Intuition vs Sensory types

[XoX]

So how to really know the difference? The most obvious cases are well...obvious but then I have seen people lately where this is not that obvious (and even began to wonder where I stand in this in the end).

So discussion about intuition vs sensory ego functions plz and how they might manifest in behavior or interests

[machintruc]

So how to really know the difference? The most obvious cases are well...obvious but then I have seen people lately where this is not that obvious (and even began to wonder where I stand in this in the end).

So discussion about intuition vs sensory ego functions plz and how they might manifest in behavior or interests

Sensing and Intuiting are input-related cognitive processes.

Sensing is dealing with sensible things (observation)
Intuition is dealing with mental images (imagination)

Let's suppose Sensing means Parts (local, specific, detail) and Intuition means Whole (global, general, holistic)

Augusta said : a TIM describes priorities of perception.

An intuitive type percieves Intuition before Sensing. This means a tendancy toward a whole-to-parts perception.
A sensing type percieves Sensing before Intuition. This means a tendancy toward a parts-to-whole perception.

[Phaedrus]

So how to really know the difference? The most obvious cases are well...obvious but then I have seen people lately where this is not that obvious (and even began to wonder where I stand in this in the end).

So discussion about intuition vs sensory ego functions plz and how they might manifest in behavior or interests

You probably already know the general differences between them, since there is a lot to read about this everywhere. Why can't you instead explain the specific problems you have with this dichotomy?

[KSpin]

I usually cannot work with bits of information, I tend to need the whole picture before I can get anything meaningful out of it.

[FDG]

I don't know how to reply to this.

I have another question though, what do you people think the difference is in matters of SPORTS?

[XoX]

I don't know how to reply to this.

I have another question though, what do you people think the difference is in matters of SPORTS?

Herzy put it like...when in sports class playing a game ESTps run around pawning everyone and ENTps trip on the first grassroot and stumble on their face. But since there apparently is a lot of ENTps e.g. in ice hockey I doubt that is always the case. I'll get back to this later

[XoX]

So how to really know the difference? The most obvious cases are well...obvious but then I have seen people lately where this is not that obvious (and even began to wonder where I stand in this in the end).

So discussion about intuition vs sensory ego functions plz and how they might manifest in behavior or interests

You probably already know the general differences between them, since there is a lot to read about this everywhere. Why can't you instead explain the specific problems you have with this dichotomy?

It is more like I'm interested in how to identify S and N people in work environment and such. In a situation where you can't really do a "deep interview" but have to rely more on externally visible behavior and work habbits and such. Sort of "speed reading" socionics type in a situation where you don't have much information or time available. I might have some stereotypes in my mind which are not true. At least I know some borderlines cases which don't seem to fit any stereotype I have.

[Creepy-bg]

I don't do and never have done sports. Unless you count karate which I was into for about 10 years... I was equal parts Se and Si in that by Diana's explanation (maybe a bit more on the Se side) *watches everybody start to retype me*

/edit damnit she deleted her posts again I swear she's probably the only person who does that more than I do

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Phaedrus]

I also reminded Phaedrus that it is not a dichotomy in the way that S/N is in mbti.

There is no big difference. It is a dichotomy in both models.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[FDG]

Anyway I said Se leading are probably more energetic and aggressive, and Si leading have more finesse and technique, but didn't know where to put everyone else.

Makes sense, although it'd place me in the Si realm.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[FDG]

I'll make observations are report. I can attest a pattern of ISTjs tending to play aggressive, but I haven't seen much in others. Strangely (not necessarily, but maybe) I have found a disproportionate number of ENFps among medium-to-hi-level soccer players.

[Phaedrus]

I also reminded Phaedrus that it is not a dichotomy in the way that S/N is in mbti.

There is no big difference. It is a dichotomy in both models.

Perhaps then you don't really understand socionics. Are Se ego types in the same category as Si ego types, are they?

You obviously don't know much about MBTT. There is a big difference between Se ego types and Se ego types in MBTT as well. And one must start to wonder how you really know about Socionics, since you can say such crap. You reveal a fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject you are talking about. There are clear general differences between sensory types and intuitive types in Socionics as well as in MBTT. Don't you know that? Read some Socionics material for once. You can start with Dmitriy Lytov's and Marianna Lytova's Introduction into Socionics, which you can find at Dmitri's site.

In mbti it's simplified: if you have a brain = intuitive, otherwise = sensor.

That is totally incorrect. There are eight functions in MBTT too, and they describe the exact same types, but their theoretical explanations for them are different.

[FDG]

I also reminded Phaedrus that it is not a dichotomy in the way that S/N is in mbti.

There is no big difference. It is a dichotomy in both models.

Perhaps then you don't really understand socionics. Are Se ego types in the same category as Si ego types, are they?

You obviously don't know much about MBTT. There is a big difference between Se ego types and Se ego types in MBTT as well. And one must start to wonder how you really know about Socionics, since you can say such crap. You reveal a fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject you are talking about. There are clear general differences between sensory types and intuitive types in Socionics as well as in MBTT. Don't you know that? Read some Socionics material for once. You can start with Dmitriy Lytov's and Marianna Lytova's Introduction into Socionics, which you can find at Dmitri's site.

In mbti it's simplified: if you have a brain = intuitive, otherwise = sensor.

That is totally incorrect. There are eight functions in MBTT too, and they describe the exact same types, but their theoretical explanations for them are different.

You-are-a-complete-idiot-that-do-not-know-how-to-treat-people. I would really enjoy smashing a plate in your fucking face and make you bleed to death by cutting your jugular with the broken ceramic pieces, and then make a wolf eat your blood and revomit it all over your body.

[Creepy-bg]

I also reminded Phaedrus that it is not a dichotomy in the way that S/N is in mbti.

There is no big difference. It is a dichotomy in both models.

Perhaps then you don't really understand socionics. Are Se ego types in the same category as Si ego types, are they?

You obviously don't know much about MBTT. There is a big difference between Se ego types and Se ego types in MBTT as well. And one must start to wonder how you really know about Socionics, since you can say such crap. You reveal a fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject you are talking about. There are clear general differences between sensory types and intuitive types in Socionics as well as in MBTT. Don't you know that? Read some Socionics material for once. You can start with Dmitriy Lytov's and Marianna Lytova's Introduction into Socionics, which you can find at Dmitri's site.

In mbti it's simplified: if you have a brain = intuitive, otherwise = sensor.

That is totally incorrect. There are eight functions in MBTT too, and they describe the exact same types, but their theoretical explanations for them are different.

you're kinda a dick Phaedrus...

[Creepy-bg]

^^^ FDG's reply was better ^^^

[FDG]

Honestly I don't know how such a piece of human trash can be allowed to post freely.

[Phaedrus]

You-are-a-complete-idiot-that-do-not-know-how-to-treat-people. I would really enjoy smashing a plate in your fucking face and make you bleed to death by cutting your jugular with the broken ceramic pieces, and then make a wolf eat your blood and revomit it all over your body.

Of course, FDG. You are right, as usual.

you're kinda a dick Phaedrus...

If you say so.

[Phaedrus]

Honestly I don't know how such a piece of human trash can be allowed to post freely.

Then you are not omniscient after all. Thank God for that!

[FDG]

Honestly I don't know how such a piece of human trash can be allowed to post freely.

Then you are not omniscient after all. Thank God for that!

This is my last response in the thread because I don't want it be the derailed again, but you are projecting your belief of omniscence over me.

[Not A Communist Shill]

I also reminded Phaedrus that it is not a dichotomy in the way that S/N is in mbti.

There is no big difference. It is a dichotomy in both models.

Perhaps then you don't really understand socionics. Are Se ego types in the same category as Si ego types, are they?

You obviously don't know much about MBTT. There is a big difference between Se ego types and Se ego types in MBTT as well. And one must start to wonder how you really know about Socionics, since you can say such crap. You reveal a fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject you are talking about. There are clear general differences between sensory types and intuitive types in Socionics as well as in MBTT. Don't you know that? Read some Socionics material for once. You can start with Dmitriy Lytov's and Marianna Lytova's Introduction into Socionics, which you can find at Dmitri's site.

In mbti it's simplified: if you have a brain = intuitive, otherwise = sensor.

That is totally incorrect. There are eight functions in MBTT too, and they describe the exact same types, but their theoretical explanations for them are different.

You-are-a-complete-idiot-that-do-not-know-how-to-treat-people. I would really enjoy smashing a plate in your fucking face and make you bleed to death by cutting your jugular with the broken ceramic pieces, and then make a wolf eat your blood and revomit it all over your body.

This is unacceptable - revomit isn't a word...

[FDG]

I also reminded Phaedrus that it is not a dichotomy in the way that S/N is in mbti.

There is no big difference. It is a dichotomy in both models.

Perhaps then you don't really understand socionics. Are Se ego types in the same category as Si ego types, are they?

You obviously don't know much about MBTT. There is a big difference between Se ego types and Se ego types in MBTT as well. And one must start to wonder how you really know about Socionics, since you can say such crap. You reveal a fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject you are talking about. There are clear general differences between sensory types and intuitive types in Socionics as well as in MBTT. Don't you know that? Read some Socionics material for once. You can start with Dmitriy Lytov's and Marianna Lytova's Introduction into Socionics, which you can find at Dmitri's site.

In mbti it's simplified: if you have a brain = intuitive, otherwise = sensor.

That is totally incorrect. There are eight functions in MBTT too, and they describe the exact same types, but their theoretical explanations for them are different.

You-are-a-complete-idiot-that-do-not-know-how-to-treat-people. I would really enjoy smashing a plate in your fucking face and make you bleed to death by cutting your jugular with the broken ceramic pieces, and then make a wolf eat your blood and revomit it all over your body.

This is unacceptable - revomit isn't a word...

That's creativity in insults! It should be rewarded

[Creepy-bg]

I thought it was one of the funniest things I've ever read

[krieger]

FDG is going into the history books for coining 'revomit' - talk about self-ownage.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Phaedrus]

di = two
chotomy = (roughly) category

Two categories. If I use a dichotomous key for instance in botany when identifying a plant it is broken into two choices each time. Either/or. MBTI uses that same process. You are either N or S, then from there if S, you are either Si or Se, yes there are the same functions as socionics but the approach follows that of a dichotomous key.

Some socionics folks also take that approach for typing, which is why it becomes so hard for people to find a type.

Socionics uses the terms “criterion” and “dichotomy” (Greek: ‘splitting into two parts'). MBTT uses the terms “dimension” or “choice” instead.

The 4 Dichotomies

By combining the following four dichotomies in all possible ways we get 16 types total. Each type has one of the traits of each dichotomy, but not both.

If you are trying to determine your type, choose between each of the four dichotomies described below and in the extended descriptions, and then use this pop-up chart for finding your type to see which type has these particular four socionic characteristics.

1. Thinking/feeling (in socionics: logic/ethic).

The definitions of this dichotomy seem to be equal both in socionics and in MBTT. If we even noticed certain differences, they were caused by own perception of their authors, not by any traditions.

2. Sensation/intuition.

The definition of this criterion in socionics has some difference from that used by Myers and Briggs, but these differences do not become obvious at once.

Jung described intuition as an “ever-unconscious function of psyche”. Let us imagine the process of thinking. One part of our consciousness focuses on what is going on around, and another part “sleeps”, i.e. combines acquired images with each other and builds associations. Sometimes these associations are fantastic (.e.g. moon may be associated with cheese for its shape and color), but sometimes they allow forecasting events. Imagination and attention are processes that coexist but sometimes “overlap”, interfere with each other, impede each other.

Sensory people live “here and now”, they do not much trust their imagination and prefer to rely on what they can get, “grab” now. They are sensitive to such small nuances as rumors, changes of somebody's status, more or less prestigious outfit, etc.

Intuitive people are often considered inattentive and/or impractical; they quickly get bored with “details, details!” If asked to express their opinions, intuitive types rather present their “vision” than a detailed description.

Up to this moment, the definition of sensation/intuition was the same in socionics and MBTT. Where do disagreements come from?

Socionics describes one more important characteristic trait of the sensing function: the control of one's own physical space. Such a trait has nothing in common with imagination – on the contrary, it is opposite to imagination, it deals with perceiving of what is going on here and now, i.e. with sensation. It is probably the most ancient of human instincts, and maybe Americans avoid describing this characteristic trait of sensing types for the reasons of “political correctness”

For example, the literary hero Sherlock Holmes told a lot about his “intuition”, and for this reason our American colleagues, adherents of the Myers & Briggs typology, consider him to be “intuitive”. However, let us recall that Sherlock Holmes' knowledge was detailed but very narrowly specialized (Conan Doyle wrote that even in chemistry Holmes omitted many important discoveries only because they did not directly concern issues of crime detection). He was perfect in noticing smallest details, in various kinds of manual arts, up to boxing and Japanese combat art, but his imagination left much to be desired, Dr. Watson had always to offer him a lot of useless versions just in order to “wake up” his friend's imagination. All these traits are characteristic for sensory, not intuitive types. (In socionics, the type logical-sensory extravert (rational) is also known under the nickname Sherlock Holmes – we will tell later about “game nicknames” of the socionic types).

Another reason for disagreement: adherents of Myers-Briggs and Keirsey typologies sometimes (not always) determine many famous politicians as intuitive types. They say, “those people must have had strong strategic thinking in order to become so successful!”. The reality, however, is simpler than beautiful theories. Intuitive types, even in spite of their brilliant minds, can lose competition because of their inattentiveness, because of getting quickly bored of monotonous work, they do not like permanent watching the competitor's activities. For example, Leon Trotsky was a brilliant intellectual, master of forecasting, but he lost competition to Stalin, who was a bad forecaster, who considered life as a game where nothing was predictable – but Stalin was a very persistent, attentive, hard-working person. For Stalin, nothing was “boring” if it could contribute to success, and he never avoided routine chores.

Does it mean that sensing types win over intuitive types? Let us consider Mikhail Gorbachev. Although David Keirsey (www.keirsey.com) believes he was intuitive, it is a greatest mistake. Gorbachev became a reformer in spite of his own will; he never planned such large-scaled reforms. He was a master of diplomacy and intrigues, was really brilliant in balancing between opposite opinions, and strived for solutions that could satisfy everybody. There was only one problem: he lacked imagination. Each new event, especially unpleasant, happened “suddenly” and “unexpectedly” to him. In fact he HAD TO make reforms, because he had no other way to stay at power. His views were conservative enough, and no wonder that he surrounded himself by other conservators, which just proved to be harder than him and finally attempted to overthrow him. The situation in 1991 was paradoxical; this year was probably the peak of Gorbachev's popularity, but it was when he completely lost his power. An intuitive type, Boris Yeltsin, got the power, and although he was criticized for a lot of chaotic, inconsistent actions, he anyway always felt the “needs of time”. Actually, Russia is ruled by another intuitive, Vladimir Putin. He is probably the smartest leader of Russia for the last 100 years (and this is why his popularity is extremely high), but on the other hand, Putin lacks strong will and decisiveness (because he is not only intuitive, but also introverted), and sometimes his reforms remain uncompleted.

Examples of intuitive politicians: Tony Blair, José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Charles de Gaulle, Nicolae Ceausescu, John Kennedy, Condoleezza Rice, Osama Bin Laden.

Examples of sensory politicians: Gerhard Schroeder, Silvio Berlusconi, Jacques Chirac, Leonid Brezhnev, Winston Churchill, Saddam Hussein, Donald Rumsfeld.

So who are more successful – sensory or intuitive types? Neither, if they stand alone. The S/N criterion is probably the one where mutual support of S and N is especially important. One can somewhat “train up” his/her weak sensing or intuitive function, but will anyway feel unsure in activities related to it. Cooperation between intuitive and sensing people is successful, when "practical approach" and "imagination" work together. Alas, much more often sensory and intuitive types criticize each other: sensors criticize intuitives for being “impractical” and “absent-minded”, and intuitives criticize sensors for being “shortsighted”, greedy”, “flat-minded”. Sensors and intuitives need some time to “accustom” to each other, only then they can begin work together successfully (or understand that their views are too different, and they had better work in a different team).

After this long introduction, let us tell how to distinguish intuitives from sensors in real life?

First: by the aptitude towards abstract or concrete (applied) thinking: the first is more characteristic to intuitives, the second – to sensors. It is easy to notice even at school years: some of pupils are successful in understanding abstract terms, but fail in applied subjects, others – vice versa.

Second: by contents of their speech. Sensors usually memorize a lot of details and use them in their speech, while intuitives used to present their “general vision”.

Third: by their eyes. The look of intuitives is somewhat distracted, as if this person looks not directly at you (or any other object), but rather above you or even through you! Sensors usually stare at objects directly, even when their eyes seem inattentive.

Fourth: generally by their appearance. Sensors are much more attentive to their appearance from their very childhood than intuitives. For sensors, their outfit means a lot: comfort of feelings, status, fashion etc. Even movements of sensory types seem to be better coordinated, more decisive than those of intuitives (however, the last much depends on people's interest to sport; some intuitives may have train their body very well, but generally, sensors look better trained, because there are more attentive to the needs of their body).

Intuiters are "mental" in the sense of identifying readily with things that they cannot see or experience physically, but "see in their minds." Sensers are also able to envision things in their minds, but they identify with them less and eventually lose interest in things that cannot be turned into reality.

Sensers are "physical" in the sense of identifying more with physical reality and less with things that they see in their minds but cannot materialize. Sensers also make generalizations, have philosophical insights, and are interested in overarching "invisible" principles. However, they are willing to take seriously only those abstract principles that are closely tied to reality. Intuiters are often prone to make "abstractions on abstractions" and accept them for reality itself.

Although most often people are drawn to areas that align with their strengths, often the opposite occurs. Sensers can make breakthroughs in typically "intuitive" areas where intuiters have strayed too far from reality and have "missed the point." Intuiters can make breakthroughs in typically "sensing" areas where sensers have focused too much on traditional forms and have neglected unseen possiblities.

Intellectual fields
When sensers are drawn to intellectual fields such as science, research, art criticism, etc. they tend to take a hands-on approach and prefer to research and discuss phenomena that they have personally observed or that others have observed using methods that they trust. Intuiters in the same intellectual fields tend to talk about ideas and speculative theories. Sometimes their speculative thought leads to actual breakthroughs, when new approaches and hitherto unseen possibilities are made. At other times it is a senser who makes the important discovery through his more hands-on approach. However, as a general rule, the more abstract and far removed from reality the field is, the higher the concentration of intuiters.

Hopefully, these points will help correct the mistakes some people would otherwise make based on other descriptions of this dichotomy.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[FDG]

It is easy to notice even at school years: some of pupils are successful in understanding abstract terms, but fail in applied subjects, others – vice versa.

??? I disagree.

[KSpin]

I was absolutely horrendous at Design Technology (woodwork, metalwork, that sort of thing), the things I made would never fit together properly. But I absolutely enjoyed the languages and science.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[FDG]

I think the axes are:

Extreme F
Extreme T
Extreme N
Extreme S

there is no N S axis to be considered if we are dealing with an Extreme T or extreme F

All of this has already been elaborated in detail by smilingeyes.

[Phaedrus]

Some socionics folks also take that approach for typing, ...

You forgot to quote the most important part of your own sentence:

... which is why it becomes so hard for people to find a type.

You are accusing Dmitri Lytov and Rick of using the same kind of stupid "dichotomies" as in MBTT. Your ignorance is astonishing.

[Mea]

Some people find a hard to find their type because they have yet to understand more about socionics.

What you're doing is just throwing unjustified insults at Diana. Her ignorant? Hmm. I wonder.

[aestrivex]

Michel de Nostredame [1], mais conhecido sob o nome de Nostradamus, foi um médico da Renascença que praticava a astrologia e a alquimia (como muitos dos médicos do século XVI). Nasceu em 14 de dezembro de 1503 em Saint-Rémy-de-Provence; sofrendo de Epilepsia psíquica, de gota e de insuficiência cardíaca, morreu em 2 de julho de 1566 em Salon-de-Provence, vítima de um edema cárdio-pulmonar.

Ficou famoso por sua suposta capacidade de vidência. Escreveu um livro de centúrias, versos codificados que seriam previsões do futuro.
Índice
[esconder]

* 1 Origens
* 2 Biografia
* 3 Profecias
* 4 Curiosidades
* 5 Páginas externas
* 6 Notas

[editar] Origens

Nostradamus

Seus pais eram Jaumet (ou Jacques) de Nostredame e Reynière (ou Renée) de Saint-Rémy. Ele é o filho mais velho dos 8 filhos do casal. O nome Nostredame vem de seu bisavô judeu, que escolheu o nome de Pierre de Nostredame quando da sua conversão ao catolicismo.

[editar] Biografia

As Profecias de Nostradamus encontram-se ligadas à história do catolicismo, nos prefácios Nostradamus aponta esta preocupação claramente. Foi considerado como homem erudito, um homem além de seu tempo e aliava-se ao fato de conhecer o latim e o grego que o possibilitava a obter conhecimentos de fontes importantes. Sua grande erudição, conhecimentos de astrologia e astronomia aliado a uma intuição, parece que permitiam um raciocínio bastante acurado a respeito do futuro. De qualquer forma, gerou um impacto em milhões de pessoas que vem se pondo em contato com seus escritos nesses quase quinhentos anos.

Teve contatos com três reis de França (Henrique II, Francisco II e Carlos IX), graças a rainha Catarina de Médicis, esposa do primeiro e mãe dos seguintes. Há indícios que tenha se formado em Medicina, mas dedicou muito do seu tempo ao estudo da Astrologia, Alquimia, Literatura e Teologia. Há rumores que muito jovem, depois de aprender latim, grego e hebraico, começou a sua carreira como médico, permanecendo durante quatro anos em Bordeaux, onde combateu uma epidemia de peste em condições bastante precárias. Mas essa mesma peste condenou-o a ficar sem família, e por isso resolveu viajar para Itália. Nos seus versos pode-se ver citações de autores como Plutarco, Platão, Jamblico entre os filósofos gregos. Muitas destas informações foram coletadas pelo grupo "Nostradamus Research Group" abreviadamente NRG que tendo a maioria de seus membros na Europa, pode pesquisar "in loco". Esse grupo pode aclarar muitas lendas e folclores que cercam a personalidade de Nostradamus.

Entretanto, casou numa pequena cidade, com uma viúva de nome Anna Gemella, de quem teve seis filhos. Foi nessa altura que começou a escrever as suas Centúrias e quando já tinha boa fama por publicar anualmente almanaques, o que fez por mais de dez anos. Almanaques estes que tinham muito de astrologia e as previsões para os próximos tempos escritas em geral de forma corrente. Havia sempre alguns versos que muito mais tarde, selecionaram dos almanaques e imprimiram como livro avulso. Não foi Nostradamus que fez isso, mas certamente pessoas interessadas em fazer dinheiro que não se importaram em mutilar o escrito do sábio. Escreveu também um livro de receitas, principalmente de cosméticos. São atribuídas a ele algumas traduções. Também dentro das pesquisas do grupo NRG encontram-se a grande influência do livro de profecias Mirabilis Liber que tinha grande curso na Europa medieval e de seu amigo François Rabelais, que se tornou famoso escritor.

Num curto espaço de tempo, as suas profecias tornaram-se conhecidas, com os acertos que encontravam com relação aos acontecimentos. O Rei Henrique II convidou-o a fazer uma viagem até Paris 1556 cidade que ficava distante um mês em viagem por carruagem da Provença (Salon) onde ele residia. Ele pode conhecer seus filhos: Francisco II e Carlos IX), que se tornaram reis mas viveram pouco e governaram sob a regência de sua mãe Catarina, com a morte do rei, três anos depois (considerada por alguns como prevista na Centúria I-35, mas o próprio Nostradamus não confirmou isso quando do falecimento do rei), Mas de qualquer forma essa quadra trouxe muita fama ao vidente. Estes acontecimentos que são encontrados depois do fato ocorrer são denominados encaixes pelo NRG.

Mas a estrela de Nostradamus brilhou com maior intensidade. A sua fama de adivinho prosseguiu, ultrapassando as fronteiras do seu país natal. Era publicado na Alemanha, Áustria, Itália etc. Dizem que de todos os cantos da Europa chegavam celebridades que o procuravam para conhecer o futuro, ou simplesmente para o conhecer pessoalmente. A saúde do profeta começa a ser abalada, não acompanhando sua fama. Seus livros são editados na Itália e na Alemanha. Por conta da sua fama muitos livros apareceram com quadras adicionais, as suas centúrias, e que não podem ser com certeza atribuídos a Nostradamus. Nessa linha de adições são famosas as edições de Seve de 1605 e de Troyes de 1611. Há pouco tempo atras foram encontradas declarações de um pesquisador já falecido, Daniel Ruzo que tais edições são falsas e foram produzidas em 1649. Os argumentos dele são muito eloquentes. As edições posteriores a esta são seguramente falsificações e na Biblioteca de Paris há inúmeras obras que querem ter o mérito de serem produzidas por Nostradamus, mas são apenas falsificações.

Sofrendo de gota e artrite, piorou em meados de 1566. No dia 1 de Julho desse mesmo ano, chama um criado e pede-lhe que arrume o quarto, dizendo: «Não estarei vivo no alvorecer do próximo dia.» E assim aconteceu.

Nostradamus morreu no dia 2 de Julho de 1566 exatamente no 183º dia contado a partir do início do ano e que corresponde a metade do ano.

Os restos mortais do profeta foram trasladados para uma outra igreja em Salon (a Igreja de São Lourenço) onde permanecem até hoje.

[editar] Profecias

Suas profecias compõe-se de 942 quadras em versos métricos decassílabos, reunidas em grupos de cem, dai o nome de centúrias. Foram publicadas em várias ocasiões; uma pequena parte em 1555, outra em 1557, sendo que das três últimas centúrias conhecemos apenas edições póstumas. Devido a fama que Nostradamus veio obtendo ao longo do tempo, muitos charlatões tentaram falsificar quadras e versos para fazer dinheiro. Na biblioteca de Paris existem alguns livros escritos entre 1600 e 1900 que usam descaradamente seu nome. O grupo NRG só reconhece como originais estas citadas. Infelizmente o dinheiro foi o rumo que procuraram muitas obras que falam do sábio e de sua obra, sem se importar realmente em descobrir quem era Nostradamus e o que desejava de fato.

Durante cerca de dez anos ele publicou um almanaque anual, com fatos astrológicos, informações variadas e milhares de presságios. Alguns presságios escritos em verso mais precisamente cento e quarenta e um foram estudados em separado por serem muito similares as quadras das Profecias, mas eles são em muito pequeno número em relação ao todo. Exegetas que estudaram esta parte de seu trabalho afirmam que se tratavam de acontecimentos na sua época ou próximos, e portanto, de pouco valor para a época presente.

Segundo os entusiastas, Nostradamus teria previsto, entre outras coisas, a queda da União Soviética na quadra em que diz "Um dia serão amigos os dois grandes chefes...". No entanto, os ceticos apontam que essas "previsões" só são interpretadas corretamente depois dos fatos, nunca antes.

Astrologicamente pode-se ver que algumas quadras previam conjunções de planetas em datas futuras e respondem bem aos fatos que aconteceram naquelas datas.

Pesquisadores sérios de Universidades muito conhecidas como Ottawa, Cambridge e Sorbonne desenvolveram uma teoria que as quadras de Nostradamus se baseavam num fato histórico anterior a sua obra e inspiravam as quadras. O grupo NRG pesquisando com seriedade já detectou mais de cinquenta destes fatos que passou a ser chamado de ponto de partida. Algumas citações de Plutarco, um historiador grego são literais, outras do historiador romano Suetonio, outras do Mirabilis Liber etc.

[editar] Curiosidades

Nostradamus viu uma vez um Frade Franciscano e fez uma referência a ele como se fosse um Papa. O tal Frade era o Frei Felici Peretti, futuro Papa Sisto V (1585 - 1590).

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Mea]

I have officially typed you now Phaedrus. You are the type who refuses to use the gray stuff between your ears, and instead only knows how to quote from what you see as "official" information. IOW, the dumbass type.

I am announcing this now, and I'd like all official socionicists to put their "stamp of approval" upon this typing, for once that is done no matter what happens Phaedrus will be bound to it. He is incapable of stretching beyond, synthesizing information on his own, understanding implications, making his own observations and reaching conclusions that have not been pre-digested for him.

It is done. Now, we only need wait for it to be formalized.

Ooo. I like that.

[Phaedrus]

I have officially typed you now Phaedrus. You are the type who refuses to use the gray stuff between your ears, and instead only knows how to quote from what you see as "official" information. IOW, the dumbass type.

I am announcing this now, and I'd like all official socionicists to put their "stamp of approval" upon this typing, for once that is done no matter what happens Phaedrus will be bound to it. He is incapable of stretching beyond, synthesizing information on his own, understanding implications, making his own observations and reaching conclusions that have not been pre-digested for him.

It is done. Now, we only need wait for it to be formalized.

I have nothing more to say to you, Diana. You have made your move. I hope you will be happy with it.

[aestrivex]

I have nothing more to say to you, Diana. You have made your move. I hope you will be happy with it.

you should move your bishop to C4.