.
So, what makes a socionist a socionist, anyways?
.
Last edited by aixelsyd; 08-12-2011 at 10:15 PM.
A confirmation by Dr. Antonina Volkova PhD Sociology Rusia.
PhD is Sociology or Psychology plus years of Socionics typing...lol
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
What makes one an enthusiast? And is it really any different from a socionicist?Originally Posted by aixelsyd
I think Krig's definition could apply to socionics enthusiast as well.
What makes one a skeptic?
For the record, many socionicists are also skeptics. It's not necessarily one who entirely disregards socionics although it can mean that. There are several schools of thought in socionics, and one can strongly believe in one school of thought but be highly skeptical of another.
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
Yes. Ask my friend hitta.
Oh wait, I forgot. Hitta is the exception to everything.
I agree. ...Mostly.
x
To become a true socionist, u must defeat Ephemeros in a duel to stand a chance
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant
--> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
A socionicist can be a psychologist/philosopher/scientist/information scientists/engineer(these are the things that I find most similar to various parts of socionics) that knows socionics.
Generally people will respect you for what you've done in life, whether it be academic or professional. I wouldn't practice socionics or type people for a living, although the training might help me in a professional environment. However I am very interest in the model and tying it to modern studies in the fields I've listed. In this fashion, the theory of socionics can achieve more validity and be easier to express to non-socionicists.
> what makes a socionist a socionist, anyways?
should do:
1) true theories
2) abbility to correctly use them for practical use
Niether 1 nor 2 have proof for anyone. There are no socionists by objectively reasons, but many by subjectively.
No, they don't have proof for you. Idiots who prefer naivete will never get the proof they desire. Even the neuroscience will ultimately prove insufficient, because the naive won't like the answer.
just been Affirmed as a Socionist by Dr. Sergei Phonimaninoff PhD Archaeology, Slough, and Professor of Nihilism Borisia Kornikova Esq., Norilsk.
The ability further understanding in the field of socionics and have your findings positively impact others AND they withstand the test of time. A good socionicist can even convice skeptics of the validity.
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
If you spend every waking hour pondering Socionics matters then it is a good start. But having lucid dreams about it is not something which just anyone can achieve.
By Piatnitski V.V.
What makes you NOT a socionist
- Socionics started and continues as a MODEL approach which models information processing of the psyche. The generally accepted model now is the Model A. If we forget this, then we completely miss the point. If we think that socionics studies real people in real life (instead of models of TIMs), or types as described in some descriptions, or relationships between real people (instead of relations between TIMs) then we are missing the point.
- Typing in socionics is nothing but TIM IDENTIFICATION based on the model A. If you have demonstrated correlation between person’s behavior or thinking or acting and the respective Model A, then and only then you have identified this person’s type. If it seems to you that the person looks similar to someone who you consider to be such-and-such type or if he seems to conform to some description or if he seems to be in a certain relationship to a “known” type or if he has passed some test or else, then, please have no illusion - you still didNOT identify his type.
- RELATIONS in socionics are NOT descriptions of some real life observations but analysis of interactions between different TIM modelswhich takes in consideration interactions between the models' functions that process the same information elements.
Basically that’s all. But it has very serious consequences:
Even if you think that talking about types is enough to be doing socionics, you might be wrong. A “type” does not necessarily mean a “model” – there are plenty of types without any model behind them at all. Take for example the temperaments or the Myers-Briggs types. They are just some type names with some description behind them, whereas a true model would be a set of elements with defined relations between them.
If you are typing by using some tools like the Reinin’s dichotomies or Myers-Briggs indicator or VI traits or DNA analysis or brain MRI or fingerprints or handwriting or horoscopes or numerology or any fancy stuff like that, please, take care to demonstrate (either theoretically or practically) that there is a definite correlation between those tools and the Model A. Otherwise you might be well typing some “other” types.
Use of socionics in order to describe some real life situations without referring to specific models or mechanisms of model interactions could be very deceiving. If you did not identify (or supposed) the TIMs of the participants of a real life situation and if you do not consider interaction between their functions how can you be sure that you are making a socionics analysis at all?
Providing oneself as an example of such-and-such type’s behavior could be very incorrect mainly for two reasons: (I) one cannot judge himselfadequately when it comes to his low-dimensional (you can also call them weak/vulnerable) functions; (II) one’s real life function’s acquired experiencecan be different. For the same reason could be erroneous an argument of the type: “I would say/do the same thing, hence he/she is my identical type”.
As far as one realizes all the said above, I personally don’t mind if one is using Model A or not. If one is using numerology or astrology, or any other typology, please, keep in mind that this is NOT socionics.
http://en.socionicasys.org/bibliotek...t-a-socionist-
Yep, it was the anti-thesis. Thus, just ought to make sure that you are aware of these boundaries and it'd make you a Socionist.
Last edited by Metaphor; 12-27-2021 at 10:34 AM. Reason: Verdict.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
