9 replies to this topic

[ArchonAlarion]

Im more and more coming to the conclusion that the inter-type relations are flawed.

They just get so ridiculously specific I don't see how they could manifest among all the variables not explained by socionics.

The ones I'm confident about in name and description and have observed are (I have put the relevent typings in for ENTp, so you know what I'm talking about):

Identity - ENTp
Duality - ISFp
Conflict -ISFj
Kindred - ENFp
Look-a-like - ESTp
Illusion - INFp
Semi-Duality - ISTp
Activation - ESFj

Ones I am not sure if the name fits, but find the description somewhat accurate:

Super-ego - ESFp
Quasi-Identity - ENTj
Extinguishment - INTp
Mirror - INTj

Ones I have observed in bits and pieces, but am skeptical of the actual manifestations:

Benefit - ESTj
Beneficiary - ENFj
Supervisor - INFj
Supervisee - ISTj (I have supervised ISTj's, but I put it here to be consistent in my doubt on what supervision entails)

I'll post more later cuz I gtg.

[anndelise]

One of the things I had difficulty with regarding Socionics was the idea of having to memorize 16 element orders in order to grasp types, their similarities with other types, and their differences from other types. Supposedly the intertype relationships are determined based on the type's element order and how those are similar or differ from another type's. We're talking having to memorize 32+ sets of random 'facts'. Wtf???

It was enough that I nearly gave up on socionics altogether.

I didn't understand model A, I didn't understand type ordering, and I didn't understand how this info determined type interactions. Why bother??

I wondered how they hell they got all this, drew the conclusions they drew, and did it actually fit with how people actually interact?

The back of my mind seemed to think that these things were connected via model A…or rather, the order of elements within each type. I guess the back of my mind began playing around with these things as once in a while I'd get a flash of an idea, an image, and then it would disappear. Finally I took my own understanding of how I learn some types of information, and I created little pieces of paper with the elements written on them, and began moving them around until something clicked inside me.

I'll show an example, and since you're ENTp I'll put things relative to the ENTp.

For easier understanding, I'm putting this in an image format.
***  ENTp_element_order.png   9.66K   1 downloads

Now, one of the interesting things is that the ISFp type order is the exact same order….it just starts in a different spot.
***  ENTp_ISFp_Duality.png   9.9K   1 downloads

This is basically what 'duality' is. The element orders are exactly the same, they just start in different spots.
The ENTp's mental elements are the ISFp's vital elements.
The ENTp's vital elements are the ISFp's mental elements.
So basically, it's kind of like communicating with your subconscious.
(Of course, there's also experiences, interests, and attitudes to take into consideration as to how well a fit someone is in bringing out your subconscious elements. Or how well their actions/behaviors match with your conscious 'thoughts'.)

You can do similar drawings for each of the 16 types. 8 drawings would get you 8 dual relationships.
ENTp-ISFp . . . . . INTj-ESFj
ENFp-ISTp. . . . . INFj-ESTj
ESTp-INFp. . . . . ISTj-ENFj
ESFp-INTp. . . . . ISFj-ENTj

But wait, there's more information in this drawing than just duals.
If you reverse the direction . . .
***  ENTp_ISFp_ENTj_ISFj_intertype_relations.png   10.26K   1 downloads

We can see that the conflictor and the quasi-identical (did I get the names right?) have the same set up… but they not only start at a different spot, but they move in the opposite direction.

From this we can see that the entp and entj may seem similar, but they are referencing information differently and so risk conflict. But the worse part is that the isfj is using the same mental functions as the entp…but they not only start with a different element, they are taking the information into a completely different direction.

You can do similar drawings for each of the 16 types. 4 drawings would get you 4 relationships (identical, dual, quasi-identical, conflictor).
ENTp-ISFp; ENTj-ISFj
ENFp-ISTp; ENFj-ISTj
ESTp-INFp; ESTj-INFj
ESFp-INTp; ESFj-INTj


From here I wondered if there was a way that all 16 types could be in one drawing.
But it seemed like in order to get two of the other sets required one switch.
And to get the final set in required two switches.
Until it dawned on me to split the mental/vital sections.
(I initially wound up with a 3D-ish circle drawing, which someone (whom I can't find it since mcnew fucked up the old posts) had put into a neater 2D format.)
So the following drawing covers every single type, how their information elements relate to each other, as well as gives a quick idea on how they could interact.
***  socion_ENTp_relative.png   43.87K   1 downloads

Note:
Green numbers show ENTp order.
Outside elements are ENTp's mental elements.
Inside elements are ENTp's vital elements.
clockwise and counterclockwise doesn't itself mean anything.
Black arrows follows the ENTp order.
Red arrows run counter to ENTp order. (opposite direction)
Blue dashed lines connect complimentary functions.


Every single type's order is on here now, in this one diagram.
. . . If you want to follow the ESFp order, you know their base is Se with Fi creative. Find Se, move to Fi, continue to follow the arrows until you wind up back at Se (their base). Drop down to their vital element Ni, move in the same direction you were moving until you've covered all 8 elements in the ESFp order.


How each type relates to another type is also on this diagram.

You can easily see that the communication issues between ENTp and ESFp would require that one of them utilize their 3rd function more while allowing the other to be themselves. But this places the burden on the one that's basically doing all the work. Though, they can take turns, ENTp role = ESFp base; ESFp role = ENTp base. If they are both putting in effort at alternate times. However, once one or the other utilizes their 2nd (creative) element more, it'll create conflict between them. (ENTp's creative = ESFp's polr; ESFp's creataive = ENTp's polr). So we can see that information exchange between them can be possible, but it would require patience, give-and-take, taking turns, and avoiding usage of creative elements. On the plus side, an INFj and/or an ISTj can mediate between them to help smooth out the transitions.

An ENTp-ENFp relationship could have the sense of a tug-of-war. ENTp taking the base into a different direction than the ENFp.

An ENTp-ESTp relationship could have the sense of going head-to-head. Both smacking into each other at their creative, but either starting with different information to reach the same conclusion, or each taking a different approach to the creative element. However, they'd also each be dealing with information that is easier to access to each of them, going no further than base, creative, role. Both happily ignoring the polr.


But wait, there's more!!!!
The diagram also quickly shows supervisor/supervisee relationships, as well as benefactor/beneficiary relationships. But now, instead of a wordy description, we can see what's actually going on regarding base/creative/role/polr.
INFj: Fi-> Ne-> Ti-> Se
ENTp: …..Ne -> Ti-> Se-> Fi
ISTj: ………………Ti-> Se-> Fi-> Ne

If the ENTp needs Fi info, the infj would be the one to go to.
However, if the ENTp isn't particularly looking at the Fi info, the INFj would keep bringing it up "Don't forget to include this part!!" which could help the ENTp…or hinder them.
Yet the ENTp could do the same for the ISTj, pointing out to the ISTj the Ne info that's being ignored, or providing the Ne info as requested/needed.

Benefactor/beneficiary relationships are similar, except that the information provided is taken in at a bit more of an unconscious level. Or the information given is complimentary to the base info. Which can be used to help support an idea/project. Also, if the benefactor flows into role info, then they can temporarily take the place of the subconscious dual elements.


Imo, using the diagram to help me grasp the types and how their element order relates to the element order of other types provides more possible interpretations as well as problem solving ideas than just memorizing the 16 inter-type descriptions could ever do.

Oh, the diagram also shows quadras, though I didn't color them in for you. (I could if you really needed me to.)
The upper left corner is Alpha Values.
Bottom left corner is Beta Values
Bottom right corner is Gamma Values.
Upper right corner is Delta Values.

Virtually every bit of information that Model A gives you...the order of elements for each type, how those elements relate to the elements of another type, intertype relationships, and quadra groups/values... all in one simple visual diagram. Instead of memorizing 16 type diagrams + 16 intertype descriptions/names, there's only one thing to remember...your own type's element order.

[dolphin]

Ok....this looks good. I want to study it more. No big reply for all ann's hard work. Makes me feel like shit. Blah.

Anyway, I'm not sure if this is related, but do you believe we use all 8 functions? Your function ring contains all eight for each type, so I was wondering. Or do you believe that the placement of the functions simply denotes how and to what degree we will attempt to imitate functions? Or another explanation I am missing?

[ArchonAlarion]

I like this Anndelise, and have come up with similar circuits of my own.

Made this in my socio-notebook a week or so ago... bit arcane, sorry.

 scan0002.jpg   1.33MB   1 downloads



But yeah this kinda flies in the face of "model x" subtypes, but I like the idea, or at least the layout.

[Capitalist Pig]

cool thread, i've got some handwritten notes, too:



these are an example of the notes i make in preparation for each of my sim flights. the yellow highlighter indicates fields i must fill in as i complete the flight. i mark down scheduled and actual departure and arrival times (down to the Gate and Runway), fuel usage (does not reflect fuel dumps to avoid overweight landings), and navigation notes. i use the information compiled from these notes to fill out my pseudo-logbook at fsxlog.livejournal.com.

[anndelise]

ArchonAlarion, on May 28 2009, 03:33 PM, said:

scan0002.jpg

I don't deal with the aristocratic/democratic dichotomies, personally. I don't see the terms being used consistently enough for me to get a good grasp of how they're supposed to be used. In 16t I did a thread on an aristocratic's view of democrats. Needless to say, it wasn't well received by the democrats. And, well, some of things I said as an aristocrat got stolen by *cough* some gamma democrats *cough* to describe themselves...even though their actual behaviors and words show otherwise. (Funnily enough, some of those who helped in the 'stealing' of those descriptions no longer claim to be gammas, lol, but nothing got adjusted to suit the new 'status'.)

Anyways, your efforts in the internal/external + static/dynamic or field/object is along the lines of what I've been playing with.

[anndelise]

Capitalist Pig, on May 28 2009, 04:20 PM, said:

cool thread, i've got some handwritten notes, too:

lol, you're a brat.

[Capitalist Pig]

I'm not a brat. Just an armchair pilot.

[ArchonAlarion]

Cpig ur a dik

Ann, I've found the "Political" (?) dichotomy useful actually and it rears its ugly head in groups I've observed or researched about.

But idk... Really you can just switch aristocratic with "X" and democratic for "Y" because i wasn't attempting to describe their behaviors as of yet.

[Capitalist Pig]

ArchonAlarion, on May 28 2009, 09:33 PM, said:

Cpig ur a dik

NO, I'M AN ARMCHAIR PILOT!