Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: socionics axioms

  1. #1
    reyn_til_runa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    1,009
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default socionics axioms

    does socionics lend itself to a set of axioms?

    if so, what do you think they are?

    i'm not talking about the basic information that makes up the theory, but a simpler set of truths that you do not question, upon which the theory can be built.

    list format would be fine, and some other format may be fine too, as long as it's concise.

    it's ok, too, if these are guesses. i believe that guessing at axioms, then testing their substance through theory, is more valuable than pretending to know the right (rigid) answers.
    whenever the dog and i see each other we both stop where we are. we regard each other with a mixture of sadness and suspicion and then we feign indifference.

    Jerry, The Zoo Story by Edward Albee

  2. #2
    snegledmaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,900
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    These are the only ones I could think of off the top of my head.

    Relationships between people form instantly (Could take time to fully show) and are stable.
    Relationships between people always take up one of the 16 forms.


    Basically, there is no possibility that after say three years with no problems at all a relationship suddenly disintegrates caused solely by people information metabolism. There is also no switching between relations, there is no, say, a three year period cycle through which couples go through switching through at least two different relations. There are also no transitory states between relations.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If only the rest of the world knew this.

  4. #4
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,614
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    These are the only ones I could think of off the top of my head.

    Relationships between people form instantly (Could take time to fully show) and are stable.
    Relationships between people always take up one of the 16 forms.


    Basically, there is no possibility that after say three years with no problems at all a relationship suddenly disintegrates caused solely by people information metabolism. There is also no switching between relations, there is no, say, a three year period cycle through which couples go through switching through at least two different relations. There are also no transitory states between relations.
    Interesting...

    I'd say,

    1. Type does not change (is stable).
    2. Same types implies same relationships.

    You could add

    3. There are 16 types.

    but subtypes contradict this.

    As for the stability of relationships,

    Smilexian socionics eliminates 1. Really there isn't much left in the way of axioms. All you have is #2, and that relationships and people follow certain patterns - and that is pretty much necessary for any (pseudo)-empirical study. What patterns they are, exactly, is essentially left to observation, no?

    IMO, #2 is really the basis of socionic's value - although what the types are is not obvious at all.

  5. #5
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: socionics axioms

    Quote Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa
    does socionics lend itself to a set of axioms?

    if so, what do you think they are?

    i'm not talking about the basic information that makes up the theory, but a simpler set of truths that you do not question, upon which the theory can be built.

    list format would be fine, and some other format may be fine too, as long as it's concise.

    it's ok, too, if these are guesses. i believe that guessing at axioms, then testing their substance through theory, is more valuable than pretending to know the right (rigid) answers.
    http://wikisocion.org/~wikisoci/en/i...s_of_socionics

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •