The ordering problem
Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:52 pm
Work in progress.
Not done converting proboard code into bbcode. Roshan
As you all know, different schools of "jungian cognitive typology" order functions and slots differently.
Some systems just enumerate them (from 1st to 4th, usually).
Some systems (like Beebe's) use names inspired from Jung's Heroic Journey.
Different socionics models use different "blocks" and function orders.
None of those orders is absolutely right, or intrinsically "correct".
They all have something arbitrary.
The reason for this is that type is a dynamic matrix, that can be seen (or then ordered) from different perspectives.
Not only that, but all the possible criteria we could use to order them are not that simple and univocal either. √
- "Strength" for example is still a pretty vague term.
If we are talking about "sustained strength", then primary function is certainly the strongest.
But if we are talking about "peak strength" or "volatile" strength, then tertiary and 6th become candidates for the first place, at least in some configurations.
- "Value" isn't that clear either, especially when you factor in things like counterphobia, countervaluation, and so on.
- "conscious -> unconscious" has similar issues.
- "developed -> undeveloped" is even worse.
And, of course, those are not even the only options.
Nobody does it but it would, for example, be perfectly acceptable to order functions based on how much of an issue they are in our lives.
Starting with polr then inferior, then demonstrative, etc. √
It would still "point to" and describe essentially the same underlying matrix.
Now the ordering we use is not JUST an ordering.
in a way it's actually a MAP.
If we take NiTe as an example it gives :
There are two main advantages to these little maps :
The first one is that the fields of cognition (iNtuition, Thinking, Feeling and Sensing) clearly appear as columns.
And the thing is, ultimately, N is N. S is S. etc.
Those fields, in a way, are more REAL and have more ontological legitimity than "functions".
The second one is that the Shadow clearly appears (as is directly readable) as the bottom "stack".
And the thing is : shadow is a thing too. A very real one.
More than any framing into "blocks". More than any metaphorical "Heroic Journey".
There is a lot more to those maps though, and i will try to expose that in my next posts in this thread. √
Not done converting proboard code into bbcode. Roshan
As you all know, different schools of "jungian cognitive typology" order functions and slots differently.
Some systems just enumerate them (from 1st to 4th, usually).
Some systems (like Beebe's) use names inspired from Jung's Heroic Journey.
Different socionics models use different "blocks" and function orders.
None of those orders is absolutely right, or intrinsically "correct".
They all have something arbitrary.
The reason for this is that type is a dynamic matrix, that can be seen (or then ordered) from different perspectives.
Not only that, but all the possible criteria we could use to order them are not that simple and univocal either. √
- "Strength" for example is still a pretty vague term.
If we are talking about "sustained strength", then primary function is certainly the strongest.
But if we are talking about "peak strength" or "volatile" strength, then tertiary and 6th become candidates for the first place, at least in some configurations.
- "Value" isn't that clear either, especially when you factor in things like counterphobia, countervaluation, and so on.
- "conscious -> unconscious" has similar issues.
- "developed -> undeveloped" is even worse.
And, of course, those are not even the only options.
Nobody does it but it would, for example, be perfectly acceptable to order functions based on how much of an issue they are in our lives.
Starting with polr then inferior, then demonstrative, etc. √
It would still "point to" and describe essentially the same underlying matrix.
Now the ordering we use is not JUST an ordering.
in a way it's actually a MAP.
If we take NiTe as an example it gives :
Ni Te Fi Se Ne Ti Fe Si
There are two main advantages to these little maps :
The first one is that the fields of cognition (iNtuition, Thinking, Feeling and Sensing) clearly appear as columns.
And the thing is, ultimately, N is N. S is S. etc.
Those fields, in a way, are more REAL and have more ontological legitimity than "functions".
The second one is that the Shadow clearly appears (as is directly readable) as the bottom "stack".
And the thing is : shadow is a thing too. A very real one.
More than any framing into "blocks". More than any metaphorical "Heroic Journey".
There is a lot more to those maps though, and i will try to expose that in my next posts in this thread. √