Anyone know anything about them?
Cross-types ...
Anyone know anything about them?
Guides
17) ExFJ: The Teacher
18) ExFP: The Star
19) ExTJ: The Enforcer
20) ExTP: The Engineer
21) IxFJ: The Scribe
22) IxFP: The Romantic
23) IxTJ: The Administrator
24) IxTP: The Operator
Luminaries
25) ESFx: The Populist
26) ESTx: The Showman
27) ENFx: The Actor
28) ENTx: The Organizer
29) ISFx: The Priest
30) ISTx: The Historian
31) INFx: The Counselor
32) INTx: The Relativist
Figures
33) xSFJ: The Facilitator
34) xSFP: The Herald
35) xSTP: The Promoter
36) xSTJ: The Sergent
37) xNFJ: The Sage
38) xNFP: The Crusader
39) xNTJ: The Chieftan
40) xNTP: The Networker
Adventurers
41) ESxJ: The Cultist
42) ESxP: The Explorer
43) ENxJ: The Ringleader
44) ENxP: The Revealer
45) ISxJ: The Inhibitor
46) ISxP: The Rebel
47) INxJ: The Maverick
48) INxP: The Escapist
Proletarians
49) xSFx: The Bishop
50) xSTx: The Revolutionary
51) xNFx: The Healer
52) xNTx: The Commander
Tribunes
53) xxFJ: The Conductor
54) xxFP: The Harmonizer
55) xxTJ: The Director
56) xxTP: The Planner
Narcissists
57) xSxJ: The Conservator
58) xSxP: The Dictator
59) xNxJ: The Insurgent
60) xNxP: The Interloper
Destinies
61) ExFx: The Celebrity
62) ExTx: The Aristocrat
63) IxFx: The Strategist
64) IxTx: The Philosopher
Motions
65) ExxJ: The Prosecutor
66) ExxP: The Exhibitionist
67) IxxP: The Illusionist
68) IxxJ: The Instigator
Motivators
69) ESxx: The Craftsman
70) ENxx: The General
71) ISxx: The Manipulator
72) INxx: The Seer
Archetypes
73) Exxx: The Diplomat
74) Ixxx: The Mystic
75) xSxx: The Overlord
76) xNxx: The Nationalist
77) xxFx: The Empath
78) xxTx: The Logician
79) xxxJ: The Master
80) xxxP: The Creator
81) xxxx: The Providentiary
By the way, a little disclaimer that this theory totally conflicts with established socionics theory. I am meerly asking for the simple fact that I am nuts, TCaudill is nuts, and I want to hear more about it.
Ask tcaudilllg, as he's the ONLY person that speaks of them. My personal opinion of them isn't that high, but that's because it seems more like something cobbled together than the logical extension of current socionics. It also seems based on a bad premise using dichotomies instead of a functional model of the psyche. I wonder if they could have developed if socionics had never started using MB style acronyms.
That faith makes blessed under certain circumstances, that blessedness does not make of a fixed idea a true idea, that faith moves no mountains but puts mountains where there are none: a quick walk through a madhouse enlightens one sufficiently about this. (A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.) - Friedrich Nietzsche
Hah, apparently he is the only one on google that knows anything about them. He has a webblog somewhere where he talks about them. That was basically the only link I found when I looked for it.Originally Posted by niveK
And if you want my opinion, dichotomonies can not work with socionics without tooling over the theory. So, if that is basically what it is, I think it is a bad theory that is backtracking back to shitty MBTI and should be thrown away with the rest of the inferior trash.
Now to wait for tcaudilllg to actually explain why this is a valid theory... boy I am nuts!
If Jungian functions are dictated by different regions of the brain then *theoretically* cross-types are possible.
I am seriously critical towards the idea of anatomical localization of any brain function, Socionics or not. But I digress.
The only way I can see cross-types working is if these people were LACKING in any functional ability. Like for example, an IxFp is incapacitated in some area of functioning that both the ISFp and the INFp possess. Also, I can see using dichotomies, however the J/P axis cross implies some really strange functional crosses.
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)
Maybe tcaudilllg should come and translate these into Socionics names? (if possible)
It appears that cross-types will lack certain weaknesses in their psyche (also certain strengths) and as a result will lack sensitivity to other peoples' weaknesses.
i.e. An INxp (who has no PoLR) might theoretically step on other peoples' PoLR more than your regular INFp or INTp would.
Theoretically.
Not that INFps or INTps are regular...
I like #37.
If I was a crosstype I think I would be XNFP, which is the crusader.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote