Rational Types

In Model A, Rational types have a rational information element in their program function.

This is the basic distinction. The behavioral tendencies described below are secondary, varying not only between types but also among individuals within the same type.

Focused Attention

The main characteristic of Rationality is voluntary attention—the conscious effort to focus on a specific task or object, which often requires willpower and intention.

Consider this task: identify only white cars passing by on the street. This requires focused attention, consciously filtering out all other stimuli – car models, etc. This act of filtering and focusing is characteristic of rational processing.

Voluntary attention operates within a defined framework; it is focused. This gives rise to characteristics such as discreteness, block-like processing, and rigidity.

Block-like Processing

The primary value for a rational type is a comprehensive and consistent internal understanding of the world they live in.

They break down an observed situation into its components and then evaluate each part against specific criteria.

They don't react to every minor detail. Instead, they accumulate information, process it as a unified block, and only then decide how to proceed. Every new piece of information is a new brick that must perfectly fit into the design without compromising its integrity.

Any significant change disrupts the established mental framework, requiring time and effort to re-establish it. Information that threatens to destabilize their internal structure (contradicting their beliefs) causes stress, as breaking down and rebuilding is extremely energy-intensive.

Planning

Rational types value predictability and often operate with a pre-set chain of action. This results in a more predictable, though perhaps less flexible, repertoire of reactions.

Imagine a rational type going to the kitchen for water. They are less likely to be sidetracked by a pet, prioritizing the completion of their task and adhering to their pre-set schedule (like a feeding schedule).

Planning and developing an algorithm is a common manifestation of rational decision-making and evaluation. It doesn't mean that Irrational types don't plan. But for a Rational type, It is a means of safeguarding their organized system from the chaos of the external world.

A deviation from the anticipated plan requires cognitive adjustment and a re-planning process, as they need to reconcile new information with their internal "map" of reality.

It's like laying a railway: build the tracks, lay the rails, and only then can the train run.

For instance, when going to the store for bread, a rational type automatically forms a plan: "First I walk through the park, then cross the street, and then the store will be there, and I'll buy bread." This isn't a written plan, nor is it explicitly thought out. It's an automatic mental "movie" their psyche plays as they walk.

Suddenly, they see that the street is dug up. A rational type experiences a moment of paralysis: their mental "movie" doesn't align with reality. It takes time and energy to process, "They've dug it up here!" Evaluation, decision, a new plan, a new "movie." This can take milliseconds, but the internal shift is perceptible.

Judgment and Rigidity

Rational types have a rational element – either Logic or Ethics – as their program function.

They form assessments based on established criteria, aligning incoming data with their personal logic or ethical standards, concepts, and frameworks. They often use categorical judgments – good/bad, correct/incorrect, should/should not, beautiful/ugly – to assess information.

These judgments can be formed even before all information is gathered. While they deliver complete, definitive judgments, the depth of understanding behind these judgments can vary.

For example, an Ethical Sensing Extratim (ESE, ESFj) might express an immediate dislike for someone based on a feeling ("I don't like them"), a direct expression of their program Fe. If asked to explain, they might then rationalize this feeling by connecting it to specific unpleasant sensations (creative Si) evoked by that person.

Communication Style

When asked a question, rational types tend to stay on topic, offering comprehensive, structured explanations without wandering into tangential associations. Their thinking is linear, developing thoughts sequentially from start to finish, within a single, focused channel.

Q: "Mr. Smith, I would be grateful if you could give me some advice on what and how I should study to become a theoretical physicist, and whether I should pursue this goal. My knowledge is roughly equivalent to three years of undergraduate mathematics, but I am already 25 years old and working in a non-academic field."

A: "I will try to answer your questions. Of course, it is difficult to say in advance how great your abilities in theoretical physics are. However, I believe that you can succeed if you truly want it. It is very important that this work is of direct interest to you. Considerations of vanity can never replace genuine interest.

Clearly, first and foremost, you must master the necessary technical skills. This in itself is not too difficult, especially since you already have some mathematical education. Twenty-five years is not too old (I am twice your age, and I have no intention of stopping). The main thing to master is the technical aspect of the work, and the understanding of subtleties will come later on its own.

...

In summary, you will become a theoretical physicist if you have a genuine interest and the ability to work hard. As for the timeframe, it will depend on how much you are burdened with other obligations and what you currently know. In practice, this has ranged from two and a half months to several years."

This is an excellent example of a Rational type response. It is structured in a way that includes an introduction, a sequence of information blocks, and a conclusion.

But of course, a rational type can sometimes mumble and ramble, especially if they are tired, sleep-deprived, or hangover.

Note: This should not be confused with Logic. Logic is a focus on the informational, inanimate content of reality. A logical type may still provide structured or free-form responses.

The Spectrum of Rationality-Irrationality

No dichotomy exists in itself, there are no walls dividing functions in the psyche of a type. A socionics type is a complex system where all parts are interconnected and influence each other.

Let's take a look at how other dichotomies can influence rationality/irrationality.

The Role of Logic and Ethics:

Ethics is the more labile (changeable/flexible) polarity, and to some extent, it's more irrational. An ethical type's actions are synchronized with the feelings and emotions of others. This makes the rational ethical type more flexible than the rational logical one.

Logic is the more inherently rational polarity. It's tied to the objective essence of the process and cause-and-effect relationships, which makes the logical type inherently more rigid.

The Role of Sensing and Intuition:

Sensing is the more flexible polarity. A sensing type easily adapts to external conditions (introvert) or flexibly modifies them (extravert).

Intuition is the more rigid polarity. Intuitive types tend to be fixated on ideas, imagery, and hypotheses. Their reaction to changes in the environment is more delayed and indirect. Because they are often deep in thought, they might, for instance, miss their subway stop.

The Role of Extraversion and Introversion:

Extraversion is generally more irrational. Extraverted types are more labile (unstable/reactive) because they quickly respond to new information and external stimuli. An extravert skips some steps in processing; their thought process is faster. In a conversation, an extravert quickly incorporates new input.

Introversion is generally more rational. Introverted types are more rigid because they need to correlate new information with existing information. Their response is more delayed. In a conversation, an introvert type needs time to process and establish more connections.

... And this list can go on.

So, what do we do when it seems we don't neatly align with a textbook description, or even find ourselves somewhere in the middle?

We have many tools available that not only help with typing but also provide a better understanding by looking at all these parts from another angle.

Rational Types Subgroups

Temperaments

Club Displacement

Perceptual Groups

Reasoning

Stress Resistance

Source: S. Ionkin