s inner and outer characteristics. Outer (evident) static object features are its form, size, beauty, effect. Inner (implicit, hidden) static object’s features are its inner organization, structure, abilities, capacities. All the information about objects in statics which can be analyzed in included in these two groups.
[...]
Information aspect about an object’s evident features, outer ones: its form, beauty, strength, will, concentration is called will sensorics."

Aushra (Se): "Perceives information about what might be called objects' "kinetic energy" — for example, information about how organized/mobilized a person is, his physical energy and power, and his ability to make use of his willpower or position and exercise his will in opposition to others'. This perception implies the ability to tell what reserves of "kinetic energy" people have and how useful they can be in getting things done. It defines the individual's ability or inability to exercise his willpower and energy in opposition to the will and energy of other people."

I have always been very skeptical of Se in Socionics. I don't think it is clear what Aushra was referring to here. Btw, SSS thinks form, color and beauty etc. belong to Si.



"Information aspect about an object’s implicit features, inner ones: structure, capacities, abilities is called intuition of opportunities.
[...]
Observers from another group – intuits – first of all will pay attention to inner, hidden from eye features, capacities, opportunities: a talented mother has a good potential for self-actualization in life, and a child who is fast learner, can become a well-educated person."

This is not "information about the features of the object itself". Capacities and abilities boil down to "things happening to the object". Self-actualization and 'become a well-educated person' are processes/actions.



"The state of health is the relation with one’s body in dynamics: better – worse. Sensations, comfort are the relations with the environment, space. Aesthetics, harmony are connected with our attitude to the things we have seen, heard, sensed.
State is not a static, but a dynamic aspect. State is always described in comparison with the previous or possible following states. For example, in medicine the state of health is spoken about as dynamics: “clinical course”, “recovery process”, “dynamics of in-between state”. State, by its semantics is the position between one and another thing. And it is not statics, this happens, continues, there are its own accelerations and turbulences. State is changeable, it flows (to compare: disease activity).
Thus, sensations are evident dynamics of relationships. Why?
* Sensation is dynamics: we sense taste only when it is changing, otherwise our receptors adapt themselves to it and stop responding. Our organs of sense only react to changes in taste, smell, colours etc. There is no statics of sensing, when adaptation appears, we stop sensing.
* Sensation is relation: our perception of taste, colour, pain depends on us: everyone has his own taste, somebody likes “sweet pain” and the sensations of “pleasant fatigue” is very relative.
* Sensation is evident: sensed.
They characterize the state of relationships."

They confuse our sensations (i.e. qualia) with physiological mechanisms. We either taste something or we don't. However, our sense organs only react to changes in taste, smell, colors etc.

'I felt sick this morning. But I'm better now.' This is not a comparison. We just mention two different states, and we obviously prefer the latter.



"It is characterized by changes occurring in time, changes in speed of the process, development of the situation in time. These changes can be accumulated latently. This is a hidden, implicit side of the relationships process. It is to be developed (like a film).
What can be referred to the implicit, hidden dynamics of relationships? These are the things not seen with eyes and not registered with other organs of sense. This is the process “ripening”. Nothing evident has happened yet but inner changes are accumulated. These changes can not be noticed but can de anticipated. By small features, so slight that they are registered without the conscious, we foresee what will happen. Our psyche, as if solving a dynamical problem tells us the possible nest stage of the process after some time with the starting conditions and the speed of development.
The history of the process is included here. What was previously, what will happen – it is not seen at present but it is registered by our organs of sense. Inner changes in the process, unnoticeable, occur. The process “ripens”. It is important here: the history of the process development, time and speed. This gives anticipation, foreseeing, forecasting.
This turned to be the most mysterious aspect. It’s not for nothing that such difficult to describe categories as mystical feeling, forecast of the future, hope."

My view is that Ni sees objects in a new context (and sometimes a series of new contexts). So it is definitely about anticipation, foreseeing, forecasting, new perspectives, development etc. But those visualizations are snapshots. Ni does not see them as a process, even though the end result may look like a process. Also, Ni is probably confused with Te or Fe at times.

Furthermore, we cannot compare two (or more) perceptions. How does the experience of red relate to the experience of blue? How does the perception/experience of one new context relate to the perception/experience of another new context?