User Tag List

First 111920212223 Last

Results 201 to 210 of 265

Thread: The beta quadra

  1. #201
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    From the looks of this thread, it appears some people have a problem with different models being used to look at things in different ways - as if there should be only one way to look at something. Look, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but we've been over this a million times in this forum. The definitions are different. People know that. Big deal.
    So you agree with me that the two systems look at things in different ways then? For that is how I interpreted your statement. My entire point was that the reason the functions are described differently is because of how the two systems view types externally or internally, not that the functions are different, but why they are different.

  2. #202
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Yes, I agree.

    And this has already been covered.

    Socionics puts more emphasis of "Jish" qualities on Judging functions, regardless of whether they're extroverted.

    This then makes types that have a dominant introverted Judging function sound more "Jish" in Socionics than in MBTI.

    And it makes types that have a dominant introverted Perceiving function sound more "Pish" in Socionics than MBTI.

    And, lastly, each theorist emphasizes different things they believe to be true about the functions.

    This exists within the "MBTI" world, between different theorists.

    It exists within the Socionics world, between Socionics theorists.

    And it exists between "MBTI" theorists and Socionics theorists.

    And, lastly, it exists between Jung and all of them.

    That doesn't mean, tho, that when they're trying to describe Extroverted Sensing, that they're not trying to describe the same thing.

    They may emphasize different things about it, they may disagree about certain things about it, but they're still trying to describe the same thing.

    10 Different Painters + Same Scene = 10 Different Paintings

    Some will be more alike than others, some will be better than others, some will focus on things other didn't even paint.

    Regardless, the underlying scene was the same.

    Our job is to figure out which painters were most insightful and accurate, and what was insightful and accurate about what they painted.

    You're looking for simple. I read your other posts in this thread. I don't have a problem if 186 type models exist. But you would.
    It's not "our job" to figure out who is most insightful. You can either use a framework or not, and if you don't like it, hell, go create one yourself.

    Now that I've wasted my time on this old nonsense, I don't have any time left to go read highlander's thread on some new system.

    I have to go pick up a prescription for my ISTJ father who has 'no interest in achieving anything'.
    Catch you later.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra
    I've learned Socionics.
    Kindergarten level doesn't count.

  3. #203
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Listening to ISTPs when it comes to discussing concepts is like listening to an NFJ about how to build a house.

    Not saying some NFJs couldn't tell you a thing or two, but they surely aren't who I'd go to first.

    Next time I need my oil changed, I'll give you ring.
    That's bad stereotyping.


    The people here are too smart to believe this bullshit.
    It's not bullshit; for anyone interested as to which post I was referring to, where I refuted it, see this post (mainly where it talks about liver vs lung stuff).


    Hate to ruin a good story with the facts, but:
    Quote Originally Posted by infinity-
    I don't think I'm the only one who sees that you're not being that logical about these claims :P
    But, where's the facts? I did not name anyone there. I was speaking in general.

    So, it's in your mind only.


    It's not ad hominem to call bullshit what it is.

    Try making realistic, worthwhile claims, and not just troll posts, and they won't be called out for being precisely what they are.
    You are clearly emotionally attached to your idea on functions. That's why you keep doing ad hominems instead of staying with detached analysis.

  4. #204
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    You're looking for simple.
    Mm...

    Not exactly.

    I'm looking for insight, accuracy, and truth.

    I read your other posts in this thread.
    This started in another thread.

    And arguments laid out there have not been articulated here.

    I don't have a problem if 186 type models exist. But you would.
    Not necessarily.

    I would rather have one, or three or four ACCURATE, INSIGHTFUL models than 186 shitty ones.

    Also, I would rather have three or four really good ones than 93 so-so ones, and 98 pieces of shit.

    But, to be completely honest, this is neither here nor there, cuz it doesn't come close to addressing the crux of my argument, nor why I make it.

    It's not "our job" to figure out who is most insightful.
    That's fine if you don't want to take up that goal.

    I think it's a worthwhile one.

    You can either use a framework or not...
    Yes, and if you use a shitty one, then you use a shitty one.

    ...and if you don't like it, hell, go create one yourself.
    We all already do this in a sense, anyway, as we all have our own interpretations of everything we study.

    Now that I've wasted my time on this old nonsense, I don't have any time left to go read highlander's thread on some new system.
    :nice:

    I have to go pick up a prescription for my ISTJ father who has 'no interest in achieving anything'.
    Not the definition or profile I chose to use.

    If you want to use the shittier ones, that's your decision.

    Catch you later
    Which reminds me: you never answered about the TeSi description I did provide.

    If you ask me, the one I did provide is perfectly compatible with "MBTI"'s version of TeSi/STJs.

    Kindergarten level doesn't count.
    I've yet to see a single thing you or anybody else has mentioned that I didn't already know, so either we're all a bunch of kindergartners, or yall should start talking about these amazing insights you learned in first and second grade that I'm not already aware of.

  5. #205
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    Funny how two ISTp's know better about function theory than an INTJ. I should be the one laughing here.
    Heh.

    Btw actually I'm ISTP only in MBTI but I'm not ISTp in socionics. Why are you ISTp there, do you relate to Delta quadra more than Beta or is it the socionics Si and Te functions or something else? Just curious. Me personally, I relate to socionics Ti and Se more than the Si/Te stuff and Delta values aren't really me either.


    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar
    Types that value Si prefer to spend their time doing enjoyable activities rather than straining themselves to achieve goals.
    Which profile is that one line taken from?

    As with any profile, some are better, and some are worse, than others.
    You really didn't get into socionics too deep. This is standard socionics Si. Not taken from a profile, it's taken from the description of the socionics Si definition.


    Actually, noone's making the argument that they're not.
    Right, the argument is about compatibility. But that's what @Jaguar meant anyway. That's also what I'm talking about.


    @Alea_iacta_est some of your posts here took my interest, I will respond to you in the MBTI vs socionics thread where it's more on-topic.

  6. #206
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinity-
    Alea_iacta_est some of your posts here took my interest, I will respond to you in the MBTI vs socionics thread where it's more on-topic.
    Great.

  7. #207
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinity- View Post
    Heh.

    Btw actually I'm ISTP only in MBTI but I'm not ISTp in socionics. Why are you ISTp there, do you relate to Delta quadra more than Beta or is it the socionics Si and Te functions or something else? Just curious. Me personally, I relate to socionics Ti and Se more than the Si/Te stuff and Delta values aren't really me either.
    It's what I relate to the most in socionics after getting into the theory and reading the descriptions of the 8 functions. I also don't get along well with people from the beta quadra personally, and I'm definitely not "duals" with ENFJs "conflict" sounds like a better fit.

  8. #208
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    It might also help to alleviate some description problems by realizing the place from which Socionics was born, which was Lithuania under the USSR. Since the Soviet Union was essentially in a nihilistic atmosphere for the majority of its existence in the social sphere, it is not surprising to see that some of these profiles do not line up with the American Stereotypes and perhaps even some of Jung's ideas of types. Just a thought.

  9. #209
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinity- View Post
    Right, the argument is about compatibility. But that's what @Jaguar meant anyway.
    Correct.

  10. #210
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinity- View Post



    Ah, I see. I guess we are definitely not the same Socionics type as I tend to like ENFj's.
    What sociotype are you? my guess would be ESTP.

Similar Threads

  1. Beta Quadra Video Examples
    By Stansmith in forum Socionics
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 07-01-2015, 05:36 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-10-2014, 11:42 AM
  3. Can anyone distinguish the Alpha Beta Gamma Delta archetypes for me...
    By Zangetshumody in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 10-26-2013, 01:15 PM
  4. The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta
    By Speed Gavroche in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 02-25-2012, 03:30 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