Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Healthy/Unhealthy Types

  1. #1
    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)

    Question Healthy/Unhealthy Types

    Kinda like the way Enneagram does it (e.g. Seven), the "uncovered" profiles of each Socionics type, and the HA, what do you think the differences are between a healthy and an unhealthy type?

    For example, combining all of the above, IMO:

    ESE/ESFj "The Enthusiast" aka Victor Hugo:

    Healthy Level
    Level 1 (At their best): Emotional energy is more happy go-lucky, considerate, and selfless. Enthusiasm is more vibrant. Stable and confident understanding about him/herself and the world. Bursts of anger less likely. Wants to be perfect. Geared towards acts of peace. "The Life of the Party."

    Average Level
    Level 2: Energy swings towards extremes, enthusiasm is more calm with highs and lows. Prone to doubt his or her reasoning every now and then. Unsure in non-ethical matters. Fluctuating interests levels.

    Unhealthy Level:
    Level 3 (At their worst): Emotional energy is forceful, tactless, and selfish, enthusiasm is replaced by apathy and carelessness. Chaotic and unsure understanding about him/herself and the world. Bursts of anger more likely. Needs to be perfect. More likely to resort to violence. "The Party Pooper."

    Feel free to make your own from your experience.
    Last edited by Timeless; 03-03-2011 at 06:10 AM.

  2. #2
    what is essential is invisible to the eye fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Space
    TIM
    Seer
    Posts
    12,823
    Mentioned
    368 Post(s)
    Tagged
    9 Thread(s)

    Default

    SLE

    Healthy level:

    Strong, ambitious, and well driven. They have a good head on their shoulders. They are well organized, and usually set in a good direction. They're usually very good with money. They fight to achieve their goals, and have a healthy level of self esteem. Great sense of humor, and fun to be around. They prefer to surround themselves with good hearted people. They know how to look sharp & presentable and will often win people over. They're usually very classy & successful people and thrive well in business settings. These types of people often make great leaders.

    Average Level:
    Hard workers. Appearance is everything. They're well aware of their surroundings. A little more in touch with their feelings. Good at getting what they want. They like to be showered with love and affection. They appear outgoing but will still surround themselves with a close inner circle of trusted people (which they will test before letting in). A bit materialistic, as they don't like to be seen as scrubs. They worry about the future, as it's an area they're inclined to be more insecure about. They're a little more wise about their well being, but will occasionally have run in's with the law. They're not as willing to jump into fights, but will strike hard if provoked enough.

    Unhealthy level:
    Highly aggressive, and very impulsive. They secretly have a negative self image, and will try to protect their reputation. They can become violent and even fall into the stereotypical gangster type. They do impulsively dangerous things without thinking twice, (theft, drugs, driving drunk, getting into fights, ect). They're also known for having little empathy. These types of people trust no one. They will often get themselves into trouble with the law.


    IEI is coming up.
    Last edited by fox; 03-02-2011 at 06:23 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    betas should be kept in zoos for children to stare and throw pop corn at.

  3. #3
    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

    ILI

    Healthy: insults you
    Unhealthy: imagines himself insulting you
    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.

  4. #4
    not gonna be around as much anymore
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    TIM
    C-IEE
    Posts
    1,258
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    My attempt:

    IEE

    healthy: feels free to explore new things/experiences; has a few stable friendships/relationships and enjoys these relationships; is at ease in a less-than-tidy room/home, but still gives some focus to maintaining a pleasant external environment; laughs freely and knows how to relax; does what is necessary to take care of her own health, not afraid to seek help in this area.

    average: suppresses desire for new experiences, putting more focus on her responsibilities and obligations; stable relationships can begin to grow strained as the IEE begins to feel like maybe too much of herself is being put into other people; feels a pull to be tidier and more "together," and tries to ignore her disappointment when her efforts fail yet again; physical self-care is sporadic and unpredictable: one day well-groomed, well-nourished, and cheerful; the next disheveled and grumpy.

    unhealthy: feels "stuck in a rut," unmotivated to change bad habits; lacks a stable relationship, instead flitting from one social group/relationship to another; uptight when it comes to organization, can get really stressed when small things are out of place; will probably also look unhealthy physically, due to lack of attention to physical needs.
    My life's work (haha):
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/blog.php?b=709
    Input, PLEASEAnd thank you

  5. #5
    not gonna be around as much anymore
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    TIM
    C-IEE
    Posts
    1,258
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ILI

    healthy: Can realistically assign blame where blame is due, and gives himself credit for the things he does right; cares about his close friends and family and includes them in his inner world; responds amicably to demands that he focus on reality, while still finding the freedom each day to escape into his head; is cabable of getting himself going in the morning and taking care of his immediate physical needs.

    average: Sometimes has trouble accepting his own human nature and expects himself to be more insightful and less prone to mistakes than the average human; has a few stable friendships/relationships, but often seems to put more focus and importance on his own inner world, which he does not always feel free to share with those he loves; often unaware of his external environment, requires occasional "shaking" to get him to re-focus on the task at hand; may have trouble getting started in the morning, and might neglect simple daily responsibilities.

    unhealthy: Everything is his fault; feels the weight of the world on his shoulders and broods over where the world is headed (and it's not headed anywhere good, of course); is so obsessed with his thoughts for the future that he completely forgets to look at today; fails entirely to take care of his physical health and hygeine, or else goes to the opposite extreme and becomes a germophobe.
    My life's work (haha):
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/blog.php?b=709
    Input, PLEASEAnd thank you

  6. #6
    Nothing in the cage of my ribcage
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I like the idea of making the distinction between healthy and unhealthy types... but I think that there are multitudes of different personality traits, characteristics and trends of each types that make it difficult to neatly categorize them as being "type-related". Some people of the same type may be more or less hostile, some may be more detached, some may be more ingratiating and appeasing, depending on their unique personalities. Also our observations tend to be incredibly limited, and we don't really have any kind of reliable data. We also likely don't have any backgrounds in psychology, so it makes it difficult to gauge between what is healthy or unhealthy. We may mistake what we think as healthy when it is really unhealthy, because we may be unhealthy in some parts ourselves. These things are usually done through years of scrutinized analysis, interviewing, questioning, etc. Not trying to be a party-pooper... but I just think that this kind of thing is well... unreliable. It's not really a good idea try to do these things "on our own" imo. I tend to think that "Socionics" solutions tend to be as equally as bogus.

  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)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    ILI

    Healthy: insults you
    Unhealthy: imagines himself insulting you


    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    I like the idea of making the distinction between healthy and unhealthy types... but I think that there are multitudes of different personality traits, characteristics and trends of each types that make it difficult to neatly categorize them as being "type-related". Some people of the same type may be more or less hostile, some may be more detached, some may be more ingratiating and appeasing, depending on their unique personalities. Also our observations tend to be incredibly limited, and we don't really have any kind of reliable data. We also likely don't have any backgrounds in psychology, so it makes it difficult to gauge between what is healthy or unhealthy. We may mistake what we think as healthy when it is really unhealthy, because we may be unhealthy in some parts ourselves. These things are usually done through years of scrutinized analysis, interviewing, questioning, etc. Not trying to be a party-pooper... but I just think that this kind of thing is well... unreliable. It's not really a good idea try to do these things "on our own" imo. I tend to think that "Socionics" solutions tend to be as equally as bogus.
    It still doesn't hurt to talk about it or play around with the idea. No one said this is, was, or will be reliable. It's also not like this thread is going to be published at The International Institute of Socionics, UC Berkeley, or presented at a American Psychological Association conference.

    That's not the intention, the main idea is just to bounce around this idea. Big difference. It's kinda like art, sometimes there is no result intended.

    Besides if you really think about it, if threads like this and the countless more made on this forum by other people—or anything for matter off and online—didn't exist; there'd be so such thing as "DCHN," "Socionics," "MBTI," "psychology," "spaceflight," "computers" or even pizza.

    Basically, instead of why as you may ask, I say:

    Why not?

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Saugerties,NY
    TIM
    ENFj-fe
    Posts
    947
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timeless View Post
    Kinda like the way Enneagram does it (e.g. Seven), the "uncovered" profiles of each Socionics type, and the HA, what do you think the differences are between a healthy and an unhealthy type?

    For example, combining all of the above, IMO:

    ESE/ESFj "The Enthusiast" aka Victor Hugo:

    Healthy Level
    Level 1 (At their best): Emotional energy is more happy go-lucky, considerate, and selfless. Enthusiasm is more vibrant. Stable and confident understanding about him/herself and the world. Bursts of anger less likely. Wants to be perfect. Geared towards acts of peace. "The Life of the Party."

    Average Level
    Level 2: Energy swings towards extremes, enthusiasm is more calm with highs and lows. Prone to doubt his or her reasoning every now and then. Unsure in non-ethical matters. Fluctuating interests levels.

    Unhealthy Level:
    Level 3 (At their worst): Emotional energy is forceful, tactless, and selfish, enthusiasm is replaced by apathy and carelessness. Chaotic and unsure understanding about him/herself and the world. Bursts of anger more likely. Needs to be perfect. Prone to acts of violence. "The Party Pooper."

    Feel free to make your own from your experience.
    Hah, I don't think I've ever known an ESFj prone to acts of violence.
    EIE tritype 5w4, 4w5, 9w1


    As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being.
    Carl Jung, "Memories, Dreams, Reflections", 1962

  9. #9
    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)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morcheeba View Post
    Hah, I don't think I've ever known an ESFj prone to acts of violence.
    I've known a few and ironically they were that way before I got to know them.

  10. #10
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,123
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timeless View Post



    It still doesn't hurt to talk about it or play around with the idea. No one said this is, was, or will be reliable. It's also not like this thread is going to be published at The International Institute of Socionics, UC Berkeley, or presented at a American Psychological Association conference.

    That's not the intention, the main idea is just to bounce around this idea. Big difference. It's kinda like art, sometimes there is no result intended.

    Besides if you really think about it, if threads like this and the countless more made on this forum by other people—or anything for matter off and online—didn't exist; there'd be so such thing as "DCHN," "Socionics," "MBTI," "psychology," "spaceflight," "computers" or even pizza.

    Basically, instead of why as you may ask, I say:

    Why not?
    I like the way you think. How else can we refine our understanding if we don't toss some ideas around here and there?

    Quote Originally Posted by morcheeba
    Hah, I don't think I've ever known an ESFj prone to acts of violence.
    I have. Once, a couple people held one back before she got a chance to clobber me. She was huge. I'm glad she didn't get the chance. She sure wanted to.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Saugerties,NY
    TIM
    ENFj-fe
    Posts
    947
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timeless View Post
    I've known a few and ironically they were that way before I got to know them.
    Idk, I visit an ESFj who lives next door to me, she lets me use her piano, and she is the sweetest person I know; it's kind of sickening actually. Her husband recently divorced her, so she is under a lot of stress right now, very depressed, but I couldn't imagine her being violent whatsoever. Of course, she is really old, so that could explain it.
    EIE tritype 5w4, 4w5, 9w1


    As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being.
    Carl Jung, "Memories, Dreams, Reflections", 1962

  12. #12
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    IEI

    Healthy Level: Involved heavily in social activist causes, not afraid to approach others, connects with others socially, artistic. 'Lives fully', understands objectivity. Lightens up. Highly clever, creative, and entertaining. 'The life of the party' in their own way. Isn't selfish with their pain, understands that most people have felt whatever it is they are feeling. Very confident in confronting others if they are bullying/mistreating others.

    Average Level: More mentally stable and non-hypocritical than unhealthy IEIs, but unlike healthy IEIs, are more selfish/victimy with their pain. Still plays the victim and acts like whatever they're feeling/going through, nobody could understand or relate to them, so shuts off others too much. Takes small but important risks in their lives, lives in the real world more than unhealthy IEI. Reaches out to others, but also keeps them at an arms length. Safe, but too safe at times.

    Unhealthy Level: Collapses in on themselves. Loses themselves in an addiction of some sort. Way too subjective, sucks in everything in their own ego and just sulks/broods with it. Self-destructive, narcissistic, with surprisingly violent tendencies. Lives way too much in their heads. Attracts thugs, bullies, and unhealthy sociopathic estps to bother them, while everybody else leaves them alone as they fall down a black hole of nothing.

  13. #13
    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)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morcheeba View Post
    Idk, I visit an ESFj who lives next door to me, she lets me use her piano, and she is the sweetest person I know; it's kind of sickening actually. Her husband recently divorced her, so she is under a lot of stress right now, very depressed, but I couldn't imagine her being violent whatsoever. Of course, she is really old, so that could explain it.
    I'm going by a few I know and especially my best friend whom I've known for more than a decade.

    Maybe I should reword it though, I don't think they're violent by nature, but an unhealthy ESE/ESFj would be very likely to resort to violence -PoLR and demonstrative is like driving a tank around blind.

    Quote Originally Posted by squark View Post
    I like the way you think. How else can we refine our understanding if we don't toss some ideas around here and there?
    Basically, that too!

    Quote Originally Posted by BulletsAndDoves View Post
    IEI

    Healthy Level: Involved heavily in social activist causes, not afraid to approach others, connects with others socially, artistic. 'Lives fully', understands objectivity. Lightens up. Highly clever, creative, and entertaining. 'The life of the party' in their own way. Isn't selfish with their pain, understands that most people have felt whatever it is they are feeling. Very confident in confronting others if they are bullying/mistreating others.

    Average Level: More mentally stable and non-hypocritical than unhealthy IEIs, but unlike healthy IEIs, are more selfish/victimy with their pain. Still plays the victim and acts like whatever they're feeling/going through, nobody could understand or relate to them, so shuts off others too much. Takes small but important risks in their lives, lives in the real world more than unhealthy IEI. Reaches out to others, but also keeps them at an arms length. Safe, but too safe at times.

    Unhealthy Level: Collapses in on themselves. Loses themselves in an addiction of some sort. Way too subjective, sucks in everything in their own ego and just sulks/broods with it. Self-destructive, narcissistic, with surprisingly violent tendencies. Lives way too much in their heads. Attracts thugs, bullies, and unhealthy sociopathic estps to bother them, while everybody else leaves them alone as they fall down a black hole of nothing.


    I know one IEI/INFp who fits that healthy level, and another who fits in between.

  14. #14
    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

    EII

    Healthy: recognizes her own emotions and how they affect others, is quick to ask for forgiveness when she feels that she's withdrawn emotionally for no good reason. Maintains healthy relations around her, tries different things. Is practical, takes care of her finances well, saves money, follows routines that work for her. Is sweet, kind, nice, generous, thoughtful; people often take advantage of her. Through self realization and realization of other's behavioral patterns she tries to evolve, to listen to the advice of other individuals and tries to follow them. Finds solutions to problems, gives good advice, is resourceful, honest, open.

    Average: is not always open to new information when she gets an idea that she wants to drive home to everyone. is impatient with others, doesn't accept assistance or help from others, keeps ok relations, but doesn't do a good job about following up with them once she is out of her depressions, has a minimal of clean/neat habits and doesn't take care or concern about keeping herself and her surrounding clean and neat.

    Unhealthy: is quick to cut relations, is mistrustful of others intentions towards her/him, highly and unhealthily suspicious of others intentions therefore closes herself off to new people/experiences, rejects new people easily, isn't good about establishing new relations, isn't good with emotional expression, closed off and locked away, spends too much time buying and returning goods only trying to get organized and efficient, but doesn't realize that this is why they are constantly trying to buy goods (so that they can find the right fit to be efficient). Has a major attitude towards people, can't forgive those who have offended her; lingers with emotions too long. Gives people the cold shoulder, thinks that this is who she is and how she should behave.

  15. #15
    Nothing in the cage of my ribcage
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timeless View Post
    It still doesn't hurt to talk about it or play around with the idea. No one said this is, was, or will be reliable. It's also not like this thread is going to be published at The International Institute of Socionics, UC Berkeley, or presented at a American Psychological Association conference.

    That's not the intention, the main idea is just to bounce around this idea. Big difference. It's kinda like art, sometimes there is no result intended.

    Besides if you really think about it, if threads like this and the countless more made on this forum by other people—or anything for matter off and online—didn't exist; there'd be so such thing as "DCHN," "Socionics," "MBTI," "psychology," "spaceflight," "computers" or even pizza.

    Basically, instead of why as you may ask, I say:

    Why not?
    I know, I wouldn't exactly stop anyone from doing it, but I also wouldn't exactly recommend it, either. But I do think that there is a kind of a danger of someone (a newbie for instance) that might read stuff like this and take it to their hearts, or whatever. And also, I'd imagine that this kind of stuff is already available in Socionics, anyway. So why not just head to the "source"?

    See, I think that those "uncovered" profiles are rather well... somewhat irresponsible. It's just some random person, an amateur, writing a random observation of 1 or 2 people. It's not exactly a representation of an entire type, but rather an observation of a particular person, and not a particularly healthy person, at that. There is also no way of checking whether the typing was correct. And I doubt that many of the things described in it are type-related at all, anyway. There is a very little way of determining what trends will develop in an unhealthy type, because people are different and so diverse in the development of their personalities and trends (for instance, I am very different from many of my own identicals, and the way we react to things may be completely different). Yet apparently, those "uncovered" profiles do have an "influence" on people. Some people may mistake them for legitimate information, only because there is an air of authority to them. Some people may take what they say as unalterable "facts". Some people may become deeply depressed after reading something about themselves that are clearly exaggerated and unhealthy, yet see it as a sign of unalterable truth and facts about themselves - they're just "wired that way".

    So, threads like this... probably harmless. Those "uncovered" profiles... I'd have a problem with. But still, I'd be very careful and cautious when dealing with information like this.
    Last edited by Singu; 03-03-2011 at 06:32 AM.

  16. #16
    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

    There's no such thing as "healthy and unhealthy types" in Socionics, but it can be applied to MBTI, which is based on behavioral traits.
    Basically, someone who considers these factors in determining types and relationships got it all wrong. For instance, I could see countless reasons for why someone who's "unhealthy" won't get along well with someone else who's his Dual - they're all social, genetic, etc factors, type being only one of them.

    I'm not saying that the OP make this claim, still it (an this idea in general) smears the line between what is "the type" and what is not. Based on my experience, this is often used as an excuse for mistypings.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  17. #17
    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 ananke View Post
    So in both extraverts and introverts there will be internal struggle if you are too one-dimensional. The more unhealthy a person seems, the more he'll seem split between extraversion and introversion (both the conscious and the unconscious is present at once). The more balanced a person is, the more he'll seem to be an ambivert. (the conscious is not one-dimensional but focuses on more functions)
    I'm not sure if that's true, but it makes sense, at least. The problem is that this "unhealthy" does not exist. Basically what you're talking about is the mechanism of that certain type, but confusing it with the actual incidents that may affect that mechanism. Take for example a gas IC engine, its type consists in its structure and functionality, not sound, heat, or possible explosions, snaps or punctures. These are aspects it shares with other types of engines.

    This "unhealthy" assumes a subjective expectation which is not to be found in Socionics types theory. I perceive in your post, for instance, the idea that being ambivert is the "healthy" state, while being either "too introvert" or "too extrovert" is "unhealthy". Why, what's the scientific (or whatever logical) reason to believe such thing? As far as I know, Socionics does not acknowledge - neither it's in its scope - how types "should behave", the "normal" level of social extroversion or similar things. Really, I don't know where you got that idea from, and in case you are referring to social balance, I would point you out that balance does not mean necessarily "healthy", neither necessarily "better" nor "normal". For example, focusing on more functions - assuming there is such thing - indeed may possibly make someone more socially-compliant, more adaptable, but focusing on one (or two) function will be the only manner to have extraordinary accomplishments or depth of thinking. Would you agree than none is better than the other, it's just different things for different purposes?
    Quote Originally Posted by ananke View Post
    BTW, this is something to consider when typing people, cause it will greatly influence external behavior.
    External or internal factors do indeed affect behavior, but once it is considered (and being superficial), it means that the typer took the wrong path, IMO. I'm telling you that in Socionics there is currently no reference/theory/procedure to synthetically determine the type by simple behavioral indicators, let alone tests.

    I can see appropriate to trace someone's behavior back to some potential causes, eg "ok this ILI is very outgoing because this, and this was caused by that", but not something like "this is ILI because he gets along well with a SEE and unhealthy ILIs are very outgoing". This is stupid and like I said, it seems that a lot of people overlook the inconsistencies between someone and descriptions based on such shallow rules of thumb. You are right in several aspects, but overall this does much more harm than good, IMO.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  18. #18
    Nothing in the cage of my ribcage
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That's basically what Jung considered to be his solution for the imbalance or disturbances that occurs in our psyche.

    The chief cause of neurotic disturbances, according to Jung, is the failure to live according to the laws of the soul. In his numerous writings Jung has worked out and formulated in detail his own system of the structure of the psyche. The laws of the psyche are considered given by its own nature, and they are conceived as universal and eternal. The task of therapy coincides with that of wisdom; it is to make it possible to learn to live according to these inner laws. The internal harmony is made possible by the balance between the conscious and the unconscious. The true way of life is to live according to the order that reigns in the unconscious.

    The structure of the psyche consists largely of pairs of opposites, such as thinking and feeling, sensation and intuition, as four varieties of function, and extraversion and introversion as two basic attitudes. Difficulties arise when one of these modes is overemphasized to the detriment of its opposite. Similarly, the conscious and the unconscious are thought of as complementary.

  19. #19
    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 Singularity View Post
    That's basically what Jung considered to be his solution for the imbalance or disturbances that occurs in our psyche.
    1. Jung is NOT Socionics. Everything that "Jung said", disregarding Model A theory, is by default FALSE, unless you talk in the "Other Personality Typologies" section.

    2. There's no such thing as "imbalanced type". There's no such thing as "more focus", there's no such thing as "equal functions". - in Socionics. There is, however, the case of imbalanced personality, neurotic diseases, which this field often explains, one of the most important principles in it is that if a type is not exposed to compatible information, it becomes neurotic. Duality included. This does not mean that something happened with his functions, that some of the functions are more repressed, that his social introversion or extroversion are correlated with functions.

    In fact, if we respect the theory, there's no reason to believe that Xe types correlate with social extroversion more than NT types correlate with scientific interest, so that an imbalance would affect this attribute. There are types that emerge as "extroverted", there are types that emerge as "emotional" and there are types that emerge as "intuitive" - if anything, just not functions. I see no more truth in the claim that "Ne makes you extroverted/outgoing" than in "the Moon emits light". The phenomena are a result of different factors and only the understanding of what's actually going on can make one capable of using that information constructively/accurately.

    And I'd emphasize here the fact that in Socionics Extroversion and Introversion are different than both Jung's (although close to) and especially other authors before him. The notions of Bodies/Fields and Extratim/Introtim were specifically coined by Aushra to overcome these confusions.

    Aushra wrote on "Pure Type":
    Often the question is asked, not whether a man can be "extroverted" (extroverted) and "introvert" (introverted) simultaneously. That is, could it be partly one and partly another. We will put an end to misunderstandings, if will be clear that the psyche of one person, potentially, that is in its infancy, does not substantially different from the psyche of another. There is not and can not be that in one there was something in the other there is no trace. In each type of MI is the same, only different degrees of development. In each type, we find and the mechanism of extraversion and introversion mechanism. But only one of them prevails. [leads] That's because only one call extroverted, others just introverted.

    ...

    When we talk about the types of informational metabolism, we have in mind precisely such conglomerates formed from all eight elements, in which certain elements always play a leading role. Therefore, if the psyche of every human being has all the elements, however, can not say that it is a bit of one, a bit of a different type. [type of function]

    Second, often ambiguously understood Young's statement is the question of whether it is possible "balanced", ie, the balanced development of two or more elements. To avoid confusion, we quote:

    (8) "Experience has shown that the basic psychological functions seldom or almost never have equal strength or the same degree of development in the same individual. Usually one or the other function outweighs both the strength and development "(p.27).

    "However, - wrote Jung ,-... there are individuals whose thinking is the same height with the feeling, both have the same conscious motivating force. But in this case it is not about the differentiated type, but relatively undeveloped thinking and feeling. Uniform consciousness and unconsciousness of functions is therefore a sign of the primitive state of mind "(p.88-89).

    Our studies have fully confirmed this statement: among mentally full of people we have not met such individuals. Just want to immediately add that this rule is true for all eight elements functions. Each element performs a different function, different as the number and quality of perceived and processed information from the outside. That is, in a model of it each of the eight elements of the performs a completely different role.

    Can I change the type of person? No, it is impossible, and effort to do so leads to a disease:

    "Where there is ... due to external influence such as a perversion, an individual in the future, for the most part becomes neurotic, and his recovery is only possible through the identification of naturally relevant to the individual units" (p.13).

    Our observations show that this process always occurs when people are provided with complementary partners, psyche, and each one tries to turn in his Douala. Anyone who can not withstand this struggle, forced to abandon implementation of any part of their identity and become neurotic.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  20. #20
    Nothing in the cage of my ribcage
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ...did you actually read what ananke posted? She was talking about Jung, which you seem to have missed.

  21. #21
    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 Singularity View Post
    ...did you actually read what ananke posted? She was talking about Jung, which you seem to have missed.
    I read that, I just didn't address, cause I focused on the important point. Her post makes some intuitive sense, it is not exclusively based on "Jung said".
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  22. #22
    Punk
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    1,659
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    ILI

    Healthy: insults you
    Unhealthy: imagines himself insulting you
    Get a life faggot. This stuff doesn't make any sense.





    Am I doin' it, rite?

  23. #23
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Divided View Post
    Am I doin' it, rite?
    You are as fit as a fiddle!
    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.

Posting Permissions

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