Psychology

Psych- Of the Mind
Ology- Logos- Divine Order/Logic

Psyhchology- Divine order and logic of the mind.

All is Mind.

(2015-2016)

Through Socionics scientific bent, and innovative expansive contemplation, they have developed hundreds of theoretical frameworks, theories, usually in the form of Tables, Models, Dichotomies, and verbal Descriptions. These have sub theories, adaptions, and expansions by individual theorists seeking to address flaws and improve real world applicability. All seeking to determine the true nature of Personality, and human cognition. For example. The theory of Intertype relations, which put forth the notion that all types interact with one another in a predictable, replicable, and consistent manner. Through reflection and experience many find these descriptions true and enlightening. It can then help individuals navigate future relationships, and obtain a wiser understanding of past interactions, and relationships. Underlying the categorical capacity for human relationships, is that immutable, cognitive preferences reliably interact with others immutable cognitive preferences . For example. Types interaction with others whose creative is their Id/Observation function (Labelled the Benefactor/Beneficiary relation), will likely dislike that person. The fundamental reason for this friction is due to the asymmetrical, non reciprocal and one sided nature, largely favouring one partner. The creative function, a feature prominent in human social encounters, is one partners socially expressed creative strength (due to its functional placement), and another partners DSF (their non socially expressed absolute weakness). This is one of 16 intertype relational possibilities. These can be expanded when applications of other theories such as sub-types within types (the idea that the same types can lean more heavily on their dominant or creative function, and even that the same types can lean more heavy on 8 of the cognitive functions period) , come into play. 16 becomes 32 in the former case, and 128 in the latter. Finally, there are elaborate descriptions written by different theorists in different languages illustrating through story, and metaphor the nature of the cognitive interactions.

Model R, by Michael Neil Rottondo

Qualitative definitional adaptions

Socionics Model A’s Ni definition (regardless of, and applied to all cognitive positions):

Ni: Perception of Internal dynamics of fields

Model Rs Ni (in Lead function)

Ni+ Subjective right hemispheric time based conscious perception of internal temporal dynamics of universal fields.

Ni- Objective right hemispheric experiential based conscious perception of internal temporal dynamics of local fields.

How did I get there?

+ Subjective, Universal
– Objective, Local

So

Traditional Socionics definition of:
Ni- Perception of Internal Dynamics of Fields.

Becomes

Ni+ Subjective Perception of internal dynamics of Universal fields
Ni- Objective Perception of internal dynamics of Local fields.

Furthermore:

Brain hemispheres correspondence with Information Elements-

Left Hemisphere- Thinking, Feeling
Right Hemisphere- Sensing, Intuition

It is ideal for a right hemisphere individual to be a Lead in sensing or intuition, and for a left brained person to be a Lead in Thinking, or Feeling. One should lead with their constantly ‘switched on’ strengths.

Information Elements correspondance to Perception or Judgement

Thinking, Feeling- Judgement
Sensing, Intuition- Perception

Information Elements (IEs) correspondence to Physics structural elements of life (in true ordering).

Intuition- Time
Sensing- Space
Feeling- Energy
Thinking- Matter

The Law of matter and energy is below the law of time and space, for matter (energies densified manifest expression) transmutes based on the time and spatial environments they’re in, diversifying matter and thus, energies expression.

So, it can be said the right hemisphere is indeed the Causal Hemisphere (as intuition and sensing are exclusively controlled by it), however the Left Hemisphere is profoundly important for success and flourishment operating in the material world of potential.

The opposites between the Information Elements and the elements of life align. Quantum Physics tells us that all matter is created by vibrating atoms, and at a deeper level still, atoms are created by electrical, non visible dynamic (whirling) energy fields. Thus, expanding well up from the Nano, the human being can either Judge the source/cause (energy) or it’s manifest expression/effect (matter) in the thinking (matter)/feeling (energy) functional axis.

If ones natural state of being is externally perceiving objective space, they are likely an ESXP type. If ones natural state of being is internally contemplating spatially accumulated details and synthesising these into a cohesive whole, they’re likely ISXJ. When an individual forces himself to be conscious of the time concept, he is likely Intuitive. When one internally catalyses energy within himself, they’re using Feeling. When one is aware of tangible, material objects they’re Thinking. Thus all cognitive functions align with traditional conceptions of ‘thinking’, but thinking in Socionics designations is simply limited to the judgement of material objects. All kinds of associations can be hypothesised for this. It is more than likely that Engineers are primarily material thinkers, Philosophers and scientists are primarily Intuitive perceivers, Doctors, Psychiatrists, Psychologists, Nurses and all people-oriented professions are primarily non materially observable, abstracted Feelers, and spatially detailed professions like Architecture, Fine Arts, Music would be primarily be spatial-sensory perceivers. There is of course cross over as each type has two primary strengths, but more than likely the lead 4 dimensional function is more likely to manifest

Now, Socionics Model A can be significantly expanded upon:

Model A definitions:

Ni+Perception of internal dynamics of Fields.
Ni- Perception of internal dynamics of Fields.

Model R definitions:

Ni+ Subjective right hemispheric perception of internal temporal dynamics of universal fields.
Ni- Objective right hemispheric perception of internal temporal dynamics of local fields.

There is 4 additional components in the above list, being the +, – nature (subjective, universal and objective, local + – polarity), the brain hemispheres used, whether the function is judgement or perception, and which physics element is being judged/perceived.

Furthermore

Functions dimensionality

In the + Polarity functions are broken down into 4 dimensions

4 dimensional- Time based perception/judgement
3 dimensional- Situational perception/judgement
2 dimensional- Normative perception/judgement
1 dimensional- Experiential perception/judgement

In the – Polarity, the 1 Dimensionality is also broken down into 4 qualitative definitions based on cognitive position.

1 dimensional- Experiential perception/judgement that is most powerful (Very strong, Lead).
1 dimensional- Experiential perception/judgement that is second most powerful (Strong, Creative)
1 dimensional- Experiential perception/judgement that is third most powerful (Moderately weak, mobilising)
1 dimensional- Experiential perception that is the weakest and most primitive. (Weak, Dual seeking function)

Applied

+ signs (INFp, INFj, ENTp, ENTj, ESFj, ESFp, ISTp, ISTj)

Lead– 4 dimensional (time based perception/judgement)
Demonstrative- 1 dimensional but the highest power of experiental perception/judgement)
Creative- 3 Dimensional (Situational Judgement/Perception)
Ignoring- 1 Dimensional but second highest power for experntial perception)
Role- 2 Dimensional (Normative Perception/Judgement),Mobilising- 1 Dimensional (3rd most powerful experential perception/judgement)PolR- 1 Dimensional + Perception (Experiential perception/judgement of the Subjective and Universal, very weak)
Dual Seeking Function- 1 Dimensional Experential Perception/Judgement, The weakest experiential perception/judgement, and the function most highly desired in partners, hence its name

The – signs (INTp, INTj, ISFp, ISFj, ENFp, ENFj, ESTj, ESTp) have the same formula in reverse

Lead- 1 dimensional but the highest power of experiental perception/judgement)
Demonstrative- 4 dimensional (time based perception/judgement)
Creative-1 Dimensional but second highest power for experntial perception)
Ignoring- 3 Dimensional (Situational Judgement/Perception)
Role- 1 Dimensional (3rd most powerful experential perception/judgement)
Mobilising- 2 Dimensional (Normative Perception/Judgement),
PolR- 1 Dimensional Experential with subjective, universal Perception/Judgement,
Dual Seeking Function- 1 Dimensional experiential with objective, Local perception/judgement

Conscious and unconscious functions?

Conscious and unconscious have no relation to Information Elements, but are dependent on their placement in the cognitive stack.

Thus

Conscious functions- Ego (Lead, Creative functions), Super-Ego (Role, PolR functions)
Unconscious functions- Id (Mobilising, Dual Seeking Function), Super Id (Ignoring, Demonstrative functions).

So

An INFp would be conscious in all + functions, these being Ni+, Fe+, Si+, and Te+. An INTp would be conscious in all – functions, being Ni-, Te-, Si- and Fe-. Therefore, all types are conscious or unconscious exclusively in the + (Subjective, Universal) or – (Objective, Local) polarity.

Therefore

Ni+ in a lead function INFp would be:

Subjective right hemispheric time based conscious perception of internal temporal dynamics of universal fields.

Conversely, Ni+ in a mobilising role becomes:

Subjective right hemispheric normative based unconscious perception of internal temporal dynamics of universal fields.

Similarly

Ti+ in lead function becomes-

Subjective left Hemispheric time based conscious judgement of external material static of universal fields.

Ti+ in mobilising function becomes-

Subjective left hemispheric normative based unconscious judgement of external material static of Universal fields

Socionics Model As ‘Perception of internal dynamics of fields’ has thus 6 additional dimensions.

So, the definitions of all functions is dependent on their placement in ones Psychological archetype,

What are the subtlest psychological functions?

Functions which perceive internal (abstracted, non materially visible) stimuli as well as fields (that which in the quantum field creates all life) are subtler bodies of perception. These are the Intuition and Feeling. Thus, INFX personality types are more sensitive to the undertapestry of reality and less adept at dealing with material. Of these two, the dynamics (the electrical whirling motionthat creates atoms which creates reality) and not the static (the impact of the net result of dynamics on energetic fields) is the perception closest to casual source. Thus the INFJ (MBTI) and INFp (Socionics) is indeed consciously functioning on the subtlest level

5th Psychological function?

There is something higher which time and space bows to and that is Eather. The invisible cause of material manifestation, the vibrating atoms that creates the entire world with it’s 4 main elements. Time and space can be recreated by the invisible eatheric vibrating atoms which constructs our material energetic world and can go back and forth through time and space.

Correspondence of psychological functions, States of Matter, and Platonic states of matter

Solid- Thinking (Matter)
Liquid- Feeling (Energy)
Gas- Sensing (Space)
Plasma- Intuition (Time)
Magnetism- Will (Eather, Source)

Final Model R Information Elements definitions (assuming all IEs are placed in the Lead function)

Ni+ Subjective right hemispheric time based conscious perception of internal temporal dynamics of universal fields.
Ni- Objective right hemispheric experiential based conscious perception of internal temporal dynamics of local fields.
Fe+ Subjective left hemispheric time based conscious judgement of internal energetic dynamics of universal objects
Fe- Objective left hemispheric experiential based conscious judgement of internal energetic dynamics of local objects
Si+ Subjective right hemispheric time based conscious perception of external spatial dynamics of universal fields
Si- Objective right hemispheric experiential based conscious perception of external spatial dynamics of local fields
Te+ Subjective left hemispheric time based conscious judgement of external material dynamics of universal objects
Te- Objective left hemispheric experiential based conscious judgement of external material dynamics of local objects
Se+ Subjective right hemispheric time based conscious perception of external spatial static of universal objects
Se- Objective right hemispheric experiential based conscious perception of external spatial static of local objects
Ti+ Subjective left hemispheric time based conscious judgement of external material static of universal fields
Ti- Objective left hemispheric experiential based conscious judgement of external material static of local fields
Fi+Subjective left hemispheric time based conscious judgement of internal energetic static of universal fields
Fi– Objective left hemispheric experiential based conscious judgement of internal energetic static of local fields
Ne+ Subjective right hemispheric time based conscious perception of internal temporal static of universal objects
Ne- Objective right hemispheric experiential based conscious perception of internal temporal static of local objects

Astral/ physical Personality

Every one has a different personality type dependent on whether they’re awake (material, sensory, mundane existence), or the Astral (eatheric existence). I don’t yet know whether everyone’s personality shifts like mine, but i go from INFJ (mundane) to ISTP (Astral).

The dominant/lead, and creative/auxillary are precise parallels uniting the MBTI and Socionics. Both refer to essentially the same thing, the two most powerful, conscious cognitive functions of an individual. However, the weakest conscious functions mark a point of seperation between the two theories. MBTI believes that the opposing functions of the two most powerful conscious ones are the weakest, and the remaining 4 possible functions are not accessible. Thus, the opposite of the auxillary would be the third most powerful, and the opposite of the dominant is the weakest. Note that no depth beyond ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ (like Socionics dimensionality concept) is provided. In contrast, Model A in Socionics posits that the weakest conscious functions (in terms of depth of informational processing, refered to as ‘dimensionality’) are the opposite to the dominant function, but also the opposite of the demonstrative function, a hidden function not repreented in MBTI, but the tertiary functions mirror image with regards to Introversion and Extraversion. so, INFJs tertiary of Ti suggests that Te is the INFJs weakest function in addition to Se.

Socionics assigns the final letter by a types most inherently powerful conscious (/unconscious) function. This Information Element(s), by the nature of the interaction between functionality and cognitive ordering individual to each type, is always collecting data, and always switched on. It operates inside (Ni) and outside (Ne) conscious awareness. MBTI assigns the final letter based on the first extraverted conscious function in a cognitive stack. For example. INFJ is a ‘judging’ type, despite it’s dominant function of Ni being a perceiving function.

Introverted ‘judging’ MBTI types, all have a perception function as their dominant function. In INXJs case, their Introverted Intuition is the quintessential, abstract perception function due to it’s introverted (contemplating meaning in fields, not objects) intuition (finding abstract meaning from external material static). Thus, MBTIs definition of this type as being an ‘Introverted Judging’ type appears profoundly inaccurate. However, as a member of this personality type, I will acknowledge there is a degree of truth to this, as we do indeed prefer to do prefer to plan ahead, and not ‘go with the flow’ a characteristic of MBTIs external perception types. Thus, in MBTIs categorical simplification for the sake of easier cross-type groupings captured a more profound truth than Socionics was unable to with its complexity. The mechanistic cause (unbeknownst to MBTI for their correct pronouncement or Socionics) can be understood through Socionics correct observation that the judging function in INXJs is extraverted in the social block an thus it can be infered that our extraverted perception or judgement function in the social block defines our emotional innate tendencies. However, overall I do contend that Socionics designation is the most accurate to define based on it’s primary mode of being. The term ‘the most powerful function’. MBTI does not acknowledge this, but I will give them a benefit of the doubt and present a Socionics concept in the hope that this reality is what has skewed An adder layer of nuance, is that types with judging functions (Feeling, thinking) in their auxillary, and tertiary position (Creative, Mobilising in Socionics) are more accurately described as such nuances as the ENTJ, has it’s most powerful function, equal to the dominant/lead (the demonstrative in Socionics, the opposing function for his auxillary in MBTI, Ne) as a extraverted perception function. This is unconscious, and lacking in it’s opposing counterbalance, Si (in the Polr position) but nevertheless more well equipped to deal with the issues of extraverted perception than IXXJs. The caveat with this, is that the advantage in dealing in the realm of the conscious, and associated cognitive functions, is that there are counterbalances to all, and every function within it. For example, the creative/auxillary has the tertiary/mobilising as it’s opposite. The dominant/lead has the inferior/Dual seeking function as it’s counterbalance. So, perhaps, to describe an ENTJ as perceiving (while being very strong in this one function), this Introverted perception function is fundamentally flawed by the very fact that it’s limited to the perception of that function in and of itself (Ni), with no counter balance (Si). Perhaps, situations and scenarios that come up that offend our conscious functions do stress us out, and that’s why Judgers are designated as such in MBTI. In an abstract utopian world where all theoretical ideas line up perfectly, Socionics designation of the final letter would be superior. However, Myers Briggs might describe a more accurate picture of external, individual, observable characteristics.

Invariable concepts embedded in all Socionics definitions, “Internal, External” are used to describe static/dynamics. My definition of ‘internal’ is ‘abstracted, non materially observable”. Thus, ENFJ, and INFJs differ in strength and functionality, irrespective of the qualitative, and Ego positional nature of the function(s), but fundamentally based on their access to each others PolR function to inform their dominant lead function, a distinct advantage. The following can therefore be applied to all mirror relations. For example. ENFJs have moderately powerful conscious Te in the role function (Super Ego), and INFJs are Te Polr. INFJs have Two dimensional Si, and ENFJs are Si PolR. Therefore, ENFJs Fe may abstract on the external static in fields (Ti), but be informed by the external dynamics of objects (Te). This would translate into the facial dynamics (movements) of a persons face (the most traditional association of Fe), as well as that of animals, and inanimate objects. ENFJs however, primarily interpret Fe through it’s direct association with a subjective, and universal interpretation of the association of the impact that inanimate objects (Ti+), and matter (human beings included) have on the individuals objective, immediately judged (not perceived) dynamic energy. Furthermore, unlike the INFJ, An ENFJ is fated to perceive Ni through the lens of subjective, universalised Se, while being Polr to Objective, Immediate Si. Their Ni is therefore without it’s counterbalance, as there is no significance or comprehension placed on how the External dynamics of fields (Si) may have any impact on the internal dynamics of Fields (Ni). Theory applied this notion can become quite absurd, an ENFJ may not be able to see how a parent who witnessed a car crash killing 3 people could be wailing, uncontrollably shaking at this discovery. Their Ni, thus, generally operates within the Se/Ne realm. However, an ENFJ would of course recognise the logical cause and effect chain because his Te fundamentally negates the fact that demonstrative Ne (the oppositional counterbalance of Si) is without any information from Si. Equally, it’s mirror, the INFJ only translates Fe through the lens of immediate, and objective external matter, and energy (Fi-, Ti-) in immediate, and objective material and non material) fields, absent entirely of Te (Their PolR). Unlike the ENFJ however, the INFJ’s Ti is constant (constantly switched on due to it’s functional placement, as is ENFJs Se), and therefore more crystalised definition having the traits of experience and time (characteristic of all two dimensional functionality), and not only experience. Fe’s definition is “Internal Dynamics of external objects”. This means these abstracted, non material dynamics of material objects are interpreted through singular static ‘snapshots’ of an object. Thus, INFJ’s don’t judge (not perceive) peoples movements of the face in order to inform Fe, the definition of Te . They compensate for this through Super Ego perception (Si), not judgement (Te), in conjunction with Ti-, the objective static snapshot of local objects (Ti), or Fi- the objective internal static of local fields (Fi). Interestingly, their use of Si of peoples facial dynamics funnels to the Observation and Role function (Ne-) . In other words, Ne abstracts from Si. Si is defined as “external dynamics of fields”. This means this knowledge is perceived and acknowledged through the right, perception-based hemisphere. The same is true for ENFJ, they do not need perceive the external dynamics of fields, but instead judge the external dynamics of objects. Due to the interacting nature of these two functions, objects, and fields can both be functionally interchanged. External dynamics of fields refers to an objective perception of external movements in fields. These ‘external dynamics’ still comprise objects. I.e perception of a field dynamic of a bird fluttering by. It is not a focus, in the INFJs case, on the bird, but its objective perception in a panoramic backdrop. Therefore, Si accumulates significantly more detail, and Te is limited entirely to the object.

What is the personality specific cognitive function ordering?

Model A is the dominant, prevailing theory, but there is also Model B, Model G and other less known theories. These models, and developments each address something that other researchers, and other tables have not.

Under this theory

For example. Intertype Relations, the alignment of the Information Elements (regardless of their I/E quality) with the structural foundations of life, it’s hypothesises on the effect that neuroscientific realities may have on cognition, and therefore, inherently change an individuals alignment with the theoretical frameworks and expression of personality. It has even categorised the Reinin Dichotomies specific to each type

There is a linked, and intersectional nature for all these theories. For example. A concept underlying the entirety of Intertype relationships, and even the implicit mechanics of Personality within the Mind, Body, and CNS can be understood on the Quantum level. That is, the interplay between peoples fundamental elements, as catalysed by cognition, can either jive, or not jive with others cognition. The interaction of peoples inherent cognitive preoccupations, even if not verbalised, but manifest through body posture, facial expression, and DNA, and Microscopic like/dislike. Mention how energy is responsible for atoms being XYZ. How Energy would be translated to ‘Feeling’.

These frameworks are the most effective tool for determining one’s type, for they provide deeper information that one can self-relay, and test whether they conform to this idea. Self-reflection usually highlights significant divergence, that shallow descriptions do not touch upon.

Stand alone, outside scientific frameworks, especially in the field of NeuroScience, have been attempted to be reconciled with the Theoretical ones in Socionics.

When one takes the sum total of components inherent in both systems, MBTI’s one size fits all attempt at applicability, and lack of scientific, or philosophical exploration, is noticeably lacking comparative to Socionics.

However, Socionics truth seeking, scientific, and philosophical exploration presents a problem for the real world too. It’s deemed and would seem, largely dismissed, as too ‘complex’. Some academics have dismissed it as highly dense jargon better left ignored. (Dr. Mike). What I will posit, is that Socionics has described realities that are more operational, as they’re aligned with fundamental components of the human condition. For example. Intertype Relations, the alignment of the Information Elements (regardless of their I/E quality) with the structural foundations of life, it’s hypothesises on the effect that neuroscientific realities may have on cognition, and therefore, inherently change an individuals alignment with the theoretical frameworks and expression of personality. It has even categorised the Reinin Dichotomies specific to each typeMBTI, in contrast, has only really been recently innovated by a man called Dr. David Keirsey. David Keirsey’s greatest contribution is the formulation of the 4 tempraments. He divided, and categorised types based on their middle two functions, and extrapolated characteristics, and traits that unite all ‘NF’, ‘ST’, SF, and ‘NT’ types. Prior to that the biggest innovation was done by Isabel-Briggs Myers, who formulated the functional Axis, or prescription of the four conscious functions. Prior to that it was Carl Jungs observation that he could categorise all of his patients into ‘Psychological Types’, also the name of his book. In this he notices the most prominent, namely, the two most powerful conscious functions of all types. He calls them by different names from what we know them by today. For Example. ‘Extraverted Feeling’ becomes ‘External Feeling’ and so on. Jung, and Isabell Briggs-Myers were invaluable in providing the foundations for simple, conceptual applications. Keirsey, similarly, contributed a nice innovation, that is relatively self-evidently true. However, this is the one and only theoretical abstraction formulated by a Psychologist seeking to find patterns within this framework.

A fundamental difference between MBTI and Socionics, is the 4 letter acronymn given to the 16 personality types. In Socionics, types are designated with a lowercase ‘p’/’j’ label based on their Lead (most powerful conscious function), irrespective of it’s Introverted, or Extraverted nature. In MBTI, Introverted, but not Extraverted types are ascribed the Uppercase ‘P/J’ label according to their second most powerful, extraverted conscious function. Thus, all introverted types in MBTI change the final letter, and all extraverted types remain the same. INFJ becomes an INFp, but an ENFJ remains ENFj.

However, Socionics truth seeking, scientific, and philosophical exploration presents a problem for the real world too. It’s deemed and would seem, largely dismissed, as too ‘complex’. Some academics have dismissed it as highly dense jargon better left ignored. (Dr. Mike). What I will posit, is that Socionics has described realities that are more operational, as they’re aligned with fundamental components of the human condition. For example. Intertype Relations, the alignment of the Information Elements (regardless of their I/E quality) with the structural foundations of life, it’s hypothesises on the effect that neuroscientific realities may have on cognition, and therefore, inherently change an individuals alignment with the theoretical frameworks and expression of personality. It has even categorised the Reinin Dichotomies specific to each typeMBTI, in contrast, has only really been recently innovated by a man called Dr. David Keirsey. David Keirsey’s greatest contribution is the formulation of the 4 tempraments. He divided, and categorised types based on their middle two functions, and extrapolated characteristics, and traits that unite all ‘NF’, ‘ST’, SF, and ‘NT’ types. Prior to that the biggest innovation was done by Isabel-Briggs Myers, who formulated the functional Axis, or prescription of the four conscious functions. Prior to that it was Carl Jungs observation that he could categorise all of his patients into ‘Psychological Types’, also the name of his book. In this he notices the most prominent, namely, the two most powerful conscious functions of all types. He calls them by different names from what we know them by today. For Example. ‘Extraverted Feeling’ becomes ‘External Feeling’ and so on. Jung, and Isabell Briggs-Myers were invaluable in providing the foundations for simple, conceptual applications. Keirsey, similarly, contributed a nice innovation, that is relatively self-evidently true. However, this is the one and only theoretical abstraction formulated by a Psychologist seeking to find patterns within this framework.

. ****

I suppose it depends on which layer of reality one reflects on in determining accuracy resulting from these uniquely justified designations. Indeed, if one were to truly reflect on ISTP from MBTI, they do align with rudimentary characteristics of perceiving types, but when you think of who they truly are, internally, constantly, they’re undoubtedly judgers.

There is a further flaw in Myers Briggs designation. Injecting Socionics Model G, as well as combining Socionics definitions of Information Elements (Cognitive functions), there are certain introverted elements that, by definition are based in perceiving and judging the outside world. Half of these are dealing with the objective, local world. ISFJs and INTPs comprimise the latter category but ISTJs and ISTPs comprimise the former with subjective and universal perception/judgement of external static/dynamics of objects/fields.

To better understand this, I’ve incorporated my own definitional adaption to inject into the definition of each Information Element. I’ve translated + to mean subjective, universal, and – sign to mean Objective, immediate. For example. As can be seen in Table 2. The definition of Si is “Perception of External Dynamics of External fields”. So, differentiating the INFJ from the INTJ, the INFJ’s lead Si+ function would be defined as “a Subjective perception of external dynamics of universal fields”, and an ISFJs one dimensional Si, would become “ Objective Perception of external dynamics of immediate fields”. The former can abstract, and extrapolate, the latter is simply experiencing things as they are, powerfully. These adaptions can be incorporated into every definition of Information elements, and are not limited by nuance of dimensionality. For example. Every single function with the + sign will always have “Subjective, Universal” injected into it’s definition, and every single – function will have “objective immediate”.
4D, 3D, 2D, are always designated a plus sign. The positioning determines it’s level of dimensionality. The – sign is always experiental, which is by definition one dimensional. But not all one dimensions are equal (though all 4,3,2 dimensions are). The Lead, Creative, Role, Polr of any type, unlike every single other function designated a + sign, can all be one dimensional, judging and perceiving through the experiental vector, with equivacol strength as it’s + sign counterparts. For example. + sign and – sign Si in the role position is of similar strength and socially received the same way (speaking generally of course, excluding the effect of intertype relations) by society at large.

This is how the same function in the same cognitive position can qualitatively diverge.
Regardless of the qualitative differences, the supreme irony is that an introverted perception function is defined by it’s observation of the real world (“Perception of Dynamics of fields’). Whether that’s abstracted and interpreted through the lens of time, situation, norms, or experience, the initial perception is still fundamentally based by abstracting from, or experiencing the real world. ‘Real’ can mean either the underlying implicit substratum of fields, or objects (Intuition), or the external dynamics/static of external fields/objects (Sensing).

Regardless of it’s I/E quality, Intuition is not fundamentally based in the real world, but abstracted from it. It perceives implicit stimuli and conceives of hidden meanings (in the form of dynamic or static interpretation). Does it not therefore stand to reason that those that perceive external dynamics of external fields should be labelled extraverted perceivers? Further, does it not stand to reason that the ISFJ, who objectively perceives the external dynamics of external fields experientially, or, exactly as it is, should be labelled an extraverted perceiver? The pressure point in terminology being exploited interacts with traditional, mainstream conceptions of ‘external’, and ‘internal’. And ‘extraverted’ and ‘introverted’. That which differentiates extraverted and introverted in Socionics is the divergence between perception/judgement of objects/fields. This is done so, even despite the actual function itself interpreting internal (hidden, abstracted) dynamics/static of objects/fields. Thus, along these lines, in order to align with larger societal, and cultural conceptions of extraversion and introversion, perhaps the functions I/E quality should be designated as such:

Introverted Functions (Functions which abstract that which is hidden, inferring) :

Ni, Ne, Fe, Fi

Extraverted Functions: (Functions which observe materially observable stimuli):

Si, Se, Ti, Te

Mention how some types have an evolutionary advantage, whether it be in human interaction, the % population similar to them, the nature of their functions, etc. INTJ, ENTJ advantage over INFJ.

Repeatedly used concepts embedded in all Socionics definitions, “Internal, External” to describe static/dynamics. I have translated internal to mean ‘abstracted, non materially observable”. I think ENFJ, and INFJ differ in strength of functionality, regardless of the qualitative, and Ego positional nature of the function(s). The difference lies in the access to each others Polr function to inform their dominant function. Thus, all conscious function mirrors align with this. (XNFJs, XSFPs, and so on). For example. ENFJs have moderately powerful conscious Te in the role function, and INFJs are Te Polr. Vice Versa, INFJs have Two dimensional Si, and ENFJs are Si Polr. Therefore, ENFJs Fe may abstract based on not only the external static in fields (Ti), but be informed by the external dynamics of objects (Te). This would translate into the facial dynamics (movements) of a persons face (the most traditional association of Fe), as well as that of animals, and inanimate objects (all and every object). ENFJs however, primarily interpret Fe through it’s direct association with a subjective, and universal interpretation of the association of the impact that inanimate objects (Ti+), and matter (human beings included) have on the individuals objective, immediately judged energy. To support this, the ENFJ uses Ni. An ENFJ is only able to perceive Ni through the lens of Subjective, Universalised Se, while being Polr to Objective, Immediate Si. Their Ni is therefore fundamentally flawed, as it is not injected with any comprehension on how the External dynamics of fields (Si) can have an impact on the internal dynamics of Fields (Ni). Their Ni, thus, generally operates within the Se/Ne realm. In some way, this is fundamentally negated by the fact that it is informed by their demonstrative, Ne (the opposing counterbalance of Si), but due to the completely vulnerability of Si, it is still fundamentally one-sided, and therefore lacking perspective. Equally, an INFJ is only able to translate Fe through the lens of immediate, and objective external matter, and energy (Fi-, Ti-) in the immediate, and objective fields. (Ti-), due to the INFJs being Te Polr. However, unlike the ENFJ, the INFJ’s Ti is constantly switched on, and more inherently powerful due to it’s functional placement. The same is true for the Se+ function of the ENFJ. Furthermore, the true opposing function of Fe is Ti, Te’s highest function is to serve Fi. Nevertheless, EXFJs still gain immensely from incorporating information from their role function, the quintessential polar opposite of their lead function. Fe’s definition is “Internal Dynamics of external objects”. This means these internal dynamics are interpreted through snapshots of a persons face. Thus, INFJ’s don’t judge peoples movements of the face in order to inform Fe. They use Ti-, the objective static snapshot of immediate objects (Ti), or the objective internal static of fields (Fi). Interestingly though, they do perceive (as opposed to judge) peoples facial dynamics through the Observation and Role function (Ne-). The Ne function abstracts from Si. Si is defined as “external dynamics of fields”. This means they incorporate this knowledge, but it’s internalised, observed, and acknowledged through the right, perception-based hemisphere. The same is true for ENFJ, they do not need perceive the external dynamics of fields, but they judge the external dynamics of objects. Due to the interacting nature of these two functions, objects, and fields are both interchangeable and linked in this process. External dynamics of fields refers to an internalisation of the external movements that take place in fields. These ‘external dynamics’ are still comprised of objects. The dynamic in a field of a bird fluttering by, and the result of an individual remembering that, is Si. The bird itself is an object, so both Si, and Te perceive a fundamentally equivacol thing. Equivacol, not to be extrapolated to all functions, but in so far as serving the purposes of Fe. The difference between Si, and Te, is that Si has a more holistic scope and is fundamentally more detailed, it accumulates the sum total of these external dynamics in fields, and Te is highly undetailed, and always limited to the object, or objects (in the case of + quality) in and of themselves. The prevailing factor uniting the INFJ, and ENFJ, is that they abstract/interpret a persons internal dynamics based off of this Ti ‘snapshot’.

Jung did not formulate, and extrapolate the function axis, nor even the concept of a creative function. Jung’s observation of types by their dominant/lead function is testament to the North Western European society in which he lived, where the safety afforded to them allowed them to operate from the ego/social vector. (It is not surprising that Jung’s most uninterpreatable patient was a Slavic of sensing origin. The possibility of his DSF/Inferior function placed in his patients Ego/Id position may have been a unintelligible combination of cultural, and biological misrecognition, and resulting personal neurological malfunction). Coming full circle, the fact that Jung defined types solely by their dominant function, is completely aligned with Socionics designation of the final letter based on the dominant (and observing), constantly switched on, function. Therefore, Myers-Briggs got away from Jung’s initial conceptualisation of what defined the types, and Socionics held true.

On the nature of Fe

The physical manifestation of internal energy- the facial expression, is a simple movement of the face up, down, left, right, side to side, whichever way you please. It is the combination of the contraction, and relaxation of hundreds of muscles in the face. Abstraction comes from the interpretation, and categorisation of what these manifest movements mean. The two hemispheres work in synch. That which perceives the material world, ‘Sensing’, in psychometrics aptly called the Visuo Spatial hemisphere, must be present for an abstraction of a person’s emotional state. We must visually view raw sensory data in order to categorise and attempt to correctly identify. Thus, despite EEG findings that Extraverted Feeling is predominately a left hemispheric function, it could not function without right hemispheric input. This synergy is ubiquitous in all the functions. No individual function could operate in a societally acceptable, or ‘normal’ way without the other. With that said, there are, certainly, unexplained dimensions by which the functions are influenced by.

‘So if a person has lost all 5 senses, his/her functions would cease to exist?’
This is an interesting proposition. Ni would exist purely, in and of itself, without abstracting from any real layer of physical, sensory reality. Does this mean it would cease to exist? Are functions solely dependent on their opposing counterbalance existence? Potentially, regardless of it’s functional placement, it would function more or less in the same sense that an Ni demonstrative would, without the opposing counterbalance of Se. We know this, because the number one way of eliciting the neurological state of Ni is by envisioning the future, or sitting in a silent room, completely devoid of sounds. Intuitive types generally have an innate dislike for these things naturally.

However, it depends on how many senses are removed, for it there w as sounds, the person, on the assumption that they had sight prior to losing it, would be able to construct a mental hologram of reality.A train horn would be abstracted and understood to be that of a train. If taste, touch, sight, hearing, smell then Ni (and Ne), would simply function in and of itself perpetually creating, wondering, constructing. I’d like to make clear that the lead, like the demonstrative is not solely dependent on it’s opposing dual function in order to function. Many would accept that the demonstrative operates more or less purely in and of itself, but would be inclined to believe the placement of the DSF within the Social Vector would require an abstraction. I know myself, personally, when completely depriving myself of the sense, with earplugs, in an water chamber, My Ni is profoundly at peace, and at rest. External sounds, and bright lights (Se) is truly a polluter to my psyche. There is some necessity in real world social (socion) functioning in incorporation of DSF, but the primary reason it’s seeking a dual who’s expert at it, is because it’s so incredibly lacking. This lacking generally means, it’s incredibly unhealthy for an individual to experience this mode of cognition for too long. I,e this is brain scans of an INTP when he’s embarrassed (a characteristic of Fe, his DSF, as well as activating areas of the cortex associated with Fe).

In General, F types are more accurate, and nuanced in this abstract determination (judgement). (Because of the nature of the Id, Ego placement being fundamentally powerful).

Myers Briggs conceptions of introversion and extraversion simply means “of the outer world, and of the inner world”. Socionics. defines the functions as what they are stimulated from. For example. Dario Nardi discovered that the Ni functional pattern elicits a ‘zen’ formation, where all areas of the brain are interconnected and activated. This state is summoned based off certain triggers, and stimulants. For example. Asking Ni types to ‘foresee into the future’ activates the whole brain, measuring as low amplitude, low frequency, almost low level response. He also noticed Ni types are the best at brainstorming. MBTI’s simplicitic lack of detail will never be fixed because there’s no organic, monetary catalyst for it’s development, and theoretical deepening.. MBTI simply notices that Ni types prefer alone time, are quiet, say deep things, and are drained by too much social interaction. Not even the “they say deep things’ quote is INFJ specific, because that simply eliminates sensors, and retains intuitives. Even within the sensing realm, there are those who are Hidden Agenda Intuitive, and Role function Intuitive, and indeed, as an INFJ, I acknowledge ESTPs can say very profound things. However, instantly, by and large, 8 types still remain. It’s functional terminology is limited to only 4 (that which we know to be conscious) functions. It also completely neglects the 4 unconscious functions, and/or their role in an individuals psyche, and the resulting manifestation into their behaviour, and thus- their personality (the combination of both). It’s positioning designations are noticeably lacking in specificity. Socionics describes in great detail, the significance of the positioning of all 8 cognitive functions, in all types, with all Information Elements. These differences can cause mistypes however. Across all systems, you have all function axises described as conscious for one type. There is the Ne-Si axis in Model G, the Se-Ni axis in all models, the Fe-Ti axis in Model A and MBTI, and so on. Thus, all types from all quadras can potentially relate. Therefore, it is not just INFJ type, it is any of the 16 types that can be claimed by anybody depending on which system they begin their journey with. Individuals from the Gamma, and Delta Quadra and even Alpha Quadra can see themselves in these descriptions. Types whose strength, and cognitive ordering is perfectly correlated to types are specifically succestible. For example. A common mistype is types who swap the last letter. I.e ISFJ/ISFP, INFJ/INFP, ENFP/ENFJ, etc. For example, in Socionics, an INFJs functions is Ni, Fe, Si, Te, in the order. The INFP has Fi, Ne, Ti, Se. You can see, that according to MBTI, the second half of both types overlap, and according to Socionics, both types strength of functionality is precisely equal. (See table 2. And Table. 3) Thus, crossing over between the two systems can be misleading, and can exacerbate a sense of already existing confusion.

Table 1.

‘INFJ’= (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se)      (MBTI)
‘INFp’= (Ni, Fe, Te, Si)     (Socionics Model A)
‘INFp’= (Ni, Fi, Ti, Si)      (Socionics Model G)

The concepts of the ‘Abstract’ and Involved’ dichotomies has still not been properly justified both by Socionics. This may be due to my unconsciously absorbing traditional societal notions, and associations, of these words. Even after learning Socionics, I struggled to reconcile Socionics conceptualisation, and application of the concept of ‘Abstract’ with the 4 qualitatively distinct Information Elements. However, there was no struggle reconciling this term with intuition. And yet, intuitively, I know thinking and intuition is abstract. Equally, It is clear that sensing is involved. When I observe feeling types use their Feeling (Regardless of it’s extraverted/introverted nature, and it’s status of ‘constantly being switched on’, or being used to make ‘contact with reality’), it is certainly involved, by observing/abstracting from reality. Indeed, you’re encouraged to look in the mirror and consciously elicit a cognitive function. XNTX types, you can consciously enter your role function, or simply let your constantly switched on function, the hidden agenda, dominate, and preside. When I personally look into the mirror, and force an Fe/Fi state of mind, there is an active, distinct, and tangible involvement in the immediate world/object. These elements remain constant regardless of the Information Element inherently observing/abstracting internal dynamics/static, or external dynamics/static. It further remains constant regardless of the inherent qualitative difference of the function (where it’s designated a plus or minus sign). Thus, an INFP engulfed in their Fi+, and even during, and despite the abstractive nature of the + sign, is still actively involved and interacting with the world. The same principle holds across all types. When I use my three dimensional Fe+, I’m still very much involved, but trying to provide a non immediate reality perspective. When ESFP uses their Se+ (4D) they’re still clearly responding and involved to the immediate, outer world. The reconciliation of Fi demonstrative (-sign), which does not have Te to abstract from (this is a tenous proclamation though) with the dichotomy of involved, Is that Fi-, by it’s very nature, is involved. Thus, Information Elements do not belong to the dichotomy because of their extrapolation from it’s counterbalance function. For example. Ti+ is not abstract because of it’s abstraction from Fe-. Ti+ is, in and of itself, inherently, abstract, with or without Fe-. So what this means, is that regardless of the cognitive positioning, the creative and demonstrative remain precisely equivalent in regards to abstract/involved dichotomie despite the creative having 2 dimensional Introverted Thinking in the social block for Fe to react from.

Another difference between MBTI and Socionics is that MBTI defines the conscious functions as those being the counterbalances of the first two functions. I.e Ni, Fe, and then MBTI says Ti, and Se are the remaining 2 conscious functions. Whereas Socionics describes the lead and creative function, and the remaining conscious functions being the polar opposite functions. I.e Ni, Fe, with the remaining 2 functions Si, Te. Interesting to note the similarity between both types is that they both acknowledge an all encompassing (that which includes Time, Energy, Space, and Matter) conscious arsenal, however, they diverge at the extraverted/introverted designation of these fundamental elements of life. A further difference is that Socionics defines lead function being 4 Dimensional, Creative Function being 3 dimensional, Role function being 2 dimensional, and Polr function being 1 Dimensional. So, this means that they further differ along conscious ordering and innate strength. Socionics ranks by strength Ni, Fe, Si, Te. MBTI ranks Ni, Fe, Ti, Se. The last two functions where these frameworks differ, differ by E/I designation, as well as the order of ranking according to strength. This however, is the wrong standard to rank the two together. A further difference is the qualitative nature of the functions. Ni, Fe, Ti, Se contains precisely one half +, and one half -. Socionics all parts one, or the other.

Unity is achieved when one tries to reconcile the Social vector of Socionics, with MBTIs conscious functions. The criteria by which they diverged previously, the ordering, the strength, is suddenly without conflict. Ni (4D lead/dominant function), Fe (3D Creative/Auxillary), Ti (2D Mobilising/Tertiary) Se (Dual Seeking Function/Inferor function). So, there is a crossing of wires between MBTIs conception of conscious, and Socionics conception of the unconscious.

I know that the Socionics Ni, Fe, Si, Te conceptualisation is right however. For no type can consciously enter into a function which is unconscious. No type. By knowing the functions one can personally enter, and knowing how to elicit these functions at will (the definition of will should be clear here), one can test, and differentiate the validity between the two frameworks. By knowing for a fact an INFJ can consciously enter Ni, and Fe (Fe being the function that is actually the easiest to identify, for it is not always switched on, it has to be consciously elicited, and has a visible manifestation) this is how one differentiates between IXFX types. Further analysis can determine the qualitative nature of these functions- Fe+ (3D Situational), that means it can only be ISFP, or INFJ, or Fe- (1D Experiential). The function that provided the most vivid answer was Fe, the function that is Observing, or Creative/Auxilary. Indeed, in watching interactions between INFJ and ISFJ, and all semi relationship types, they tend to snap at each other with their Observation function, because both perceive the lead of each other to be nasty, and spiteful, when it’s really innocent and who they are, uncontrollably. One total, and complete, but non-sustainable solution to all of life’s problems is entering into one’s Polr function. Only when learning the definition, and seeking to align with that (I personally find that aligning with ‘external matter’ is the easiest to align with) this ability is the gateway to cognitive bliss, and the answer to all life’s problems. (Oh, INFJ? You want to do something? Just do it. Contrary to popular belief, this is not an inherently Se-, lead/DSF advice, this is actually Demonstrative/Polr advice. Case and point, the ENTJ is the most productive of all types, and is an intuitive, not a sensor) Certainly, when I elicit this function, I observe dynamics of matter at a very close distance, characteristic of +. Though the dimensionality is unclear. It certainly feels very vulnerable, shaky, uncontrollable not on a literal way, but in a subjectively (probably cognitively ordering preference, and capacity), long-term way.

According to Socionics, the Polr function has the same power that the Dual seeking function has (one dimensional), and is utterly vulnerable (indeed it is named the vulnerable function by some theorists) to being co opted by those with a more powerful function placement. Interestingly, it is vulnerable to being exploited by t*hose with the same dimensionality, who differ only in it being placed within the social vector. (I.e ISFP, INFP).

On the face of it, there is a glaring flaw with this axis. Feeling and sensing, are definitionally disparate. Feeling being a function that judges the internal dynamics/static of fields/objects, and sensing being a function that interprets external dynamics/static of objects/fields.

All types, regardless of quadras, have bizzare contradictions in that Alpha and Gamma Quadras are most powerful in functions that focus on external and internal dynamics/static of fields/objects, but are uniform and consistent in being strong (Lead, Creative function positioning) in 2 involved functions, whilst being conversely weak in 2 abstract functions, and the intuitive types being strong in abstract, and weak in involved. Under Reinin dichotomies, these factors are what constitutes them being a ‘Democratic’ type, as opposed to an ‘Aristocratic’. Beta, and Delta Quadra are uniform in their two most powerful functions being the description of External Dynamics/Static of Fields/Objects, and being weak in Internal Dynamics/Static of Objects/Fields. However, they’re inconsistent in that one function is abstract, and one is involved. This is probably the biggest source of tension and barrier in understanding between these quadras, as for an Alpha to do what a Delta does, they must be in MBTIs ‘tertiary loop’ which is essentially just the 1^st and 3^rd function interacting with each other without a counter balance of the 2^nd. So, a Beta/Delta being themselves, and aligning healthily and maturely with their cognitive stack elicits a negative response with a member of another quadra, who, if they saw their own Dual or the like behaving in such a way, would correct it by ushering in a harsh ignoring/demonstrative function stemming place.

However, seemingly contradictory, I personally think everyone intuitively knows when an individual is being cognitively healthy. Even the ESTj behaving in alignment with their most developed modes of cognition (That of the Social Axis, even if an ESTj is using Fi, this will actually be noted, and appreciated though slightly shocking for the INFJ in it’s manifestation). It may be externally scorned, but internally, there will be an internal recognition that this individual they’re conversing with is behaving from a sound place. I think it’s much more tolerated when the Kindred, or Business relation, or Beneficiary (though interestingly, not the benefactor) is being their cognitive differential selves. The INFJ needs matter created, but does not have Te+, and the INTJ needs energy created, but does not have Fe-. Despite the conscious creative functions being different, and the demonstrative of each type but fundamentally different in quality, both receive an exactly equal benefit to each other. This sort of interpretation by the partner of the kindred through the easily understood, and shared lens of the lead, that is qualitatively distinct, is the precise mechanism that ensures mutual benefit, and relief for the partner. To close, I think thinking is abstract precisely because it observes, and abstracts matter, and from matter, and this lends itself to a more cereberal stimulation.

(though qualitively, and functionally placed distinctly, and this is precisely what, over time, makes these two types incompatible, where, controlling for obvious superiorities such as intellect, or social status, the + possessing type of the dominant function will invariably win in this battle)

Difference between Socionics type tests, and MBTI quizzes.

The concept of mistypes****

No matter halts individual and societal progress more than individuals mistyping themselves. There are many causes for this. Some people simply want to be a certain type because they like the description. Some people genuinely believe they’re a certain type because of conflicted, and general descriptions. Nevertheless, if one ventures on any forums, be it on Facebook, Personalitycafe, etc. they will inevitably be accused of being ‘mistyped’, or ‘not the type they propound to be’. The problem with this is, that people generally think they have an all seeing eye and can correctly judge all people at all times, regardless of how little information is available to them. I don’t think that an internet forum, where blank text, absent of tone, facial expression, is an effective means for determining ones type. Nor do I believe most tests are 100% effective. I do, however, believe tests are far more effective than the former, and I believe that tests are very effective at whittling down, and removing types from the conversation. For example. A true INFP may be found to be an INFJ, however, they are certainly not ESTX types. In this, and many other, common mistypes, the first 3 letters are correct. So, you may not have the correct type, but 14 out of 16 types have been wiped from the conversation. Generally, a good place to start is to look at your ratios. If you’re 80/20 Intuitive (Overwhelming), 60/40 Feeling (Moderately), and 55/45 Perceiving (Slightly) one can usually accurately determine a type. Despite these ratios being designated ‘INFP’, if one compares the ratios with cognitive ordering, they can differentiate between INFJ/INFP. If you’re overwhelmingly intuitive, that suggests that that is your dominant function. This is because Sensing would be your inferior, or absolute weakest function, that is the direct opposite of your dominant. Thus, it is rarely used, and one function predominates. The highest ratio is a good gage for determing which is your dominant function. The Moderate Feeling preference, shows that this is likely to be your auxillary, and tertiary functions. The concept of a tertiary loop is well known in MBTI, and it is the concept of the Dominant and tertiary function being inseperably linked due to their shared Introverted, or Extraverted conscious nature. Socionics also acknowledges this reality, and describes certain functions as continuous, meaning they’re constantly switched on, in one of their dichotomies. Other functions are described as contact functions, as they are used to make ‘contact’ with the world, and not constantly switched on, they need to be switched on. In INFp, the Ni Ti loop does exist. According to the ratios, if this theoretical observation correctly observes reality, then we would expect a narrow ratio. Indeed, there is a 60/40, that suggests moderate use of both thinking and feeling. So it is very likely thinking and feeling is a creative, and tertiary function axis. Finally, the extremely narrow ratio of the judging/feeling is a dead giveaway that there is a high likelihood of a mistype occurring. The major point of difference to look for, is ‘is there a higher ratio for the perception, or judging?’. The higher ratio will generally be the dominant function, and the lower ratio generally the auxillary.

A further cause for mistype is individual cognitive hemispheric preferences. Dr. Dario Nardi from UCLA used EEG technology to determine that perception functions are primarily located in the right hemisphere, and Judging functions primarily located in the left hemisphere. An INFJs dominant function is Ni (Perceiving), and INFPs is Fi (Judging). So that which they are, all the time, effortlessly, is their dominant function. This is why the usual cause for mistypes is that final letter in the MBTI test, because all types dominant function is the opposite of their last letter designated to them. Furthermore, if an INFJ is predominantely right brained, meaning naturally higher in Visual Spatial Intelligence, then he is even more likely to favour, and therefore manifest, Perceiving qualities, as opposed to Judging qualities. Equally if an INFP is higher in Verbal Intelligence, then he/she will manifest Judging qualities. This can usually not complicate the other way however, where if a INFJ is dominant left brain, his/her feeling will still generally not outweigh the enormous constancy of a dominant function, at least ratio wise. They would actually become the embodiment of these traits.

*Mention how you believe a lot of tertiary loop descriptions on the internet being profited from are done by people actually describing the Ni-Fi loop, potentially.

Are we born with types? Can we change types? What are types? Gather evidence. Dr. Dario Nardi.. ***

This is a very common question plastered all over the online Personality world. People believe that because they’re constantly changing due to environment, that their observed outward, and even internal conceptions of ‘Personality’ change, that their ‘Type’ in Personality typology changes too. This is folly. We are born with Cognitive preferences, and they remain unaltered, unchanged, for the rest of our life. Dr. Dario Nardi said “*******

How do we resolve Mistypes?

**** Purpose of MBTI
*****I suspect, that the underlying rationale and purpose behind MBTIs creation was to better assess employees for division of labour. Extraverted, Sensing types would be chosen as leaders, middle managers, and Introverts would typically be underlings.******

****************Talk about individual consciousness, technology, text, and society. *******************

If one had to typologically translate and apply MBTIs observations, they report on materially observable, (Sensing, Thinking) stimuli, whereas Socionics reports on abstracted, hidden stimuli. Psychological equivalents to these differences, would be the difference between Freud and Jung. Sigmund Freud was philosophical and contemplative initially, but sought to operationalise his insights into reality through emepricism. He shunned ideas that were not empirically replicable. Jung pursued the unexplainable, into explaining previously conceived phenomena that was considered ‘magic’. Socionics, and Dario Nardi hold the best aspects of Jung, and Freuds philosophies, and MBTI, retains the worst aspects of both gentleman. Thanks to Dario Nardi, observations of that which is hidden, abstractions, extrapolations, and hypothesises, unlike Jung, are all validated and substantiated by Scientific Literature, and Neuroscientific studies.

An individuals placement of functions will determine the level of nuance an individual can perceive/judge correctly. For example. an ESTP with Mobilising/Tertiary Fe, has a normative (2D) dimensionality for Fe, and therefore, judges, and abstracts others emotions with less inherent nuance, often resulting in misinterpretation. Due to the lack of necessary surrounding counter balances, this results in weak strength. Thus, it can also be erratic, it’s unconscious nature means that it’s uncontrollable (at least aligning with most definitions of this concept). It feels as if it’s a victim to the world. This function, is also always switched, as it’s part of the XXXX dichotomie. if they feel (via other people tripping this unconscious trip wire) offended on this function, and react with extreme anger (Se/Te/Ti/Si). The underlying foundational cause of this over reaction is having no E/I counterbalance function (In ESTP’s case, it would be Fi) to provide a broader, more well rounded view of the situation. This is precisely why a types Hidden Agenda/Polr function can be more painful than a types DSF/Role.

Academic work

Model G believes that each IE, or cognitive function, is qualitatively distinct. So two Si Leads/dominants, (ISXp/ISXJ) are (while equally powerful, and well rounded) not using the same function, the same. The way in which they diverge is by dimensionality. There are four dimensions, time vector (4D) Situational vector (3D) , Norms vector (2D), Experience Vector (1D). General logic would be as follows: ‘The higher the positioning in the cognitive stack, the higher the dimension- Si leads would be 4 Dimensional, because they perceive that function with the greatest depth and clarity, per all the descriptions’. This is not the case. ISTJ/ISTp uses 4 dimensional, time based perception of Si Lead, and ISFJ/ISFp uses perceives a 1 dimensional, experiential vector of Si (1D).

Model R, by Michael Neil Rottondo

+ Subjective, Universal
– Objective, Local

Traditional Socionics definition of:
Ni- Perception of Internal Dynamics of Fields.

Becomes

Ni+ Subjective Perception of internal dynamics of Universal fields
Ni- Objective Perception of internal dynamics of Local fields

Therefore

Ni+ Subjective Perception of internal dynamics of Universal Fields.
Ni- Objective Perception of internal dynamics of Local Fields.
Fe+ Subjective Judgement of internal dynamics of Universal Objects
Fe- Objective Judgement of internal dynamics of Local objects
Si+ Subjective Perception of external dynamics of Universal Fields
Si- Objective Perception of external dynamics of Local fields
Te+ Subjective Judgement of external dynamics of Universal objects
Te- Objective Judgement of external dynamics of Local objects
Se+ Subjective Perception of external static of Universal objects
Se- Objective Perception of external static of Local objects
Ti+ Subjective Judgement of external static of Universal fields
Ti- Objective Judgement of external static of Local fields
Fi+ Subjective Judgement of internal static of Universal Fields
Fi- Objective Judgement of internal static of Local Fields
Ne+ Subjective Perception of internal static of Universal fields
Ne- Objective Perception of internal static of Local fields

Conscious and unconscious functions

Conscious functions- Lead, Creative (Ego), Role, PolR (Super Ego)
Unconscious functions- Mobilising, Dual Seeking Function (Id), Ignoring function, Demonstrative function. (Super Id)

Brain hemispheres correspondence with Information Elements-

Left Hemisphere- Thinking, Feeling (Judgement)
Right Hemisphere- Sensing, Intuition (Perception)

Thus, it is ideal for a right brained person to be dominant/lead in sensing or intuition, and for a left brained person to be dominant/lead in Thinking, or Feeling. The reason should be clear, our strengths should be our ‘constantly switched on’ cognitive homes.

Information Elements (IEs) correspondence to fundamental elements of life

Feeling (Energy)
Thinking (Matter)
Sensing (Space)
Intuition (Time)

You will notice that Intuition and Sensing, linked but opposite cognitive functions have their correspondence with mattery and energy which are equally linked and opposite. It should be clear that when one external perceives spaces (‘exteraverted sensing’) he is using his senses to view external space. When one internally perceives internalised space, they’re simply referencing a snapshot recorded from viewing external space and contemplating/reviewing it.

Thus, according to this new definitional adaptions to my previous Model can be created in order to be more accurate.

Table 3. New Definitional Adaptions, Michael Neil Rottondo

Ni+ Subjective Perception of internal Temporal dynamics of Universal Fields.
Ni- Objective Perception of internal Temporal dynamics of Local Fields.
Fe+ Subjective Judgement of internal Energetic dynamics of Universal Objects
Fe- Objective Judgement of internal Energetic dynamics of Local objects
Si+ Subjective Perception of external Spatial dynamics of Universal Fields
Si- Objective Perception of external Spatial dynamics of Local fields
Te+ Subjective Judgement of external Material dynamics of Universal objects
Te- Objective Judgement of external Material dynamics of Local objects
Se+ Subjective Perception of external Spatial static of SpatialUniversal objects
Se- ObjectivePerception of external Spatial static of Local objects
Ti+ Subjective Judgement of external Material static of Universal fields
Ti- Objective Judgement of external Material static of Local fields
Fi+ Subjective Judgement of internal Energetic static of Universal Fields
Fi- Objective Judgement of internal Energetic static of Local Fields
Ne+ Subjective Perception of internal Temporal static of Universal fields
Ne- Objective Perception of internal Temporal static of Local fields

Introverted Functions (Functions which abstract that which is hidden, inferring) :

Ni, Ne, Fe, Fi

Extraverted Functions: (Functions which observe materially observable stimuli):

Si, Se, Ti, Te

Mention how some types have an evolutionary advantage, whether it be in human interaction, the % population similar to them, the nature of their functions, etc. INTJ, ENTJ advantage over INFJ.

In General, F types are more accurate, and nuanced in this abstract determination (judgement). (Because of the nature of the Id, Ego placement being fundamentally powerful).

Table 1.

‘INFJ’= (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se)      (MBTI)
‘INFp’= (Ni, Fe, Te, Si)     (Socionics Model A)
‘INFp’= (Ni, Fi, Ti, Si)      (Socionics Model G)

Difference between Socionics type tests, and MBTI quizzes.

The concept of mistypes****

*Mention how you believe a lot of tertiary loop descriptions on the internet being profited from are done by people actually describing the Ni-Fi loop, potentially.

Are we born with types? Can we change types? What are types? Gather evidence. Dr. Dario Nardi.. ***

What are types?

It is clear that all mammals have this cognitive preference. Obviously reptiles, and other animals are excluded as many do not even have a brain. Yes, dogs can be ESFJ, and cats can be INTJ. All the same components of the reinin dichotomies, functional axises, intertype relations, etc. are present.

It is clear there must be an underlying cause for ISFJ, and ESFJ to be so popular in women, and for XYZ to be so popular in men. This, however, differs across societies. Similarly how these types are expressed are different. In a warfare culture, the Id, in Freuds use of the word, and in Socionics specific functions, would predominate in a person’s Personality.

Table 2. Ordering by strength of functions

Most powerful-Lead and Demonstrative

2^nd Most powerful- Creative, Observation

3^rd Most Powerful- Mobilising, Role

4^th Most Powerful- Polr, Dsf.

Table 3. Positionining among INFJs, and INFPs.

INFP

-Lead/Demonstrative (Fi, Ni)

-Creative/Observation (Ne, Fe)

-Mobilising/Role (Si, Ti)

-DSF, Polr (Te, Se)

INFJ

-Lead/Demonstrative (Ni, Fi)

-Creative/Observation (Fe, Ne)

-Mobilising/Role (Ti, Si)

-DSF, Polr (Se, Te)

*Note: As can be seen, both types posess equal strength of functionality, but unequal positioning, and conscious/unconscious designation. Both types posess no conscious functions in common, and no unconscious functions in common.

How do we resolve Mistypes?

****************Talk about individual consciousness, technology, text, and society. *******************

The sum total of outward success can be explained mechanistically by this: use the mobilising, not the demonstrative. For a 2 dimensional function with it’s 3 dimensional counter balance is far superior to a 4 dimensional function w no counterbalance. (In terms of career)

Family, and religion should be understood through the Id and Super Ego functions. These three departments (career, family, religion) correspond to the physical (career), astral (family), and mental (religion).

Without career, there is no survival in this world. This is the prerequisite to then have a good family, religious life. Thus, the super id and ego (mobilising, and creative functions) are indispensable to human existence