Abstract vs Concrete functions

[raisonpure]

While I was reading Dichotomic descriptions of types v2.0, it occurred to me that marmalade fits abstract acc-Ni:

Gulenko: the intuition of the time In its behavior it is guided by intuitive presentiments. Because of this quality it is capable to survive in most difficult situation, since rapidly are distinguished artificiality, falsity, hypocrisy, degradation. It freely manages both its and strange time. It always acts in the manner that as if he has reserve of time. It puts aside much for tomorrow. Large dreamer and lyric nature. The pictures, which to it sketches the imagination, bright and bright, are much more attractive than everyday life. It believes in good future. It calms down people, moving in them hope by phrases about the fast changes to the best. Does not concentrate its attention in the errors of the past.

While concrete acc-Ni is a better depiction of my general behaviour:

Gulenko: the intuition of the time Keenly observes after the flow of life. It thinly notices details and hardly the planned tendencies. It explains, what reasons led to the existing consequences. It is submerged in the past, the repetitive phenomena are studied. Because of the associatively organized memory and the love for the knowledge he is frequently scholar. Contradictions and actual errors in positions and opinions are revealed well. Possessing a philosophical turn of mind, it knows how to produce the impression of wise and man of vision. It is careful in decision making. It proceeds from the fact that it is necessary to slightly anticipate events. The safe version of actions is always selected.

Though I identify with abstract cre-Ni most of all:

Abstract form:
Gulenko:He has a good understanding the the development of situation in time. Sensing danger ---gotovigsya to it previously - thinks over the fallback positions. He warns people about the danger threatening to them. Men constantly koleblyushchiysya and being doubted. To it it is to not easy accept decision of major importance. However, after decision is made, no longer it will think over and will not turn back. Its world view in the course of time can be changed for diametrically contrary. It is internally very contradictory. Recovers falsity and nonconformity between the words and the real behavior of people. It is usually interested in the themes, connected with the fate and other mysterious phenomena. It loves to seclude and to reflect about the sense of life, the past and the future. All problems are examined from a global, philosophical point of view. ---

What are the implications of this? Are there any other articles that explain the abstract and concrete forms and their differences?

[Dmitri Lytov]

Eugene Shepetko (1990) defined N and T as abstract functions, S and F as concrete.

Victor Gulenko in his "structural and Functional Socionics" (1999) described S and F as "direct input of information" and "direct output of information" , respectively, while N and T as "mediators in processing of the information", and thus came to the same conclusion about S and F being concrete, N and T being abstract.

In fact, abstract thinking really depends on N and T. N is responsible for imagination, abstraction from "here-and-now", while T is responsible for verbalization and structuralization. See the relevant topic:
http://the16types.no-ip.info/forums/...pic.php?t=9592

[Smilingeyes]

Eugene Shepetko (1990) defined N and T as abstract functions, S and F as concrete.

Victor Gulenko in his "structural and Functional Socionics" (1999) described S and F as "direct input of information" and "direct output of information" , respectively, while N and T as "mediators in processing of the information", and thus came to the same conclusion about S and F being concrete, N and T being abstract.

In fact, abstract thinking really depends on N and T. N is responsible for imagination, abstraction from "here-and-now", while T is responsible for verbalization and structuralization. See the relevant topic:
http://the16types.no-ip.info/forums/...pic.php?t=9592

There are a number of different definitions of abstract/concrete running around in socionics, a matter that's been discussed here quite recently and you reference the wrong one having no relation to the original question at all. If you care to actually read the post and what is referenced you will note that in this case it is a discussion of what you, herr Lytov, may know by the catastrophically bad name of - and +functions. You know the one's that you magically know everything about because you claim to have been in the same room when someone else suggested their existence.

As for the original question: Any post discussing how different types use the same function written by any socionist is essentially a discussion of differences of creative and accepting and concrete and abstract versions of the same function. That is unless the socionist in question happens to be full of it. Try to cross-reference Stratiyevskaya's descriptions of functions for different types to get some more understanding.

There's little to no discussion by the russians about the actual categorizations of different forms of functions since they continue to mainly lump all forms of Ni into the same basket so there's little good analysis to be found.

[Jonathan]

Gee...let's not have any punching here.

It sure is confusing if Gulenko would use the term "abstract" for what is clearly an IEI description, and "concrete" for what is clearly ILI, whereas, as Dmitri mentioned, Socionics also use abstract to mean N&T and concrete to use S&F (a distinction that Anndelise uses quite effectively in a lot in her posts).


@Raisonpure: So, it sounds as if though your signature says you're IEI, you identify better with some things in ILI, but that one of the ENj types fits you even better (I can't tell which one because this abstract/concrete terminology is now totally confusing :-)).