IMHO enneagram is too vague. For a person havingOriginally Posted by electric sheep
and
in the super-id block you need to provide a system that is rock solid and ready to use
.
But I think that socionics does lack the descriptions of people's health. But then again - you can figure it out by yourself through studying their weak functions... Well if someone has too much of free time he may try and enlighten us with the 'health levels' according to socionics model.
Actually, I think this has more to do with a tendency to oversimplify socionics than its theoretical roots or inherent shortcomings. Plus, a lot of socionics' principles are so vaguely defined/understood that people want to make things easier by falling back on rigid stereotypes of functions and types. I agree with what you're saying on some level, but I think part of it has to do with socionists wanting to take the easy way out by conjuring up petrified models instead of exploring what socionics means as a fluid guide to psychological processes.
I totally agree with this, and I think exploring how the same types can develop in different ways and manifest in more healthy / less healthy forms could illuminate many aspects of socionics theory and practice. Right now, socionics is basically a collection of one-dimensional caricatures of types, which is one reason it's so hard to apply socionics on a personal level. An important step towards bringing socionics to theoretical maturity is going to be turning these rigid models into flexible understandings of how types can unfold in different ways with many subtleties. Socionics is currently a very NeTi system in the sense that it tries to cut to the static, internal essence of people and fit this this understanding into an impeccably precise, logically consistent framework -- but this isn't enough to transform socionics into something living.
EIE-Ni
So true, man! Model A is too static, look at the T model - it is dynamic. Why? Because its made by an ILI. Funny how static/dynamic reflects in socionical works.
Somebody who consistently points out the weaknesses of others (perceived weaknesses usually), they themselves are not healthy.
I take it seriously, actually more so than socionics. I think it is a better system because it explains the types basic fears and needs, the only thing socionics has going for it ultimately is intertype relations, which are very useful. I mean if you take personality typology so seriously then you might as well hang out at a MBTI site.
EIE tritype 5w4, 4w5, 9w1
As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being.
Carl Jung, "Memories, Dreams, Reflections", 1962
I actually think socionics can be too extreme. You have 16 types and it seems like they are trying to imply that all people across the board should fit the type descriptions, which isn't the case. Enneagram gives you more leg room.
EIE tritype 5w4, 4w5, 9w1
As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being.
Carl Jung, "Memories, Dreams, Reflections", 1962
I don't take enneagram damn seriously seeing how people of one type today, pretty sure and having it all 'settled and decided', end up another tomorrow when the wind blows. I think I shouldn't take some people seriously as well.
I just use it, be it enneagram or something else, and I think I do it effectively.
Yeah it's kind of irritating when so many people change their type on a weekly basis. It makes it difficult to read anything they have to say in regards to socionics theory.
EIE tritype 5w4, 4w5, 9w1
As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being.
Carl Jung, "Memories, Dreams, Reflections", 1962
Same hereI use it in more workaday situations than anyone else, I don't really theorize much, but if I see a
/
valuer and/or a
/
With me, I have to meet the person, see how they respond to me, see how they handle things, see a lot of stuff - otherwise, I don't get too many typings done, the difficulty is too much more than the benefit, especially here... once people are aware of the system, they'll start going about things differently than they did before, possibly as a growth experience... I know I did, and I've still much to do...
I like Socionics for the raw mechanics of it mostly, I'm working on something to iron out all of the odd spots, but it will take a while to complete. I like it that you mentioned MBTI; the thing I missed most about it was that there were percentages involved and a certain analog quality to it, things weren't "here" or "there" strictly... once again, I'll see what I can do...
Last edited by woofwoofl; 06-27-2011 at 04:09 PM. Reason: needed to write more, I stopped typing but the ideas kept coming
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
I'm not into theory at all, never were, practice is where it is at and I'm not talking only about socionics theory or something. I find it quite amusing to be honest, this talk about some type description/functions one relates to just to say/do something different the other day. A little consistency doesn't hurt, does it ?
lol i was just playing around with the idea of being type 6 today.
i think its sort of useful and i like that its not so rigid (like i dont REALLY have to question if i'm a 6 if i see 6ish characteristics in myself because i have a line to it as a 9 and its like flexible in that way). the variants are really interesting when i see them playing out. i dont actively try to type people using it, either i see it or i dont, and i think this attitude toward it is part of why i'm so much more tolerant of it than socionics (among other reasons). idk about taking it "seriously" though.
And what did you settle and decide upon ?
If you say so, it is so
I take enneagram seriously. It certainly has more value than subtype. The problem with it is that it's not nicely divisible by 2 like socionics is.
i'm about toDo you take enneagram seriously?
yes
I think the enneagram is very useful in understanding yourself outside of socionics. Humans are very complex and to think they can be explained with only one system you have to be deluding yourself. Enneagram helps me understand aspects of my behaviour that cannot be adequately explained solely through socionics.
“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 like the enneagram the best imho, but I think there is alot of crap out there about it.
It's the system that clicks with my understanding of people the best.
Socionics is good but it just doesn't fit me like a glove. Enneagram does for whatever reason.
I don't take typology in general altogether too seriously, but I like Enneagram.
What do these signs mean—, etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason,
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor DarkAngelFireWolf69, Dmitri Lytov
Enneagram is the most valuable personality typology by far concerning personal use and growth.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Agreed.
Enneagram, socionic, and mbti in a less important way can probably be used too as a tool to heal and speculate on determined psychological problem.
Idk its perhaps already the case.
"The final delusion is the belief that one has lost all delusion."
-- Maurice Chapelain
Reply With Quote
