Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: What is the consensus on Filatova's descriptions?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default What is the consensus on Filatova's descriptions?

    Are they considered accurate?

  2. #2
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Are they considered accurate?
    Some of them are considered more accurate than others. E.g. Gamma descriptions are considered more accurate than Alpha descriptions.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX View Post
    Some of them are considered more accurate than others. E.g. Gamma descriptions are considered more accurate than Alpha descriptions.
    Thank you.

  4. #4
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Where are these descriptions?
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  5. #5
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't particularly care for them. It's like... they're based too strongly on one or two people she's known of those types. Her SEE description is particularly horrible.

    I do very much relate to her ILI description though.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  6. #6
    what is essential is invisible to the eye fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Space
    TIM
    Seer
    Posts
    12,804
    Mentioned
    367 Post(s)
    Tagged
    9 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just to add my own input, I do find that I relate a lot to Filatova's IEI description myself; I can't speak for all IEI's though.
    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    betas should be kept in zoos for children to stare and throw pop corn at.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    I don't particularly care for them. It's like... they're based too strongly on one or two people she's known of those types.
    That is the problem with many (most? all?) socionic type descriptions. The LII type description at Lytov's site (from Weisband) is in its entirety solely based on Immanuel Kant's personal life, the ILI type description is solely based on Honoré de Balzac's life, etc.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    The INTj description begins with a Thomas Jefferson quote and goes on to quote Descartes multiple times..
    But all the details about the INTj's behaviour can be found in biographies about Kant. Reading a biography about Kant is like reading an LII type description. Almost the same phrasings are there. And it was the same situation, perhaps even more accentuated, when I read a two volumes biography of Balzac. Balzac is chosen as the protype INTp (even though he clearly is not a typical INTp, and maybe even not an INTp at all), and everything described in the ILI profile has happened to Balzac in real life.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    Does Weisband go into detail somewhere else, in his own words, on who else he based his INTj description on?
    I don't know.

  10. #10
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    I don't know.
    Phaedrus I really need to quote this. Has this ever happened before?

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX View Post
    Phaedrus I really need to quote this. Has this ever happened before?
    Yes, many times. In fact, one of my most often used expressions when I was a kid -- and thus still young and stupid -- was "I don't know". But the more I have studied through the years that has passed since then, the less appropriate I have found the expression to be. Nowadays I only use it on special occasions ...

  12. #12
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    Yes, many times. In fact, one of my most often used expressions when I was a kid -- and thus still young and stupid -- was "I don't know". But the more I have studied through the years that has passed since then, the less appropriate I have found the expression to be. Nowadays I only use it on special occasions ...
    Like weddings?

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX View Post
    Like weddings?
    That was a good one ...

  14. #14
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    That was a good one ...
    What do you think of the MBTI profiles at this site:
    http://www.personalitypage.com/portraits.html

    Would you say they are good or bad compared to other MBTI and socionics profiles you have read?

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX View Post
    What do you think of the MBTI profiles at this site:
    http://www.personalitypage.com/portraits.html

    Would you say they are good or bad compared to other MBTI and socionics profiles you have read?
    They are not the best ones. I haven't evaluated and ranked every MBTT type description, but those at personalitypage might be worse than average. Hard to tell. I have read so many of them that they tend to blur into each other. My understanding of the types is based on many such descriptions. I can't say for sure which is the best I have seen.

  16. #16
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    They are not the best ones. I haven't evaluated and ranked every MBTT type description, but those at personalitypage might be worse than average. Hard to tell. I have read so many of them that they tend to blur into each other. My understanding of the types is based on many such descriptions. I can't say for sure which is the best I have seen.
    OK. I asked because I think they are easy to read and kind of concrete. I don't know if the information content is good though. I am kind of exploring whether the MBTI type descriptions could be somehow useful to me. Socionics type descriptions often seem so weird and difficult to apply to yourself.

    One more question: Why do people some say "MBTT" instead of "MBTI". Is it about being a snob or is there some better reason behind it? Do they mean the same thing or slightly different things? Where does the "T" come from? "Theory"?

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX View Post
    OK. I asked because I think they are easy to read and kind of concrete. I don't know if the information content is good though. I am kind of exploring whether the MBTI type descriptions could be somehow useful to me. Socionics type descriptions often seem so weird and difficult to apply to yourself.
    Try this site: http://www.murraystate.edu/secsv/fye/m-b.htm

    The descriptions there are at least slightly better than those at personalitypage.

    One more question: Why do people some say "MBTT" instead of "MBTI". Is it about being a snob or is there some better reason behind it? Do they mean the same thing or slightly different things? Where does the "T" come from? "Theory"?
    Yes. MBTT stands for Myers-Briggs Type Theory. MBTI stands for Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.

    Compare #34: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...t=19461&page=4

  18. #18
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Best guesses of famous INTJs include Thomas Edison (who was given to almost daily inventions, upon which he was always improving); Richard Nixon (whose political genius made him a man ahead of his time, but whose grasp for control ultimately undid him); and Katherine Hepburn (whose private nature belies her take-charge, I'll-do-it-my-way style).
    If we are to believe Rick about the types of the people that are mentioned, it is almost excluded that the author was speaking about socionics INTjs, OR had any idea of what he was talking about.

    Rick:
    Edison: ESTj
    Nixon: ISFj
    Hepburn: ENTj (seems to be removed from his page, but used to be there)

    Edit: in response to the MBTT profiles that were posted; not Filatova's work

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    If we are to believe Rick about the types of the people that are mentioned, it is almost excluded that the author was speaking about socionics INTjs, OR had any idea of what he was talking about.
    He had no idea what he was talking about. He was of course talking about socionic INTjs, but he didn't know it. Many typologists don't know the true nature of the types in their own model. That is especially true of Enneagram practitioners.

  20. #20
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,617
    Mentioned
    158 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    He had no idea what he was talking about. He was of course talking about socionic INTjs, but he didn't know it. Many typologists don't know the true nature of the types in their own model. That is especially true of Enneagram practitioners.
    I agree only in the sense that artists do not decide what their art means.

  21. #21
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Are they considered accurate?
    I think they're good, giving an insight on types from a particular point of view.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    I don't particularly care for them. It's like... they're based too strongly on one or two people she's known of those types. Her SEE description is particularly horrible.
    Yes; if it is taken to mean that SEEs are going to really always behave in that precise way. I think, however, that even the SEE description is good in the sense that it gives an insight on how SEEs may come across to others at times.

    I think that Filatova's descriptions should be read along with those of socioscope.com and Stratievskaya's.

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    Does Weisband go into detail somewhere else, in his own words, on who else he based his INTj description on?
    We discussed his descriptions with him in Duesseldorf - not INTj in particular. He was more or less "assigned" the task - or saw it as his assignement - to write the first full set of socionics descriptions. I don't think he thinks he'd write them again like that, today.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

Posting Permissions

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