Fricking lmao, Socionics is occult, not cult. It operates outside of the realm of needing to be empirically proven or disproven. If you can't already see its value then no one can show it to you. It's a voice that only reaches the open ear.
Fricking lmao, Socionics is occult, not cult. It operates outside of the realm of needing to be empirically proven or disproven. If you can't already see its value then no one can show it to you. It's a voice that only reaches the open ear.
I don't think it's as dark as thatOriginally Posted by Grendel
Well the word itself means "hidden" anyway. It has all the trappings of a mystical framework imo.
I agree lol
people either say Jung was a psychologist with a lot of insight into the occult or an occultist who fooled everyone into thinking he was a psychologist.
Occultism is not necessarily shallow pseudoscience designed to scam fools and housewives, it can be very insightful sometimes
edit: Jung is so fucking cool sometimes
Jung wrote about one of these in his famous 1936 essay “Wotan.” At a time when most people in Europe believed that the funny little man with the Charlie Chaplin mustache who’d recently become Chancellor of Germany was a third-rate Mussolini wannabe who would be out of office as soon as German politics went through another of its routine convulsions, Jung grasped that something far deeper and more terrifying was at work: “A hurricane has broken loose in Germany,” he wrote, “while we still believe it is fine weather.”That hurricane, Jung suggested, was the activation of an archetype that belonged not to all of humanity but specifically to the people who live in central Europe, where the immense sweep of the Eurasian plains breaks against the rumpled hills and river valleys that run between the Alps and the North Sea. That archetype was associated with the myths of the archaic god Wotan. These days, most people who remember the deity in question think of his near-equivalent Odin, whose deeds and impending doom are celebrated in Old Norse poetry, or of the literary creation who plays a central role in Richard Wagner’s Ring of the Nibelung operas, but there is also a distinctive version of Wotan in German folklore, a terrifying huntsman-figure who rides the stormwinds, leading a vast army of ghosts through the midnight skies.Whether gods are the reflections of archetypes or archetypes are the reflections of gods is a question we can discuss some other day. The point that’s relevant here is that Jung caught something that nearly everyone else missed. For decades, since the twilight years of the 19th century, something had been stirring in the German-speaking lands of central Europe, something that shook off the heavy-handed rationalism of a confident age and plunged into the deep places where human consciousness merged with the forces of nature. In the wake of a lost war and a bitter economic depression, that archetypal force seized on an unlikely vehicle—an Austrian artist turned political agitator named Adolf ******—and swept up most of Europe into a maelstrom that ended, as the myths of Wotan always end, in Götterdammerung.
Democritus' notion of the atom was a philosophical one rather than a scientific one - it wasn't based on any observation.
Socionics is theory and requires technical understanding of the theory in order to practice it accurately. It’s pretty much like most things in life that if you want excel at it, you have grasp it on the conceptual level before executing it.
Empiricism does not enable a path of reasoning or a system, so vice versa. To ignore all theoretical-speculative knowledge is to ignore the possibilities, and thus limit yourself only to what is absolute and sensitive to the senses. Two things must be balanced to avoid absolutism and relativism.
People working well with each other because they are/aren't mean about it together isn't real too I guess.
If it was, all we'd have to do is find out who's an asshole, and who's not, and how they interact with each other to form groups of jerks. Maybe we should do that instead of socionics. Hrrm.
I had a worse word instead of jerks before, but then I realize, some people would not be amused, and I don't want to sound like a jerk.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology
An optimist - does not get discouraged under any circumstances. Life upheavals and stressful events only toughen him and make more confident. He likes to laugh and entertain people. Enters contact with someone by involving him with a humorous remark. His humor is often sly and contain hints and double meanings. Easily enters into arguments and bets, especially if he is challenged. When arguing his points is often ironic, ridicules the views of his opponent. His irritability and hot temper may be unpleasant to others. However, he himself is not perceptive of this and believes that he is simply exchanging opinions.
http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=LIE_Profile_by_Gulenko
You seem to not understand how truth seeking works. Socionics is a theory, or an idea, and no right minded person would assume that this is all true considering that there is really no empirical proof to it just like you said. But truth seekers will dig deeper into the unknown to sift through the bullshit, hoping that they will actually find something here that can be proven in reality. If the info that you get from socionics seems to be erroneous, try again, tweak the system to make things fit.
What I'm saying is, you are looking for a conclusion, or some scientific study here when we are still at the young stages of experimentation and testing.
You also seem to be the person who only wants to deal with what is already proven and apply it to the real world. This is why you seem to see this as bs. Nothing bad about it, just match your expectations to what Socionics really is.
Socionics is real. I am a typical IEI in the sense that I am diplomatic with the masses in large, have fallen in love with a bad boy ESTp before- I stereotypically like gooey things like love and romance (esp. if it's intense and forbidden and society hates it but you love each other still- which is a very Te devaluing thing to me) I also know how to play innocent and pretend to be cute.
People fit stereotypes. Everybody's personality has a general habit they fall into that other people see. Socionics just explains that.
People are all unique, but they're also Karen-y and easy to pigeon-hole by academic types. Although it seems contrary, both of those things are true.
Of course people are human and complex and subtle too. That's also 'the truth.' I may be a typical IEI, but I also don't dress like Oscar Wilde or Willy Wonka or 'touch my interloctor's hand' or whatever. I have traces of EII/SEI/IEE/EIE/ILE in me despite my core type being IEI. I don't have a weird amulet in my house that I think is magical power. I don't think magic is real, I instead gaslight people into thinking my own magic is real because they are stupid. I also am known to be quite hardworking.
The intertype relationships are based on a real tangible evidence u can observe socially IRL, but perhaps a bit too idealized... just because two peole are duals doesn't mean it's a good idea for them to try and make a real relationship work or anything lol.
The benefit of socionics seems obvious to me, in attempt at genuinely understanding others ppl hopefully won't hurt their feelings too bad where they end up doing something really shitty. Like mass discrimination, real genocide- not just 'hurt feelings'- although that's the seed of where it all comes from, is it not? Being offended doesn't make a person right but then again- neither does being an asshole. It's kinda the same reason people are forced to take 'diversity training' in classes and school/the work force even if they find it condescending, too PC and stupid. Cuz there was a time ppl did grimdark and horrible things to ppl that were different whether it was gay/black/jew/trans/str8 white male/whatever.
In practice this might not work out so well. They will end up understanding the person even more and just hate them all the more still but whatever, all academics are a type of lofty ideal. All the subjects u learn about in school had truth to them even if they were boring and institutionalized.
People who say 'feelings don't matter' are naive and stupid. Feelings are the only thing that do matter. Society rewards the person who pretends to care the most, not the mechanic or whatever. Sad but true. "we have to be logical and practical and scientific!" COME ON DUDE. You know that shit doesn't work in the real world. ((well it does but in a very small way)) It would be like me thinking I can deploy Piper's Hands of Discontent in real life instead of in a fan fiction story - I CLEARLY UNDERSTAND I CAN'T DO THAT IN REAL LIFE EVEN THOUGH I CAN DO IT SO WELL MAGICALLY LOL.
Scientists are just stereotyped as out of touch nerds with no charisma or appeal. Even if that's heartless and not true, ppl's brains recognize patterns from everybody's behavior.
Socionics is based on the laws of information metabolism, which are derived from thermodynamics and cybernetics. These are well-established fields of science that deal with energy and information flows in systems. Socionics applies these laws to human psychology and social interactions, revealing the patterns and structures of information processing in different types of people.
Socionics is supported by empirical evidence from various sources, such as visual identification, intertype relations, quadra values, and cognitive styles. These phenomena can be observed and measured in real life, and they show consistent correlations with socionics types and functions. Socionics also provides testable predictions and explanations for human behavior and compatibility, which can be verified or falsified by experiments and observations.
Socionics is not like Freud’s ideas, which are based on his own subjective experiences and interpretations of dreams, myths, and symbols. Freud’s theories are vague, unfalsifiable, and full of contradictions and biases. He also ignored the role of culture, environment, and individual differences in human psychology, and he generalized his own neuroses and complexes to the whole of humanity. Socionics, on the other hand, is objective, logical, and systematic, and it takes into account the diversity and complexity of human nature.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
