My Current Status: Exhausted from Translating Stratievskaya ILE description (incomplete - mental functions done; 11/16 pgs. finished)

Future Plans:

Translate all of Stratievskaya's type descriptions
Write out a basic outline of my socionics theories

A Note on My Translations

In order to get as much of the author's original meaning across and to make it easier to see the connections between various passages, I try to use only one single English word as an equivalent for a single Russian one. This makes several passages sound weird or awkward in English. However, I believe the benefits of this technique (as amateurish as I am at it) still outweigh the costs.

In future grammatical edits, if at all possible, I would like the original words to be kept, or at least only the closest synonyms to be used.

Developmental Socionics

Developmental socionics is a possible explanation for the variety of personalities found in the world, or the cause of Intratype differences. Personality differences between people of the same type can be explained through two pathways: genetic and environmental. Developmental socionics focuses primarily on the environmental factors, though some assumptions about the genetic factors must be incorporated. It is not a subtype theory by itself, as it makes no attempt to subdivide each type. Rather, it establishes a potential range of personalities that can exist within each type. It can also be used as an addendum to any other subtype theory.

Basic Assertions

Type starts at conception - A person's type depends solely on his inherited DNA. A personality is not consolidated at some point during development (before which the child/fetus had no concrete personality,) but rather begins in the womb and develops from the external stimuli it encounters throughout its entire life.
Each environment is composed of a unique arrangement of IM elements - Even if the elements in the world are in complete balance, this does not mean they are in a complete balance for every single person. Parents can be any number of possible socionics types, and their relationship with each other and with their child will all shape the development of the child (as well as their own development). Parents also cannot be easily replaced; if your father is a conflictor, no matter how many identity and dual role models you meet, your father will still be a conflictor as long as he remains an active part of your life. This example does not even assume the possible developments from divorce, being abandoned by one or both parents, or one or both parents dying prematurely.
People adapt to their environment - If the environment values one IM element over another, a person's function use will modify over time to give him the best possible return from his environment.
Example: An LII that is surrounded by -type personalities will be rewarded for producing , so after several years of relatively little change in his environment, his creative function will grow in strength compared to his leading function. (Concurrently, his leading function will always be developing, but perhaps in another dimension). This LII is very likely to differ from one that had been allowed free reign with his program function from an abundance of -types or one who had to learn to adapt to -types or even one that had no great element bias in his environment.
Adaptation for each function can occur in a variety of ways - If an environment favors an element, that element's function will develop to express itself more. However, if an environment is not favorable to an element, that element's function will adapt to control the element and its expression. Even while his role function would evolve to produce more output, an LII in an -devaluing environment would learn to subdue his leading function, not think about things too much, and be more assertive even if it went against his primary nature. If he was smart enough, perhaps his function would learn to speed up, calculate the outcome faster, so that his actions were not in such an egregious violation of his nature.
The greater and longer a stimulus on one's life, the more effect it has had on one's personality.

Possible Developments of a Personality Type

Life is complex. The stimuli we receive from our surroundings - our parents, friends, teachers, broader culture, etc. - vary in type, amount, scope, and duration. Developmental socionics can potentially be used to address all the quirks of one's personality, but there are so many experiences that we accumulate in our lives that this is near impossible. Even a lack of people to talk to in a given moment is an experience with an accompanying stimulus that had an impact on personality development. Therefore, the best use of this theory is in figuring out what effect the "greatest common denominator" of one's life has potentially had on his personality.

Intelligence does have some effect on the outcome. A more intelligent person will, in general, adapt more quickly to a given environment, whether for his benefit or detriment. Too much adaptation, too much of a stimulus in one direction can be bad.

The following are some of the simplest potential effects (written descriptively from lesser to greater psychological warping):

Positive Stimulus on Ego Expression

Caused by an abundance of Super-Id functions' elements in the environment, in close relatives and friends, or perhaps in the culture itself
Leads to the development of expressive Ego functions
Greater sociability, since the voiced Ego functions are generally well met
Eventual superiority and trumpeting of one's own viewpoints
Distaste and distrust of the subdued elements and their expression
Hypocrisy in denying one's strong vital functions

Negative Stimulus on Ego Expression

Caused by an abundance of Super-Ego functions' elements in the environment, in close relatives and friends, or perhaps in the culture itself
Self-expression is hard and often misunderstood
More solitary and individual personalities form, ones that can manage isolation, in return for less exposure to criticism and strife
More selfless and pleases others; hones Ego expression to better mask it, so that he does not needlessly displease
"Masks" are worn more and more, and the individual forgets about his own desires
Loss of identity, when the Ego is so subdued and the masks so pronounced in one's memories that individuality or personal intent become questionable concepts

Positive Stimulus on Super-Ego Expression

Caused by an abundance of Id functions' elements in the environment, in close relatives and friends, or perhaps in the culture itself
Leads to boredom, a lack of stimulation in the environment; socialization is easy, but unfulfilling
More independent, from a combination of boredom and a desire/need to strike out on one' own
Adventure-seeking, whether internal or external, which depends on both the individual and his specific situation
Takes more risks in order to stimulate self; finally becomes rebellious, turns against society in the ultimate lashing-out
Eventual isolation and possible ostracism from the community

Negative Stimulus on Super-Ego Expression

Caused by an abundance of Ego functions' elements in the environment, in close relatives and friends, or perhaps in the culture itself
Conductive to Ego expression, but socialization is eventually unfulfilling
Necessity to display individuality, differentiate oneself from others
Not extensively directed or unchecked Super-Id expression, especially in informal settings
Greater readiness to engage in Super-Id activities; with time results in child-like fascination and behavior
Ultimately results in a lack of maturity or obstinacy when dealing with the world

Impossible Developments

There are certain developments that would be impossible in this theory. First, the overall structure and activity of Model A would have to remain intact. This means that an LII's creative function could not evolve to the point where it overtakes his leading function, but neither could it be overtaken by his role function. Model A must remain intact because the functions in it feed into and reinforce each other. Therefore, a stimulus that would increase the expression of one function would also stimulate the development of the others. A stimulus on the expression of the creative function will cause the leading function to develop to accommodate an increased expression of the creative. A stimulus on the expression of the vulnerable function will cause all the three preceding functions to accommodate its expression, which would likely include controlling and limiting their own expressions.

Secondly, extended stimulus on the vital functions will not cause them to overcome the mental functions. First off, a stimulus on any vital functions would indicate a corresponding distortion of its complementary mental element in the environment. The distortion (overabundance or lack) of a mental element would take precedence on personality development over its stimulus on a vital function. Next, such a stimulus would only increase the readiness to engage in activities of that element, but the overall approach to those activities would still be guided by the mental functions.

Lastly, there is no ideal development. Although discouraged from doing so, an ILI raised in a -devaluing environment might know how to express to others better than an ILI that was raised in an environment that lauded him for any expression of it. Learning to control an element might be better in certain situations than expressing it.

Dimensions of Personality

There is a great variety of personality that can be found within even a single type. As with most natural phenomenon, extreme cases are rare. Furthermore, the extreme cases are also much less noticeable than they appear; while anyone may be acquainted or know several extreme cases in their personal lives, extreme individual cases themselves rarely make a global impact, or even one that goes beyond personal. Most famous individuals that frequently get typed and put into benchmark lists, whether their typing is widely debated or not, have one thing in common: even with all their oddity, they remain at a level where their functions are still being normally expressed.

Each type can fluctuate between the extremeties of risk-seeking and independence to risk-aversion and dependence, self-expression and obstinancy to self-repression and adaptability. These are just the basic range of personality for a type. To make a complicated example, the effect of living in a quadra biased society on a type in an adjacent quadra (a Gamma ESI that lives in a Delta society, for instance) is very difficult to predict. It involves a stimulus on only one half of each block in Model A, the difference between a stimulus on an accepting and a producing function, the interplay between a simultaneous positive stimulus and negative stimulus on the same block (but obviously not the same functions in that block), and so on.

Personalities are complex. They are not incorruptible, meaning they adjust to their environment. An LSE in Ancient Sparta will likely be a very different compared to an LSE in modern day Brazil. In order to fully understand our personalities, we must realize how our environment, both social and physical, has affected us and how we conformed to it.

Levelled Socionics

Socionics, or at least my experience with it, has been largely about division: division between quadras and types, division by dichotomies and divisions on which dichotomies are authentic, division between the functions and between the elements, with no real consideration of what can and cannot be simply divided. This focus creates two major problems.

First, it creates both false and forced variation between types, which ultimately confuses and irritates everybody. An example of not simply a meaningless, but just plain harmful project is this Vocabulary compilation for the different elements. Besides most entries in it being questionable and unproven, it is also an enormous repetition of circular logic (work is related to because is related to work). Consequently, this list and other instances of these divisions create wrong analogies, wrong typings (both of oneself and of others), and a wrong understanding of socionics (the types and what they entail, the functions and what they entail, the elements and what they entail, what each dichotomy means, etc.)

Second, it creates confusion about how each element manifests and what each element does. The impression of a black-and-white world causes doubt about the existence of eight elements (why eight? why not more?). It leads to false conclusions about a type never doing one thing or another. While doing so, it ignores reality.

For example, law and legality are often associated with , while morality is often associated with . In reality, most philosophers who wrote about morality were -types, and almost every moral code in existence is written in a -manner, while many -religious leaders wrote about laws and authority (Nature's Law, God's Law, laws of the community, etc.) The truth is and are bound together by their very nature, that while they may disagree with each other, they are always examining the same topics.

Levelling Socionics

Socionics is a theory that attempts to describe reality. As such, the IM elements and functions are really only concepts, a way of grouping reality and the mind, respectively. Each and every element and each and every function exists not just by what it is, but also by what it is not. In simpler terms, it is impossible to describe one element or function without referencing its relationship to all the others.

The following sections will describe the IM elements in pairs by their temperaments. When each element is discussed individually, stereotypes and biases about the elements creep in. This method will hopefully reduce my personal biases, but is unlikely to eliminate them entirely.

Definitions to some terms used below:

domain - the world as it currently exists from an individual standpoint (not reality as a whole, but individual reality)
object - any inhabitant of the world, whether inside or outside a domain; can be anything (person, place, thing, idea, theory, belief)

Extraverted Irrational Elements

Extraverted Intuition () and Extraverted Sensing () are the two most natural, living, and thriving elements. They are constantly expanding, constantly growing and gaining more objects in their field of vision. There is a wanderlust attached to them; they constantly want to go further, see what is beyond the hill and on the horizon. This is also their best expression: extension into and annexation of objects, things, concepts that were previously not in their worldview, the discovery, opening, and inclusion of the novel in the rest of their world. Their ultimate goal is not just to encapsulate all of reality, but to stretch beyond reality's borders. Like pure energy, they expand in all directions until they deplete themselves. They must push the boundary, and bring under their purveyance as many objects as possible.

In order to stay strong and vigorous, however, they need those same boundaries, horizons, frameworks, and interconnections between separate objects. They are constantly hindered by such things, but they cannot survive without them. At the very least, such limitations serve as an objective to be defeated, with a corresponding satisfaction once it has been overcome. Frameworks and interconnections allow and to figure out what lies beyond their present borders, so that they can predict where they can expand into and what will be there once they do so. and are like a shrub: if it is not trimmed, eventually it will grow in on itself and wither; if it is trimmed too much, it will die. Limitations are what and constantly oppose and try to demolish, but they are also the only way they can make sense of their constantly ballooning domain.

and do not expand mindlessly. They always incorporate their new objects into the rest of their world, linking divided objects with each other. This is the only way they have of retaining a grasp on all of the objects in their domain, of keeping losses to a minimum the more they gain. In order to do this with any chance of success, and need an instinctive sense for each object, which objects can go together, and which repel each other. To function, and need inputs, whether conscious or subconscious, on the internal states of each object and how they change in response to various stimuli. While and both have a subconscious capacity to monitor these internal states, their real interest lies in expanding their collection of objects, and they maintain each object's "well-being" only so far as it helps them maintain that collection.

Finally, the only way to achieve their task and expand their domains is by affecting existing objects in such a way as to break down the previous barrier (but creating new ones in the process). and also have to do this instinctually, although their realization about how this happens is limited. Without affecting objects, it is impossible to bridge them and impossible to break through existing borders. Thus affection (in the sense of affecting something or somebody) is an integral part of how and operate.

Extraverted Rational Elements

Extraverted Logic () and Extraverted Ethics () want to affect the objects within their domain, to exact some type of change, to accomplish something, anything. They rally and coordinate some objects to change or improve those objects, other objects, or their environment as a whole. They deal with ever-changing situations, where everything is in constant flux, so even if the present environment is perfect, it can change or start to delineate the next second. To keep things on course, and need to continuously monitor all factors involved and begin to address problems the instant they occur. They are, thus, ever-vigilant and ever-busy, constantly in motion and expending energy.

and , however, are not very considerate of the objects they affect. They do not regard the internal state of an object highly because it is that very state that they need to change to change the environment. Individual issues take a back seat in relation to improvements that need to be made for the advancement of the whole. But, at the same time, and easily burn out and fatigue the objects they are working with, if they are not intervened with. They need to keep an eye on internal states and to know when things are at the breaking point. Too much consideration, too much care for maintaining the stability of the situation will, nonetheless, fence them in, put them in a situation where all their energy does not have a direction, a project, or a purpose to unleash itself on. In such an instance, and could implode.

and need inputs about the relation of each object to the rest. These inputs are vital, absolutely necessary because they provide causality to their operations. Without these frameworks, it is impossible to know how to best affect an object and what a reaction it will produce. Frameworks provide pathways for and to work along; they are the web of interconnections between objects that show the various steps and paths that lead to the desired goal. Nevertheless, these frameworks are a means to an end. and are bad at maintaining them because their purpose in the first place was to affect the objects in them and alter the framework.

and have an intrinsic vision for the world beyond the framework, beyond their domain. The signals they receive about the possible opportunities and possibilities beyond their existing world are what fuel their desire for change and improvement. Deep at the root, the actions that they take are aimed at achieving these distant goals, even if the goal is not always distinct and the end result not perfectly understood. Without inputs about the objects beyond their domain, their present set of possibilities, and could not pursue their projects with the same amount of energy and dedication.

User:KevAsh

Contents