About this video

• Video Title: Model A2 with Ibrahim Tencer
• Channel: World Socionics Society
• Speakers: Jack, Ibrahim Tencer
• Duration: 2:30:00

Overview

This video is a discussion between Jack and Ibrahim Tencer about Ibrahim's work on Model A2, an updated version of the Model A socionics framework. They cover the conceptual basis for Model A2, including a re-evaluation of basic socionics definitions, the quadrant progression (beta, alpha, gamma, delta), and the nature of specific socionics dichotomies and elements, such as "conclusive vs. questionable" and "unifying vs. dividing." Ibrahim also shares his thoughts on how these concepts relate to his Islamic faith and his understanding of entropy.

Key takeaways

• Model A2 Development: Ibrahim Tencer has been developing Model A2 as an update to Model A, aiming for clearer definitions of information elements and a more practical approach compared to other models.
• Quadra Progression (Beta, Alpha, Gamma, Delta): Ibrahim proposes a linear progression for the quadras: beta, alpha, gamma, delta, which he links to concepts of maximal intensity to maximal complexity, drawing inspiration from his faith and the concept of entropy.
• Dichotomies and Element Characterizations: The discussion explores various dichotomies, such as "conclusive vs. questionable" (beta vs. delta) and "unifying vs. dividing" (alpha vs. gamma), and how they define the essence of each quadra.
• Critique of Existing Models: Ibrahim expresses reservations about models like Model G and Model B, considering them still too speculative, and emphasizes his desire for a model closely related to practical application.
• Personalized Approach to Socionics: Both Ibrahim and Jack demonstrate a deep engagement with socionics, continuously refining their understanding and developing new frameworks, while also acknowledging the personal and sometimes intuitive nature of their work.

The video states that Model A2 is an update to Model A, which Ibrahim Tencer began working on many years ago, possibly around 2016. The motivation behind this work was to address problems within socionics, particularly with the abstract, dichotomous definitions of information elements. Ibrahim found these definitions, like "external statics of fields" for Ti, to be impractical, while alternative conceptualizations were seen as disorganized. He aimed to return to the basics of Model A and define them more clearly, leading to a 16-element model that he believes will be more closely related to practice than models like Model G or Model B, which he considers still in the speculative realm. At the time of the discussion, Ibrahim had published descriptions for the alpha and beta quadras, with gamma and delta to follow, noting that the model is still a work in progress.

The video discusses Ibrahim Tencer's proposed quadra progression: beta, alpha, gamma, then delta. He explicitly states that this is a "new kind of quadripgression" and that it does not follow the traditional arrangement where alpha is across from gamma, and beta or delta would be in between. Instead, he describes it as a "more linear way of thinking about the quadras."

This progression is linked to ideas discussed earlier in the video:

• Maximal Intensity to Maximal Complexity: Jack mentions reading on Ibrahim's blog that this progression moves from a place of maximal intensity to a place of maximal complexity.
• Entropy and the Big Bang: Jack draws a parallel between this progression and the concept of entropy, moving from the low entropy of the Big Bang to the eventual high entropy of the universe's heat death. He sees a connection between things being simple and cohesive (early in the progression) to becoming complex (later in the progression).
• Inspiration from Faith: Jack also notes that part of this inspiration comes from Ibrahim's Islamic faith.

The video discusses several dichotomies and their characterizations, primarily as proposed by Ibrahim Tencer:

1. Conclusive vs. Questionable (Beta vs. Delta):

   • Beta valued elements: Described as "conclusive," increasing certainty in the information's position or outcome. They are not "messy" but rather "packaged" with clarity and force of influence, representing an understanding of deeper truth or absoluteness.
   • Delta valued elements: Described as "questionable," decreasing certainty in the information's outcome or position. They are characterized by humility, a willingness to rethink, learn from mistakes, show vulnerability, and a "it depends on the situation" way of thinking, embodying "messy sincerity."

2. Unifying vs. Dividing (Alpha vs. Gamma):

   • Alpha valued elements: Characterized as "unifying," aiming to bring things together and reduce the space between elements. They are seen as inclusive, aiming to make situations or communities more favorable to more people and ensure everyone's needs are met. Alpha NE is about generating new ideas, alpha TI about generalizing information, and alpha SE about inclusion and community. Alpha SI is related to making the environment more suitable for people.
   • Gamma valued elements: Characterized as "dividing," aiming to separate things apart. They are seen as focused on independence, filtering out "bad ideas and bad people," and guarding personal information because it could be used against them. Gamma FI filters out "bad people" to protect oneself, while Gamma SE is about personal effort and striving towards goals, moving forward, and improving things through action, often rejecting what is present. Gamma NI is described as "purely negative," eliminating possibilities. Gamma TE is about progress and continuous improvement.

3. Positivist vs. Negativist (Used with caution, related to Model G signs):

   • Ibrahim initially used these signs (plus/minus) in Model A2, associating them with "positivists and negativists" as in Model G. However, he found it difficult to make sense of what these traits actually meant in practice, questioning why, for example, SLI would be "plus SI."
   • Later in the discussion, he re-contextualizes these as Affirming vs. Denying virtues.
     • Affirming (Positive): Associated with SLI and SEI (though with nuances). For SLI, it's about authenticity and a "work in progress" mentality, embracing complexities. For SEI, it's about communion, coming together, harmony, and integration into a wholesome whole, but also a willingness to "tinker" and adjust without absoluteness.
     • Denying (Negative): Associated with EIE and SLE (beta extroverts). These types are described as being concerned with authenticity, calling out fakeness, and are often associated with becoming celebrities or making a mark. They can be stubborn in sensation and ethics, and their sense of self can be tied to external recognition. EIE, for example, can feel they don't exist until they are known.

4. Stubborn vs. Flexible (Related to the "virtues" of elements):

   • Stubborn: Associated with the more static or established aspects of an element. For example, stubbornness in ethics for Gamma types means their personal attitudes and behaviors must be on their own terms, not shaped by group consensus. Stubbornness in logic for LSI means their beliefs and reasoning are absolute and unchangeable.
   • Flexible: Associated with the more adaptable or evolving aspects. For example, flexibility in intuition for NE allows for exploring new ideas and possibilities. For Delta SI, flexibility is about not being tied down to absolute states, acknowledging that feelings can change and that adjustment is possible without rigidity.

5. Strong vs. Weak (Implied by energy allocation):

   • Strong (4D): High energy allocation and efficient use of that energy towards information metabolism, leading to constant activation.
   • Weak (1D): Low energy allocation and inefficient use of energy, leading to deactivation, becoming a "cry for help," or a blind spot.

6. Valued vs. Subdued (Implied by energy allocation):

   • Valued (3D): Efficient use of energy towards information metabolism, leading to skillfulness, but can deactivate when no longer needed. This is seen in creative and demonstrative functions.
   • Subdued (2D): Misuse of energy, leading to rigidity, burnout, or deactivation due to a retreat from the mobilizing function or reluctance due to external demands (role function).

7. Explicit vs. Implicit (Related to External vs. Internal):

   • Explicit: Information that is tangible and can be directly perceived or measured, often associated with physical objects pushing away other material extensions (like a coin in water). This can lead to a sense of exclusivity or competition.
   • Implicit: Information that is expansive, extroverted, and does not emit repulsive force, allowing multiple possibilities to coexist within a single seed. This is associated with intuition and ethics.

8. Rational vs. Irrational (Related to Prescriptive vs. Descriptive):

   • Rational (Prescriptive): Information about how things should be or ought to be. Ibrahim tentatively links this to SI and the idea of maintaining equilibrium or a "golden mean."
   • Irrational (Descriptive): Information about how things are, could be, or will be. Ibrahim links this to NE (generating possibilities) and SE (action that realizes potential states). He disagrees with the simplistic "judging vs. perceiving" mapping.

9. Determined vs. Exacting (Related to Stubborn/Flexible):

   • Determined: Associated with NE and SE, focusing on possibilities and opening things up, not being dissuaded from exploring new avenues.
   • Exacting: Associated with NI and SI, where things need to be "on their terms" and there's a strong sense of internal truth or personal conditions that must be met. This can manifest as fussiness about details or personal space.

10. Assertive vs. Intrigued/Intrusive (Function Roles):

    • Assertive: Leading and Mobilizing functions, actively engaging with the world.
    • Intrigued/Intrusive: Ignoring and Vulnerable functions, characterized by a desire to avoid engagement or detachment from circumstances.
    • Collaborative: Creative and Suggestive functions, working with others.
    • Reluctant: Demonstrative and Role functions, often performing tasks out of necessity or habit rather than intrinsic drive.