Alpha vs Gamma aristocracy

[Creepy-female]

.

[717495]

And how about Beta and Delta democracy while we're at it?

[Galen]

Whoops

[krieger]

Not sure if this is entirely right, but let's throw it out here:

Alpha: trusting and accepting everyone until given reason not to

Gamma: trusting and accepting no one without good reason


Both lead to individualistic mindsets with no regard to groups despite that they are opposites.

[munenori2]

It's a good start. I like it.

[Trevor]

Alpha - democracy
Gamma - snobishness

[MatthewZ]

Alpha - democracy
Gamma - snobishness

Alpha - Anarchy
Gamma - A system that actually WORKS.

</partially tongue-in-cheek>

[FDG]

Not sure if this is entirely right, but let's throw it out here:

Alpha: trusting and accepting everyone until given reason not to

Gamma: trusting and accepting no one without good reason


Both lead to individualistic mindsets with no regard to groups despite that they are opposites.

I don't really relate to the secondo mindset...

[Eldanen]

Alpha: taking eye of the dynamics of a relationship and altering their responses based on the behavior of the other person. if it changes, they will change the status of the relationship.

Gammas: idealize individuals into demons and angels. once they make their minds up, they don't often change in regard to relations.

[DirectorAbbie]

Alpha: taking eye of the dynamics of a relationship and altering their responses based on the behavior of the other person. if it changes, they will change the status of the relationship.

Gammas: idealize individuals into demons and angels. once they make their minds up, they don't often change in regard to relations.

Sounds like the difference between merry and serious. Last week I asked Brilliand whether ArchonAlaron was a reliable source, and he wouldn't give me a straight answer, just "Sometimes." "Sometimes" is no help. In my mind, people are either credible or not, and it doesn't change unless the person changes drastically.

[MatthewZ]

Sounds like the difference between merry and serious. Last week I asked Brilliand whether ArchonAlaron was a reliable source, and he wouldn't give me a straight answer, just "Sometimes." "Sometimes" is no help. In my mind, people are either credible or not, and it doesn't change unless the person changes drastically.

People are usually more credible in certain areas moreso than others. The broader answer of "always" fit the relatively broad question.

[Galen]

People are usually more credible in certain areas moreso than others. The broader answer of "always" fit the relatively broad question.

I'm in agreement with this statement. It's not safe to assume that if someone is deemed credible/reliable that they are adept at all aspects of life. But if I'm right in assuming that in that context Abbie meant reliable in terms of socionics knowledge, then she'd probably be right to want a more concrete answer.

[MatthewZ]

I'm in agreement with this statement. It's not safe to assume that if someone is deemed credible/reliable that they are adept at all aspects of life. But if I'm right in assuming that in that context Abbie meant reliable in terms of socionics knowledge, then she'd probably be right to want a more concrete answer.

But even then, he could have various degrees of reliability relating to Model A, various subtype theories, VI, etc.

[Galen]

But even then, he could have various degrees of reliability relating to Model A, various subtype theories, VI, etc.

That too. Specificity is key I suppose.

[Brilliand]

That too. Specificity is key I suppose.

I don't think that I could have given a straight answer for anything less than "ArchonAlarion said this, is he reliable?". Besides the general discussion that you just had, Archon is a smart man prone to strange ideas; he could easily make a brilliant statement and a huge mistake in the same sentence.

[krieger]

I don't really relate to the secondo mindset...

What does it mean to you to have a special Fi ish connection with another person if not that you trust the person more than you trust any other person, and how this does not entail that you put the "bar" for investing trust in any random person very high so that there can be a significant difference in trust in the first place? Is there a chance that you are ENFj?

[crazedrat]

it is more that alpha dictates acceptance and gamma dictates rejection. saying alpha accepts the crap and gamma discriminates against the good is overstepping. it's true in cases

[1981slater]

Not sure if this is entirely right, but let's throw it out here:

Alpha: trusting and accepting everyone until given reason not to

Gamma: trusting and accepting no one without good reason


Both lead to individualistic mindsets with no regard to groups despite that they are opposites.

Very good.

I'd like to add that, IMO, Gammas tend to pay attention to the background of a person ("oooh, he's a Doctor/Rich/a famous politician") and accept him because of that and alphas tend to assess personal traits of the people (kind/funny...) and ignore what gammas care about.

[1981slater]

I don't really relate to the secondo mindset...

I've noticed some Ni-ENTjs are really kind wth strangers whereas others are not

[Aiss]

I'd like to add that, IMO, Gammas tend to pay attention to the background of a person ("oooh, he's a Doctor/Rich/a famous politician") and accept him because of that and alphas tend to assess personal traits of the people (kind/funny...) and ignore what gammas care about.

Isn't it the difference between aristocratic and democratic?

Aristocratic: Their initial attitude to another person is influenced by their attitude to the group they see the person as belonging to.

Democratic: Form their relationships/attitudes toward other persons based on the latter's own individual characteristics, not with base on their relationships to groups of any kind, nor on their relationships to representatives of such groups.

[krieger]

I've noticed some Ni-ENTjs are really kind wth strangers whereas others are not

That's the thing about ENTjs. On the surface they are kind, enthusiastic and positive people. On a deeper level they are like their duals: critical, negative, not easy to satisfy. They spend less time and effort on this latter mindset, but it's still integral to what they are. Depending on what state you find them in, their appearance can wildly vary.

[mikemex]

Sounds like the difference between merry and serious. Last week I asked Brilliand whether ArchonAlaron was a reliable source, and he wouldn't give me a straight answer, just "Sometimes." "Sometimes" is no help. In my mind, people are either credible or not, and it doesn't change unless the person changes drastically.

Individual traits doesn't change over time but what we do is affected by our environment. So even if we are honest by trait, for example, given the proper circumstances we will get corrupted. Aristocrats are driven by idealists and ideals are not directly aplicable to reality. Idealists (and their ST duals) do believe in "pure" stuff, such as good, evil, etc. but things are not as clear cut in the real world.

[xixi]

i've heard gamma used to describe the USA and the UK, and associated with capitalism...
if gamma inclines itself to capitalism...
alpha inclines towards...?

slightly off topic, but while we're talking about social-political structures, what kind of society was the one depicted in 'The Beach'?

[1981slater]

i've heard gamma used to describe the USA and the UK, and associated with capitalism...
if gamma inclines itself to capitalism...
alpha inclines towards...?

slightly off topic, but while we're talking about social-political structures, what kind of society was the one depicted in 'The Beach'?

I've always seen UK as gamma quadra (cold, serious or even harsh) and USA as alpha quadra (fun-loving, accepting of everybody: after all, USA is a nation made by immigrants; furthermore, USA has accepted millions of scientists throughout the last century: most of these scientist were despised in Europe or wherever). Anyway, stereotypes suck, but we can spot some traits shared by a whole nation...

[Ezra]

And how about Beta and Delta democracy while we're at it?

Haha

[ArchonAlarion]

socialism.

[Lotus]

*head-pat* i love grumpy anarchists.

[ArchonAlarion]

*head-pat* i love grumpy anarchists.

[Ezra]

I've always seen UK as gamma quadra (cold, serious or even harsh) and USA as alpha quadra (fun-loving, accepting of everybody: after all, USA is a nation made by immigrants; furthermore, USA has accepted millions of scientists throughout the last century: most of these scientist were despised in Europe or wherever). Anyway, stereotypes suck, but we can spot some traits shared by a whole nation...

At the bottom of this page, they talk about macrotypes, and the English are seen as LSE and the Americans are seen as LIE.

[discojoe]

I don't really relate to the secondo mindset...

Gee, I wonder why.

[MatthewZ]

socialism.

I've spent hours debating against socialism, mind you.