User:Admin/Avenues of thought to pursue
From Wikisocion
< Back to Rick's Writings at Wikisocion
[edit] Four (or more) uses of IM elements
It may be useful to differentiate between different uses of the IM elements:
- (+)* positive appraisals, praise, and enthusiastic assessments coming from the IM element
- (-) negative assessments, criticism, etc.
- (0) neutral, matter-of-fact statements concerning this aspect of reality
- (H) humor rooted in the IM element
* these are unrelated to the so-called "plus/minus" signs used by some socionists.
Note that so-called "PoLR hits" concern only negative assessments ("You don't know what you're talking about." "Can't you take better care of yourself?" etc.). OR, alternatively, people with "sore" 4th functions might tend to perceive all but the most obvious and heartfelt praise as negative assessments. The suggestive function responds differently even to negative assessments: "well then, help me if I'm not doing it right!"
3rd and 4th function praise has a completely different effect, even though it is accepted with those same vulnerable Super-Ego functions. It may well produce elation. No "PoLR hit" there at all.
1st function praise, however, leaves the individual totally indifferent. Imagine one IEE giving another IEE +: "you're such an interesting and unusual person!" Indifference to this kind of display is one of the things that makes relations of identity so incohesive. An SLI would react completely differently, though. This kind of praise would produce interest in the praise-giver and a desire to elicit more of the same kind of praise.
"-1" statements about oneself, however (here I mean negative evaluations of whatever is the person's leading IM element) produce quick and robust reactions and rejection. The person is sure of himself in this area and cannot be easily pushed over. Hence, he might quickly repel the comment with irony, sarcasm, mockery, similar criticism of the other person, etc.
This division may help to recognize biases; types with strong , for example, may tend to describe incompletely, focusing on -. At the same time, they may focus on + instead of all varieties of .
Also, this may be present a way of describing different behavior among people of the same type and recognizing the emotional state of specific people. For instance, some popular images of ILIs (what is understood by the word "Critic") may actually depict - ILIs. But ILIs can be brought up to be more positive about things; in this case, they would tend to be more neutral or positive in their assessments.
[edit] Model A: Interrelation of the functions
As Thehotelambush pointed out in an article, there is a lot of logical redundancy in socionics. The element of the first function determines three other functions, etc. From the point of view of a perceptive, but non-socionist observer, these four elements in their four positions of the type formula would probably be perceived holistically as being a single whole. In a way, Model A introduces extra complications and suggests more autonomy of the functions than actually exists. Also, the existing pictoral representation of the model suggests that "all functions are created equal." In actuality, there are clear preferences: the 3rd element is consistently "rejected" in favor of 1 and 5, 8 in favor of 2 and 6, etc. So, one uses one's 3rd function far, far less than the 1st.
Another thing is that there are always two sides to every "element" (, , etc.): the IM element (what the individual is doing) and the information aspect (what is happening in reality). Model A is not just a model of a type's behavior and "values" ( over , etc.), but also a model of how the type responds to different kinds of information. So, even if the functions are not created equal, as stated above, the amounts of information of different aspects are equal.
Basically, I'm opening the door to a possible improvement of the central socionic model — not a "correction" of what function does what, but a better, more intuitive way of tying it all together.
