User Tag List

First 910111213 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 128

  1. #101
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,013

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edchidna1000 View Post
    Typing by face, known as Visual Identification, is not actually part of mainstream 'Classical' Socionics. It is mostly upheld by Sergei Ganin on his offshoot site, unfortunately named www.socionics.com.

    Socionics improves on MBTI in numerous areas, it's more comprehensive, includes values as well as strengths and weaknesses, has theories on inter-type compatibility, YES solves that whole IxxJ IxxP issue etc. It just has a lot of crazy people with crazy theories that people confuse with Socionics proper. There's one person who tries to type you based on what colours you like.

    Without these setbacks, Socionics would have become a lot more well known in the West than it has so far.
    What IxxJ IxxP issue? Why would anybody have a problem with this? Oh yes, JCF is the problem with this...
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  2. #102
    Senior Member edchidna1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE Fe
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    What IxxJ IxxP issue? Why would anybody have a problem with this? Oh yes, JCF is the problem with this...
    Well that's just it, the problem of MBTI is that if poorly fuses with JCF in the cases of introverts and if it doesn't fuse with JCF it's just Keirsey types, a lesser version of Big 5.

    It's odd to say that an INTJ leads with an Irrational function Ni and argue that auxiliary Te is what makes it a J when that Te is auxiliary. Socionics makes sure that the leading function determines both Extroversion/Introversion AND Judging/Perceiving.
    Founder and President of World Socionics Society
    http://www.facebook.com/groups/worldsocionicssociety

  3. #103
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,013

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edchidna1000 View Post
    Well that's just it, the problem of MBTI is that if poorly fuses with JCF in the cases of introverts and if it doesn't fuse with JCF it's just Keirsey types, a lesser version of Big 5.

    It's odd to say that an INTJ leads with an Irrational function Ni and argue that auxiliary Te is what makes it a J when that Te is auxiliary. Socionics makes sure that the leading function determines both Extroversion/Introversion AND Judging/Perceiving.
    There is no problem, once they stop allowing E/I and J/P to be determined by the functions.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  4. #104
    Senior Member edchidna1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE Fe
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    There is no problem, once they stop allowing E/I and J/P to be determined by the functions.
    The functions are what makes MBTI Jungian. If you sever the link to Jung's cognitive functions, you end up with the Keirsey types which are essentially a less empirically validated version of Global 5. The dichotomies themselves don't really stand without the functions as if you go deeper into it, they themselves are derived from how functions work. Without functions, you have to judge how extroverted someone is by how chatty they are, how F or T by how emotional they are, counting up the tallies etc. It gets reduced from type to a set of scales.

    If you would like to get a better understanding of Socionics, I invite you to take a look at my articles:

    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...-elements.html
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...ons-model.html
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...relations.html
    ^^ On another note, I'm starting to think I might have put these articles in the wrong sub-forum. How do I alleviate this?
    Founder and President of World Socionics Society
    http://www.facebook.com/groups/worldsocionicssociety

  5. #105
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    That's the sucky part about it. LSI, LII, LSD, all that confusing nomenclature pretty much repels me from getting into this.
    It's not that bad, just need to get used to it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    My last question has been buried under troll waste. No matter, I'll just repeat it. @KDude "Which type [like Darwin] thinks about ideas abstractly, and builds a brand new paradigm out of evidence based on experiment and observation?"
    Any type.

  6. #106
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Again starting to read this long thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    (...) This effectively eliminates all descriptive content from the labels P and J which traditionally mean perceiving and judging as well as a slew of other things. For some, Se has even been limited to merely "looking." Such confusion has arisen from this function talk that even an intellectual such as Carl Jung is considered by some - an ISTP, as if he were some motorcycle mechanic or something. (...)
    Se == looking, that's not in socionics, right? Or what did you mean by that?

    As for ISTP's not ever being intellectuals, that's just a stereotype, right?

  7. #107
    Stansmith
    Guest

    Default

    Socionics strikes me as being a bit too focused on inflexible archetypes/patterns of behavior for my taste. MBTI seems to allow for more individual quirks that don't necessarily have to do with one's type, or at least that's the vibe I get when comparing the two communities.

  8. #108
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    typing faces is stupid.
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  9. #109
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    Do you know any ISTPs who can write even remotely like Carl Jung. And even if any CAN, do they WANT to do it for a living?

    http://www.mypersonality.info/personality-types/istp/

    "ISTPs have an adventuresome spirit. They are attracted to motorcycles, airplanes, sky diving, surfing, etc. They thrive on action, and are usually fearless. ISTPs are fiercely independent, needing to have the space to make their own decisions about their next step. They do not believe in or follow rules and regulations, as this would prohibit their ability to 'do their own thing'."
    - Portrait of an ISTP (The Personality Page)

    "Like their fellow SPs, ISTPs are fundamentally Performers, but as Ts their areas of interest tend to be mechanical rather than artistic like those of ISFPs, and unlike most ESPs they do not present an impression of constant activity."

    Do these quotes even remotely describe Carl Jung? Now you see why I like to describe them archetypically as "motorcycle mechanics." Yes that is somewhat in joke, but not entirely.

    Does typology have ANY meaning in reality? Is it so vague and therefore flexible that anybody can be any type?
    ISTP archetype != every ISTP out there. Yes, I can imagine Jung as being TiNi. That in MBTI is most closely related to ISTP being a Ti dom and not using Ne, but it will not be the stereotypical ISTP as Se is weak.

    I find that there's many people online who are identifying most strongly with NiTi or TiNi with weak Fe/Se. I don't know the reason for this phenomenon. :p


    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    Which type thinks about ideas abstractly, and builds a brand new paradigm out of evidence based on experiment and observation?
    As I said before, any type but I want to add, because I see now why the topic came up: Darwin didn't build completely new ideas. He took some already existing ideas and of course also used his observations to put together a new theory. A rudimentary one that has been changed since then. But yes, it was a big achievement, I just wouldn't claim only INTx can do this. Though it also seems to me that almost nobody really has any completely new ideas anyway. (But, this is a long topic and off topic here)


    Quote Originally Posted by ICUP View Post
    Some ISTP's deal with inner-images and revelationary periods as well. This excerpt doesn't prove detachment.
    I mostly stayed in the house for two solid years because I was so overcome by images and revelations..... lol..... Yes, I know how being swamped feels.
    Many introverts go through similar experiences, so I don't see how this could build a case for a type.
    I went through this for a few weeks during a period of my life and I'm pretty sure I'm no INTx.

    But wow, two years, that's a lot. Why did you get into that in the first place?

  10. #110
    Senior Member edchidna1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE Fe
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    ISTP archetype != every ISTP out there. Yes, I can imagine Jung as being TiNi. That in MBTI is most closely related to ISTP being a Ti dom and not using Ne, but it will not be the stereotypical ISTP as Se is weak.

    I find that there's many people online who are identifying most strongly with NiTi or TiNi with weak Fe/Se. I don't know the reason for this phenomenon. :p




    As I said before, any type but I want to add, because I see now why the topic came up: Darwin didn't build completely new ideas. He took some already existing ideas and of course also used his observations to put together a new theory. A rudimentary one that has been changed since then. But yes, it was a big achievement, I just wouldn't claim only INTx can do this. Though it also seems to me that almost nobody really has any completely new ideas anyway. (But, this is a long topic and off topic here)




    I went through this for a few weeks during a period of my life and I'm pretty sure I'm no INTx.

    But wow, two years, that's a lot. Why did you get into that in the first place?

    I'd say that Jung is a an LII-INTj in Socionics. Because we mention all 8 IM elements, he can lead with Ti but still have strong Ni. He just won't value it. He's very much an Intuitive type though, very much in the abstract world and nowhere near as volitional as an LSI-ISTj.
    Founder and President of World Socionics Society
    http://www.facebook.com/groups/worldsocionicssociety

Similar Threads

  1. All news is bad news?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-20-2016, 04:02 PM
  2. Type me, for socionics. Is this even where I am supposed to ask this?
    By Evolving Transparency in forum Socionics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-20-2012, 01:42 AM
  3. Socionics is amazing
    By Unique in forum Socionics
    Replies: 86
    Last Post: 05-13-2012, 04:40 PM
  4. Wirty Dords - They Is Bad?
    By Arthur Schopenhauer in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-10-2010, 02:52 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO