User:Meganeura
From Wikisocion
Contents |
[edit] Formal Introduction by Meganeura
| Greetings! I am currently enlisted in the United States Navy and training to be a nuclear reactor operator aboard a submarine or aircraft carrier; I have a bachelor's degree in mathematics and physics and experience conducting experimental laboratory research including simulating and measuring the surface mechanics of molecular films, imaging for government projects using LIDAR and laser spectroscopy, and harvesting and purifying nematode extracts for sex pheromone discovery. I am also a National Merit Scholar and a member of the International Society for Philosophical Enquiry. You may know me as Huitzilopochtli[1], Shadowpuppet[2], Prion[3], Antitachyon[4], Acathisiac[5], or Zugzwang[6]. I came to socionics from MBTT as an INTJ and after five months of relentless study I have concluded that socionics is the more consistent of the two disciplines and contains far greater explanatory power: |
| Meganeura 05:30, 18 September 2008 (BST) |
[edit] Alternative Personality Designation
Subjective > Decisive > Process > Thinker
Though I am a self-typed Ti-ISTj, I have been typed
alternatively by others in the socionics community:
Xe
axielsyd[7],
Cheesy
Aestrivex[8],
ArchonAlarion,
Brilliand,
crazedratXII,
Expat,
jxrtes,
Logos,
Rick,
RSV3,
Smilingeyes,
Squark,
Thehotelambush
Allie,
Ashton,
Ezra,
Gilly,
Jarno,
JRiddy,
Strrrng,
N00bian,
Phaedrus
Complicater-Complexer,
Cyclops,
SG
If I missed/misrepresented you or else you would like
to be included please leave a notice on my talk page!
[edit] In Defense of Taxonomy of Psyche
| I believe that structures of personality such as those incorporated into the socionics type do not shift unless under prolonged, extreme conditions which require an emotional substantiation in order to reorganize and accommodate a novel form of stimulus processing (see A. Kępiński's information metabolism), that is also otherwise relatively difficult to destabilize under desensitized conditions, especially with regard to social interaction (which is why people may act maladaptively long after traumatization); everyone uses different avenues to collect and interpret data though there exists the continuously ingrained habit of delegation that promotes the social success of the valued ring by subconsciously monitoring the polarized sublation (see V. Gulenko's DCNH system) of each conscious IM element (which manifests holistically as the primal alter-ego, or vital ring, especially with regard to extroversion and social controls) on which the ego functions are developed and which are unlikely to change without some type of external influence. That there should develop some type of noticeable imbalance is probable because everyone has a favorite or 'primary' mindset, from which the indicative foundations of behavioral habit emerge. Each dichotomy is a dimension of freedom, and as the probability of localization is distributed among many points it is not likely that any particular one will be chosen, especially not a perfect balance between all types (where very unbalanced types are considered to have a subtype affinity). Perfect balance requires either complete apathy, dissociative identities, or a very dedicated interest in developing all elements simultaneously from a very young age, and because each competitive impulse in the mind still has its own independent motives and ideas (which are often mutually exclusive), equality is unlikely. The moods, expectations, and priorities of people are markedly different beyond the inherent biological impulse, and socionics provides an axis on which to measure individual deviations from the norm of generic textbook cognition. The architect of personality theory, C. G. Jung, wrote the following: “As experience shows, it is next to impossible – as a result of unfavourable conditions – that somebody could develop all his functions at the same time. Social demand bring to more differentiation (developing) by a person that of his functions where he is more talented by nature or which gives him the most evident real means to achieve social success. A person very often, almost regularly, wholly identifies himself with the function placed in the most favourable conditions and due to that the most developed one. This way psychological types are constructed.”[9] |
[edit] A Revolutionary Socionics Concept
| I would like to announce my contribution to the field of socionics: The SSS (or Socionically Stable Strategy, modeled after the similar concept introduced by geneticist John Maynard Smith). The SSS enables a chaotic attractor for certain behaviors, and justifies how each type (no matter how functionally unbalanced) may have an element-independent set of absolutely exclusive behaviors (that are expressed idiosyncratically) rather than a continuous divergence in tendency. This new tool will allow future practitioners to devise theories of cognitive ætiology much in the same way that modern evolutionary biologists often speculate with regard to the possible ultimate pressures that lead to the the development of proximate responses in the field of developmental neuroethology. This premise asserts that type-mediated behaviors should be derived not only from information metabolism and quadra values, but as the most efficient solution for the constraints of any particular niche (such as type) with regard to the socion as a whole - for example the order of each information element as described by Model A is such an SSS (see On the Formation of Reliable Habit) set by the fundamental ignoring function which the subject uses unconsciously to piece together reality, and is negated by feedback controls from the hierarchy of functions that follows it (beginning with the demonstrating function, which is used to indicate the immediate success of the ignoring function in the somatic homunculus). The vital functions mainly serve to focus and refine the ignoring function's impulses, which drive the basic motor impulses of the individual but are ultimately suppressed to inspired impressions by the superid and neglected in the subject's conscious mind. The superid, which shares the temperament of the id and thus may supplement its IM and supervise its actions, allows the subject exercise prudence with regard to behavior and is usually strongly correlated to discipline by others. The IM of the superid, which ultimately intiates (by suggesting and mobilizing) unconscious voluntary behaviors, will allow the conscious functions to operate without empirical perturbations or motor interruptions due to confusion, either by the self or others, by inverting the focus (of judgment and perception) from introversion or extroversion to it opposite, providing the means to satisfy the needs of the other without sacrificing the operations of the self. This is most ideal for the subject, because as the subject intially lacks perceptual or judgmental accommodation in the other temperament and is necessarily subordinated by the constraints of society he will be forced to negate his own governing (superid) elements by retaining and then subjugating the premise for their intentions using applicable club values but be required to process his own volition using the superid simultaneously. The superego is then aggressively moderated by the ego functions using IM of the same temperament, and becomes the subject's acknowledgment of society's correponding criticism towards the subject's compensation of the subject's own impulses. | |
|
- multiply-applicable algorithmic considerations | |
|
- fluctuating external manipulation of moods | |
|
- possibilities as general potentials and alternatives | |
|
- directed endeavors for social organization | |
|
From this argument directly follows another SSS which describes the relation of the temperament to the static/dynamic Reinin trait. While dynamic types notice significant changes as focused concrete information with general applicability, static types notice stationary trends as complicated abstract structures pertaining to specific qualities. The temperament asymmetry is often considered among the most confusing in socionics. Because judging is what permits decision, types with introverted judging will be most confident in manipulating themselves while types with extroverted judging will be most confident in manipulating others. Extroverted perceiving accommodates introverted judging by seeking large, abstract, organizational propensities externally that are consistent with the internal structure that is generated by introverted judging. Introverted perceiving accommodates extroverted judging by seeking small, concrete, communicable indicators internally that may signify in the self what is isolated for immediate notice by extroverted judging. Because indicators (measurements) document changing and propensities (dimensions) document unchanging, EJ/IP is dynamic while IJ/EP is static. Immediately, since one trait over time is best exploited or supplemented by the other, duality is incorporated - each dual judges different things so there is no common ground for conflict. |
| Element Axis => SSS => Reinin Trait => Quadrant Value | ||
| Quadra | IM - Description | |
| Reasonable |
- dynamic sensitivity to present changes that occur
| |
| Decisive |
- dynamic sensitivity to future changes that occur
| |
| Objectivist |
- dynamic evaluation of counterfactual states
| |
| Subjectivist |
- dynamic evaluation of interpersonal states
| |
| Autocratic |
ST - sense is thought upon (concrete reference is significant)
| |
| Democratic |
SF - sense is felt upon (concrete reference is relevant)
| |
[edit] On the Formation of Reliable Habit
| Ring / Expression | Block / Age | Result | Function | Description |
| Peripheral / Subconscious | Id / Infancy | Respect | Ignoring | IM which provides most direct reinforcement and motivation such that it is never considered significant enough for attention and subsequent development |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demonstrating | IM which provides less immediate reinforcement than ignoring, and causes both functions to be examined and compared independently of other phenomena | |||
| Superid / Childhood | Restraint | Suggesting | IM which provides equivalent temperament IM to ignoring and is triggered by discrepancies associated with demonstrating | |
| Mobilizing | IM which allows alternate IM to negate demonstrating IM by actively neutralizing its trigger as directed by suggesting | |||
| Central / Conscious | Superego / Adolescence | Remorse | Role | IM which superimposes centralized association from suggesting on society to increase superid influence on general cognition and accommodate dual's id |
| Vulnerable | IM which exposes negligence because mobilizing IM acting peripherally in favor of suggesting is reinforced before comprehensive processing occurs | |||
| Ego / Adulthood | Reliance | Leading | IM which overwhelms sociological equalization tendencies of role while acknowledging ignoring and demonstrating IM | |
| Creating | IM which opposes demonstrating IM and is responsible for the direction of most conscious behaviors with respect to higher cognition |
[edit] Reinin: Quadra and Temperament
| Though the Reinin dichotomies are often considered a form of alternative socionics, they are in fact as fundamental to the 16 types and the IM elements that make them up as are the quadra values and temperaments from which the types are directly derived...it is evident from this model that the more general aspects of personality and philosophy (specifically being organization, accountability, and derivation) are determined only by quadra values, whereas the differentiation between ego and superid or accepting and creating functions and the various subtypes in the individual is ultimately manifested with the temperament in the actual application of the quadra values by the individual with respect to other members of the quadra and the socion in general; also note that as the tier of the permutation increases, the associated dichotomy becomes less dependent on the indivual's IM and more related to the balance of quadra values in the socion... |
| Origin | Permutation | Tier | Dichotomy | Temperament | Quadra | Metabolism | Description | Philosophy |
| XXXX | 0 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | ||
| Jung | IXXX | 1 | Attentive > Expressive | INTROTIMS | N/A | accepts or accepts or | focuses energy internally during interaction | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XSXX | 1 | Perspicacious > Connotative | N/A | N/A | accepts or creates or | perceives events with direct awareness | ||
| XXTX | 1 | Logical > Ethical | N/A | N/A | accepts or creates or | judges a problem using logical analysis | ||
| XXXj | 1 | Habituating > Sensitizing | RATIONALS | N/A | accepts or accepts or | accepts judgment and creates perception | >Rationalism > Empiricism | |
| Reinin | IXXj | 2 | Syntactic > Stochastic | RATIONAL INTROTIMS IRRATIONAL EXTRATIMS | N/A | accepts or creates or | perception of judgment (concepts > patterns) | |
| XSTX | 2 | Autocratic > Democratic | N/A | DECISIVE SUBJECTIVISTS REASONABLE OBJECTIVISTS | N/A | organizes perception according to judgment | ||
| XSTj | 3 | Conservative > Liberal | RATIONAL IRRATIONAL | AUTOCRATS DEMOCRATS | N/A | central process > peripheral result | ||
| ISTX | 3 | Optimist > Pessimist | INTROVERTED EXTROVERTED | AUTOCRATS DEMOCRATS | N/A | deals with punishments rather than rewards | ||
| ISXj | 3 | Decisive > Reasonable | N/A | SUBJECTIVE AUTOCRATS OBJECTIVE DEMOCRATS | accepts or creates or | influences perception by increasing judgment | ||
| ISXX | 2 | Capricious > Circumspect | RATIONAL IRRATIONAL | DECIDERS REASONERS | accepts or creates or | uses uncertainty to perceive certainty | Reliabilist > Infallibilist | |
| XSXj | 2 | Frank > Considerate | INTROVERTED EXTROVERTED | DECIDERS REASONERS | accepts or creates or | accepts intuition or produces sense | ||
| IXTj | 3 | Subjective > Objective | N/A | AUTOCRATIC DECIDERS DEMOCRATIC REASONERS | accepts or creates or | derives judgment by increasing perception | Epistemic > Deontic | |
| IXTX | 2 | Adamant > Flexible | RATIONAL IRRATIONAL | SUBJECTIVISTS OBJECTIVISTS | accepts or creates or | uses certainty to judge uncertainty | ||
| XXTj | 2 | Impressive > Passionate | INTROVERTED EXTROVERTED | SUBJECTIVISTS OBJECTIVISTS | accepts or creates or | accepts logic or produces emotion | ||
| ISTj | 4 | Declarative > Interrogative | STATIC DYNAMIC | AUTOCRATS DEMOCRATS | N/A | hides motive of communication | Dianoia > Noesis |
- Thanks to Smilingeyes for describing the small cycles, and to Expat for explaining the dichotomy permutations.
[edit] Supervision and Inference Analogy
|
There are many ways to interpret raw data to form beliefs (Quine-Duhem Thesis). Among modes of epistemological inference, Ætiologic and Nomothetic arguments primarily give assertions of fatalism, whereas Bayesian and Frequentist frames of reference adhere to the stochastic approach. There is also another undercurrent running in this set: Frequentist and Nomothetic justifications tend to exhibit an exclusively empirical underpinning within a rational context though Ætiologic and Bayesian inferences depend heavily on either a posteriori or a priori convictions. Lastly, the possibilities and mechanics that are Ætiologic and Frequentist concepts are completely deduced from an exclusive set of fundamental premises, while the combinations and classifications envisioned for Nomothetic or Bayesian use are inducted from a vaguely defined but larger set. In relation to socionics, I believe that perhaps the influence of intrinsic metaphysical prejudices may contribute to the encouragement of some IM processes more than others, which in turn generates conditions for a stable SSS to manifest that acts as a chaotic attractor for certain mental states and their associated behaviors. This is the abstract from a paper published by Victor Gulenko: Dichotomies in Socionics and Philosophy - The close connection and parallelism of the basic socionic concepts - the theory of mental information metabolism - with a series of philosophical categories and systems is demonstrated. The use of quadruple socionic system of knowledge structuring, which covers all the information aspects, allows to expand and to complete many of these philosophical knowledge systems. The process of evolution of ideas in philosophy from antiquity up to the present days is considered from socionic positions. My model was inspired by Gulenko's "Forms of Thinking" as derived from the 3 Reinin polarities and other traits associated with each supervision ring, but is less epistemologically ambiguous and relies directly on the original 4 Jungian dichotomies for support rather than Augusta's object and field relations, which Gulenko is what used. In my model, the analogous cognitive patterns are Vortex/Bayesian, Cause-Effect/Ætiologic, Holographic/Nomothetic, and Algorithmic/Frequentist (such that Gulenko's classifications precede the divider and mine follow it). ILE > LSI > SEE > EII > Ætiologic study is deductive because it is supported with the logical relation of pre-existing counterfactual claims. It is analytic because the claims are defined a priori and assessed mechanically allowing no room for ambiguity and thus cannot be negated. The application may involve induction of empirical conditions relevant to the premises and conclusion, but the relation itself is deduced and does not require induction. It is positivist because it can be formulated either a priori or a posteriori as it does not actually require both working examples and rationalized arguments to support the validity of cause and effect. LII > IEE > ESI > SLE > Nomothetic classification is inductive because it represents the induction of empirical discoveries into definitive categories. It is analytic because the classes are separated using arbitrarily distinguishable thresholds that cannot be refuted in themselves. Applications require inductions of empirical specimens to support most significant distinctions between classes, however deductive analysis is not necessary as any premises of distinction will suffice for categorization. It is negativist because it cannot be formulated only a priori or a posteriori, it requires many classified examples to have any functionality as a system of order. ILI > LSE > SEI > EIE > Frequency probability is deductive because it applies to unambiguous syllogistic relations between possibilities that are exactly defined. It is synthetic because it predicts positive correlations that may or may not be disproved a posteriori. It is negativist because though competing possibilities are differentiated a priori, correlations must be proven a posteriori. LIE > IEI > ESE > SLI > Bayesian inference is inductive because it refers to the degree of belief in a subjectively defined possibility that is inducted rather than axiomized. It is synthetic because it predicts positive correlations that may or may not be disproved a posteriori. It is positivist because stochastic predictions can be made with regard to conditions that only exist a priori or a posteriori. |
| Domain of Influence | Inference | Ring of Supervision | Characterization | Property of Interest | Interpretation |
| Mental Blocks (1234) | Deduction (Process) | Æ: >>>> F: >>>> | Autocratic Rationals Democratic Irrationals | Top-Down Judgment Bottom-Up Perception | T>S>F Concerns require Conditions which require Clarifications (SF Claim < TS Syntax) F>N>T Significance requires Abstraction, which requires Relevance (NT Suggestion < FN Connotation) |
| Induction (Result) | N: >>>> B: >>>> | Democratic Rationals Autocratic Irrationals | Bottom-Up Judgment Top-Down Perception | T>N>F Relevance requires Abstraction, which requires Significance (NF Analogy < TN Interpretation) F>S>T Clarifications require Conditions which require Concerns (ST Identification < FS Axiology) | |
| Strong Blocks (1278) | Analysis (Static) | Æ: >>>> N: >>>> | Extroverted Irrationals Introverted Rationals | Perception @ Bottom Judgment @ Top | Specifically Exclusive Conceptualization (Pe) decided Internally (Ji) by Determination of Unchanging Relations |
| Synthesis (Dynamic) | F: >>>> B: >>>> | Introverted Irrationals Extroverted Rationals | Perception @ Top Judgment @ Bottom | Holistically Inclusive Representation (Pi) decided Externally (Je) by Probability of Unrelated Changes | |
| Evaluatory Functions (1458) | Reliabilism (Optimist) | Æ: >>>> B: >>>> | Autocratic Introverts Democratic Extroverts | Top-Downs @ Top Bottom-Ups @ Bottom | Information Metabolism is Augmented by Reactants, which are used to Supplement and Reinforce the operation |
| Skepticism (Pessimist) |
N: >>>> F: >>>> | Autocratic Extroverts Democratic Introverts | Top-Downs @ Bottom Bottom-Ups @ Top | Information Metabolism is Diminished by Products, which are used to Evaluate and Criticize the operation |
| Classification | Inclination | Disposition | Jurisdiction | Organization | Preoccupation |
| ILE/SEE (Æ) | Deterministic | Reliable | Bottom-Based | Bottom-Up | Perception |
| Static | Positivist | Extroverted | Democratic | Process | |
| LII/ESI (N) | Deterministic | Skeptical | Top-Based | Bottom-Up | Judgment |
| Static | Negativist | Introverted | Democratic | Result | |
| SEI/ILI (F) | Probabilistic | Skeptical | Top-Based | Bottom-Up | Perception |
| Dynamic | Negativist | Introverted | Democratic | Process | |
| ESE/LIE (B) | Probabilistic | Reliable | Bottom-Based | Bottom-Up | Judgment |
| Dynamic | Positivist | Extroverted | Democratic | Result | |
| LSI/EII (Æ) | Deterministic | Reliable | Top-Based | Top-Down | Judgment |
| Static | Positivist | Introverted | Autocratic | Process | |
| SLE/IEE (N) | Deterministic | Skeptical | Bottom-Based | Top-Down | Perception |
| Static | Negativist | Extroverted | Autocratic | Result | |
| EIE/LSE (F) | Probabilistic | Skeptical | Bottom-Based | Top-Down | Judgment |
| Dynamic | Negativist | Extroverted | Autocratic | Process | |
| IEI/SLI (B) | Probabilistic | Reliable | Top-Based | Top-Down | Perception |
| Dynamic | Positivist | Introverted | Autocratic | Result |
- Thanks to jxrtes for providing the reference to Gulenko's "Forms of Thinking", and to RSV3 for clarifying induction and deduction in ILI and LII.
