A better plan of attack would be "socionics within self-development". It gives you the option to discard socionics entirely.
A better plan of attack would be "socionics within self-development". It gives you the option to discard socionics entirely.
The trickster is at one and the same time creator and destroyer, giver and negator, he who dupes others, and who is always duped himself.
I am not happy about your post; it discounts so many aspects of individual personality traits a and characteristics of all kinds of people; you almost assume that everyone, even with the knowledge of socionics has an idea about why they do the things they do... If they discard socionics and forgo a lot of understanding, not knowledge, of what happens bellow the visible scene, it would be like you saying that the world of microorganisms don't matter if you can't see them. I can say this a million times and I'm still sorry that people don't get it.Originally Posted by RedBeard
-
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
I think you're interpreting something that isn't there.
I'm saying that socionics isn't key to understanding oneself or one's motivations. You may understand yourself using any number of platforms, but the richness of "the self" remains. Introspection is a function of any sane mind. How could you even believe in socionics without believing in a faculty for introspection?
The trickster is at one and the same time creator and destroyer, giver and negator, he who dupes others, and who is always duped himself.
Phone was being a bitch. Sorry redbeard.
I'm surprised that Steve Jobs character didn't design a touch screen to effectively respond to slaps.
The trickster is at one and the same time creator and destroyer, giver and negator, he who dupes others, and who is always duped himself.
I don't disagree with this point as people's individual circumstances shape a lot of how they view the world and what they want out of it despite being ABLE to do the things they do, which is explained by Socionics. That ABILITY IS WHAT SOCIONICS TRIES TO EXPLAIN.
None of those platforms explain what the person is able to do. And, cynics of Socionics expect too much from it and for whatever circumstances they don't get it, they turn around and blame Socionics for not having provided that ideal circumstance for them. If they are, however, careful, patient and considerate of the world around them, of people and relationships, I don't doubt that they can find that eventually.
Dual type
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
It could be argued that psychological preferences are abilities in themselves. Is this what you are arguing? Or are you arguing that psychological preferences directly dictate practical abilities to do things removed from the psyche? If you are arguing the former, than I agree with you. If you are arguing the latter, I would disagree
I think that once again, you are rushing to conclusions. What platforms do you think I'm referring to? By creating this strawman, you've exposed yourself as being very biased in favor of the idea that socionics is the only "way". You explicitly made this clear, not only in writing but in action.None of those platforms explain what the person is able to do. And, cynics of Socionics expect too much from it and for whatever circumstances they don't get it, they turn around and blame Socionics for not having provided that ideal circumstance for them. If they are, however, careful, patient and considerate of the world around them, of people and relationships, I don't doubt that they can find that eventually.
The trickster is at one and the same time creator and destroyer, giver and negator, he who dupes others, and who is always duped himself.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
