Transactional Analysis of Socionics Relations

TRANSACTIONAL ANALYSIS OF SOCIONICS RELATIONS 		1.9.2017 Tuukka Virtaperko

This is a hypothetical transactional analysis of socionics relations. It isn't intended to be used for comparing overall comfortability of different relations.

XXXX and YYYY are generic sociotype specifications so that each letter is a binary variable. XXXX is identical to XXXX but different from YYYY and XxXx and any four-letter code that includes a lower case letter which indicates a difference in truth value. In this method, each line is written so that XXXX is intended as the default specification and other specifications as deviations from XXXX.

1st X. Introversion-Extroversion
2nd X. Sensing-Intuition
3rd X. Feeling-Thinking
4th X. Judging-Perceiving

This method is used by writing statements of the following form. REL is a generic socionics relation and - a generic connective of classical logic. NNNN is the truth table of - in XXXX - YYYY but also the transactional content of this analysis.

REL: XXXX - YYYY 	NNNN

Each N stands for a transactional element. If that element is present in the sociotype relation there is a corresponding true transactional relation.

1st N. Casual-Distant:			XXXX DIS YYYY 	(XXXX: "I'm Not OK, You're Not OK")
2nd N. Egalitarian-Submissive: 	XXXX ←SU YYYY 	(XXXX: "I'm Not OK, You're OK")
3rd N. Egalitarian-Dominant: 	XXXX DO→ YYYY 	(XXXX: "I'm OK, You're Not OK")
4th N. Independent-Blending:	XXXX BLN YYYY 	(XXXX: "I'm OK, You're OK")

Elementary sociotype relations:

IDN: XXXX ǂ XXXX 	1111
DLT: XXXX ∧ xxxX 	0001 	// this relation is called "duality" and XXXX and XXXx are "duals"
QID: XXXX ≢ XXXx 	0110	// worsened by identical duals, improved by non-identical duals
CNF: XXXX ↓ xxxx 	1000 	// improved by duals
ACT: XXXX ↑ Xxxx 	1110 	// improved by duals
EGO: XXXX ↑ XxxX 	1110 	// deactivated by duals or deactivates duals
CNT: EXXX ⇒ IXXX 	0011 	// deactivated by EXXX's duals or deactivates EXXX's duals, worsened by IXXX's duals
MRR: XXXX ≢ xXXx 	0110	// improved by duals
LKL: XXXj ≡ XXxj 	1001 	// deactivated by duals or deactivates duals
	 XXXp ≡ XxXp
CMP: XXXj ≡ XxXj 	1001 	// improved by identical duals, worsened by non-identical duals
	 XXXp ≡ XXxp
ILL: XXXj ILL xxXj 			// deactivated by EXXX's duals or deactivates EXXX's duals, worsened by IYYY's duals
	 XXXp ILL xXxp
	 EXXX ⇒ IYYY 	0011
SDL: XXXj ∨ xXxj 	0111 	// deactivated by dual, activates dual
	 XXXp ∨ xxXp
BN>: XXXp ↛ XXxj 	0101, 0100 		// blending is situational and usually ceases after some time
	 XXXj ↛ XxXp
SP>: XXXj → XxXp  	1011, 1010 		// blending is optional
	 XXXp → XXxj

Transactional sociotype relations:

1111: IDN
0001: DLT
1000: CNF
0110: QID, MRR
0111: SDL
1110: ACT, EGO
0011: CNT, ILL
1100: CNT, ILL
1001: LKL, CMP
1011: SP>
1101: <sp 		// supervisee taking distance
0101: <BN, <SP  // supervisee not taking distance
0100: <bn 		// no blending
1010: BN>, sp>  // no blending
0010: bn> 		// no blending

There is no sociotype relation whose transactional truth table is 0000 but if there were socionics would apparently be inconsistent or incomplete.