Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Aspects of Socionics that should be thrown in the garbage

  1. #1

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

    Default Aspects of Socionics that should be thrown in the garbage

    Like other people on this forum, I obviously think there's a lot of value in Socionics. But that doesn't mean that all of it is equally good.

    Here's my garbage list for what should be discarded:

    ILE type descriptions: Almost all Socionics ILE type descriptions apply to any irrat-N type who values creativity and intellect. See my critique at http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...=191600#191600.

    A related thing that should be revised is typical Socionics descriptions of extraversion, which tend to confuse all extraversion with by implying that extraverts are "out of the box thinkers" and introverts are drones that just follow the crowd.

    Content-based definitions, one-word definitions: Ni=time, Se=punches, Ti=understanding, etc. These just create misconceptions. Unlike most of Dmitri's excellent work, his flow-chart-type table in his introduction article where one decides first N vs. S, and then goes along until one nails down the type, is a good example of the "content vs. structure" flaw in describing Socionics. (To his credit, he has a disclaimer when he introduces the table.) Most of the discussions on this forum that get off base, in my opinion, do so because people map functions too much to content-interest, without really getting to the essence of the functions in question.

    Quadra descriptions: I explain why these should be thrown out here: http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...=10290&start=0. Note, again, my comments are not a critique of Rick's wonderful site, but rather of the whole quadra descriptions thing, which is outdated, contradictory, and should just be discarded and replaced with something else.

    Most Reinin dichotomy descriptions: The Reinin dichotomies are good, but the descriptions I've seen are pretty bad. First, depending on how one interprets them, they could apply or not apply to anybody. And second, reasonable interpretations of them tend not to apply to the people they're supposed to apply to. And, they tend to contradict more fundamental dichotomies such as rat/irrat. The dichotomies should remain, but the descriptions need to be thrown in the garbage and replaced with better ones.

  2. #2

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

    Default Re: Aspects of Socionics that should be thrown in the garbag

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Here's my garbage list for what should be discarded:

    ILE type descriptions: Almost all Socionics ILE type descriptions apply to any irrat-N type who values creativity and intellect. See my critique at http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...=191600#191600.
    I haven't scrutinized the socionic ILE type descriptions, becuase no one has seriously questioned the validity of the claim ENTp=ENTP. Now, when I read Filatovas ILE description I admit that your critique in that thread is valid. But even as it stands her description is not that bad actually. It could be complemented with the things you mention, but it is no worse than most MBTT descriptions of ENTPs, and if we compare it with the other socionic type descriptions we can see the differences. Only an ILE can identify with everything in it. As an ILI I identify with many things in that description but not all of them, and I clearly identify more with her ILI description.

  3. #3
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,624
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Aspects of Socionics that should be thrown in the garbag

    Intertype relations as commonly accepted. They need to be replaced by Smilingeye's slight modification that takes into account the subtypes. It seems to be minor, but it's actually very major.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  4. #4
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Throw out everything except socially open/socially closed, internal/external, hot/cold, static/dynamic, rational/irrational and abstract/concrete, then define everything in their terms. That's the only way you'll ever have a socionics free of misconceptions.

  5. #5
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,624
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    Throw out everything except socially open/socially closed, internal/external, hot/cold, static/dynamic, rational/irrational and abstract/concrete, then define everything in their terms. That's the only way you'll ever have a socionics free of misconceptions.
    But that's only the theorethical part of it. It's not even verifiable. Only the relations are verifiable.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  6. #6
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    Throw out everything except socially open/socially closed, internal/external, hot/cold, static/dynamic, rational/irrational and abstract/concrete, then define everything in their terms. That's the only way you'll ever have a socionics free of misconceptions.
    What do those have to do with socionics?
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  7. #7
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Socially open is the attribute that Sensation and Feeling have in common.
    Likewise Thinking and Intuition share socially closed.

    Intuition and Feeling share attribute Internal...
    and Sensation and Thinking share External.

    With those two hyper-compressed dichotomies you can skip to defining all four of the functions without defining each independantly.

    Hot-cold is the definition Smilingeyes uses to denote extroversion/introversion in temperaments. It's less confusing than using introverted/extroverted as that one can also denote orientation in functions.

  8. #8
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,624
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    Hot-cold is the definition Smilingeyes uses to denote extroversion/introversion in temperaments. It's less confusing than using introverted/extroverted as that one can also denote orientation in functions.
    Quick question: a Fe dominant IP is to be considered as hot i think
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  9. #9
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    Throw out everything except socially open/socially closed, internal/external, hot/cold, static/dynamic, rational/irrational and abstract/concrete, then define everything in their terms. That's the only way you'll ever have a socionics free of misconceptions.
    and what does "abstract-concrete" mean ?

  10. #10

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    Socially open is the attribute that Sensation and Feeling have in common.
    Likewise Thinking and Intuition share socially closed.

    Intuition and Feeling share attribute Internal...
    and Sensation and Thinking share External.
    This is equivalent to Anndelise's theory, but she calls S and F "involved" and T and N "abstract" (I think that's the term she used? But it can be confusing because it's not the same abstracting/concretizing).

    @FDG: Which modification by Smilex? I'd be curious what he said.

  11. #11
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    labcoat wrote:
    Throw out everything except socially open/socially closed, internal/external, hot/cold, static/dynamic, rational/irrational and abstract/concrete, then define everything in their terms. That's the only way you'll ever have a socionics free of misconceptions. Smile


    and what does "abstract-concrete" mean ?
    It's one of the more elusive parts of the theory. Basically a concrete function takes something specific and finished from the environment, and the abstract function complementing it looks to the horizon of the creation of a new specific and finished content. In general concrete functions give rise to confident behavior that is free of doubt (after all it argues on behalf of something real, not something that is not yet real) and abstract functions bring more 'probing', 'searching' kinds of behavior.

    Using abstract/concrete one can formulate definitions of the Reinin dichotomies, for example:
    Narrator is a union of concrete introversion and abstract extroversion.
    Smilingeyes likes to say: 'Narrator turns introversion into extroversion'.

    Using our imagination for a bit we can get a picture of what kind of behavior this attribute gives rise to. A 'narrator' is a person who considers his private understanding of things as more 'finished' and 'real' than the facts he gleans from specific things in the environment. Hence, he feels confident to dictate his understanding to others without too much regard for outside specifics.

  12. #12
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    Using abstract/concrete one can formulate definitions of the Reinin dichotomies, for example:
    Narrator is a union of concrete introversion and abstract extroversion.
    Smilingeyes likes to say: 'Narrator turns introversion into extroversion'.
    basically, this is related to the "16-element theory" (+/- model) ; a narrator has +i and -e ; a taciturn has +e and -i.

    basically + is concrete, and - is abstract.

    "process / result" means "funtion 1 + / function 1 -"

  13. #13
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That's right, the + and - signs refer to concrete and abstract respectively.

  14. #14
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    That's right, the + and - signs refer to concrete and abstract respectively.
    process is something concrete, and result something abstract.

    this will generate more derivative dichotomies for elements. there are seven dichotomies for the elements, 3 basic and 4 derivative :

    (not sure for the positive / negative on left / right)

    X1 internal / external
    X2 statics / dynamics
    X3 objects / fields
    X-3 X1 * X2 beta / delta
    X-2 X1 * X3 alpha / gamma
    X-1 X2 * X3 rational / irrational
    X-0 X1 * X2 * X3 detached / involved

  15. #15
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hm..yes. You could basically draw everything we know about socionics from those axioms if you perform the right derivations. Thing is, it's all been done before. Have fun anyway.

  16. #16

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    It's one of the more elusive parts of the theory. Basically a concrete function takes something specific and finished from the environment, and the abstract function complementing it looks to the horizon of the creation of a new specific and finished content. In general concrete functions give rise to confident behavior that is free of doubt (after all it argues on behalf of something real, not something that is not yet real) and abstract functions bring more 'probing', 'searching' kinds of behavior.

    Using abstract/concrete one can formulate definitions of the Reinin dichotomies, for example:
    Narrator is a union of concrete introversion and abstract extroversion.
    Smilingeyes likes to say: 'Narrator turns introversion into extroversion'.

    Using our imagination for a bit we can get a picture of what kind of behavior this attribute gives rise to. A 'narrator' is a person who considers his private understanding of things as more 'finished' and 'real' than the facts he gleans from specific things in the environment. Hence, he feels confident to dictate his understanding to others without too much regard for outside specifics.
    I'm a little slow on this part of the theory, sorry, but I'll get it eventually. Basically, if ILI is narrator, and narrator means concrete introversion and abstract extroversion, then ILI's Ni is concrete, and ILI's Te is abstract...which you must admit is weird based on your description. After all, most people wouldn't think of Ni as something specific and finished or Te as something that is something that is more vague. It almost seems backwards. I know it has to do with the plus signs and minus signs though. :-)

    Anyhow, ILIs in my estimation don't seem to be "free of doubt." They may have a sense of a revelation that seems right to them and propels them forward, but "free of doubt" seems a bit of an exaggeration, especially considering that ILIs are irrational types.

  17. #17
    heath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,722
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The notion that it is horribly complex. There is too much added to such broad categories. 16(or 32?) types for 6 billion people-- given this how many of minute details are going to be observed in each individual of a type? Too many exceptions to be scientific.
    asd

  18. #18
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm a little slow on this part of the theory, sorry, but I'll get it eventually. Basically, if ILI is narrator, and narrator means concrete introversion and abstract extroversion, then ILI's Ni is concrete, and ILI's Te is abstract...which you must admit is weird based on your description. After all, most people wouldn't think of Ni as something specific and finished or Te as something that is something that is more vague. It almost seems backwards. I know it has to do with the plus signs and minus signs though. :-)

    Anyhow, ILIs in my estimation don't seem to be "free of doubt." They may have a sense of a revelation that seems right to them and propels them forward, but "free of doubt" seems a bit of an exaggeration, especially considering that ILIs are irrational types.
    Think of each of the properties as relative. An INTp's Ni is not necessarily 'free of doubt', it is just that more so than the Ni of an INFp, or that of an ENFj.

    You only get a complete picture of a function by looking at each one of the properties it is composed of. In the case of Ni, there are the attributes 'internal', 'socially closed', 'perceiving' all contributing to making the Ni function look less confident. 'Concrete' offers only a slight counterforce to those attributes.

    Still, the difference between croncrete Ni and abstract Ni are marked enough to warrant sepparate descriptions:

    Positive(short range):
    The future, change of a situation in time, a prediction, a prediction, gradual development, evolution, a scheduled accession, dynamics of changes, a time stream, imagination, consistency, imperceptible changes — step by step, a convergence, convergence;
    Negative (long range):
    The past, error check, avoiding of danger, uneasiness, vague anxiety, nazrevanie crisis, revolution, jump in time, skill to be insured against troubles, sharp shifts, discrepancy, the moment of resolute actions, a divergence, divergentsija.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I should note here that I've seen no evidence that perception of evolution has anything to do with information metabolism/socionics in its current form.

    The author of those descriptions would do well to strike all mentions of evolution from their notions of IM .

  20. #20

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    I should note here that I've seen no evidence that perception of evolution has anything to do with information metabolism/socionics in its current form.

    The author of those descriptions would do well to strike all mentions of evolution from their notions of IM .
    I think what they meant by evolution was the dynamics quality...the idea that Ni involves viewing changes taking place in time, as opposed to a "static" view of Ij or Ep. This seems consistent with many Socionics descriptions of Ni.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    I should note here that I've seen no evidence that perception of evolution has anything to do with information metabolism/socionics in its current form.

    The author of those descriptions would do well to strike all mentions of evolution from their notions of IM .
    I think what they meant by evolution was the dynamics quality...the idea that Ni involves viewing changes taking place in time, as opposed to a "static" view of Ij or Ep. This seems consistent with many Socionics descriptions of Ni.
    That may be what they meant, but it's not clear. They should clearly distinguish information exertion from metabolism.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ..edit..

  23. #23
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    throw those symbols in the garbage.

    what's the advantage of it over just writing "si" "te" ????

  24. #24
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,609
    Mentioned
    156 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno
    throw those symbols in the garbage.

    what's the advantage of it over just writing "si" "te" ????
    Definitely. The symbols are ill-suited to a character-based medium, and make it particularly difficult for beginners. The MBTI dichotomy-based notation is better too. It's easier to have partially-specified types, and who wants to write "intuitive" instead of N?

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In front of the computer
    Posts
    172
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno
    throw those symbols in the garbage.

    what's the advantage of it over just writing "si" "te" ????
    Definitely. The symbols are ill-suited to a character-based medium, and make it particularly difficult for beginners. The MBTI dichotomy-based notation is better too. It's easier to have partially-specified types, and who wants to write "intuitive" instead of N?
    I like those symbols. Any kind of pictures make things easier to remember. It's a lot easier to associate things to or than some cryptic Ti or Fe.
    Intuition

Posting Permissions

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