.
So what's wrong with him exactly?
The fact that he uses VI a little too much?
Was he plain wrong about people's types on a consistent basis?
Are people just jealous of his body?
(I know I am but that's no reason to hate him)
p.s. you can direct me to a link that explains it. I know Lytov said something about his bad use of VI. But what else is there?
Last edited by xerx; 10-13-2009 at 10:38 PM.
What are your grounds for assuming that there is anything wrong with him?Originally Posted by jxrtes
He doesn't use it too much.
No, he is mostly right about people's types on a consistent basis. And his V.I. skills are pretty good.
It is obvious that Dmitri Lytov's V.I. skills are rather poor, and that is probably the main reason why he don't want to use that typing method. I don't know or recall exactly what Lytov has said about Ganin's use of V.I., but Ganin is certainly much better at it than Lytov.
It's the bad VI, and the bad typings, and the J/P switch, and some other stuff. He has more accurate information than generally given credit for.
He uses VI in the correct method. On this forum people frequently post pictures with an explanation of themselves. This is no different. Ganin happens to be better at putting the information together than anyone here.
Which bad typings? His typings are far more accurate in comparison to yours and this website (for instance your understanding of Ti from myself and from Mindes paragraph shows your poor understanding of the system.)
Of course when you or Expat or someone makes a mistake, which is bound to happen to everyone at some point, then it appears the issue is simply ignored of course, can you see that (and what this means?)you should explain yourself. His view on j p switch is quite correct and 'normal', that as an introvert you can either be a J to j or a J to p etc. It is the frequent mistypings on this site which are the issue and that data should therefore not be considered.and the J/P switch, and some other stuff.
This is true.He has more accurate information than generally given credit for.
You do know how much thehotelambush has contributed to the Wikisocion, right?
That paragraph was Ti. It was only after Minde revealed herself as the author, that the thread became subject to apologetics of how an Fi-dominant could have written that.(for instance your understanding of Ti from myself and from Mindes paragraph shows your poor understanding of the system.)
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
I can't really explain further about his mistypings without analyzing specific ones, and since he presents no justification for most of them other than a picture, I can't speak to his reasoning.
As for J/P switch, I don't really give a shit about MBTI anyway.
This has nothing to do with being wrong about things and then sweeping it under the carpet, whereas said mentality, possibly 'mob' mentality has different rules, or horses for courses.
Your response about wiki is more of a defensive posture and does not address the current issue. Besides, I do not know what he has submitted, or the quality of it. But even if the quality is good - writing about the theory, is seperate from understanding the theory, which is of course different from practicing the theory. Were one can be better at one or two but not so much the other(s.)
This is incorrect, perhaps it is 'mob' mentality function selection. If you read *my* posts you will see I had her identified prior to revealment, I wrote a post directed to her. Minde and I both realised what we meant. Maybe some 'delta' connection. What I saw in that paragraph and what I wrote and explained also later tied in very well. Oh, and my analysis was Fi with Te seeking. I have no desire to repeat myself on this.That paragraph was Ti. It was only after Minde revealed herself as the author, that the thread became subject to apologetics of how an Fi-dominant could have written that.
Fair enough.
Are your reading skills bad? The V.I. is not that bad, the typings are not that bad, and there is no J/P switch -- Ganin has never stated that there is such a switch. You have probably misunderstood something he has written about it (maybe the articles in which he discusses that problem).
Correct.
Yes.
Regarding VI: I know that he also types people according to fixed facial structures, even things like how full your lips are, etc. My view is that this is taking VI too far. If, however, people agree that things like "your lips are too full for you to be a Ne dominant" is a good typing argument, fine.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
http://www.socionics.com/articles/jpproblem.htm
"In fact, all MBTI extroverttypes have the last letter coinciding with Jung definition, and all MBTI introvert
According to my understanding of English, this means Ej = EJ, Ep = EP, Ij = IP, and Ip = IJ.
Wait -- or is he saying, "Ej is always equal to EJ", same for Ep and EP, but not always so for Ij and IJ and Ip and IP?
I find myself getting dragged into this.
Expat, this is incorrect information. I also suspect the reference here is to username Gilligan (which is *probably Gilly or some similar name now.. in any event, it pretty similar so worth mentioning)
I came across the thread, of this type discussion and whatever you have been told or believe is completely inacurate. Not only did Ganin ask the user name questions, but he was also watching the thread here closely where Rick was attempting to type him.
While doing all this, and to say, I get the impression that you are either ESTp or ESFp, and that you also look like some ESTp's or ESFp's I've known, is a far cry from your attempt at derison.
No offence Expat, seriously.. But you must realise it's wrong to state such factualy inacurate and exaggerated information as though it is correct fact, especially when you are of course authority around here and such.
People of course can take out of this what they want; and they will. However I felt compelled to put forward some more information as an external observer that I am, who has witnessed said (and other) proceedings.
Maybe we should be trying to unite the socionic community rather than unfairly saying things about each other, but hey, will that ever happen lol
I will not dig up now where I read it, but I do remember clearly, as per Gilly's quotes of the discussion, of Ganin saying stuff like, "if you have Ne, show it to me. Look at your full lips" etc etc. Now, even if he wasn't basing his typing only on that information, he was seeing it as meaningful. Which was my point, and it remains valid.
By the way, attempts by you to lecture me on what I "must realise it's wrong" will never get you anywhere.
The reason I'm not keen on his method of typing is because he places too much emphasis on the dichotomies. Basically, he condones the use of the Socionics Type Assistant (even if he didn't come up with the idea), which essentially types using dichotomies. And how is this different from MBTI? Another thing a lot of people don't like is that he says that in order to get your socionics type, you just need to flip your MBTI "J" to "p" and your "P" to a "j". What he's saying is that it's possible to find your socionics type using MBTI, which - quite frankly - I find ridiculous, as do many others. I don't like his forum because he places to much emphasis on "keeping positive" which pisses me off. It's one of the few things I really have no respect for when it comes to Alphas; the way they use Fe (perhaps the more coercive methods are down to Beta's use of it).
On the contrary, that is exactly what V.I. is about. What else should we focus on? The inborn differences in personality are linked to certain genes, and the same genes are also causing physical differences in facial structure, body type, etc. In some 10-20 years we will probably be able to tell someone's socionic type with near 100 % certainty by the use of a computer and a face scanner. The research in this area has come pretty far already. Some psychiatric conditions can be diagnoses using this method, which will continue to be refined.
Your point is grossly exaggerated, I have no inclination to elaborate on that once more with you here.
The only issue perhaps I can see as relevant is perhaps people could perceive Ganin as not revealing his thinking processes as much at they would like him to. So what we are seeing here is perhaps people reading into things which are actually incorrect from the realities of situation.
However, in any event it does look as though you are taking quotes from someone else, Gilligan, sticking to his conclusions to back up your points, and not considering other points also. I guess it seems that your mind is made up so I would expect you to use whatever methods of "discussion" in your posting to of course back up your decision, which really does seem to come from some alterior motive. Deny even if you wish, your words and actions would not correlate, I suspect.
In regards to me getting anywhere, where am I trying to go, I take you mean get somewhere with you? I'm trying to ignore my instincts but I somehow sense the only way to get somewhere with you is to first agree with, as opposed to most discussions where one should hopefully end up agreeing with the other party, or at least come to mutual agreement.
Some people will at least see what I mean in my few posts on this thread, others won't. What else is there to do or care about?
However I am suprised that you try to twist round what should be a love of facts into a lecture, when you can tell as I was appealing to your objectivity, but then that's the way of ENTJ's occasional confrontivity.
Well, maybe your right and I should re-think things. Nonetheless, It's a lovely day
*sigh* ... http://www.socionics.com/articles/howto.htmhttp://www.socionics.com/articles/jpproblem.htm
"In fact, all MBTI extrovert
According to my understanding of English, this means Ej = EJ, Ep = EP, Ij = IP, and Ip = IJ.
Why do you play Ganin's lap dog? Why do you so readily assume that Ganin's grasp is that much stronger?
Alot of people were able to essentially identify that it was her, I would imagine, on the first page of the thread when she was getting all antsy about people seeing all the Ti when it was clear that she wanted it to magically be Fi. While I am absolutely thrilled that you were able to make a 'delta' connection, that is rather irrelevant to the dominance of Ti that was in that paragraph.This is incorrect, perhaps it is 'mob' mentality function selection. If you read *my* posts you will see I had her identified prior to revealment, I wrote a post directed to her. Minde and I both realised what we meant. Maybe some 'delta' connection. What I saw in that paragraph and what I wrote and explained also later tied in very well. Oh, and my analysis was Fi with Te seeking. I have no desire to repeat myself on this.
But is that still not impossible to your system that an INTP could even possibly be an LII by saying that it is possible in some cases?
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
Which ones? And do you have links to some reports?
On genetic differences, types, VI, etc.
I won't provide pictures (I may at some point, over PM, if I manage to find some very old pictures to scan), but in my own family, we have the case of 4 men: myself, my brother, our father, and our father's father.
During our entire lives, everyone always noticed how alike my brother, my father, and myself looked. As a teenager, friends of my brother, who had never seen me, would on occasion spot me on a bus (or something), and ask, "excuse me, but are you [his name]'s brother?" In terms of body type, we are (or were, my father is dead now) all mesophorphic, with my brother and father inclining a bit more towards ectomorphic. In terms of things like lips, nose, ears, etc, there isn't really any meaningful difference. There is arguably a difference in skull structure, with mine being more towards "cubic" than theirs, which is more elongated; consistent with their being more into the ectomorphic side.
My father's father looked, again, remarkably like my father, and so like my brother and I; the difference being that he seemed to be still more ectomorphic-ish (btw he died before I was born).
Regarding types: I am LIE, my brother is ILE, my father was SEI. According to an aunt of mine, who got to know us both, my personality is very much like my grandfather's, and from what I know of his life, LIE makes sense.
So, we have a LIE who had a SEI son, who then had ILE and LIE sons. All of whom looked pretty much alike in those kinds of features.
Now, it may well be that even those differences in facial features that we had could still be connected to type; but, if I'm correct in typing my grandfather as LIE, even the body type does not help much there.
I know that this example isn't very helpful if I don't provide pictures of us all; but my point is that, to me, that already makes me rather skeptical of VI according to those kinds of features.
ETA: correcting typo, I has written "SEI" instead of "LIE" at one point.
Last edited by Expat; 06-04-2008 at 01:21 PM. Reason: Typo
If the person is correctly typed according to both Socionics and MBTT, the answer is clearly "no". It is a logical impossibility.
I have read some reports not too long ago, but I don't remember where.
not to be dick but you should add another "ETA: correcting typo" for that
"Not to be a dick", right?not to be dick but you should add another "ETA: correcting typo" for that
oh snap
If you were correct about something or if I was in the vicinity of someone saying incorrect facts or things about you, I tend to look to correct them. I'm doing whats right by whats right, and I'm correcting Expats flawed description of events. It really is quite the opposite of your first question here.
On the second question, there are a few answers to that, one thing is that I have observed Ganins typing accuracy to be far higher than what I have observed on this forum, and of course by individuals on this forum, so surely he must at least either know or be doing something better? It isn't really an assumption.
I read the paragraph formulated my opinion, and commented, I didn't read any of the replies and was not aware of any angst. My functional analysis stands. How can it be irrelevant if I was correct.Alot of people were able to essentially identify that it was her, I would imagine, on the first page of the thread when she was getting all antsy about people seeing all the Ti when it was clear that she wanted it to magically be Fi. While I am absolutely thrilled that you were able to make a 'delta' connection, that is rather irrelevant to the dominance of Ti that was in that paragraph.
Last edited by Cyclops; 06-04-2008 at 03:06 PM.
When it comes to facial structures, which is probably the most important aspect of V.I., the only thing you mention happens to be what we should expect, since LIEs are known to have a square faces and the elongatedness of ILE faces is often accentuated.
The similarity in look between family members should not be confused with the similarity in look between people of the same type. One must know what to look for, exactly those aspects of a face's structure that is relevant to typing. I cannot formulate well in words what it is that I see, but I know that I am often right in my estimations of people's types when I am using V.I., at least in so far that there are some very typical looks that I have stored in my memory, and when exactly those looks occur in reality I know what type the person is. The intuitive "feel" for the differences in V.I. looks that I use to predict a person's type can of course, in some near or distant future, be formalized, and the actual typing will be more accurately performed by computers.
You should do it more often then and not just when Ganin is involved.
And how do you judge the differences in accuracy between one person and an entire forum? Why do you think that his typings are more accurate? How do you know that they are more accurate? You cannot have a sense of what is accurate without having some sense of the truth.On the second question, there are a few answers to that, one thing is that I have observed Ganins typing accuracy to be far higher than what I have observed on this forum, and of course by individuals on this forum, so surely he must at least either know or be doing something better? It isn't really an assumption.
Because I too was correct on who wrote the paragraph. Making a connection with a person is irrelevant to the nature of the content in the paragraph, since it did not change the dominance of Ti that was in the paragraph.I read the paragraph formulated my opinion, and commented, I didn't read any of the replies and was not aware of any angst. My functional analysis stands. How can it be irrelevant if I was correct.
So why do you try to support him by posting a position of his that seems to hold error in your eyes?
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
Could you elborate on what you mean by this, please? I'm confused to be honest, Um.. Do you mean I should defend you more? In what context? How can I help?
Because just about everyone here changes there type at some point. Some people are also not allowed to change their type like UDP or FDG. I myself have been type LII, SEI, LSI, LSE and by a stroke of luck SLI, despite me joining this forum already knowing my type.. And if I didn't know what I was talking about then I would probably be the way Ezra's ended up where they're working in the Ukraine at coming up with a few more types so he can put them on. You can observe a lot of the reasons and motivations for peoples typings here to see that it's often misinformed and also personal, you can see where the errors are.And how do you judge the differences in accuracy between one person and an entire forum? Why do you think that his typings are more accurate? How do you know that they are more accurate? You cannot have a sense of what is accurate without having some sense of the truth.
Is there no chance then that you are wrong, that I am seeing something within the functional analysis that your not? Have you attempted to find out?Because I too was correct on who wrote the paragraph. Making a connection with a person is irrelevant to the nature of the content in the paragraph, since it did not change the dominance of Ti that was in the paragraph.
Where is this going Logos? What do are you really mean, or are you self projecting...
I'm beginning to wonder if I should apply mirror to the questions and statements your making to me:
Are you Expats lap dog?
Why don't you speak up for whats right more often?
Your functional analysis is irrelevant.
Seriously dude, where is this going? if it's personal about Ganin, I'd like you to advise thus, and why?
Actually, Loki connected it to Fi+Ne before she knew for sure it was me. Just to be factually accurate.
Anyway, do you, Logos, have any ideas on the implications and meaning of the paragraph being Ti and the author being me? I would like to hear your opinions, if you have any.
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
Because that was not the issue here. The issue was whether Ganin supports the J/P flip between MBTT and Socionics or not, and the correct answer is that he does not. So the accusation against Ganin was wrong. That I might disagree with Ganin on other things is irrelevant here.
I mean that you should defend truth not just when Ganin is involved.
Price of eggs in China?Because just about everyone here changes there type at some point. Some people are also not allowed to change their type like UDP or FDG. I myself have been type LII, SEI, LSI, LSE and by a stroke of luck SLI, despite me joining this forum already knowing my type.. And if I didn't know what I was talking about then I would probably be the way Ezra's ended up where they're working in the Ukraine at coming up with a few more types so he can put them on. You can observe a lot of the reasons and motivations for peoples typings here to see that it's often misinformed and also personal, you can see where the errors are.
Of course there is a chance that I am wrong. What is your point?Is there no chance then that you are wrong, that I am seeing something within the functional analysis that your not? Have you attempted to find out?
Obviously at this rate of not, it is going the way of the dodo.Where is this going Logos? What do are you really mean, or are you self projecting...
Okay. That is your prerogative.I'm beginning to wonder if I should apply mirror to the questions and statements your making to me:
Yes, but only when he let's me.Are you Expats lap dog?
Do I not?Why don't you speak up for whats right more often?
Why?Your functional analysis is irrelevant.
Merely pointing out inaccuracies and logical holes in your initial post. If you wish for me to stop responding, then cease making them.Seriously dude, where is this going?
And if it is not personal?if it's personal about Ganin, I'd like you to advise thus, and why?
Expat, thehotelambush, Joy, and I saw heavy doses of Ti. What is your point?
It could have been in the role function, but it was Ti nonetheless. Your emotional reactions to the responses that your paragraph contained Ti was more informative in regards to your Fi > Ti. If you write in that manner extendedly, then you should have reason for concern of being mistyped, but if that is a rarity, then you have less reason to doubt being an EII.Anyway, do you, Logos, have any ideas on the implications and meaning of the paragraph being Ti and the author being me? I would like to hear your opinions, if you have any.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
My attempted point was - You said that it was only after people knew I was the author that they tried to justify the Fi-ness of it all. I was correcting you by saying, "No, Loki saw Fi+Ne before she knew it was me." That's all.
Yes, thank you, I realize that conundrum already. By the way, have you read any of my explanations of the contents of the paragraph? The latter portion of the thread, especially?
By the way, as I have said before but it bears repeating here, I am less concerned about my typing than I am about the theory as a whole.
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
Haha Logos, maybe you should try answering more questions than asking them for a change. What's what you point man. There is no logical contradictions in my post, and if there are you've certainly not pointed them out.
Allow me to give you some pointers: Whats your point about Ganin?! What's your point about the other side of the story with Gilligan?! And if it's there's any point, just say it.
Hey, you're a clever guy, so why not contribute something constructive that we can talk about eh instead hiding behind this ping pong posting of yours?
Ok..I'll try and make it easier: if you state your position on Ganin and if you state your position in regards to the extra information on Gilligan then I might come back and discuss it with you.
If so, he contributed to it himself. I should say that what I quoted only implies the standard J/P switch if I/E in socionics is the same as I/E in MBTI. Otherwise it just means j = EJ + IP and p = IJ + EP.
Last edited by Exodus; 06-04-2008 at 10:20 PM.
Correct me of what? I said: "That paragraph was Ti. It was only after Minde revealed herself as the author, that the thread became subject to apologetics of how an Fi-dominant could have written that."
I did not say that no one said that the statement had Fi, but that there was a shift to apologetics and justification for a Ti statement written by an Fi-type.
You wanted me to share my thoughts, so I did. But what do you mean that you are concerned about the theory as a whole?Yes, thank you, I realize that conundrum already. By the way, have you read any of my explanations of the contents of the paragraph? The latter portion of the thread, especially?
By the way, as I have said before but it bears repeating here, I am less concerned about my typing than I am about the theory as a whole.
I hate to do a Phaedrus here, but most of your post below was rather irrelevant:
The problem was that the establishment of a connection does not prove anything, other than allowing you to broadcast that you "had a moment." Identifying her prior to revealment is also fairly irrelevant since you were not the only one, so your ability to do so does not amount to much argumentatively. Furthermore, just because you went against the consensus of the 'mob,' does not somehow make you more correct or the consensus of the mob less correct.This is incorrect, perhaps it is 'mob' mentality function selection. If you read *my* posts you will see I had her identified prior to revealment, I wrote a post directed to her. Minde and I both realised what we meant. Maybe some 'delta' connection. What I saw in that paragraph and what I wrote and explained also later tied in very well. Oh, and my analysis was Fi with Te seeking. I have no desire to repeat myself on this.
It was not a point about Ganin, but a point about you and your assumptions about the validity of Ganin's typings and accuracy.Allow me to give you some pointers: Whats your point about Ganin?! What's your point about the other side of the story with Gilligan?! And if it's there's any point, just say it.
Like what?Hey, you're a clever guy, so why not contribute something constructive that we can talk about eh instead hiding behind this ping pong posting of yours?
Extra information on Gilligan? What are you talking about?Ok..I'll try and make it easier: if you state your position on Ganin and if you state your position in regards to the extra information on Gilligan then I might come back and discuss it with you.
Last edited by Logos; 06-05-2008 at 01:29 AM.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
[quote=Logos;371777]Correct me of what? I said: "That paragraph was Ti. It was only after Minde revealed herself as the author, that the thread became subject to apologetics of how an Fi-dominant could have written that."
I did not say that no one said that the statement had Fi, but that there was a shift to apologetics and justification for a Ti statement written by an Fi-type.
[quote]Yes, thank you, I realize that conundrum already. By the way, have you read any of my explanations of the contents of the paragraph? The latter portion of the thread, especially?
By the way, as I have said before but it bears repeating here, I am less concerned about my typing than I am about the theory as a whole.You know. As a dominant sensing type, I would enjoy the sensation of crushing your skull in, box head.You wanted me to share my thoughts, so I did. But what do you mean that you are concerned about the theory as a whole?
I hate to do a Phaedrus here, but most of your post below was rather irrelevant:
The problem was that the establishment of a connection does not prove anything, other than allowing you to broadcast that you "had a moment." Identifying her prior to revealment is also fairly irrelevant since you were not the only one, so your ability to do so does not amount to much argumentatively. Furthermore, just because you went against the consensus of the 'mob,' does not somehow make you more correct or the consensus of the mob less correct.
It was not a point about Ganin, but a point about you and your assumptions about the validity of Ganin's typings and accuracy.
Like what?
Extra information on Gilligan? What are you talking about?
I feel honored that I stir such sincere feelings inside you.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
can you at least remember which psychiatric conditions they were referring to?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote