Lost in translation (thread split)
My question is: What is the english representation?
You pose really tough questions, woman. It's an article that further explains the difference between leading -Si and +Si (when you take a look at ISFp article), it's not a person, so I don't really get your question. Unless you don't want to get into that, there is still Jung.
All roads lead to Rome.
As for representatives, 'English' ones - they're posting on this site...
Wonder who activated Expat from coma.
Last edited by Absurd; 03-17-2013 at 09:17 AM.
I think you didn't understand the question.
The point is: from what I understand, socionics was written in the Russian language, understood and created from the mindset of such. To translate it to english will leave a muddled result at best. I have trouble reading a translation and then believing true meaning can be taken from it, that it means exactly what it says, or that it should even be understood from the point of view offered.
In other words, there is no true english representation. It doesn't exist.
Well, the Bible has has been written in Aramaic/Hebrew in the beginning and translated into many languages, English being one of them. It didn't stop people from believing in The Word despite many interpretations/translations it underwent - so it all boils down to faith. Whether it is blind is debatable...
Originally Posted by jet city woman
Besides, you can always read Socionics Bible in original and cease crying over spilled milk, I can. People read Jung in English even though he wrote most of his work in German and it didn't stop people on this forum from flinging terminology he procured and paying attention to it...
So yes, I disagree, there is a "true" English representation.
Oh, and Jim, don't toss those 'likes' so haphazardly, you can get burned at the stake for heresy.
Last edited by Absurd; 03-18-2013 at 11:24 AM.