# Function Signs



## elixare (Aug 26, 2010)

IE: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/107-Signs-of-Functions-(-)

What exactly is a Plus function? What exactly is a minus function? What makes one differ from the other? How would you describe your understanding of these two concepts?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I am not sure I understand this at all. Shoddy grammar isn't helping.


----------



## stevenjore (Nov 22, 2012)

off topic..


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

stevenjore said:


> HEY LEAT!!!!
> 
> I really enjoy looking at your avatar profile pic. It's really groovy and sizzle-licious. I would shake my milkshake and cheesburger to that if it was in music form. Where it from.
> 
> Duderz.


And why couldn't you just VM me about it instead of going entirely off-topic?


----------



## stevenjore (Nov 22, 2012)

I didn't know how...but now I do....my bad. I'll delete and repost.


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

When I was on another forum I had the oppurtunity to talk to Dmitri Lytov, the Russian socionist about these and ask him the question myself. He said that they were never defined by socionists themselves, that most socionists tend to ignore them and that I best follow their example.


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

Victor Gulenko and some other guys from Kiev decided that 8 IM elements was not enough, so they made more. Naturally, most of the other people ignored them.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Could someone explain what is meant though since I couldn't really understand the purpose based on the link provided in the OP? I'm terrible at understanding complex theoretical ideas in text only with no ability to ask questions.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

LeaT said:


> Could someone explain what is meant though since I couldn't really understand the purpose based on the link provided in the OP? I'm terrible at understanding complex theoretical ideas in text only with no ability to ask questions.


IIRC, + and - functions are essentially a more complicated way of looking at element blocking and quadra values. For example, Fe acts differently when blocked with Ni (+Fe) than it does when blocked with Si (-Fe). I recall seeing a relatively decent article on the concept a couple of times, but I cannot recall where I saw them.

Edit: To be honest, I don't agree with the descriptions in that link. As an EII with a less than stellar upbringing, I identify just fine with many of the -Fi traits. It's possible that I am interpreting things too simplistically.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

To elaborate on my previous post:

Let's take EII. We can say

+Fi
-Ne
+Ti
-Se
+Te
-Si
+Fe
-Ni

Or we can say, "My Fi is blocked with Ne and therefore has a different flavor than a Gamma's Fi, which is blocked with Se. I do badly with Se blocked with Ti" and so forth. The latter is far less complicated, IMO. The WS Wiki has some quadra descriptions in progress; I think they do a good job of distinguishing the Rational elements between quadras and how said elements are flavored by the Irrational element with which they are blocked.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> IIRC, + and - functions are essentially a more complicated way of looking at element blocking and quadra values. For example, Fe acts differently when blocked with Ni (+Fe) than it does when blocked with Si (-Fe). I recall seeing a relatively decent article on the concept a couple of times, but I cannot recall where I saw them.
> 
> Edit: To be honest, I don't agree with the descriptions in that link. As an EII with a less than stellar upbringing, I identify just fine with many of the -Fi traits. It's possible that I am interpreting things too simplistically.


So it's almost like subgroups except wheher you see a function as positive or not? I have a pretty negative view of Fe for example, so that would mean I consider -Fe?


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

LeaT said:


> So it's almost like subgroups except wheher you see a function as positive or not? I have a pretty negative view of Fe for example, so that would mean I consider -Fe?


Not really. The orientation of the element is fixed per quadra. EII has +Fe and -Ni in the Superid.

Alpha (Fe & Si, Ne & Ti)
-Fe
+Si
-Ti
+Ne

Beta (Fe & Ni, Se & Ti)
+Fe
-Ni
+Ti
-Se

Gamma (Te & Ni, Se & Fi)
-Te
+Ni
-Fi
+Se

Delta (Te & Si, Ne & Fi)
+Te
-Si
+Fi
-Ne

I think this brings up another interesting question. Given that elements do not exist by a vacuum, how are the functions within our Superid flavored by each other? How is my Fe-ignoring different from an ESI's Fe-ignoring?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> Not really. The orientation of the element is fixed per quadra. EII has +Fe and -Ni in the Superid.
> 
> Alpha (Fe & Si, Ne & Ti)
> -Fe
> ...


Also, why would Ne be invalued for an EII even if you're say, an Ne subtype?


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

LeaT said:


> Also, why would Ne be invalued for an EII even if you're say, an Ne subtype?


+ and - do not signify value; from what I see, it has more to do with things like breadth and psychological distance.

To be honest, looking at the descriptions, I don't entirely understand what the creator was on about. I'd sooner attribute +Fe to Alpha (which prefers positive emotion) and -Fe to Beta (which is perfectly fine with positive or negative). +Fi makes sense for Delta, as it tends to be more accepting and accommodating of people and more focused on what people could be than on what they are; I can see -Fi for Gamma, as they are more inclined toward a "you're an asshole/idiot, now get the fuck away from me" sort of attitude if they feel the person merits it. I've never understood the +Se and -Se dichotomy. I think the article I read put a slightly different spin on this concept than I am seeing here.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> + and - do not signify value; from what I see, it has more to do with things like breadth and psychological distance.
> 
> To be honest, looking at the descriptions, I don't entirely understand what the creator was on about. I'd sooner attribute +Fe to Alpha (which prefers positive emotion) and -Fe to Beta (which is perfectly fine with positive or negative). +Fi makes sense for Delta, as it tends to be more accepting and accommodating of people and more focused on what people could be than on what they are; I can see -Fi for Gamma, as they are more inclined toward a "you're an asshole/idiot, now get the fuck away from me" sort of attitude if they feel the person merits it. I've never understood the +Se and -Se dichotomy. I think the article I read put a slightly different spin on this concept than I am seeing here.


Maybe, but yes, I think it would make more sense to say that +Fi for delta. But doesn't it also depend on if it's the dominant function in that type so SEE would have +Se but ESI -Se? That doesn't make sense to me though, but then again, I can't make much sense of this even after skimming through the article in the OP.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

LeaT said:


> Could someone explain what is meant though since I couldn't really understand the purpose based on the link provided in the OP? I'm terrible at understanding complex theoretical ideas in text only with no ability to ask questions.





Kanerou said:


> IIRC, + and - functions are essentially a more complicated way of looking at element blocking and quadra values. For example, Fe acts differently when blocked with Ni (+Fe) than it does when blocked with Si (-Fe). I recall seeing a relatively decent article on the concept a couple of times, but I cannot recall where I saw them.


What Kanerou said. It was explained here with better translation: Plus and Minus by Victor Gulenko



aestrivex said:


> Victor Gulenko and some other guys from Kiev decided that 8 IM elements was not enough, so they made more. Naturally, most of the other people ignored them.


They didn't invent any new information elements, only new designations.
New designations =/= new elements.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

cyamitide said:


> It was explained here with better translation: Plus and Minus by Victor Gulenko


Ah, thank you.

Hmm. I disagree with the assertion that Deltas cannot work during emergencies. It's not my preference, but I am capable.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Kanerou said:


> Ah, thank you.
> 
> Hmm. I disagree with the assertion that Deltas cannot work during emergencies. It's not my preference, but I am capable.


I think they mean preferences rather than capabilities.

ENFps actually handle emergengies very well. Two of my doctors were ENFps, and two of my ENFp friends from college went into nursing. To work in medical career you must be relatively stress-resistant and be ready to respond quickly. ISTps perform well in emergency situations too, but not as well as ENFps from what I've seen. INFjs and ESTjs are worse at it among Delta types.

Among Decisive Se/Ni quadra, ESTp and ENTj are best at keeping their wits and nerves together in dire situations.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

cyamitide said:


> I think they mean preferences rather than capabilities.
> 
> ENFps actually handle emergengies very well. Two of my doctors were ENFps, and two of my ENFp friends from college went into nursing. To work in medical career you must be relatively stress-resistant and be ready to respond quickly. ISTps perform well in emergency situations too, but not as well as ENFps from what I've seen. INFjs and ESTjs are worse at it among Delta types.
> 
> Among Decisive Se/Ni quadra, ESTp and ENTj are best at keeping their wits and nerves together in dire situations.


If they meant preferences, they ought to say that (or someone ought to translate better). There's a huge difference between "x group really doesn't prefer to do this" and "x group _cannot_ do this", which is what was stated. (And I'm not ragging on you here, just the article.)


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Kanerou said:


> If they meant preferences, they ought to say that (or someone ought to translate better). There's a huge difference between "x group really doesn't prefer to do this" and "x group _cannot_ do this", which is what was stated. (And I'm not ragging on you here, just the article.)


The author of that article is Gulenko and he is LII, so I'm assuming he is stating things overly categorically and over-using can/cannot constructions as is typical of static types. I've interpreted the categorical statement in his articles more "softly" as preferences or inclinations.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

cyamitide said:


> The author of that article is Gulenko and he is LII, so I'm assuming he is stating things overly categorically and over-using can/cannot constructions as is typical of static types. I've interpreted the categorical statement in his articles more "softly" as preferences or inclinations.


I see since I actually seem to be very responsive in crisis situations because I'm capable of thinking on my feet and keep my head cool as opposed to most other people. I can easily make up a plan for action as I go in order to solve the situation efficiently but I suppose that is more like an individual quality I personally possess rather than it speaking for my type or my quadra as a whole.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

GornSosesworb said:


> Hello My name is Aubree I live in BrazilB I love to sing and dance and of course my friends I want to find a girls! My foto from flirk com
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The introduction forum is here:Intro


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Boolean11 said:


> The introduction forum is here:Intro


It's a spam bot so report it for spam.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

It's spam. He posted these links in a number of threads all over the forum.


----------



## PhoenixFox (Jul 14, 2012)

Alright, having looked at the information, the signs simply appear to be how each quadra tends to use their functions. A + is very adaptable and tends to be willing to endorse the function's active use for practically anything and to enjoy the world. A - seems to be very pragmatic about its application; if it is not useful for survival, it is turned off, but it is far more adaptable than a + in that it actively prevents the negative effects of the function. Basically, - keeps the needs of its function met so that the personality can focus on enjoying and maximizing the +. 

I guess the simple explanation is that '+' is very competent in the use of the function (tends to reward the use of the function when seen in others), whereas '-' is very competent at dealing with the function (defending/reacting to the function in the external world, which makes its use very pragmatic and realistic, accomplishing needs as they come and actively using the information to solve 'real' problems). - equals a more business-like approach; a 'get things like this done' approach, where + seems more a 'this is a reward/fun thing to do' kind of mentality. It isn't necessarily a dichotomy, but it is a way of differentiating whether it is productive (+), or reactive (-). A '-' dominant function would imply a tendency to adapt to the world (as characterized aptly by my LIE teacher, who lectures us on our need to adapt to the world and fix issues), whereas a '+' dominant implies a tendency to develop oneself and force the world to adapt (as charactized by my ILI need for independence and freedom to think in solitude).

I hope this has helped you, even if the interpretation isn't valid, maybe it has given a fresh perspective.


----------

