Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: LII's and socionics

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default LII's and socionics

    Random observation really, not really thought about it too much.

    It seems like they always end up specialising and advancing in one part of it, and in a kinda theoretical aspect.

    SG - VI
    RSV3 - Subtypes
    JohnDo/Che (whatever name is) - DCNH
    DarkAngelFireWolf69 - Subtypes, typing just about all celebs at ENFj or ENTp
    Tcaud - Dual type theory

    I can't really think of other types that do this sort of more theoretical, maybe "abstract" specialising.

    But it seems that most other people struggle to get to grips with what they are coming from. VI probably works but no ones really been able to pick up the skill which SG uses it, same with DCNH (making it into face shapes and other stuff), and subtype strength for RSV3 - I don't really meet people where I can classify their subtype strength to any great usefullness for myself when interacting with them. Dual type theory is interesting but I can't really seem to understand how it's worked out.

    Dunno about the other INTj's, not even sure if it's thread worthy or correct but thought i'd mention it cause i'm bored. Maybe other INTj's end up doing something like this with some other of their interest.

    Seems on the face of it a bit eccentric direction to me, and I end up not really understanding it.

  2. #2
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,418
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    yep, LII's like to make hypothesis.

    Ti = speculative connections
    Ne = weird ideas

    So you have all the right ingredients.

    Often the hypothesis is worth nothing, but once in a while they create something truly magnificent!

  3. #3
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,937
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't think they specialize. It's just a small number of the ideas they investigate that really make an impact. When you line up everything tcaudilllg does, for example, you get something like this:

    - exertion types (dual type theory)
    - ideological theory ("political types")
    - +/- aspect of functions
    - dimensionality of functions
    - immanence/sainthood/pathology/shadow types, etc.

    it's actually the easiest to relate to of these (dual type theory) that people end up knowing about.

  4. #4
    JohnDo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    LII-IEI
    Posts
    636
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You forgot to mention KrigTheViking who had the great idea to use the contradictory subtype descriptions to get DCNH descriptions. Unfortunately he is not convinced of his own idea anymore.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Dual-type theory is simple to explain. ("You have another type system inside you. Its existence explains why you are not good at that same things as that other LII.") It's also damn useful -- a lot of issues in the world probably exist because people don't know the 2nd type level exists. Conflicts between conflictors at the EM level are certainly more severe than at the level of information metabolism. When more people learn about the 2nd type dimension, then I think the world will become more peaceful.

    I don't talk much about the immanence theories because they are scary. Dimensionality is difficult to understand, and most people simply don't get the political theory. The next step from understanding the political theory is immanence, anyway.

    I think immanence is the only idea in the world that can drive a person insane from knowing it, or at least drive them even farther over the edge than they already were!

    I'm really trying to make people understand the social potential theory, however, because that goes hand in hand with the dual-type theory.

  6. #6
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,608
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You're right, Cyclops, this does seem to be a trend. I think it has to do with the LII way of learning a system thoroughly, and then logically expanding it and/or modifying it to explain new data (or old, as-yet unexplained data).

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnDo View Post
    You forgot to mention KrigTheViking who had the great idea to use the contradictory subtype descriptions to get DCNH descriptions. Unfortunately he is not convinced of his own idea anymore.
    I've always thought of it as a fascinating rough correlation, nothing more. You're the one who took it way more seriously than I had intended.
    Quaero Veritas.

  7. #7
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,418
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Huginn View Post
    I want to make socionics as simple as possible, which I think is a valid LII perspective, but of course you need to agree that I'm LII for this to mean anything.
    simple meaning breaking it down to it's smallest pieces?

    or simple by meaning, easy to understand?

    Those are two different things, I personally like option 2, but IMO LII's like option 1.

Posting Permissions

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