Gulenko talks a lot about how, in order for an individual to grow, it's best they focus on improving the role function. Why is that? And how would you go about doing it?
I would think that one would want to strengthen their id functions..?
Role strengthening
Gulenko talks a lot about how, in order for an individual to grow, it's best they focus on improving the role function. Why is that? And how would you go about doing it?
I would think that one would want to strengthen their id functions..?
Socionics is ideas of Jung and Augustinavichiute. The rest should be outside of interests of novices, as those do not understand the basics to understand the degree of baselessness of other ideas.Originally Posted by chocolatte
The best way to improve weak functions is to do this by valued functions - as this is easier for the psyche. That's why we feel better with duals but not with superegos which are often perceived as most weird types (in average, not all individs and not always are perceived badly). If you consciously load much 2nd block functions - you may get depressive symptoms, for example.
You may improve a function by an activity in its any E/I form (by suggestive or by role) - the both kinds of a function are developed rather equally. It's possibly to have significantly better developed some of skills in a function's variant (E or I), but not only one of E/I functions variants. As they always work together, - it's alike different sides of a same coin, it's your consciousness limits to see only one of them in a single moment while other side stays in a shadow.
> And how would you go about doing it?
An attention and actions related to the region of some function - this develops the function, not only some skills. Also may help a good friendship with a dual - as you introject his personality, get his influence - you pay more of your attention on your weak regions and may study skills of their usage from your dual. The weakest function is suggestive/role by Jung - it's where you may improve yourself the most. Though all weak functions differ not so much by a strenght, if to compare their strenght with strong functions.
Other types which can be good to help you in imrovement, - those who have in ego what you have in superid: semi-dual, activator, mirage. The problem with the orderer - it's not equal relations, while for a friendship it's important to be perceived so (for orderer you are often alike "bad kid", but not a possible friend; though you may like orderer and to study in dealing with him to some degree).
> I would think that one would want to strengthen their id functions..?
they are strong already. you may develop strong functions too, though it's not where you have the most problems as a person
oops, I meant "superid" i think. the weak but valued block. yeah, that's what i thought, why would you want to improve a function you don't value?
sigh, it's frustrating how everyone seems to believe a different thing in socionics. if only there were a clear cut theory!
thank you for your response
Role is superego so it helps you adapt. Many people have developed Role.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Your superego is an area of shame and insecurity. People often feel obligated to improve their role function so that they're "good enough" at it in order to avoid embarassment. This means adopting scripted rules of thumb that are very specific to the way your society (or subculture) values that information element (e.g. Se is channelled differently in ancient Sparta compared to a modern corporate board room).
In a society that doesn't put a lot of emphasis on your role function, you may not feel a strong urge to develop it (e.g. Fi can be somewhat bypassed in mainstream America; not so much if you're Amish or Mormon).
Can you elaborate on what you mean by “Fi can be somewhat bypassed in mainstream America”? More so than other IEs? And why?
Not to put a fine point on it, but highly urbanized, highly anonymous societies allow sufficient individual freedoms for social interactions to become bespoke arrangements. I regret using the United States as my example, because it's so large and diverse, with major differences between regions, not all of which are urbanized (this is perhaps applicable to every country).
While American media is certainly full of them, there's no "official" expectation to develop (or share) highly personal sentimental experiences. There's no pressure to evaluate the strength of interpersonal bonds (or maintain them) in an arena where relationships are contractual arrangements between atomized individuals. This is not the case for Te, because understanding the efficacy of actions is necessary in virtually every environment.
I'm being general. I'm certain that these societies offer all kinds of complexity that involves contradictions of every kind. I am not an anthropologist or a sociologist.
WRT Mormonism, I recommend this article, written by a Socionist who used to post here, about Mormonism and Fi: http://socionist.blogspot.com/2007/0...hings-and.html
Last edited by xerx; 05-13-2020 at 07:47 PM.
It's impossible to improve or strengthen an information control system; there's no means to upgrade our operating systems. The best we can do is develop workarounds for our shortcomings, which will never be like the real thing; we can't strengthen a missing arm so we learn to compensate.......
a.k.a. I/O
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote