Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Socionics is suspicious because 16 is too symmetrical a number

  1. #1
    Making peace.
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    175
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Socionics is suspicious because 16 is too symmetrical a number

    Types in real life are never that symmetrical. Look at the periodic table of element or the standard model of elementary particles. They have patterns (periodic table has cosets, particle physics has duals and lie groups like SO3, U, etc...), but they don't have clean numbers like 16.
    "A barbarian built civilization, as an illiterate invented writing." - Classical Apothegmist

  2. #2
    Northstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    SLE-C 8w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    875
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Socionics is necessarily ”symmetrical” as in having an even number of types because it is expressed in binary (dichotomies). You either have a trait or not, there is no in between. It doesn’t make the theory suspect in itself. To represent infinite variation and a spectrum of types with more detail, you just add more dichotomies. It is like analog to digital conversion, adding more bits (dichotomies) enhances the resolution.

  3. #3
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,547
    Mentioned
    131 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    One could say that particle physics is somewhat suspect also. Hopefully, doubt will inspire a more scientific approach to Socionics; it's only at the there-seems-to-be-a-pattern stage - like dark energy.

    a.k.a. I/O

  4. #4
    Making peace.
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    175
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northstar View Post
    Socionics is necessarily ”symmetrical” as in having an even number of types because it is expressed in binary (dichotomies). You either have a trait or not, there is no in between. It doesn’t make the theory suspect in itself. To represent infinite variation and a spectrum of types with more detail, you just add more dichotomies. It is like analog to digital conversion, adding more bits (dichotomies) enhances the resolution.
    That's cool! So there could be 8bit, 16bit, 32bit, etc... versions of Socionics?
    "A barbarian built civilization, as an illiterate invented writing." - Classical Apothegmist

  5. #5
    Smilex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    293
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Exactly. As long as you are aware of if the types in the dichotomy prefer the same quality or the opposite quality, the basic rules of socionics apply.

  6. #6
    Northstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    SLE-C 8w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    875
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SocietyOTLittleFlower View Post
    That's cool! So there could be 8bit, 16bit, 32bit, etc... versions of Socionics?
    Yeah, classic model A (or MBTI, for that matter) is 4-bit (2^4 = 16). The DCNH system adds 3 more dichotomies which would result in a 7-bit typology of 128 types, but because only half of the combinations are "allowed" or considered distinct subtypes, it becomes a 6-bit typology of 64 types.

    The Reinin dichotomies are fully derived from the basic dichotomies and don't add any more information as every type only matches to one combination of Reinin dichotomies.

  7. #7
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    2,812
    Mentioned
    212 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The human body is also almost totally symmetric on the y-axis. Is this suspicious too?
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)


    My Pinterest

  8. #8
    a two horned unicorn renegade Comatose Lamiac 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    tickling your PoLR
    TIM
    ILE-H LEVF 7 so/sx
    Posts
    5,787
    Mentioned
    255 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    The human body is also almost totally symmetric on the y-axis. Is this suspicious too?
    Only the surface. Neurologically not true but there do exists near exceptions.
    Measuring you right now

    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type

    Your life is too short to actually do anything useful with it without being wasteful.

  9. #9
    ⛧Satan-Cat is Queen⛧ Nobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    228
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It IS suspicious, if you don't really believe in duality of functions or think it's not that important most of the time.
    The beatings will continue, whether morale improves or not.

  10. #10
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    EII typed by Gulenko
    Posts
    4,687
    Mentioned
    323 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    The human body is also almost totally symmetric on the y-axis. Is this suspicious too?
    LOL. I was thinking this too. Does OP also find things like mirrors and starfish suspicious?

  11. #11
    Tommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    TIM
    SLI-D sx/sp
    Posts
    3,221
    Mentioned
    387 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    LOL. I was thinking this too. Does OP also find things like mirrors and starfish suspicious?

  12. #12

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    11,366
    Mentioned
    333 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    People want symmetry, it's natural. People find symmetrical faces and things much more pleasing and attractive than asymmetry which causes disarray. It causes people to feel dizzy, "ugly" and disorientated. It literally is like being on a weird amusement park ride forever that doesn't let up and makes you vomit. It's not a good way of being. The brain is always trying to symmetrize things itself even because of this. The human body also has natural functions like homeostasis which tries to bring you to that point of symmetry. Your body likes to stay at average 97-98-ish degrees no matter what is going on outside.

    The problem comes in relationships when people think being involved in somebody no good for them will bring them 'symmetry' but it really brings it's opposite.

    I agree tho that life isn't a neat butterfly pattern of perfect yawn-ness. How boring! That is kind when 'symmetry' goes too far and pretty ribbon-y. Human beings are complex in that in the end we crave symmetry but we also wish to be broken apart out of it- because it's like the chaotic stir that causes orgasms. That is why subs and most people feel so empowered if somebody talks about them being cut up without being a loser emo overly empathetic dork about it, but would be rightfully horrified and offended if they actually did it.

  13. #13
    a two horned unicorn renegade Comatose Lamiac 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    tickling your PoLR
    TIM
    ILE-H LEVF 7 so/sx
    Posts
    5,787
    Mentioned
    255 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, I have worked with frameworks that dealt with scientific systems that had very broken regulaties. It was very patchy to get it working. You could call it b0rked. So basically it called for symmetrization for the end viewer. It works as long as it does not change out from the ordinary regularity and it could raise its ugly head unexpectedly. Kind of funny way to think if it is as a grand scheme of things. Well, I heard that introduction of breakage in symmetry in thermodynamics borked some of it immediately... so have a nice rest of the weekend thinking about the shaky grounds you stand on.
    Measuring you right now

    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type

    Your life is too short to actually do anything useful with it without being wasteful.

Posting Permissions

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