Skip to content

Type as Binary Code

June 4, 2013

The hypothesis is that the factors of temperament are the root of personality through neurological elements, rather than the cognitive processes, which themselves are believed to have a neurological basis.

It’s all about a person’s stimulatability.
We can make 1 a need for more stimulation, and 0 a need for less stimulation.

There are two dimensions of stimulatability.
How much one is willing to actively move to gain stimuli (e), and how much he wants to passively receive it from others (w).

If we divide this into the areas of surface social skills (I), leadership and responsibilities (C), and closer personal relationships (A), we will have a six digit binary code.

xxxxxx (x=variable)

The values of each digit represent:
ewewew
IICCAA

For the 16 types, we only need the first four digits.

The way it translates into the type factors:
eI = extraversion (1)/introversion (0)
wI = informing (1)/directing (0)
eC = pragmatic (1)/cooperative (0)
wC = motive (1)/structure (0)

ISTJ 0000xx
INFJ 0001xx
INTJ 0010xx
ISTP 0011xx
ISFJ 0100xx
INFP 0101xx
INTP 0110xx
ISFP 0111xx
ESTJ 1000xx
ENFJ 1001xx
ENTJ 1010xx
ESTP 1011xx
ESFJ 1100xx
ENFP 1101xx
ENTP 1110xx
ESFP 1111xx

Temperaments, Interaction Styles
SJ xx00xx
NF xx01xx
NT xx10xx
SP xx11xx
Chart the Course 00xxxx
Behind the Scenes 01xxxx
In Charge 10xxxx
Get Things Going 11xxxx

We now can also map the cognitive functions to this neurological binary, through their common effects on type:
(Also, Y and Z will indicate that the values must be different from each other, and it can be either way: Y=0, Z=1 or Y=1, Z=0).

Se xx11xx (dominant: 1x11xx)
Si xx00xx (dominant: 0x00xx)
Ne x1YZxx (dominant: 11YZxx)
Ni x0YZxx (dominant: 00YZxx)
Te x0x0xx (dominant: 10x0xx)
Ti xY1Zxx (dominant: 1Y1Zxx)
Fe xY0Zxx (dominant: 1xYoZxx)
Fi x1x1xx (dominant: 01x1xx)

My full type binary code: 011001

This is also useful in outlining Leo Ryan’s partial ICA combinations:

The Rock: 000000
The Hollow Man: 101010
Full Blown Neurotic/High Expectations: 010101
Ball of Fire: 111011
Let’s Have a Party/Party Time/Flower Child: 110011
Dictator/Controller: 001000
Foot Stomping Dependent: 000100
Affectionate Homebody: 00xx11
Table Hopper: 11xx00
Have your cake and eat it too: 10xx01
The Patsy: xx1xx1

This would be basically the same as what is  normally used in FIRO: 0=”l”[low]; 1=”h” [high]

We could also extend it to the moderate scores, with “M”, and for APS, to distinguish between the neighboring Phlegmatic blends, 4=m; 5=M.
Thus, Phlegmatic-Melancholy-SanguinePhlegmatic, would be MM001M.

Looking at it this way, there would be six “switches” in the brain so to speak, determining our personality; with the first four determining our cognitive preferences.
(It would also further explain why the preferred functions– the first two determining type –must always be Ji/Pe or Pi/Je alternations. Try to pair two e’s or i’s; or P with P or J with J, and you will get a conflict in one or two digits).

While I was able to produce codes for the eight function-attitudes, the four original functions by themselves (S, N, T, F) were a bit more difficult. S/N have a definite pattern, but it’s T/F that required much more thought.

S: –XX– (xx00xx—SJ/Si, xx11xx—SP/Se)
N: –XY– (xx01xx—N+F, xx10xx—N+T)

Again, of the two middle digits; the first is cooperative(0)/pragmatic(1), (which I associated with “expressed control”). The second is Structure(0)/Motive(1), (which would fit “wanted Control”).

I think there might be something to this in the brain. The expressive/responsive factors I am using may be connected with stimulatability to the outside world, and thus may have to do with particular regions of the brain. So I could see where having the two areas governing our conative skills with similar levels of stimulatability might make us focus more on concrete or tangible reality, while having them different might make us focus away from the tangible, onto the abstract or conceptual. Don’t know exactly how, but I can’t help notice that the congruence of one would figure in a person preferring to see what’s there, and incongruence would lead one to focus on what is not there.

T and F were harder to define:

(Omitting the first digit, which is I/E):
T: 000 (STJ), 010 (NTJ), 011 (STP), 110 (NTP)
F: 001 (NFJ), 100 (SFJ), 101 (NFP), 111 (SFP)

It’s hard to see a common thread in those numbers.

Trying different things, what I found is from looking at the “pure” tendencies of the preference:

T: directive (0–), pragmatic (-1-), structure-focused (–0).
F: informative (1–) , cooperative (-0-), motive focused (–1).

The T/F preference will be determined whenever two or three of these digits are matched.

What made it hard is that I was looking at patterns of 0 and 1, with T leaning towards 0’s representing “low wanted” or “task-focus”, and F leaning towards 1’s representing “high wanted” or “people-focus”.

However, T/F also figure in expressed Control, but in a reversed fashion. T will tend towards pragmatism (1), and F towards cooperativeness (0).
From there, I could finally see the pattern, of two out of three determining the preference.

The “purest” T in this respect would be NTJ (010), directive, pragmatic and structure focused.
STJ (000), is directive, cooperative and structure focused. STP (011) is directive, pragmatic and motive focused. NTP (110) is informative, pragmatic and structure focused.

So you look at something like 001, which has these two 0’s together, but one of those 0’s represents cooperativeness, and the other directiveness, and the single one represents motive focus. So there’s only one match to the ideal T leaning, so this falls on the F side (NFJ).

The most “pure” F in this respect is NFP (101), informative, cooperative, motive. SFP (111) is informative, pragmatic, motive. SFJ (100) is informative, cooperative, structure, and again, NFJ (001) cooperativeness, directiveness, motive.

It also works for J/P (which I discovered first, from noticing the patterns in the 1’s and 0’s):

J: 000 (STJ), 001 (NFJ), 010 (NTJ), 100 (SFJ)
P: 011 (STP), 101 (NFP), 110 (NTP), 111 (SFP)

The J’s clearly favor the 0’s, and the P’s, the 1’s. This I looked for in T/F, but it fit J/P instead. J/P are similar to T/F, in the wanted scales, with J favoring 0, and P favoring 1. Yet in cooperative/pragmatic, they are opposite of T/F, with J favoring 0 (cooperative) and P favoring 1 (pragmatic). That actually matches the other two digits, hence, it is more obvious.

So it’s the same principle: two or three out of three.
STJ (000: directive, cooperative, structure) is the “purest” J in this respect. SFJ (100: informative, cooperative, structure); NFJ (001: directive, cooperative, motive); NTJ (010: directive, pragmatic, structure)
SFP (111: informative, pragmatic, motive) is the purest P. NFP (101: informative, cooperative, motive); NTP (110: informative, pragmatic, structure); STP (011: directive, pragmatic, motive).

So again, the point is that if these digits might represent points in the brain (through their stimulatability), then this might show where functional preference might be formed in neurology.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: