NOTICE: This document contains small images of the IM synbols which may not be displayed in some cases on mobile; please open this up in the Docs app.
written by pyramidserum
9/2/23 & 12/23/23
So lately I've been getting stoned and really digging into Augusta's original works and consolidating it with my existing understanding of information from other authors. I've been finding strong patterns and getting to apply this knowledge to the people I meet and studying our dynamics, or what I see out in the world and what my inner response to it is, seeing what dichotomies are more or less relevant to those responses. How the sort of information I share and what I do makes my friends feel. How the sort of information they share with me makes me feel.
So this isn’t word of god anything, I’m just analyzing my impressions of a general nature based on real experience and trying to explain them in socionics terms. Maybe there’s some worthwhile stuff in here you can take away from it that you also see.
The more I thought about evolution and involution while grasping Augusta's original proposal, the more nuanced my understanding of it became and the more pervasive these patterns began to feel. Because it feels like it describes everything dude. I really think I've whittled away this stuff down to the core upon which everything else about these types follows from as a result.
The roots of involution and evolution as a dichotomy trace back to Augusta’s social progress rings.
I find that this dichotomy covers many, MANY patterns in society and the people living in it, the roles they play in information metabolism and transfer between people (which is what socionics is about really when it comes down to it) that other dichotomies do not touch on.
Fundamentally, socionics is a philosophical and rational study in the reflection of the external world on a person’s internal psyche, how information becomes distorted in the individual, and how information is transferred between people, from individual to society/others and from society/others to the individual. It is the physics of information transfer between objects.
Involution and evolution go by different names in the socionics literature; the way types are grouped are synonymous with the “left, result” and “right, process” dichotomies.
Superficially, “result”/“process” seems like kind of a stupid way to dichotomize types, sure. but once you understand the foundation of it, it makes a lot more sense. “Result”/“process” is really a super generalized behaviorist version of involution/evolution.
I like the name involution and evolution rings of social progress over left and right rings of social progress because there’s some historical discrepancy in naming and I don’t want that to be a point of confusion, but they’re basically synonymous.
I know that some people dismiss Reinin dichotomies outright which I disagree with. I'm of the belief that some dichotomies are more relevant to understanding someone’s type than others, and I also believe that involution and evolution rings of social progress should also be considered a significant dichotomy and more widely considered when determining someone’s socionics type.
Lastly, I should note that, because this is basically a journal of freeform association of my own thoughts, it may contain biases from my own perceptions as an involutionary type since that is how I approach all information in the world instinctively. I understand the involutionary sequence of information metabolism inside-out, but I can only comprehend the evolutionary sequence of information metabolism from the outside-in. I do not know the phenomenological experience of what it is like to be an evolutionary type, so I apologize if some nuance is lost. Nevertheless I think I still discuss these patterns quite objectively.
But the fact that socionics exists at all as a system for us to speak about this in the first place is really my main interest, lol.
Before I start, I want to say that I might eventually move this to a website where I can have different pages for entries, like a Neocities maybe? It depends on how motivated I am. I know if I did that I’d be stressed out about making it look nice and original coding-wise when really all I really care about is the content, so maybe a bottom up site isn’t the best idea unless I get some direction for it (if any coding gurus wanna help me with that….). Whatever the case may be I can sense that what I have here as it is isn’t going to be feasible if I continue because the document will wind up being too stuffed to reasonably find something. But I also don’t want to split it into other docs because then I’d have documents floating around which are kind of annoying to keep tabs on. I’d like to have them all hosted in one place not on Google docs for easy access at some point.
“Human condition”
Augusta uses an analogy to a combustion engine to describe body phases.
“Body” here is quite similar to what it means in physics: Basically, bodies are objects and their movement. Such as the actual bodies of the planets in a solar system and their movement. Their appearance, shape, size, atmospheric content, the heat they generate in their cores and their movement through space. The “extraverted” elements in socionics are body phases.
This is in contrast to fields. Fields are present between objects but aren’t part of the objects themselves; the relationships between them. Such as the gravitational fields between celestial bodies. “Introverted” elements in socionics are field phases.
The body phases are described by Augusta as follows:
Potential energy; the object’s mass and internal picture, its structure →
Excitation (compression); a process of potential energy conversion to kinetic energy – a change of the object’s internal micro-structure, including fluctuation →
Kinetic energy; ignition; internally mobilized object, its micro-structure and external form →
Work (working stroke); the object’s kinetic energy expenditure, a change of its coordinates and entropy resulting from a reverse change of its micro-structure, the object’s demobilization, return into the idle state.
Imagine you have a car. A car has the potential to drive you somewhere contained within its structure.
You put the keys in the engine and this turns the engine on, it excites the engine.
The car’s engine becomes mobilized. The lights are on, it’s playing music. This is the car’s mobilized appearance and external state. External mobilization is partially the literal external appearance of the object, but also how it presents itself, the actual form it takes. If it has its shit together.
Now you press down on the gas pedal (which in itself is an excitement), and the constant motion of driving is using object’s kinetic energy in movement, or work.
This is describing energy metabolism. The concepts of energy metabolism can be used to describe the sequence that information aspects transfer information about bodies at different phases.
Inner structure/potential (N) → Excitation/energization (F) → Mobilized external form (S) → Action/movement (T)
This is the sequence of human thinking that corresponds to INVOLUTION. Otherwise known as “result” or “left” (though Augusta originally refers to this as the right ring).
However, Augusta notes, there is another type of thinking that goes in reverse:
Action/movement (T) → Mobilized external form (S) → Excitation/energization (F) → Inner structure/potential (N)
This is the sequence of human thinking that corresponds to EVOLUTION. Otherwise known as “process” or “right” (though Augusta originally refers to this as the left ring).
What are the implications of a system that has action/movement as its pivotal loop? In a society, it’s as if this sequence is trying to preserve its own momentum and feeding back into itself. This makes it a self-sustaining and standardizing force. Evolution deals in preservation and repeatability, though as it accumulates more and more information, the energy in the system deteriorates over time and needs to be updated and replaced (by ideas from involutionary sources).
Hence, this is why INVOLUTION is described “closer to living and modeling existence derived from nature which can be traced down to the struggle for existence”, while EVOLUTION is described as “closer to emulating life in a civilized society with upheld conventions, traditions, philosophies,” etc.
In all the information blocks, we see different sequences of information elements going clockwise.
In INVOLUTION types (LII, ESE, SLE, IEI, ESI, LIE, IEE, SLI) the sequence is as follows:
N → F → S → T → …
For example, starting from the Role/Suggestive (since that's the psyche’s main entry point for incoming information in Model A’s blockings), in ESI:
T role / suggestive (1) → N PoLR / mobilizing (2) → F base / observing (3) → S creative / demonstrative (4) → T role / suggestive (1) …
In EVOLUTION types (ILE, SEI, LSI, EIE, SEE, ILI, EII, LSE) the sequence is:
T → S → F → N → …
Equivalent example for EII:
T role / suggestive (1) → S PoLR / mobilizing (2) → F base / observing (3) → N creative / demonstrative (4) → T role / suggestive (1) …
These sequences are not only reflected at the individual type level, but in society at large.
The mental and vital tracks
The intelligence of each type “masters” one piece of the sequence and in different vertedness (introversion/extraversion). For example, LII and LIE’s kinetic (outward) intelligences lie in the T→N phase but one consciously concerns themself with static information and one with dynamic information on those phases.
Since not everyone processes all information elements equally, new information is created within the subject’s distorted bias towards some elements over others, and that new information gets passed on outside oneself.
Augusta says:
“The information transmitted from an individual to society only contains the individual’s understanding of some aspects of reality, but not others … individual aspects of reality are reflected in the human brain with different degrees of differentiation and conscious awareness”
Socion, or The Foundations of Socionics (https://classicsocionics.wordpress.com/socion/)
The mental track is particularly important for information transfer in society. It processes information in a conscious, intentional way, hence the block names “EGO” and “SUPEREGO”. It is the track of social life activity which is learned when people become aware of what they “must” do and that there are other people who have their own interests that one must be wary of in approaching them with (the SUPEREGO block). The mental track is the source of creativity and one’s personality development to face others and society. The mental track pays conscious deliberate attention to certain types of information and uses that information to actively ponder and assess (with the scope of other entities’ existence in mind).
Meanwhile, the vital track is instinctual, automatic, habitual, not controlled and is purely personal. It’s the things that you instinctually need/crave instruction on (SUPERID) and the things you don’t instinctually need instruction on (ID).
Recently I’ve likened the mental track to “software” and the vital track to “hardware”.
Sequence of of human information metabolism
“The intellect of the representatives of the 1st ring of social progress [evolution] is probably directed mainly towards material reproduction. They think about the useful qualities (Ne) of different objects, including human beings, which in the process of labor (Te) are transformed into usable objects (Se) for the sake of the emotional (Fe) inspiration of people.
The intellect of the representatives of the second ring of social progress [involution] is addressed to the problems surrounding the reproduction of the labor force and culture of society. They think about the physical and spiritual abilities of people (Ne), about the ways to inspire and mobilize them (Fe) which causes their kinetic energy to acquire certain qualities (Se) and are used in work (Te) for the sake of further expanding reproduction of the physical and spiritual abilities (Ne) of people.
Perhaps [evolution] is more concerned with the objective, including the useless waste of worldly riches, while [involution] seems to think that the most important thing on Earth is people themselves with their enthusiasm and needs.
Perhaps [evolution] has a tendency to search for new material resources and new objective laws, and the adaptation of man to nature, while [involution] has a tendency to search for new riches in the human personality.
Perhaps the creativity of thought of [evolution] is mainly directed to the material basis of society, and [involution] – to the study and shaping of the spiritual and material needs of people. Perhaps [involution] has the ability to take care of a person simply because they are human, not because society needs their activity. All of this should be studied. To date, we only know for a fact that there is a significant difference between them and that these differences are caused by the opposite directions of IM.”
(https://augustaproject.wordpress.com/theory-of-reinin-dichotomies-4/)
For context, if if wasn’t already known:
- N (Intuition), S (Sensorics) are irrational aspects
- T (Logics), F (Ethics) are rational aspects
Augusta has used both N→T→S→F and T→S→F→N sequences to refer to the evolutionary ring of social progress, just shifting the N and T, however I prefer the latter. Though it would seem fair to start both sequences with N, it undermines the rationality-guidance of evolution that involution doesn’t really have.
This all is my own thoughts here, but I don’t feel like N is what the “starting point” of the evolution thinking sequence is. In evolution, it appears to be that the internal structure of an object and developments over time () are the end result trying to be found, and that informs if the object is needed or not to uphold what continues to work or what non-immediate circumstances or opportunities should be taken up.
Evolution is characterized by stability and standardization, which implies some sort of oversight of a rational nature.
I need to reiterate that what I’m talking about is very abstract and broad strokes and I want to emphasize that it is just a sequence of human thinking: I’m talking about N and T in a wide, civilization-spanning way, not in how the relationship to this type of information manifests in any particular type. We all know how fractal-like socionics concepts are, so consider my use of N and T here as a higher level of meta-language used to describe it.
For example, EII and EIE are of course going to think primarily in terms of F and N, but their F and N are colored by this evolutionary sequence and the importance of external action/movement (T) and rituals that contribute to the decelerating management of the “working stroke” of information transfer that dominates in a society. This doesn’t mean there won’t be social upheavals with evolution, but they will be wide in scale and scope and in a way that seeks to appeal to and address the people in that civilization on the basis of standardized rituals, expectations, and dependencies, and slow but steady standardization of dynamic information: the standardization of workflow, time, internal excitation, and present state in the environment.
I also think putting Te first for evolution, a rational element, is significant because it is evaluatory in the extraverted types that energize society (ILE, EIE, SEE, LSE), and is situational in the introverted evolutionary types that accumulate, uphold, and work within the sequence (such as SEI, LSI, ILI, EII). The latter introverted types consume, absorb, and hold on to lots of information from society, but that information has to come from somewhere. Meh work on this
So by starting with Te for the evolutionary sequence, it sets the tone for “societally-developed external motion” that evolutionary types work within, giving them a rational “purpose” and overtone so to speak even if they are irrational types:
“An [irrational’s] actions are impulsive, they are nothing more than an individual’s adaptation to the real situation and to their own feelings. It could be said that an [irrational] acts when they need to exit some kind of situation or some kind of state, while a [rational] acts when they need to create a particular state, to make themselves feel a certain way.“
(https://classicsocionics.wordpress.com/rationality-irrationality/)
Remove this from the context of individuals and instead cast it onto deconstruction (simplifying, ridding of unnecessary fluff, making more “undomesticated”, more primal) and construction (evolved in a certain direction):
“wild” animals in nature (involution) are closer to irrationality
“domesticated” animals in homes (evolution) are closer to rationality
Of course I don’t mean to compare people to animals.. (although we kind of are), but I want to draw this analogy.
Domesticated animals imo are the product of evolutionary rather than involutionary thinking. They’re expected to behave in a predictable way (- dynamics) so that it doesn’t maul your face, and whose forms have been specifically chosen and guided by human influence (+ statics) in what sort of genes we’d want to pass on, so that they are more domesticated and compatible with human living. This has worked out well for the most part! We love our domestic dogs and cats and bunnies and whatnot and they love us. But in the most extreme cases there can be negative consequences in these new forms that can be seen with brachycephalic pets such as the pug or persian cat whose features were chosen and bred for their cuteness, even if to the detriment of their health.
By contrast, we can compare wild/undomesticated animals to involutionary thinking: these animals simply are whatever nature endowed them with (- statics), but through that they can behave to their fullest natural extent, yet in unpredictable ways, ways that don’t necessarily serve us in the way we need them to be to be good pets (+ dynamics). They’re also more standoffish and reasonably wary of us.
This mirrors how involutionary types are generally at their best in small, informal groups but struggle in larger organizations or social groups with formalized procedures (involutionary +dynamics struggling to be “domesticated” to evolutionary -dynamics). While evolutionary types are better suited at handling affairs that feel like they’re oriented at “all of society”, (like how basically anyone in any society around the world can safely have a cat as a pet because they’ve been domesticated.)
This will make more sense when we contextualize these thinking sequences into their half-phases.
Every type in the same ring of progress (either evolutionary OR involutionary ring) will have the same direction of flow between information elements within some part of their psyche. You can see this below.
See if you sense any sort of pattern emerge between the half-phases in those different directions of thinking. (Btw, when you see “objects”, that can include both people and actual objects.)
Read more about the the information element charges (+/−) I used below here if you want. Because I feel like SCS’s charge system actually makes sense, works well with Augusta’s idea, and it’s a complementary addition to this writeup.
(The source for the information element blocking descriptions in italics comes from Theory of Reinin Dichotomies, Part 5. The descriptions above them that aren’t in italics are mine.)
EVOLUTIONARY Sequence of Information Metabolism
(… T → S → F → N → …)
T → S
The action/movement of an object (−Te) and systems of relations/distances between objects (+Ti) inform the object’s kinetic energy/external mobilized form (+Se) and the object’s dynamic present situation/state (−Si).
+Ti→+Se: “The system of relations with material goods and people leads to an increase or decrease in a person’s kinetic energy. If they are needed, society gives them power over objects/subjects and people.”
−Te→−Si: “The quality of deeds and actions and the efficient expenditure of energy in work are always connected with the improvement or deterioration of people’s well-being. If someone is in bad health, they should always search for why based on their deeds and actions. There is no other way.”
S → F
The static kinetic energy/external mobilized form an object (+Se) and its present situation/state (−Si) informs the dynamic internal excitation/urge the object will experience (−Fe) and the static attraction that will be felt between something and the object (+Fi).
+Se→+Fi: “A person’s beauty, tidiness of appearance, and access to high-quality objects are the basis of whether or not others love them. If someone wants to increase their self-respect, they should increase their kinetic energy, part of which is their power over objects, money, and people, including children.”
−Si→−Fe: “Someone’s well-being is the reason they’re in a good or bad mood, and lively or depressed. Emotionality is a consequence of well-being.”
F → N
The dynamic internal excitement/urge an object experiences (−Fe) and the static attraction between something and the object (+Fi) informs the object’s static potential energy/capabilities/internal structure (+Ne) and its dynamic development over time (−Ni).
+Fi→+Ne: “A person’s attraction – the extent to which they love and are loved – provides opportunities for the physical and spiritual enrichment of a person, increasing their potential informational energy and as a result, influencing others. Love ensures the development of potential informational energy.”
−Fe→−Ni: “All inner processes and emotions are the cause of subsequent calmness and a clearer picture of the future. If a person is uneasy, they need to be shocked, even with tragic experiences. It is not without reason that FeNi loves to write tragedies. And also not without reason that they say that empathizing with tragic figures on the stage leads to catharsis.”
N → T
The static inner structure/potential of an object (+Ne) and its dynamic development over time (−Ni) informs how the object acquires dynamic action/movement (−Te) and static systems of relations/distance (+Ti). Thus stably feeding into itself.
+Ne→+Ti: “A person’s potential energy, physical strength, skills, abilities, and understanding of the nature of the world around them is what makes other people need them or not.”
−Ni→−Te: “How well and wisely an individual uses their time leads to greater or lesser utility of their work activity.”
INVOLUTIONARY Sequence of Information Metabolism
(… N → F → S → T → …)
Meanwhile, every step in the INVOLUTION process of human thinking is naturally limiting rather than self-sustaining, creating kinks and mutations that deviate and go against the grain of the evolutionary thought process, destabilizing it.
N → F
An object’s static latent potential energy/capabilities/inner structure (−Ne) and its development over time (+Ni) inform the dynamic internal excitation/urge the object will experience (+Fe) and the static attraction that will be felt between something and the object (−Fi). Essentially deciding what is worth being energized based on the potential it holds or thing from the get-go.
−Ne→−Fi: “A person’s potential energy, physical and mental strength, characteristics, and peculiarities are what makes others reach out to them or not, and what makes them loved or not.”
+Ni→+Fe: “How well and wisely an individual uses their time leads to the richness or dullness of their emotional life.”
F → S
The dynamic internal excitement/urge an object experiences (+Fe) and static attraction between something and the object (−Fi) informs the object’s static kinetic energy/external mobilized form (−Se) and its dynamic present situation/state (+Si).
−Fi→−Se: “A person’s attraction – the extent to which they love and are loved – contributes to how much kinetic energy and different objects they can amass. If they are loved, material goods are given; and if not, those are taken away.”
+Fe→+Si: “All inner processes, experiences, and emotions are the causes of one physically feeling good or bad. If you feel bad, that means you are in a bad mood, so you need to lift your spirits with jokes, music, stories, etc. Emotions are what makes people feel good.”
S → T
The kinetic energy/external mobilized form an object (−Se) and its dynamic present situation/state (+Si) informs action/movement that can be done with the object (+Te) and the system of relations/distance (−Ti) it can acquire
−Se→−Ti: “A person’s beauty, tidiness of appearance, kinetic strength, position, capabilities, degrees, and access to high-quality objects are the reasons that they are needed or not needed by other people, including their family.”
+Si→+Te: “Someone’s well-being is the reason for them wanting to or not wanting to move and work. Efficiency is the consequence of well-being.”
T → N
The action/movement of an object (+Te) and systems of relations/distances between objects (−Ti) informs the object’s static latent potential energy/capabilities/inner structure (−Ne) and its development over time (+Ni)
−Ti→−Ne: “The system of relations with material goods and other people contributes to how much potential energy someone will have. If they are needed, people help them develop physically and spiritually, as well as helping them assist others with this.”
+Te→+Ni: “The quality of deeds and actions and the efficient expenditure of energy in work – only performing for what is truly necessary – leads to peace of mind in the future.”
Also read both! if you have a specific phase movement as your conscious EGO block (e.g. for me LII, -Ti→-Ne), you have the other one on your ID block, the way of thinking you are naturally inclined to habitually “act out” in your daily life (+Te→+Ni).
The outer blocks of Model A, the EGO and ID, are called the kinetic blocks. In addition to your kinetic blocks, also look at your potential blocks; the inner blocks of Model A; the SUPEREGO and SUPERID.
As an LII, my kinetic blocks’ movement is on T→N. My potential blocks’ movement is on F→S.
Kinetic and potential blocks are the two MAIN information movements that rule your psyche because they move horizontally; from accepting function to producing function.
Oh god not more dichotomies.
Lol.
Lmao, even.
The other two blocks are the vertical ones—inert and contact blocks), but people pay less attention to them because they move from producing to accepting; a sort of “winding up” or “storing” of information or energy which then gets released on the next producing half-phase.
E.g., in the LII, S→T is their inert vertical block. Then the next phase T→N is their kinetic horizontal block.
Here what all half-phase movements look like in LII so you can visualize a more polished version of how I snapshot visualize this shit in my head like looking at different sides of the same die.
(1 → 2) POTENTIAL HORIZONTAL: F → S
(2 → 3) INERT VERTICAL: S → T
(3 → 4) KINETIC HORIZONTAL: T → N
(4 → 1) CONTACT VERTICAL: N → F
Side note: Notice the cool pattern that shows up everywhere in Socionics since it’s mathematical and has symmetries. What group of types do these four motions form? Both the supervision and benefit rings of the same direction of social progress! Depending on what vertedness (E or I) you read these information aspects through.
The other members of LII (Ti→Ne)’s benefit AND supervision rings are ESI (Fi→Se), IEx (N→F) and SLx (S→T).
The only two types missing are LII’s and ESI’s duals, ESE and LIE, whose types can be brought into a new set to create the entire involutionary ring of social progress by removing the vertedness of LII and ESI so they become LIx (T→N) and ESx (F→S).
Involutionary ring of social progress
- IEx (N→F)
- ESx (F→S)
- SLx (S→T)
- LIx (T→N)
I just want to emphasize that my choice of LII here is arbitrary. I’m using it because it’s my type. You can always assume when I use an example like that it can be rotated and the same pattern is found to be true for any given type. Also, this is why the superego type is so intriguing to me because of how much it fundamentally has in common with its mutual superego type this way. LII and ESI are superegos to each other.
And yes, this does imply an inert subtype (LII-Ti) may be slightly “flavored” with or have a focus on the information domains associated with their supervisor (SLE) in the mental ring, and beneficiary (SLI) in the vital ring. Likewise, the contact subtype (LII-Ne) may be slightly “flavored” with the information domains associated with their supervisee (IEE) in the mental ring, and benefactor (IEI) in the vital ring.
This is my own idea here and I haven’t seen it talked about, but I find it to hold true for the Model A contact/inert subtypes.
Because subtypes can be emphasized to different levels, these “flavors” and use of those information elements are certainly not mutually exclusive to either subtype. A type still internally functions the same and realizes themself using the same information.
The more polar the subtype from 0 in either direction, the more the person is attuned to, or addresses, the type of information on either the inert (2→3) or contact vertical (4→1) block more frequently than the other.
In either case, however, they retain the type’s model A structure and “rhythm / beat” of information transfer. A type like LII is a rational type and interacts with the world as a rational type. A LII-Ti is never going to be a SLE. On the inert vertical block (2→3) they will form a worldview starting with Se products going into Ti, meant to build on an accumulation of Se information to be consistently applicable by Ti. They will not produce new (kinetic) implementations of Se the way SLE would. They shrimply do not, and would prefer not to, give this information about an object much of their focus or attention at all. They do not impose any advice on people about an object’s “presence” and mobilizing resources. There is a painful reception and dismissal of Se advice from others, though less so through the justification and judgment of the role Fi. The role function is the way for someone to trust their vulnerable function.
(The following quoted sections about vertical blocks are written by Zayn, from this doc they wrote. You can also read more about horizontal and vertical blockings there.)
On the mental inert vertical block (2/1 → 3/1 • -Se→ -Ti; LII-Ti’s dominant “flavor”), “The mental inert vertical block is characterized by continuous accumulation of societally relevant data and the formation of that perpetually relevant information into a concrete idea. This can simply be understood as a type’s worldview. The goal of the producing element [Se] is to understand and accumulate ideas from the objective world that have no exception. Once an individual understands what is consistently applicable within the outside world, the individual forms a fully realized idea on [Ti]. In doing this, the individual turns what was once potential into something kinetic.”
On the mental contact vertical block (4/1 → 1/1 • -Ne→ -Fi; LII-Ne’s dominant “flavor”), “The mental contact vertical block’s purpose is to use this worldview in order to innovate and affect what is seen as objective. The producing element of this block [Ne] is the accumulation of the entire cycle of information metabolism. It expends its energy outwardly, subordinating society to the accumulated thoughts of the self, providing new information, assistance, and abstract solutions to anything that the mental inert vertical block [Se→Ti] has deemed applicable through its storage of relevant information. The produced information often finds novel ways to be relevant to already objective states as it is aimed at transferring kinetic information into potential information.The accepting element on this block [Fi] is aimed at starting the process of ideation all over again, making contact with the outside world and situationally noticing anything that doesn’t follow normative patterns, ultimately forming realizations, and transferring them to the mental inert vertical block [Se→Ti] in order to store them.
On the vital inert vertical block (2/2 → 3/2 • +Si→ +Te), “The vital inert vertical block is defined by the unrealized potential for mobilization. This information can only be fully perceived when one is provided with a stimulus from a complementary mental contact vertical block (ESE’s Si→Te) which directly perceives and programs a sense of validity within the aspects of an individual that others would not be able to see. The inertness and vitality of this block [in LII] causes it to beg for realization, but at the same time, it must be able to fit in as well. Only the mental contact vertical block of the dual which fully understands what is in line and what is out of line can perceive this and take action. There is an inability to assert one’s own will on this block, as it is only a means to understand how one can fit in among other organisms. The complementary mental contact vertical block (ESE’s Si→Te) is easily able to make contacts with external reality on the same aspects in order to solve or fully realize the perceived problems on the vital inert vertical block (LII’s Si→Te).
On the vital contact vertical block (4/2 → 1/2 • +Ni→ +Fe), “The vital contact vertical block is the realization of one’s own personality through the actions they take among separate organisms. On the other hand, the vital inert vertical block (Si→Te) is understood as how information accumulated about the self can be realized by others. On the vital contact vertical block, one is continuously receiving information about themself through the way they mobilize their energy state in the external world. The mental ring (SUPER-EGO & EGO blocks) is important for denoting our thought cycles and ideations, but the vital ring (SUPER-ID & ID blocks) is an implicit cycle of self-realization. In order for this block to become fully realized, it must be mobilized by the information on the mental inert vertical block of the dual (ESE’s Ni→Fe). The mental inert vertical block accumulates information about how things must be, and seems to be able to come to a viewpoint from this, yet it is unable to act on its idea. The vital contact vertical block (LII’s Ni→Fe) has the ability to produce and demonstrate these ideas to the world, and feel internally as if they fully agree with their dual on what is being said. The positive reception within the dyad (LII-ESE) leads to an increase in the vital contact vertical block’s excitation. Eventually ideas imprinted by the dual lead to behavioral patterns that allow one to come to complete individual realization.
Now, let’s take an example of some types that people tend to mix up or struggle to differentiate:
Even though SLIs have 1D Ne, LSEs are actually more “conventional”, as in appealing to standardization in society. N says nothing about one’s “conventionality”; it has to do with the flow of information elements and if they are led to uphold and lead work in a way that is stabilizing for society, or live unorthodoxically from a natural state of existence “outside” of the rituals of society.
So even though SLIs are by base a sensory type and thus primarily grounded in the physical world, they are still as unorthodox as IEI tend to be, just in their own sort of niche.
LSEs are upholding/stabilizing and directing work methods because they are evolutionary (to uphold/stabilize as informed by what seems to work for society; T→S→F→N→… minded).
SLIs are creating new work methods as one’s senses and state naturally call for it because they're involutionary (independent and derived from the potential in the laws of nature; N→F→S→T→… minded).
It doesn’t mean that there is no innovation in evolutionary types, but it’s an innovation that’s still fundamentally tied to society at large.
ILEs are innovative in a way that is directly bound to established civilization, even if it confronts established norms (think of Frank Zappa). “Supporters of his music admired its compositional complexity, while detractors found it lacking emotional depth.”
That example is how inner structure/potential leads into work directly (N→T), rather than inner structure/potential leading to emotional energization and pursuit that then leads to work later (N→F→S→T).
11/16/23
Involutionary and intuition
A large part of what characterizes the essence of involutionary types (LII, ESE, SLE, IEI, ESI, LIE, IEE, SLI) is a sense of doing exactly what is required, nothing more and nothing less. Nothing is artificially inflated beyond what is absolutely necessary which gives these types a hands-off and natural sort of thinking. They don’t go through the motions to reveal stuff; stuff reveals itself to them, then they act accordingly. SSS really tries to dig into the manifestations of this with their signs of functions but it really ultimately comes down to this imo.
This also overlaps with what Dovgan said in response to Gulenko about the psychological manifestation of these different ways of thinking:
“In my opinion, the psychology of left [involutionary] and right [evolutionary] types differs in level of development and orientation with respect to conscious and unconscious.
Right [evolutionary] types have a better developed conscious framework, greater complexity of mental processes, thoughts, behavior, and more complexities in their social rituals. They focus on maintenance of reputation, which determines the particular significance of right type in complicated hierarchies of modern society. Right types are, however, more internally conflicted with their unconscious, which often leads to discharge of the conflict in a way of various psycho-social excesses that involve large numbers of other right types, as well as to cooling of the relationships between right types at close psychological distances.
Left [involutionary] types have a simple and natural conscious framework. They are more in harmony with the unconscious than right types. Left type behavior and thinking is more simple and natural. This makes left types generally more harmonious and content, as well as prone to avoid participation in mass movements and excesses. However, this simplicity in conscious framework makes the left type less adaptable to the complexities of life in modern society, to elaborate collective rituals in professional and public spheres. They compensate for this by adapting well to coordinated work within small groups.”
On the Essence of Vectors of Social Progress (http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.php/On_the_Essence_of_Vectors_of_Social_Progress_by_Dovgan)
This makes complete sense to me, in how involution types have a more harmonious relationship to their subconscious. Involutionary types don’t need to construct anything to reveal hidden patterns; these patterns make themselves known (as it is in the natural world) and they’re just following from that: Limitations and innate opportunities given by the natural world, not constructed or “engineered” towards, so it always seems to be “just right” or just what’s essential to communicating some form of information.
They prefer to streamline constructs by cutting away what is superfluous and artificial to reveal the natural essential static core of something (Holographic-Panoramic: LII, SLE, ESI, IEE), or by following a gestalt trendline within the chaos that naturally reveals itself to the person (Vortical-Synergetic: ESE, IEI, LIE, SLI). Therefore, they don’t run into much cognitive dissonance, because they already have a sense for what truly matters without needing to work within a constructed system to derive that.
This is why I believe they are “result” types and why I think their thought sequences are always in some way bound to N (irrational, general inner structure), while evolutionary type’s thought sequences are always in some way bound to a T (rational, reproduction of methods, more comfortable with ways of actions proven to persevere and have a tendency to get rustled when found outside of that. Hence why they’re better at managing dynamic information and better suited for working in large groups or to handle a wide audience.)
Meanwhile, involutionary types as a broad rule of thumb I’ve observed to be more independent / self-directed. Even if their Ne is weak, they are drawn towards latent existence of an object or relation (- static) and feel suffocated in environments that shut down their ability to pursue or regard it (+ dynamic), or may be perceived as difficult to sympathize with by an evolutionary social structure.
Again, this ties perfectly into the SCS charge system.
Involutionary types seem to inadvertently disregard the methodical management/reproduction of the dynamics (-) and construction of the statics (+). Instead they are the primitive inventors of dynamics (+), and discoverers of statics (-). Hence, they work best in small informal groups and are characterized by an abundance of free energy.
It sort of reminds me of the question if we developed/invented mathematics as a society, or uncovered it as a given from the natural world. They’re both true and valid ways of thinking about it, but they seem like they come from these different perspectives.
12/30/23
Contact vertical block (4/2 → 1/2) patterns
EVOLUTIONARY RING OF SOCIAL PROGRESS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ILE has Te demonstrative (4) → Si suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of LSE’s ego block.
- ILE self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information LSE consciously regards the world with.
SEI has Fi demonstrative (4) → Ne suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of EII’s ego block.
- SEI self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information EII consciously regards the world with.
LSI has Si demonstrative (4) → Fe suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of SEI’s ego block.
- LSI self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information SEI consciously regards the world with.
EIE has Ne demonstrative (4) → Ti suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of ILE’s ego block.
- EIE self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information ILE consciously regards the world with.
SEE has Fe demonstrative (4) → Ni suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of EIE’s ego block.
- SEE self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information EIE consciously regards the world with.
ILI has Ti demonstrative (4) → Se suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of LSI’s ego block.
- ILI self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information LSI consciously regards the world with.
EII has Ni demonstrative (4) → Te suggestive (1) in the vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of ILI’s ego block.
- EII self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information ILI consciously regards the world with.
LSE has Se demonstrative (4) → Fi suggestive (1) in the vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of SEE’s ego block.
- LSE self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information SEE consciously regards the world with.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< INVOLUTIONARY RING OF SOCIAL PROGRESS
LII has Ni demonstrative (4) → Fe suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of IEI’s ego block.
- LII self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information IEI consciously regards the world with.
ESE has Se demonstrative (4) → Ti suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of SLE’s ego block.
- ESE self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information SLE consciously regards the world with.
SLE has Te demonstrative (4) → Ni suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of LIE’s ego block.
- SLE self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information LIE consciously regards the world with.
IEI has Fi demonstrative (4) → Se suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of ESI’s ego block.
- IEI self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information ESI consciously regards the world with.
ESI has Si demo (4) → Te suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of SLI’s ego block.
- ESI self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information SLI consciously regards the world with.
LIE has Ne demonstrative (4) → Fi suggestive (1) in their vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of IEE’s ego block.
- LIE self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information IEE consciously regards the world with.
IEE has Fe demonstrative (4) → Si suggestive (1) in the vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of ESE’s ego block.
- IEE self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information ESE consciously regards the world with.
SLI has Ti demonstrative (4) → Ne suggestive (1) in the vital track’s contact block.
- Self-realizes the information elements of LII’s ego block.
- SLI self-realizes their own vital energy with the same information LII consciously regards the world with.
1/2/24
Exploration of dynamic and static elements.
This originally started as a Discord conversation with my friend but I felt as though it had enough rich material to make it into this document.
It started out when I realized that THC makes my brain and body feel like Si information overhauls Ni information, or “drowning” it out with Si. (Keep in mind my Si is mobilizing (2/2) and my Ni is demonstrative (4/2).)
Vital track Ni acts on the same half phase as my mental track Ne (“innate structure of objects”) (phase 4) and plays out in my mind through the one-directional temporal dimension.
Like all my vital dynamic information elements, I feel the flow of time for Ni through the temporal dimension rather than time existing mainly as a concept, and though I can conceptualize time, it doesn’t come as naturally to me as first and foremost feeling it.
Rather than mentally conceptualizing ideas of how to
exist in the present , move , become energized/de-energized , and exist through time like a dynamic type, I just do it, and it weighs on me. The flow of time () and reflection of it in objects is just as much a visceral feeling within me as the flow of the present environment () and reflection of that in objects. But it’s not localized in the environment like Si is.
Si is also visceral in the same way but also in a more literal sense, since it’s information about the way the object exists horizontally within the present, reverberating and existing in a space. the qualia; aches and pains, nausea, being high and listening to a song and hearing the instruments like I’m there. And yes, fully enjoying an edible and just experiencing your senses (as a verb happening to you and within you) is an Si experience for me.
Because I feel these dynamic elements personally and viscerally I can be a little eccentric about how I spend my time, since time is a result of the actions that I take or do not take.
Because I have ADHD and can be forgetful about my obligations if I have too many, there seems to always be a slight background noise of anxiety that doesn’t originate from the immediate, present moment. The best I can describe where it feels like it originates from is the idea that I may have forgotten to do something but I’m not sure what, and that in time something is going to unforeseenly bite me in the ass due to the actions I had forgotten to take.
I also always have a sense of how I’m spending my time and display my own sense of pacing and hurriedness even in the face of others. I’ve been frequently told I need to relax about upcoming events because I want to get to them as soon as possible, struggling to change my own sense of pacing. I just told my mom who was lying in bed earlier today, “Come on, when do you want me to go shopping already? It’s 1pm, half the day is gone and you still haven’t sent me your grocery list.” I wanted to get it over with so I could have the rest of my day free, I went through the supermarket and only got what I needed. By getting stuff done as soon as possible, I was creating free time for myself in which I could feel happy and enjoy myself with no strings attached (SUPERID Fe → Si). I don’t need to be instructed on how to pace my life, nor do I instruct mine on anyone else’s (unless my available time is contingent on someone’s actions and I feel anxiety about it since I’m not in control of it. That tense feeling you get when you watch someone Google something less efficiently than you would.)
I remember I was working on a take home formal logic exam last semester, just irritable and anxious because I couldn't focus on it even though I had to since it was due the next day. I procrastinated thinking I could get away with it because I pretty much always can, and trust my ability to get it done real quick, which I almost always do. But for some reason this day was different. ADHD is worse on some days than others and it was one of those days.
I took a delta 9 THC gummy to see how it would alter my working ability because why not, and suddenly my time-related anxiety was gone. I felt no visceral looming time-related anxiety, it just vanished. No sense of time. Like I was just in the moment, one step at a time and I was able to get it done. It tuned out the “background noise” of pacing. Yet it doesn’t diminish my thoughts of Ne, because obviously I wrote most of this while stoned!
I noticed I was taking in my experiences more “horizontally” in space and my general present state, rather than “vertically” strung along time.
When I think of how to visualize socionics Ni“time”, I think of how the Homestuck Intermission does it.
All of this is what I mean by Ni “advancing vertically” in one direction rather than “expanding horizontally”.
The first two panels (with the orange trails) compresses the dynamicity of Ni all into one single static visual slide representation.
Se is a flipbook and what’s on the individual pages and Ni is when you play the flipbook.
In the first panel, the orange trail of the characters in the story also includes Te information about the object’s dynamic movement in space (through time). In the second panel we also see the distances between the characters () at a static moment (through dyanmic time).
That’s because the T element is external, like the S elements. The trail of time here is visually represented to us readers in Se static form. Actually experiencing it/going through it is Ni for us readers and, in the story, the characters.
If we don’t consider whatever specific movements they’re using through time, we’re left with the character advancing through time. And that is fundamentally what Ni is.
Understanding Ni as a dynamic element in this way I think was a good introduction point to help people understand how the other dynamic functions work in tandem with them at the same moment, and later static ones too. At least because Ni is where my own vital experience of information about objects is the most nuanced and emphatic.
There are many ways for an object to move and exist in a space and energetically fluctuate through that timeframe . These are the dynamic elements, the moment to moment; the smooth curve.
Let’s imagine time as a flowing river. The river of time flows with Te and Fe and Si information that doesn’t exist as a snapshot but instead can only be understood as constantly changing from moment to moment.
Te and Fe describe the nature of the dynamics of the object itself.
Imagine someone throws a chair. What was in the emotional energy of that movement? Get rid of the explicit logistics of the movements involved in throwing a chair (all Te information). What remains is the information of Fe, the dynamic emotional piece of information of the object. Again, these events play out alongside the flow of time’s river .
Si and Ni describe the information about the horizontal/spatial (Si) and vertical/temporal (Ni) field that the object exists within, and how they exist within it.
Something I realized is that the static information elements give information about the dynamic element's ability to flow.
For example, the other intuition element is Ne which is like a metaphorical toll gate/dam for Ni’s movement. Ne is the information that regards the object with: “Does this object have the inner structure/potential necessary for the river of time to flow through this possibility?”
The river of time and everything in it (the other dynamic elements) is only able to split where it’s allowed or able to.
People with Ne ego have the ability to consciously commentate about, study, and manage these “gates” of possibility. Whether latent structure/potential is constructed and given (+Ne in EII and ILE) or deconstructed and uncovered (−Ne in LII and IEE).
The irrationals, ILE, and IEE with base (3/1) Ne are chiefly interested in these gates. They wind up producing judgements and procure distances and movements around the potential inherent to objects, and vitally experience the way the river of time flows through them. Intuition for them is an accepting element rather than a producing element meaning it's something they accept about the world, and rational actions/emotional energy are what is produced on the demonstrative (4/2) function in response to the observing (3/2) time function (for ILE this is Te and for IEE this is Fe).
For the rational types, LII and EII, with creative (4/1) Ne, the gate is a response to a rational “code” of operation—the static relationship between objects ( or )—to determine what potential can be acquired or what potential necessarily exists. Their rationality makes it so that conditions need to be met before an object’s potential can be determined. For them, this also affects how time is produced; time that they experience vitally. Time for them is a consequence of the observed changes happening to an object (for LII this is Te and for EII this is Fe).
Static elements are a lot like the slices of an MRI scan that you put together in your head.
Explicitly, you can see the form (Se) and position (Ti) of the brain parts on an MRI scan relative to each other on each slice and you can create a 3D form of it in your head from all the individual slices and rotate it (that’s how it’s like for me with holographic panoramic cognition, though more abstract).
But it’s still just a static “capture” of an object at a moment in time. And instead of conceptualizing it dynamically as a paused process or event, it’s felt more as “timeless” because it’s concerned with static structures and the static relationships between them.
Static mental types consciously think about and talk about what parts of objects are generally unchanging regardless of change involving the dynamic element on the shared half-phase.
For example, if a tiger lunges at you, its external movement in space is changing (Te), but the felt logical “balance” or proportionality between objects (Ti) is unchanging because that tiger, being a tiger and you being an unarmed human, holds power over you. It’s the logical relationship to the object.
And static elements can change, e.g. growing closer to someone (Fi) which is a change in psychological distance, but it needs to be re-evaluated, and the change is felt instantaneously rather than continuously. If you’re feeling moment-to-moment change, that’s probably one of the dynamic functions alongside it. It’s how two people can have fluctuating emotions through their relationship (Fe) but still consider each other closer than they are to anyone else (Fi).
Another example of Fi is the idea of being “on thin ice”. This describes the nature of the relationship between two objects as a field, akin a literal field of thin ice. If one object keeps doing something another object finds repulsive, the relationship between two objects will be severed. It’s a condition that limits or serves as a gate to how an object can “act” / move a certain way through it while still maintaining the condition of the Fi field. This is also a good example of why Fi is rational like Ti.
I find this especially true for Ne which perceives an object’s non-literal inner structure. To me, it’s like an object’s abstract skeleton of sorts.
If an object is perceived to NOT have the inner structure for something, that means it DOESN’T possess the potential for the river of time and events to flow through that possibility.
Ne is the static perception of if an object internally “has what it takes to potentially develop” this way. As an LII, for me this is influenced by the logical position it’s in and its dependencies ().
In essence, I think a good analogy is that static information is noun/adjective-like and dynamic information is verb/adverb-like.
Nouns identify the static nature of something: a specific object or set of objects, such as person, animal, place, thing, phenomenon, substance, quality, or idea.
Adjectives describe the qualities of the object in the noun: A tall building. A wonderful person. A fast car.
Verbs indicate an action, event, or state of being.
Adverbs modify or describe the dynamic qualities of the object being verbed.
For example, In the phrase “a fast car,” the word “fast” is an adjective because it's describing the noun “car.” This describes how static elements are conceptualized.
In the sentence “Don't drive fast,” the word “fast” is an adverb because it's modifying the verb “drive.” This describes how dynamic elements are conceptualized.
This is why two of the same basic elements occupy the same half-phase in the mental and vital tracks (e.g. Fi role and Fe suggestive both occur on the first half-phase in LII; Fi is just in the mental track and Fe is in the vital track). They concern the same basic information (logics, ethics, sensorics, intuition) but focus on two different aspects about it: the static and the dynamic.
How I would conceptualize half-phases visually, like acting parallel in 3D space. Red is the mental track and black is the vital track.
In summary
There are four types of information we can consider objects through (logics, ethics, sensorics, intuition), and for each type of information there are two sides to it. So there are a total of 8 ways to consider an object.
That’s what socionics is: The different ways and directions of communicating about those 8 aspects of objects. If two people see the same thing, chances are they will focus on different aspects of the experience and understand it in a different way.
It explains why you experience mutual misunderstandings or clash with a certain “type” of person who processes information about objects in a way alien to you, and how with others you both mutually understand the other’s way of seeing objects in a way that feels agreeable to your own experience.
When you consider it this way, you can appreciate the structure of socionics and learn to break out of thinking in terms of stereotyped behavior, and instead have a better idea of what to look for when typing someone.
Thinking about it this way offers the flexibility of the specific behaviors and beliefs of individuals of a given type, which is closer to how people in all their uniqueness operate in the real world. It also makes more sense for how all of these unique individuals can manage to be identified as one of 16 types.
A socionics type / TIM (type of information metabolism) is just one of the 16 possible structures of the relationships people have to these different kinds of information in their psyche: How one’s intellect perceives, processes, and produces these different types of information, rather than a specific set of behaviors or beliefs.
Sensorics / S - irrational, explicit information about objects Se - static body perspective Si - dynamic field perspective |
Intuition / N - irrational, implicit information about objects Ne - static body perspective Ni - dynamic field perspective |
Logic / T - rational, explicit information about objects Te - dynamic body perspective Ti - static field perspective |
Ethics / F - rational, implicit information about objects Fe - dynamic body perspective Fi - static field perspective |
Recall that extroverted elements are bodies.
And introverted elements are fields.
The symbols have meaning. Or at least I perceive them to have meaning. Frequently, field elements are depicted as opaque (solid) white, but it would make more sense that they be interpreted as transparent, where the outline is the focus of the symbol. It is in the same shape as its solid counterpart, but the symbol is of the outline of the shape rather than its mass, indicating that it bears a different relationship to the same type of information.
Se is a solid black circle, and Si is the transparent outline of that circle. Si is the “field” that permeates or lies around that solid body, but isn’t the external body itself. And I feel like that’s one of the best ways to conceptualize the information elements and their relationships to each other as well.
Static bodies (and dynamic fields):
Se — the mobilized external form of an object, through which a general state of “being” and present sensations may permeate (kind of like how sound reverberates differently in rooms of different shapes and sizes)
Ne — the internal abstract structure of an object, through which the unfolding river of time / events may permeate
Static fields (and dynamic bodies):
Ti — feeling of proportionality/distance/position/logical dependencies, through which the object may make certain actions and movements
Fi — feeling of psychological distance/attraction/repulsion, through which the object may experience energetic fluctuations and emotions