Socionics Personals
Middle East
North America
Join now!

My Take on Temperament
by I/O

Perspective makes us all different, and affects us to the core of our being, to the root processing within our brain. All Socionics types employ the same processing functions but not in the same way nor to the same degree; temperament is a result of fundamental operating perspectives, and type is built on a ...
Bookmark and Share

Your Comments: 1+
C1 Very well written. I see a lot of truths in this article. Please continue to share your knowledge with us. -- Anonymous
C2 I/O:can you please illustrate with a good example the "the feed back mechanism" for introverted input functions?! -- Anonymous
C3 Wikipedia states: “Feedback describes the situation when output from (or information about the result of) an event or phenomenon in the past will influence the same event or phenomenon in the present or future. When an event is part of a chain of cause-and-effect that forms a circuit or loop, then the event is said to 'feed back' into itself.” Feedback is used in an interactive (or closed-loop) system which needs a inherent basis or reference for comparison (a 'comparator' in engineering terms) whereas the autonomous, interrupt (or open-loop) system doesn't (note that the bracketed terms are defined on the web). Therefore, introverted input compares what is being said or done with what has been said or done in order to immediately affect or refine what will be said or done. For example, an ISTp will likely learn better by doing, by making it personal or by getting involved; whereas, an ESTp doesn't necessarily need to get involved or repeat a process in order to acquire the knowledge that it 'thinks' is important. ESTp will likely accept the new information that's out there fairly readily; whereas the ISTp may like to try it out first - to get some personal feedback on it. ISTp is usually fairly wary of people, things or situations that it hasn't dealt with in the past whereas the ESTp will look upon that as exciting and inspirational. The same contrast would hold true for INTp and ENTp. -- I/O
C4 I/O:can you elaborate the mechanism of (open loop systems) with a good example?! -- serag.
C5 The Farlex online dictionary defines 'open loop' as referring to: "a control system that does not have a feedback loop and thus is not self-correcting". It implies that action is expected to faithfully follow direction; however, it is a mode of operation where action usually doesn't follow directives to-the-letter. The dominant function 'generally' directs the secondary, which interprets orders somewhat 'liberally'. The lack of feedback loop means that introverted output and extroverted input generally have little effect on each other's operation even though one may determine the sphere of focus of the other. When introverted output dominates, it 'selects' a subset of the data from extroverted input 'as is' and analyzes it in order to formulate or refine a direction. When extroverted input dominates, it gives data to introverted output expecting it to 'analyze all of this quickly' in order to get back to the search pattern - but frequently EXXp ignores its own decisions and IXXj ignores key data. Regardless of which function dominates and what information is in memory, every situation can be somewhat like (re)learning to fly a plane when the instrumentation is not fully engaged. An IXXj will likely operate better in isolation, by stepping back or by remaining objective; whereas, an EXXp would only seek isolation when a decision has to be made. EXXp will want to continually seek new information, readily replacing old information; whereas the IXXj prefers a stable set of information although data can be much different than was available during the previous similar experience - however, rationalization requires that input stop. IXXj can be single-minded, intransigent and deliberate whereas EXXp will be spur-of-the-moment, non-directed and variable - decision making for EXXp is far too confining, but doable in small doses. Both these open-loop configurations demand freedom and independence - autonomy. As an INTj, I visualize structure in everything but I often disregard what I said or did in the past, and when I need refreshed data, my senses often fail me - even though I know what I need, I seem to pick up a lot of irrelevant information which can take me on tangents so I frequently need several passes and refinements to settle on the information that is important to the issue because I deliberately ignore what my intuition is telling me - extreme focus and independence are my strengths and weaknesses. -- I/O
C6 To author of article: Can you give an example of how INFP could be "cornered or corralled" and thus forced to become 'reactionary' (mobilized?) in his life (referring to line: "INFp, INTp, ISFp, and ISTp tend to be described as observers who try to avoid stress but are very reactionary if cornered or corralled.") -- Anonymous
C7 C6, IXXp have a tendency to react in a knee-jerk fashion to unexpected or unwanted realities. They seem to become immediately evasive or defensive (sometimes angry or confrontational, often wanting to flee) when they are being forced to do something they do not want to do, or are caught in a lie, or are being shown to be wrong or incompetent. They're not the types to deliberately start something but I've observed them strutting and or pouncing when they've gained the upper hand. -- I/O
C8 Because temperaments (Ej, Ep, Ij, and Ip) are independent of preferences (N, S, F and T), then the strengths of the preferences have no bearing on which preference leads the cognitive control system. Thus, one can deduct how sub-types evolve. For example, suppose an Ej temperament has a F-to-T ratio {calculated F/(F+T)} of 55%, meaning the tendency toward using F-output processes is weak, and suppose the S-to-N ratio {calculated S/(S+N)} is 95%, meaning the tendency toward S-input is very strong then one could see how a Se-ESFj subtype could evolve. In this case, rationalization would be weakly dominated by F-processes (with a huge mix of T-processes) while input would be dominated mostly by S-information so determining a distinction between being an ESTj or an ESFj would be difficult. It follows that one could definitely be an Ej-temperament but near the fence with respect to all preferences; the one on the fence, although unlikely, would be the true EXXj. -- I/O
C9 Note a typo in C8: Se-ESFJ was supposed to be Fe-ESFj. Arbitrarily, the labelling indicates a weakness in Fe rather than having the labelling point out the Si strength. -- I/O
C10 I/O: Might you elaborate on how taking on new situations for IXXp temperaments would work? To use a specific analogy, how would an IXXp writer best face writing in a new, unfamiliar genre? Could he set new baselines for himself by reading ("inputting") other novels in similar genres - or should he also practice dabbling in writing ("outputting") words? -- Anonymous
C11 The IXXp compare everything and everybody to internalized references - their knowledge bases. One may think of them as introverts because they prefer input, but they do need interactive engagement (with others and or things) in order to be productive. They need to touch, debate and or spar with subjects, colleagues and or confidants. To change genre, they would need to expand their circles of exposure and acquaintances. Input (this could be reading) is natural for them but output (say writing a novel) would not, especially if the task required long periods of isolation. They seem to like immediate results upon which they can get feedback (from someone?); writing short dense pieces such as commentaries or poetry would be easier for them. I know an INFp who dislikes reading, writing and anything else considered boring but can spend hours drawing, an interactive activity that woud be considered boring for other IXXp. You would need to talk with others of your own particular type in your field about specific strategies. -- I/O
Page 1
Would you like to add anything?
(When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)

Name: (leave blank for "Anonymous")