Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: I have a question

  1. #1
    I'm back, assholes! Herzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    5,098
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default I have a question.

    You know about all these + and - functions, right? Well since the ESTp's functions are - and +, what would happen if it was + and - ? Is that even possible at all?
    , Se-sub
    8w8-3w8-7w8 sx/sx

  2. #2
    I'm back, assholes! Herzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    5,098
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Oh okay, that makes sense. That would be kind of weird IRL.
    , Se-sub
    8w8-3w8-7w8 sx/sx

  3. #3
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Are there articles somewhere on what + and - mean? I haven't found any so far.

  4. #4
    Cone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,717
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Not sure where any articles are...

    Herzblut, I was thinking the same thing a few weeks ago. I think it may be possible, but I'm not sure on what it would imply.

    Supposedly, an ISTp uses Se+Ti- in his active will along with Si-Te+.
    Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: I have a question.

    Quote Originally Posted by Herzblut
    You know about all these + and - functions, right? Well since the ESTp's functions are - and +, what would happen if it was + and - ? Is that even possible at all?
    That's where Socionics is flawed.

  6. #6
    Cone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,717
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think Socionics is flawed in more places than just that.

    Remember folks, Socionics is a psychoanalytic theory!
    Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)

  7. #7
    Cone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,717
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I thought the idea of distance aspects came before that article.
    Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)

  8. #8
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Pedro, thank you for the URL. I looked it up, and then I looked up "distance aspects" on Google. What I found is this: (-) functions are theoretical, changeable, and aloof. So (+) functions must be practical, stable, and involved. (In my mind's eye, I saw Starship Enterprise, with the captain going "engage Ne, please, Mr Checkhov", and up in the drive room a formerly theoretical and aloof function goes KLONK and becomes practical and stable... OK, I'll stop now. )

    Question: Is this correct? Are distance aspects the same thing as (or something connected to) conscious / subconscious, or weak / strong, or producing / accepting?

  9. #9
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So do I get this right - Fi (for example) is usually (-), i.e. it works in its own sphere and is theoretical and changeable and aloof, BUT it can also be (+) and then shifts into another sphere and is practical etc.

    So Fi (+) is extraverted Fi?

Posting Permissions

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