Chapter 20
Instead of a Conclusion. SOCIONICS AS METHODOLOGY
Scientific methodology is a system of logical and heuristic means by which a scientist processes empirical data and forms a theory of the object of his research.
That socionics possesses methodological potential with respect to a number of humanities disciplines became clear once its concepts began to be used effectively in sociologists’ recommendations to victims of the Chernobyl disaster, in the formation of working groups in business and in cosmonautics, in literary studies for the analysis of works of fiction, and in other subject areas — engineering, for example! There remains, however, the question of how universal the methodological potential of socionics is, and what the limits of its methodological competence are.
From its emergence around 1968, socionics was never integrated into the official science of the Soviet Union. Soviet ideology rejected Jung as an “accomplice” of the Nazis, and his works could be obtained from the library’s restricted holdings only by special permission, granted to those who directed their efforts at the struggle against “bourgeois ideology.” One could be given a prison term for reading Jung without authorisation. Yet people did possess Jung’s principal work for our purposes, Psychological Types, and through acquaintances and in deep secrecy it could be obtained. One way or another, around 1975 I managed to read this book. Jung’s typology made a strong impression on me, above all by its logic and persuasiveness. I had managed to read Freud earlier, but his ideas were oriented towards the clinic rather than towards normal everyday use, and in this they lost out. Although for us — “pre-perestroika people” — both were fresh and exciting. I enthusiastically retold to my acquaintances whatever I had managed to absorb from these two great psychologists; but now, knowing socionics and everything one can possibly know about typologies and contemporary psychology, I realise how much naivety there was in those accounts.
In 1986 Aushra Augustinavichute came to Kyiv for the second time at the invitation of progressive Kyiv psychologists (above all S. A. Bakhtiyarova), and I was lucky enough to get to a meeting with her. Aushra’s lectures revolutionised my conceptions of human typology. That revolution had, admittedly, already been prepared by my acquaintance with the works of Freud and Jung.
Soon “perestroika” began, the harsh ideological control over “reliability” was lifted, and we began to acquaint ourselves with world achievements in psychology. It “turned out” that Jungian typology — or rather, a typology based on Jung’s ideas — was widely disseminated in America; but by then, knowing socionics, we could see its deficiencies clearly. And despite the fact that official psychology gradually began to acknowledge Jung and even to take his position into account in his opposition to Freud, it refused to accept and recognise socionics as an independent and fully-fledged typological development, although the connection with and continuity from Jung are obvious here. This can be explained in part by the fact that a struggle of scientific schools exists in science; but the deeper cause is that the bearers of the official scientific paradigm consciously or subconsciously sense that socionics has a different methodological foundation, and for them that is a “limit thou shalt not pass.” Not the least role here is played by the deep bureaucratic corruption of post-Soviet science both in Russia and, especially, in the countries of the “near abroad.” In Ukraine the corrupt falsification of science has flowered luxuriantly, since it has now become altogether easy to acquire any dissertations and academic titles for money and through connections. This still does not mean that among the dissertations bought for money there are no real scientific achievements — it is simply that without a bribe they would not have been passed.
A somewhat contradictory situation arises: socionics in its constructions makes wide use of the methods of other sciences — systems theory (V. Yermak), structural combinatorics (V. Gulenko), geometrical configurations (G. Shulman, S. Churyumov and others), thermodynamic and quantum-mechanical analogies (Aushra Augustinavichute, A. Bukalov) and so on — and thereby demonstrates its methodological tolerance; yet other sciences, and above all psychology, deny socionics scientific status. Apparently the representatives of other sciences subconsciously feel that, in recognising socionics, they would also have to recognise the methodology standing behind it, and that might entail the necessity of revising many settled conceptions.
And although at the level of the subconscious such fears undoubtedly have the force of a categorical imperative, at the level of common sense they are infantile in character. The methodology underlying socionics has just as much right to exist as any other.
The Search for Invariants and Symmetry
In classical mechanics, as in quantum mechanics, the following assertion holds: if a certain state is possible, then the mirror reflection of that state is also possible. This assertion is a priori, since it follows from the properties of the corresponding mathematical equations and not from physical experiments. A priori valid conclusions can also be drawn from other mathematical truths. For example, if a set of objects, phenomena or processes is discovered in reality which can be evaluated as an algebraic group, then one should expect from that set a phenomenology following from the properties of the corresponding group. This phenomenology may turn out to be extremely generalised, but it exists, and its existence follows from the properties of the mathematical category corresponding to it. In elementary particle physics, at any rate, this principle works. The discoveries of socionics allow us to suppose that this principle manifests itself in psychology, biology, sociology and other humanities. Incidentally, this principle can serve as the theoretical foundation of methodological structuralism.
Therefore, if energo-informational fields (or several fields) connected with the psyche exist, and if within them there are objects forming an algebraic group or some other mathematical structure, then from the totality of those objects one may expect a phenomenology following from the properties of the corresponding mathematical structure. And this means that substantial conclusions about such structures could be obtained as the result of calculations. It was in precisely this way that Aushra obtained the primary descriptions of the ARP.[1]
Between the structures of the TIMs there is the symmetry of the rotation group of the cube and its mirror reflections. Therefore, in particular, A. Afanasyev’s constructions in his Syntax of Love (see the chapter on the inevitability of methodology), unquestionably beautiful but not corresponding to the group transformations, may be assessed as a specific distortion of the truth — in essence they represent a poeticised profanation of socionic constructions. Their effectiveness (but not their truth!) is explained in the same way as the effectiveness of such constructions as the MMPI and Leonhard’s accentuations: by the overlapping of the semantic fields of the individual categories. The ten categories of the MMPI, and following it of the SMIL, prove sufficient for assessing psychic states, giving recommendations and predicting changes in the personal space only because their semantic fields — which the ARP (the Augustinavichute–Reinin traits) structure in more detail — cover the entire semantic field of the TIMs. In Afanasyev’s case, besides the overlapping of the semantic fields of the categories, a degenerate variant of the principle of fractality must also be taken into account: it is expressed in the fact that the distribution of functional accentuations within the structure of a TIM may be any whatsoever, while at the same time those variants which correspond to the group of cubic rotations and mirror reflections will be real, that is, will manifest themselves in the characters of particular people.
The Principle of Fractality
This principle was proposed by A. V. Bukalov as an explanatory basis for the fact that structurally similar formations exist which thematically pertain to the psyche, to psychology and to sociology. Some aspects of this principle were examined in the chapter on diversity within the TIM.
Let us consider the principle of fractality (PF) in more detail. This principle manifests itself in the structural similarity of the whole and its parts. Another expression of it is the hierarchy of homologous structures. The principle is widely used in various spiritual teachings of the East. It can also be discovered in the Christian religion’s assertion that God created man in His own image and likeness. Yet, strange as it may seem, European science before the 21st century was unable to formulate and trace this principle clearly either in biology, say, or in such humanities disciplines as psychology and sociology.
In Chinese medicine, however, it has long been known that the human body as a whole is projected onto its separate parts — onto the palms of the hands, onto the soles of the feet, onto the auricle of the ear, onto the iris of the eye (see Figs. 20.01, 20.02, 20.03) — which is precisely a manifestation of this universal principle in anatomical physiology. European medicine has the notion of the Zakharyin–Head reflex-projection zones, but this result is regarded as no more than an empirical observation — interesting, practically useful, but not rising to the level of a universal principle. In Chinese medicine, by contrast, the fractal character of the structures of the human body is traced at all levels of biological organisation. Not only is the whole body projected onto the palm or the sole, but it is further projected onto each finger, so that, for example, the terminal phalanx of each finger corresponds to the head.
The Chinese discovered energy meridians on the human body, the whole set of which represents a fractal substructure of the human organism. Each meridian corresponds to a definite anatomical and physiological system. Accordingly, there are meridians of the heart, the lungs, the liver and so on. But, entirely in accordance with the principle of fractality, on each meridian both all the organs and all the meridians are represented.
Fig. 20.01. The human body is a superposition of several fractal bodies: skeletal (1), muscular (2), vascular (3), nervous (4), endocrine and others, including the meridian-energetic (5).
Fig. 20.02. Fractality manifests itself in the structural similarity (homology) of subsystems of different levels. Projection of the human body onto the face (1) and onto the motor zone of the brain (2).
Fig. 20.03. The representation of some structures of the human body within others. Projection of the human body onto the iris of the eye (1), onto the auricle (2), onto the palm (3), onto the sole (4).
A professional can say a great deal about a person’s character from his face or even from his hand. This may be understood in the sense that a person’s physical fractals stand in correlational accord with his psychic fractals. Unfortunately, no scientific physiognomy or scientific chiromancy has been created to this day, although specialists in these fields have accumulated a great quantity of valuable empirical material.
Genetics has at present advanced far in the cognition of man. One of its conclusions amounts to the claim that all the structures of the human organism are represented in the molecular structures of the deoxyribonucleic acids of which the chromosomes consist. There are still many unresolved questions in genetics, but proceeding from the principle of fractality one may say that it deals with the molecular fractal of the human being.
Given the reality of the manifestations of fractality in anatomy and physiology, it is natural to suppose the existence of fractality in psychic, psychological and social structures. Socionics for the first time provides sufficient grounds for seeing and substantiating fractality in these structures.
Fig. 20.04 presents a schematic depiction of the socion in the form of a closed square configuration, which represents it as a closed structure reflecting the informational-metabolic continuity of the quadras composing the socion.
Looking at Fig. 20.04, one may arrive at the thought of an internal symmetry of the socion. But what kind of symmetry is it? It certainly does not belong to the class of well-known symmetries such as axial or central symmetry. There are other frequently encountered symmetries, but their names are not so widely known — these are compatible-equal symmetry, or metamery, corresponding to the “coordinate” arrangement of floor tiles; and antisymmetry, where two figures are mirror-symmetrical but, for example, coloured in opposite colours. But there exist symmetries which few besides mathematicians would recognise as such. To this class belong all the functional symmetries defined by arbitrary mathematical functions. After all, the literal translation of the word symmetry is co-measurement. Among the functional symmetries there is a subset of screw (helical) symmetries. They are distinguished by the fact that the elements of the initial set, along with a rotation through some angle, are additionally subjected to some further transformation. Considering the configuration of the socion given above, I came to the conclusion that it may, at least conditionally, be called a screw antisymmetry. The antisymmetry manifests itself here in the fact that the TIMs located opposite one another in this configuration are opposites. In their EGO formula there stand the same functions, but of opposite vertness.
α Il sE Es lI β
eI Ei
Ls lS
sL Sl
Ie iE
δ iL Se eS Li γ
Fig. 20.04. The structure of the socion presented in the form of a square configuration.
In this configuration the initial foursome is rotated through 90°, and in doing so each of its elements is regularly transformed into a new element of the rotated foursome. However, after the fourth transformation we return to the initial position. Of course, in ordinary screw motion this does not happen — you do not return to the initial position, but you find yourself exactly above it. Nevertheless, if the vertical component of the screw transformation is replaced by a transformation of the elements, then we obtain a screw transformation in which a return to the initial position is possible. The subtlety here, however, is that although we have returned to the initial position of the initial elements, the elements themselves, while apparently remaining the same, have nonetheless changed internally, since they contain within themselves the history of their transformation. Of course, purely mathematically this is not difficult to describe, but it is still interesting that the socion possesses such a not entirely ordinary, though fairly simple, symmetry.
Incidentally, in examining the square configuration presented above one may notice in it a manifestation of the principle of fractality: the socion divides into four quadras, each of which in turn divides into four TIMs. But let us not forget that each TIM constitutes a system consisting of four functional blocks. And, as was shown in the chapter on modelling the psyche, a further internal structural articulation of the functions is also possible.
One of the subtler manifestations of the PF is that functions can work in different thematic regimes. These regimes may be designated as generalised worldview schemas. I first heard of this — in a different terminology, admittedly — in 1987 from I. N. Kalinauskas, a remarkable director, psychologist and true Master. I personally consider him my Teacher, regardless of whether he considers me his pupil. In group trainings he used the concept of temporhythm, with which I was familiar from the works of K. S. Stanislavsky. However, what Kalinauskas proposed differed both structurally and substantively from what Stanislavsky worked with.
Temporhythm is probably a very correct and precise term, but Kalinauskas’s temporhythms may also be called generalised worldview forms. What is meant is four generalised characteristics of the perception of the external environment: 1) perception of the environment as a wholeness; 2) perception of the environment as a living and magical connectedness; 3) perception of the environment as a rigidly determined machine; 4) perception of the environment as a disintegrating and degrading chaos. Kalinauskas called these generalised forms, respectively, rhythm A, rhythm B, rhythm C and rhythm D. I first heard these categories in 1987 from Kalinauskas and associate them with his name. Of course, this foursome forms a rhythmic, or generalised-worldview, fractal.
As observations within the socionic paradigm show, the generalised psychic functions tune themselves to the perception of the world in accordance with one of the four forms indicated. It appears that such tuning may arise both as a result of upbringing or education and as a result of the uncritical assimilation of programmes circulating in society. Of course, this requires deep study.
It is clear that if this rhythmic fractal is superimposed on the functional field of the psyche, the possibilities for describing human phenomenology increase significantly. This fractal may also be called generalised-worldview, since it sets the most general contours of the personality’s relation to the world. It is plausible that this fractal is not innate.
Closely related subject matter was developed by the remarkable researcher of depth psychology E. Litrovnik. He too speaks of four rhythms A, B, C and D, which may be linked with the work of each of the functions, but he invests them with a somewhat different sense. Rhythm A, according to Litrovnik, is roughly like the vision of an object from two or three sides, something like a three-dimensional drawing. Rhythm B is like a linear scale: more–less, drier–wetter, sweeter–sourer, and so on. Rhythm C is something like two-dimensional graphics: one can take into account branchings, intersections, limitations by area. Rhythm D he calls variable volume. It is not easy to understand what this means, but from his explanations it becomes clear that it resembles the ability to foresee non-obvious consequences. What is important is that, according to Litrovnik, each function, independently of the others, can work in one of these rhythms, which affects its specific productivity. This is a good theme for experimental research.
A. V. Bukalov approaches the problem of the differing productivity of the functions somewhat differently. He sees the solution to this problem in the fact that functions have different dimensionality: from 1 to 4. Moreover, according to Bukalov, dimensionality is rigidly attached to each function: the first and seventh functions (numbering after Gulenko) are four-dimensional, the second and eighth three-dimensional, the third and sixth two-dimensional, and the fourth and fifth one-dimensional. A four-dimensional function works at the level of clairvoyance, when the subject moves freely in the conceptual space of the object. A three-dimensional function makes it possible to manipulate the object freely, adapting it to current needs. A two-dimensional function allows one to distinguish certain parameters of the object quite confidently. A one-dimensional function works in a regime of rejection, non-acceptance, avoidance, denial of the object’s subject matter, or of distancing from it. A. V. Bukalov also has a more detailed explication of the concept of dimensionality. He holds that a four-dimensional function processes the information flow by the parameters of time, situations, norms and selfhood. A three-dimensional function deals only with the last three parameters. A two-dimensional function deals only with norms and selfhood, and a one-dimensional one only with selfhood. It is interesting to consider how an experiment might be set up to verify the reality of these concepts.
On closer examination of the three proposed interpretations of functional modalities, one can see that their semantic fields have substantial intersections. In all three cases we see a hierarchy of functions by the criterion of the coverage of the object’s semantics. The differences concern the details of how this coverage is accomplished. What has been said gives grounds for supposing that behind the three approaches considered to the assessment of the productivity of the functions there stands one and the same archetype. However, none of the explanations cited relies on the intrinsic nature of the socionic functions; each imposes on the function some external schema — which is entirely justified empirically, since quantitative differences in the work of the functions are indeed observed.
Let us try to assess the quantitative differences in the work of the functions as a function of their positional semantics. As was shown earlier, positional semantics is determined by the IA standing in the corresponding function in the model of Don Quixote, for whom, by virtue of the peculiarities of his model, the positional and aspectual symbols coincide. And since the positional semantics is the same for all types, all the features of the functions that depend on their position are identical for all types. Let us recall that the positional semantics of the PPF and the IVF is determined by I\i, that of the KZF and the RTF by L\l, that of the ANF and the ERF by S\s, and that of the KKF and the MMF by E\e.[2] Proceeding from this, let us assess the generalised quantitative productivity of the functions.
I\i — intuitive penetration into the essence of the object, deep understanding of its potential, free expansion of adjacent subject matter, the generation of enriched and improved images corresponding to the subject matter of the function’s IA.
L\l — logical elaboration, technological execution, structuring of the object.
S\s — sensory perception, registration of the actual state of affairs, examination of the object from different sides.
E\e — emotional reaction, fixation of an attitude depending on the subjective set.
In these explications one can see gradations in the degree of freedom with which the function handles its material. Of course, quantitative productivity should not be confused here with the possible diversity of object forms within the framework of one or another IA. And nevertheless intuition, operating in the ideal plane, is presumably the freest in creating ideas, images and projects. Logic and technology are more limited, since they process an already given object or materialise a concrete variant of it; however, they are free in structural combinatorics. Sensorics merely perceives, registers or resists the object at hand, but it is nevertheless free to observe it from various points of view and in various modalities. As for emotionality, being limited by internal subjective sets, it merely reacts to the object or situation on the pattern acceptable–unacceptable. Thus, by the criterion of quantitative productivity, the IAs are arranged in the following order: I\i > L\l > S\s > E\e. If this is so, then the differing quantitative productivity of the functions observed in practice becomes comprehensible and socionically grounded. Of course, all the reasoning given above stands in need of deeper research, but as an initial position it is entirely plausible.
In what follows we shall return several more times to fractal phenomenology in the human being. E. Donchenko and Yu. Romanenko make interesting use of the concept of the fractal in their book [18]. This is valuable evidence that representatives of official science are seeking approaches to the use of fundamental principles.
If the principle of fractality is confirmed experimentally, it will be possible to assert that a human being constitutes a system of mutually interconnected anatomical, physiological, energetic, psychic, psychological, role-related and other socially conditioned fractals. Works on the semantics of bodily postures, facial expressions and gestures (Allan Pease and others) give grounds for regarding the corresponding communicative fractal as really existing; its presence makes it possible to diagnose a whole range of second-order factors.
Quantum-Mechanical Analogies and the Field Paradigm
Speaking of quantum-mechanical analogies: is it permissible in psychology to use concepts borrowed from other sciences? Well, presumably at the level of analogy or metaphor there is no sedition in this. However, I think that in the case of thermodynamic and quantum-mechanical concepts the matter stands more subtly and more fundamentally. Unfortunately, science has to date gathered too little empirical material concerning the energetic substrate of the psyche. Science has yet to discover this substrate, and here great tasks face the experimenters. Therefore at present it cannot be demonstratively asserted that psychic processes have precisely a quantum-mechanical character. But to suppose this and to develop the corresponding theoretical conceptions is entirely permissible, since the integral experience of humanity does not contradict such conceptions.
If we allow that at the basis of psychic processes there lies a certain energo-informational field (Volkov), then much in the psyche and in psychology receives a full-fledged grounding. In particular, the qualitative thermodynamic reasoning partly used by Aushra Augustinavichute in her attempt to substantiate Model “A” acquires sense. The hypothesis of an energo-informational field sheds light on the possibility of dichotomous quantisation, that is, of the polarisation of parts of the energo-informational substrate, in which the well-known qualities, processes and states of psychology are counterposed to one another. Psychology has accumulated a truly extensive body of material which literally begs for a quantum-mechanical and thermodynamic explanation. Incidentally, R. Wilson’s book Quantum Psychology, which appeared in 1998, contains almost nothing “quantum” in it, and its title is no more than a play on words — although the book itself, irrespective of the idea of the quantisation of energo-informational fields, entirely deserves attention and contains valuable information for the education of the young. The theoretical challenge contained in the energetic component of the brain’s work, with its alpha, beta, theta and other waves, so far remains without a “quantum” answer. Nor are there qualitative theoretical generalisations for such a striking empirical phenomenon as the Chinese meridians. And what about the polar states of consciousness (sleep–waking), the change of moods (joy–sorrow), the polarity of the psychic functions (sensorics–intuition, thinking–feeling), the polarities of temperaments, the polarities of personality characteristics — and what else besides might be found in psychology where polar structures declare themselves openly. The theme of polar structures is encountered in the works of many psychologists, but one of its best presentations can be seen in V. Levi’s bestseller The Art of Being Yourself, in the chapter on the pendulums within us; in V. Petukhov’s dissertation; and in the remarkable book by S. Bakhtiyarova [13], where the polar transitions of different psychic and psychological modalities are investigated.
In Western psychology such structures are partly given shape by structuralist approaches, but these are no more than conceptual packaging, not fundamental solutions. So, gentlemen experimenters, the matter rests with you! Prove the existence of energo-informational fields, or at least of something analogous — it is not obligatory to keep the name — and psychology will reach fundamentally new frontiers.
The reasoning given above is also applicable to what may be called fractal quantisation — the formation of psychological structures nested within one another many times over. But of course fractal quantisation is by no means limited to psychology; it permeates all the processes, phenomena and conglomerates of the cosmos. Such a phenomenon, if it were proved, could explain not only the formation of the polar-symmetrical structure of the psyche, but also many social processes and objects.
The Methodological Potential of Socionics
Socionics is new knowledge, and it is natural that people should try to find ever new applications for this knowledge. This process is analogous to aromorphosis in the evolution of biological species and technical systems, but the range of adequacy in the application of new knowledge here may be very wide: from deep, essential, heuristic elaborations with an effective output into practice, into everyday life and activity, down to superficial metaphors possessing at best only aesthetic value, and at worst creating new delusions.
Simply postulating the possibility of applying socionics in some field of knowledge or activity at the level of “brilliant guesses” is, at the present stage of this science’s development, no longer sufficient. What is required is research, proofs, comparative analysis of facts and similar scientific processing of the material of the corresponding field. Such work is being actively conducted by the staff of the International Institute of Socionics. As an example I shall cite just one work by the IIS staff, the Kyiv socionists O. G. Lemeshev and Yu. V. Lemesheva, “Notes on the Danger of Radioactive Damage,” in which socionic methodology connected with pattern recognition is applied to such a concrete phenomenon as radioactive danger. As a result of socionic analysis, what happened at Chernobyl was recognised as an object characterised by intuitive-ethical introversion. And this is sufficient grounds for giving socionic recommendations to the relevant services and to the victims.
That socionics is becoming a powerful methodological instrument in the study of social phenomena can be seen from the remarkable articles by A. V. Bukalov and his colleagues [3, 8, 9, 10, 11 and others]. Article [3] gives examples of the predictive power of socionic methods, which make it possible to forecast, for instance, the development of political events with high accuracy.
Socionics is used as a methodology for solving psychological problems and problems of information processing, in sociological research, for analysis and recommendations in business and economics, in history, ethnography, pedagogy, medicine, linguistics, in literary, artistic, musical and other kinds of creative work, and in the analysis of religious, ideological and philosophical problems. Such a list would do honour to any science, but alas, neither philosophy, nor psychology, nor any other humanities discipline has so wide a range.
One may also assert that socionics can itself act as a methodology. This means that its propositions may become normative in social, historical, literary, linguistic, psychological and other research, as is clearly seen in the example of the works of scholars who profess socionics: A. V. Bukalov (the law of quadra succession in history and politics), V. V. Gulenko (the fine structure of evolutionary processes and group management), A. V. Prokhorova (analysis of the relations of characters in literary works, linguistic analysis of texts), and others.
The extraction of the methodological paradigm underlying socionics leads to strikingly simple and convincing initial assertions. The fundamental concept of the methodological paradigm of socionics is the notion of information metabolism, which may be decomposed into the notion of information and that of metabolism (exchange). The next axiomatic level is the repeated dichotomy of the information flow, which leads to a simple categorial basis satisfying the requirements of completeness, independence, consistency and minimality. Since the plausibility of this basis has a natural and obvious character, the theoretical constructions founded upon it are distinguished by high persuasiveness and can unquestionably be used for practical social technologies.
Let us consider in somewhat more detail the arguments in favour of the plausibility of the methodological basis of socionics. First of all, the very concept of plausibility. This is the only thing to which a scientific theory can lay claim in the modern world. To prove the absolute character of one’s theoretical constructions, as two and a half millennia of the development of European philosophy and science have shown, is beyond anyone. Plausibility, for its part, is ensured by the presence of several factors. Above all it has an intuitive character — the scientist intuitively trusts, believes in, or inclines towards accepting certain assertions, constructions, hypotheses. But intuition must have sufficient grounds. Science has so far not formulated a criterion for what makes grounds sufficient: the same facts, assertions and suppositions may prove convincing for one person and not for another.
Only the entire totality of methodological factors makes plausibility well-founded. Experiment (the sensory factor), the internal connectedness of theoretical constructions (the logical factor), the external consistency of the material (the ethical factor) — all of this is necessary; but in any case the last word in the recognition of plausibility and its degree remains with intuition.
How, then, do the assertions of socionics look from this point of view? The fundamental significance of information metabolism — that is, the high degree to which personal phenomenology and social processes are determined by the peculiarities of the circulation of information in society and in the human psyche — is becoming ever more obvious, and correspondingly ever more plausible, to the majority of scholars working in the humanities. This leads, in particular, to an increase in the number of articles and papers in which questions connected with the role of information in psychological and social processes are raised to one degree or another, although such works often do not presuppose a knowledge of socionics. In such cases one may speak of a spontaneous rediscovery of what has already been discovered in socionics. Alas, such rediscoveries often have an intuitive-hypothetical character and do not rise to the level of full-fledged theoretical constructs.
The conception of information flows introduced in socionics can be convincingly presented in deductive form (see the chapter on the semantics of information aspects), and this, at least on the logical side, removes the problem of the completeness and consistency of the set of IAs. In any case this theme deserves full-fledged academic discussion rather than the silencing to which socionics is subjected in official science.
If, even simply on the basis of intuitive plausibility, one adds the axiomatic conception of eight functions which, depending on the TIM, may be linked with different information aspects, then the axiomatic basis of socionics may be considered complete. Of course, this is not obligatory. Theorists may, if they wish, work on this more thoroughly. Thanks to the simplicity of its axiomatic basis, socionics is capable of drawing conclusions distinguished by high universality. In particular, socionics makes it possible to give a complete classification of all the methods used in science.
In accordance with the socionic paradigm, all methods used in science and technology may be divided into intuitive, logical, sensory and ethical. Their extraverted and introverted variants may then be added. Possible combinations of these basic components must also be taken into account. Such a classification, entirely natural for socionics, may prove unfamiliar from the point of view of the paradigm established in science and technology. In that paradigm only sensory (observation, experiment, etc.) and logical (classification, deduction, proof, etc.) methods have their lawful place. Intuitive methods (induction, discovery, insight, invention and others), although they constitute the very essence of scientific creativity, are still marginal in character, since they yield with difficulty to logical description, and have only recently become an object of close attention from psychologists. As for ethical methods, such a combination of concepts may not be perceived at all. Generally speaking, ethics in science is spoken of, but as a kind of general moral requirement — that it would be right, that it would not be bad, to adhere to ethical norms in science; yet such a wish is far from corresponding to the real state of affairs. Socionics explains this by the fact that the TIM — the code — of science is intuitive-logical extraversion (ILE), which means that in its socionic model ethics is in a weak position. And from this, to put it mildly, follows the modest position of ethics in science.
Rhythmic Laws
The various entities which appear from time to time in our world, having different terms of existence, display different evolutionary phenomenology. But common to all evolutionary processes are at least three elements: emergence, flourishing, extinction. In each concrete case a finer spectrum of phases of development can also be discovered. Different researchers have structured the processes of evolution differently. In K. Marx, for instance, the historical process is structured by the succession of socio-political formations, behind which stands the succession of relations of production, which in turn is determined by gradual changes in the means of production. In accordance with the theory of this remarkable philosopher one may distinguish six such formations: primitive communism, slaveholding, feudalism, capitalism, socialism, scientific communism. If socialism and communism are combined as phases of a single formation characterised by the socialisation of the means of production, five formations remain. One may also combine slaveholding and feudalism, since they can be treated as variants of the mass enslavement of the majority by a social minority, and moreover not all ethnoses had both of these formations. The Eastern Slavs, for example, passed straight from the primitive-communal order to feudalism with the gradual enslavement of some people by others. If these combinations are made, only four formations remain, which correspond entirely to the law of quadra succession proposed by A. V. Bukalov and V. V. Gulenko. If we recall Plato’s theory of the state, there the state structure passes through four phases. These phases are by no means formal, since behind each of them stands a quite definite social mechanism. In the first phase, as Plato held, the state arises as the result of the efforts of sages, and at its foundation stands the power of law. But the state has to be defended, and then the military come to the fore, and the basis of power becomes force. When the state is secure, the accumulation of wealth gradually occurs, and power passes to the plutocrats, that is, to the richest, who have amassed their property by fair means and foul. And when the stratification of society by the criterion of wealth and poverty reaches a certain critical maximum, the people rise up and take power into their own hands — this is what Plato calls democracy. Despite the simplified character of Plato’s schema, it describes the social process quite adequately at the level of almost ultimate theoretical generalisation. From the point of view of socionics, this process fits well into the schema of the law of quadra succession (A. V. Bukalov, V. V. Gulenko). Incidentally, this law accords well with the principle of fractality — the four generalised phases of the evolution of society form an evolutionary fractal.
The first quadra, headed by an intuitive-logical extravert, some sage Don Quixote, puts forward ideas concerning a just ordering of society and, to a first approximation, creates it. In this society an enlightened monarch rules and monarchical liberalism reigns.
But to some it seems that this society is a little dull, and that something more could be achieved. The ideologist of new, spiritual prospects turns out to be an ethical-intuitive extravert, some Hamlet, who paints before the mind’s eye of his supporters astonishing prospects filled with spiritual feats — but for this one must close ranks and, sparing neither one’s own strength nor that of others, march in orderly rows into the struggle for the new ideals and defeat one’s enemies, since “if they do not surrender, they are destroyed.” As a result a harsh dictatorship is established, under which an enormous number of dissenters find themselves under harsh pressure, up to and including dungeons and concentration camps. Many recall the old days when life was easy and free. So what if you paid a tithe — there was everything, and how merrily one lived, how many carnivals there were, and there was something in that for the sake of which it was worth living.
This may go on for a long time, but not for ever. New, pragmatically minded people appear, whom ideological uniformity and collective conformism do not satisfy, and who want individual freedom. And then a logical-intuitive extravert, some Jack London, points out such a possibility. He says that everyone can secure his own well-being himself; one need only try, work tirelessly, discover some Klondike, wash gold there and invest it in some profitable enterprise. Many do just that, and many succeed. But not all. Those who did not succeed now work for those who did. But they too have a chance, because they are free people: if they want, they work for this successful entrepreneur; if they want, for another. In this society individual freedom reigns, everyone is for himself, and nobody cares about anyone else. “What do I care about you all, and you about me,” sings the hero of the film The Last Inch, based on the novel by James Aldridge. Many live for their own pleasure, and many for their own displeasure. Some recall the old days when things were hard but everyone was together, they felt each other’s elbow, there was a goal ahead, and there was something in that for the sake of which it was worth living…
This may go on for a long time, but not for ever. People appear who understand the inhumanity of individual freedom. And then an intuitive-logical extravert,[3] some Huxley or Dostoyevsky, says that one must think not only of oneself but of other people, that people are, in the end, the most important thing in this world. It must be arranged so that all people can live with dignity, not only the most adroit, the most brazen and the most everything. Considerable wealth has been accumulated in society; technologies have been created such that one person can feed a thousand. He simply needs comfortable conditions, a well-arranged service sector, and every kind of entertainment made available, so that work does not seem hellish to him — and this is exactly what the thousand people he feeds will occupy themselves with. It seems that now everything is fine. Everyone is fed, clothed and shod, and there is so much entertainment that it begins to nauseate. Many seek oblivion in narcotics and other forms of comfortable suicide. Many recall the old days when things were hard but everything depended on you, and you felt yourself a human being, you achieved everything with your own hands, and there was something in that for the sake of which it was worth living.
And then an intuitive-logical extravert, some Don Quixote… And it all begins again. This is a very generalised and simplified schema, but on its basis ever more complex and subtle transformations and changes unfold in society. This is one of the first fractal harmonics of any social process.
Humanity has long known of the existence of various rhythmic schemas of development. Attempts have repeatedly been made to formulate universal rhythmic laws. Moreover, a formulation of the law of rhythm is known: everything in the world is subject to a definite rhythm. Such an assertion, however, ought to belong to the category of principles rather than laws. But it is only with the discovery in socionics of elementary informational entities that the possibility appears of sketching the contours of a basic rhythmic law.
A well empirically grounded schema of the evolutionary dynamics of ethnoses was developed by L. Gumilev. This schema, as has been shown in the works of A. V. Bukalov, accords well with the law of quadra succession. The law of quadra succession has a structural-formal character, which ensures its deductive derivability and high universality. This principle is examined in more detail in the works of A. V. Bukalov and V. V. Gulenko.
The Concept of Quantisation
The principle of quantisation may be formulated thus: any entities in this world are the result of the quantisation of a primary field or its derivatives. From this point of view, all polarised structures may be regarded as the result of the dichotomous quantisation of the substrate corresponding to them. In such quantisation the parts, components or layers of the substrate find themselves in a relation of opposition, but the connection between them is not broken. This is a good physical interpretation of the famous dialectical law of the unity of opposites, but it may also be considered its grounding.
What, then, is quantisation? This concept appeared in physics (Bohr) as the basis for explaining the discrete transitions of electrons between energy orbits without the possibility of a continuous transition between them. Subsequently this concept was extended to the mechanisms of the formation of elementary particles within a field. These particles, in another terminology, are regarded as resonances, or vibrational complications, of the initial substrate. Thus it became possible to speak, for example, of the photon as a quantum or resonance of the electromagnetic field. Analogous terminology is applied to other elementary objects as well. Generalising this physical concept and extending it to any natural phenomena, one may define quantisation as the spontaneous or self-generated configuring of a concrete field. It appears that the scenarios of such configuring may be different, and one of the simplest is the dichotomous scenario, in which the primary field substrate is stratified into parts that may be regarded as opposite, as counterposed to one another, or as poles. From the theoretical point of view, what is important is that despite the phenomenological rupture of the parts, they remain parts of a single whole, and the connection between these parts is not broken; but it acquires the character of a specific exchange, whose peculiarities must be determined separately in each subject area.
It is possible that one and the same field substrate is able to be quantised simultaneously according to several scenarios, or to be quantised repeatedly according to one and the same scenario, and also to be quantised in accordance with various combinations of various scenarios — which, incidentally, accords entirely with the principle of fractality. Among other quantisation scenarios one may name, for example, the Fibonacci scenario [15], in which the successive stages of a chain quantum process are related to one another as elements of the Fibonacci series, represented by the sequence of numbers 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8… In this sequence each term, beginning with the third, equals the sum of the two preceding ones. Fibonacci arrived at his series as a result of solving the problem of the breeding of a pair of rabbits, symbolised in this series by the two ones after the zero. Despite the extreme pragmatism of such a problem and its apparent primitiveness, it is in essence a problem about the productive increase of a minimal set under given parameters of growth. It is not difficult to transfer this problem to the problem of the diversity of things and processes in the Cosmos. For this it is enough to pose the question as follows: “If the world is one, then how is the diversity of the things and processes observed in it to be explained?” One of the explanations of this may be precisely that the primary substrate underlying our world possesses the capacity for quantisation, that is, for a specific change of the initial structural configuration, characterised by ultimate simplicity, towards ever more complex forms.
Closely connected with the Fibonacci series is the concept of the “golden section,” whose numerical expression is the limit of the ratio of two successive terms of the Fibonacci series. This ratio tends to the number 1.618…, and this specific constant appears repeatedly in various practical applications connected with productive growth [18]. The theme of the “golden section,” or “golden proportion,” developed out of the simple geometrical problem “of the division of a segment in mean and extreme ratio,” apparently formulated by Euclid. Behind the complicated verbal name of this problem there stands a simple geometrical sense: to find the magnitudes of two adjacent segments a and b whose ratio equals the ratio of their sum to the larger of them. Mathematically this is expressed by the formula a/b = (a+b)/a. By introducing an exponent on the right-hand side, this formula is easily generalised into an infinite series of formulas of productive growth: a/b = ((a+b)/a)^n [18]. This formula allows one to speak of scenarios of the “golden section,” a particular case of which, for n = 1, is examined in the work of Yu. N. Kovalev [16]. It is not hard to see that the limiting scenario in this set, at n = 0, will be precisely dichotomous quantisation, since in this case the primary substrate will be divided in half: a : b = 1, that is, the equality a = b will hold. Of course, here we are dealing with an abstract division into two equal halves; but, as follows from various philosophical considerations, a division into polar, antisymmetrical halves is possible — halves which are equal in their opposition, which preserve their unity through the initial substrate, but which are nonetheless counterposed to one another as qualitatively different opposites. Yet these are opposites whose semantics belongs to a single thematic set. In this sense such polarities are complementary, that is, they complete one another into a single systemic whole.
The general formula of the dichotomous, or polar, scenario is the expression P = 2^n, where the number of poles is successively doubled. This, incidentally, corresponds to the geometrical schema once proposed by the ancient Greek logician Porphyry — the famous “ladder of Porphyry” (see Fig. 20.05). For all the apparent metaphysicality of the reasoning given above, it unambiguously reflects the empirical fact that plant and animal organisms develop precisely according to the dichotomous scenario. One single parental cell divides into two parts, as a result of which two new cells appear. It is obvious that even these first two cells are not identical, since one contains the male and the other the female chromosome, completing themselves into the double helix.
Fig. 20.05. The first four levels of the “ladder of Porphyry.”
One of the manifestations of the principle of quantisation at the macro-level is apparently the stratification of a substrate, adequate examples of which are the rings of Saturn and the spirals of galaxies (Fig. 20.06). And the very formation of macro-bodies such as the spiral arms of galaxies, stars and planets can apparently also be described in terms of macro-quantisation.
Fig. 20.06. Examples of macro-quantum effects. On the surfaces of Jupiter and Saturn the stratification of their atmospheres is clearly visible. In the ring of Saturn a gap free of substrate can be seen. In the image of the galaxy spiral arms are visible.
The hypothesis of the universality of quantisation makes plausible the existence of structural and morphological laws. Structural phenomenology is well known, and attempts to formulate such laws have been made, but there was not enough grounding for a unified approach to this subject matter.
In biology, in medicine and in psychology alike, the need to adapt the concept of the field into their paradigms has long been ripe.
The Socion
At the level of philosophical and sociological abstraction, the socion is the deep law of the functioning of society. The socion is the abstract structure of society; it is one of the projections of that motor which sets society in motion and controls its pulse. This law could be expressed by a structural model, which would make it sufficiently graphic, but such a model is not so simple to depict. Let us try to touch lightly on a description of this structural model.
In accordance with the socionic paradigm, one ought to speak not of information in general but of informational-field flows. What is called information in cybernetics is merely the introverted-logical flow (in-lg). This flow is launched from the second function of Il structures. When this flow is launched, it immediately begins to suppress the extraverted-intuitive flow (ex-it), blocking the independent generation of information by the lS structures under its control — or rather, forcing this information to move along a definite channel promoted by the Ei structures. Simultaneously the lI structures launch the extraverted-intuitive flow (ex-it) in the opposite direction and suppress the extraverted-intuitive (ex-it) flow of the Il structures under their control. When the l-flow of Il reaches Ei, since the latter has the corresponding suggestive channel, it in turn launches from its first function an i-flow, which is received by Se through its suggestive function, and so on. Analogously, the I-flow of lI reaches sL, which begins the practical use of the ideas embodied in constructions, thereby launching an s-flow, which will be received by Li.
Simultaneously, in the opposite direction along each active flow there moves a reactive flow of the demonstration of readiness on the part of the receivers, and a provoking flow on the part of the controlled structures. As a result there arises a central screw antisymmetry (which, incidentally, is also expressed in the group-theoretic structure of the socion), having an adequate graphical projection. One can go further and use the metaphor of screw thrust, created by the screw structure of the information flows within the socion. If all this corresponds to reality, then such thrust is a generalised image of the driving force of social processes.
Since the conception of information flows belongs to the level of high abstractions, their temporal attachment to concrete processes in society may have both a diachronic and a synchronic character. And at the level of real functioning, all these flows and informational impulses may arise simultaneously or in any sequence, creating a complex picture of informational interactions.
Socionics as a Basis for Teaching Methods
Socionics constitutes an excellent methodological basis on which methods for teaching children and adults may be built, with the aim of forming in them all manner of life conceptions of a practical and instrumental character.
Relying on socionics as a methodological means, all the instrumental skills and abilities which may or must be formed in a child so that he may successfully adapt to life can be classified in accordance with the information aspects adopted in socionics. They may be divided into eight classes: S (extraverted sensorics), s (introverted sensorics), I (extraverted intuition), i (introverted intuition), L (extraverted logic), l (introverted logic), E (extraverted emotioning), e (introverted emotioning).
In accordance with what has been said above and the designations adopted, the psychological qualities of group S include: the ability to change a situation in accordance with one’s plans and intentions, the ability to withstand the pressure of the external environment, will, personal strength, persistence, tenacity, endurance, the ability to defend one’s interests, to carry through what one has begun, to expand the zone of one’s influence (expansion), and others.
The psychological qualities of group s include: the ability to restore and maintain a positive bodily well-being, to adapt to the surrounding environment using the resources available in it, to organise cosiness, to create comfort and the aesthetic objects connected with it.
The psychological qualities of group I include: the ability to perceive intuitively the sense of phenomena, situations, events and texts, to assess the potential possibilities of objects and people, to understand in the broadest sense of the word. The psychological qualities of group i include: the ability to perceive an object in development, to orient oneself in temporal categories — in the past (taking experience into account, respect for traditions), in the present (manipulation of time: for example, being on time, doing something regularly), in the future (the formation of ideals, goal-setting, planning).
The psychological qualities of group L include: the ability to process physical material, to change the state of physical objects in accordance with an existing project, to carry out a technological process directed at obtaining a final product constituting a definite life resource, to change the position of objects and arrange them in space, to think and act technologically.
The psychological qualities of group l include: the ability to transmit, gather, accumulate and classify information about objects from written and oral sources, to reason, define, draw logical conclusions and construct proofs, to establish logical connections and existing relations between objects, to establish rules and adhere to them, to find quantitative parameters of their external characteristics — weight, size, distance and so on.
The psychological qualities of group E include: the ability to react emotionally to situations, events, phenomena and objects, to transmit the energy of emotional states to others, to support and inspire other people emotionally, to evaluate, to choose.
The psychological qualities of group e include: the ability to feel the attitude of other people to oneself and to one another, to evaluate these relations and actively to establish them.
Socionics and Biology
Socionics makes it possible to take a fresh look at a whole range of psychological and biological concepts.
For example, let us turn our attention to the concept of instinct, long established in psychology and psychophysiology. First of all let us note that the concept of instinct is not unambiguous in science. Here we shall have in mind innate, or unconditioned, reflexes. Observation of animals and people shows that there exist both separate reactions and whole behavioural blocks which a living being is capable of carrying out without any learning. The programmes of such behaviour are innate, are transmitted by inheritance, and may be connected with the notion of species memory.
Each species of living being has its own set of such instinctive programmes, realised in the form of concrete actions. There is, however, a certain number of instincts common to many animal species. In the human young — the infant — psychophysiologists count twenty-nine innate reflex actions. For example, the reflex of sucking at the breast. When the mother takes the child in her arms and brings the breast to his lips, the hungry child very precisely seizes the nipple with his lips and begins to suck. Yet this is far from a simple act: the child must combine sucking, swallowing the milk and breathing. From the outside all this looks like a clearly formed rhythmic sequence of actions. The expediency of this reflex is obvious. Another example of an instinct in the infant is the grasping reflex, which manifests itself in his gripping firmly with his little fingers objects that fall into his palm. He can be lifted into the air this way if one offers him, say, one’s index fingers to grasp. The child clutches at them so firmly that his little body is able to hold itself suspended indefinitely. For a human being such an adaptation does not seem necessary, but it can be understood as an animal atavism preserved from distant (some three million years ago!) simian ancestors, when the ability to hold on to the fur on the mother’s chest or back was essential for survival.
It is held that the number of instinctive reflexes is specific to each animal species, but psychophysiology long ago discovered the possibility of distributing the whole possible diversity of innate reflexes among a small number of groups. This, incidentally, may be regarded as one of the manifestations of the structuralist approach in biology. However, different authors do this differently. Thus P. V. Simonov [16] distinguishes three groups of instinctive reflexes: vital reflexes ensuring the physical survival of the individual (alimentary, drinking, sleep-regulating, defensive and others); role, or zoosocial, reflexes (sexual, parental, territorial, hierarchical, and that of emotional resonance — behaviour motivated by signals of the state of another individual); and reflexes of self-development (exploratory, imitative, playful and others).
V. I. Garbuzov [17] develops a conception of seven human instincts: I — self-preservation, II — procreation, III — altruism, IV — exploration, V — dominance, VI — freedom, VII — preservation of dignity. In his book this theme is well worked out and well received, and can undoubtedly be applied with benefit by people for the upbringing of others and for work on themselves. But the same questions remain: “How do such lists arise? Do they possess completeness?”
We shall not give a full survey of the approaches to the classification of instincts here; these may be found in the specialist literature. All such classifications reflect to one degree or another the achievements of biology in the cognition of reality and correspond to the scientific interests of their authors. But one way or another, they are all the result of the invention of a suitable construct, the result of the scientist’s inductive train of thought, and they contain the component of subjectivity that is inevitable in such a case. It is, however, legitimate to raise the question of the existence of a single basis for all such classifications, one that maximally eliminates subjectivity in the division of instincts into groups. Such a basis may be provided by the natural structure of the psychic functions discovered by socionics.
Proceeding from this idea, one may assert that there must exist exactly eight groups of innate reflexes, which is what instincts in fact are. Each such group reflects the tuning and work of the psyche with definite sides of reality; and since socionics discovers eight generalised aspects of the world, it is natural to suppose on this basis that the generalised reactions to the impact of the different sides of the world upon a living being must also be eight in number. Without laying claim to any final solution of the problem of instincts, let us present the correlation between information aspects and instincts in Table 20.01.
Table 20.01. A possible correlation between IAs and instincts.
| IA | Group of instincts | Instincts |
|---|---|---|
| S | Self-preservation | Preservation of the integrity of the organism, defence, attack, avoidance |
| E | Preservation of the species | Emotional reactions and procreation |
| L | Chemical metabolism | Nutrition, food reflexes, obtaining food |
| e | Relations | Care of offspring, care of those close to one, play, socialisation |
| l | Gas exchange | Respiration, acoustic communication |
| s | Recognition | Perception and interest |
| I | Modelling of the habitat | Orientation, cognition |
| i | Teleological complex | Striving for self-realisation and self-perfection, personal dignity, pride, need for approval |
The number of instincts entering each group may be revised and refined, but it is highly plausible that the existence of the eight proposed groups not only corresponds to reality but reflects its ultimately generalised structure. If this is so, then one may speak of a fractal of instincts making its contribution to the formation of character.
Socionics and Physiology
Analogously to the theme of the theoretical structuring of the set of instincts, one may consider the theme of structuring the set of functional subsystems of the organism. It is entirely natural to suppose that this structure is not accidental and is connected with the organism’s need to react adequately to the impact of the surrounding environment. And since, in accordance with the socionic hypothesis that a generalised structure of the universe exists, it is natural to suppose that the human being’s surrounding environment has the same generalised structure, and that such too is the generalised structure of the factors which act upon the organism. From this, by virtue of natural causality, it must follow that the generalised structure of the functional subsystems of the organism does not merely correspond to the generalised structure of the set of factors, but is identical with it. The supposed correspondence is presented in Table 20.02.
Table 20.02. Correlation between IAs and the functional subsystems of the organism.
| IA | Functional subsystems of the organism | Elements of the functional subsystems |
|---|---|---|
| S | Musculoskeletal apparatus | Bones, muscles, ligaments, connective tissue |
| E | Endocrine system | Glands of internal secretion, reproductive organs |
| L | Digestive system | Oral cavity, oesophagus, stomach, liver, intestines |
| e | Cardiovascular system | Heart, blood vessels, blood |
| l | Respiratory system | Lungs, airways |
| s | Sensory system | Organs of perception |
| I | Nervous system | Brain, spinal cord, nerves |
| i | Subsystem of consciousness, or spiritual system | Physical organs are absent. Presumably the only such organ is the ventricles of the brain. |
Still more remarkable in this hypothesis (V. V. Popov, Conversations, 1984–1990) is that the functional systems have mutual representations within one another, which makes their systemic connection especially concrete and graphic. Thus, for example, the nervous system is represented in the system of the musculoskeletal apparatus by the cerebellum, and conversely the musculoskeletal apparatus is represented in the nervous system by the bones directly pertaining to it (skull, spine), by muscle fibres and by connective tissue. Thus there must exist 8 × 8 = 64 functional subsystems, as is presented in Table 20.03.
Table 20.03.
| S | E | L | e | l | s | I | i | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | SS | ES | LS | eS | lS | sS | IS | iS |
| E | SE | EE | LE | eE | lE | sE | IE | iE |
| L | SL | EL | LL | eL | lL | sL | IL | iL |
| e | Se | Ee | Le | ee | le | se | Ie | ie |
| l | Sl | El | Ll | el | ll | sl | Il | il |
| s | Ss | Es | Ls | es | ls | ss | Is | is |
| I | SI | EI | LI | eI | lI | sI | II | iI |
| i | Si | Ei | Li | ei | li | si | Ii | ii |
As an example let us give the actual composition of some of these subsystems in Table 20.04.
Table 20.04. The composition of the nested functional physiological subsystems (schematically).
| SS | Bones, muscles, connective tissue |
| SE | Immune system |
| SL | Teeth, muscles of the digestive system |
| Se | Muscles of the cardiovascular system |
| Sl | Muscles and cartilage of the respiratory system |
| Ss | Bones and muscles of the sensory system |
| SI | Skull, spine, muscles of the nervous system |
| Si | Intracerebral ventricles (hypothesis) |
| IS | Cerebellum |
| IE | Hypothalamus |
| IL | Thalamus |
| Ie | Cardiac pacemakers, etc. |
| Il | Respiratory centre |
| Is | Pineal gland, visual cortex, auditory cortex, etc. |
| II | Cerebral cortex |
| Ii | Frontal neocortex (hypothesis) |
There is no sense in listing here the composition of all the functional physiological subsystems, since this material is under development and is hypothetical in character. Any thinking physiologist, however, can easily carry out such work himself.
An analogous idea makes it possible to suppose that the psychic subsystems likewise have a full mutual representation, and that this is the actual realisation of the systemic interconnection of all the functions. If this receives experimental confirmation, then Model “A” will have to have 64 cells, since into each of the existing cells one would need to insert 8 cells indicating the presence within each function of the representation of every other. Then, for example, the “8 × 8” model of Dumas might look as follows (Table 20.05).
Table 20.05. The 8 × 8 model of Dumas.
| 1.2 | 2.2 | 3.2 | 4.2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| iSI | iSl | LeI | Lel | sII | sIl | ElI | Ell |
| iSe | iSS | Lee | LeS | sIe | sIS | Ele | ElS |
| iSE | iSs | LeE | Les | sIE | sIs | ElE | Els |
| iSi | iSL | Lei | LeL | sIi | sIL | Eli | ElL |
| 1.1 | 2.1 | 3.1 | 4.1 | ||||
| IsI | Isl | lEI | lEl | SiI | Sil | eLI | eLl |
| Ise | IsS | lEe | lES | Sie | SiS | eLe | eLS |
| IsE | Iss | lEE | lEs | SiE | Sis | eLE | eLs |
| Isi | IsL | lEi | lEL | Sii | SiL | eLi | eLL |
Undoubtedly this is only a hypothetical rough sketch, but this schema could become a real programme for the experimental verification of socionic ideas. And if experimental confirmations of the suppositions made were to appear, one could speak of a fundamentally new theoretical foundation for biology and the humanities.
Of great theoretical and practical interest are the attempts of socionists to find a correspondence between IAs and zones of the brain (A. V. Bukalov, Yu. P. Purik, I. Weisband, V. Talanov and others). However, since these attempts relied only on general conceptions about the functioning of the brain available in the literature and on intuitive guesses not supported by rigorous experiments, they should be regarded as interesting but highly preliminary. It is probable that the very framing of the problem as an attempt to establish the zones of the brain to which IAs are “attached” is incorrect; that is, within the framework of the opposition of two polar theoretical positions in neurophysiology — localism and globalism — it may turn out that there is no localisational solution to this problem, and that one must seek a more complex correspondence connected with a distribution of functional-socionic correspondences across the whole volume of the brain. Yes, neurophysiologists know the speech zones of Wernicke and Broca in the left temporal cortex, they know the localisation of the visual cortex, they know about the special role of the frontal neocortex in the synthesis of personality, and they know a great deal else about the structure of the brain and its functioning — but can one speak just as definitely about the localisation in the brain of “extraverted intuition” or “introverted logic”? Here deep experimental and theoretical elaboration is needed with the direct participation of neurophysiologists. A programme for such experimental work, however, socionics does offer.
The Recognition and Formation of Images
One of the classical problems of informatics is pattern (image) recognition. However, the corresponding research has been concentrated on visual images. Socionics, by offering models of generalised informational processes, makes it possible to raise the question of the recognition of abstract images. The theme of the recognition of abstract images bears directly on the problematics of artificial intelligence.
Literature and Art as a Source of Psychologically Significant Information
Psychologists can hardly be reproached for having conducted psychological research in the way they did. They did it as best they could. They projected onto their research everything that was known to them in their time, including the philosophical views contemporary to them and, as we now understand, their own personal problems. In the course of broad psychoanalytic practice it turned out that an analyst who has not undergone special preparation inevitably projects his own complexes and problems onto the patient when working with him. In this connection a practice was adopted prescribing that a beginning psychoanalyst who has completed the corresponding educational institution should undergo a whole series of psychological trainings which reduce the danger of a deformation of the psychoanalytic procedure.
At present it is time for psychologists to think about the possibility of raising the level of objectivity of their research. One of the ways of solving this problem is the necessity of reckoning with the integral experience of humanity, which is recorded both in so-called secret knowledge and in such open and accessible sources as literature and works of art.
One may suppose that literature, for example, constitutes an enormous bank of psychological data reflecting the psychological experience of humanity. The same may be said of other kinds of art. One of the instruments which might prove useful here is socionics, which has created new psychological constructs allowing one to structure the psychologically significant information contained in literary works and works of other kinds of art.
Socionics and Psychiatry
Socionics makes it possible to take a fresh look at certain borderline cases of human behaviour. First of all, the nomenclature of mental disorders may be assessed from the point of view of how fully the socionic functions are working. Besides this, there are many cases which cannot be classed as mental disorders. This may be entirely ordinary behaviour, widely distributed among people; but when such a person comes for a consultation with a psychologist, the psychologist may, in the course of working with the client, reveal a quite definite symptom complex which can perfectly well be described in socionic concepts. Recall the Oldham–Morris list, developed by them on the basis of the terminology of the fundamental psychiatric handbook DSM-IV: Conscientious, Self-Confident, Dramatic, Vigilant, Active, Dependent, Solitary, Leisurely, Sensitive, Idiosyncratic, Adventurous, Altruistic, Aggressive, Serious.
Those who know socionics will easily discover in these psychological concepts various combinations of the semantic multipliers which are presented in pure form in socionics. Thus, from the explications in [22], one may understand that Conscientious is a combination of accentuated introversion and rationality; Self-Confident — accentuated extraversion plus sensorics; Dramatic — accentuated ethics plus extraversion; Vigilant — accentuated intuition plus irrationality; Active — accentuated extraversion plus extraverted logic; Dependent — accentuated introversion plus ethics; Solitary — accentuated intuition plus logic; Leisurely — accentuated extraverted logic in the KKF position; Sensitive — accentuated introversion plus ethics; Idiosyncratic — accentuated extraverted intuition; Adventurous — accentuated introverted intuition plus extraversion; Altruistic — accentuated ethics; Aggressive — accentuated extraverted sensorics; Serious — accentuated rationality. Since the existence of a fractal of accentuations is confirmed by such solid works as DSM-IV, Leonhard’s accentuations, the MMPI, the SMIL and others, it must of course be taken into account in the psychological description of a person.
Prospects and Programmes
In socionics one can now speak not only of a minimum programme but also of a maximum programme. It is clear that the minimum programme is the more modest, and may be reduced to the necessity of recognising socionics as a full-fledged and independent scientific discipline.
That socionic information enjoys interest from all strata of the population is confirmed by the growing demand for articles, books and journals with socionic content. Besides this, it is unofficially known that many “official” scholars are interested in socionics but cannot use it in their work precisely because it is not officially recognised, and their superiors forbid the use of what is not officially recognised.
The maximum programme could be formulated as THE RECOGNITION OF THE SOCIONIC PARADIGM AS THE UNIVERSAL METHODOLOGICAL FOUNDATION OF ALL THE HUMANITIES — which would, incidentally, be an entirely natural acknowledgement of the colossal contribution to psychology made by C. G. Jung and Aushra Augustinavichute.
It is easy to imagine that there will be people who cannot, will not, or will not find it possible to agree with such possibilities for socionics. There may be many reasons for this, including “defence of one’s own uniform.” It is not excluded that many such people, instead of discussing such questions in an academic mode with the use of logical argumentation, will resort to debating tricks, up to and including accusations that the author is psychically and mentally deficient, as well as to the use of administrative measures.
That socionics has the right to lay claim to a universal methodological role was shown in the articles “Socionics as Methodology” and “Nothing New Under the Sun,” and also in A. V. Bukalov’s programmatic article “Socionics — a New Approach to Understanding Man and Society” [12].
If such recognition were to take place, one important conclusion would follow from it — one which is not fully, or not at all, recognised or even realised by the majority of socionists. This conclusion is that socionics has its grounds within itself and therefore has no need to seek grounds in other scientific disciplines.
In particular, it has no need of a systems-theoretic grounding, since, on the basis of the postulate of the universality of the socionic paradigm, matters should stand precisely the other way round: systems theory itself must be derived from socionics.
It is not difficult to sketch certain moments of such a derivation. Let us note first of all that any scientific discipline relies on a certain set of concepts fundamental to it, and on the corresponding terms and meta-terms by means of which the subject and method of the given science are described and its connection with its grounding is maintained.
The basic concepts of systems theory are: SYSTEM, STATE, TRANSITION FROM ONE STATE TO ANOTHER, INPUT, OUTPUT, INFORMATION, CONTROL, and others. The concepts of THEORY and INFORMATION may in this case be regarded as meta-concepts, since the concept of THEORY, being general-scientific, is used in systems theory externally and only for the organisation of the material of this scientific discipline. With the concept of INFORMATION matters stand more complexly, since it may be directly introduced and defined within systems theory; yet it is broader than the limitations imposed upon it by that theory. And in general the concept of INFORMATION is a meta-concept for any human cognition, since it precedes cognition, and cognition may be reduced to the obtaining of information.
In socionics, however, in its methodological hypostasis, the concepts of INFORMATION and INFORMATION ASPECT are primary. Here, unlike in systems theory, INFORMATION is postulated first, together with its ASPECTS and the immediately adjoining concept of INFORMATION METABOLISM, and only then does everything else appear.
Let us now consider each of the concepts of systems theory from the point of view of socionics. The concept of SYSTEM is connected with the information aspect l (introverted logic); it appears within the depths of this aspect, as of its archetype, since this aspect points to the ordering of objects in space, and since in the DESCRIPTION (l) of a SYSTEM (l) time can be reduced to spatial relations by depicting it as one of the coordinate axes. But the point, of course, is not the formal modelling of time by spatial symbols, but the existence of the corresponding archetype.
In exactly the same way the contribution of the other aspects to the formation of the concepts of systems theory may be partially explicated. Thus, for example, the concept of THEORY constitutes a STRUCTURED DESCRIPTION (l) of POTENTIAL POSSIBILITIES (I), and this is its archetype. Real systems, however, unlike their descriptions, are characterised by the CHANGE OF STATES IN TIME (aspect i), by the presence of STATES (E), by a CAUSE (I) of the change of states, by the presence of MATERIAL ELEMENTS (L) and of CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THEM (e), by a definite ENERGY (E), and also by the LAWS OF THEIR OWN EXISTENCE and SOURCES OF GOAL-SETTING (I). The implicit definition of a system contained in this paragraph, without laying claim to completeness or finality, gives an idea of the complexity of this concept, which is connected with all the socionic IAs. On the basis of what has been said, one may suppose that the concept of system is the most complex of all abstract concepts — precisely because it is connected with the interaction of all the IAs.
The concept of CONTROL can apparently be presented as the result of the joint manifestation of two IAs — S and l. The aspect S by itself gives only the energetic-volitional component, the “motor” of the impact, as it were; and since the concept of CONTROL includes a change of trajectory in phase space, projections of the aspect l must be added for a sufficient description of it. Let us note that since two combinations are possible in the sequence of the aspects S and l, namely Sl and lS, one may speak of two forms of control — strategic (Sl) and tactical (lS).
Another important concept of systems theory is that of FEEDBACK, which in a first approximation may be reduced to the aspect e. However, this aspect alone is insufficient for describing so important and even complex a concept. This is not simply a connection. This connection is loaded with REFLECTION, with the MUTUAL MAPPING of two elements; and this connection is not simply an abstract concept but really manifests itself in the CHANGE (i and I) of the BEHAVIOUR (L) of one element depending on the STATE (E) of another.
Let us note that in this case the concept of CHANGE, which in pure form may be linked with the single aspect i, turns out to be connected with the aspect I as well, since this is a change depending on a certain content, on SENSE (I), and one which itself generates sense.
If we now distinguish within a system, as is done in the works of V. D. Yermak, the PROGRAMME and EXECUTIVE BLOCKS, then these too may be reduced to projections of definite IAs. The PROGRAMME BLOCK is connected with the aspects l and I, since it contains PRESCRIPTIONS (l) relying on a certain SENSE (I) connected with the ACHIEVEMENT OF A GOAL (I). Since two combinations are possible in the sequence of the influence of the aspects I and l, one may speak of two varieties of programming — strategic (Il) and tactical (lI). Analogous reasoning applies to the EXECUTIVE BLOCK as well.
Of course, one may ask why one should reduce the well-proven and practically tested concepts of systems theory to socionic aspects. The answer here may be not one but several.
First, we wish to show the potential possibilities of socionics as a methodology. Second, in science there always remains the problem of grounds and grounding, and the choice of a well-grounded paradigm is, from this point of view, an optimising step. Third, since socionic terminology may be laid at the basis of the description of any concepts, one may speak of terminological unification. Fourth, it is always useful to look at a problem from another angle. And fifth, socionic terminology makes it possible to discover a fine spectrum within concepts that are quite settled and no longer subjected to further analysis.
In connection with what has been set out above, one may speak of a PANSOCIONIC approach to all phenomena and processes in this world. And here, as always, there are pluses and minuses. Of course, the reckless reduction of complex phenomena infinitely rich in content to the dry schema which socionics can at times propose is hardly likely to bring useful results. However, the conscious application of the conceptual apparatus of socionics to the problems of contemporary science will undoubtedly help to discover new shades of settled meanings and will lead to the appearance of new solutions to old problems with a concrete technological output.
The reproach of the apriorism of irresponsible theoretical fantasising, sometimes encountered in scientific criticism, cannot bear on socionics as a whole — this is a science that uses the entire array of empirical data of psychology, sociology, history and so on. But of course individual intuitive “flights” may occur in socionics, just as in any other science. That is precisely why a constant open scientific discussion is needed, one which not a single idea touching in any way upon socionics, however insignificant at first glance, could pass by unnoticed.
Time will pass, and the terminological and conceptual windfall left by the impetuous flow of thought of the romantic-scientists of socionics, who took upon themselves the first blow of the theoretical tsunami, will gradually be cleared away. Thanks to the impulse of the romantic pioneers, the fundamentalist scholars will at last understand the truth and beauty of socionics, and will emerge from the dense forests of psychological empiricism onto the bright road of deductive psychology. With the help of controlled experiment the basic concepts of socionics will gradually be verified, and it will stand before an astonished humanity as a diamond blazing with its sixteen facets — the diamond of the scientific feat of Aushra Augustinavichute and her followers. And perhaps at last the Lithuanian people will duly appreciate one of its geniuses and place her name alongside such names as Čiurlionis. And perhaps somewhere in Vilnius, or at worst in Zapyškis, they will erect a monument to her — about which, however, a Don Quixote, the type to which this brilliant woman psychologist belonged, does not greatly care.
SOCIONICS OPENS UP NEW GNOSEOLOGICAL SPACES OF WHICH HUMANITY KNEW MUCH, BUT NOT EVERYTHING, AND OFTEN VERY APPROXIMATELY. HERE HUMANITY ENTERS THE TERRA INCOGNITA OF SCIENTIFIC COGNITION. THIS IS ONE OF THE CAUSES OF THE INSTINCTIVE RESISTANCE OF THE DOGMATISTS AND BUREAUCRATS OF SCIENCE.
AND IF SOMEONE SAYS AND THINKS THAT THERE IS NOTHING LEFT TO DISCOVER IN SOCIONICS, OR THAT EVERYTHING HAS ALREADY BEEN DISCOVERED — DO NOT BELIEVE IT. SOCIONICS IS ONLY BEGINNING, AND FOR THE NEXT HUNDRED YEARS THERE WILL BE ROOM IN IT FOR EVERYONE WHO WISHES TO APPLY HIS LABOUR IN ITS FIELD!
Conclusions to Chapter Twenty
-
At the foundation of socionics lies a paradigm capable of extending the possibilities of contemporary science. However, the paradigm established in official science — which in its time ensured its progress, but which is also the cause of the deep crisis of science at present — resists, in the person of its adherents, the recognition and introduction of socionic methods.
-
Socionics finds wide application in the solution of many theoretical and practical problems in the most varied fields of science and practice: psychology, problems of information processing, sociological research, analysis and recommendations in business and economics, history, ethnography, pedagogy, medicine, linguistics, literary, artistic, musical and other kinds of creative work, and the analysis of religious, ideological and philosophical problems.
-
Socionics, for the first time in the history of science in general and of psychology in particular, discovers informational elements which are really present in our world, are substantial entities, and do not depend on the mode of description.
-
Socionics, for the first time in the history of psychology, discovers the internal symmetry of the human psyche and the structural elements by means of which this symmetry is realised.
-
Socionics proposes a principle by means of which the diversity of human manifestations can be explained on a single basis — the principle of fractality (A. V. Bukalov). According to this principle, psychic and socio-psychological structures constitute superpositions of functional-informational groups. This principle may also be extended to anatomo-physiological structures and processes.
-
Socionics contains concepts which may be laid at the basis of a classification not only of psychic and psychological phenomena, but also of a number of phenomena in biology and the humanities.
References
- Churyumov S. I., Socionics as Methodology, article, SMPP 1, 1996.
- Churyumov S. I., Socionics and Philosophy: Nothing New Under the Sun, series of articles in SMPP 1–3, 1998.
- Bukalov A. V., Integral Socionics. Types of Collectives, Nations, States. Ethnosocionics, SMPP 5, 1998.
- Churyumov S. I., Methodological Fashion in Science and Philosophy, paper at the city socionics seminar, 2000.
- Churyumov S. I., Socionics and Philosophy, paper at the city socionics seminar, 2000.
- Churyumov S. I., A Socionic Approach to the Classification of Philosophical Systems, article, SMPP 2, 1995.
- Lemeshev O. G., Lemesheva Yu. V., Notes on the Danger of Radioactive Damage, SMPP 6, 1999.
- Bukalov A. V., O. B. Karpenko, G. V. Chikirisova, On the Statistics of Relations in Married Couples, SMPP 1, 1999.
- Bukalov A. V., Ethnosocionics: Alcoholism, Drug Addiction and the Mentality of Ethnoses, SMPP 6, 1998.
- Bukalov A. V., O. B. Karpenko, G. V. Chikirisova, On the Distribution of Socionic Types in Various Production Collectives, SMPP 1, 2000.
- Bukalov A. V., O. B. Karpenko, G. V. Chikirisova, Socionics, Sociology and the Problem of the Practical Rehabilitation of the Social Self-Consciousness of Those Affected by the Chernobyl Disaster, SMPP 3, 1999.
- Bukalov A. V., Socionics — a New Approach to Understanding Man and Society, SMPP 1, 1996.
- Bakhtiyarova S. A., The ABC of Self-Understanding, Kyiv, 2002.
- Simonov P. V., Reflection Theory and the Psychophysiology of Emotions, Moscow, Nauka, 1970.
- Garbuzov V. I., Practical Psychology, St Petersburg, 1994.
- Stakhov A. P., Sacred Geometry and the Mathematics of Harmony, Vinnytsia, 2003.
- Donchenko O., Romanenko Yu., Archetypes of Everyday Life and Politics (in Ukrainian), Kyiv, 2001.
- Kalinauskas I. N., Group Trainings, Kyiv, 1987–89.
- Litrovnik E., Conversations on Occasion, Kyiv, 1994–2006.
- Oldham J. M., Morris D. B., Know Yourself. A Self-Portrait of Your Personality, Moscow, 1997.
Translator’s notes
- ARP — Чурюмов’s abbreviation for the признаки Аугустинавичюте–Рейнина, i.e. the Reinin dichotomies. Left as ARP throughout, per the convention used in earlier chapters.
- PPF, IVF, KZF, RTF, ANF, ERF, KKF, MMF — Churyumov’s positional function names, kept as transliterated abbreviations. From the text itself the positional pairing is derivable: PPF/IVF = positions 1 and 5, KZF/RTF = 2 and 6, ANF/ERF = 3 and 7, KKF/MMF = 4 and 8 (i.e. the pairs sharing an IA in the Don Quixote model).
- “intuitive-logical extravert, some Huxley or Dostoyevsky” — as in the original, but this looks like an error: Huxley is IEE (intuitive-ethical extravert) and Dostoyevsky EII, and the fourth-quadra ideologist role requires the ethical type. The identical phrase for Don Quixote in the next paragraph is correct.
- “the ancient Greek logician [Porphy]ry” — the name is truncated in the source scan (“ирий”); restored as Porphyry from the “ladder of Porphyry” reference.
- DSM-IV — original reads “ДСС-IV”, evidently a typo for ДСМ-IV.
- Teaching-methods section: the source lists the eight aspects as “l (extraverted logic), l (introverted logic)”; the first is clearly L. Corrected silently in the list, since the paragraphs that follow use L and l correctly.
- Reference numbering in the original is inconsistent: entries 14 and 15 are missing from the list, though [15] is cited for the Fibonacci scenario and [16] for Kovalev’s golden-section work (entry 16 is Simonov). The fractal-concept citation for Donchenko & Romanenko is given as [18] in the text but as entry 19 in the list. Numbering left exactly as printed.
- SMPP = Соционика, ментология и психология личности (Socionics, Mentology and Personality Psychology), the IIS journal.
- Notation in the socion/model sections (Il, lI, Ei, sL, Se, Li, etc.) is Churyumov’s: capital = extraverted, lower case = introverted, first letter = leading function.
Appendix 9. Examples of completed graphic test Ch-07
The test presents fifteen cells. Cells 01–10 each contain a starting configuration (two verticals, a sunburst, an angle, three horizontals, a sinusoid, an hourglass outline, a Z, a slanting line, a vertical sinusoid) which the respondent completes and then names. Cells 11–14 carry set tasks — “draw a non-existent animal”, “complete the dot”, “myself in the world”, “draw or write whatever you would like” (in some versions: draw an elephant, draw a crocodile, a free-subject drawing). Cell 15 asks for a motto, a favourite saying, and personal details.
Dima Churyumov. A youth of 15. Expert assessment — logical-sensory extravert (LSE)
The high overall energy of the images is a good marker of extraversion. The care of the drawing and a certain hardness of line, and the presence of sharp serrations (13), are possible indicators of sensorics.
01. “An unknown barrel-shaped object from the depths of my fantasy” — indeed from such depths that the object remains unidentified. However, the very capacity and possibility of penetrating those depths is, as we see, present. Here one may speak of the materialisation of an intuitive impulse. So is this intuition or sensorics?
02. “A mutant sun (code name ‘Fluffy Dandelion’)” — the capacity for fantasy discovered in 01 is here fully realised. The sun here is genuinely sensory. And its smile is not ethical but logical. This image may fully be considered an ego-projection of the respondent. This is logical-sensory extraversion in one of its embodiments.
03. “The letter A from an ‘Astra’ brand compressor (typeface Alegra_Nr)” — this phrase is an adequate projection of logical-sensory extraversion. A compressor, the firm “Astra”, a cast relief letter A on the compressor’s housing — and its form is emphatically expressive. The depiction of this letter is sensory, although this is achieved by minimal (logical) means. Logical-sensory too is the reference to the specific typeface Alegra_Nr.
04. “Two half-rings” — a ring has been cut in half and the front half laid on the lower one. To discern this in three horizontal lines and think one’s way to it requires a very advanced imagination. Cutting a ring, of whatever material it may be made, and placing the halves one on another in an ordered way, is one of the possible projections of logical-sensory extraversion.
05. “A horned aubergine” — it is probably not hard to see horns in the initial configuration, though among my respondents I have met this realisation only twice. The “horned aubergine” is apparently a character analogous to a fairy-tale one, and as such it is concrete in the extreme, which is equivalent to sensoriness.
06. “Yin and yang” — an entirely adequate logical realisation of the sinusoid. Besides, for an adolescent this is a good indicator of erudition.
07. “A thirty-minute egg-timer” — note the constructive-decorative uprights which turn the timer into a real thing. Very sensory.
08. “A crooked ship called ‘Picassonic’” — a fine sense of humour and a developed imagination, together with erudition, allow the respondent to realise the initial configuration elegantly with a reference to Picasso. The fluttering flag is very nearly the only, but a reliable, indicator of dynamics.
09. “A mystical, fantastic symbol” — an example of symbolic abstraction and the spontaneous creation of an image. The mechanical is joined to the natural. An image very rich in semantic overtones. An original, unexpected realisation of the initial slanting line. The mechanical (extraverted logic) turns out to lie at the base of the natural (the sensory).
10. “A snake and a stick” — note the snake’s head, the knob of the cane, the small but elegant widening of the cane at its base, the silvery forking of the little snake, and the impeccable proportions of the image. A full-fledged example of the realisation of logical-sensory extraversion.
11. “A wyvern” — a non-existent animal as a projection of the ability to stand up for oneself: a potential Dragon (an image of concealed strength and threat). Here sensorics and rationality are combined.
12. “A ‘Rossava’ wheel” — I do not know what “Rossava” signifies here, but a structure consisting of a wheel in the middle of which two touching rings revolve is a full-fledged projection of extraverted logic.
13. “Myself in the world” — a carefully drawn ego-projection inside a halo indicates the powerful potential of a personality in the making. A confident stance, squared shoulders, a closed posture, full equipment — the image of a seed ready to awaken.
14. “The centre of the Universe” — laconism carried to its limit, where intuitive generalisation coincides with sensory concreteness within the framework of rhythm A (after Kalinauskas): a global perception of the World.
15. Motto: “Better to live without a motto” — a confident claim to independent orientation, no preconceptions. The person relies only on himself (extraversion).
A woman of 33, unmarried, no children. Expert assessment — intuitive-logical extravert (ILE)
01. “What matters is not what is said but what we kept silent about” — a direct indication of an intuitive assessment of the situation. The vertical lines are chosen as a background separating the people and pointing to what is not said. An inscription, a verbal element, has been introduced into the drawing. The people are marked out by outline — a logical indicator. The explication of the drawing looks like an aphorism, like a law of a kind — an indicator of intuition. It is like an attempt to look behind the surface of things. What has been said justifies the supposition of intuition. The verbal element is the logical framing of the situation.
02. “Love fills space, joy expands it” — here the ego-projection in the form of a smiling face expresses a cultivated optimism. The smile is logical. A joyful ego-projection is a possible indication of a state of being in love, explained by the explication. The notion of space is used — an abstract category.
03. “Nature is Mother” — a tent on a riverbank: stable values, nature and freedom.
04. “It is impossible to travel in two opposite directions at once” — an example of the formulation of an objective law. Objective constraints are taken into account (logic).
05. “Earthly pleasure” — a beautiful realisation of the angle with its vertex downward. Of course we are dealing here with introverted sensorics. In Don Quixote this aspect is bound up with the ERF — the expectational-resource function. If the experts have not erred and the respondent really does belong to this type, then one may conclude that a projective test can display not only the archetypes of the EGO but those of other functions as well. It is entirely plausible that such archetypes are displayed in delayed reactions, which are activated after the reactions bound up with the core of the EGO have been realised.
06. “Childhood memories” — an infantile image is preserved which is important for the formation of parental feeling: an indicator of introverted feeling. Here it may be assessed as a gender indicator bound up with maternal programmes.
07. “In receiving news from other people we intersect with them informationally” — communication by letter as an informational channel. The situational currency of this channel; however, the image of a letter is generalised into a law — an indicator of intuition.
08. “A sign from the Harry Potter films” — a situational reminiscence bound up with a recently watched film. This item may be interpreted as “symbolic sensitivity”, a tendency to single out symbols and to think with symbols as a support. A logical indicator.
09. [A four-line verse of the respondent’s own, on smiling early in the morning at a ray of light slipping through the window and beginning the day as though wishing to forget the future. Not reproduced here.] — a programme of optimism, instilled from childhood or directly bound up with temperament, is subjected to a testing by the future. This item may be understood as a tense expectation of the future, an indeterminacy connected with the future. The smile is merely declared, while the image is rather neutral-tense. The placing of the image in the upper right corner may be assessed as an orientation towards the future; the current accent of life is connected with the future — an indicator of intuition.
10. “A roly-poly doll” — an image of stability in life. It may also be understood as a gender indicator bound up with a set towards desired motherhood.
11. “Zmey Gorynych” (the three-headed dragon of Russian folklore) — one of the forms of ego-projection: yes, to be effective in this world three heads would not come amiss. The sweep of the symbol, its energetic fullness, is one of the possible indications of extraversion.
12. “An expanding circle” — the process of the gradual mastery of the world is well caught. The drawing may be understood as an indicator of extraversion (cognitive expansion).
13. “Myself in the world” — a realistic conception of oneself as a small but equal unit among other units. However, the central position of that unit indicates an acceptance of one’s own value. The world is presented as an aggregate of more or less equivalent units — an indicator of extraversion.
14. “A flower opening” — an intuitive experience and presentiment of one’s own evolution. A gender indicator of femininity.
15. Motto: “Whatever happens is for the best”; favourite saying: “Make a fool pray to God and he’ll break his own forehead” — the neutrally optimistic attitude to the world reflected in the motto is supplemented by the balance of position expressed by the saying. The saying may be understood as an indicator of introverted logic.
Conclusion: although the test itself does not give sufficient grounds for an unambiguous decision about the respondent’s type, it stands in good correspondence with the expert assessment.
A girl of 18. Expert assessment — intuitive-logical introvert (ILI)
01. “Any-old-how” — minimisation of effort, an accent on inner space. The vertical lines are chosen as boundaries marking out an inner space — an indicator of introversion.
02. “An ambulance” — minimisation of effort, an accent on inner space — an indicator of introversion.
03. “A theorem” — an accent on an abstract-logical object (intuition + logic).
04. “A musical stave” — a possible indication that she plays an instrument. The notes are drawn professionally, but only at the level of an image. An image of an instantaneous inner state (a possible indication of introversion).
05. “The letter U” — a minimal realisation of the angle with its vertex downward. This is not an evasion of the task, since the test contains fully executed tasks; it is a minimisation of effort. Note also the elegantly executed curl of the letter’s curved part. The result may be assessed as an indication of introversion.
06. “Infinity” — a minimal realisation of the sinusoid: a symmetrical completion. An indicator of introverted thinking.
07. “The straight-A student’s equation” — minimisation of effort, an expression of current interests. The solution of the task expresses an introverted-logical set.
08. “An egg-timer” — minimisation of effort: the basic part of the image is obtained with a single line. Sensitivity to the passage of time is one of the indicators of introverted intuition.
09. “X” — the ascending slanting line is perceived as part of the symbol for the unknown. Here this may be understood as an indicator of introverted logic and intuition — the latter because an ascending line, pointing to the future and to possible effort, has been transformed into a symbol of the unknown.
10. “A diving dolphin” — a beautiful realisation of the vertical sinusoid. To dive into the depths and return to one’s accustomed element — an indicator of introversion.
11. “A walking elephant” — an indicator of dynamics. The drawing, though not professional, has a sense of dignity in the elephant. This is an elephant that knows its own worth but throws down no challenge to anyone. An elephant that knows what it has to do. By its vector of movement it is a returning elephant. In the light of the previous tasks, the return may be understood as a sign of introversion. The elephant’s capacity for work is an indication of extraverted logic in a strong position.
12. “A crocodile” — aggression is absent, but there is a cautious inquisitiveness.
13. “A flower” — a gender indicator.
14. “Calm” — a typical set is expressed: comfortable contact with nature. Easily understood as an indicator of introversion. However, elements of the image, in particular the reflection in the water, are a good indication of intuition.
15. Motto: “To be better than everyone” — an entirely comprehensible indication of perfectionism, or of a set towards self-improvement.
Conclusion: the test contains sufficient indications of introversion, intuition and logic, while the choice between rationality and irrationality can be made on the trait of dynamics; that is, the final result coincides with the expert assessment.
A man of 52. Expert assessment — intuitive-logical extraversion (ILE)
01. “Perspective” — a complicated spatial vision (an indicator of extraverted intuition).
02. “A spyglass” — the use of an instrument to make out what is distant (an indicator of extraverted intuition).
03. “Beyond the mountains, more mountains” — a globally integral perception of the world (an indicator of extraverted intuition).
04. “Legs dangling, I sit on the jetty” — an unexpected extraverted realisation of the three horizontal lines (an indicator of extraverted intuition).
05. “Aspiration” — the configuration is not completed but reinterpreted as a craft rushing forward.
06. “An oscillograph” — a literal technological realisation of the sinusoid (extraverted thinking).
07. “A working bunch” — the configuration is understood as a bunch of working tools and extended (extraversion).
08. “A symbol of eternity” — an original solution to the egg-timer problem.
09. “Forward and upward” — aspiration, capacity for work, a high energy level.
10. “A snow-woman” — a simple and comprehensible realisation of the vertical sinusoid. The object is not isolated but included in a broad environment (extraversion).
11. “Flush” — the elephant’s outlines coincide with the outlines of the frame (extraversion).
12. “There in the distance under the hot sun a crocodile swims in the river” — aggression is absent; the subject delights in freedom, merging with nature. An indicator of self-realisation.
13. “Find your star” — cosmic consciousness (an indicator of intuitive-logical extraversion).
14. “A mountain lake” — a hidden treasure, to be found and known (an indicator of intuitive-logical extraversion).
Conclusion: the high energy of the drawing is a good indicator of extraversion. The totality of indicators in the test allows the hypothesis of intuitive-logical extraversion to be advanced, which coincides with the expert assessment.
A girl of 17. Expert assessment — ethical-sensory extraversion (ESE)
The high energy of all the images accords very well with extraversion. The task “Myself in the world” points to ethical rational extraversion (I am the organiser at the centre, everyone has a good time with me). The motto “Business before pleasure” may be understood as an indication of the secondary status of working effort, work as an obligation. The drawing corresponds fully to the expert assessment.
A girl of 21. Expert assessment — logical-sensory introversion (LSI)
The minimality of the graphic solutions and their extreme schematism may be understood as an indication of introversion and of logic in its rational variant. The elephant is normatively ethical and static. The crocodile is “partial” and aggressive (extraverted sensorics in a strong position). The free drawing, “Television set”, is a stable value. The pencil of straight lines passing through a point is not a symbol of radiation but a symbol of the sameness of all directions. The motto “In a person everything should be beautiful” may be understood as an indication of the normativity of ethics. The drawing corresponds fully to the expert assessment.
A young man of 25. Expert assessment — intuitive-logical introversion (ILI)
Introversion and logic are here almost obvious. In favour of intuition are the egg-timer and the model of the atom. However, the sensorily drawn crocodile’s head and the sphere are disconcerting. This does not fit the expert assessment, whose probability of correctness is higher. Some theoretical explanation is required. A variant is possible in which the expert assessment is incorrect and we are dealing with a sensory-logical introvert; in that case the jolly, toothy little crocodile together with the sphere quite adequately provides introverted sensorics. At present, however, the respondent is out of reach and there is no possibility of rechecking the expert assessment.
This example shows that a discrepancy between the expert assessment and the interpretation of the test may serve as grounds for revising the former.
A girl of 18. Expert assessment — ethical-intuitive extraversion (EIE)
The overall energy of the test supports the possibility of extraversion well. In the original of the test, alongside black there is a lilac colour, which creates a tense drama in the images. The majority of the images here represent symbolic combinations (an indicator of intuition). The motto “Knowledge of the truth gives real freedom” points to an openness to logic (rationality). So in this case the graphics do not contradict the expert assessment.
A girl of 18. Expert assessment — intuitive-ethical extraversion (IEE)
A large number of living creatures — a possible indicator of irrational ethics. Logical indicators are absent. Indicators of intuition: the egg-timer in the position of the first task, the mirror. The test does not contradict the expert assessment.
A man of 36. Expert assessment — intuitive-ethical introversion (IEI)
The energy of the image favours introversion. Indicators of intuition: the ladder as a symbol, the sand-glass and the clock with hands, the road calling into the distance, the little ball in an unstable position. Indicators of ethics: the submissive elephant, the non-aggressive crocodile, the large-breasted bird, and the thoroughly introverted-ethical little face. However, the dynamics one would expect of an intuitive-ethical introvert are not visible in the test. And this prompts the thought that the expert may have erred, since this test would suit an ethical-intuitive introvert better. Thus in this case one may speak of an insufficient correspondence between the conclusions following from the test and the expert assessment.
A girl of 17. Expert assessment — logical-sensory extraversion (LSE)
The high overall energy of the text accords fully with extraversion. The sensoriness of the images, manifested in the hard drawing and heightened contrast, is entirely obvious. The absence of vividly expressed “ethical” images obliges one to acknowledge the majority of the images as not simply logical but extravertedly logical (made things). Thus in this case one may speak of a high correspondence between the conclusions following from the test and the expert assessment.
Appendix 10. Examples of non-academic aggression on the Internet and in everyday life
G. A. Shulman’s reaction to the analysis and criticism of his configuration
Judging by the article “A Reply to Curzon”, written by G. A. Shulman and circulated among socionists, he took great offence at me for attempting to make sense of his works and understand the course of his thought. Do I really have no right to that? I used no abusive words, as he does; I used no irony; I simply discussed the information contained in his articles, and did so in exactly the same way as when reading any other author. G. A. apparently considers that I do not understand him and do not hear him, and that over many years. Of course I could readdress that very statement to him and say that it is he who does not understand and does not hear me. For those who know socionics there is nothing surprising in this — two mutually uncomprehending types have come together. Of course I do not understand why he calls me Curzon. I appear to have no relation whatever to Curzon, and there is no analogy in my surname. I cannot, for instance, tell whether this is a variety of insult or some variety of humour. In any case his article approaches in style a lampoon, or rather a libel.
And yet it is interesting: how could I have understood him had I not thought over and analysed his articles? After all, I read and analyse not only his articles but the articles and books of many other socionists. With some I agree more, with others less. And that is comprehensible. I, for example, disagree with V. V. Gulenko and V. D. Ermak on many points, and I say so constantly, and I am ready to discuss contentious questions in an academic mode — but, needless to say, without any manipulative tricks: without offence-taking, threats, pressure, blackmail, mockery, profanation, defamation and the like.
However, judging by the article, G. A. Shulman considers that I am engaged in vilifying him. He writes that the vilification began fifteen years ago, with the appearance of the Periodic System of the Socion (PSS), and continues to this day — with varying assiduity, under various sauces (from “But this is nonsense!” to “And what for?”). G. A. goes on to write that a special place among all the vilifiers is occupied by the head of the methodology department of the International Institute of Socionics, Semyon Ivanovich Churyumov. No references to the corresponding places in my articles and papers are given, apparently because I never used the phrases quoted about “nonsense” and about “what for”. I find it interesting to make sense of the peculiarities of people’s thinking, and I try to do so professionally. In the end we are socionists and are trying to make sense of people. I do not understand why G. A. Shulman tries to be ironic at my expense, why he attempts to cast doubt on my ability to think and to formulate my thoughts. I do not understand why, about my attempts to make sense of G. A. Shulman’s theoretical constructions, it is necessary to write that the Periodic System of the Socion just will not let Semyon Ivanovich sleep in peace — will not let him at all — and that he has been demolishing the poor thing at no fewer than three socionics conferences. For me G. A. Shulman’s Periodic System really does represent a special interest, but simply because, to my mind, more logical and methodological errors have been committed in this theoretical construct than in the works of other socionists, while at the same time it is a beautiful and plausible construct whose logical defects and errors are not obvious. And these errors must be analysed and explained so that they do not hinder the development of the new science. The errors themselves deserve deep and close attention. I always have been and remain open to a conscientious discussion of any theoretical construction. I have always built my argumentation in detail and with care, and I should like people to talk to me in an academic style rather than in the language of libels.
Here, for example, is a phrase from “Curzon” which is completely incomprehensible to me: that if S. I. Churyumov had, among the 1,420 sources of information he used in writing his doctoral dissertation, not merely indicated two collections of hikers’ songs but conscientiously listed all the songs in those collections — then, oho, what a bibliography would have resulted! Frightening to think of. And those collections he too knows, for he is a sinner and loves hikers’ songs; a great many songs are gathered there. What have hikers’ songs to do with it? I catch only that some insinuation is contained here, but why a person writes precisely in this way is beyond me. Possibly some doubt is being expressed about the quality of my doctoral dissertation, but what its substance is I do not understand.
From the style of “Curzon” one gets the impression that G. A. Shulman does not admit the thought that he might be mistaken, and that he perceives academic criticism as a wish to defame — at any price.
At the 8th socionics conference in Irpen I found, as it seems to me, an exceptionally mild form of conveying my understanding of G. A. Shulman’s work: I applied his method to the construction of analogous constructs, from which it could follow that no such construction is absolute, and hence that one may doubt the absoluteness of the PSS as well. G. A. Shulman assessed this as a striving to defame. In my book I have devoted sufficient attention to G. A. Shulman’s constructions (but of course not only to his) simply because I am a logical type and do not let logical errors pass. All the more since this is my direct duty as head of the methodology department of the IIS. In other respects I regard G. A. Shulman with respect, considering him a talented poet, translator, journalist, editor, orator and educator, and in some measure I understand his feelings; but I need arguments, not attempts to manipulate through taking offence. There is nothing personal in my analysis of G. A. Shulman’s works, and if anyone finds errors in my argumentation I am ready to discuss any topic, as I have done more than once. There is no “crusade”, no vilification and no striving to defame a talented person; there is only logical argumentation. I by no means insist that I understand everything correctly, and when G. A. Shulman says that my article abounds, to put it mildly, in inaccuracies, I study his text attentively. G. A. Shulman considers that my article utterly rejects (or refutes, crosses out, disavows etc.) the basic propositions and conclusions he arrived at as a result of sixteen years of research in socionics. I fully allow that this may be dramatic; but if the construction of G. A. Shulman’s under examination has turned out to be an artefact — a beautiful one, outwardly plausible and actively defended — then one must have the courage to renounce one’s “favourite delusions”, assuming of course that I am right. Unfortunately G. A. has chosen the path of taking offence and of ethical dramatisation instead of calm and careful discussion.
In any case this discussion shows how differently two representatives of two socionic types understand one and the same words; and if G. A. Shulman retains confidence in his own rightness, that is his right — but I too am entitled to my own view of the problem. I have set out my argumentation in detail in the appropriate place in the book. I probably have many errors, but I should like to be convinced of them rather than have open and disguised abuse used against me. For example, G. A. Shulman openly mocks the “Churyumov Square”, holding forth on the absurdity of this “article of manufacture”. The “Square” seems to him so preposterous that he uses of it the expression “I do what I like and turn things as I please”, and goes on to write that our author — in time free from this laborious activity — also heads a department, and not simply a department but a department of methodology. I take this as incomprehensible and inappropriate irony. The “Square” helped correct Lyashkyavichyus’s error, so why is it necessary to use the expression “seizing on V. Lyashkyavichyus’s error”? Why is it necessary to use expressions such as what Semyon Ivanovich has “contrived” in “his” — in general not the most complex — “geometrical figure”? Is this irony at the expense of an opponent’s mental abilities? On the whole it seems that G. A. Shulman is convinced of the profound erroneousness of the square I have built. This consoles me, although his argumentation remains incomprehensible to me. But judge for yourselves. He writes that the socion is an integral, closed entity; and that if one is to arrange the quadras of that socion along the sides of a square, then one ought, by the very idea of the thing, to make use of at least some kind of methodology. For example, all the quadras are arranged along the sides of a square with horizontal-vertical sides from left to right and from top to bottom. Everything would be clear — there is a regularity as an element of methodology. Or — which is far more consistent, given the phenomenon of the socion’s closedness — around a “ring”: that is, an arrow from left to right on the upper side of the square, a two-way vertical arrow on its right vertical side, from top to bottom, a double arrow on the lower side, from right to left, and a ring on the second vertical side of the square, from bottom to top. That is a quotation from “Curzon”; for typographic reasons I have merely replaced the symbols of the arrows and the circle with the corresponding words. If anyone understands this phrase, please explain it. The argument adduced ends with the words: but this task proved highly complex for the said author. From the further text it seems to follow that G. A. Shulman is not against the square but considers that it must be filled in differently — that Lyashkyavichyus’s error lies not in the placing of the Huxley and Stierlitz dyads but in the placing of the London and Napoleon dyads, which are the ones that need to change places. The argumentation ends with the words: the Square, however, has turned into gibberish. The argument adduced shows how far people can fail to understand one another.
There is, however, one piece of reasoning of G. A. Shulman’s which I do not accept. This is the assertion that making public another person’s TIM, and likewise appealing to that publicised TIM, is considered unethical in socionics. This is an ethical argument I do not understand. And I do not know who in socionics considers it unethical. What else are we engaged in in socionics if not the determination of types in order to make sense of people’s behaviour? A person’s TIM is not something indecent, forbidden and not to be mentioned. In any case, socionists determine and name the TIMs of actors, writers, scholars, politicians and generally anyone they wish.
“Curzon” ends with a list of categories in which G. A. Shulman assesses my abilities to work with theoretical texts. They are: “1. Aggressive-ignorative voluntarism; 2. The method of snatched fragments; 3. Global trivialism; 4. Concrete-conceptual primitivism (in naming the working methods of the co-contacts under survey).” This at least is comprehensible and witty. And for it one can only be grateful.
There is, however, an essential difference in the motivation of the generalising terms used by Shulman and by Churyumov. For the generalised designation of Shulman’s methodological complex, Churyumov used methodological categories which Shulman himself insistently, over many years, in many articles and papers, used as key ones, in his opinion, for work with socionic material. These are the category of beauty as a criterion of truth, the principle of relative reliability, and the principle of the error of the measuring instrument. This is his working terminology, and therefore there can be nothing offensive in designating Shulman’s methodological position by these terms as instrumental-aesthetic relativism. That is, there is no question here of pinning on labels, as G. A. assesses it, but only of using an adequate term. Shulman, on the other hand, ascribes to Churyumov methodological terms which the latter has never used as normative instruments.
An example of paranoid vigilance on the part of an anonymous well-wisher
A message was forwarded to the Director of the Institute of Prognostics, E. Shursky, a fragment of which is given below. I do not know the author’s name, but it may perhaps be easy enough to establish from the link contained in the text.
“Knowing that I am interested in new technologies and achievements in any field of science, former colleagues at work gave me this link. I shall not reproduce the text here in full — it does not deserve it (all the more since the text runs to several printed pages; I am sorry for your time); whoever wishes may acquaint himself with it independently at the address http://www.umoloda.kiev.ua/forum/show/10/1104/. I would not have mentioned this ‘document’ here were it not for two circumstances: the text mentions the respected participant of the first (and second? I have no exact information) forum on the problems of immortality, S. I. Churyumov. The text mentions MABET — the International Academy of Bioenergotechnologies, of which our respected Emir Emmanuilovich is a member. And it is mentioned in far from the best light… Here are two extracts from the text where what I wrote of above is mentioned: At the present time unsanctioned psychotronic and bioenergo-informational torture experiments on people are being conducted in Kiev under the ‘cover’ of the following organisations: — the Kiev (and only!) branch of the International Academy of Bioenergotechnologies of Ukraine (MABET). — the Kiev International Institute of Socionics, concealing itself at the address PO Box 23, Kiev-206, 02206, Ukraine 38044, tel. 558-09-35, and represented on the Internet at http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ (head — the self-styled ‘doctor of socionics’ and ‘bioenergologist’ Alexander Valentinovich Bukalov http://socioniko.narod.ru/ru/authors/bukalav.html). — The socionist Churyumov S.I., experimenting on the ‘psychic substrate of man’, article ‘The Problem of the Psychic Substrate’, No. 1(1) 2001, http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/socmain.html#top Of course this cannot be taken seriously, but knowing our opponents’ doings will, I think, do us no harm. Incidentally, this is dated 27 November 2004. Shall we defend ourselves?”
This text bears signs of a paranoid perception of reality, and that makes its author’s position entirely comprehensible. Only one thing is unclear: whether the author conducts such investigations on his own initiative or whether someone is setting him on to search for enemies. It is clear that in Soviet times such a mention would have been enough to put a person in prison, send him to the GULAG, or shoot him without trial or investigation by decision of a revolutionary troika.
An example of malicious internet sneering
On the Internet the lads found the “Travel Notes” of a certain Z., written in 2000 and directed against the Kiev school of socionics. The text is vulgar, base and low-grade. The author himself apparently considers that his text is written with a sense of humour. This is evident from the note “for those whose sense of humour is intermittent” — so he, then, has no such interruptions. That is probably so; but it is the sense of humour of a slanderer trying at any price to blacken those who, if you please, have displeased him, whose cast of thought does not suit him, while he would so like to impose his own order on someone else’s territory. There are many varieties of negative humour — black, gallows, obscene. In this case we are dealing with some variety of sneering-cesspit humour. In form the “Notes” are a libel steeped in inadequate hatred of the Kiev school of socionics; in content they are gossip employing low-grade sneering. From the very outset the author declares that one of the tasks of his trip to Kiev was “testing the level of the school in Kiev”; but at the same time he “tested” Ukraine as well (“Ukraine does not love Russia but cannot live without her”) and the Kievan-Ukrainian mentality, which in his opinion “always lags behind the mentality of Moscow by roughly 1.2–1.5 times”. As we see, here the malice bursting out of the gossip acquires an international-chauvinist character. True, he himself is not from Moscow but from Volgograd, where the mentality, judging by the “Notes” written by Z., is 3.5 times lower than Moscow’s; but most likely the matter here lies not in the mentality of Volgograd but in the mentality of Z. himself. Judge at least the malicious primitiveness of the following phrase: “In order to substantiate the superiority of Ukrainians over Russians, the ancient tribe of the Ukry was urgently invented, who were the true Khokhols, lived in caves and ate galushki and salo (wherever did they get them?).”
Next the gossip-intelligent hastens to communicate the “joyful news” that “the official status of the International Institute of Socionics (the IIS) is very indeterminate”. The reasons are unknown to him; there are only idle suppositions and observations, of which he says that they “cannot be called entirely objective, but nevertheless”. It turns out that for this “progressive innovator of thought” the most important things are formal-bureaucratic signs: “The IIS has no office premises”, “Official representatives of Kiev science were not observed at the conference”, “Nor were there official representatives of science from Russia”. So this, it turns out, is what the well-wishing snooper occupies himself with. As is evident from the text of the “Notes”, he is incapable of understanding what people are talking about at a conference, but he spies out and sniffs out “intimate details” so as to have something to sneer at.
The people gathered at the conference he perceives as clinical idiots: “they can neither speak nor communicate with an audience”, “the exposition of their brilliant thoughts is very confused, foggy, contradictory”. It is clear that psychological projection is at work here, and that the gossip is simply incapable of understanding what is being talked about — behold the Volgograd mentality! Everything at the conference arouses his dislike, and above all its organiser and the leader of the Kiev school of socionics, A. V. Bukalov. He simply does not take to him, and therefore the man is bad. Thus began the testing of the Kiev school.
The gossip joyfully reports that the conference took place on the premises of an ambulance service. True, he does not say that this was a spacious conference hall — though a real scholar is hardly so troubled by such details, since the main thing is the exchange of thoughts. But for the slanderer-snooper, prestige-bureaucratic details matter, and at the level of sneering he predicts that “the next conference will surely be held in a circus”. Funny, isn’t it!? The gossip does not see the selfless work of the publishers of a journal intended for a small circle of specialists; he mocks the limited means of the editors, giving away to his readers the “terrible secret” that “the official printed organ of the IIS — the journal Socionics, Mentology and Personality Psychology — is produced by hand in a cottage-industry way. The camera-ready copy is printed on an inkjet printer, then run off on a risograph, then glued.” Here, though, the author sinks to open slander — the journal is prepared as in any modern editorial office and printed in a printing house; but the slanderer is interested not in the journal’s content but in the conditions under which it is published, since that gives him something to sneer at. But what irritates the gossip particularly is that he is himself incapable of discovering anything new in socionics, and everything that seems to him a discovery has already been discovered by those who took the subject up earlier.
Next the author of the “Notes” complains that he was treated unjustly at the conference (this, apparently, is what provoked him to the libel-gossip). But he was simply shown the door in connection with the open boorishness and rudeness with which he began to insult the conference organisers. Well, if you don’t like the Kiev socionists, don’t associate with them; organise your own gathering, publish your own journal, and expound your brilliant thoughts there.
Here is an example of how the mentality of the author of the “Notes” twists a profound and beautiful theme worked out by A. V. Bukalov. This is Bukalov’s representation of the Universe as a computing machine. Only a mentally limited person could prove incapable of appreciating the originality of this idea, whose essence can be expressed in a few words, though far from everyone is capable of arriving at such an idea, formulating it as a hypothesis and giving elements of its theoretical grounding. The Universe, like a computer, continuously processes and produces new information. From this one may conclude that it has a corresponding element base, for which one might, for example, take elementary particles. The gossip, however, garbles this idea into the following passage: “Bukalov’s favourite theme is the cosmos. This cosmos keeps coming down on him, reminding him that it is a ‘quantum computing machine’ by the name of ‘the Universe’. When this happens, Bukalov becomes unavailable for external contact. All declarations of broad practical activity must evidently be understood as ‘our practical activity in the cosmos’.” It is clear that Z. has heard about the “quantum computing machine”, but ideas do not interest him; all he needs is to sneer. And he goes on sneering for another couple of paragraphs about A. V. Bukalov, Marx and Shambhala.
Next Z. sneers about Churyumov. He calls him nothing but THE SLY ONE IN THE LAND OF FOOLS. “The slyness consists in the fact that Churyumov, imperceptibly to the Kievan maîtres, is drawing level with them, and then intends to seize ideological power in Kiev (or in the whole of socionics?). It was for this that he declared himself a Don Quixote, so that his inheritance of socionics from Aušra should become more lawful. All this, together with his position, threatens a transfer of power (the illusion of power) from Bukalov to Churyumov. It is interesting whether the ‘maîtres’ themselves understand this, and also whether they understand that they are exchanging an awl for soap. And how do they intend to meet their hour X?” How perceptive this Z. is! He was thrown out of the conference for boorishness, yet he still managed to penetrate to the “very essence” of the internal intrigue of the Kiev school of socionics, which he pictures to himself as a “jar of spiders” — projecting onto the world, of course, his own habits. Here he introduces his own intrigue too: it turns out that he wants to set the Kievans, with their “simplified mentality”, against one another, and tries very hard to succeed in this, constructing his vulgar conjectures, in whose categories alone he is capable of perceiving reality.
Naturally Z. says nothing about the substance of the work done in the Kiev school — he does not understand it. His mentality does not permit it. But he savours and derides the age-related peculiarities and physical defects of his opponents. “The little dandelion-oldster Churyumov, the intelligent-raznochinets Ermak, who for years now cannot get himself a set of teeth and is fit only for lisping.” This is already the level of a degenerate scoundrel capable of taking a sweet from a child and putting a stone in a beggar’s hand.
He openly defames the subtle and talented theoretician Gulenko, working up in the style of sneering the image of a dim half-wit who, allegedly, goes about with the idea that “to determine a type you have to gather three people: one sees, another hears, and a third understands types”. This is a hint at the representational systems of NLP, in which Z. considers himself an expert. Truly it is a matter for regret when “experts” try to use professional knowledge for maliciously settling scores with opponents. How much effrontery it takes to say of the creative scholar Gulenko that Gulenko’s competence in NLP is close to zero. Note that Z. does not analyse V. V. Gulenko’s works — he simply sneers about him. He does not analyse Shulman’s work — he simply, at the level of Lieutenant Rzhevsky, applies NLP in order to ridicule a man merely because that man does not appeal to him: “ONE SHULMAN, TWO SHULMAN…” Evidently this seems very funny to him.
Finally Z. moves on to open abuse, classifying Kiev socionists (only the Kiev ones) into “the elevated, the elevatedly-cracked, and the simply cracked”. And now, having boorishly ridiculed and sneered at scholars, Z., in the spirit of NLP, poses a question prepared in advance: “can such people teach others to be human? Can they advise how to arrange one’s personal life if they have none themselves — on the contrary, life has them?” What a little turn of phrase, with that “has”! Of course it is presupposed that a person with the qualities of a gossip and a degenerate scoundrel can readily teach others to be human; and as for a personal life, that he has.
Further the vulgarity of the author of the “Notes” reaches its apogee: “The maîtres cannot determine TIMs, starting with their own. The inability to determine types, starting with one’s own, is masked by the phrase: if in answer to a question about your type you start being coy, then it is the same as in answer to a question about your sex… But who asks about sex: for that there are eyes and hands (if you are in doubt).” Such is Z.’s uninterrupted humour.
Distorting facts and the situation, Z. writes: “to tell a person what type he is, is with them practically a rule of good tone. They come right up and declare: ‘you’re a Don Quixote’ or ‘you’re a Jack’. Until then I had no doubt that my name was something else.” What is he writing about? That he had no doubt his name was something else? And what is he doing in socionics if he treats the determination of type with such disgust?
The last section of the “Notes”, HOW SHALL WE ARRANGE … THE KITCHEN, is a model of civic cynicism entirely characteristic of the post-Soviet de-ideologised — in essence, of the New Russian who has lost positive value orientations — sneering in passing at the tragedy of the Russian intelligentsia, crushed and suppressed by the inhuman regime under which it had to live. Striking the pose of a judge-raisonneur, he writes: “The lumpen intelligentsia — the very one that is called rotten and toothless — well, it knew how to do only one thing well: read. Reading replaced life with kitchen gatherings which imitated stormy social activity. The imagination, warmed by wine and vodka and spurred on by nicotine, drew pictures on the theme ‘How shall we arrange Russia’, and already something like a Nobel Prize for a contribution to the history of humanity was being dreamt of. The kitchen is just the place to dream on the scale of the Universe. But out of the kitchen they never came. The second skill, honed over decades, is REFLECTION. In this case reflection is self-analysis. It is, above all, the fitting of one’s perception of reality to an imagined profound understanding of that same reality. Socionics proved as timely here as could be: one could quickly and conveniently explain one’s own idleness while spending little time on reading. After that all that remained was to fit the world to the ‘scientific explanation’ of that world.” A vulgar and cynical passage, stylised as a profound reflection on the “authentic” essence of the intelligentsia. It is also obvious that Z. takes pride in his lack of reflection — otherwise he would not write such filth.
It is nevertheless interesting what his type is. Probably his type is not bad; only his character is heavily mixed with baseness and boorishness.
If Z.’s text is used as a test, then it is not hard to make a diagnosis: hysteroid paranoia with a complex of mental superiority, which is precisely what impels him to occupy himself with what is not his business and to go to other people’s gatherings with his boorishness. Apparently this is the only thing he knows how to do.
Appendix 11. The author’s articles and papers on socionics
(Journal abbreviation: SMPL = “Socionics, Mentology and Personality Psychology”.)
Articles
- Socionic accentuations, SMPL 1, 1994.
- Type and character, SMPL 1, 2000.
- A socionic approach to the classification of philosophical systems, SMPL 2, 1995.
- An author’s course of lectures on socionics, SMPL 3.
- The hypothesis of the universality of the socionic TIM, SMPL 1, 1996.
- Generalisation of the socionic model, SMPL 5, 1996.
- Socionics as methodology, SMPL 1, 1996.
- The TIM of a railway station, submitted to SMPL, November 2000.
- The problem of diversity within the TIM, SMPL 1, 2002.
- Socionics and philosophy: there is nothing new under the sun, SMPL 1–3, 1998.
- Two approaches to the formal description of socionic relations, SMPL 3–5, 1999.
- The possible and the impossible in socionics, or the smile of the Cheshire Cat, SMPL 4–6, 1998.
- Materials towards determining the socionic type of the Ukrainian ethnos, SMPL 6, 1999.
- Individual peculiarities of the methodological complexes of scholars working in the sphere of socionics, Socionic Readings, 1999.
- THE LIGHT AND HORIZONS OF THE “GREAT EXPERIMENT”, Socionic Readings, 1999.
- Configurations in socionics, SMPL 5, 2001.
- Discussions on the names of the socionic types, submitted to SMPL, November 2000.
- The TIM of a kindergarten, submitted to SMPL, November 2000.
- The TIM of a general-education school, submitted to SMPL, November 2000.
- The TIM of a higher educational institution, submitted to SMPL, November 2000.
- The TIM of an army, submitted to SMPL, November 2000.
- The problem of the existence and uniqueness of the TIM, submitted to SMPL, October 2000.
- An alternative view of the functioning of Model “A”, SMPL 2, 2000.
- The problem of the psychic substrate, submitted for publication September 2000.
- The problem of differentiating traits in psychology and socionics, SMPL 6, 2002.
- The problem of the psychic functions and their semantics, submitted for publication November 2000.
- The problem of informational metabolism and informational aspects, submitted for publication November 2000.
- Socionics as a periodic system of TIMs (PSTIM), submitted for publication November 2000.
- The problem of modelling the psyche, submitted for publication November 2000.
- Preface to a collection of articles devoted to C. Castaneda, in the collection Notes on Don Juan, vol. 1, Sofia, Kiev, 1996.
- Islam, or is it worth arguing about who is right, Nevedomy Mir 1, 1998.
- Buddhism, or dewdrops on lotus petals, Nevedomy Mir 2, 1998.
- Christianity, or the crown of thorns, Nevedomy Mir 3, 1998.
- An expanded model of the TIM, SMPL 6, 2001.
- The inevitability of methodology, SMPL 1, 2003.
- The problem of the psychic functions and their semantics, SMPL 3, 2003.
- Possibilities of constructing, on deductive foundations, a unified theory of the Universe and of Being, Stavropigian Philosophical Studies, issue 1, Lviv, 2008. (in Ukrainian)
- Extreme dimensions of contemporary science, Stavropigian Philosophical Studies, issue 2, Lviv, 2008. (in Ukrainian)
- The universality of the TIM code, Stavropigian Philosophical Studies, issue 2, Lviv, 2008. (in Ukrainian)
- The problem of Truth in the humanities, Stavropigian Philosophical Studies, issue 3, Lviv, 2010. (in Ukrainian)
Papers
(All by S. I. Churyumov.)
1–5. Representation of the socion as a closed contour in the form of a square (the “S. I. Churyumov square”); Representation of the relations between socionic types by means of the square “Ch”; Refinement of the order of types in the socion on the basis of the square “Ch”; The concept of the socion as a closed-ring structure on the basis of its representation as the square “Ch”; The square “Ch” as an equivalent of the table of relations, and its mnemonic peculiarities. (All papers to meetings of the city socionists’ club, 1986.) 6. On one method of designating socionic TIMs. (City socionists’ club, 1987) 7. The method of expert assessments in socionic testing. (Paper, 1988) 8. On the designation of the typological axes. (City socionists’ club, 1988) 9. On the designation of relations. (City socionists’ club, 1988) 10. A scale of psychological compatibility. (First seminar on socionics, “Socionics and the purposeful formation of collectives”, Poltava, 1988) 11. The conception of socionic accentuations. (City socionists’ club, 1989) 12. On the functional designations of the blocks of the model. (City socionists’ club, 1989) 13. Correspondence between energy meridians and IAs in socionics, and their activation in the process of a socionic type’s functioning. (Conference at Šventoji, 1990) 14. The problem of the energetic substrate of the psyche. (Conference at Šventoji, 1990) 15. The concept of configuration in socionics. (8th socionics conference, Irpen) 16. Varieties of socionic configurations. (8th socionics conference, Irpen) 17. An analysis of G. A. Shulman’s configuration. (8th socionics conference, Irpen) 18. Regular rhombic configurations in socionics. (Paper) 19. Alternative methods of tetradic coding of socionic types. (9th international socionics conference, 1994) 20. Cattell’s factors as dichotomising aspects of the personality. (9th international conference, 1994) 21. Numerical invariants of socionic relations. (9th international conference, 1994) 22. Metrical peculiarities of G. A. Shulman’s configuration. (10th international conference, 1995) 23. Possibilities of introducing various metrics over socionic configurations. (10th international conference, 1995) 24. A critique of the notion that the LSE and IEI tetrads are privileged. (10th international conference, 1995) 25. Characteristic peculiarities of dual pairs and their tetradic sets. (11th international conference, 1996) 26. The principle of duality in socionics. (Socionics conference, Vilnius, 1991) 27. The universality of the socionic TIM, on the example of interior design. (Socionics seminar, March 1996) 28. A socionic classification of general-scientific methods. (City socionics seminar, 1996) 29. The TIM of species and breeds of animals and plants. (City seminar, 1996) 30. The TIM of objects and structural units of society. (City seminar, 1996) 31. The TIM of objects and structural units of nature. (City seminar, 1996) 32. The TIM of a religious temple. (City seminar, 1996) 33. The TIM of an army. (City seminar, 1996) 34. The concepts of subject and object from the point of view of socionics. (City seminar, 1996) 35. Possible correlations between object and subject and their socionic correlates. (City seminar, 1996) 36. Generalised negative names of the socionic TIMs. (13th international conference, 1997) 37. The correlation between manipulative stances and TIMs. (13th international conference, 1997) 38. On one socionic phenomenon connected with A. V. Bukalov’s principle of fractality. (13th international conference, 1997) 39. The TIM of an Academy of Sciences. (City seminar, 1997) 40. The TIM of an opera house. (City seminar, 1997) 41. The TIM of a railway station. (City seminar, 1997) 42. The TIM of a higher educational institution. (City seminar, 1997) 43. Methodological aspects of socionics. (13th international conference, 1997) 44. The methodological paradigm underlying socionics. (City seminar, 1997) 45. The problem of diversity within the TIM. (City seminar, 1997) 46. An axiomatic approach to describing the foundations of socionics. (City seminar, 1997) 47. The mathematical concept of symmetry and the peculiarities of the socion’s symmetry. (City seminar, 1997) 48. The socionic model as a particular case of the structural description of a psychic type and of any types of informational metabolism. (13th conference, 1997) 49. Towards a definition of the concept of information in socionics and other sciences. (City seminar, 1997) 50. The methodological concept of the scientific paradigm as applied to individual sciences and to science as a whole. (City seminar, 1997) 51. Various approaches to the concept of the psyche in contemporary psychology. (City seminar, 1998) 52. The TIM of a general-education school. (City seminar, 1998) 53. Socionic parameters of a musical work. (City seminar, 1998) 54. The hypothesis of the unity of text and melody in folk song. (City seminar, 1998) 55. The hypothesis of the unity of text, melody and performance in the case of the author’s song. (City seminar, 1998) 56. The superposition of typological components in the case of synthetic works of art — vocal-instrumental performance, theatre and cinema. (City seminar, 1998) 57. Diagnosis of V. Vysotsky’s TIM with reference to his song-performance work. (City seminar, 1998) 58. Diagnosis of B. Okudzhava’s TIM from his musical works. (City seminar, 1998) 59. Socionic parameters of the musical work of Joe Dassin. (City seminar, 1998) 60. Socionics and philosophy: there is nothing new under the sun. (Series of articles in SMPL 1–3, 1998) 61. The Jungian dichotomies as archetypes of a high level. (City seminar, 1998) 62. A socionic assessment of the folk and composed music of England, France, Germany, Italy, the USA, Spain and the Latin American countries. (City seminar, 1998) 63. Socionic parameters of cities, on the example of Moscow, New York, St Petersburg, London, Paris, Odessa, Lviv and others. (City seminar, 1998) 64. The inevitability of a methodological assessment of a scholar’s scientific activity. (15th socionics conference, 1999) 65. The problem of the semantics of the socionic functions of Model “A”. (Socionics conference in Dnepropetrovsk, 1999) 66. The origin of the TIM. (City seminar, 1999) 67. On the possibility of a model of relation. (City seminar, 1999) 68. Two formal approaches to the description of relations. (City seminar, 1999) 69. The model of relation as a structure dual to the model of the TIM. (City seminar, 1999) 70. A model of relation based on the contact of functions with identical IAs. (City seminar, 1999) 71. A hypothesis on the semantics of the IAs. (City seminar, 1999) 72. A hypothesis on the semantics of the socionic functions. (City seminar, 1999) 73. The Reinin–Aušra traits as an ordered set. (15th socionics conference, 1999) 74. A hypothesis on the structure of the table of Reinin–Aušra traits. (15th socionics conference, 1999) 75. On the possibility of a model of a differentiating trait. (City seminar, 1999) 76. A definition of socionics as a science. (City seminar, 1999) 77. The possible and the impossible in socionics, or the smile of the Cheshire Cat. (Series of articles in SMPL 4–6, 1998; 1–3, 1999) 78. The social significance of determining the TIM of an ethnos in general and of the Ukrainian ethnos in particular. (City seminar, 1999) 79. The basic concepts of ethnography and their socionic interpretation. (City seminar, 1999) 80. The emergence and development of the Ukrainian ethnos. (City seminar, 1999) 81. The influence of geographical conditions on the formation of an ethnos in general and the Ukrainian in particular. (City seminar, 1999) 82. Ukrainian Cossackdom as a unique ethnic phenomenon and its assessment from the point of view of socionics. (City seminar, 1999) 83. The emergence of the “Ukrainian quality” in the period from 1199 to 1340. (City seminar, 1999) 84. The stability of ethnic invariants over time. (City seminar, 1999) 85. The structure of scientific proof from the point of view of socionics. (City seminar, 1999) 86. Generalisation of the concept of metabolism to any transformations connected with matter, energy and information. (City seminar, 1999) 87. Socionic testing and diagnostics — the limitations of question-based tests, diagnosis relying on projective tests and behavioural situations. (City seminar, 1996) 88. Question-based tests as tuning tables for calibrating the operator. (City seminar, 1999) 89. Diagnostic projections of the Ego, Super-Ego, Super-Id and Id. (City seminar, 1996) 90. Socionic diagnostics — verbal formulas characterising the horizontal blocks of the models of all TIMs. (City seminar, 1996) 91. General-psychological and special requirements for diagnostic instruments in socionics. (City seminar, 1997) 92. A package of diagnostic tools for the socionist for work in field and laboratory conditions — “A graphic test on completing figures”, “A verbal projective test on completing images in situations”, “An improved test with the depiction of a non-existent animal”, “Verbal-graphic interpretations”, “Dodonov’s test adapted to socionics”, “Game situations for revealing socionically significant parameters”, “Picture situations — the determination of preferences”. The package was handed to the organisers of the socionics conference in Dnepropetrovsk in April 1999. 93. Postulates relating to the construction and description of the structure of models of informational metabolism. (City seminar, 1999) 94. The astrological model of personality as a particular case of the generalised model of informational metabolism. (13th conference, 1997) 95. A “relational” model of the TIM. (13th conference, 1997) 96. Socionic analogues of the elements of the astrological model. (13th conference, 1997) 97. On the question of socionic terminology and notation. (City seminar, 1998) 98. General-scientific requirements for terminology and notation, and the necessity of meeting them in socionics. (City seminar, 1998) 99. Derived relations in socionics. (13th socionics conference, 1997) 100. The concept of a differentiating trait in socionics. (City seminar, 1999) 101. On the sixteenth Reinin–Aušra trait. (City seminar, 1999) 102. Socionics as a periodic system of psychological types. (15th socionics conference, 1999) 103. Socionic coding of arbitrary information. (13th socionics conference, 1997) 104. The origin of human types of character in accordance with the ideas of B. F. Porshnev. (Socionics conference, 1998) 105. The model “Ch”. (11th socionics conference) 106. Various approaches to the concept of model and system in contemporary science. (City seminar, 1998) 107. V. V. Gulenko’s differentiating traits for the set of IAs. (City seminar, 1999) 108. The concept of the individual methodological complex and its role in scientific work. (City seminar, 1999) 109. Individual peculiarities of the methodological complexes of scholars working in the sphere of socionics. (City seminar, 1999) 110. The periodisation of history and rhythmic laws. (City seminar, 2000) 111. The problem of the uniqueness of the TIM. (City seminar, 2000) 112. Methodological fashion in science, and philosophy. (City seminar, 2000) 113. The problem of the existence of the TIM, from the methodological and practical points of view. (City seminar, 2000) 114. The Bukalov–Gulenko law of quadra succession and Plato’s periodisation of social organisation. (City seminar, 2000) 115. Socionics and philosophy. (City seminar, 2000) / Generalisation of the concept of a differentiating trait. (City seminar, 2000) 116. Shepetko–Gut differentiating traits for the socion. (City seminar, 2000) 117. The problem of signs in Model “A”. (XXII International Socionics Conference, 2006) 118. An analysis of the model “E”. (XXII International Conference, 2006) 119. Requirements for a theory of personality. (XXII International Conference, 2006) 120. The theorem on the strict ordering of the socion. (XXII International Conference, 2006) 121. A generalised assessment of relations. (XXII International Conference, 2006) 122. Initial assumptions in socionics. (XXII International Conference, 2006) 123. The gender fractal. Moscow, conference of 12 April 2009. 124. Extreme situations in science. Moscow, conference of 12 April 2009. 125. A proof of the theorem on the strict ordering of the socion. Moscow, conference of 12 April 2009. 126. Methodological miscalculations in contemporary socionic enquiry. Moscow, conference of 12 April 2009. 127. Critical remarks on the current understanding of the ARTs (the Aušra–Reinin traits). Moscow, conference of 12 April 2009. 128. What is wrong with Kalinauskas’s socionics? Moscow, conference of 17–18 April 2010. 129. A theoretical image of intuitive flights of fancy in socionics. Moscow, conference of 17–18 April 2010. 130. Are socionists capable of coping with theoretical problems on their own? Moscow, conference of 17–18 April 2010.
Imprint
Scientific edition. Approved at the XXIII International Socionics Conference.
Churyumov, Semyon Ivanovich. The Smile of the Cheshire Cat, or the Possible and the Impossible in Socionics: Problems, Hypotheses, Solutions. Vol. IV — Moscow, “Chornaya Belka”, 2010.
© S. I. Churyumov · © “Chornaya Belka” · ISBN 978-966-8260-83-4
Printed in the author’s own editing. Illustrations by S. I. Churyumov and A. S. Churyumov. Second edition — corrected and enlarged.