Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Improving Type Descriptions

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,309
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Improving Type Descriptions

    I've looked at many type descriptions, and I've found that I can relate to some but not others. I've thought of some ways that type descriptions could generally be improved:

    - Be as general as possible. For example, in describing Ti, it makes more sense to say that Ti dominant types try to live a structured life than to say that everything they do is done in accordance with a rule. Or to say that they are theoretically logical, as opposed to saying that they have a tendency to design theories from the bottom-up.

    - Provide alternatives. Talk about how Ne dominant types like to generate ideas, see many possibilities, start projects and don't finish them, are attracted to novelty, etc. Try to mention as many different variations on the same theme as possible, elaborate on them, and mention that, for example, Ne dominant types value most one or more of those variations. By giving as many different variations as possible, it's more likely that the person will see themselves as their correct type, and by explicitly stating that not all of the points necessarily apply, the person won't necessarily be turned away from their correct type either.

    - Give concrete examples. It is much easier for people to see if the behaviour mentioned applies to themselves if real-life examples are given.

    - Avoid descriptions of characteristics that seem unusual. For example, Ni-dominant types are often described as being keenly aware of the flow of time. I doubt that there are many people who are obsessed with time. Better descriptions, might, for example, describe their imagination, their attraction to the surreal, beautiful or unusual, etc.

    That's all I have. Maybe others could come up with some ideas as to what a good type description entails.

    Jason

  2. #2

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

    Default

    Your suggestions here are good, Jason. The socionic type descriptions can definitely be improved. That about providing alternatives and giving concrete examples is especially important. And there is too much mumbo-jumbo crap stemming from Jung's eight types, like the talk about time intuition in relation to . (Jung talked about N in general as the time dimension.) is about correctly estimating probabilities (but not only that), which is related to time in a sense but not in the mystical way that is described in many type profiles.

  3. #3
    JuJu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield, Massachusetts, USA
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    2,703
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    I've looked at many type descriptions, and I've found that I can relate to some but not others. I've thought of some ways that type descriptions could generally be improved:

    - Be as general as possible. For example, in describing Ti, it makes more sense to say that Ti dominant types try to live a structured life than to say that everything they do is done in accordance with a rule. Or to say that they are theoretically logical, as opposed to saying that they have a tendency to design theories from the bottom-up.

    - Provide alternatives. Talk about how Ne dominant types like to generate ideas, see many possibilities, start projects and don't finish them, are attracted to novelty, etc. Try to mention as many different variations on the same theme as possible, elaborate on them, and mention that, for example, Ne dominant types value most one or more of those variations. By giving as many different variations as possible, it's more likely that the person will see themselves as their correct type, and by explicitly stating that not all of the points necessarily apply, the person won't necessarily be turned away from their correct type either.

    - Give concrete examples. It is much easier for people to see if the behaviour mentioned applies to themselves if real-life examples are given.

    - Avoid descriptions of characteristics that seem unusual. For example, Ni-dominant types are often described as being keenly aware of the flow of time. I doubt that there are many people who are obsessed with time. Better descriptions, might, for example, describe their imagination, their attraction to the surreal, beautiful or unusual, etc.

    That's all I have. Maybe others could come up with some ideas as to what a good type description entails.

    Jason
    Good job Jason... I appreciate what you're doing here.

    I agree with you--the Socionics descriptions can be improved... The ones on the wiki are the best so far, IMO--and even those are incomplete... (Hell, the ENFp isn't even half done, despite bing the most popular type page on wikisocion.)

Posting Permissions

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