Hello, anyone who happens to read my thread. I am new to Socionics, but am a long-time hobbyist of JCF and related theories. Nice to meet you all!
Hello! Transfer from PerC!
Hello, anyone who happens to read my thread. I am new to Socionics, but am a long-time hobbyist of JCF and related theories. Nice to meet you all!
Welcome!
Refugee staging area is over there. *points*
Hello
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Oh, so refugees are common? :-POriginally Posted by Capitalist Pig
Refugee staging area is over there. *points*
Hello
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Hello! And refugees are quite common...
Why's that?
Hoping you could shed some light on that.
I came from PerC because I was very interested in the Socionics 16 relationships types which rang true for me in so many ways. MBTI doesn't have anything like that. What they say is compatible for types is often not compatible, IMO. Some people on PerC at the time I migrated here considered Socionics as being off-topic for an MBTI site. Not sure if that's changed. (However, then again, some people here would rather not talk Socionics.
I really wish they had a site that was just for functional type theories in general. PerC and TypeCentral are MBTI leaning, and this site is Socionics leaning, but I don't really relate to either theory. They just seem to make too many assumptions, with both theories trying to confine something extremely dynamic and abstract in a simple structure. It would be nice to have a site to present your own views on Jung's original conceptions (or even present other people's views), without adhering to a limiting structure devised by a small group of personality 'experts'. Not to demean these people and all the hard work they put in, I just don't agree with them. I may just be talking crazy, though.I came from PerC because I was very interested in the Socionics 16 relationships types which rang true for me in so many ways. MBTI doesn't have anything like that. What they say is compatible for types is often not compatible, IMO. Some people on PerC at the time I migrated here considered Socionics as being off-topic for an MBTI site. Not sure if that's changed. (However, then again, some people here would rather not talk Socionics.
(Though, the real reason I left PerC is because my school blocked it.)
Last edited by Tranquility; 05-27-2014 at 04:15 PM.
DISCLAIMER
If I use the wrong words for the same concepts, please excuse me. I understand this is a Socionics forum, but arguing over something as simple as semantics over similar concepts is not desirable. I'll try to keep to Socionics terminology, but I may forget to, and don't wish for any unnecessary confrontation. If you don't understand my point of view due to a misuse of proper vocabulary, I will be happy to expound upon the source of the misconception, and will attempt to use the proper word the next time. Also, if you happen to disagree with my opinion (which all of my posts are, regardless of how I present them), please don't attack me ad hominem. I am perfectly happy to consider alternatives, and am also fine with a friendly debate, but do not wish to be insulted just because my opinion differs from yours, nor insulted over my purposes for holding this opinion.
Thank you!
It's the men from Res. They have driven back the eastern outposts, and wrecked havoc in the countryside. We have tried to fend them off, but they are strong. Millions are fleeing from the wrath of those barbarians. Tis better to lose your home and land than to lose your life, and we must do anything we can to defend the land of Psyche!
DISCLAIMER
If I use the wrong words for the same concepts, please excuse me. I understand this is a Socionics forum, but arguing over something as simple as semantics over similar concepts is not desirable. I'll try to keep to Socionics terminology, but I may forget to, and don't wish for any unnecessary confrontation. If you don't understand my point of view due to a misuse of proper vocabulary, I will be happy to expound upon the source of the misconception, and will attempt to use the proper word the next time. Also, if you happen to disagree with my opinion (which all of my posts are, regardless of how I present them), please don't attack me ad hominem. I am perfectly happy to consider alternatives, and am also fine with a friendly debate, but do not wish to be insulted just because my opinion differs from yours, nor insulted over my purposes for holding this opinion.
Thank you!
They were only trying to protect you from yourself.(Though, the real reason I left PerC is because my school blocked it.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
...They were only trying to protect you from yourself.
DISCLAIMER
If I use the wrong words for the same concepts, please excuse me. I understand this is a Socionics forum, but arguing over something as simple as semantics over similar concepts is not desirable. I'll try to keep to Socionics terminology, but I may forget to, and don't wish for any unnecessary confrontation. If you don't understand my point of view due to a misuse of proper vocabulary, I will be happy to expound upon the source of the misconception, and will attempt to use the proper word the next time. Also, if you happen to disagree with my opinion (which all of my posts are, regardless of how I present them), please don't attack me ad hominem. I am perfectly happy to consider alternatives, and am also fine with a friendly debate, but do not wish to be insulted just because my opinion differs from yours, nor insulted over my purposes for holding this opinion.
Thank you!
there are ways around that, you know(Though, the real reason I left PerC is because my school blocked it.
If effort and risk are worth the reward. I don't usually like to use other websites to log into my accounts so I never tried them.
http://howto.wired.com/wiki/Bypass_S...ternet_Filters
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I'm not going to do that. I was already burned once for something similar, and do not wish to be burned again.
DISCLAIMER
If I use the wrong words for the same concepts, please excuse me. I understand this is a Socionics forum, but arguing over something as simple as semantics over similar concepts is not desirable. I'll try to keep to Socionics terminology, but I may forget to, and don't wish for any unnecessary confrontation. If you don't understand my point of view due to a misuse of proper vocabulary, I will be happy to expound upon the source of the misconception, and will attempt to use the proper word the next time. Also, if you happen to disagree with my opinion (which all of my posts are, regardless of how I present them), please don't attack me ad hominem. I am perfectly happy to consider alternatives, and am also fine with a friendly debate, but do not wish to be insulted just because my opinion differs from yours, nor insulted over my purposes for holding this opinion.
Thank you!
Heh my suspicions of the motives of the proxy sites or unknown software are enough to make me avoid.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
They do seem shady, yes. I like the references to Greek mythology in your profile.
Last edited by Tranquility; 05-27-2014 at 07:14 PM.
DISCLAIMER
If I use the wrong words for the same concepts, please excuse me. I understand this is a Socionics forum, but arguing over something as simple as semantics over similar concepts is not desirable. I'll try to keep to Socionics terminology, but I may forget to, and don't wish for any unnecessary confrontation. If you don't understand my point of view due to a misuse of proper vocabulary, I will be happy to expound upon the source of the misconception, and will attempt to use the proper word the next time. Also, if you happen to disagree with my opinion (which all of my posts are, regardless of how I present them), please don't attack me ad hominem. I am perfectly happy to consider alternatives, and am also fine with a friendly debate, but do not wish to be insulted just because my opinion differs from yours, nor insulted over my purposes for holding this opinion.
Thank you!
Hii hi hi*waves*
And hm, maybs eventually make a thread if you wannaI really wish they had a site that was just for functional type theories in general. PerC and TypeCentral are MBTI leaning, and this site is Socionics leaning, but I don't really relate to either theory. They just seem to make too many assumptions, with both theories trying to confine something extremely dynamic and abstract in a simple structure. It would be nice to have a site to present your own views on Jung's original conceptions (or even present other people's views), without adhering to a limiting structure devised by a small group of personality 'experts'. Not to demean these people and all the hard work they put in, I just don't agree with them. I may just be talking crazy, though.
(Though, the real reason I left PerC is because my school blocked it.
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
That is... extremely complex. I will try to wrap my head around it. It is very technical. Thank you for pointing me to your ideas, I enjoy seeing other perspectives!Hii hi hi
And hm, maybs eventually make a thread if you wanna
Not entirely certain about posting my observations, considering how completely different they are from Socionics. The only ideas from Socionics I really incorporated in it are the clubs (though, they differ from the Socionics clubs) and the nature of the leading function, rejecting the emphasis MBTI/JCF people such as Thomson and Beebe place on the auxiliary. I do like the Socionics descriptions of Si, Ne, and Ni, however, so do have some parallels there in my descriptions of the Introverted Sensation and Extraverted/Introverted Intuitive types.
But I digress... just worried that my ideas might get negative reactions, considering this is a Socionics forum.
Last edited by Tranquility; 05-29-2014 at 03:51 PM.
DISCLAIMER
If I use the wrong words for the same concepts, please excuse me. I understand this is a Socionics forum, but arguing over something as simple as semantics over similar concepts is not desirable. I'll try to keep to Socionics terminology, but I may forget to, and don't wish for any unnecessary confrontation. If you don't understand my point of view due to a misuse of proper vocabulary, I will be happy to expound upon the source of the misconception, and will attempt to use the proper word the next time. Also, if you happen to disagree with my opinion (which all of my posts are, regardless of how I present them), please don't attack me ad hominem. I am perfectly happy to consider alternatives, and am also fine with a friendly debate, but do not wish to be insulted just because my opinion differs from yours, nor insulted over my purposes for holding this opinion.
Thank you!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
