Socion Archive

16-Component Model of the TIM and the Socion

8 min read

16-COMPONENT MODEL OF THE TIM AND THE SOCION

© 1996 Bukalov A. V.

Socionics, Mentology and Personality Psychology — International Institute of Socionics

Abstract. A 16-component model of the type of information metabolism is examined, one which permits a fuller description of subtype formation, the behaviour of types at differing psychological distances, the differences between the rings of social progress, and so forth. A 4-dimensional 16-component model of the socion is also considered.

Keywords: socionics, 16-component model of the type, socion, typology, rings of social progress.

The base model of the IM type in socionics is the 8-component model proposed by A. Augustinavičiūtė (Model A) [1]. The introduction of signs into the model (V. V. Gulenko1, [2]) refined the understanding of the functions, which differ somewhat in semantics, particularly the leading functions of Kindred types. The model nevertheless remained 8-component, which somewhat narrows its capabilities.

The 8-component model can naturally be represented as a 3-dimensional cube (fig. 1). Taking the sign of the function into account “stratifies” the model (fig. 2). In the resulting 16-component model (Model B [3]) there arise a principal 8-component component and a shadow 8-component one. The direction of information movement in the principal and shadow models is predominantly opposite. The appearance of an additional dimension in Model A, represented as a 3-dimensional cube, converts it into a 4-dimensional one, and accordingly Model B may be represented as a 4-dimensional cube with 16 vertices, each of which corresponds to an aspect and a function of information metabolism (fig. 3).

Such a model explains where a person of any type obtains the psycho-informational resources for responding in various situations, including extreme ones. Thus, we have repeatedly observed that in a situation of adapting to an interlocutor or partner, people unconsciously adjust themselves “to the interlocutor’s dual,” manifesting aspects of dual behaviour. This is readily explained by the fact that, under Model B, dual aspects are joined, and acting upon one of them leads to the activation and manifestation of the other. The phenomenon of subtype formation in childhood is explained analogously. Depending on the types of the parents, subtypes are predominantly fixed in a child which are dual or identical to the parents’ types. When an adult finds themselves in a situation whose informational impact is close to the informational impact of the parents or caregivers, the manifestation of the corresponding subtype is “launched” in them. This manifestation often has a reflexive character, in the form of a known behavioural programme being triggered, which may respond even to an insignificant stimulus (a word, an emotion, etc.). In such a case the inadequate behaviour of an adult is especially noticeable to those around them, who do not understand why he behaves so in what seems an ordinary situation.

Furthermore, the shadow ring of the EGO block permits a person to play the role of the Kindred type in certain situations, thereby protecting the fourth, vulnerable function.

Above we considered the abstract Model B in the form of a 4-dimensional cube (fig. 3). But since the type of information metabolism, which reflects the structure of the human mental body, is five-dimensional, the four-dimensional model considered above is only one of the possible four-dimensional constructions — projections of a more complex, five-dimensional construct. Thus, in the three-dimensional world perceived by the human sense organs, a 4-dimensional cube (its 3-dimensional projection) may look different (fig. 4). Correspondingly, our model in the form of a cube acquires a structure consisting of an inner and an outer layer, reflecting the difference in the behaviour of a type at far and close psychological distance.

A similar difference was noted by S. Filimonov [4], who introduced the notions of the outer and inner circle of communication of the IM type, and also by V. Gulenko [5], who examined the differences between the right and left rings of social progress: the right are softer in social communication, at far psychological distances, but harsher in personal communication; the left, in turn, are soft at close psychological distances and harsher and more uncompromising at far, social psychological distance. These features are well described by the 16-component model, in which the outer contour of the model in types of the right ring of social progress (▲□ and others) contains, in the EGO block, the leading function with the + sign and the functions of the principal model subordinate to it. The same function with the − sign and the subordinate functions of the shadow model are contained in the inner contour of the model. In types of the left ring of social progress (□▲ and others) the negative principal functions are located in the outer contour, and the positive ones in the inner. This is precisely what determines the difference in a person’s behaviour as an IM type at differing psychological distances, and the difference in the behaviour of the right and the left.

Let us note also that the model presupposes the possibility of a larger number of subtypes forming in one person, both fixed and dynamic, situational. This follows from the fact that the informational capacity, or power, of the IM functions and IM blocks is far greater than the informational volume of the concrete situation which evokes the formation of a subtype as a reaction of the consciousness governing the functions of the model. To this should be added the principle of superposition of subtypes, which follows from the quantum properties of consciousness and of the IM model [6].

By virtue of the principle of fractality, the proposed model also permits a description of the socion, which may likewise be represented as a 4-dimensional cube. This nicely illustrates the oppositeness of the movement of informational flows in the right and left rings of social progress. Such a construction also reflects the relation between the informational volumes of the right and the left. The right operate with a greater informational volume; they are more inert and consistent, forming the evolutionary ring of social progress. The left operate with a smaller informational volume (but a greater energetic one); they are more reactive, less consistent and less stable with respect to a destabilising situation, more inclined toward extreme actions or deeds (the involutionary, or revolutionary, ring of social progress). As one consequence, the smaller informational volume of the left, together with their location in the inner contour of the socion, looks like “egocentrism” in comparison with the “collectivism” of the types of the right ring. The right, in their turn, by virtue of their smaller energetic volume, are inclined to conserve energy, effort and resources, expending them only as necessity requires.

At the level of ethnosocionics this is clearly visible in comparing, for example, Great Britain (integral type ■○ (ESTJ, LSE) — right ring of social progress) and the USA (integral type ■△ (ENTJ, LIE) — left ring of social progress). If the style of Great Britain is conservatism, moderation and gradualness, then that of the USA is an extremely active style of activity, egocentric in its essence (“America for the Americans”), consuming a far greater quantity of resources and energy per head of population than most countries of the world. At the same time the requisite informational volume is maintained by the “brain drain” from all the countries of the world into the USA, since the ethnos’s own informational volume (unlike its energy-material volume), if left to itself, has a tendency to diminish. In the countries of the right ring of social progress the situation is the reverse: self-sufficiency of informational volume and a tendency toward contraction of the energy-material volume, which is compensated by the functioning of an open economic system.

An analogous situation obtains in Ukraine, which, being self-sufficient in informational terms, exhibits a tendency toward the collapse of its energetic volume in the form of a protracted economic crisis, aggravated by the closedness of the economy.

References

  1. Augustinavičiūtė A. The Socion. — journal Socionics, Mentology and Personality Psychology, nos. 4–5, 1996.
  2. Gulenko V. V. Management of a Well-Coordinated Team. — Novosibirsk, RIPEL, 1995.
  3. Bukalov A. V. The 16-Component Model of the TIM and the Socion. — Paper delivered at the 3rd All-Union Conference on Socionics, Palanga, 1990.
  4. Filimonov S. V. On the Outer and Inner Circle of Communication. — 1993.
  5. Gulenko V. V. On the Difference Between the Left and Right Rings of Social Progress. — Paper delivered at a seminar at KGDU, 1996.
  6. Bukalov A. V. The Interaction of the Functions of Information Metabolism and Quantum-Mechanical Analogies. — journal Socionics, Mentology and Personality Psychology, no. 3, 1995.

Figures (not reproducible from the text layer):

  • Fig. 1 — Model A as a 3-dimensional cube, vertices marked with the eight IM aspect symbols.
  • Fig. 2 — the sign-stratified cube: each aspect symbol appears twice, with + and − superscripts, as an inner and outer square joined by dashed edges.
  • Fig. 3 — the 4-dimensional cube (tesseract) with 16 vertices, one per signed aspect. (Page 3 of the original carries this figure alone.)
  • Fig. 4 — an alternative 3-dimensional projection of the tesseract, showing the nested inner/outer layer structure.

Footnotes

  1. Let us note also that the sign of a function is a phenomenon arising from the joining of pairs of functions in the EGO, SUPEREGO, SUPERID and ID blocks. Thus, for example, intuition joined with logic differs from intuition joined with ethics. ↩

Graph View

Backlinks