Socionics Article Project

[tcaudilllg]

I've created a Facebook group for purposes of discussing it. Let me know if you want in.

[Cat King Cole]

If you can sort something out using a Google service I'm in. Facebook permabanned me.

[tcaudilllg]

Alright I'll make something on Google+. But I want to emphasize that we need to have some kinda "real" knowledge of each other to make this work.

[Cat King Cole]

Sure. How do you mean "real"?

[tcaudilllg]

Sure. How do you mean "real"?

I mean like real names and photographs. This is a *real* paper after all.

[Cat King Cole]

Sure. My real-life name and photos and everything are linked to my Google+.

https://plus.google.com/102389359492340722435

[tcaudilllg]

Google+ is closed beta. Can't do it.

[tcaudilllg]

How about LinkedIn?

[Anglas]

I'm ìn. Facebook fine

[ClownsandEntropy]

I agree, I'm not sure what this is about, but I'd be interested nonetheless!

[Bluenoir]

I'm curious. What article is this?

Also Gul, what on earth did you do to get permabanned??

He was never told. I suspect it had something to do with him using a pseudonym. Apparently they are craking down on that because people are hinding behind anonymity to troll and harass.

My theory is that they just want accurate data to sell to third parties.

[tcaudilllg]

I've discussed for a while that I mean to mainstream socionics in the psychology community by getting it some professional attention. I personally think that socionics in itself has only limited utility... but the theory of information metabolism has been fatally overlooked by western psychology. It's the means by which pretty much every other social trait is put into context. Will advance all branches of psychology a hundred years beyond what they otherwise would have accomplished over the next hundred. And beyond that, I think IM is just the intellectual kick in the pants the world needs right now. I predict an innovation explosion on basis of it.

So anyway, it's a big undertaking and people disagree on how to do it. That's what the discussions will be about. The idea is to determine the form of the expose, how quickly to roll it out and where to let go of the ball once it's rolling.

There is a world beyond socionics, but you can only begin to glimpse it once you've accepted the theory's validity. We need to get those who could potentially be pushing for this world and its exploration duly engaged, and an article in a journal, where it can get lots of exposure, is just the way to do that. We tried to do it with Wikipedia, and got hammered over the head by culturally conservative forces. We're going above Wikipedia, this time.

I've already added Hydrangea and Maritsa. April are you also party to this? Main thing is, I need everyone who wants to take part in this to friend me on Facebook. Here's my ID: http://www.facebook.com/anthony.carl.caudill

[Cat King Cole]

Google+ is closed beta. Can't do it.

It's a word-of-mouth field trial. PM me an email and I'll send you an invite

[ClownsandEntropy]

I've discussed for a while that I mean to mainstream socionics in the psychology community by getting it some professional attention. I personally think that socionics in itself has only limited utility... but the theory of information metabolism has been fatally overlooked by western psychology. It's the means by which pretty much every other social trait is put into context. Will advance all branches of psychology a hundred years beyond what they otherwise would have accomplished over the next hundred. And beyond that, I think IM is just the intellectual kick in the pants the world needs right now. I predict an innovation explosion on basis of it.

So anyway, it's a big undertaking and people disagree on how to do it. That's what the discussions will be about. The idea is to determine the form of the expose, how quickly to roll it out and where to let go of the ball once it's rolling.

There is a world beyond socionics, but you can only begin to glimpse it once you've accepted the theory's validity. We need to get those who could potentially be pushing for this world and its exploration duly engaged, and an article in a journal, where it can get lots of exposure, is just the way to do that. We tried to do it with Wikipedia, and got hammered over the head by culturally conservative forces. We're going above Wikipedia, this time.

I've already added Hydrangea and Maritsa. April are you also party to this? Main thing is, I need everyone who wants to take part in this to friend me on Facebook. Here's my ID: http://www.facebook.com/anthony.carl.caudill

Sure, I'd like to help.

[WVBRY]

I've discussed for a while that I mean to mainstream socionics in the psychology community by getting it some professional attention. I personally think that socionics in itself has only limited utility... but the theory of information metabolism has been fatally overlooked by western psychology. It's the means by which pretty much every other social trait is put into context. Will advance all branches of psychology a hundred years beyond what they otherwise would have accomplished over the next hundred. And beyond that, I think IM is just the intellectual kick in the pants the world needs right now. I predict an innovation explosion on basis of it.[/url]

Woah there cowboy, which version of IM are you talking about? Aushra Augusta's version, which is based on the cognitive process of jungian fucntions, or Kepinski's theory which Aushra didnt understand yet referred to? Because if its the latter its already been written before as to why Kepinski's theory is not compatible with socionics and never was.

I like how Aushra boasts, "we could at least partly pay tribute to the classics of Polish psychiatry A. Kempinski, the creator of the original and completely in tune with our typology theory of information metabolism," when it's self-evident she didn't actually understand IM. Aushra essentially reduces information metabolism to information processing, and attempts to draw false equivalence between the two. These are not the same.

This reduction occurs by way of Aushra's assumption, that each IE uniquely parses certain kinds of objective information present in reality—a notion antithetical to how IM is conceived to operate per Kępiński:

Informational metabolism” is a different term for human psyche. It consists of two strictly dependent layers, or parts: unconscious and conscious. The first part deals with the unconscious processes which are expressed by moods and the emotional colouring. On this layer we deal, on the one hand, with a vague emotional mood and, on the other hand, with more definite feelings. The unconscious area is not strictly integrated with consciousness, but they are not, like in psychoanalysis, the opposite forces which remain in the state of conflict. The former may be defined as a kind of pre-consciousness or conditio sine qua non of consciousness.

The second part of informational metabolism belongs to the conscious layer of our psyche. Its role is to create pictures (representations) of reality. Representations are not just reflections of objects in the environment. The external world is not just imprinted on the subject. They are rather useful models for coping with reality and for the possibilities of acting. The notion of informational metabolism does not implicate a kind of computationalism or representationism like in the classical cognitive sciences.

…

Kępiński’s epistemology does not present human cognitive activity in terms of objective representation of reality and is rather critical to the scientific (natural) method of cognition. In his view, one of the basic aims of human activity is to impose man’s own internal order upon external reality, to materialize his own models / projects. Social structures, in turn, impose constrains and provide resources for the development of personality and everyday functioning. This form of interaction, or engagement in the environment, serves as a condition for subject’s autonomy-achieving. Only by deliberate action we are able to get an informational feedback necessary for working out an effective reality models and a real contact with the world. “The sense of reality refers to activity” (Kępiński 1981: 204).

Just saying that to avoid you any embarrasment.

[tcaudilllg]

Augusta's. But I've reviewed Kepinsky's theory and it's not that far apart from hers. Kepinsky discussed it in a general sense... Augusta applied Kepinsky in a specific context.

Kepinsky's info metab shouldn't be read as a philosophy, but as a general principle.

Secondly, I don't see any real departure from socionics in Kepinsky's work. In fact I would argue that what he's alluding to above is the output of the dual-type system (with the political types and other basic needs as motivators).

[tcaudilllg]

OK I got the invite but I don't know how many I can invite myself (Google isn't saying...). If you want in on the project, please try to get an invite to Google+ by asking someone who is on there already. (we're doing this for Gul). I'll answer as many invitations as I can. PM me your email and I will send you an invite.

[Bluenoir]

Why not, I would like to get involved, if it's still open.

https://plus.google.com/112799232774...45978893/posts

[somavision]

I'm in mr. please send me whatever info

[Cat King Cole]

tcaud, don't let me hold you back. I can certainly fit myself in if you publish to google docs. I can happily take a squizz at the finished product and offer advice on making it presentable.

[tcaudilllg]

I'm in mr. please send me whatever info

I need your email address to send you an invite.

[tcaudilllg]

tcaud, don't let me hold you back. I can certainly fit myself in if you publish to google docs. I can happily take a squizz at the finished product and offer advice on making it presentable.

Right but we want to let people post their thoughts at will.

But I've changed my mind. I want April to write this doc with our input.

I've reflected on the facts of the situation: we have enabled that the truly inquisitive can discover socionics, via Wikipedia in particular. That it hasn't been given a lot of attention is no accident at this point: a lot of people just aren't interested. What we need to do is maximize attention to its highest degree, and that's what this paper will go a long way towards. April has the credentials and the ability to write an effective article. That she is writing this paper in her capacity as a statistician will lend additional legitimacy to socionics that I don't think it could have otherwise. The rest of us can be signatories/co-authors to the paper.

Eh let's just get people together and we'll see how it goes.

[tcaudilllg]

First step is to friend me on FB. I'm not going to permit any signatories who haven't.

The deadline is Saturday. I aim to be finished with the article by the end of the month.

[tcaudilllg]

Deadline is tonight. Participating:
- Maritsa
- Hydrangea
- Somavision
- woofwoof
- Gul
- Michelle Wong (what's her name on here?)

If you dream of socionics taking root in the west, you owe it to yourself to be a part of this historic undertaking.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

You need to make it more sexy. If your goal is to make more people interested in socionics, you have to make it more well liked- instead of just some nerdy thing that constantly criticizes people's personality flaws...

Socionics needs a make over. It looks like the obese nerdy lesbian in high school with 0 friends, that everybody hates, and nobody talks to. It looks like Wednesday on the Adams Family, only more pimply....and more obese.

If you want it to appeal to the popular culture then you need to explain it in a clearer way for the everyman to understand, everybody needs to lighten up on the arguing, and agree on the objective definition of the functions. People need to stop thinking that 'Fe' means something that it doesn't, etc.

Because 'most people' are easy, and just want everybody to be nice to each other, and are normal and don't like intellectual arguing and just sort of want to be entertained, do their work and come home.

When Joss Whedon tried to get Buffy on the air, he ran through many obstacles. Who wants to run a show called Buffy the Vampire Slayer? Who would like a show with the main protagonist being called Buffy? Although Joss is a strong liberal with very progressive views, I'm sure that people tuned in because Buffy is well, hot, and aesthetically pleasing.

Nothing is 'hot' about functions. For most people with real lives, nothing could be more boring than looking at black and white colored shapes all day. For starters, at LEAST start color-coding the functions.

Then we'll go from there. On my next post (I may even start a new thread), I'll give some insight on what function should be what color.

[tcaudilllg]

You need to make it more sexy. If your goal is to make more people interested in socionics, you have to make it more well liked- instead of just some nerdy thing that constantly criticizes people's personality flaws...

Socionics needs a make over. It looks like the obese nerdy lesbian in high school with 0 friends, that everybody hates, and nobody talks to. It looks like Wednesday on the Adams Family, only more pimply....and more obese.

If you want it to appeal to the popular culture then you need to explain it in a clearer way for the everyman to understand, everybody needs to lighten up on the arguing, and agree on the objective definition of the functions. People need to stop thinking that 'Fe' means something that it doesn't, etc.

Because 'most people' are easy, and just want everybody to be nice to each other, and are normal and don't like intellectual arguing and just sort of want to be entertained, do their work and come home.

When Joss Whedon tried to get Buffy on the air, he ran through many obstacles. Who wants to run a show called Buffy the Vampire Slayer? Who would like a show with the main protagonist being called Buffy? Although Joss is a strong liberal with very progressive views, I'm sure that people tuned in because Buffy is well, hot, and aesthetically pleasing.

Nothing is 'hot' about functions. For most people with real lives, nothing could be more boring than looking at black and white colored shapes all day. For starters, at LEAST start color-coding the functions.

Then we'll go from there. On my next post (I may even start a new thread), I'll give some insight on what function should be what color.

All these... good points. Please join.

[tcaudilllg]

OK Sam has joined... that's B&D, right?

The deadline has passed. The project begins now.

[somavision]

Is there actually some kind of project brief?

[tcaudilllg]

I've made a decision: gonna do this over Google Docs. I'll let everybody who has joined the project in on the doc location, and we can discuss its makeup that way. That way we can bring people together from FB and Plus.

I didn't work on the project over the weekend because I had assignments and a lot of reading to do for my business classes.