Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: My Basic Views on Socionics

  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 My Basic Views on Socionics

    (This is open to reformulation)

    1. Intertype relations is the most important aspect of type.

    2. The best way to determine the nature of the functions is to figure out the most coherent pattern of functions and intertype relations, combining both textbook knowledge and empirical observation.

    3. The patterns that are discovered only represent a general trend - there will often be anomalies in the functions of an individual type or of an individual relation.

    4. The information that you produce, the way you respond to various types of information, and the pattern of intertype relations that you exhibit are the biggest factors in determining your type.

    5. The following have less importance in determining your type than the things listed in 4.:
    - Purely internal thought processes that are not expressed (either directly or indirectly).
    - The four basic dichotomies.
    - Temperaments.
    - Purely textbook knowledge of types and functions.

    6. The following have far less importance in determining your type than the things listed in 4.:
    - VI

    7. The following have no importance in determining your type:
    - Knowledge that comes entirely from unsubstantiated theories.
    - Assessments based on Statics/Dynamics, Internals/Externals, or Fields/Objects.
    - Isolated examples of information metabolism or intertype relations that are not considered with respect to the person's overall pattern of behaviour.
    - Reinin dichotomies

    Jason
    Last edited by jason_m; 04-02-2009 at 03:18 AM.
    LII

  2. #2
    Creepy-male

    Default

    I freakin' love this. Seriously. Why couldn't you have posted this while I was stumbling through Socionics trying to get my type?

    However, "The four basic dichotomies" under #5 contradicts #4. The dichotomies determine which spheres of information you're plugged into.

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    (This is open to reformulation)

    1. Intertype relations is the most important aspect of type.
    4. The information that you produce, the way you respond to various types of information, and the pattern of intertype relations that you exhibit are the biggest factors in determining your type.
    No. First of all you can't type anyone if you just try typing based intertype relations, you'll just end up with empty framework how people in this group interact between eachother, without anchors to lock them to types. In practice intertype relations between people of certain types vary very much, due to multitude of external factors other than the theoretical intertype relation they have. The intertype relation descriptions are somewhat vague and easily malleable to a wrong intertype relation.

    According Portrait of a Modern Socionist theory of intertype relations scored reliability score of 3.81, 5 being the highest.

    So intertype relations are of some assistance in typing people, and sometimes helpful in locking in on a type, but not extremely reliable.

    5. The following have less importance in determining your type than the things listed in 4.:
    - Purely internal thought processes that are not expressed (either directly or indirectly).
    How you think internally is essentially who you are. This is the most realiable. Trying to guess how someone else is actually thinking judging by their external behaviour can be very unrealiable.

    - The four basic dichotomies.
    - Temperaments.
    Jungian foundation is the most reliable part of socionics. In the aforementioned source, it was scored at 4.32.

    The following have no importance in determining your type:
    - Knowledge that comes entirely from unsubstantiated theories.
    - Assessments based on Statics/Dynamics, Internals/Externals, or Fields/Objects.
    - Isolated examples of information metabolism or intertype relations that are not considered with respect to the person's overall pattern of behaviour.
    +100

    - Reinin dichotomies
    I'm not trusting of Reinin dichotomies either, but they seem apply in my case. Also someone can easily often slip to behaviour that's on the other side of the dichotomy, you would have to have very good idea of the general behaviour of the person.
    ...the human race will disappear. Other races will appear and disappear in turn. The sky will become icy and void, pierced by the feeble light of half-dead stars. Which will also disappear. Everything will disappear. And what human beings do is just as free of sense as the free motion of elementary particles. Good, evil, morality, feelings? Pure 'Victorian fictions'.

    INTp

  4. #4
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Right. You need objectivity. It's about who you naturally are in relation to other objects (people, animal things- everything in the physical envrionment), not who you want to appear as or who you THINK you are. So if you have a lot of internal thought processes that you can't express- or not in alignment with who you really are. (You don't really mean them you're just saying it to fit in or whatever) then they can't really be accurately studied.

    I see how other people see me. And it's not *quite* how I see myself, but I can see how I act like that.

    Ultimatley there IS a deeper level than personality though. Personality is the only first layer under pure extertanlities, when you think about it. Socionics is mainly about finding your role in the objective world to me, for these reasons. Writing seems highly internal but ultimately it is an *objective* occupation, that which you can get paid real money for. INFps = writers, mostly.

    To use it to attract a mate is wrong. It IS about relationships *what isn't about relationships?* but to use socionics as a tool for romantic partners....is really lame to me, I find sites like okcupid MUCH better than that, or even myspace. It can be used as a guidebook. But ultimately you can only use Ni so much to pierce into socionics, and you can make things sound as interesting as possible but you can't make it say more than what it possibly can say. That's why you basically, get the gist of what socionics is trying to say, and learn to apply it where it can be applied and kinda have to ignore your mind wandering into stuff where you want to happen, not stuff that actually is happening.

    A dual can be a good friend, NOT just a lover- people sometimes forget that.

  5. #5
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BulletsAndDoves View Post
    A dual can be a good friend, NOT just a lover- people sometimes forget that.
    Which people?

    And don't throw that around your "you're so science" ad hominem bullshit either.

  6. #6
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Newbies. People who are just learning about socionics, it's only natural to get too hooked up on the dual thing when reading about it at first, cause it sounds so neat.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    Fields/Objects ~ Introverted/Extroverted Base
    Internals/Externals ~ Club
    To you it's so. But that's not what Jason was talking about.
    ...the human race will disappear. Other races will appear and disappear in turn. The sky will become icy and void, pierced by the feeble light of half-dead stars. Which will also disappear. Everything will disappear. And what human beings do is just as free of sense as the free motion of elementary particles. Good, evil, morality, feelings? Pure 'Victorian fictions'.

    INTp

  8. #8
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Generally, I like it, but I have a few minor issues with it.

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    3. The patterns that are discovered only represent a general trend - there will often be anomalies in the functions of an individual type or of an individual relation.
    Are said anomalies explained, or are they simply accepted, thus weakening the intuitive appeal of socionics as a system of intertype relations?

    6. The following have no importance in determining your type:
    - Knowledge that comes entirely from unsubstantiated theories.
    What counts as an "unsubstantiated" theory?

  9. #9
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beyond the blue horizon
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    13,088
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Jason, you look nice in that robe, man.
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  10. #10
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree with most.

  11. #11
    JuJu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield, Massachusetts, USA
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    2,704
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree with you 100% Jason.

    As to Warlord writing, "Jungian foundation is the most reliable part of Socionics..." Warlord: have you learned anything from reading through this forum? The Jungian foundation (i.e. temperament and four dichotomies) is what most often leads people to incorrectly type themselves here.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    (This is open to reformulation)

    1. Intertype relations is the most important aspect of type.

    2. The best way to determine the nature of the functions is to figure out the most coherent pattern of functions and intertype relations, combining both textbook knowledge and empirical observation.

    3. The patterns that are discovered only represent a general trend - there will often be anomalies in the functions of an individual type or of an individual relation.

    4. The information that you produce, the way you respond to various types of information, and the pattern of intertype relations that you exhibit are the biggest factors in determining your type.

    5. The following have less importance in determining your type than the things listed in 4.:
    - Purely internal thought processes that are not expressed (either directly or indirectly).
    - The four basic dichotomies.
    - Temperaments.
    - Purely textbook knowledge of types and functions.

    6. The following have no importance in determining your type:
    - Knowledge that comes entirely from unsubstantiated theories.
    - Assessments based on Statics/Dynamics, Internals/Externals, or Fields/Objects.
    - Isolated examples of information metabolism or intertype relations that are not considered with respect to the person's overall pattern of behaviour.
    - Reinin dichotomies

    Jason
    no complaints.

  13. #13
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think Jason knows what he's talking about too well to post here.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  14. #14
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default x

    I'm a supporter of Reinin dichotomies, they are damn accurate!
    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  15. #15
    Board philosopher or bored philosopher? jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    884
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Generally, I like it, but I have a few minor issues with it.



    Are said anomalies explained, or are they simply accepted, thus weakening the intuitive appeal of socionics as a system of intertype relations?
    They are accepted, but, ideally, some attempt should be made to explain them at some point, using either aspects of socionics itself, or external theories. In my view, it has to be accepted that socionics is not a perfect system of intertype relations - it only represents a general pattern that can often be applied, but will not always hold.


    What counts as an "unsubstantiated" theory?
    Socionix.

    Jason
    LII

  16. #16
    Board philosopher or bored philosopher? jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    884
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gulanzon
    I freakin' love this. Seriously. Why couldn't you have posted this while I was stumbling through Socionics trying to get my type?
    Quote Originally Posted by Winterpark
    Jason, you look nice in that robe, man.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno
    I agree with most.
    Quote Originally Posted by JuJu
    I agree with you 100% Jason.
    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed
    no complaints.
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    I think Jason knows what he's talking about too well to post here.
    Thank you!

    Jason
    LII

  17. #17
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JuJu View Post
    I agree with you 100% Jason.

    As to Warlord writing, "Jungian foundation is the most reliable part of Socionics..." Warlord: have you learned anything from reading through this forum? The Jungian foundation (i.e. temperament and four dichotomies) is what most often leads people to incorrectly type themselves here.
    Temperaments are not part of the Jungian foundation. They're a later additional by Gulenko.

    They're also valid, imo, but they need to be carefully considered. "He does stuff and has stable mood = EJ" is not careful consideration.

    Jungian foundation and Model T imo.

  18. #18
    Creepy-male

    Default

    The page you linked me to did not agree with what you said.

    Temperaments are a later construct. They are built off the Jungian foundation. A building is not bedrock.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    Temperament is a direct consequence of the E/I and J/P dichotomies which, togeather with the dichotomies of Club, are conventionally referred to as the Jungian Foundation.

    Dichotomies - Wikisocion
    temperament is a direct consequence of lifestyle as a result of leading function.

  20. #20
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    temperament is a direct consequence of lifestyle as a result of leading function.
    Yes.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  21. #21
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    well they could be explained (outside of the model) and still weaken Intertype relations.
    Fair enough, but I was mainly talking about their being explained within the context of socionics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom View Post
    I think Jason knows what he's talking about too well to post here.
    Don't say that! We need more people like Jason to make this forum worth posting on.

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    They are accepted, but, ideally, some attempt should be made to explain them at some point, using either aspects of socionics itself, or external theories. In my view, it has to be accepted that socionics is not a perfect system of intertype relations - it only represents a general pattern that can often be applied, but will not always hold.
    Okay, perhaps it does have scientific potential after all.

    Socionix.
    How is it any less substantiated than classical socionics?

  22. #22
    JuJu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield, Massachusetts, USA
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    2,704
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    How is it any less substantiated than classical socionics?
    Because they don't yet have a working model of inter-type relations, (the most important aspect of socionics.)

  23. #23
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JuJu View Post
    (the most important aspect of socionics.)
    In your opinion. In Augusta's opinion. Classical socionics dictates that it is an important aspect. Ashton, clearly, does not. This does not make it unsubstantiated.

  24. #24
    Creepy-male

    Default

    "But then it's just MBTI!" - JRiddy.

  25. #25
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No it isn't. MBTI works on a dichotomical basis; socionics pays the functions more due.

  26. #26
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Fair enough.

    Beyond that, we just get in to 'What do I value in Socionics?' "arguments".

Posting Permissions

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