Results 1 to 37 of 37

Thread: What are the best type descriptions, in your opinion?

  1. #1
    High Priestess glam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,388
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Question What are the best type descriptions, in your opinion?

    i like:

    - Gulenko's type profiles (w/alterations by Ganin): http://www.socionics.com/prof/prof.htm
    - Lyubov Beskova's male & female portraits: http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...e_descriptions
    - Igor Weisband's type descriptions: http://socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/index.html
    - Meged & Ovcharov's dual pair descriptions: http://socioniko.net/en/1.3.rels/dual.html

    i prefer the portrait/profile style descriptions to the functional breakdown ones (such as Stratievskaya's and Wikisocion's)

  2. #2
    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 glamourama View Post
    i prefer the portrait/profile style descriptions to the functional breakdown ones
    yeah, functional breakdown is strange. It doesn't provide the broad picture.

  3. #3
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,625
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    IMO Filatova's are the most comprehensive and theoretically sound. Gulenko and Weisband's are interesting as a sort of trivia or personal perspective on the types, but they have a lot of weird idiosyncrasies and VI bullshit too (SEIs "often have short legs"???).

  4. #4
    when you see the booty Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    everywhere at once
    Posts
    8,449
    Mentioned
    203 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've always had trouble with type descriptions because it's just so easy to pick them apart and point out cases where somebody of a certain type doesn't have a specific written characteristic. Saying "XXXx is like" is a lot like saying "Christians are like," because the things that hold together people who self-affiliate with Christianity are relatively few. There are different groups and subgroups of people who hold different, even opposing, specific beliefs from one another, yet still all call themselves Christians. As such, what matters is knowing a combination of two things: what is actually relevant to a specific group that all people of that group share indivisibly, and what is simply a secondary attribute that permeates throughout several different groups under different contexts. The same applies to any given socionics type. Where I get frustrated with type descriptions is that so many of them focus on specific secondary, or even tertiary, characteristics of a type that what actually defines the type is completely lost under a sea of superfluous and often times inaccurate details. This also includes descriptions of temperaments, IEs, etc etc.
    "And above all, watch with glittering eyes the whole world around you because the greatest secrets are always hidden in the most unlikely places. Those who don't believe in magic will never find it." -Roald Dahl

    http://forum.socionix.com/
    It's pretty cool

  5. #5
    2 EVIL I golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Several stories high
    TIM
    EIE prob 6
    Posts
    2,969
    Mentioned
    106 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    At first I hated these kinds of descriptions, but I've spent some time slowly reading a shitload of them at http://www.socionic.ru/index.php and find that if I don't get too hung up on any one idea or any one description, a picture (even though incomplete) emerges. It's more like reading them makes me ask, "What kind of person would all these descriptions point to? What is the underlying theme?"

    Also, as I start to have a better understanding of the IEs, I read the descriptions and can identify what parts of them seem to be linked to which IEs, and question in what other ways they might manifest.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    0
    Mentioned
    Post(s)
    Tagged
    Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galen View Post
    I've always had trouble with type descriptions because it's just so easy to pick them apart and point out cases where somebody of a certain type doesn't have a specific written characteristic. Saying "XXXx is like" is a lot like saying "Christians are like," because the things that hold together people who self-affiliate with Christianity are relatively few. There are different groups and subgroups of people who hold different, even opposing, specific beliefs from one another, yet still all call themselves Christians. As such, what matters is knowing a combination of two things: what is actually relevant to a specific group that all people of that group share indivisibly, and what is simply a secondary attribute that permeates throughout several different groups under different contexts. The same applies to any given socionics type. Where I get frustrated with type descriptions is that so many of them focus on specific secondary, or even tertiary, characteristics of a type that what actually defines the type is completely lost under a sea of superfluous and often times inaccurate details. This also includes descriptions of temperaments, IEs, etc etc.
    Typology is pretty much the systematic study of stereotypical traits in humans. While it is true that a person will likely not identify wholly with any type descriptions and he may identify with aspects of many different type descriptions, the point is to provide a context to the theory through generalizations and recurring characteristics. That is, to show what a manifestation of each type stereotypically looks like. They are resources in the process of determining one's type, but ends to determining type themselves.

    =====

    I like Filatova's descriptions as well. They appear to be the most comprehensive and most accurate. I also really liked the article you put up of dual relations.

  7. #7
    Imagine Timeless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, CA.
    TIM
    ILE/ENTp
    Posts
    819
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  8. #8
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timeless View Post
    These are voted upon with stars (they have a webpage like this for each type)

  9. #9
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Golden View Post
    At first I hated these kinds of descriptions, but I've spent some time slowly reading a shitload of them at http://www.socionic.ru/index.php and find that if I don't get too hung up on any one idea or any one description, a picture (even though incomplete) emerges. It's more like reading them makes me ask, "What kind of person would all these descriptions point to? What is the underlying theme?"
    Yep, exactly. That's how descriptions should be read, imho.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  10. #10
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Meged & Ovcharov's description of ILE is kinda stupid, focused on behavior - looks like a mix between ILE and casual LIE (while the LIE description looks focused on business). MBTI style. From the LIE description, LOL:
    Only when the LIE grows older does he start to wear a suit and the like.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  11. #11
    The Looks stanprollyright's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    In your pants
    TIM
    IEE-Ne cp 6w7 sx/so
    Posts
    555
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glamourama View Post
    - Gulenko's type profiles (w/alterations by Ganin): http://www.socionics.com/prof/prof.htm
    For fuck's sake NO.

    Quote Originally Posted by glamourama View Post
    - Lyubov Beskova's male & female portraits: http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...e_descriptions
    These are pretty good, but a lot of them are bad translations and difficult to understand.

    Quote Originally Posted by glamourama View Post
    - Igor Weisband's type descriptions: http://socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/index.html
    These are OK.

    Quote Originally Posted by glamourama View Post
    - Meged & Ovcharov's dual pair descriptions: http://socioniko.net/en/1.3.rels/dual.html
    Those are pretty good.
    Stan is not my real name.

  12. #12

  13. #13
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanprollyright View Post
    For fuck's sake NO.
    They IMO fit pretty well with other descriptions, assuming one ignores the visual parts and some specifics.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  14. #14
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,234
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Ineffable View Post
    They IMO fit pretty well with other descriptions, assuming one ignores the visual parts and some specifics.
    To help subjects of casual typings validate my analyses I once made use of Ganin's profiles (they're brief and largely free from jargon, and thus digestible by the uninitiated or barely-interested), but always with the caveat that the first two or three paragraphs should be ignored. Eventually I dropped those in favor of his +/- profiles before abandoning the site entirely.

  15. #15
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Socioniko.net

  16. #16
    The Soul Happy-er JWC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,808
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The ones you find in real life.
    Easy Day

  17. #17
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,907
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JWC3 View Post
    The ones you find in real life.


    More than anything else, I like finding obvious human benchmarks of the types, and using that pool of people as a living, breathing type description

  18. #18
    Azeroffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    California
    TIM
    ENTj 3w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,216
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woofwoofl View Post


    More than anything else, I like finding obvious human benchmarks of the types, and using that pool of people as a living, breathing type description
    The problem with benchmarking is that not everything a person does is type related. A person's personality is a combination of type and life experience, as well as other factors, I'm sure.
    3w4-5w6-9w8

  19. #19
    High Priestess glam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,388
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanprollyright View Post
    For fuck's sake NO.
    they're pretty good imo. they're easy to read and present lucid descriptions of the typical behaviors of the types - behaviors that can be explained with Model A if you know it.

    those profiles are essentially Gulenko descriptions with some modifications by Ganin (it says this on the profile pages) and i've compared a few of them before to verify. are people dismissing the validity of these descriptions because they are posted on Ganin's site? or because they get hung up on things like "Male ISTjs often wear a moustache"?

  20. #20
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,907
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azeroffs View Post
    The problem with benchmarking is that not everything a person does is type related. A person's personality is a combination of type and life experience, as well as other factors, I'm sure.
    That problem would be more pronounced in smaller (especially one-person) pools - I know it's not a technically perfect method, but it's a workable, relatable, and concrete one, and as the pool of benchmarks grows, it might be the most complete one out of all the available options...

    I try to look far and wide, across age differences, money differences, professions, their relations to me, surface personality differences, all sorts of things - as of now, Alton Brown, Mountain Dew, a cousin of mine, and a manager at my workplace make up a good part of my mental image of an ESE, and as I find and know more for almost certain, they'll be made a part of the pool too (Seth Rogen and Alex Lifeson are standing on deck right now - I haven't fully thrown them in the waters quite yet)...

    Quote Originally Posted by glamourama View Post
    they're pretty good imo. they're easy to read and present lucid descriptions of the typical behaviors of the types - behaviors that can be explained with Model A if you know it.

    those profiles are essentially Gulenko descriptions with some modifications by Ganin (it says this on the profile pages) and i've compared a few of them before to verify. are people dismissing the validity of these descriptions because they are posted on Ganin's site? or because they get hung up on things like "Male ISTjs often wear a moustache"?
    They totally do! an uncle of mine and a boss at my workplace - both definite LSIs, both wear moustaches very well... I think moustaches are a more IST thing (and, for that matter, an ENF thing, though to a lesser degree) than specifically LSI, but they do look more "official" on an LSI (and an EIE) than on an SLI (and an IEE)...

  21. #21
    The Looks stanprollyright's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    In your pants
    TIM
    IEE-Ne cp 6w7 sx/so
    Posts
    555
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by k0rpsey View Post
    You're a good man.


    Quote Originally Posted by The Ineffable View Post
    They IMO fit pretty well with other descriptions, assuming one ignores the visual parts and some specifics.
    Yeah, and that's 2/3 of the description. There's usually about 1 or 2 paragraphs I like in the middle of each description that isn't about clothes, physiognmy(sp?), or rife with overly vague statements.

    Quote Originally Posted by k0rpsey View Post
    To help subjects of casual typings validate my analyses I once made use of Ganin's profiles (they're brief and largely free from jargon, and thus digestible by the uninitiated or barely-interested), but always with the caveat that the first two or three paragraphs should be ignored. Eventually I dropped those in favor of his +/- profiles before abandoning the site entirely.
    I still use the +/- profiles for that, if anything. Also, his relationship pages are quite good.
    Stan is not my real name.

  22. #22
    Azeroffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    California
    TIM
    ENTj 3w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,216
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woofwoofl View Post
    That problem would be more pronounced in smaller (especially one-person) pools - I know it's not a technically perfect method, but it's a workable, relatable, and concrete one, and as the pool of benchmarks grows, it might be the most complete one out of all the available options...

    I try to look far and wide, across age differences, money differences, professions, their relations to me, surface personality differences, all sorts of things - as of now, Alton Brown, Mountain Dew, a cousin of mine, and a manager at my workplace make up a good part of my mental image of an ESE, and as I find and know more for almost certain, they'll be made a part of the pool too (Seth Rogen and Alex Lifeson are standing on deck right now - I haven't fully thrown them in the waters quite yet)...
    For sure, but I think it's important to use benchmarks with theoretical descriptions so that the traits being assigned to type stay relevant.

    This might just be because of my approach. I don't heavily ascribe to subtypes and just look at difference between types as mostly non-socionic variation. When I look at a real person, their type isn't always the most prominent thing, so it's not accurate to say "SEEs are like her" for example because there are so many things that she would be that aren't relevant to the SEE type.

    Granted, working examples are useful for describing things that aren't easily described in words, and a lot of what I believe to be relevant to type I can only describe as a general "vibe."

    anyway, I'm rambling.
    3w4-5w6-9w8

  23. #23
    Azeroffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    California
    TIM
    ENTj 3w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,216
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @OP
    I really like the Stratievskaya descriptions that I can understand
    socionics.org has some good descriptions too. I use google chrome to translate.
    3w4-5w6-9w8

  24. #24
    2 EVIL I golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Several stories high
    TIM
    EIE prob 6
    Posts
    2,969
    Mentioned
    106 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The stock type descriptions only seem helpful to me as an adjunct to actually observing people over time and recognizing patterns.

  25. #25
    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 like type descriptions as a way to get an overall feel for a type, or like a big picture of it or something, but they shouldn't be used as a list of traits or as a recipe of what it means to be some particular type.

    The ones I dislike most give physical descriptors. No, one type does not have its own style nose, and different types don't have different heights.
    Last edited by Slacker; 06-05-2011 at 09:50 PM.
    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.

  26. #26
    Azeroffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    California
    TIM
    ENTj 3w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,216
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ashton View Post
    Yeah, but with an increasingly larger sample size, more of the NTR idiosyncrasies should ebb out.
    Still, you need a theoretical base before you can start using the sample exclusively. I prefer to stick with descriptions as my benchmark since I'm not confident in typing people I don't know personally and can't confidently build a very large sample size. I may reference other people's typings that I see as having merit, but I always take them with a grain of salt and just don't have a high enough level of confidence in them.
    Last edited by Azeroffs; 06-05-2011 at 09:29 PM.
    3w4-5w6-9w8

  27. #27

  28. #28
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,098
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  29. #29
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ahhh...so this is where you found out that I am a forgiving person!!!

    I AM!

    These are wonderful descriptions; I've booked marked them for future reference. Thank you.

  30. #30
    24601 ClownsandEntropy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    TIM
    LII, 5w6
    Posts
    670
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa33 View Post
    These are wonderful descriptions; I've booked marked them for future reference.
    Agreed, the LII type description is pretty coherent with how I view myself. Moreover, they're concise and then expand, so you can read it in short bursts and the information is well sorted, rather than reading pages of text with a lot of information.

    And yes, I know that you were looking for other good type descriptions, but yours just beat my traditional source - the Filatova's descriptions on Wikisocion.
    Warm Regards,



    Clowns & Entropy

  31. #31

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    252
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default


    These type descriptions are awesome. I've yet to find one that is so thorough that it describes the type when its undergoing certain states. The description fits me to a T, while also fitting the type in general. I also like the Reinin descriptions (I'll find a link later). Not because they are great descriptions but because they give an aspect to Ni that is usually overlooked.

  32. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crispy View Post
    ...
    Yup, once again one of them fits me.

  33. #33
    Darn Socks Director Abbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Southwest USA
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    6,724
    Mentioned
    237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ESTj
    1w2 sp/so 1-2-6
    Brilliand's Younger Sister
    Squishy's Older Sister

    Johari Nohari

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritella View Post
    Over here, we'll put up with (almost) all of your crap. You just have to use the secret phrase: "I don't value it. It's related to <insert random element here>, which is not in my quadra."
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
    Abbie is so boring and rigid it's awesome instead of boring and rigid. She seems so practical and down-to-the-ground.

  34. #34
    silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    TIM
    Ni-IEI sx/sp
    Posts
    3,796
    Mentioned
    317 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Filatova. This is one of my favorite sets of profiles. Simple, easy to understand, relatively stereotype free. There are a few passages that are useful for typing. I've noticed some bias in favor of delta, however (her own type is EII).

    Beskova. A flattering set of profiles that is appealing on a personal level, but too riddled with all the usual misleading stereotypes such as "SEE can't math b/c Ti-PoLR". Appropriate as an introductory set only. Her profiles for her 'supervisees' were amusing when she suggested striptease as potential occupation for them.

    Gulenko. I liked his descriptions primarily because he tries to derive type traits directly from his theoretical work on Model A. As such his profiles have the highest concentration of type-specific traits and the least amount of superfluous attribution. One a personal level they are a bit too dry and strenuous to read (and translate) due to being so dense in content.

    Stratievskaya. Another one of my favorites. I find her profiles to be accurate for the most part. However, unlike Gulenko, she tends to attribute virtually everything to socionics sometimes to the point of absurdity. She also goes too much into describing particulars and specific situations, such that I get the impression that one needs a lot of Ni to connect it all together and derive meaning from these disparate scenarios. I think her intertype relationships articles are more elucidating of type distinctive traits than her type profiles.

    Ganin. His socionics.com website is where most of people land when they start researching socionics. I remember there was a lot of debate on MBTI forums about his profiles for similar types, particularly quasi-identicals where it was suggested that he had switched the profiles around. His profiles are concise and easy to understand for beginners, but they provide a very general outline of types by which it's impossible to type accurately. After the intro stage I've never paid attention to them again.

    Another author that I like that I haven't seen translations anywhere is Elena Zamanskaya. I think her observations of types are particularly insightful, but I've found only incomplete sets online: http://www.sociotype.ru/

  35. #35
    DaftPunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Alps
    TIM
    SiTe 6w5 sp/so
    Posts
    730
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silke View Post
    Filatova. This is one of my favorite sets of profiles. Simple, easy to understand, relatively stereotype free. There are a few passages that are useful for typing. I've noticed some bias in favor of delta, however (her own type is EII).

    Beskova. A flattering set of profiles that is appealing on a personal level, but too riddled with all the usual misleading stereotypes such as "SEE can't math b/c Ti-PoLR". Appropriate as an introductory set only. Her profiles for her 'supervisees' were amusing when she suggested striptease as potential occupation for them.

    Gulenko. I liked his descriptions primarily because he tries to derive type traits directly from his theoretical work on Model A. As such his profiles have the highest concentration of type-specific traits and the least amount of superfluous attribution. One a personal level they are a bit too dry and strenuous to read (and translate) due to being so dense in content.

    Stratievskaya. Another one of my favorites. I find her profiles to be accurate for the most part. However, unlike Gulenko, she tends to attribute virtually everything to socionics sometimes to the point of absurdity. She also goes too much into describing particulars and specific situations, such that I get the impression that one needs a lot of Ni to connect it all together and derive meaning from these disparate scenarios. I think her intertype relationships articles are more elucidating of type distinctive traits than her type profiles.

    Ganin. His socionics.com website is where most of people land when they start researching socionics. I remember there was a lot of debate on MBTI forums about his profiles for similar types, particularly quasi-identicals where it was suggested that he had switched the profiles around. His profiles are concise and easy to understand for beginners, but they provide a very general outline of types by which it's impossible to type accurately. After the intro stage I've never paid attention to them again.

    Another author that I like that I haven't seen translations anywhere is Elena Zamanskaya. I think her observations of types are particularly insightful, but I've found only incomplete sets online: http://www.sociotype.ru/
    Grrrrr, once I settled for SLI you have to praise Filatovas profiles what made me of course curious and according to her profiles I am so LSE and so not SLI what leaves me puzzled again

    But from an objective perspective it's an awesome review

    Edit: I'd be interested what the others sociotype is if you know.
    Last edited by DaftPunk; 12-20-2013 at 03:53 AM.

  36. #36
    Eldanen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southeastern USA
    TIM
    ILI 5w4 sx/??
    Posts
    489
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't have a favorite set of type descriptions. They are all fun to read and provide a different perspective. The best descriptions come from observing the types for yourself and learning to notice type related themes in both epic events and everyday life. Those descriptions are my favorite. It's my opinion that one doesn't really understand Socionics until he has some idea of where all those descriptions came from.

  37. #37
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Berlin
    TIM
    LSI 5w6 sx/so
    Posts
    5,421
    Mentioned
    144 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Gulenko's

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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