.......
..........
.......
Last edited by soggy-flakes; 08-08-2009 at 08:06 AM.
I'm stuck between alpha and delta.
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
.
The subtopic NT in Alpha fits me very nicely
All Hail The Flying Spaghetti Monster
Beta and gamma seem the most right, but actually I agree with Erkki. None of them sounds good.
Beta ST and gamma NT and gamma SF seem plausible.
EIE, ENFj, intuitive subtype.
E3 (probably 3w4)
Cool ILI hubbys are better than LSIs any time!
Old blog: http://firsttimeinusa.blogspot.com/
New blog: http://having-a-kid.blogspot.com/
I have never been able to indentify with supposed "quadra spirits".
They all look enjoyable to me.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
ditto. i don't think they really work for INTp/ENTj.Originally Posted by FDG
both of the gamma statements sound most like me, except that bit about serving society. these quadra descriptions MUST be wrong. I'm ISTj!!!
that's me when I get high, shroom, or take amphetemines (recreationally) with INTjsFreely exchanging new ideas and theories. Systematizing knowledge and creating new categories and speculative hypotheses.
Why didn't you just direct them to the page instead of rewording it? Because IMO, the way you took away some words completely destroyed it's usefulness.
http://www.socionics.us/theory/quadras.shtml
(I love Rick's site. More people need to see it.)
From my point of view, those aren't meant to type individuals, their meant to show typical quadra behavior. It's meant to show how the quadra acts and what they value.
Where are all these ppl coming from?
they're all hugo
I considered it. He seems to prefer names with vowels seperated by constanants. All his name choices feel block-y. haha
it's not just that
All of them sound good to me except Gamma
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
how would you define "typical quadra behavior" if it can't be reflected by the members of that quadra?
Me fourMe three. I think being stuck in an all beta or all gamma group would make me uncomfortable.same, even though I don't feel very close to any of the descriptions.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
From these descriptions, I'm clearly Alpha, and not even remotely Gamma.
However, I also think that the quadra descriptions approach tends to contradict other information in Socionics. Basically, the typing by quadra description theory is as far from other portions of Socionics as Socionics is from MBTI.
I agree, quadra identification is far too generalized and can be attributed to anyone, which makes it inconceivable to be taken seriously for typing.
I affiliate mostly with alpha and delta equally.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
I understand quadras, but no, they cannot "type" people exactly. For instance, I do not relate to Beta at all... I relate to Beta the least of any of the quadras (then alpha, then delta). However, I am very clearly ISTj.
of course you are.
Yes, and in addition to that, it actually contradicts other conceptions in Socionics of whatI agree, quadra identification is far too generalizedis, especially when expressed as a 1st function.
Of course, one of the ongoing discussions has been what are the Socionics types closest to when compared to other Jung-based typologies. Apart from the obvious differences in typing methods, there's still an underlying reality to be considered...namely, the phenomena being studied.
As has been pointed out in many threads, Socionics tends to defineand
If the quadra descriptions mentioned in this thread are correct, then INTj would be most similar to INTP in other typologies (MBTI, Keirsey), and INTp most similar to INTJ.
I don't think that it is that simple. In some respects I believe that the INTjs really fit the Alpha quadra better than the INTps. I wouldn't be surprised if the INTjs in general are more "critical of mercantilistic views, ostentatious displays of wealth and status symbols" than the INTps. I also believe that INTps in general have a more "realistic, materialistic outlook on life" than INTjs. But I have no empirical justification of those beliefs other than my own real life experiences with a rather limited number of INTjs and INTps.If the quadra descriptions mentioned in this thread are correct, then INTj would be most similar to INTP in other typologies (MBTI, Keirsey), and INTp most similar to INTJ.
The role of the Gamma quadra is to criticize the ideas of others and to perfect them rather than to come up with brand new ideas of their own, and that role should suit the INTps better than the INTjs.
But the claim that the members of the Alpha quadra like to create "speculative hypotheses without necessarily intending to see their theories tested or implemented" is somewhat misleading, because it is the INTjs who want their theories implemented but not necessarily tested, whereas it is the opposite for INTps, who want to see their theories tested but not necessarily implemented.
Do you really see that as applying to yourself?The role of the Gamma quadra is to criticize the ideas of others and to perfect them rather than to come up with brand new ideas of their own, and that role should suit the INTps better than the INTjs.
For me, I'm always happier coming up with and implementing my own ideas, although when it's not possible to work on my own ideas, I'll settle for critiquing or improving other peoples'.
Actually, when one thinks of famous people listed as INTp, I can't see that that statement would apply to them either....people like Newton, Jung, Pascal, etc. Of course, as with anyone else, they got the ideas from somewhere, but they certainly were interested in developing their own, unique ideas; that's not just the domain of INTjs and ENTps, apparently.
Re: Quadra identification- does this work?
Alpha is ok on occasion, no way for Beta, Gamma is partly ok, Delta is mainly ok
Alpha NT is fine, Alpha SF sucks, Beta NF sucks, Beta ST is partly ok, Gamma NT is fine, Gamma SF is fine, Delta NF is not so good, Delta ST is mostly ok
So, from this point of view, I identify mostly with Gamma and then Delta.
"But the claim that the members of the Alpha quadra like to create "speculative hypotheses without necessarily intending to see their theories tested or implemented" is somewhat misleading, because it is the INTjs who want their theories implemented but not necessarily tested, whereas it is the opposite for INTps, who want to see their theories tested but not necessarily implemented."
INTjs do not necessarily want their theories implemented at all, but rather enjoy devising them out of the sheer joy/pride/sense of satisfaction that is dervied from doing so. In particular circumstances, they might, but it is not a necessary condition for INTjs to bother with a theory.
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
Yes, in a way. But I agree with you that there is something wrong with the quadras.Do you really see that as applying to yourself?
I'm not sure there is a contradiction here. It might depend on what you want to emphasize. I think that I am better at criticizing and eliminating flaws and logical imperfections than coming up with fresh, original ideas that are possible to implement. But who doesn't want to, or would prefer, coming up with and implementing their own ideas?For me, I'm always happier coming up with and implementing my own ideas, although when it's not possible to work on my own ideas, I'll settle for critiquing or improving other peoples'.
I don't disagree with you here. But which type is the ultimate critic in general? Of course it is the INTp. That type is better than any other type at finding imperfections in theories, logical arguments, projects etc. That doesn't mean that it is the only thing they might be good at.Actually, when one thinks of famous people listed as INTp, I can't see that that statement would apply to them either....people like Newton, Jung, Pascal, etc. Of course, as with anyone else, they got the ideas from somewhere, but they certainly were interested in developing their own, unique ideas; that's not just the domain of INTjs and ENTps, apparently.
I didn't say that INTjs necessarily want their theories implemented. I said that they want their theories implemented, which is another thing. And that is of course meant in comparison with INTps. There might be some other types that are more keen than INTjs on implementing theories.INTjs do not necessarily want their theories implemented at all, but rather enjoy devising them out of the sheer joy/pride/sense of satisfaction that is dervied from doing so.
Right. Theories are probably not as important to INTjs as they are to INTps. INTjs are more like other types in that respect, since most people want to see a practical application of a theory to find it interesting. And some types probably want to skip theories all together and only focus on practical outcomes.In particular circumstances, they might, but it is not a necessary condition for INTjs to bother with a theory.
I don't know. Both these roles appeal to me, too. The descriptions of the quadras, and maybe even the whole concept of the quadras, are in need of correction.If alpha and gamma are opposite quadras, why do both of these roles appeal to me so much?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote