If this somehow means you'll never respond to my posts, then it was worth it.Originally Posted by Johannes Bloem
If this somehow means you'll never respond to my posts, then it was worth it.
You don't mean that.
Anyway, since I think I might've missed the essence of one of your objections, I'd like to elaborate a bit on an earlier point of mine:
I assign "plus" and "minus" to specific functions because I think an "individual function" can be either positivist or negativist. A "positivist" or "plus" function says "yeah" to information, whereas a "negativist" or "minus" function says "yeah, but" to information. Consider this example:
So basically, a "positivist type" is a type with a "positivist" or "plus-" primary function and a "negativist type" is a type with a "negativist" or "minus-" primary function.My boss is LSI. LSI has primary plus-Ti and secondary minus-Se (I'm using "secondary" instead of "auxiliary" now because it is an easier word to type). One night when I was closing, he asked me if I had completed zoning my area. I told him yes, and he responded by pointing to an aisle I had forgotton to zone and saying "doesn't look like you zoned this". In this aisle there were boxes that were slightly out of place or completely knocked over, items (objects) were in the wrong places, shit was just a big mess. Here is my definition for "minus-Se":
"minus-Se" = "obvious differences in or of the objects
yes, it's a good one, i found this particularly useful when i discovered it : http://en.socionics.ru/index.php?opt...253&Itemid=138
Last edited by Amber; 01-31-2014 at 09:29 AM.
...
Last edited by Amber; 01-31-2014 at 10:14 AM.
Nope. Positivist types can also say "yes, but.." to what they are being told.
link - Positivists are better at assimilating affirmative experiences. They are inclined to "convert" negative experiences into positive ones (they try to find the "silver lining"). They speak more of the positive and try to present negative moments on a positive background ("Yes, this is a problem, but..."—then continue to paint a positive picture).
You haven't thought this through very well, have you?
You're a moron.
"Front side" = "yeah"Positivist types are more inclined to spot similarities and draw analogies ("they are so alike", "y is just like x" etc.), while Negativist are inclined to instead look at contrasts or alternatives ("they are nothing alike!"). Figuratively speaking, if Positivists are shown the front side then they will be looking at the front side, while Negativists will try to look at its inverse. If this inverse is not readily apparent, they will start searching for it. Thus Negativists do not seek to present a "negative" or "pessimistic" view of things, but simply the inverse or the alternative one.
"Inverse" = "yeah, but"
Regarding choice of words, i think there are a few things that stand out amongst the IEs.
Se - Direction, Observational perspective. Means to accomplish an end. "I saw blah blah" "Here, all you have to do is blah blah"
Te - Fact-form. Differs from Se, in that certainty is removed from the senses. Objective because the criteria for rightness is outside his perspective. The scoreboard doesnt lie. "The Sun is a star, stupid."
Ne/Ni - Pattern/Insights, just like the Intuitive stereotype. However, i've noticed with Ne a lack of relaying the patterns upon themself, when speaking. Ni, there's a reference to self in the pattern/insight almost always. An individual is mentioned. I think it's the dynamic aspect of it.
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
Positivist converge points together. Negativists make clear divergences.The former attempts to tie all the strings together. The Latter attempts to unravel the knots.
Both have their purposes and placement.
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
Aw, don't be so bitter that you can't explain anything.
Did you not read the rest of the post?
Again: moron.
YES
I'm glad you're around Johannes. Socionics(and Jungian typology in general) really doesn't have enough people stirring the pot and redefining things to suit themselves while pretending they're talking about the same thing. Are you into the new age phenomenon at all? You can start a school of Socionics called Bel'Air, and lavish the uninitiated with your princely knowledge.
For edification purposes, maybe a mod could sticky this post. (Even the inevitable post-information pissing contest has quality input from various sources.)
Take a tip from one who's engaged in this sort of thing and has lived to regret it - and one who doesn't have a horse in the race - to greater and lesser extents, there's something of value in each of your different interpretations… Given where it all started, years ago, adrift with babelfish'd Russian translations and holdover notions from MBTI that anyone who smiles is an ethical type, it's been a hell of a journey -- and "land ho!" if everyone keeps pushing. There's no sense letting pride get in the way.
You've come a long way. Good work.
Easy Day
Thank you.
There's some stellar production on here this season, and it's a sight to behold.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote