An American Institute of Socionics

[Creepy-]

It's not so much conventional as it is primordial. Se/Ni is about timeless, bold and meaningful constructions.

Oh, wait... that's pretty fine, actually. But I was talking about that black pyramid, the meaning of those shapes. The symbols are just some mostly arbitrary mnemonics, conventions with no other use than representing the IEs on paper. Yes, if we find some true metaphysical or philosophical principle that connects those shapes and colors with the actual types, that would worth thinking about some Feng-Shui like environments, otherwise I feel no pride in displaying a black triangle or work in a black pyramid. Regardless of Ni, Ne, etc, I find the idea of seeing types as some sort of brands at least hilarious


-Bolt

[EyeSeeCold]

[Aleksei]

[Marie84]

"trustworthy sources only!!" nahhh


i wouldn't be so concerned with that, i think anybody who is interested enough should/could participate, but realistically if the people involved are disagreeing more often than not, the discord would mean lack of productivity and possibly eventual failure of the organization.

Well, that isn't exactly without trade-offs either. The whole point of an institute separate from the one in Russia is for it to lend a counterweight to the Russian one. To let them supervise the process defeats that purpose. It's not unlikely that their community has reigning dogmas and cemented thinking that badly need to be criticized from an informed outside perspective.

I see what you two are saying but I see a difference in outside participation and outside dictation. Multiple perspectives are great for opening up discussions and further developing the theory, but they shouldn't be used as a basis for Socionics information.
That's basically my main contention with this site, although at least this is a discussion site whereas an institute would need actual base knowledge to authenticate itself, it won't last if its run by clashing ideologies.

It also probably won't work if the people running it are not already involved in the psychiatric and sociology community; the Western world would likely quickly reject the theory if it didn't as quack nonsense

[leckysupport]

it won't last if its run by clashing ideologies.

Due to a lack of a solid empirical basis in socionics acting as if it isn't full of conflicting ideologies would make the institution look intellectually dishonest and could end up hurting the organisation.

In terms of a institute authorised view of socionics I believe a socionics institution can only give an official representation of consensus by voting members.

[FDG]

The community of certified western psychiatrists and sociologists is composed by a large number of used-to-be-whacks who managed to obtain a PhD a convince some rich, old alumni to finance their departments.

[leckysupport]

The community of certified western psychiatrists and sociologists is composed by a large number of used-to-be-whacks who managed to obtain a PhD a convince some rich, old alumni to finance their departments.

So there is hope for socionics.

[tcaudilllg]

I see now something that mocks the concept of "institution". Real institutions aren't some means to rebellion... they are dependable pillars that provide decent, actionable advice. What you are talking about is a think tank. Think tanks =/= academic institutes.

Go ahead. Push it. There are laws against masquerading as psychologists. If things start getting out of hand, expect them to be toughened. You'll be running your "institute" from jail cells.

There isn't a need for an institute. Socionics is just a subfield of industrial psychology. In its current form, it isn't seen as an attractive alternative to MBTI in the West. This thread appears to be a waste of time. Go ahead, try. You'll fail, if not end up in jail.


I think the best way to advance socionics in the West is to behave decently and respectfully; practice what we preach; maintain open communication; and not give in to egotism.

[Creepy-Korpsey]

I think the best way to advance socionics in the West is to behave decently and respectfully; practice what we preach; maintain open communication; and not give in to egotism.

Fucking hilarious.

[tcaudilllg]

Fucking hilarious.

Korpsey, welcome to the ignore list.

And I'll add lecky as well, and that other idiot.

Ya'll should know there's a possibility I'll get banned for calling the idiots idiots to their faces. SubT is anal like that.

SubT if you ban me this time, I will be writing you off as someone I will never be able to get along with.

...And why the hell is Aleksei not on the list? I -know- I added him.

While I'm at it, I'll add B&D. Not like I can remember the last time he contributed to my understanding of socionics anyway.

[EyeSeeCold]

C'mon Tcaud lighten up. I'm still new and even I can tell how much the community values you.

Pertaining to Socionics and the institute...your hierarchal opinions are understandable, since they are based on reasonable inclinations and aptitude. The hierarchy becoming a reality, though, is an ignorance to humanist ideals(which is expected from you, valuing ). At the end of the day, we are only speaking theoretically here and should there ever actually be an institution, I'm sure these differences would have no bearing on its integrity. The matter of earning a degree in Psychology also places a great limit on the admitted practitioners.

[Creepy-bg]

tcaud is one of our mascots. the forum isn't the same without him

[tcaudilllg]

I think it would be reasonable to allow occasional exceptions to the degree bit. Like for example, if Rick wanted to join I think we could spare him the 10k it would cost to take ten psyche courses. However I would think that you'd base positions of authority in the institution on basis of level of degree, with masters being required for like specific branches. Really PhDs are unnecessary though.

I was reading today that to administer the official MBTI you have to have a masters degree in something psychology-relevant, or else you risk getting sued. I don't think you can even call yourself an industrial psychologist until you have a masters. Relative to most of the psychology world, socionics sheds light on a few specific phenomena included in the Big 5 categorization scheme (which includes something like 39 independent factors... it's not really a continuum). If we are to be respected we present socionics as precisely that, I think.

But again, I really think that for the next 20 years, socionists are going to be psychologists with the common link that they cite Augusta, Gulenko, Boukalov, Filatova, etc. in their papers. The challenge is informing people, and -- this is all important -- making the ties to the neuropsyche community required to finally get the evidence that model A is actually real. We're going to have to defend ourselves against criticism, but only after we've began making ties to the business community and the unethical types start asking how they profit at the our expense.

I believe socionics' breakout point will be the next recession, which I see happening in about 10 years. If we can put a dent with it by applying the subelement-based concepts I talked about in the functions consensus proposition thread, and marshalling the business community around them, things will be different.

[EyeSeeCold]

But again, I really think that for the next 20 years, socionists are going to be psychologists with the common link that they cite Augusta, Gulenko, Boukalov, Filatova, etc. in their papers. The challenge is informing people, and -- this is all important -- making the ties to the neuropsyche community required to finally get the evidence that model A is actually real. We're going to have to defend ourselves against criticism, but only after we've began making ties to the business community and the unethical types start asking how they profit at the our expense.

I haven't been reading much of the studies but I'm interested in scientific evidence for Socionics' neurosis claims.

I believe socionics' breakout point will be the next recession, which I see happening in about 10 years. If we can put a dent with it by applying the subelement-based concepts I talked about in the functions consensus proposition thread, and marshalling the business community around them, things will be different.

There's still the matter of usurping and invalidating MBTI theory. Until MBTI has been professionally disregarded no mass conversion can happen. It's sad that so many theories are being wasted on a fundamentally inconsistent theory.