Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 56

Thread: Effect of rat/irrat vs Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on behavior

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on behavior

    Okay, another one of *these* threads; but I think this may be an interesting new way at looking at an old issue. Anyhow, just curious what sort of insights you may have on these........

    It seems to me that yet another way of viewing of the various divergences in how people understand Socionics is to consider how these two things affect behavior:
    * rationality vs. irrationality
    * being in an Ni-Se vs. Ne-Si quadra

    EFFECTS OF IRRATIONALITY AND RATIONALITY
    In theory, having a dominant rational functions causes people to be more straightforward about decisions and an actions. Rational functions appear to be less changeable than irrational ones. Therefore, a person with a dominant rational function might be more inclined to follow a plan and to do what was planned. Activities might be more straightforward ("I decided to do x, and so x is what I did.")

    In theory, having a dominant perceiving function causes people to be more changeable in their activities, as their differing perceptions lead them to go in various directions. For this reason, when afforded the opportunity, irrational types might be expected to prefer less planning, or less detailed planning, or at least to be more inclined to diverge from their plans, as their need to engage their perceptions causes them to want to continue with an activity longer than was planned, or to engage in activities that weren't planned in advance (or even forseen). In particular, irrational types may be expected to sometimes "lose themselves" in their activities; indeed, the common notion of "losing oneself" in something may be a perfect description for engaging the perceiving functions; and, according to a lot that has been said in Socionics, it would seem this would pertain to some extent to any perceiving function...Ne, Ni, Si, and Se.

    EFFECTS OF Ni-Se vs. Ne-Si ORIENTATION
    On the other hand, similar behaviors may be explained by some as emanating from whether a person is in a quadra that values Ni and Se, or Ne and Si.

    Some Socionists say that Ni has to do with perception of time, understanding how long things will take, and taking a long-term view. Similarly, Socionists often associate Se not only with being tuned into what's going on around them (as Jung describes), but also with having a high action orientation, and possibly aggressive tendencies.

    Conversely, Si is sometimes described in terms of taking more of a short-term view (putting comfort first, choosing to the enjoy the moment now), and Ne is often described as leading toward constantly changing interests.

    It seems plausible from these views of the functions that an Ni/Se orientation would lead to the following:
    *More action orientation; a "get things done" tendency (because of valuing Se)
    *More self-restraint; ability to ignore short-term comfort for the sake of long-term gain (delayed gratification) (because of valuing Ni)
    *More straightforward use of time; less rushing; less disorganization caused by not being aware of time (because of valuing Ni)

    Similarly, Ne/Si orientation, according to these views, might be associated with:
    *A great tendency to suddenly change interest (because of valuing Ne)
    *Harder time with delayed gratification; more tendency to do whatever feels good at the moment (because of valuing Si)
    *Less aggressive tackling of goals; more laid-back demeanor (because of devaluing Se)
    *More disorganization resulting from less awareness of time; a great tendency to lose oneself in cherished activities and not recognizing the time (because of devaluing Ni)

    CONFICT AND PROBLEMS
    Clearly, the descriptions of tendencies of Ni/Se and Ne/Si quadra orientations seem quite similar to the descriptions of rational and irrational type tendencies, respectively...at least similar enough that in real-life situations these behaviors may be easily confused.

    Of course, the biggest problem with these descriptions is that not everone agrees that Ni has anything to do with time perception; as has been addressed on this forum, many see Ni as a dominant function as having very little do to with time perception, while it may be directed toward time perception and long-term planning when used by Ej types.

    Indeed, some may question whether the descriptions of Se often found in Socionics are even correct, given that they diverge significantly from Jung's descriptions.

    In any case, many of the seemingly contradictory things that are said in Socionics appear to come from the inherent tension between these interpretations.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    EFFECTS OF IRRATIONALITY AND RATIONALITY
    In theory, having a dominant rational functions causes people to be more straightforward about decisions and an actions. Rational functions appear to be less changeable than irrational ones. Therefore, a person with a dominant rational function might be more inclined to follow a plan and to do what was planned. Activities might be more straightforward ("I decided to do x, and so x is what I did.")

    In theory, having a dominant perceiving function causes people to be more changeable in their activities, as their differing perceptions lead them to go in various directions. For this reason, when afforded the opportunity, irrational types might be expected to prefer less planning, or less detailed planning, or at least to be more inclined to diverge from their plans, as their need to engage their perceptions causes them to want to continue with an activity longer than was planned, or to engage in activities that weren't planned in advance (or even forseen). In particular, irrational types may be expected to sometimes "lose themselves" in their activities; indeed, the common notion of "losing oneself" in something may be a perfect description for engaging the perceiving functions; and, according to a lot that has been said in Socionics, it would seem this would pertain to some extent to any perceiving function...Ne, Ni, Si, and Se.
    this is MBTI clutter. to be honest, i don't see these sorts of viewpoints as being particularly prevalent or a significant source of confusion in socionics.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    In theory, having a dominant rational functions causes people to be more straightforward about decisions and an actions. Rational functions appear to be less changeable than irrational ones. Therefore, a person with a dominant rational function might be more inclined to follow a plan and to do what was planned. Activities might be more straightforward ("I decided to do x, and so x is what I did.")
    i think this is overly simplistic. in my opinion p types just "oscillate" more than j types. it seems like p types have less personality density? i think of judgers as a swarm of vectors that is moving against itself but the "swarm" or "cloud" has a discrete form of motion, it has a direction whereas p types sort of take 2 steps forward and one step back? (then one to the left and they walk downstairs and grab a cup of coffee and where was i? oh right, i came downstairs for a reason. wtf?! guh *walks upstairs* damn it no sugar!)

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    EFFECTS OF IRRATIONALITY AND RATIONALITY
    In theory, having a dominant rational functions causes people to be more straightforward about decisions and an actions. Rational functions appear to be less changeable than irrational ones. Therefore, a person with a dominant rational function might be more inclined to follow a plan and to do what was planned. Activities might be more straightforward ("I decided to do x, and so x is what I did.")

    In theory, having a dominant perceiving function causes people to be more changeable in their activities, as their differing perceptions lead them to go in various directions. For this reason, when afforded the opportunity, irrational types might be expected to prefer less planning, or less detailed planning, or at least to be more inclined to diverge from their plans, as their need to engage their perceptions causes them to want to continue with an activity longer than was planned, or to engage in activities that weren't planned in advance (or even forseen). In particular, irrational types may be expected to sometimes "lose themselves" in their activities; indeed, the common notion of "losing oneself" in something may be a perfect description for engaging the perceiving functions; and, according to a lot that has been said in Socionics, it would seem this would pertain to some extent to any perceiving function...Ne, Ni, Si, and Se.
    this is MBTI clutter. to be honest, i don't see these sorts of viewpoints as being particularly prevalent or a significant source of confusion in socionics.
    No, I'm relying totally on descriptions of rational/irrational in Socionics writings. As I'm sure you know, MBTI would relate the behaviors associated here with irrationality with having an extraverted irrational function. I've documented descriptions of rationality and irrationality in Socionics in other posts, but here's a recap:

    http://www.socionics.com/main/types.htm
    http://www.socionics.us/theory/rat_irr.shtml
    http://socioniko.net/en/index.html (click on Introduction into Socionics, and go to Part2)

    Interestingly, Sergei Ganin has written a short article where his interpretation of rationality/irrationality as relating rationality to being habitually punctual, organized, etc., is especially clear: http://www.socionics.com/advan/phenomenon.html

    So anyhow, this thread isn't about Socionics&MBTI. I'm talking purely about stuff written in Socionics.
    As to whether these differing interpretations are related to the various conflicts of viewpoints that exist, well I guess it's hard to point it out if you don't "see" it; I'd say, just look at the vast scope of the posts on this forum. I guess it's your word against mine there; to document it all probably wouldn't be useful at this point.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by science as magic
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    In theory, having a dominant rational functions causes people to be more straightforward about decisions and an actions. Rational functions appear to be less changeable than irrational ones. Therefore, a person with a dominant rational function might be more inclined to follow a plan and to do what was planned. Activities might be more straightforward ("I decided to do x, and so x is what I did.")
    i think this is overly simplistic. in my opinion p types just "oscillate" more than j types. it seems like p types have less personality density?
    Not sure; none of the Socionics descriptions of rationality/irrationality mention "personality density." How would you define it?

    whereas p types sort of take 2 steps forward and one step back? (then one to the left and they walk downstairs and grab a cup of coffee and where was i? oh right, i came downstairs for a reason. wtf?! guh *walks upstairs* damn it no sugar!)
    Sounds pretty dysfunctional. Actually, that's exactly how I feel sometimes, but I think irrational types can be focused; and even when they are, they still exhibit different behaviors than judging types.

    Anyhow, I didn't mean for this thread to focus on the words I use to paraphrase Socionics descriptions of rat/irrat; my point is how those concepts are often described in ways that (in some interpretations) seem to conflict with descriptions of quadra values in regard to N and S.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Of course, one other angle on the issue concerns how dual and activity functions are expressed. Some people (in the Ni/Se=judging-like behaviors camp) may tend to assume that the dual function comes off "strongly" because it is valued. This may or not be correct. It seems to me that possibly peoples' activity function makes a stronger impression and is more likely to seem "strong" to others than their dual function.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Not sure; none of the Socionics descriptions of rationality/irrationality mention "personality density." How would you define it?
    they do not. i just mean that p types seem less "tied" to a specific identity than their j counterparts. they have weaker mind over body associations

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Sounds pretty dysfunctional. Actually, that's exactly how I feel sometimes, but I think irrational types can be focused; and even when they are, they still exhibit different behaviors than judging types.
    it was an exaggeration so don't take it too seriously. i think your description of j types was similarly exaggerated

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    EFFECTS OF IRRATIONALITY AND RATIONALITY
    In theory, having a dominant rational functions causes people to be more straightforward about decisions and an actions. Rational functions appear to be less changeable than irrational ones. Therefore, a person with a dominant rational function might be more inclined to follow a plan and to do what was planned. Activities might be more straightforward ("I decided to do x, and so x is what I did.")

    In theory, having a dominant perceiving function causes people to be more changeable in their activities, as their differing perceptions lead them to go in various directions. For this reason, when afforded the opportunity, irrational types might be expected to prefer less planning, or less detailed planning, or at least to be more inclined to diverge from their plans, as their need to engage their perceptions causes them to want to continue with an activity longer than was planned, or to engage in activities that weren't planned in advance (or even forseen). In particular, irrational types may be expected to sometimes "lose themselves" in their activities; indeed, the common notion of "losing oneself" in something may be a perfect description for engaging the perceiving functions; and, according to a lot that has been said in Socionics, it would seem this would pertain to some extent to any perceiving function...Ne, Ni, Si, and Se.
    this is MBTI clutter. to be honest, i don't see these sorts of viewpoints as being particularly prevalent or a significant source of confusion in socionics.
    No, I'm relying totally on descriptions of rational/irrational in Socionics writings. As I'm sure you know, MBTI would relate the behaviors associated here with irrationality with having an extraverted irrational function. I've documented descriptions of rationality and irrationality in Socionics in other posts, but here's a recap:

    http://www.socionics.com/main/types.htm
    http://www.socionics.us/theory/rat_irr.shtml
    http://socioniko.net/en/index.html (click on Introduction into Socionics, and go to Part2)

    Interestingly, Sergei Ganin has written a short article where his interpretation of rationality/irrationality as relating rationality to being habitually punctual, organized, etc., is especially clear: http://www.socionics.com/advan/phenomenon.html

    So anyhow, this thread isn't about Socionics&MBTI. I'm talking purely about stuff written in Socionics.
    As to whether these differing interpretations are related to the various conflicts of viewpoints that exist, well I guess it's hard to point it out if you don't "see" it; I'd say, just look at the vast scope of the posts on this forum. I guess it's your word against mine there; to document it all probably wouldn't be useful at this point.
    sorry... i can't buy this.

    first of all, i throw out all material written by sergei ganin as written by an organism with the same knowledge of socionics as that of a meatball, and therefore unreliable.

    rather, rick's site fails to uphold this idea, instead holding that "rationals act according to their expectation of a situation" (from which often results a plan, but not always), while "irrationals act on impulse."


    basically, this idea might have some validity in terms of correlation to socionic type, but is not a result of socionic type since the presence of planning is at all universal.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by science as magic
    they do not. i just mean that p types seem less "tied" to a specific identity than their j counterparts.
    That seems reasonable to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by science as magic
    they have weaker mind over body associations
    Not sure about that part. What you mean by "mind over body associations"?

    Quote Originally Posted by science as magic
    it was an exaggeration so don't take it too seriously. i think your description of j types was similarly exaggerated
    Yeah, it's hard to describe the stuff without exaggerating a little. That's the trouble with using language to describe these things.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    first of all, i throw out all material written by sergei ganin as written by an organism with the same knowledge of socionics as that of a meatball, and therefore unreliable.
    I'm not a fan either, but I thought it was interesting he described irrational types so bluntly in that article (after previously having been a little ambiguous on his opinion). Anyhow, I'd still give him more credit than a meatball.

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    rather, rick's site fails to uphold this idea, instead holding that "rationals act according to their expectation of a situation" (from which often results a plan, but not always), while "irrationals act on impulse."
    Great point. I thought that was pretty close to my wording, but probably a lot better. I said irrationals are "at least to be more inclined to diverge from their plans." Yes, plans are universal; one needs them to hold meetings, get business done, etc. My wording wasn't perfect, (especially on the side of the rational type; the irrational type wording was maybe a little more nuanced), but the point is still the same.

    Anyhow, let's throw out my wording and use Rick's.

    If we settle on Rick's wording, it still seems to me that in some conceptions of Socionics, views of Gamma/Beta types seem to be similar to the idea of acting according to one's expectation of a situation (because some see Ni as relating to having a long-term view of time (similar to an expectation that one then might act according to), whereas some views of Alpha/Delta types seem to be similar to the idea of acting on impulse (because some see Ne as being an impulsive force even amoung INj types, and because some see Si as related to comfort-seeking, which would be impulsive as contrasted to the long-term perspective of Ni).

    I'm not saying these views are correct; I'm just pointing them out.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan

    If we settle on Rick's wording, it still seems to me that in some conceptions of Socionics, views of Gamma/Beta types seem to be similar to the idea of acting according to one's expectation of a situation (because some see Ni as relating to having a long-term view of time (similar to an expectation that one then might act according to), whereas some views of Alpha/Delta types seem to be similar to the idea of acting on impulse (because some see Ne as being an impulsive force even amoung INj types, and because some see Si as related to comfort-seeking, which would be impulsive as contrasted to the long-term perspective of Ni).

    I'm not saying these views are correct; I'm just pointing them out.
    IMO, yet another misconception of Ni.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    this

    Quote Originally Posted by science as magic
    i just mean that p types seem less "tied" to a specific identity than their j counterparts.
    is an example of this

    Quote Originally Posted by science as magic
    they have weaker mind over body associations
    to me

    p types generally seem less able to "direct their consciousness"

    i would like to offer up the suggestion that j-ness is similar to introversion in that both seem to elaborate on a particular. when i said that js have greater "personality density" i was referring to their ability to form and dismantle strong associations by means of repetition

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    52
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    An SI person values Ne in Socionics?
    INTj

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Interestingly, Sergei Ganin has written a short article where his interpretation of rationality/irrationality as relating rationality to being habitually punctual, organized, etc., is especially clear: http://www.socionics.com/advan/phenomenon.html
    Even thogh Ganin's dislike for irrationals shine through in that article, I think he has a very good point. What he says there makes a lot of sense, and it seems to be true. It is perfectly in line with my own observations. The typing guidelines he describes in that article are very useful.

  15. #15
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,635
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Interestingly, Sergei Ganin has written a short article where his interpretation of rationality/irrationality as relating rationality to being habitually punctual, organized, etc., is especially clear: http://www.socionics.com/advan/phenomenon.html
    Even thogh Ganin's dislike for irrationals shine through in that article, I think he has a very good point. What he says there makes a lot of sense, and it seems to be true. It is perfectly in line with my own observations. The typing guidelines he describes in that article are very useful.
    That article sucks. Or, it's organized the wrong way. P people respond well to goal setting as opposed to routine. I can be highly regimented when there is a short term goal to reach, hyperpunctual and everything planned. However there are times in which there's routine work and i become slobby-ish.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Republicus
    An SI person values Ne in Socionics?
    In theory, yes. That's the quadra values thing. An Si would value Ne but generally have weak Ne and therefore be drawn to people with stronger Ne.

    What's perhaps less understood is the way this valuing manifests itself in a personality...whether it manifests itself as being sort of Ne (but in a weak way), or as having a sort of "hole" in the Ne department that an Si type would need others to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed15
    IMO, yet another misconception of Ni.
    Probably. Still, it's one that we keep encountering and probably will into the future.

    Quote Originally Posted by science as magic
    p types generally seem less able to "direct their consciousness"
    Hmm, maybe for some. I don't think most p types would agree totally. This makes it sound as if p types are unconscious, out of control, or not psychologically aware. Maybe another way to put it is that p types are aware of a wider range of perceptions, and so to just ignore the richness of their perceptions and simply "direct" themselves this way or that would seem foolish and missing the point.

    Quote Originally Posted by science as magic
    when i said that js have greater "personality density" i was referring to their ability to form and dismantle strong associations by means of repetition
    I still don't get it, sorry. Do you mean "the ability to set good habits and break bad ones"?

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    That article sucks.
    Yeah, it's quite biased against p types. I just thought it was interesting that he'd go so far.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    52
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Quote Originally Posted by Republicus
    An SI person values Ne in Socionics?
    In theory, yes. That's the quadra values thing. An Si would value Ne but generally have weak Ne and therefore be drawn to people with stronger Ne.

    What's perhaps less understood is the way this valuing manifests itself in a personality...whether it manifests itself as being sort of Ne (but in a weak way), or as having a sort of "hole" in the Ne department that an Si type would need others to fill.
    Who uses the word value, and in what context? How is this consist with the theory, where does it say this? Does it also go Ne values Si? If people valued an inferior function, wouldn't they be using it more and it would no longer be inferior? What do values have to do with personality? How are values directly related to cognitive functions?

    Just trying to understand.
    INTj

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Republicus

    Who uses the word value, and in what context? How is this consist with the theory, where does it say this? Does it also go Ne values Si? If people valued an inferior function, wouldn't they be using it more and it would no longer be inferior? What do values have to do with personality? How are values directly related to cognitive functions?

    Just trying to understand.
    I thought this was pretty mainstream. I don't have time to cite references right now; maybe someone else can fit in. Basicaly, what we're talking about is sometimes called the suggestive function, but I don't think it's ever called the inferior function Socionics (the correspondingly-named function is in MBTI though). In theory, it's a weak function, but one values it in others; that's supposed to be the core of the "dual" concept; your "dual" is someone who values what you're strong in and is good in the areas that you're weak in (but that you value). In theory, you're also weak in the super ego functions, but you don't value them as much. This is just basic, standard Socionics.

    Just because one values something doesn't mean one is strong in it. For example, maybe a person likely to be around others who take care of the practical details, but one may not like to do so oneself.

    However, inherent in your question is a potential other question..."what is the nature of the valuing," which I think is a really key question here....also "how is that valuing expressed?"

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    52
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    I thought this was pretty mainstream.
    To be honest, I never really learned Socionics terms. A few translated articles, and people building axiomatic theories off of one sentence descriptions and single words, don't really fit my model for credible material. People picked up ideas off these forums, and as I said, one sentence descriptions and brief translated articles. Then they started building that into an idea. In my opinion, a form of group think. Any mistakes in the original material has been magnified down for years now. I'm try to engage people on Socionics to learn, but no one can ever really bring it back to anything but what is on these forums, cyclical logic.

    I've always focused more on the Jungian side, which in theory is the axiom for Socionics . What is true in Jungian psychology should be true in Socionics. But, if I were to believe everything people around here that wouldn't be the case. I think a lot of people here think there is a "main stream" core of understanding, but it is only surface level. It's kind of like saying there is a common definition of American culture. But once you try to get a common definition of it, you're in trouble. I do believe there is information in Socionics that is valuable, I think someone here might someone have achieved and understanding without any source information by backwards engineering the concepts from the limited material and Jungian psychology. Still, no one has been able to explain anything against a common frame of reference when asked.

    This business about one valuing it other is a good example. What does that even mean? Value in what way? Yes, theoretically an Si person would like an Ne person, that is Jungian, not Socionics. Socionics describes that relationship, and others. But, that is not what you, and others, are implying. You are implying value to mean something much more, moral values, likes dislikes and forth. And somehow, an Si person's Ne is actually contributing to the constructions of the ego. Not just by not being there, actually being actively employed in the creation of the persona. I see this being talking about a lot on this forum, and as best I can tell it is an impression people got on this forum from this forum. But it is not consistent with Jungian psychology and therefore Socionics. I may be wrong, but i'm looking for someone somewhere who can make this discrepancy consistent, or point where my understanding is wrong.
    INTj

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Interestingly, Sergei Ganin has written a short article where his interpretation of rationality/irrationality as relating rationality to being habitually punctual, organized, etc., is especially clear: http://www.socionics.com/advan/phenomenon.html
    wow. i hadn't even looked at this one going through this thread the first time around.

    anybody who believes a word of this article needs to seriously reevaluate everything they think they know about socionics.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    52
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Interestingly, Sergei Ganin has written a short article where his interpretation of rationality/irrationality as relating rationality to being habitually punctual, organized, etc., is especially clear: http://www.socionics.com/advan/phenomenon.html
    wow. i hadn't even looked at this one going through this thread the first time around.

    anybody who believes a word of this article needs to seriously reevaluate everything they think they know about socionics.
    why is that niffweed
    INTj

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    because that article is less accurate on the topic of socionics than what a rabbit might write if exposed to a keyboard for an hour.

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Interestingly, Sergei Ganin has written a short article where his interpretation of rationality/irrationality as relating rationality to being habitually punctual, organized, etc., is especially clear: http://www.socionics.com/advan/phenomenon.html
    anybody who believes a word of this article needs to seriously reevaluate everything they think they know about socionics.
    Then I seriously have to reevaluate everything I think that I know about Socionics. That's what we are here for anyway, so why don't you help me by arguing against Ganin's claims in that article? I believe that his main theses are true and that his "rule" is correct too. Everybody except me seems to think that most of the things Ganin says are bullshit, but nobody has ever offered any good arguments for that. Now it's time for a change. So argue, please.

  24. #24
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,633
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Interestingly, Sergei Ganin has written a short article where his interpretation of rationality/irrationality as relating rationality to being habitually punctual, organized, etc., is especially clear: http://www.socionics.com/advan/phenomenon.html
    wow. i hadn't even looked at this one going through this thread the first time around.

    anybody who believes a word of this article needs to seriously reevaluate everything they think they know about socionics.
    I disagree, somewhat.

    E/I is generally easier to discern with the first impression. Although p/j as a pure dichotomy should not be used in typing. That's ridiculous.

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    I still don't get it, sorry. Do you mean "the ability to set good habits and break bad ones"?
    no. i mean like molding one's self into a particular format whether or not that jives with P-input. like enxjs doing that thing where they see themselves as tragic heroes with a grand fate and things like this? it is self aperception and it can be used for good or ill. it is also why Njs can go without sleep/food/whatever for long periods of time without realizing what their state is doing to them and things like this? it is also used in positive imagery. thinking of a situation that you will encounter and envisioning how you will accomplish your ends and things like this. also it explains silly k fedish white boyz that think they are bangers that everyone laughs at? shit like this. it can be a very useful tool though. j is also somewhat confounding? like a big mountain that doesn't give a shit about you and won't move out of your way or something. the halting problem seems like it arose from j thought for example

  26. #26

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Interestingly, Sergei Ganin has written a short article where his interpretation of rationality/irrationality as relating rationality to being habitually punctual, organized, etc., is especially clear: http://www.socionics.com/advan/phenomenon.html
    wow. i hadn't even looked at this one going through this thread the first time around.

    anybody who believes a word of this article needs to seriously reevaluate everything they think they know about socionics.
    I disagree, somewhat.

    E/I is generally easier to discern with the first impression. Although p/j as a pure dichotomy should not be used in typing. That's ridiculous.
    not disagreeing with that part, but with the rest of the article.

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Then I seriously have to reevaluate everything I think that I know about Socionics. That's what we are here for anyway, so why don't you help me by arguing against Ganin's claims in that article? I believe that his main theses are true and that his "rule" is correct too. Everybody except me seems to think that most of the things Ganin says are bullshit, but nobody has ever offered any good arguments for that. Now it's time for a change. So argue, please.
    i have a lot of work right now. i will work on forming a coherent argument tomorrow.

  28. #28
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,635
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Interestingly, Sergei Ganin has written a short article where his interpretation of rationality/irrationality as relating rationality to being habitually punctual, organized, etc., is especially clear: http://www.socionics.com/advan/phenomenon.html
    anybody who believes a word of this article needs to seriously reevaluate everything they think they know about socionics.
    Then I seriously have to reevaluate everything I think that I know about Socionics.
    Yes.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  29. #29
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I wouldn't say that everything that Ganin writes is crap, but that little article seems silly to me. Rather than make a case against it, I would like to see the case for it, since Ganin just writes it as describing his observations, which personally I can't confirm. What he's describing seems to be a change in a person's priorities, that is, getting less focused on pleasing a particular person (the reader of the article) as they feel more secure as they get to know you. That could apply to rational types too, if they are giving higher priority to something (or someone) else.

    Anyway, although I do think rationality/irrationality can be used for typing people, in terms of behavior I think it's more useful to focus on temperaments.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  30. #30
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan

    If we settle on Rick's wording, it still seems to me that in some conceptions of Socionics, views of Gamma/Beta types seem to be similar to the idea of acting according to one's expectation of a situation (because some see Ni as relating to having a long-term view of time (similar to an expectation that one then might act according to), whereas some views of Alpha/Delta types seem to be similar to the idea of acting on impulse (because some see Ne as being an impulsive force even amoung INj types, and because some see Si as related to comfort-seeking, which would be impulsive as contrasted to the long-term perspective of Ni).

    I'm not saying these views are correct; I'm just pointing them out.
    IMO, yet another misconception of Ni.
    Jonathan, you insist on thinking that Ni is a rational function.

    What you say here:

    (because some see Ni as relating to having a long-term view of time (similar to an expectation that one then might act according to),
    Acting according to one's Ni perception of the longer-term, big-picture is as irrational, or rational, as acting according to one's Si perception of what's in front of you.

    That is the key to your whole Ni-related confusion. You just take for granted that paying more attention to the longer term or big picture is more rational than paying attention to immediate physical sensations. No: they are both perceptions. In many situations, it would be more "rational" to focus on what's in front of you or what you are sensing right now.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  31. #31

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Anyway, although I do think rationality/irrationality can be used for typing people, in terms of behavior I think it's more useful to focus on temperaments.
    Rationality/irrationality probably is a temperament thing according to my observations. At least that seems to be a strong hypothesis.

    I wrote a post some time ago about "night owls" and "morning birds". I can't find it now, so maybe it is lost. Anyway, we all know what it is about, don't we?

    The night owls have a biological day and night cycle that is slightly longer than 24 hours. That results in a typical tendency to stay up later and later in the nights when they are not obliged to do otherwise. They usually work best in the afternoon or in the night, and their body temperature is usually higher when they go to bed than when they wake up.

    The morning birds have a biological day and night cycle that is 24 hours or even slightly less than that. They prefer to go to bed earlier, because they work best in the mornings or at least in the first half of the day. Their body temperature is typically higher when they wake up and lower when they go to bed.

    The difference between night owls and morning birds is a biological phenomenon that nobody really questions. Everybody agrees that it exists and that our preference here is something we are born with. The more interesting question is whether it has something to do with your socionic type or not. According to my own observations that might very well be true. Every real life person (maybe except one) that I have been able to type with near 100 % certainty as a a rational type (at least 15-20 people), and whose day and night cycle I also happen to know, have been morning birds. And probably every irrational type that I have met in real life has been a night owl. There might be exceptions to the rule, but the overall pattern seems to be very clear.

    If that is true we would be in possession of a very convenient and powerful typing tool. Let's say you are not sure whether someone is an ESFp or an ESFj. Find out whether he or she is a night owl or a morning bird and you might have the answer!

    The best thing of all here is that this hypothesis can rather easily be tested and falsified, so it is an example of a good scientific hypothesis.

  32. #32
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Anyway, although I do think rationality/irrationality can be used for typing people, in terms of behavior I think it's more useful to focus on temperaments.
    Rationality/irrationality probably is a temperament thing according to my observations. At least that seems to be a strong hypothesis.
    Yes, of course; but what I meant is that sometimes it's easier to spot whether someone is EJ/EP rather than IJ/IP (that is, extrovert rather than introvert); other times it is indeed easier to spot whether someone is EJ/IJ rather than EP/IP, or rational rather than irrational.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  33. #33
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,635
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree with expat, and phaedrus is stupid and clueless.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  34. #34

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Effect of rat./irrat. vs. Ni-Se/Ne-Si preference on beha

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan

    If we settle on Rick's wording, it still seems to me that in some conceptions of Socionics, views of Gamma/Beta types seem to be similar to the idea of acting according to one's expectation of a situation (because some see Ni as relating to having a long-term view of time (similar to an expectation that one then might act according to), whereas some views of Alpha/Delta types seem to be similar to the idea of acting on impulse (because some see Ne as being an impulsive force even amoung INj types, and because some see Si as related to comfort-seeking, which would be impulsive as contrasted to the long-term perspective of Ni).

    I'm not saying these views are correct; I'm just pointing them out.
    IMO, yet another misconception of Ni.
    Jonathan, you insist on thinking that Ni is a rational function.

    What you say here:

    (because some see Ni as relating to having a long-term view of time (similar to an expectation that one then might act according to),
    Acting according to one's Ni perception of the longer-term, big-picture is as irrational, or rational, as acting according to one's Si perception of what's in front of you.

    That is the key to your whole Ni-related confusion. You just take for granted that paying more attention to the longer term or big picture is more rational than paying attention to immediate physical sensations. No: they are both perceptions. In many situations, it would be more "rational" to focus on what's in front of you or what you are sensing right now.
    Actually, that's not what I was saying; I was just saying that some posts and source material seem to describe the Ni/Se axis in a way that could be confused with rationality behaviors. I wasn't saying that's the view I agree with.

  35. #35

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Republicus
    This business about one valuing it other is a good example. What does that even mean? Value in what way? Yes, theoretically an Si person would like an Ne person, that is Jungian, not Socionics. Socionics describes that relationship, and others. But, that is not what you, and others, are implying. You are implying value to mean something much more, moral values, likes dislikes and forth. And somehow, an Si person's Ne is actually contributing to the constructions of the ego. Not just by not being there, actually being actively employed in the creation of the persona. I see this being talking about a lot on this forum, and as best I can tell it is an impression people got on this forum from this forum. But it is not consistent with Jungian psychology and therefore Socionics. I may be wrong, but i'm looking for someone somewhere who can make this discrepancy consistent, or point where my understanding is wrong.
    You raise some good points. Just to clarify though: I think there are always two questions here...1) What is Socionics, and 2) What is the best theory in regard to Jungian typology?

    Socionics is not the same as Jungian psychology; it is more of an interpretation. It seems clear from what I've read by Augusta and other Socionics materials that Socionists do not feel bound to Jung's ideas. Socionics and MBTI are two competing interpretations of Jung's ideas, with some very different ideas about the behaviors associated with the functions.

    There are, I think, some innovations on this forum, as well as some common misconceptions. But I'm quite sure that the idea that people in the same quadra in a certain sense "value" the functions that are strong in the various representatives of that quadra is, in fact, a Socionics idea, not something that came from this forum. The idea is that people value those functions that are strong (in the ego block) and that they have a particular need for (in the dual block). The meaning of "value" in the latter sense is that the person recognizes the need to be helped in that area in order to make the most use of his/her strengths. For example, a Ti-dominant person may recognize the need for someone with strong Fe to help him sell his views of the world to other people. Anyhow, that's the idea. Rick, on his site, explained an example for why Ne-dominant people may value the fact that Si-dominant people help them to relax.

    One thing that is a misconception propagated in some forum posts, though, is the idea that people are particularly strong in their dual block functions. However, among certain famous artists, that may actually be true to some extent.

  36. #36
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,633
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Jonathan, much of what you are saying is rather obvious.

    Don't treat Socionics as mere philosophical, abstract concepts. Descriptions will only take you so far. To really "get it" you have to see if it works out IRL, in your interactions with people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Socionics is not the same as Jungian psychology; it is more of an interpretation. It seems clear from what I've read by Augusta and other Socionics materials that Socionists do not feel bound to Jung's ideas. Socionics and MBTI are two competing interpretations of Jung's ideas, with some very different ideas about the behaviors associated with the functions.
    Yes. Relying on Jung in Socionics arguments is fruitless.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    One thing that is a misconception propagated in some forum posts, though, is the idea that people are particularly strong in their dual block functions. However, among certain famous artists, that may actually be true to some extent.
    Who says this? I have never heard it.

  37. #37

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    Jonathan, much of what you are saying is rather obvious.
    Maybe. I was just replying to Republicus's skepticism that quadra values is part of Socionics, and that Socionics is different from Jung. Of course I look for data regarding Socionics IRL; good point though.

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    One thing that is a misconception propagated in some forum posts, though, is the idea that people are particularly strong in their dual block functions. However, among certain famous artists, that may actually be true to some extent.
    Who says this? I have never heard it.
    Maybe this thread is all about my tendency of late to chase down phantom misconceptions.

  38. #38
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quadra values consist in the sharedness of the resolute/reasonable and merry/serious dichotomies. The basic explanation is that it is easy for people with shared values to appreciate the same climates, as said people would be relaxed/mobilized, respectively merry/serious under matching circumstances. It is unclear to me what these dichotomies are derived from, however.

  39. #39

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    Quadra values consist in the sharedness of the resolute/reasonable and merry/serious dichotomies. The basic explanation is that it is easy for people with shared values to appreciate the same climates, as said people would be relaxed/mobilized, respectively merry/serious under matching circumstances. It is unclear to me what these dichotomies are derived from, however.
    Hmm...This is exactly what I was talking about! I like the way you worded that, by the way, because if expanded that promises to give us a much better understanding of the harmony within quadras and conflicts that may occur between quadras. But this really gets to the heart of what I was saying all along in this thread.

    In the Articles section there's a post with a chart of the Reinin dichotomies; it seems very useful for learning what they are, though I don't know where it comes from or whether the dichotomies descriptions are correct.

    Here's what it says for resolute/reasonable:
    Relaxed (Reasonable) (I IV):
    1.Natural state is relaxed.
    2.Work best when they can relax beforehand, and are mobilized only for the duration necessary.
    3.Have an easy time going from 'mobilized' to 'relaxed', but not from 'relaxed' to 'mobilized'. Thus, they may need external stimuli to become mobilized.
    4.Tend to divide up matters into smaller stages during which they are mobilized, relaxing between each stage.
    5.Become aware of their own mobilization as soon as it manifests – i.e., as soon as they start considering an action. However, they are often poorly aware of the periods of maximal mobilization – i.e., the time of action.
    6.Focuses and places the most importance on the preparatory stage – the 'action' stages are considered implicit and given less attention.
    7.Consider their working conditions (e.g., comfort, freedom, and convenience) more important than the possible results and rewards (e.g., how much they are paid).
    8.This attitude is strengthened by introversion.
    9.More aware of when they are mobilized than when they are relaxed.
    10.“Consideration is very nice, that time during which you still don't have to make a decision. It's even better when it isn't necessary to do anything afterwards.”
    Readied (Resolute) (II III):
    1.Natural state is readiness.
    2.Work best if they are able to tart mobilizing in preparation for what they must do.
    3.Easily go from 'relaxed' to 'mobilized', but not from 'mobilized' to 'relaxed'. Thus, they may need external stimuli (like a movie) to relax.
    4.Tend to perform an entire task at once, and to maintain their internal 'readiness' between tasks.
    5.Become of aware of their own mobilization at its maximals – i.e., when it is time for action. However, they are often poorly aware of when the mobilization firsts manifests – i.e., when they first start considering an action.
    6.Focuses and places the most importance on taking action – preparation is considered implicit and given less attention.
    7.Consider the possible results and rewards of their work (e.g., how much they are paid) more important than the working conditions (e.g., comfort, freedom, and convenience).
    8.This attitude is strengthened by extroversion.
    9.More aware of when they are relaxed than when they are mobilized.
    10.“I will not get stuck in the process of consideration – it always ends in a decision being made.”
    Do people see what I mean when I say that reasonable/resolute could easily get confused with rational/irrational? (I don't mean getting the concepts confused...I mean the behaviors.)

    Look at reasonable: "Natural state is relaxed." "Work best when they can relax beforehand, and are mobilized only for the duration necessary." "Have an easy time going from 'mobilized' to 'relaxed', but not from 'relaxed' to 'mobilized'. Thus, they may need external stimuli to become mobilized."

    Doesn't that sound like some of the descriptions in other threads describing Ip temperament? (And BTW doesn't it sound, perhaps, a bit unlike Filatova's description of LII?...but that's not really important, just an aside )

    And look at resolute:"Tend to perform an entire task at once" “I will not get stuck in the process of consideration – it always ends in a decision being made.”

    Doesn't that sound a bit like some descriptions of rational types? (And, perhaps, also, a bit unlike Filatova's description of IEI?...but again, just an observation...not a big deal.)

    It's always this tension between the two interpretations...really, that's it: The roles of resolute/reasonable as vs. rational/irrationality in affecting behavior.

    Resolute seems like rational.
    Reasonable seems like irrational.

    Getting those straight (if it were possible) would be the key to understanding Socionics; but I figure that in reality, there isn't much concensus, with some people emphasizing the resolute/reasonable dichotomy more when thinking about type, while others emphasize the rational/irrational dichotomy more.

  40. #40
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, unfortunately, me being a heavy 'judgment' addict, that is the part of the theory I try to avoid at all costs cause it makes my head hurt badly. I say just use the descriptions as stepping stones to an intuitive understanding, then forget about them.

    I'd say a simple solution is that judgment and perception are poorly described terms. Smilex does a good job at wording their descriptions, but beyond his, the descriptions are all MBTI infested.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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