function numbers

[machintruc]

On model A, functions are numbered 1-8 ; does that mean a LII percieves first, second, third, and so on ?

Or is there another IM algorithm which is more complicated and unknown to me ?

[aestrivex]

the numbers simply reflect the position of the function in model A.

so yes, for an LII Ti=1, Ne=2... Fe=5, etc.

[tcaudilllg]

On model A, functions are numbered 1-8 ; does that mean a LII percieves first, second, third, and so on ?

Or is there another IM algorithm which is more complicated and unknown to me ?

That's right. You can actually read it in a person's writing.


Stop and look at what I just wrote: "You can actually read it in a person's writing." See? . If you break down a person's writing into Model-A progression, then you are structuring it. So that sentence, which I wrote as a normal process of my thinking, was an instance of .

And then you'll notice, "Stop and look at what I just wrote:", which is exertion . The metabolism picks up again at "See? Ti. If you break down..." which is metabolism following into "model-A progression" exertion .

I actually suspect that you may be a exertion type. "On model A, functions are numbered 1-8 ;": this is metabolism
"does that mean a LII percieves first, second, third, and so on" -- This would appear to be exertion, because you are describing an evolutionary sequence.

Also off topic, but what you appear to be doing reminds me of Valkyrie Profile's Lezard Valeth: looking for "runes" and "symbols" that indicate signs of a higher reality.

[machintruc]

On model A, functions are numbered 1-8 ; does that mean a LII percieves first, second, third, and so on ?

Or is there another IM algorithm which is more complicated and unknown to me ?

That's right. You can actually read it in a person's writing.


Stop and look at what I just wrote: "You can actually read it in a person's writing." See? . If you break down a person's writing into Model-A progression, then you are structuring it. So that sentence, which I wrote as a normal process of my thinking, was an instance of .

And then you'll notice, "Stop and look at what I just wrote:", which is exertion . The metabolism picks up again at "See? Ti. If you break down..." which is metabolism following into "model-A progression" exertion .

I actually suspect that you may be a exertion type. "On model A, functions are numbered 1-8 ;": this is metabolism
"does that mean a LII percieves first, second, third, and so on" -- This would appear to be exertion, because you are describing an evolutionary sequence.

Also off topic, but what you appear to be doing reminds me of Valkyrie Profile's Lezard Valeth: looking for "runes" and "symbols" that indicate signs of a higher reality.

You seem to caricature information elements...

Intuition is related to the perception of time, which means intangible reality, by the means of constructing mental images.

First when I studied socionics I was caricaturing a little ; I read a Rick's article which talked about the semantics of information elements.

I'm talking of how that information could flow, is that 1234 ? 3412 ? 4123 ? Which functions input and output ?

Augusta said that the "input" functions are 3 and 5, and that information flows like 34123 and 56785.

But Rick said an intuitive type would have dulled and delayed reactions to the sensing world, and vice versa ; I'm nearly 100% sure I'm intuitive because I'm currently learning to drive (a car), and my driving instructor said I was "a dreamer which is not interested at what's happening, and which has a very long reaction time".

I saw an article which said functions were "priorities of perception". (probably from Rick)

So how does the information really flow ? What are really the roles of each function ? Which are the real definitions for the dichotomies, accepting/producing, conscious/subconscious, weak/strong, and inert/contact ?

I'm not talking of Information Exertion, but Information Metabolism. Even professional socionists are conflicting on the meaning of 1-8, so it's difficult to know what the 1-8 numbers really mean.

[tcaudilllg]

Where did she say "34123"?

I guess I could see that in the way people introduce themselves, although does that really have anything to do with role? I bought that idea for a while... turned out not to be reflected in speech, however. It actually obfusticated my work on exertion/crosstypes.

Apparently Model A is the urobolos, the foundational precept behind the hermanetic notion of the snake eating its own tail. (Jung talks about this, and I've mentioned his words on it elsewhere in the forum) From my perspective, it is somewhat of a philosopher's stone, a key by which subjective experiences may be calculated and, by a margin, predicted. Others may disagree, but they probably don't have as the exertion base.

[machintruc]

Where did she say "34123"?

I guess I could see that in the way people introduce themselves, although does that really have anything to do with role? I bought that idea for a while... turned out not to be reflected in speech, however. It actually obfusticated my work on exertion/crosstypes.

Apparently Model A is the urobolos, the foundational precept behind the hermanetic notion of the snake eating its own tail. (Jung talks about this, and I've mentioned his words on it elsewhere in the forum) From my perspective, it is somewhat of a philosopher's stone, a key by which subjective experiences may be calculated and, by a margin, predicted. Others may disagree, but they probably don't have as the exertion base.

Articles said that information flows like 12341 or 34123 or 53412. Socionists are unsure of this.

[tcaudilllg]

Where did she say "34123"?

I guess I could see that in the way people introduce themselves, although does that really have anything to do with role? I bought that idea for a while... turned out not to be reflected in speech, however. It actually obfusticated my work on exertion/crosstypes.

Apparently Model A is the urobolos, the foundational precept behind the hermanetic notion of the snake eating its own tail. (Jung talks about this, and I've mentioned his words on it elsewhere in the forum) From my perspective, it is somewhat of a philosopher's stone, a key by which subjective experiences may be calculated and, by a margin, predicted. Others may disagree, but they probably don't have as the exertion base.

Articles said that information flows like 12341 or 34123 or 53412. Socionists are unsure of this.

Smilingeyes says the order comes from Jung. "T follows N or S, but never F." It would be appropriate to consider Jung the authority on this because of his metabolism, exertion. (ENFp-INTj) "At this point in the sequence this exchange is going on... at this point..., etc."

[krieger]

Once someone manages to model socionics computationally it should be fairly easy to tell which transformations between functions are possible and which are not.

It seems to me that what matters is not so much what arbitrary sequence of firings one is prone to detect in human speech/thought, but rather which sequences are possible, and which are triggered under which circumstances.

[tcaudilllg]

Once someone manages to model socionics computationally it should be fairly easy to tell which transformations between functions are possible and which are not.

It seems to me that what matters is not so much what arbitrary sequence of firings one is prone to detect in human speech/thought, but rather which sequences are possible, and which are triggered under which circumstances.

"It seems to me that what matters is not so much what arbitrary sequence of firings one is prone to detect in human speech/thought, but rather which sequences are possible, and which are triggered under which circumstances."

The question is this: how does the brain model components of information? How do these components bleed together? Answer this question and you will have what you seek.

I recommend studying linguistics.