Clarifying "Quadra Values"

"Quadra values" is one of many socionics terms that is repeated often and yet understood litte. I would like to venture a technological explanation of the term that will also help to clarify some of the roots of intertype relations.

Everyone acknowledges all socionic functions and believes they have a rightful place in life. For instance, who would object that people in a competition are trying to beat each other? Or who believes that people should never get mushy and sentimental when they're in love with someone? Or that people whose job it is to forecast should not speculate? No one objects when Alex Trebek (Jeopardy game show) bluntly tells people on his show that they are "incorrect." These are approaches that are inherent to the activity.

Thus, if your conflictor is ESE and you are exposed to him or her using  in an situation, it probably won't bother you, even though  is your "vulnerable function." What will bother you are uses of  in ambiguous situations or, even more importantly, in situations where you feel a different approach is more justified.

What differs fundamentally among quadras and types are responses to situations where a socionic function is being used outside the inherent domain of that function. For example, being robotlike in an interpersonal situation that demands sympathy and warmth, or appealing to personal sentiments in the context of scientific discourse. Or being overly individualistic and attention-getting when cooperation and trustworthiness are called for. If Alex Trebek continued to routinely tell people they are incorrect outside of his game show, many people would view him as being callous and rude (however, most duals will probably view this is a sign of admirable honesty and sincerity), even though it is perfectly acceptable in the context of Jeopardy.

Basically, if the function that is "overstepping" its bounds belongs to the quadra values (the four valued functions of the quadra, corresponding to the four base functions represented in the quadra), it is viewed as a "minor weakness," a "good joke," or a "sign of sincerity." If the function, however, is not among the quadra values (i.e. is one of the four "suppressed" functions), then overstepping the natural bounds of that function is viewed as "showing off," or as something counterproductive, malicious, or even sinister. 

Naturally, people view their own leading function as the most benign thing in the world and don't see anything wrong with applying it freely to just about anything. Then comes the suggestive function, which they may learn to grant the same range of expression (in others, at least) as they grant themselves in their leading function. Everything else, though, needs to be cropped, caged, and harnessed to make way for the free expression of these functions. So, while an ILE grants free reign in applying  and (if he's lucky) to nearly anything in the world, he sincerely believes must be limited to Mother's Day cards and eulogies. When he oversteps the natural bounds of , it's just "practice" or "fun and games," but one someone else oversteps the natural bounds of , it's a deadly sin. 

So, to recap, peoples' negative reactions to use of certain functions occurs when they perceive someone to be applying the wrong function for the situation. There's nothing inherently negative about one's vulnerable function; one is just particularly sensitive to overuse of this type of activity or approach.

"Dyad values"

Values differ somewhat within quadras as well. For instance, in Beta Quadra, the LSI and EIE dyad (dual types) are more forgiving of overdoing things with and  and a little less tolerant of overdone and , though they still remain generally sympathetic. 

Application

I believe this explanation has some constructive applications. For instance, if you want to avoid conflict, then try to resist natural, lazy impulses to overstep the natural bounds of your Ego functions, and instead try to appreciate (and possibly learn) the "best practices" inherent to each area you venture into rather than compulsively applying your leading function behavior to everything you see. Other types will be sure to point out your "errors."

Interplay between Leading and Suggestive Function in Self-Realizing Individuals

I have written elsewhere that the suggestive function can become a source of compensatory activities to temporarily take the strain off the leading function. The explanation I gave is that the areas of the brain being used for a certain kind of activity associated with the leading function begin to use up their energy resources after a period of time (generally several hours), producing tiredness, apathy, or irritability. I hypothesized that a shift in focus (not just dabbling, but a real, full-fledged shift) to the suggestive function essentially turned off the neurons that had been active and activated those that were least connected to the worn-out neurons. This would create optimal conditions for the brain to recuperate and beef up its reserves in the depleted areas.

Presumably, over time this exercise would enhance the "firepower" of the leading function, much like weight training strengthens the muscles. In addition, it would support the suggestive function and in effect "lubricate" the brain, meaning that the brain would have less difficulty switching from state to state. The practical result of a "well lubricated" brain is less rigidity in behavior. In contrast, persisting in the use of one's leading function beyond the point of usefulness results in exhaustion and a total lack of will. I think the analogy with muscles and basically all physiological systems is apt. A powerful, but not overdone exercise of any system strengthens it; overworking any system, however, produces negative side-effects and illness. So it is with the brain.

What I have found is that self-realizing individuals -- people who have learned to focus the use of their strong functions (especially the leading function) to produce societally useful results -- almost inevitably have habits that engage their suggestive functions and provide much needed rest from their primary activities. Their main focus is so dominant that these compensatory activities are probably born of necessity. Often there is an element of the 6th function involved in the activities as well. Here are some examples:

1. Albert Einstein (ILE): He would go on rambles through the forest on a near-daily basis, as well as sail his small boat on nearby lakes. These activities exposed him to nature, sun, wind, and natural sounds and sensations, and provided relaxing physical movement. They eased his mind and give him time to reflect upon big issues without the intense focus he would display when working on a specific problem.

Einstein's music hobby also seemed to be a compensatory activity related to both and . He often played violin with other people, giving him the chance to interact with others on an emotional, rather than mental level. He practiced the violin on a near-daily basis to give his mind a rest. The focus of this playing was not to achieve mastery, but to provide a much-needed diversion.

2. Immanuel Kant (LII): Kant was also well-known for taking walks. However, in contrast to Einstein, his walks -- begun at precisely the same time every day -- took him through the town where he lived (present-day Kaliningrad). People would greet him, and he would feel part of the community in which he lived. As an LII, the compensation Kant needed most was to experience interaction with living people and society, and not so much with nature and the physical world.

3. Winston Churchill (SLE): Churchill is well-known for being an avid and talented painter. Painting, like many other activities, can mean different things for different people, and can activate different functions depending on the painting style and approach. For him, painting was a route to tranquility and inner peace -- a state quite the opposite of the hustle and bustle and confrontation of public politics.

4. Jimmy Carter (EII): Carter is well-known for taking part in public service work such as building homes for Habitat for Humanity. As an EII who professionally uses his to maintain relationships with world leaders and encourage them to talk to each other and do nice things, the most effective kind of compensatory activity is doing productive physical work. Note the focus as well, inherent to the idea of building places for people to live.

I'm sure there a host of other examples, and I will add them as I come across them. Four examples isn't exactly a large enough number to build an entire theory. In addition, there is a certain amount of guesswork involved, as we often don't know for sure what the personal meaning of the activities is, however, extrapolation from personal experience and the experience of people you know, as well as anecdotes from the biographies of these people can give clues.

Not just relaxation, but important food for thought

In my experience, using the leading function in a focused and productive way to do something that is meaningful to you produces a satisfying "flow experience." Then, taking a break for an enjoyable suggestive function pastime provides an sense of wholeness. Inevitably, the compensatory activity provides food for thought that then works its way back into your primary work.

We can surmise that Einstein's long walks and sailing gave him opportunities to reflect upon the nature of the physical world and experience unexpected insight as a direct result of observing physical phenomena. Kant's daily walks around town gave him the chance to observe human society and interaction and reflect upon the nature of human society and culture. Churchill's painting provided him with ... something. Carter's physical volunteer work gives him chances to reflect upon the nature of cooperation, altruism, and other ideal values.

Distinguishing between compensatory and primary activities

Primary activities are:
- complex and evolving
- entail leadership, responsibility, and initiative
- require focus and energy
- directly associated with the person's most evident personality traits

Compensatory activities are:
- simple and relatively unchanging
- entail no leadership or responsibility; passive and receptive rather than initiating
- require little focus or energy expenditure
- impossible to guess based on superficial acquaintance with the person

In essence, primary activities are what you do to the world. Compensatory activities involve putting yourself in a situation where something will be done to you. To be a compensatory activity, it must be relaxing and non-achievement-oriented. I believe that as soon as one's achievement motivation is engaged, the leading function gets involved and begins calculating the best way to achieve that goal.

A hypothesis

(unrelated to the main subject of the post)

This suggests an intriguing hypothesis that I've entertained now for some time: the leading function is "located" completely or chiefly in the left hemisphere, and the suggestive function in the right. I would go beyond that to suggest that the mental functions (1 through 4) are all in the left hemisphere, while the vital functions (5-8) are in the right. "Right brain" creativity, then, is about having increased access to the vital functions. To some extent this can be trained. Some degree of right hemisphere work is necessary and healthy, but "highly creative" people who have "unlocked" their right hemisphere tend also to be more emotionally unstable. "Too much brain lubrication," you might say...

The mental functions are verbal, involve more conscious cognition, planning, "scheming," public discourse, etc. The vital functions are largely nonverbal and "learn through doing." Doesn't that sound like left versus right hemisphere?

ADDED 12/16/2008:
I've done some reading on the hemispheres and have realized that I clearly don't know enough about the subject to make such broad statements. Furthermore, the pop-psychology understanding of the brain hemispheres is exaggerated or simply incorrect.

Some real-life examples of compensatory activities

SEI: attending public lectures on scientific topics
SLI: attending foreign language evening classes, "for fun"; attending public lectures by people who've traveled to exotic countries; reading Bertrand Russell (IEE) for fun
ILI: jogging daily
IEI: petty crime and "getting into trouble" (sorry, can't think of a more positive example right now)
IEE: nature walks; backpacking
ILE: attending group picnics and campouts
EII: yardwork and fixing things around the house
LII: attending dinner parties where he is a passive participant and is taken good care of
ESE: reading philosophy for fun

"Openness" of the Mental Functions

If you look at the mental functions (1 through 4), there is a clear tendency for each function to be more restrictive than the previous one, with the 1st function most open to new information and the 4th function most closed.

The base function is open to new experience and is willing to consider pretty much any information that comes its way, even though this function forms opinions quickly and often categorically (and loves to exaggerate). The creative function has a considerably more restrictive view of reality and doesn't want to consider "useless" information corresponding to this aspect. The role function is more restrictive yet and "tries" to operate just enough to avoid major risks to one's well-being and social reputation. The vulnerable function barely tries to consider new information -- much less information that is clearly inapplicable to one's situation -- and only considers information that the individual has dealt with on a personal level.

Here are some scattered examples:

• IEEs and SEEs believe that all relationships should be good and don't want to invest in or waste time with those that aren't ideal or don't go anywhere (restrictions on 2 ). EIIs and ESIs do not shun "bad" relationships, but see them as an integral part of life that must be worked with and learned from (no limitations on 1 ).
• IEEs believe that people are the way they are and are worthy of study and understanding no matter what makes them tick (no limitations on 1). EIIs believe that people should strive towards certain ideals (restrictions on 2).
• LSEs and ESEs find recreation, enjoyment, and comfort very important, but try to "perfect" these activities by ridding them of unpleasant sensations (restrictions on 2). SEIs and SLIs are more open to experimenting with new sensations, even if not all turn out to be positive.
• ILIs and SLIs try to avoid doing any "useless" work and applying ineffective methods that don't bring any immediate returns (restrictions on 2). LIEs and LSEs are more open to experimenting with new methods to test their effectiveness, even if that means wasting energy and discovering dead ends.
• IEIs and SEIs try to brighten up the emotional atmosphere and avoid "negative" emotions (restrictions on 2). EIEs and ESEs are less likely to avoid or skirt heated negative emotional situations, because this is part of what life is about.
• ILEs are likely to ignore logical systems and classifications that they see as pointless or lacking in insightfulness (restrictions on 2), while LIIs are more open to considering any systems, perhaps to hone their logical thinking skills or to whet their mental appetite.
• IEEs and EIIs both don't appreciate coercive or overbearing behavior (who does, really?), but IEEs believe they personally need to be capable of coping with it effectively, while EIIs believe it should be eradicated altogether (greater restriction on 4 than on 3). Similarly, SEEs and SLEs have more open attitudes towards changeable, unpredictable, and finicky behavior in others and try to be prepared to deal with the unexpected in people and events, while ESIs and LSIs try to limit the possibility of unexpected changes in direction to a bare minimum (greater restrictions on 4 than on 3)

A Peculiar Trait of the Base Function

Recently I have been able to recognize a common thread in base function-determined behavior among literally all the people I know. This characteristic seems to be a fundamental source of conflicts with one's conflicters and supervisors. In these relations, the weak and limited fourth function of one partner interacts with the strong and absolute base function of the other.

The trait is that the base function processes information very rapidly and efficiently and jumps to conclusions without the individual realizing it. The base function synthesizes stored-up experience and new bits of information along its path and produces a conclusion quickly and confidently. The individual likes to share the resulting thoughts and opinions with others, not necessarily because he is sure he is right, but as a way of "flexing" his mental muscles.

A conflicter or supervisee (see chart at top right column) can be highly irritated by this if 1)these conclusions touch upon his vital interests and 2) if he doesn't agree with the person's conclusions (when people are not connected by a common vital interest, they usually just wave people like this off and go their own way).

When explaining how they reached conclusions related to their base function, people inevitably leave out some stages in their mental process. Some of the stages one finds too "obvious" to expound on; others one is not aware of. To their conflicters and supervisees, this makes it look as if the conclusion is arbitrary or based on an irrational "belief," when in fact it is based on a long string of deductions and a large body of experience that the individual is not inclined or able to elucidate.

Since the person's vital interests are at stake if the conflicter's or supervisor's conclusions are correct, he fights back by criticizing the latter's viewpoint, trying to uncover the errors and incorrect assumptions of the other (assumptions is really the key word in this type of conflict). This causes strain on the plodding fourth function. What's worse, the "offender's" views almost never budge at all, because they are based on a vast system of observations and experience.

Characteristics of the Base Function

There are 8 possible "varieties" of the base function that correspond to the 8 information aspects discussed earlier. Jung and socionics maintain that the base function forms the core of personality. Here are some of its outstanding characteristics (in red are examples for base types to better illustrate the concept):

The base function describes the individual's most stable, consistent state of mind (especially in his or her adult years).
: A physically relaxed, resting state of mind where the individual is focused on his internal sensations of comfort and harmony.

It describes the individual's most central interests - the kinds of interests the person is most likely to keep up over the years.
: A concern with health and inner balance, correctly and harmoniously organizing one's everyday activities (eating, sleeping, living at home), and making sure one's everyday physical environment produces sensations of comfort and pleasure and is not harmful to one's health.

When the individual's life is not centered around the base function, he feels lost. At the same time, there is a tendency to overdo the activities and state of mind of the base function and then look for forms of compensation.
: Feels lost when circumstances do not allow him to carry out his favorite relaxing activities (taking walks, listen to relaxing music, painting or doing other relaxing things) or organize his immediate home environment according to his own tastes. When given the chance, there is a tendency to overdo somewhat these activities and then look for some external activities that will make him strain a bit.

It describes the areas the individual is most sure of and generally most vocal about.
: Questions of health - improving health, diagnosing health issues, treating health and diet problems; questions of proper living, including sleep and eating, activities around the home, sex, and other therapeutic activities that bring joy, pleasure, and balance.

In these areas the individual is extremely resistant to suggestion and insists on his own interpretation of things.
: See above.

In these areas the individual is constantly gathering new information and adding it on to his existing views.
: Tends to study and analyze carefully how people live their everyday lives, the sensations they experience from day to day, their diets, sleep, and exercise habits, their aesthetic tastes and styles, their immediate physical environment, their general state of health and vitality. Constantly uses these new impressions to modify his views on proper living and maintaining a balanced, harmonious inner world.

The individual's memory is generally sharpest (near absolute memory, actually) in areas where the base function has processed information (impressions) and structured them in its characteristic way.
: Sensations one experienced in different locations and situations, the cause of these sensations and how to reproduce them.