Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 161 to 200 of 254

Thread: Socionics Causes Pain

  1. #161
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,646
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    So you agree with what I've been saying about Popperian critical rationalism.
    Idk.



    It’s a theory, which can’t be proven.

  2. #162

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,215
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    Idk.



    It’s a theory, which can’t be proven.
    The whole point of critical rationalism. You can never prove something to be true.
    Quote Originally Posted by A.Augustinavichiute
    The goal of our work is to try to penetrate into the models of the psyche projected by Jung, to show which positions and categories can be considered completely proved and irrefutable.
    https://translate.google.com/transla...t.html&prev=_t

    The start of a Socionics cult.

  3. #163

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Plumes View Post
    Who's there?
    Pay

  4. #164
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,646
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    The whole point of critical rationalism. You can never prove something to be true.
    I’ll let you know how I feel after finishing the article too. But my stance probably won’t change.

    Basically it’s just a useful framework for building knowledge. But it’s pointless when applying it colloquially without a whole bunch of addendums.

  5. #165

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karatos View Post
    Recent additions cast doubt on Model A in that if there are subtypes, then it means that what's depicted as "conscious" or "high dimensionality" in Model A are dubious at best and completely false at worse. For example, an LIE - N shouldn't have "1-D" Fi or "1-D" Ti, as Model A claims.

    I think DCHN and subtypes refer the strength of IE not its dimensions, I can be wrong about this, however, I couldn't find any article that suggest the otherwise.

    Ah, so you tacitly admit that Socionics isn't universal in saying that psychopaths can't be typed.
    Maybe I am, maybe I am just saying that Socionics needs an extreme psychological disorders patch. I don't have a clear opinion about this topic.

  6. #166

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    I sort of agree with you on this, but not completely in that I think extreme personality disorders can warp personality type. For instance, I do think psychopaths can be typed, but the psychopathic version of that type is very different than the normal version of that type. So if you get a psychopathic SLI and a normal SLI then they will behave very differently and think very differently, but they will both be SLI. So Socionics somehow manages to fit two very different people into the same type and this is the problem with Socionics, you can fit a lot of different people into each of the 16 boxes.
    You can be right, I am not sure but I have trouble identifying people who have severe personality disorders. The brain structure of people who suffer from anti-social personality disorder or extreme narcissism, have similarities. Maybe that structure can warp a personality type like you suggest. I am not sure how that would manifest. For example, psychopaths who have different types and similar level of general intelligence, social intelligence and impulsivity, can seem more similar to each other than the healthy version of their type. The structure of their brain that causes the disorder seems like its overriding their own personality. I agree with the rest of your post, "non-Socionoics factors also have an ITR of their own" as you put it.

  7. #167

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,215
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luminous Lynx View Post
    I'm most certainly not an arbiter of any kind. I haven't spent anywhere near enough time on this model as many on this forum have. Long ago, I was in fact in a relationship (for just shy of a year and a half) with a woman in my opposing Quadra (Delta), and it was (as IR would advise me) the most difficult, rocky, conflict-prone and non-amenable relationship I ever had. Both of us, to this day, have mutual respect for each other, and could probably be fairly good friends, but it was a very tenuous relationship for us both. Like I've already clarified, making a friendship work out isn't too much of an issue, but intimate relationships are another matter. What I know is that both the worst and best of my relations have fit comfortably inline with IR expectation, long before I even knew of Socionics. That is the simplest, honest response on the matter I can offer. What You do is Your prerogative, Singu.
    Well your fears seem to be mostly rooted in the fact that if you stray off from the ITR pattern somehow, then something terrible is going to happen. Which if you accept the premise of Socionics to be true, then that would be true. But that only depends on whether the premise is true or not. Has that actually worked out in practice? You wouldn't know this, unless you take the approach by trying to prove something wrong rather than right, even if you inherently want something to be true.

    How would you know? How would you know that just because something terrible happened in the past, it will happen again? This fear isn't easily shaken off, because it's pretty much the root of all traumas. But it can only be dispelled by having the assumption being negated by positive experiences.

  8. #168
    To Stand As The Oak Luminous Lynx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Wilderness
    TIM
    EIE-Ni
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Well your fears seem to be mostly rooted in the fact that if you stray off from the ITR pattern somehow, then something terrible is going to happen. Which if you accept the premise of Socionics to be true, then that would be true. But that only depends on whether the premise is true or not. Has that actually worked out in practice? You wouldn't know this, unless you take the approach by trying to prove something wrong rather than right, even if you inherently want something to be true.

    How would you know? How would you know that just because something terrible happened in the past, it will happen again? This fear isn't easily shaken off, because it's pretty much the root of all traumas. But it can only be dispelled by having the assumption being negated by positive experiences.
    You are a champion of finding exceptions. Your consistent deconstructive reasoning on the forums unnerves me, but it's also necessary to test what is true, so I can appreciate that much. As I have said, I am not a veteran of the theory, and I can only speak to the fact that my own personal history, both the best and worst of my relations, has aligned eerily with IR theory. If that is some small measure of confirmation of the theory or simply my own ignorance then so be it. I know whom I have found my strength in.

    "We live in an age in which there is no heroic death."



    Model A: EIE-Ni2
    -
    Model G: EI

    Quadra Values: Beta
    Dyad:
    /
    Enneagram: 6w7, 2w1, 8w9
    Instinctual Variant: Sx/So


  9. #169

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    My point is that you don't know whether a person will be "Ne Polr" or "Ne base" in the future, that's an "unknown". Nor do we know how the person will act in different situations where "Ne" isn't necessary or appropriate, in which the determinant "Ne" would be totally useless.

    About the only thing that you could do to predict the person's behavior, is if we could determine how certain beliefs will translate into certain behavior, and in what way, and in what situations. And only then, we could say that if the belief either stays the same or is introduced to the person, we could say that that a certain behavior will be created in the future.
    I don' understand the reference that you made with your post to my quote, that's why I am asking this. Do you agree or disagree with this statement: Adult brain is substantially wired and it is possible to increase our cognitive abilities but we can change a little with lots of training during a long period of time?

  10. #170

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,215
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luminous Lynx View Post
    You are a champion of finding exceptions. Your consistent deconstructive reasoning on the forums unnerves me, but it's also necessary to test what is true, so I can appreciate that much. As I have said, I am not a veteran of the theory, and I can only speak to the fact that my own personal history, both the best and worst of my relations, has aligned eerily with IR theory. If that is some small measure of confirmation of the theory or simply my own ignorance then so be it. I know whom I have found my strength in.
    ...Isn't that how traumas and superstitions work? You can say that for example, you have a fear of a burglar attacking you and assaulting you if you enter a room, unless you carefully examine the room beforehand. And since you perform this ritual every time you enter a room, and every time you do it, you are not actually attacked by a burglar. And therefore, this "confirms" that checking every time you enter a room "works".

    Quote Originally Posted by myresearch View Post
    I don' understand the reference that you made with your post to my quote, that's why I am asking this. Do you agree or disagree with this statement: Adult brain is substantially wired and it is possible to increase our cognitive abilities but we can change a little with lots of training during a long period of time?
    I don't really think that people are either inherently creative or uncreative. But since we don't actually know how creativity works, we can't really say much about it yet. All I can say is that people are capable of having any kind of possible thoughts that are allowed by the laws of physics. Which is, again, any kind of possible thought imaginable.

  11. #171

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    I don't really think that people are either inherently creative or uncreative. But since we don't actually know how creativity works, we can't really say much about it yet. All I can say is that people are capable of having any kind of possible thoughts that are allowed by the laws of physics. Which is, again, any kind of possible thought imaginable.
    Singu I wasn't talking about creativity or creative thoughts. Your post is about creativity.

    I am going to copy pasting my post. Could you please answer to that without mentioning socionics or other things?

    I don' understand the reference that you made with your post to my quote, that's why I am asking this. Do you agree or disagree with this statement:Adult brain is substantially wired and it is possible to increase our cognitive abilities but we can change a little with lots of training during a long period of time?

  12. #172
    To Stand As The Oak Luminous Lynx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Wilderness
    TIM
    EIE-Ni
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    ...Isn't that how traumas and superstitions work? You can say that for example, you have a fear of a burglar attacking you and assaulting you if you enter a room, unless you carefully examine the room beforehand. And since you perform this ritual every time you enter a room, and every time you do it, you are not actually attacked by a burglar. And therefore, this "confirms" that checking every time you enter a room "works".
    I can appreciate that You're persistent at keeping people on their toes, but You come off like an Ne valuer throwing out what-ifs so as to not inhabit any position at all. Look, I get You're trying to make me think, but You're wasting Your time. Chalk it up to arrogance or ignorance or whatever helps You, but I know who and where I've found growth and strength in, and I certainly know who's drained me the most bending over backwards to accommodate and adapt to. If Socionics IR theory has cemented my bias' or whatever then I suppose time will tell. You also strike me as someone who talks at people instead of to them, which is likely part of my reaction.

    "We live in an age in which there is no heroic death."



    Model A: EIE-Ni2
    -
    Model G: EI

    Quadra Values: Beta
    Dyad:
    /
    Enneagram: 6w7, 2w1, 8w9
    Instinctual Variant: Sx/So


  13. #173

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,215
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Amazing, one person thinks I'm Ne PoLR, and another says I'm Ne-valuer. Goes to show how much this whole thing works.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luminous Lynx View Post
    If Socionics IR theory has cemented my bias' or whatever then I suppose time will tell.
    Time won't tell, because you won't be proven wrong. How can you ever be wrong, if all you're looking for is the confirmation of truth?
    Last edited by Singu; 01-03-2019 at 12:41 AM.

  14. #174
    To Stand As The Oak Luminous Lynx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Wilderness
    TIM
    EIE-Ni
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You're as cocksure as anyone I've seen on the forums, @Singu, just not on matters of Socionics. In fairness, my Ne statement was conjecture based on personal experiences with Ne's. It's entirely likely they may have a better read of You, I wouldn't know, as I still haven't fully transitioned over from MBTI. Why do You presume all I'm looking for is confirmation? I only learned of IR about 5 months ago. Do You sincerely think it impossible the theory could've lined up with my life's experiences? I can't think of a single time I've seen You amicably agree with anyone on anything substantial as of yet. It's becoming entertaining. I can see why Sb seems to have so much fun with You.

    "We live in an age in which there is no heroic death."



    Model A: EIE-Ni2
    -
    Model G: EI

    Quadra Values: Beta
    Dyad:
    /
    Enneagram: 6w7, 2w1, 8w9
    Instinctual Variant: Sx/So


  15. #175

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,215
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luminous Lynx View Post
    You're as cocksure as anyone I've seen on the forums, @Singu, just not on matters of Socionics. In fairness, my Ne statement was conjecture based on personal experiences with Ne's. It's entirely likely they may have a better read of You, I wouldn't know, as I still haven't fully transitioned over from MBTI. Why do You presume all I'm looking for is confirmation? I only learned of IR about 5 months ago. Do You sincerely think it impossible the theory could've lined up with my life's experiences? I can't think of a single time I've seen You amicably agree with anyone on anything substantial as of yet. It's becoming entertaining. I can see why Sb seems to have so much fun with You.
    The theory can line up with any kind of experiences, because the theory says that virtually any kind of behaviors are possible. Which is basically how humans are. I can act in ways that are both Ne PoLR and Ne-valuer behaviors, because those behaviors are well within the possibilities of my possible behaviors. It doesn't contradict anything whether I act like a Ne PoLR or a Ne valuer. It certainly doesn't contradict the theory.

  16. #176
    of the sun Karatos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    TIM
    LSI- Se 9w8
    Posts
    1,611
    Mentioned
    97 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; genius hits a target no one else can see." - Schopenhauer

  17. #177
    of the sun Karatos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    TIM
    LSI- Se 9w8
    Posts
    1,611
    Mentioned
    97 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by myresearch View Post
    I think DCHN and subtypes refer the strength of IE not its dimensions, I can be wrong about this, however, I couldn't find any article that suggest the otherwise.
    Strength and dimensionality are the same thing.



    Maybe I am, maybe I am just saying that Socionics needs an extreme psychological disorders patch. I don't have a clear opinion about this topic.
    We'll see what happens.
    "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; genius hits a target no one else can see." - Schopenhauer

  18. #178
    aka Feathers, Penny Dreadful Chrysalis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Behind your tonsils
    TIM
    I I E E E - Scream
    Posts
    709
    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by myresearch View Post
    Pay
    Pay who?

    Sorry, fell asleep and kinda killed the joke mood ;-;
    4w3 7w6 9w1 so/sx

    "You see, there are still faint glimmers of civilization left in this barbaric slaughterhouse that was once known as humanity. Indeed that's what we provide in our own modest, humble, insignificant... oh, fuck it."

  19. #179
    Ragdoll Lynx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    TIM
    0-D ISTp sx/sp
    Posts
    2,628
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    In the parallel universe where N9 is ILE, Karatos is actually LSI while sbbds is EIE. All makes perfect sense.
    Also Adam finally got an ESI who's not actually SEI (in that universe).



    Quote Originally Posted by Plumes View Post
    Pay who?
    me.


    Plumes is actually Feathers and I need my money back.
    Last edited by Ragdoll Lynx; 01-03-2019 at 04:51 AM.

  20. #180
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    5,240
    Mentioned
    657 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    No refunds.

  21. #181
    of the sun Karatos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    TIM
    LSI- Se 9w8
    Posts
    1,611
    Mentioned
    97 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Atari View Post
    In the parallel universe where N9 is ILE, Karatos is actually LSI while sbbds is EIE. All makes perfect sense.
    Also Adam finally got an ESI who's not actually SEI (in that universe).
    Whatever I have to say on the issue isn't going to be listened to because your prerogative is to suit everything to your preconceptions, which are not based on observable fact.

    I have no reason to waste my time convincing you otherwise - you'll even cite this disconnect as proof of "semi-dual ITR." Lol.

    At a certain stage, I just have to stop giving a fuck what people on the internet who've never met I think. And I have no reason to consider myself "psychologically close" to people who fail to listen in the most basic ways. I'd find more resonance with a tree stump.
    "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; genius hits a target no one else can see." - Schopenhauer

  22. #182
    of the sun Karatos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    TIM
    LSI- Se 9w8
    Posts
    1,611
    Mentioned
    97 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Pain



    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    SLE, of course.

    That guy is not going to be happy in a few hours.

    Attachment 10140
    "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; genius hits a target no one else can see." - Schopenhauer

  23. #183
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,646
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luminous Lynx View Post
    You're as cocksure as anyone I've seen on the forums, @Singu, just not on matters of Socionics. In fairness, my Ne statement was conjecture based on personal experiences with Ne's. It's entirely likely they may have a better read of You, I wouldn't know, as I still haven't fully transitioned over from MBTI. Why do You presume all I'm looking for is confirmation? I only learned of IR about 5 months ago. Do You sincerely think it impossible the theory could've lined up with my life's experiences? I can't think of a single time I've seen You amicably agree with anyone on anything substantial as of yet. It's becoming entertaining. I can see why Sb seems to have so much fun with You.
    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    The theory can line up with any kind of experiences, because the theory says that virtually any kind of behaviors are possible. Which is basically how humans are. I can act in ways that are both Ne PoLR and Ne-valuer behaviors, because those behaviors are well within the possibilities of my possible behaviors. It doesn't contradict anything whether I act like a Ne PoLR or a Ne valuer. It certainly doesn't contradict the theory.
    I want to put my face in between Singu’s asscheeks

  24. #184
    Ragdoll Lynx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    TIM
    0-D ISTp sx/sp
    Posts
    2,628
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karatos View Post
    Whatever I have to say on the issue isn't going to be listened to because your prerogative is to suit everything to your preconceptions, which are not based on observable fact.

    I have no reason to waste my time convincing you otherwise - you'll even cite this disconnect as proof of "semi-dual ITR." Lol.

    At a certain stage, I just have to stop giving a fuck what people on the internet who've never met I think. And I have no reason to consider myself "psychologically close" to people who fail to listen in the most basic ways. I'd find more resonance with a tree stump.
    I don't care dude. It's not like I want you to be my semi dual, you are not so cool for that so don't waste your time. I'll keep joking about it anyway. However whatever type you think you are is not going to get you any chicks and that's not socionics fault

  25. #185

    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    TIM
    SLE.Wait...Shit, EII
    Posts
    329
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Strength and dimensionality are the same thing.
    What ? This is not my understanding. Jung said the position of the function don't say anything about his strenght. My understanding is that you could have a "strong" 1d PoLR compared to another individual who would have a "weaker" 1d PoLR

  26. #186
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,804
    Mentioned
    874 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    the common case for being negative to Socionics are wrong types
    I wouldn't agree with your statement that the common case for being negative to socionics is wrong types. lol It is an obscure theory and most people irl have never heard of it and would not use it to pick friends or lovers. Maybe some people just don't take it as serious as others. The more attached to it you are the more positive or negative your perception of it will be. I am neutral on it these days as are most people I know who have moved on from it and are more focused on their lives and relationships than on the theory of them. There will come a time when you have to go out into the world and experience it instead of theorizing about how relationships work.

    If it works for people great but life will still throw them curve balls. Hopefully they have more than a bit of socionics knowledge to deal with them when it does. Otherwise you will see them back here retyping themselves and/or everyone they have ever known during an existential crisis.

    Socionics is a concept. It is your perception and use of it is that gives you pain or pleasure. Same with any other system including astrology, tarot, etc...

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung

     



  27. #187

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karatos View Post
    Strength and dimensionality are the same thing.
    I visualize dimensions as vector directions and strength as vector magnitudes.

    The-four-voices-span-up-a-four-dimensional-vector-space-of-description-in-analogy-to-a.png

  28. #188

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andreas View Post
    Are you banging your against the wall because you are not telepathic? it is ok because I am also not.

  29. #189
    WinnieW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    1,238
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Amazing, one person thinks I'm Ne PoLR, and another says I'm Ne-valuer.
    The PoLR is a valued function in Socionics.
    The trouble with PoLR is it's the opposite of the stronger creative function. My take on this is: The PoLR function is difficult to use because the creative function interferes much.

  30. #190

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,078
    Mentioned
    908 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    I wouldn't agree with your statement that the common case for being negative to socionics is wrong types. lol
    You underesteemate Te approach in your view. I'll explain my point.

    Wrong types are often/common as average typing matches are <20%. The mistakes lead to that theory does not work as is expected. This leads to negative relation to the typology.

    For example, someone mistypes himself and reads about interests which are at his type, about people which are best for him, - but in reality the type is different, so real interests are other and people with which he'd felt good are other too. There are a lot of people who mistype themselves for years and hence get bad results using the theory. On forums it's probably a half of all - and they can't accept Socionics as should get regular bad results with it. These 50% mb called as a common case.

    > I am neutral on it these days as are most people I know who have moved on from it and are more focused on their lives and relationships than on the theory of them.

    Jung's types are important factor for abbilities, interests, close friendship relations. While the most people can't even notice this clearly with often mistypings. While to get lesser mistypings needs to develop typing skills what needs efforts which most people never do.
    Also texts of types theory describe abstract cases when everything other is equal, while besides types affect different factors on people and relations. So you may meet F type with very high IQ and excellent education among top-ranked physicists, but anyway it's very minority of F types among them. The worse you'll type - the lesser clearly you'll not notice the types factor there.

    > Hopefully they have more than a bit of socionics knowledge to deal with them when it does. Otherwise you will see them back here retyping themselves and/or everyone they have ever known during an existential crisis.

    The main reason for own retyping is bad typing skills, as the types theory is clear enough to distinguish between types factors and other factors. While when it's not clear is explained above and bad typing skills are easily noticable at people on forums and even among those who try to study others.
    >50% of typing mistakes is just common case, according to average matches - it's a lot to make a mess in the results of the usage of the theory. This matches are proved in the known experiments. But are not obscurity theorizing about this situation. It's objective.
    While when it's a noob who uses bs theory alike Reinin's traits and instead of reading normal typology books read only bs in some English translated articles with gulenko's subtypes and Augustinavichiute's much doubtful fantasies etc - the mistypings should be some higher. To compare the experience and make conclusions you need to use the comparable cases, at least. And do not forget to take into account that even best typers do a lot of mistakes objectively what is seen in their objective typing matches.

    > Socionics is a concept.

    In case of many mistypings making hard to see it's a real practice. This makes the main difference in perceptions. The 2nd is inappropriate usage, when people forget about other factors and ignore that descriptions of types and IR are made for abstract cases.

    As for Tarot - the situation is similar. There are those who get more correct results and hence value guessings higher as working practical method. The same is with any correct knowledge, - it needs to have it and skills to use it - so then to value and use it.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  31. #191
    Uncle Ave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Under rain
    TIM
    LIE
    Posts
    1,459
    Mentioned
    111 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post

    Wrong types are often/common as average typing matches are <20%.
    What is the source of this data?


  32. #192

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,078
    Mentioned
    908 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post
    What is the source of this data?
    All known experiments with real matches, - when types were said when typers did not know the opinions of others beforehand. The quantity of typed ones should be ~10 of higher, and of typers alike. Not 2-3 or statistical mistak would be too high.

    I saw such experiments on socioforum by questionnaires, photos, mine with 16 bloggers in 2015 and earlier.
    There was a wide known CRT-99 made in 1999 by IRL interview. The article which followed to it had wrongly calculated average match seems ~30-40%, but if to calculate correctly it is ~17%.

    Practically, I never saw anyone in experiments or other with real typing matches >50%. Mb more experienced and better typers without heretic bs than in those experiments would got higher average matches, but those results are intersting also as show what is expected in masses - on forums, in clubs, etc. If people studed in the same typology school - the chance to get higher matches should be also. <20% is average, in general.

    You may also to look at large lists of actors types of >500 names. The matches drop to ~20% with the size. The problem of lists - there is many not independent matches as typers saw those types at other typers. The larger lists are - the more of their own opinion is there and more new actors. So the match drops closer to real one.

    The similar experiments mb repeated, they are not hard. Mb used any typing materials, just it's important that typed ones did not know the Socionics theory to do not play on some types. The optimum would be typing videointerviews of random people. Bloggers seem as 2nd choice - that would be analogue of actors but some better. Even special typing questionnaires gave low matches.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  33. #193

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,215
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WinnieW View Post
    The PoLR is a valued function in Socionics.
    The trouble with PoLR is it's the opposite of the stronger creative function. My take on this is: The PoLR function is difficult to use because the creative function interferes much.
    So the Sociotype is capable of producing virtually any kind of behaviors. Which is pretty much what humans are capable of. People are capable of having virtually any kind of thoughts, which may turn to certain behaviors if the person wished to turn it into action, and if there are no restrictions constraining that behavior. What people can do and can't do will be determined by the laws of nature. The laws of nature doesn't restrict people to have any kind of thoughts.

    You can't predict any kind of human behaviors in this way, because the Sociotype doesn't have any constraints. You can just as well say that "His PoLR is strong" "It's his Dual-seeking function", etc, if he doesn't act like a stereotypical type. Basically, all it's saying is that "People will act in any kind of possible manner in the future". Which is true, but also pointless.

    @Sol How would you know when you got typings "correct" and "wrong"? This would be impossible to tell, as there's no criteria for what makes something correct or wrong, and since you're trying to "fit" people into certain descriptions, there's no way that you can be "wrong".

  34. #194
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,646
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    So the Sociotype is capable of producing virtually any kind of behaviors. Which is pretty much what humans are capable of. People are capable of having virtually any kind of thoughts, which may turn to certain behaviors if the person wished to turn it into action, and if there are no restrictions constraining that behavior. What people can do and can't do will be determined by the laws of nature. The laws of nature doesn't restrict people to have any kind of thoughts.

    You can't predict any kind of human behaviors in this way, because the Sociotype doesn't have any constraints. You can just as well say that "His PoLR is strong" "It's his Dual-seeking function", etc, if he doesn't act like a stereotypical type. Basically, all it's saying is that "People will act in any kind of possible manner in the future". Which is true, but also pointless.

    @Sol How would you know when you got typings "correct" and "wrong"? This would be impossible to tell, as there's no criteria for what makes something correct or wrong, and since you're trying to "fit" people into certain descriptions, there's no way that you can be "wrong".
    You’re still thinking about it wrong.

    It’s like the 4 seasons. You can technically have any type of weather crop up at any time of the year, and in a way the seasons are just approximations and just concepts we created. But does that mean they don’t exist? Does that mean we can’t define our criteria for them to “prove” that they exist?

    A lot of us are seeing the same things here. It’s not just coincidence and it’s probably not impossible to prove objectively either.

  35. #195
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,646
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Well your fears seem to be mostly rooted in the fact that if you stray off from the ITR pattern somehow, then something terrible is going to happen. Which if you accept the premise of Socionics to be true, then that would be true. But that only depends on whether the premise is true or not. Has that actually worked out in practice? You wouldn't know this, unless you take the approach by trying to prove something wrong rather than right, even if you inherently want something to be true.

    How would you know? How would you know that just because something terrible happened in the past, it will happen again? This fear isn't easily shaken off, because it's pretty much the root of all traumas. But it can only be dispelled by having the assumption being negated by positive experiences.
    I liked this post of your accidentally.

    Do you know how low the chances of us all making shit up and being wrong about this statistically, would be? Such detailed, complex personal experiences?

    Your POV defies basic logic and common sense. Actually ironically it’s paranoid and superstitious like how you’re accusing others of being.

  36. #196

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,215
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    It’s like the 4 seasons. You can technically have any type of weather crop up at any time of the year, and in a way the seasons are just approximations and just concepts we created. But does that mean they don’t exist? Does that mean we can’t define our criteria for them to “prove” that they exist?
    The seasons are explained by the tilting of the Earth's axis, which either hemispheres receive more or less heat from the sun, depending on the location.

    We're not interested in "proving" whether seasons really exist or not (or "deriving"), but we're after explaining. We're interested in explaining, why do seasons occur?

    Do the existence of types have any such explanations? No. And if you can't explain it, then you can't predict it. The tilting-axis Earth theory can perfectly well predict which seasons will occur in which locations, and when, and even why.

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    A lot of us are seeing the same things here. It’s not just coincidence and it’s probably not impossible to prove objectively either.
    You're only "seeing" the same thing, because that's what the theory tells you to see. You can only see within what the theory says that that's all there is. If you had a different theory, then which data to observe would be completely different, and therefore you'd be seeing completely different things.

  37. #197

  38. #198
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,804
    Mentioned
    874 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post


    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung

     



  39. #199

    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    106
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So I have this theory, that those of us who fight the most against certain systems and theories do so, because it's an ongoing battle at the same time inside of us, and we feel we have more ammunition when we vocalize it or try to fight against it in other people as well. Because changing others' opinion would give us more moral support and belief in that we can - indeed - change our own perception in the long run.

    Or it might just be me.


  40. #200
    kickass crybaby mrrrmaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    266
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karatos View Post
    When we give someone a Socionics type, we type them according to a system of fixed cognitive traits.

    When we observe that the typed person diverges from the type we gave them in thought or action, we must develop an explanation for the divergence.

    Socionics is a system of fixed cognitive traits. Thus, our explanation for divergence must conflict with the Socionics typing.

    Therefore, when we hold on to the Socionics typing and our explanation for divergence, we possess conflicting beliefs.

    Conflicting beliefs cause cognitive dissonance, or mental discomfort caused by maintaining contradictory thoughts.

    Thus, attachment to Socionics causes discomfort because Socionics is a system of fixed cognitive traits that fails to explain divergence in thought or action.
    did this arise from the pain in the ass of typing me?
    "I take back like half of the exclamation points.....they make me look....eager to please. Which I AM....but I don't want anyone to KNOW that"
    - Carrie Fisher

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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