White Ethics, White Sensorics – What Do They Have In Common at the Biological Level?
Intercorrelations of functions in a respondent dataset mathematically balanced for sociotype representation proportions, consisting of respondents who answered V. Talanov’s Form 082 questionnaire
| Ni | Ne | Si | Se | Ti | Te | Fi | Fe | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ni | 1.00 | 0.22 | -0.68 | -0.08 | -0.04 | -0.32 | -0.11 | 0.01 |
| Ne | 0.22 | 1.00 | -0.20 | -0.67 | -0.25 | -0.27 | 0.09 | 0.15 |
| Si | -0.68 | -0.20 | 1.00 | -0.15 | -0.12 | 0.11 | 0.24 | -0.18 |
| Se | -0.08 | -0.67 | -0.15 | 1.00 | 0.12 | 0.13 | -0.37 | -0.10 |
| Ti | -0.04 | -0.25 | -0.12 | 0.12 | 1.00 | 0.45 | -0.73 | -0.48 |
| Te | -0.32 | -0.27 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.45 | 1.00 | -0.28 | -0.73 |
| Fi | -0.11 | 0.09 | 0.24 | -0.37 | -0.73 | -0.28 | 1.00 | 0.24 |
| Fe | 0.01 | 0.15 | -0.18 | -0.10 | -0.48 | -0.73 | 0.24 | 1.00 |
From the standpoint of “information socionics” - there is, in general, nothing between them that would distinguish this pair of functions from the pairs Ti and Ni, Fe and Se, and so on. In fact, however – Fi and Si have a great deal in common. Especially SEI and EII. As a result, the averaged type profiles of representatives of these two sociotypes are positively correlated with one another significantly more strongly than is the case for other pairs of types standing in similar relations to one another. Even representatives of the SEI and EII types themselves quite often become confused and make mistakes about their own types – SEIs not all that infrequently consider themselves EIIs (because they are kind and caring), and EIIs – SEIs (because they are attentive and affectionate). Yes, yes. It happens. What, then, might be going on here, and what cause lies behind this commonality?
We have previously discussed one evolutionary consideration. Si and Fi gravitate toward one another because, in primates, both are closely associated with social grooming - mutual cleaning of the fur, which allows close social bonds to be established and reinforced. This is a very ancient social mechanism, long since imprinted into primate genes at the level of instinct. It is through these social bonds, based on the patient and relaxed procedure of picking and biting fleas off a partner, that Fi and Si become linked to one another.
But evolutionary considerations alone are not enough. After all, behind any mechanism fixed by evolution there lies first a genetic basis and then a biochemical one. This means that Si and Fi, too, must have some substantial commonality at the purely biological level, prompting these functions often to manifest jointly and increasing their intercorrelation.
So. It turns out that both SEI and EII (and also Si and Fi in general) are equally characterized by an increase in the activity of the neurotransmitter (and also neurohormone) serotonin.
Where does this assertion of ours come from?
For the approximate assessment of many neurohormonal or neurotransmitter activities, there are specific markers (namely, their characteristic physiological manifestations, which can be included in questionnaires). By measuring the number of “yes” and “no” responses across the list of these markers, one can estimate, with reasonably good accuracy, the activity level of the corresponding neurohormone (or neurotransmitter) in a person. Such markers that are quite suitable for use in questionnaires exist, for example, for acetylcholine, and we have already discussed them in detail on our public page (we spoke about pupil size, muscle tone, memory and concentration of attention, and the moistening of mucous membranes). There are corresponding markers for serotonin as well. However, we will not list them today (and there is a reason for this – some of them are still undergoing further verification in the current questionnaires). For now, however, we ask you to take our word for it – both according to the current markers that are still being worked on (but have already yielded results) and according to other markers that were previously checked in detail, the result is exactly the same: both strong Fi and strong Si are equally associated with an increase in serotonin activity in the brain.
Of course, these two functions do not depend on serotonin alone (if they were determined only by serotonin, there would be no difference between them at all). However, serotonin is a very important neurotransmitter for the brain, and therefore its parallel elevation for both of these functions of the psyche is precisely what gives them an especially large amount in common with one another. In any case, more than the analogous commonality that exists between, for example, Se and Fe (or, say, Ni and Ti).
And finally, look at the attached table showing the correlations between the functions. Between which of them is the correlation higher than expected? Yes, between Fi and Si.
For most functions (with the exception of the Se-Si pair, and here again the matter lies in serotonin – only this time specifically in the dissimilarity of these functions with respect to it), the highest correlation is observed in the Ti-Te, Fi-Fe, and Ni-Ne function pairs. And only Fi has with Si a correlation of the same magnitude as the correlation it has with the extraverted function of the same name, Fe.
The next-highest correlation is found in the Fe-Ne pair. It is smaller in magnitude than the correlation between Fi and Si, but is also significantly positive. Here, too, the explanation is most likely a shared neurotransmitter closely tied to supporting both Fe and Ne. Only in this case it is no longer serotonin, but another neurotransmitter and neurohormone – dopamine.