Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Issues with Socionics

  1. #1
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    INTp ILI
    Posts
    372
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Issues with Socionics

    How about, instead of confining people to categories that may or may not work out to be at all practical, we work on identifying relations empirically. For example, ignore any preconceived notion of personality.

    My issue comes from the inability for people to coherently define aspects of their personality. I get it, you see things in a line, and I see things in a bunch lines. But how does that make me hate you and you hate me? As such, I'd like to share things I read about people hating each other.

    Context of the situation. Someone has a migraine, and you say hi, and this leads to an aggressive response. This second person lumps the person with the migraine into a category of mean people, or applies a label of not cool or some such thing.

    Skill and style. One person is incredibly skilled in the social ways, and as such, can compensate for someone who is quite bad. This can put off a person who sees that skill as a threat. This can also make that person see the other person as pompous, and not one of them. Skill bleeds into style, and vice versa. Someone who curses a lot definitely has style, and this puts them off a lot of people a bunch. Same with someone who doesn't curse, who might be perceived as prude.

    Static predispositions. This site is pretty much a place for this kind of thing. I don't think I need to explain this, other than "you are an XXXX, therefore I won't bother". Some of these are well founded, the mind body connection is quite real. Too bad none of the accredited ones aren't even touched upon here, like depression, manic-depressive mood disorder, psychopathy, schizophrenia, anxiety, so on and so forth. There are more of these then there are personality types.

    Knowledge or skill of a subject. Just because you aren't on my level, you are not worth my time. This is how business culture works at the moment, even though typically the people who claim to be are lower than you are, and get there due to the above skill and style. Entire corporations are based on this.

    Someone did something. You like them because they gave you five dollars for lunch. You hate them because they socked you in the jaw. So on and so forth. Probably can be lumped into context.

    Emotional state. [tangent]My psychology teacher expressed some kind of spiritualistic energy that makes positive feelings make things better. Well, I'm pragmatic, and call BS. I say your emotions, which, I believe are more or less weighted random, make perception of events go through a filter. Everyone's filter is different. [/tangent] Anyways, the point is that nobody goes into the various emotional states on this forum, just cognitive functions, which seem to not be equal to emotional states.

    These are all options I just came up with on the spot, and none of them have to do with socionics. I feel that they are more important. So uh yeah, how do we solve this? As maker of the thread, I would rather not extending socionics to cover this, or making new stereotypes.

    NOTE, this is a disclaimer, I don't know if there are actual people who do empirical evidence on socionics. I don't know what the Easterners do about it, or what. All I know is that most of this forum is quite unproductive, and it irks me that people just sit there doing nothing.

    I'd reword my words to be more pleasing, such as in a sonnet, but I don't have the wherewithal to do that. This already takes more effort than it is worth. Free-verse is fine.

    So uh yeah. I'll be looking for a place to ask questions. And looking for good questions. I really need to ask more questions instead of stewing about here.
    If I stop responding or posting, I've probably taken a break from posting stuff. This really taxes me for whatever reason. Said break could last anywhere from a month to a year. I will likely be back, as socionics is one of my interests. If I'm not on here, you can contact me on steam.

    I got a new computer, so I'll not type on mobile as much any more.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Seattle, Washington
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    138
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    1) We're not going to start up with your bullshit opinions on the entire praxis of various individuals with differing levels of expertise.
    2) You want empiricism and practicality? Pick and choose a real example from this forum, and state each individual error.
    3) Tell us which goal you are prioritizing and why your approach entails a better package of costs and benefits.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,099
    Mentioned
    385 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    If theory of Socionics is correct (it is good about IR in my experience), then there is no sense to reject it.
    The problems are not only from the theory, but from how you are using it. You need correct types, at first.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  4. #4
    sorrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    TIM
    ESE- Fe 4w3
    Posts
    536
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In regards to sharing information and communication I believe Socionics is accurate. For the most part ITR explains how information is shared and metabolized between types and how likely those types are to get along and be productive together.

    However, there is so much more to relationships than ITR. Enneagram is a major consideration and I find myself spending time with types I have "poor relations" with because we have good compatibility in enneagram. Likewise, there are types in the enneagram that I struggle to engage with long-term due to being in conflict despite being in my own quadra.
    “Until he extends the circle of his compassion to all living things, man will not himself find peace.”



  5. #5
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    INTp ILI
    Posts
    372
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, I did it, I had someone explain all this to me. Surprisingly, he's not from this forum. How about that. Personally, he thinks forums are dumb for this kind of thing. Well, anyways, He'd like to remain anonymous. Solved pretty much all my issues. Well, I now feel more qualified to deal with the subject matter.
    If I stop responding or posting, I've probably taken a break from posting stuff. This really taxes me for whatever reason. Said break could last anywhere from a month to a year. I will likely be back, as socionics is one of my interests. If I'm not on here, you can contact me on steam.

    I got a new computer, so I'll not type on mobile as much any more.

  6. #6
    Chains's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,308
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    If I were a betting man I would wager that actual brain scans and categories based on scans and their implicated behavior, would not happen to line up with and prove socionics and Jung. I don't believe in wishful thinking, but actual empirical data and what the likely implications of the data is, not "let's see how we can use science to prove our philosophical speculations". That is pseudoscience.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    434
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I find it's too subjective. People have a subjective understanding of the functions, arbitrarily type someone they know as X type and then type others who look/act/smell like Y person as X type. Yeah great. : /

Posting Permissions

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