Socionics is BAD

[ICUP]

Interesting.. Do you know where he said that? (yeah, yeah, maybe you suck at citations as much as I do.. . Just wondering).

I think as far as famous intellectuals go, I think a better case can be made for Darwin being an ISTP. Not to say he is, but I can see it more than Jung. Jung said he spent his whole early life in a state of detachment, trying to make sense of all of these ideas he finally put words to later. At least Darwin was out and about, exploring the world - and then his theoretical models came later (edit: This could very well be INTP too though, of course).

I was involved in a thread here a little while back on Carl Jung's type, and the quote is in that thread. I really don't care what type he is.... But I think istp is a possibility. It's not a non-possibility.

 

[Mal12345]

Interesting.. Do you know where he said that? (yeah, yeah, maybe you suck at citations as much as I do.. . Just wondering).

I think as far as famous intellectuals go, I think a better case can be made for Darwin being an ISTP. Not to say he is, but I can see it more than Jung. Jung said he spent his whole early life in a state of detachment, trying to make sense of all of these ideas he finally put words to later. At least Darwin was out and about, exploring the world - and then his theoretical models came later (edit: This could very well be INTP too though, of course).

Which type thinks about ideas abstractly, and builds a brand new paradigm out of evidence based on experiment and observation?

 

[Jaguar]

The proliferation of ignorant stereotypes in this forum is getting tiresome. I posted this in the SP forum:

If a profile smacks of stereotyping, I won't even use it.

Here are couple of objective ISTP profiles:

http://www.jungtype.com/ISTP.htm

http://www.careerplanner.com/Berens-Nardi/ISTP-Themes-Relationships.cfm

Contributions to the team of an ISTP

In a team environment, the ISTP can contribute by:

* being a source of information, or an 'expert' in some subjects
* using analytical skills to produce practical solutions to difficult problems
* encouraging the team to think, and then act
* having a cool head in a crisis
* applying relevant and realistic logical arguments
* encouraging the team to realistically assess the situation


Furthermore, do any of these suggested ISTP careers sound like "bikers"?


Careers ISTPs Might Consider:

Commercial Artist
Intelligence Agent
Private Detective
Software Developer
Lawyer/Judge
Media Specialist
Fire Fighter
Medical Technician
Corrections Officer
Legal Secretary
Electrical Engineer
Purchasing Agent
Automotive Products Retailer
Coach/Trainer
Computer Repair Person
Construction Worker
Optometrist
City Works Technician
Physical Therapist
Public Manager
Craft Worker
Computer Systems Analyst
Race Car Driver
Pilot
Marine Biologist
Surveyor
Farmer
Mechanic
Computer Programmer
Banker
Securities Analyst
Cook
Professional Hunter
Corporate Executive
Radiological Technician
Paralegal
Forest Ranger
Police Officer
Economist
Dental Hygienist
Respiratory Therapist
Chiropractor
Mechanical Engineer
Weapons Operator
Carpenter


I found that ISTP career list in mere seconds. (And that's just one of many.) If someone would actually take "mechanic" and "carpenter" out of a list of careers with that much breadth, and think that's what ISTPs do, I don't see how they could be smart enough to operate a coffee maker without harming themselves.

People's knowledge of type will be limited by the sources they choose to use.
If there are any adults reading this, I suggest grabbing a copy of:

Quick Guide to the 16 Personality Types in Organizations: Understanding Personality Differences in the Workplace

Go here:
http://www.amazon.com/Quick-Guide-Personality-Types-Organizations/dp/0971214417

 

[ICUP]

Which type thinks about ideas abstractly, and builds a brand new paradigm out of evidence based on experiment and observation?

You must know for a fact what type Carl Jung is. Why we were all involved in those threads to argue and try to figure out his type, I have no idea. We could've just asked you.
Carl Jung doesn't ride a fucking motorcycle, so he must not be an istp. Genius thoughts.

It's a much more-complicated endeavor to type Carl Jung than what you are expounding, as he is a complicated individual. From what I have seen, it would take larger amounts of effort to make a real case for it, and it's beyond the scope of this forum.

 

[Glycerine]

Didn't you get the memo? If you don't ride motorcycles or fix things, you fail at life as an ISTP.

 

[ICUP]

Didn't you get the memo? If you don't ride motorcycles or fix things, you fail at life as an ISTP.

Apparently I was out of the office that day.

 

[Jaguar]

Didn't you get the memo? If you don't ride motorcycles or fix things, you fail at life as an ISTP.

Must be an ISTP motorcycle mechanic:

 

[ICUP]

Yea, because any other type would never ride or fix a fucking motorcycle. Of course not, because a website didn't tell me they did.

 

[Mal12345]

My last question has been buried under troll waste. No matter, I'll just repeat it. [MENTION=9214]KDude[/MENTION] "Which type [like Darwin] thinks about ideas abstractly, and builds a brand new paradigm out of evidence based on experiment and observation?"

 

[garbage]

I think that threads veer off topic because some believe that those who delve deep into the internal logic lose sight of the overall context, and they seek to reestablish that context. There seems to be more and more of this sentiment going around. I happen to think that's a great thing and for god's sake we really do need more of it, but we can also work to establish which parts of these theories are useful (none! lol! haha hi five! *congratulatory fist bump*) and which are not.

I guess the question would be--if we're going to categorize types anyway, would the lovely fourth dichotomy be better termed as what we extravert or what actually drives us? My first thought is that that the former is more useful for behavior modeling and workforce development and the latter for a more 'scientific,' down-in-the-weeds cognitive approach..

 

[ICUP]

My last question has been buried under troll waste.

You call telling the truth being a troll? And I thought you were so smart.

 

[Mal12345]

I think that threads veer off topic because some believe that those who delve deep into the internal logic lose sight of the overall context, and they seek to reestablish that context. There seems to be more and more of this sentiment going around. I happen to think that's a great thing and for god's sake we really do need more of it, but we can also work to establish which parts of these theories are useful (none! lol! haha hi five! *congratulatory fist bump*) and which are not.

I guess the question would be--if we're going to categorize types anyway, would the lovely fourth dichotomy be better termed as what we extravert or what actually drives us? My first thought is that that the former is more useful for behavior modeling and workforce development and the latter for a more 'scientific,' down-in-the-weeds cognitive approach..

Doesn't the fourth category describe lifestyle? Isn't that how Myers-Briggs developed it?

 

[KDude]

My last question has been buried under troll waste. No matter, I'll just repeat it. [MENTION=9214]KDude[/MENTION] "Which type [like Darwin] thinks about ideas abstractly, and builds a brand new paradigm out of evidence based on experiment and observation?"

That would be NTP. But all I'm saying is ISTP could build their own theories too, given enough time. Many ISTP cops and other investigators and profilers do exactly this. It's next to impossible to spin one's wheels consistently, without contemplation and building a model from it. Definitely impossible for another introvert at least.

 

[Mal12345]

That would be NTP. But all I'm saying is ISTP could build their own theories too, given enough time. Many ISTP cops and other investigators and profilers do exactly this. It's next to impossible to spin one's wheels consistently, without contemplation and building a model from it. Definitely impossible for another introvert at least.

We're talking about two different kettles of fish. I certainly agree that investigators and such create their own theories. But these are not like Darwin's theory. They are not paradigm shifts.

The INTP is the architect of new scientific paradigms.

 

[KDude]

We're talking about two different kettles of fish. I certainly agree that investigators and such create their own theories. But these are not like Darwin's theory. They are not paradigm shifts.

The INTP is the architect of new scientific paradigms.

Fair enough. You can have Darwin, if you want. I was only using him as someone where I could see ISTP being more plausible (than Jung). Jung dealt strictly with symbols and esoteric subjects.

 

[Mal12345]

Fair enough. You can have Darwin, if you want. I was only using him as someone where I could see ISTP being more plausible (than Jung). Jung dealt strictly with symbols and esoteric subjects.

Not true. Jung stated that he observed his patients for 20 years before writing Psychological Types. I believe he said 20 years. The only difference I see is that Jung didn't go gallivanting around the world looking for the evidence needed to support his theory.

 

[KDude]

Not true. Jung stated that he observed his patients for 20 years before writing Psychological Types. I believe he said 20 years. The only difference I see is that Jung didn't go gallivanting around the world looking for the evidence needed to support his theory.

I'm not just talking about Psychological Types, but his ideas as a whole. It seemed like he had been working a lot of philosophy out from a more detached point, from an early age. "The years when I was pursuing my inner images were the most important of my life - in them, everything essential was decided. It all began then; the later details were only supplements and clarifications of the material that burst forth from the unconscious, and at first, swamped me. It was the prima materia for a life's work." Memories, Dreams, and Reflections pg 225 (hey look, a citation. I'm getting better at this).

 

[ICUP]

As I said, it's beyond the scope of this forum to truly make a case for it. But from what I have gathered, it's very possible that Jung was istp, probably 5. What Jung accomplished in his life and how he went about it, could very well be a result of istp. I would say the same thing about intp.

 

[Mal12345]

I'm not just talking about Psychological Types, but his ideas as a whole. It seemed like he had been working a lot of philosophy out from a more detached point, from an early age. "The years when I was pursuing my inner images were the most important of my life - in them, everything essential was decided. It all began then; the later details were only supplements and clarifications of the material that burst forth from the unconscious, and at first, swamped me. It was the prima materia for a life's work." Memories, Dreams, and Reflections pg 225 (hey look, a citation. I'm getting better at this).

I was hoping you would mention this. That is an important trait to keep in mind when determining this type. The theory suddenly bursts forth into consciousness from the unconscious mind like an inspiration from heaven. It is not INTP with the Ne function but INTJ with the Ni function.

 

[Mal12345]

I'm not just talking about Psychological Types, but his ideas as a whole. It seemed like he had been working a lot of philosophy out from a more detached point, from an early age. "The years when I was pursuing my inner images were the most important of my life - in them, everything essential was decided. It all began then; the later details were only supplements and clarifications of the material that burst forth from the unconscious, and at first, swamped me. It was the prima materia for a life's work." Memories, Dreams, and Reflections pg 225 (hey look, a citation. I'm getting better at this).

I was hoping you would mention this. That is an important trait to keep in mind when determining this type. The theory suddenly bursts forth into consciousness from the unconscious mind like an inspiration from heaven. It is not INTP with the Ne function but INTJ with the Ni function.