Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Victor Gulenko's Descriptions

  1. #1
    Board philosopher or bored philosopher? jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    884
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Victor Gulenko's Descriptions

    The descriptions at Socionics.com, and some of the subtype descriptions on Wikisocion are based on Victor Gulenko's work. What I like about his descriptions is that they are based on real behaviours, as opposed to function descriptions. I relate to his descriptions of types that are similar to me somewhat more than I can relate to the descriptions created by others. This doesn't mean that the other descriptions are bad, I just prefer his descriptions. What do you think of his work? Can you relate well to his descriptions of your type?

    Jason

  2. #2
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    As far as subtype descriptions go, I prefer Meged's to Gulenko's.

    I think his descriptions are generally ok. As for his work generally, I think he's probably the most original of socionics writers after Augusta; a lot of his contributions and suggestions are really good, such as the erotic groups. Others are a bit more arcane, like the rings of supervision.

    If you read all his articles, you see that he seems to go into all kinds of directions; more recently he's gone into directions that other socionists are skeptical about.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  3. #3
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    The descriptions at Socionics.com, and some of the subtype descriptions on Wikisocion are based on Victor Gulenko's work. What I like about his descriptions is that they are based on real behaviours, as opposed to function descriptions. I relate to his descriptions of types that are similar to me somewhat more than I can relate to the descriptions created by others. This doesn't mean that the other descriptions are bad, I just prefer his descriptions. What do you think of his work? Can you relate well to his descriptions of your type?

    Jason
    I agree totally that behaviour descriptions are better then function descriptions.

  4. #4
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat View Post
    As far as subtype descriptions go, I prefer Meged's to Gulenko's.
    Does Meged have translated descriptions of the types? (I am not talking about his subtype descriptions though).

  5. #5
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,630
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    I agree totally that behaviour descriptions are better then function descriptions.
    They're only better until you realize how much behavioral, "holistic" descriptions are leaving out, and how they could never possibly capture the true nature of a type and its Model A.

  6. #6
    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 Logos View Post
    Does Meged have translated descriptions of the types? (I am not talking about his subtype descriptions though).
    Valentina Meged is a woman.

    And, in the texts where she describes the subtypes, she also gives a general description of the type.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  7. #7
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat View Post
    Valentina Meged is a woman.
    Noted.

    And, in the texts where she describes the subtypes, she also gives a general description of the type.
    And these are subtype descriptions that can be found, translated, on the Wikisocion page?

  8. #8
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You can find everything - type and subtypes - here:

    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ead.php?t=7322
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  9. #9
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    They're only better until you realize how much behavioral, "holistic" descriptions are leaving out, and how they could never possibly capture the true nature of a type and its Model A.
    Sure both descriptions have their positive features. But behaviour descriptions give a better image of the type.

    To give an example, ISTJ's are best known for their reliability.

    This word is not used when the type is described by functions.

  10. #10
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Sure both descriptions have their positive features. But behaviour descriptions give a better image of the type.

    To give an example, ISTJ's are best known for their reliability.

    This word is not used when the type is described by functions.
    yeah it's almost like socionics describes the interworkings of the mind and the communication process that leads to the behavioral result....but then leaves out the behavioral result. whereas MBTI leaves out the lead-up and only describes the behavior.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

Posting Permissions

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