Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: V. DarkAngelFireWolf69 Talks About the Future of Socionics, Diagnostics problem

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    meme hotline Chae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    ethic 3
    Posts
    9,083
    Mentioned
    716 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default V. DarkAngelFireWolf69 Talks About the Future of Socionics, Diagnostics problem

    Released on his channel two days ago:





    What do you think?



    My impression was that we're not going from Alpha to Beta currently, but of Gamma/Delta is highly requested for the fresh start. The Beta transition he talks about is around 4:40 but as he indicates, this will do more damage than good.

  2. #2
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    what he's saying is that socionics already took a trip around alpha once, and now its in the process of its second trip and he hopes they can solve the problem that the first trip never adequately resolved which is the problem of seeing past people's "masks" and into their program function. in other words, to devise a way to reliably type people without it devolving into endless arguments because people see different aspects of behavior and infer different types on the basis of it. he says there are methods proposed to address this but there is no common agreement in alpha. so he says there's two ways he sees it possibly going: 1) just pick a way and force it on everyone: but he says this only pushes the problem back does not solve it at the root or 2) we need technology that solves the measurement problem (someone like Dario Nardi seems to be on the forefront of this).

    when he talks about it moving to beta he means beta needs a product it can implement in society. right now if we went with option 1 beta could take it and run but it would be unstable and be vulnerable at the root and ultimately any beta regime predicated on it would collapse and it would ultimately not be a lasting contribution to humanity etc etc (unless #2 someone was devised along the way). The reason gamma and delta aren't really involved yet, except as social spectators is because gamma primarily exists to materially exploit and expand methods of production and consumption of a thing and delta functions in order to moderate such exploitation to make it sustainable. right now theres nothing to exploit manifest in society, because A hasnt delivered B a product to implement yet. which isn't to say that gamma and delta individuals can't contribute intellectually to the project as it stands currently, of course they can, just that they'd be participating in a fundamentally alpha project

  3. #3
    meme hotline Chae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    ethic 3
    Posts
    9,083
    Mentioned
    716 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    what he's saying is that socionics already took a trip around alpha once, and now its in the process of its second trip and he hopes they can solve the problem that the first trip never adequately resolved which is the problem of seeing past people's "masks" and into their program function. in other words, to devise a way to reliably type people without it devolving into endless arguments because people see different aspects of behavior and infer different types on the basis of it. he says there are methods proposed to address this but there is no common agreement in alpha. so he says there's two ways he sees it possibly going: 1) just pick a way and force it on everyone: but he says this only pushes the problem back does not solve it at the root or 2) we need technology that solves the measurement problem (someone like Dario Nardi seems to be on the forefront of this).

    when he talks about it moving to beta he means beta needs a product it can implement in society. right now if we went with option 1 beta could take it and run but it would be unstable and be vulnerable at the root and ultimately any beta regime predicated on it would collapse and it would ultimately not be a lasting contribution to humanity etc etc (unless #2 someone was devised along the way). The reason gamma and delta aren't really involved yet, except as social spectators is because gamma primarily exists to materially exploit and expand methods of production and consumption of a thing and delta functions in order to moderate such exploitation to make it sustainable. right now theres nothing to exploit manifest in society, because A hasnt delivered B a product to implement yet. which isn't to say that gamma and delta individuals can't contribute intellectually to the project as it stands currently, of course they can, just that they'd be participating in a fundamentally alpha project
    Grazie, you made it concise!

  4. #4
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,050
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the amount of people in DarkAngelFireWolf69's videos who pretends they not there <3

  5. #5
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    3,787
    Mentioned
    283 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It might take hundreds or thousands of years before Socionics will flourish. By then it might have another name, but that doesn't matter. People will have to become conscious enough to type correctly.

    DarkAngelFireWolf69 is so LII, normalizing subtype.
    The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.

    (Jung on Si)

  6. #6
    Honorary Ballsack
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    3,361
    Mentioned
    110 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Rigorous scientific theories do not suffer the same problems. Socionics still lacks
    1) Clear and concise definitions of functions
    2) identification of statistically different brains that would explain the existence of a "type"
    3) consistent consensus on the function being used in real time
    4) ability to consistent identify where that function belongs in the psyche hierarchy
    5) overall objectivity

    Even the most expert socionicists cannot agree on the same set of definitions and identifications, leading to significantly different types in different quadra. Many tend to agree, that if we only defined it this way, or looked at it like this, then you would arrive at the same conclusion. It is doomed to fragment into different schools, models, systems due to limitations, unless there is a figurehead that enforces their own interpretation across the board.

    Cheers!

  7. #7
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    3,787
    Mentioned
    283 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Osifer View Post
    Rigorous scientific theories do not suffer the same problems. Socionics still lacks
    1) Clear and concise definitions of functions
    2) identification of statistically different brains that would explain the existence of a "type"
    3) consistent consensus on the function being used in real time
    4) ability to consistent identify where that function belongs in the psyche hierarchy
    5) overall objectivity

    Even the most expert socionicists cannot agree on the same set of definitions and identifications, leading to significantly different types in different quadra. Many tend to agree, that if we only defined it this way, or looked at it like this, then you would arrive at the same conclusion. It is doomed to fragment into different schools, models, systems due to limitations, unless there is a figurehead that enforces their own interpretation across the board.

    Cheers!
    Rigorous scientific theories are very limited in what they can observe.

    Socionics developed because some people were smart enough and observant enough to look directly at psychic matters but with a scientific mind.

    Psychology is still a very young science and there are things that are gold but cant yet be incorporated into the academic world.

    The scientific world is very extraverted. That makes psychology a problem hard to solve.

    There are two possiblities: Either socionics developes so it fits the requirements of contemporary extraverted science, if it is possbile at all. Or, maybe in the far future, science can change so it will start to consider the objective psyche. I think that would need an overall developement of mankind. But it has happened before.
    The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.

    (Jung on Si)

  8. #8
    Honorary Ballsack
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    3,361
    Mentioned
    110 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    Rigorous scientific theories are very limited in what they can observe.

    Socionics developed because some people were smart enough and observant enough to look directly at psychic matters but with a scientific mind.

    Psychology is still a very young science and there are things that are gold but cant yet be incorporated into the academic world.

    The scientific world is very extraverted. That makes psychology a problem hard to solve.

    There are two possiblities: Either socionics developes so it fits the requirements of contemporary extraverted science, if it is possbile at all. Or, maybe in the far future, science can change so it will start to consider the objective psyche. I think that would need an overall developement of mankind. But it has happened before.
    Would the theory evolve with the available evidence though? Would it be discarded if evidence demonstrated that socionics wasn't a possibility?

  9. #9
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,050
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    neuroscience could be the key

  10. #10
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,050
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    To me, one of the problems that makes socion weak sometimes is the excessive stereotyping of the types. The cool thing of socion, when coming from a Mbti frame of mind, is that it stops to be a "INTJs are the coolest they're the most intelligent/perfect/everything", "F means emotions if you F you don't Think" etc etc. Socion reveals that it's actually the functions to create the mind, and then the person. But this doesn't mean that the persons will look and behave all the same among their types (as it's common to mistype people on here "you're not a SLE because they don't do that!") it means they just will share the same TIM. Does this make people with the same TIM all alike? Of course not, there are so many other factors at play for how we look and act, genetics, upbringing, values.. it's not all about socionics, eh.

    Anyway if we stopped shallowly typing people because they resemble "the EII description of DarkAngelFireWolf69"(that just says EIIs are pink butterflies chasing rainbows), we'd start grasping functions better. The thread about EIIs responding to criticisim is enlightening about this... who would have thought they're like that?! But they are... and guess why? Because the super-ego functions are actually Ti Se= criticism, nitpicking, accorded with a very low understanding of the environment. And it's not like we're defying any EII rule saying they can get extremely bothered by criticism, it is just pointed out in their super-ego block.

    http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?t...del_A_by_Eglit < this article is a good example of how stereotyping can take very petty shades that I think is not much helpful.

  11. #11
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    3,787
    Mentioned
    283 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hybris theory View Post
    To me, one of the problems that makes socion weak sometimes is the excessive stereotyping of the types.
    Thats just a surface phenomenon. I haven't read any socioncs descriptions for many years. Who cares? Its all out there in reality.

    Sometimes you need stereotypes to get in touch with the real thing. Then when you have the real thing you can throw out the stereotypes.
    The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.

    (Jung on Si)

  12. #12
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,050
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    Thats just a surface phenomenon. I haven't read any socioncs descriptions for many years. Who cares? Its all out there in reality.

    Sometimes you need stereotypes to get in touch with the real thing. Then when you have the real thing you can throw out the stereotypes.
    Yes you're right and I'm ashamed bcause went to check DarkAngelFireWolf69's description of EIIs after writing that and it was actually the best description Ive ever read (sorry Viktor <3).
    Guess the stereotyping is in my mind, ahaaa

  13. #13
    Seed my wickedness Sanguine Miasma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    7,563
    Mentioned
    321 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    #1 collect humongous amount of people measure their brain activity and responses to different people
    #2 analyze
    #3 refine
    #4 analyze
    ...
    #x profit or poop (in case you are not suffering from constipation)

    I would approach this problem from ITR perspective. Individuals are their own experiences and whatever.
    If you can make replication of pattern appear again and again then you are clearly into something. Sure it does not start from the psyche but this stuff is only Jung derivative.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    NO Private messages, please. Use Discord instead.

  14. #14
    Jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    658
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    We could just use Socionics as a way of understanding one another. Everything will come down to our own perceptions of other people, so there will be no 'objective' measurement of types in any form, whatsoever. If we can use Socionics simply as a tool for helping bridge the gap between ourselves and other people then I think the model is a success in it's own right.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •