Showing posts with label information aspects. Show all posts
Showing posts with label information aspects. Show all posts

Apr 8, 2013

Reexamining Socionics: Information Aspects

This is a continuation of my effort to critically examine the foundations of socionics, which I began in January.

Information aspects (note: NOT "elements of information metabolism," i.e. "mental functions") are a not-terribly-productive construct introduced by Augusta as she developed her unique perspective on Jung's Typology. Instead of being merely "modes of processing information" as in Jung's Typology, the psychic functions became instruments for "perceiving, processing, and conveying" information. Augusta saw the functions as responding to different streams of information coming in from the outside world. A stream of information could then be labeled by the corresponding Jungian function that processed it. The extraverted sensing-function processes extraverted sensing-information, and so forth. One person's extraverted sensing responds to extraverted sensing-information and conveys extraverted sensing-information to the outside world, and another person's extraverted sensing picks up that extraverted sensing-information and responds to it in a way defined by the position of extraverted sensing in his socionic type. The response might tend to be confident and authoritative, it might be curious and accepting, helpless, narrow-minded and categorical, etc. depending on the person's type.

I say that information aspects have not been very productive as a construct because there is really not much to be said about them other than "extraverted sensing-information is what the extraverted sensing-function perceives and produces," etc. They can't be defined in isolation from psychic functions; something is only "information" if it is a message that is potentially perceivable by a human observer. Augusta gave the information aspects more abstract definitions (see here, for instance), almost suggesting she first divided up reality and types of information, then found that her division matched Jung's functions. I'm certain it was actually the other way around.

Augusta's descriptions have been revised and concreticized by subsequent authors to more closely match how people of different types perceive the world in practice. And, to be honest, nothing much has been said or done about information aspects (also called "information elements") since Augusta wrote about them. Usually, they are simply confused with IM elements (elements of information metabolism), which are another name for the Jungian functions. In fact, most professional socionists even confuse them (another symptom perhaps?).

So, is there any use in dividing up information into different types? I think yes, if the division is arrived at empirically — rather than off the top of one's head — and improves understanding of the real world. In the case of socionics it appears that neither is true. The kind of division Augusta suggested is far from obvious. If one were to attempt to categorize information coming from a general science perspective, one would probably take a different approach:

  • By sensing organ/receptor: light and visual information, sounds, scents, tastes, tactile information, various bodily sensations, emotions and moods, etc.
  • By relevance to the perceiver: important/unimportant/potentially important, pleasant/unpleasant/neutral, etc.

If you had to divide up information, how would you go about it?

Jan 23, 2007

The Psyche and Reality: Augusta's Understanding

In an earlier post I mentioned the confusion surrounding the terms "function" and "information aspect." In actuality there are three different things that each have their own proper name, and people often mix them up or use them interchangeably for convenience. To clear up the confusion, I have created the following visual (the underlined words are not links):



*Note that in Jungian typology both IM elements and functions of the psyche are called "functions" ("thinking," "feeling," etc. are called functions, but so are the "leading function," "vulnerable function," etc.), while there is no concept that corresponds to information aspects in socionics.

Augusta saw objective reality as consisting of "bodies and fields" - objects and their interrelations. Individuals' perception is able to register all aspects of reality (or at least those accessible to our species) to some degree, but focuses on certain aspects more than others. Hence, the categories used to "divide up" reality can also be used to describe the corresponding "modules" of perception that register them. These modules Augusta called IM elements, or elements of information metabolism. The aspects of reality Augusta called information aspects. She viewed reality as sending living beings a constant stream of information about itself. This stream breaks down into different information aspects much as light breaks down into the colors of the rainbow.

To describe the differences in perception of information between individuals, Augusta used Jung's concept of functions of the psyche. By assigning a number to each IM element in her model of a specific type, she was able to describe the priority of perception, or - in her preferred wording - "the degree of clarity and differentiation of perception" of the given information aspect. The first two IM elements determine the ordering of the other six according to the rules outlined by Jung. At first Augusta referred to only 4 functions, following Jung's example. She called this "Model J." However, there was a logical inconsistency. Reality consisted of 8 information aspects, but only four of these were represented in the model of the psyche, suggesting that the psyche was unable to register the other four. Eventually Augusta and her associates introduced the 8-function model, called "Model A," and found the proper places for perception of all 8 aspects of reality in the socionic model of the psyche.

Dec 30, 2006

Information Aspects as Building Blocks of Interaction

A lot is happening behind the scenes when two people communicate. Not only are they exchanging verbal information on or around a certain topic, but they are jumping from information aspect to information aspect and sending each other signals from different functions that affect the other person in certain ways. These subtle interactions can be easily observed and studied if you focus your attention on them; otherwise they go unnoticed.

In brief, businesslike conversations of a few minutes or so, people may speak using the "voice" of just a single function. In longer, informal conversations between people with a low level of compatilibility, people generally get stuck in a certain voice and can't get out of it, which causes mental fatigue if the interaction lasts for more than five or ten minutes (probably as a result of certain groups of neurons temporarily depleting their resources). But in conversations between people who are highly compatible, partners usually cover a wide range of information aspects within a relatively short period, typically speaking from each function for no more than a few minutes at a time - and often for as little as 10 or 20 seconds. This creates a sensation of mental pliability and emotional flexibility (different groups of neurons are given time to renew their resources before reactivating).

Every person continually experiences various sentiments, feelings, thoughts, sensations, insights, questions, problems, etc. that build up and cause distress if they are not shared and resolved (or put in their proper perspective). Some of these are associated with feelings of confidence and personal achievement, while others evoke feelings of self-pity, guilt and self-doubt, or anger. These sentiments and realizations relate to different information aspect.

When a person has no outlet for expression of his sentiments and realizations, he begins to insert them - often ineffectively - in communication at work and elsewhere with random people. Unless these people respond in a certain "correct" way, the person is unable to develop his thought adequately and resolve the sentiment or realization. So they continue to build up. If they reach a critical level, chronic distress, accentuations, perversions, and neuroses form.

In communication between psychologically compatible partners, people are able to share their sentiments and realizations more or less freely and hop from information aspect to information aspect, expressing the most pressing or interesting sentiment of the moment. Conversations take the form of complete, multi-faceted interaction, and not merely an exchange of words on a given topic. As people touch on their current sentiments or experience across many different areas of life, partners have the chance to conveniently share more long-term sentiments and realizations on the same topic and resolve them with the other's help. When people communicate rigidly around one or two information aspects, there are rarely convenient opportunities to bring up sentiments and realizations relating to other aspects.

Dec 21, 2006

Comments on Previous Post (Information Aspects)

The previous post (below) should be recognized as a new and definitive description of the information aspects. I would like to point out two things:

1. Logical consistency of the descriptions.
In each case the difference between the extraverted and introverted versions of each aspect is the same as for any other aspect. Extraverted aspects describe traits of objects (processes, phenomena, events) outside the observer, while introverted aspects describe - in essence - the subject's internal experience of objects (processes, phenomena, events).

More on this:
Bodies and Fields in Socionics

2. Ambiguity of linguistic clues.
Virtually any word - and sometimes entire phrases - can represent different information aspects. Our spoken or written language is not the most fundamental "language" of the psyche, but is an evolving derivation of more basic neural arrangements. Thus, to determine which aspect a word or phrase refers to, we must look at the context and, in some cases, make a subjective interpretation based on the circumstances surrounding the communication.

The Information Aspects Revisited

Let's revisit the information aspects with the help of The Semantics of the Information Aspects. First, a very brief look at what the information aspects are about (areas of overlap of both the extraverted and introverted versions of the aspect):

Intuition (extraverted intuition and introverted intuition): creating mental images
Sensing (extraverted sensing and introverted sensing): concreticizing and materializing
Logic (extraverted logic and introverted logic): the thinking process
Ethics (extraverted ethics and introverted ethics): influences on people's feelings

Now in more detail (translated material in black, my paraphrasing and commentary in red):

Intuition
Intuition involves the process of creating a mental image. Images are usually described in speech through the use of metaphors and figures of speech. The more the description of an object or situation is abstracted from a multitude of concrete details - as is characteristic of image-based perception - the more complete and multi-faceted the image can be. Through the pole of intuition the individual perceives the object or situation in its wholeness and entirety and strives to translate concrete information (sensory images) into more generalized form, resulting in a perceptual vector from specific to general.

Overlapping themes:
Describing time
extraverted intuition perceives time as an external process and describes it in relatively concrete terms (indicating specific time intervals or amounts of time), while introverted intuition perceives time as an internal sensation and describes it in subjective terms (what time seems to be doing and how it feels to be in the flow of events).

Perceiving non-material aspects of reality
extraverted intuition describes guesses or insight about the external non-material world (intuitive guess, realizations, insights; motives, paradoxes, prospects), while introverted intuition describes the reflection of the external non-material world on the individual (foreseeing, imagining, anticipating; a sense of the meaningful).

Sensing
Both extraverted and introverted sensing involve concreticization - emphasizing the specific characteristics and details inherent to the object or situation - resulting in a perceptual vector from general to specific.

Overlapping themes:
Describing object's concrete characteristics
extraverted sensing perceives physical traits directly, without an implied reference to the individual (size, shape, color, strength, rigidity), while introverted sensing perceives physical traits as they are experienced subjectively (objects' feel in your hand or as they come in contact with the subject through all senses).

Handling objects
extraverted sensing describes the handling of objects as an external physical act (throw, grab, stick, push, remove, fit, hit), while introverted sensing describes the experience of handling and interacting with objects (hold, rub, hug, feel, squeeze, try, stain, clean).

Assimilating space
extraverted sensing describes the physical act of assimilating an area (look around, squeeze in, get through, rearrange, put in its place, influence), while introverted sensing describes subjective experience of assimilating space (get adjusted, get cozy, make comfortable).

Needs and desires
extraverted sensing describes desires as the need to consume an external object ("I really need," "I want," "come on," "I want you to"), while introverted sensing describes the internal experience and physiological processes of satisfying one's needs and desires (processes and sensations associated with health, illness, physical exertion, sex, pleasure, eating and drinking).

Logic
Both extraverted and introverted logic describe thought processes (the process of reaching logical conclusions). Individuals with introverted logic describe to a greater degree - and, hence, are more aware of - thought processes (their own or other people's) expressed in analysis or classifications. Individuals with extraverted logic describe the external manifestations of this process - for example, one's awareness of one's actions. Both aspects involve citing or listing facts and data; in extraverted logic citing data serves to specify the subject of discussion and the order of listing is irrelevant, while in introverted logic it reflects the information's internal structure. Also in common between the aspects is the theme of discussion - expressing and substantiating one's thoughts, as well as the habit of referring to the functioning of living things (people) as if they were mechanisms.

Overlapping themes:
Clarifying information
extraverted logic essentially treats facts and data as external, autonomous objects (emphasizing facts, details, principles, algorithms, and the act of expressing them), while introverted logic perceives data in the context of its structure and organization (emphasizing constructions, models, proper organization of data, outlines, systems, and structures).

Asking clarifying questions
extraverted logic focuses on the what and the how of facts and data, while introverted logic focuses on the why - the logical basis of assertions.

Substantiating one's own and others' conclusions
extraverted logic focuses on the external proof of assertions - facts, examples, illustrations, concrete data and its interpretation - while introverted logic focuses on internal proofs of the logic of statements and the consistency of logical principles applied.

Ethics
Both extraverted and introverted ethics describe influencing and influences on people's feelings through vocabulary such as offend, make happy, enthrall, infuriate, scare, get interested. It appears that individuals with strong extraverted and introverted ethics emphasize somewhat different aspects of this influence: the former are focused on external action as a way of changing the emotional atmosphere (saying or doing something), whereas the latter are focused on changes in the subject's emotional state and feelings as a result of this impact.

The same is true of emotional states. Extraverted ethics emphasizes external manifestations (facial expressions, gestures, words), while introverted ethics emphasizes internal feelings, though the theme itself is a part of both aspects. Also, all ethical types are prone to personification - the "animation" of unliving things ("bad computer!" "the computer is acting up again," "this fence doesn't seem to want to fall over; it's still alive"). The field of ethical aspects also includes evaluatory or emotionally charged oaths, for example "creep" or "mean person."

Overlapping themes:
Verbs describing relationships between people
extraverted ethics describes external manifestations of relationships (meet, date, make friends, be friends, flirt, break up, make up, break off, suck up), while introverted ethics describes the subject's experience of relationships (be grateful, admire, love, fall in love, hate, be offended, be embarrassed, value).

Verbs describing influencing feelings
extraverted ethics focuses on the external (observable) actions associated with emotional interaction (excite, praise, get going, hurt, fool, offend, cheer up, scare, make laugh, comfort, calm down), while introverted ethics focuses on internal feelings (trouble, get tired of, make nervious, offend, let down, scare, irritate, make mad, make upsent, calm). Note that the same words can be used, but with a different emphasis.

Abstract nouns for expressing emotions
extraverted ethics focuses on visible emotional states (edginess, gloominess, breakdown, boredom, quietness, ecstasy, horror, panic, enthusiasm, sarcasm), while introverted ethics focuses on internal feelings (guilt, unrest, delight, pride, annoyance, fright, love, hate, hurt, feeling, shame, embarrassment).

Adverbs describing how actions are performed and one's attitude toward them
extraverted ethics, again, focuses on visible emotional attitudes (gladly, dismally, wonderfully, half-heartedly, discreetly, sarcastically), while introverted ethics focuses on internal attitudes (frankly, honestly, dishonestly, decently, in a friendly way, in a good way, in a bad way, tactfully, tactlessly).

Functions or Aspects?

COMMENT (1/23/2007): I HAVE NOW RESOLVED THIS TOPIC AND HAVE DESCRIBED IT FULLY IN ANOTHER POST.

- - - - - - - - - -

In socionics we have an interesting situation where it is perfectly logical to say, for example:


"introverted logic perceives introverted logic"

The first introverted logic is referring to introverted logic as a function of the psyche - introverted logic. The second introverted logic is referring to the information aspect "introverted logic". The difference between the "two introverted logics" is that the first is a characteristic of the psyche, whereas the second is a characteristic of external reality.

The world around us can be seen as "emitting" signals of different natures that are picked up by our psyche. In this way, we can say, "he was sending strong introverted logic signals." Of course, it is also the introverted logic function that picks up introverted logic signals, and the introverted logic function that sends them (if it's a living thing)!

For Jung - an introtim - functions were a characteristic of the psyche alone. For Augusta - an extratim - the signals picked up by Jung's psychic functions were actually objective characteristics of external reality. Now we have both approaches! :)

- - - - - - - - - -

Actually, it's even more complicated. There are 8 information aspects which describe characteristics of external reality. Next, there are 8 functions numbered 1 to 8. Each function has its own characteristics regardless of which information aspect the function perceives in each type structure (i.e. the base function or any other function can be described independently of the information aspect it corresponds to).

- - - - - - - - -

EDIT 1/22/2007:

In the process of translating more of The Dual Nature of Man, I found that Augusta addressed this ambiguity herself. Partway into point 5, she states, "Thus, in the process of information metabolism one uses eight IM elements, each of which reflects one of the objective aspects of reality." Next, in the chart she has the headings "Aspect of reality reflected," "Name of characteristic of psyche or IM element by which one obtains information about given aspect of reality," and "Symbol of aspect of reality and corresponding element."

In other words, we can avoid ambiguity by following Augusta's approach:
1. Aspects (of reality) are "objective characteristics of [external] reality"
2. IM (information metabolism) elements are psychological characteristics (modules, receptors, etc.) that perceive different aspects of reality
3. Functions are numbered 1-8 and are characteristics of the socionic model of the psyche ("Model A"). In each type model each function has its own IM element.

No. 1 and 2 can be denoted by a symbol (e.g. extraverted sensing), while functions are denoted by a number or a name (e.g. "leading function").