IM element descriptions
Does anyone know where to find clear and accurate definition of each of the functions. I am trying to teach someone about socionics but most of the definitions I find are a lttle to abstract for the average person to get a good understanding of what the function is about. I thought these descriptions might be okay: http://oldforumlinkviewtopic.php?t=5...er=asc&start=0
Does anyone have any better descriptions or disagree with the ones from that link?
“No psychologist should pretend to understand what he does not understand... Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand nothing.” -Anton Chekhov
http://kevan.org/johari?name=Bardia0
http://kevan.org/nohari?name=Bardia0
Those are not element descriptions. These are:
- internal statics of objects
- internal dynamics of fields
- external statics of objects
- external dynamics of fields
- internal dynamics of objects
- internal statics of fields
- external dynamics of objects
- external statics of fields
these are not descriptions. they describe nothing. they are definitions, more specifically very bad Ti-blather definitions.Originally Posted by Gilly
Those are not element descriptions. These are:
Wrong. They are arguably the most fundamental piece of theory to observing and implimenting Socionics in real life, in my opinion. You just have to fully understand what they mean.
And regardless...
Last edited by Gilly; 12-23-2007 at 04:02 AM.
these definitions are completel bullshit and you will never change my mind.
end of discussion, for me.
those descriptions are just neat little abstract phrases. A newbie wouldn't know what they meant if he didn't understand the nature of each function. they make sense, and are fundamental in the sense that they are succinct, but not the most important.
Hmmmm....
I think this would apply to some but not others. It doesn't entirely work for Te and Ti, for example.
Generally speaking, it works for Si, Ni, Fe, and Se though.
Interesting. I'll have to think about this a bit. On first glance it looks good. An object is a person, place, thing, or idea. A field is a connection or relationship between people, places, things, or ideas.Object: anything represented in language by a noun
Field: a connection between things represented by nouns
I don't necessarily agree with this though... I mean, everything changes over time. I tend to think of "dynamics" as "activities" or "movement". "Static" can be best understood through looking at latin...Static: not necessarily affected by the passing of time
Dynamic: necessarily affected by the passing of time
Personally, it helps me understand "static" when I look at the root of the word static, and other associated roots:
sist, sta, stit
assist, persist, circumstance, stamina, status, state, static, stable, stationary, substituteOther related words:The root STA-STO-STIT-SIS meaning "stand" has the following 25 "everyday words".assist, circumstance, constable, consistent, constant, constitution, destination, destiny, distance, equidistant, establish, existence, inconsistency, instability, instantaneous, institution, obstacle, persist, reconstitute, stage, stanza, static, statue, substitution, superstitious.
So... It's not exactly something that doesn't change... it's more something that isn't changing at that very moment. Generally, I look at it as dynamics being activities and statics being states.Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stable Norm, Normal, healthy, homeostasis ... Stadium Sta Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Staff Distaff, ... Stake Sta Stadium Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stalactite Sta Stadium Stake Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stalagmite Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stale Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stalemate Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stalk Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stall Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stallion Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stan Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stand Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Standard Status, Statistical, State ... Stapes Ear Star Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Stat Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay State Status, Statistical, State, Standard ... Statement Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Station Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Statist Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statistic Statue Stature Statute Stay Statistic Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statue Stature Statute Stay Statistical Status, State, Standard ... Statue Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Stature Statute Stay Stature Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Statute Stay Status Statistical, State, Standard ... Statute Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Stay Stay Sta Stadium Stake Stalactite Stalagmite Stale Stalemate Stalk Stall Stallion Stan Stand Star Stat Statement Station Statist Statistic Statue Stature Statute
If there's a red ball, the statics of it are the color, size, shape, consistency, potential, definition, etc. The dynamics would be what it's doing, what's happening to it, how it's changing, etc.
The state of something can change. The change itself is dynamic though.
We talked about this at one point before... you ended up saying that they're not complete/total bullshit, they're just useful. If you recall, to say that it's bullshit is to say Socionics is bullshit. If you want a theory that does not implement these meanings, go back to Jung (or MBTT).
That is a big "just". Like Joy said, it takes a long time, and even though you understand the element dichotomies intuitively, I doubt that you could explain them correctly to another person ("observable by the senses" doesn't even begin to capture what external really means).
Understanding of socionics has to propagate back and forth between observation and theory; you can't have one without the other, and this is how I still am learning socionics.
Somehow I don't think those would be useful to teach to someone new to socionics.Those are not element descriptions. These are:
“No psychologist should pretend to understand what he does not understand... Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand nothing.” -Anton Chekhov
http://kevan.org/johari?name=Bardia0
http://kevan.org/nohari?name=Bardia0
If you introduced someone to Socionics and were able to start them off with these, they would have a good chance at developing a functional understanding of the theory in a short space of time. I wish for the life of me that someone had plopped these in my lap and insisted I learn and understand them the moment I arrived at the forum; I would do as much for newbies here if they weren't rejected as "Ti-blither" by just about everyone.
External: observable by the senses
Internal: deduced from information gained via the senses
Static: not necessarily affected by the passing of time
Dynamic: necessarily affected by the passing of time
Object: anything represented in language by a noun
Field: a connection between things represented by nouns
Man these are strict logical definitions, quit piddling all over them. You're just rambling.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around a few of them, but for the most part, these actually seem like really good definitions. Providing these definitions plus examples seems like a much better way to start someone off with socionics than saying that Ti is "structural logic" and Te is "business logic" and Ni is "intuition of time" and blah blah blah. It would also be a good way to avoid a lot of the misconceptions about the functions that pop up.Those are not element descriptions. These are:
delta nf (?) ... 4w5 (?)
There are two ways to avoid misconceptions:
1. Explain everything in great detail, providing lots of examples of what you mean
2. Use unintelligable definitions and descriptions
It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.
To you, maybe. Don't undercut what you don't understand.There are two ways to avoid misconceptions:
1. Explain everything in great detail, providing lots of examples of what you mean
2. Use unintelligable definitions and descriptions
Joy, I like "measurable/unmeasurable" for external/internal.
Again, I'll mention the constitution as something that hasn't been affected by time. In a TeSi sense, yes, the actual piece of paper and the ink have "changed," but their TiSe effect on the way the country is governed is not.
Last edited by Gilly; 12-24-2007 at 02:40 PM.
I posted Augusta's to the Articles section. Check 'em out.
perhaps (that's what I assumed you meant, and chances are you're right... though I have a difficult time with the concept that something is useless just because you don't understand how to use it...)
Personally though, the whole theory of Socionics has made much, much more sense and has been a lot more useful (and functions have been easier to spot in others) once I was able to grasp most of these meanings. Like I said though, it took a while.
+2
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote