Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 44

Thread: Fp1 and Fp2 brain regions - Rationality vs. Irrationality?

  1. #1

  2. #2
    FarDraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    TIM
    ILI sp5
    Posts
    390
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In theory, I think that there are some problems if used incorrectly - but this goes with any theory. The dichotomies used in socionics and MBTI were not empirically derived, meaning that they are not falsifiable. Hence, any empirical connection we try to make will only work in one direction. In other words, we can say that if one has xxxx dichotomies, then they will likely have these areas of their brain work the most (forwards causation), but we can't say that just because one has these areas of their brain lighting up, then they are likely xxxx type (backwards causation).

    However, studies have shown that there are correlations between MBTI dichotomies and the five factor model (FFM) which was derived empirically1. Note: they used personality tests to determine how you fit in each model. You can see that the strongest correlation was r = -0.72 (|r| >= 0.7 considered significant) between FFM extroversion and MBTI introversion with others having less significant correlations.

    Similar to the MBTI, these factors were not derived via brain scans but rather via factor analysis, which is certainly more empirical than MBTI but may not be enough to justify a backwards causation between brain scans and FFM since the latter was not derived from the former. However, the correlations found in this analysis would be more interesting and useful given that both brain scans and FFM are empirically based, meaning that, in theory, they should agree if each theory was developed independently. In other words, if factor analysis deduces that there exists 5 personality factors, then there should be consistency in which areas of the brain light up if two individuals fell closely enough on each factor scale.

    The reason I bring this up is because this would be truly interesting research if done properly. It would allow us to quantify personality or determine that our current models are insufficient. But for interest's sake and very colloquial usage, these images you present are sufficient as MBTI is "close enough" to FFM for these purposes.

    The next big thing to be aware of is that connecting the brain scan results to the cognitive functions would be a big leap. Cognitive functions are completely unempirical (as far as I'm aware), meaning that their connection to MBTI and socionics dichotomies are based on intuition and common sense, which isn't scientifically valid. So, if we look at a brain scan and notice that it's similar to the INTJ (ILI as well since apparently your pictures assume that the function definitions are the same between MBTI and socionics) brain scan prediction, and then correlate the cognitive functions to that brain scan, then we'd be far outside the domain of practicality since there is no practical reason to expect that there exists precisely 8 cognitive functions or that they should be organized in the way that we expect. Once again, though, for interest's and curiousity's sake, doing this is "good enough". But we should be very careful about the domains of our theory.

    1) https://jfdeschamps.files.wordpress....am-2003-6p.pdf
    ----- FarDraft, 2019

  3. #3
    a two horned unicorn renegade Troll Nr 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Logical supermacy torturing So(u)ls
    TIM
    Ne-ILE-C 7 ELFV?
    Posts
    4,269
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, at least one study subject have shown to be irrational in socionics while rational in Nardi's system.

    So called ISTP/LSI is pretty clear SLI IMO. So it could be the case those flipped. The problem is that those criteria are not compatible. Nardi's work is heavily Keirsey/MBTI influenced. I think Nardi is quite possibly LII and types as INTJ/ILI.

    They look like (semi-)duals Vicky Jo being EIE.


    As the test subjects are not available due to confidentiality, obviously, it makes it very hard to actually say anything conclusive.
    Quote Originally Posted by Groucho Marx
    I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member.

  4. #4
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FarDraft View Post
    The next big thing to be aware of is that connecting the brain scan results to the cognitive functions would be a big leap.
    yes, absolutely

    Cognitive functions are completely unempirical (as far as I'm aware), meaning that their connection to MBTI and socionics dichotomies are based on intuition and common sense, which isn't scientifically valid.
    Yes and no. Jung's Feeling, Thinking, Intuition and Sensing + Extraversion and Introversion are more or less scientific. Intuition corresponds to "The frontal lobe or prefrontal association complex ... abstract thought" etc. That is why we get 16 clearly different types. But if we want to define Ni, Ne, Te... then it is MUCH more difficult and less scientific. Neither socionists nor MBTI typologists have defined the functions accurately.

    So, if we look at a brain scan and notice that it's similar to the INTJ (ILI as well since apparently your pictures assume that the function definitions are the same between MBTI and socionics)
    They are not identical, but white intuition (Socionics) is of course most similar to Introverted Intuition (MBTI).

    brain scan prediction, and then correlate the cognitive functions to that brain scan, then we'd be far outside the domain of practicality since there is no practical reason to expect that there exists precisely 8 cognitive functions or that they should be organized in the way that we expect
    I disagree with you here. I think there is a reason to expect 8 cognitive functions, since we have 16 types. The types could be caused by different cognitive patterns instead, but then why would it be precisely 16 patterns?

  5. #5
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    Well, at least one study subject have shown to be irrational in socionics while rational in Nardi's system.
    I don't think Dario is using Rational/Irrational. He is using Judging/Perceiving (MBTI) instead.

    So called ISTP/LSI is pretty clear SLI IMO. So it could be the case those flipped. The problem is that those criteria are not compatible. Nardi's work is heavily Keirsey/MBTI influenced.
    ISTP is "the mechanic" in MBTI. We should expect a strong correlation with the parietal lobe, which is shown in the brain map. And a TiSe type (mbti) must correspond to a white logic - black sensing type in Socionics.

    I think Nardi is quite possibly LII and types as INTJ/ILI.
    I don't see LII at all.

    They look like (semi-)duals Vicky Jo being EIE.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppGTFLxU3Es

    Vicky Jo is most likely an IEI / INFp (Socionics) or INFJ (Myers-Briggs).

  6. #6
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    1,920
    Mentioned
    136 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I just want so say that I agree that Vicky is EIE. She has a lot of videos where her EIEness shows and her husband seems to be Ti dom.

    Vicky seems D subtype

  7. #7
    a two horned unicorn renegade Troll Nr 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Logical supermacy torturing So(u)ls
    TIM
    Ne-ILE-C 7 ELFV?
    Posts
    4,269
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, there are ethically very inert LII's but there are also quite lively or even calming ones especially when they try to bring that Si forefront.

    Today I met extremely inert one who was like Vicky Jo's husband but even more extreme.
    Quote Originally Posted by Groucho Marx
    I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member.

  8. #8
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,080
    Mentioned
    88 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    IEs are classifications of brain programming and the brain has been shown to be plastic as far as information processing is concerned; different areas of the brain can take over many impaired functions. Therefore, wouldn't relating type to brain activities in specific physical regions imply non-plasticity? Software should be treated separately from the brain's hardware (core processors).

    a.k.a. I/O

  9. #9
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    TIM
    eyy
    Posts
    2,683
    Mentioned
    197 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    apart from ESTP and INFP, ENTJ and ISFJ, ESFP and INTP, that are somewhat complementary (=no brain departments in common), all the others duality or conflict pairs share at least one function, in the prefrontal cortex or in the occipital/temporal lobe.

  10. #10
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    IEs are classifications of brain programming and the brain has been shown to be plastic as far as information processing is concerned; different areas of the brain can take over many impaired functions. Therefore, wouldn't relating type to brain activities in specific physical regions imply non-plasticity? Software should be treated separately from the brain's hardware (core processors).

    a.k.a. I/O
    I don't think the brain is that plastic. For example, logical reasoning is (always) dependent on the frontal lobe. And type descriptions refer to healthy/normal people.

  11. #11
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  12. #12
    Ice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    250
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Idc how legit this is, brain scans are automatically superior to any other form of typing. It might make people shut up finally and stop causing needless confusion about things that how "that one thing everyone does sometimes is now ESI, and the other thing that everyone does sometimes is ILE but somehow also ESI sometimes"

    I theoretically would type by realtime perception/focus and brain activity but I can't, so the second best thing is typing by eye movement- because the eyes are just a minor glimpse into the brain.

  13. #13
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    http://www.brainmaster.com/help/Posi...n_function.htm

    Fp1 seems to be related to logical attention and Fp2 seems to be related to emotional attention.

    http://www.insightsforchange.co.uk/a...es_Jul2012.pdf

    All Feeling types have a dominant Fp2 in this article.

  14. #14
    عالم نفسي thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,001
    Mentioned
    281 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chryskoru View Post
    Idc how legit this is, brain scans are automatically superior to any other form of typing. It might make people shut up finally and stop causing needless confusion about things that how "that one thing everyone does sometimes is now ESI, and the other thing that everyone does sometimes is ILE but somehow also ESI sometimes"

    I theoretically would type by realtime perception/focus and brain activity but I can't, so the second best thing is typing by eye movement- because the eyes are just a minor glimpse into the brain.
    Certainty isn't the same as truth.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,548
    Mentioned
    496 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    ISTP is "the mechanic" in MBTI.
    SLI is the mechanic in Socionics.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    IEs are classifications of brain programming and the brain has been shown to be plastic as far as information processing is concerned; different areas of the brain can take over many impaired functions. Therefore, wouldn't relating type to brain activities in specific physical regions imply non-plasticity? Software should be treated separately from the brain's hardware (core processors).
    Actually the brain is not fully plastic. Quick example. Your visual processing areas will never be NOT in the occipital lobe.

  16. #16
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    SLI is the mechanic in Socionics.
    Some socionists think so, yes. Why? Because they define Te very strangely: "work", instrument, tool, mechanism etc. The problem here is that their definition of Te doesn't match their definition of Si.

    If SLI (SiTe) is the mechanic, then what is LSI? Accountant, administrator... with TiSe as ego functions? Really? It doesn't add up.

    Se (Socionics): strength, power, will, effect, desires, tactics, appearance, weight, form, colour, beauty, territory, realization, to defend, to reach

  17. #17
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,380
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    Some socionists think so, yes. Why? Because they define Te very strangely: "work", instrument, tool, mechanism etc. The problem here is that their definition of Te doesn't match their definition of Si.

    If SLI (SiTe) is the mechanic, then what is LSI? Accountant, administrator... with TiSe as ego functions? Really? It doesn't add up.

    Se (Socionics): strength, power, will, effect, desires, tactics, appearance, weight, form, colour, beauty, territory, realization, to defend, to reach
    Your job isn't necessarily always tied to your functions.

    LSIs are Ti dominants anyway, Se is just the auxiliary, so using the desc of Se to make your point isn't exactly correct.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  18. #18
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,080
    Mentioned
    88 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    .........Actually the brain is not fully plastic. Quick example. Your visual processing areas will never be NOT in the occipital lobe.
    Socionics is about cognition (the plastic parts of the brain), and type determines the 'type' of information that is processed from the senses. Yes, the visual processing area is part of the sensor and fixed liked the eyes but isn't part of cognition. A blind person wouldn't access this area but will still be of a certain type......

    a.k.a. I/O

  19. #19
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Your job isn't necessarily always tied to your functions.
    Of course it isn't always tied to your functions. But "the mechanic" is more of a general description of this type.

    You can argue, like SSS, that SLI, LSI, LSE, ESE etc aren't about types at all, so there are no descriptions. But then your/their theory is pointless.


    LSIs are Ti dominants anyway, Se is just the auxiliary, so using the desc of Se to make your point isn't exactly correct.
    Yes it is. Ti is a judging function and Se is perceiving function, so Ti is always dependent on Se.

  20. #20
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    Socionics is about cognition (the plastic parts of the brain), and type determines the 'type' of information that is processed from the senses. Yes, the visual processing area is part of the sensor and fixed liked the eyes but isn't part of cognition. A blind person wouldn't access this area but will still be of a certain type......
    But cognition is still dependent on different physical parts of the brain.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_processing

    "Visual processing is a term that is used to refer to the brain's ability to use and interpret visual information from the world around us. The process of converting light energy into a meaningful image is a complex process that is facilitated by numerous brain structures and higher level cognitive processes."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occipital_lobe

    V1 is probably the same for all types, though.

  21. #21
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,380
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    Yes it is. Ti is a judging function and Se is perceiving function, so Ti is always dependent on Se.
    No, that would be a SLE.

    In a LSI it's the Se which is dependent on Ti, since Ti is the first function.

    So a LSI understands the world through Ti and uses Se to apply his Ti to the world around him.

    The creative variant of a perceiving function is different in its real-life manifestation if compared to the base variant, that's one of the main points of socionics.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  22. #22
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    No, that would be a SLE.

    In a LSI it's the Se which is dependent on Ti, since Ti is the first function.

    So a LSI understands the world through Ti and uses Se to apply his Ti to the world around him.
    You are missing the point. Ti is "blind" without a perceiving function (Se).

  23. #23
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,380
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    You are missing the point. Ti is "blind" without a perceiving function (Se).
    No, it's you who don't really understand how jung / socionics works - it's not related to perceiving the world in terms of smell, sight, and so on - it's about higher oder cognitive functions. People who are extremely focussed on introverted judging functions can still eat and take a shower.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  24. #24
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    No, it's you who don't really understand how jung / socionics works - it's not related to perceiving the world in terms of smell, sight, and so on - it's about higher oder cognitive functions. People who are extremely focussed on introverted judging functions can still eat and take a shower.
    Yes I do... I am not talking about sight (V1, see above) etc... I am talking about higher order cognitive functions. In order to make any judgements, you need some kind of information. That is Se. Then you must match Se with Ti, so you must match strength, power, will etc with logic. However, that is not impossible. But matching socionics Te and Si is impossible.

  25. #25
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,380
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    Yes I do... I am not talking about sight (V1, see above) etc... I am talking about higher order cognitive functions. In order to make any judgements, you need some kind of information. That is Se. Then you must match Se with Ti, so you must match [COLOR=#333333]strength, power, will etc with logic. .
    A person who uses primarly Se and supports it with Ti is a SLE in socionics...
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  26. #26
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    A person who uses primarly Se and supports it with Ti is a SLE in socionics...
    You are still missing the point. Whether Se is dominant or not is irrelevant. Se must match Ti, and Si must match Te. Coziness, state of health, comfort... doesn't match instrument, tool, effectiveness...

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,548
    Mentioned
    496 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    Socionics is about cognition (the plastic parts of the brain), and type determines the 'type' of information that is processed from the senses. Yes, the visual processing area is part of the sensor and fixed liked the eyes but isn't part of cognition. A blind person wouldn't access this area but will still be of a certain type......

    a.k.a. I/O
    It was only one example. I can give you more examples that definitely affect cognition directly. So for example, emotional processing that's Ethics information in Socionics is also in specific brain areas. Same for logical processing. Same for intuitive analogy based thinking. Etc. Ofcourse none of these are as simple as just 1 area = 1 IE, no no, it's several centres and connections on several levels (not just high level neocortex) working together.

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,548
    Mentioned
    496 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    Some socionists think so, yes. Why? Because they define Te very strangely: "work", instrument, tool, mechanism etc. The problem here is that their definition of Te doesn't match their definition of Si.

    If SLI (SiTe) is the mechanic, then what is LSI? Accountant, administrator... with TiSe as ego functions? Really? It doesn't add up.

    Se (Socionics): strength, power, will, effect, desires, tactics, appearance, weight, form, colour, beauty, territory, realization, to defend, to reach
    It's not a "very strangely" defined Te, by "some socionists", it's basic Socionics.

    Socionics Si seamlessly integrates with Te actually... Si processes of the sensory "glue" for sensory relations between objects work very well with the Te approach for physical jobs etc. It isn't just about some bits of how to create physical comfort, that's just part of it.

    Ti in Socionics is more "left-brained" than in MBTI so that's how it adds up for LSI and TiSe being the inspector in Socionics (whereas SiTe is the inspector in MBTI). It's about logically organising and structuring information in a strict way and is less directly physical than Si, so yeah the idea is that it works better for those office jobs. Though of course not just for those jobs. Even in MBTI they recommend physical jobs too for ISTJ like for any ST type.

    Se creative in Socionics definitely works with all those things you listed, a mechanic is more about the "sensory glue" along with Te tools/mechanisms.


    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    You are missing the point. Ti is "blind" without a perceiving function (Se).
    Ti isn't blind without Se lol.

    It just takes basic visual information (from the V1 etc that you yourself mentioned) and other incoming basic information and taking the information to a higher level in processing, it organises logically instead of fully immersing in the Sensing physical side of the information.

    This is my take anyhow (and in a simplified way ofc)

  29. #29
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,080
    Mentioned
    88 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    But cognition is still dependent on different physical parts of the brain........

    ......The process of converting light energy into a meaningful image is a complex process that is facilitated by numerous brain structures and higher level cognitive processes." ......
    As I have said many times, type structure has to be be independent of physical structure; the app can run on IOS or android and both operating systems would likely produce the same outcomes but not in an identical fashion. Type must be part of a so-called central processing structure (likely integral to its kernel); otherwise, one could end up with a N-type visual processor and a S-type audio processor; and if this is possible, say goodbye to Socionics theory......

    a.k.a. I/O

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,548
    Mentioned
    496 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    As I have said many times, type structure has to be be independent of physical structure; the app can run on IOS or android and both operating systems would likely produce the same outcomes but not in an identical fashion. Type must be part of a so-called central processing structure (likely integral to its kernel); otherwise, one could end up with a N-type visual processor and a S-type audio processor; and if this is possible, say goodbye to Socionics theory......

    a.k.a. I/O
    IOS and android devices both have the same basic hardware.

    Yeah, I think it's possible to have such decoupling of modules. Model A is only good as a general overview of some patterns and ideas, you can't *directly* draw from it any specific concrete conclusions. To make such a conclusion, you always have to add other reasonings in the process. And Model A cannot determine those additional things on its own. So yeah, goodbye to it in that sense, but that's a well-known thing I would think.

    And to get more specific about your post, I don't think any of the general overview Model A provides can determine how the processing structure works in such detail, down to these modules you mention for examples. The model is too lightweight for that, it does not have enough information to explain the workings of the brain down to that detail.

  31. #31
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    it's basic Socionics.
    No, it is not. SSS doesn't use type descriptions at all, and SHS (Gulenko) seems to argue for ISTP <--> LSI in Gulenko-Nardi Youtube videos.

    SRSI:

    "Sensoric-logical introverts (SLI) are people preferring a bird in hand to two in the bush. Sensorics of sensing, being the strong function, gives SLI talent in everything that is connected with handwork. The particular feature of this type is creating comfort in their everyday life. They are good at design, furniture and have good taste. They like expensive clothes pointing out their high status. And it is really very high. Women, as well as men are able to organize a profitable business in commerce or production. And more, SLI are born cooks. The process of cooking for them is a kind of sacred ritual. The strong function of sensorics of sensing helps them here. Even if they do not have a villa in Canary Islands, but only a small house near Moscow, please, believe, they will manage to enjoy a morning jogging on dew, the smell of blossoming lilac and a mug of fresh milk."

    This description corresponds to ISTJ (mbti).

    Socionics Si seamlessly integrates with Te actually... Si processes of the sensory "glue" for sensory relations between objects work very well with the Te approach for physical jobs etc. It isn't just about some bits of how to create physical comfort, that's just part of it.
    LOL ... What is the other part?

    Ti in Socionics is more "left-brained" than in MBTI so that's how it adds up for LSI and TiSe being the inspector in Socionics (whereas SiTe is the inspector in MBTI). It's about logically organising and structuring information in a strict way and is less directly physical than Si, so yeah the idea is that it works better for those office jobs. Though of course not just for those jobs. Even in MBTI they recommend physical jobs too for ISTJ like for any ST type.
    Okay, so SLE is also more suited for office jobs, according to you? :-) It doesn't add up!

    Ti isn't blind without Se lol.
    It just takes basic visual information (from the V1 etc that you yourself mentioned) and other incoming basic information and taking the information to a higher level in processing, it organises logically instead of fully immersing in the Sensing physical side of the information.
    This is my take anyhow (and in a simplified way ofc)
    So V1 is the perceiving function in your view? LSI: TiV1? ... or both Ti and Se are blocked with V1??? :-)

  32. #32
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,646
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chryskoru View Post
    I theoretically would type by realtime perception/focus and brain activity but I can't, so the second best thing is typing by eye movement- because the eyes are just a minor glimpse into the brain.
    Now there’s an idea that hasn’t been tried before afaik. Attention time and eye movement in reaction to different kinds of stimuli.

    This is almost as good as monitoring brain activity.

    I think the idea of monitoring areas of the brain trying to map it to IEs is silly. Or at least, Nardi needs to be more transparent about his methods because he’s shown to be scammy (like, really, not like WSS dude levels). Some of his work may actually be valid, but his presentation and delivery and the way he’s responded to criticism makes it invalid.: https://amp.reddit.com/r/mbti/commen...t_introverted/ , http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive...o-nardi-5.html

  33. #33
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    otherwise, one could end up with a N-type visual processor and a S-type audio processor;
    How do you come to that conclusion? And what exactly do you mean by "N-type visual processor" and "S-type audio processor"?

  34. #34

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,548
    Mentioned
    496 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Petter

    I do not have respect for people who are unable to keep personal bullshit out of discussions. The same for you.

    I also will not waste my time on responding to your strawmans or on educating you on basic Socionics definitions that are easy to look up.

  35. #35

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,548
    Mentioned
    496 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Rebelondeck, I'd like to also add: I think that what is observable as preferences for general information processing emerge from how the lower level modules happen to be working together. I have not seen proof that there is some way of a high level organisation in the brain that must determine the low level down to that detail you mentioned. Some of them probably do work together more often than not (and of course there would be a reason for that), but that is not the same as having that "a priori" high-level systematic design for how they work together. Even the existence of a dominant/inferior function is not guaranteed (I think Jung said the same actually). And the Socionics model only deals with those generalities, lacking proof for the details of implementation of any structure, the model itself does not add any theory or explanation for such, also the vagueness of the generalities it deals with indicates that the case is what I said above. I.e. I have yet to see a way to operationalise properly in more detail and I believe it is not possible due to the above. It can only be done if we use a new model, which of course has to go way beyond Socionics's lightweight one.

    And yes maybe this is disillusioning to anyone who wants to "believe" in Socionics as it is now but I think this is the realistic view without having to scream "evil pseudoscience!!" either. Though I do dislike it when the use of the model too easily leads to apophenia. That is a very bad side effect.

  36. #36
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,080
    Mentioned
    88 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    How do you come to that conclusion? And what exactly do you mean by "N-type visual processor" and "S-type audio processor"?
    It wasn't intended as a conclusion. If intelligence is distributed to also include the input processors of the brain, there's no reason why each processor couldn't have their own type characteristics. You had stated that "cognition is still dependent on different physical parts of the brain" but in order for Socionics theory to hold water, wouldn't type type have to be central in order that uniform characteristics be applicable to the entirety of information processing?.......

    a.k.a. I/O

  37. #37
    عالم نفسي thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,001
    Mentioned
    281 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    You are still missing the point. Whether Se is dominant or not is irrelevant. Se must match Ti, and Si must match Te. Coziness, state of health, comfort... doesn't match instrument, tool, effectiveness...
    Knowledge of how things work (Te) is very important for health (Si). Just look at the medical profession, it's literally all about how to use knowledge of how your body works to improve or maintain its state of health. That's Te + Si.

  38. #38
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    @Petter

    I do not have respect for people who are unable to keep personal bullshit out of discussions. The same for you.

    I also will not waste my time on responding to your strawmans or on educating you on basic Socionics definitions that are easy to look up.
    excellent... btw that's mutual

  39. #39
    Petter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    Knowledge of how things work (Te) is very important for health (Si). Just look at the medical profession, it's literally all about how to use knowledge of how your body works to improve or maintain its state of health. That's Te + Si.
    That's a really far-fetched explanation. How do you explain Si when it comes to a mechanic (SLI, SiTe... in your view)?

    Mechanic and physician are two very different professions, which attract two very different groups of people (i.e. types).
    Last edited by Petter; 01-16-2019 at 02:26 PM.

  40. #40
    عالم نفسي thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,001
    Mentioned
    281 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    That's a really far-fetched explanation. How do you explain Si when it comes to a mechanic (SLI, SiTe... in your view)?

    Mechanic and physician are two very different professions, which attract two very different groups of people (i.e. types).
    I think that's a very straightforward explanation actually. The IM elements are general enough to include a wide range of activities. I wouldn't expect 1/16 of the population to be mechanics.

    But the process of diagnosing mechanical issues with a car is essentially the same as with the body of a human being: you look for symptoms (such as weird sounds), and try to get it back in working order. The goal is to keep it or get it back in good shape so that it benefits the user. You could say Si is more generally about physical condition.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •