Wdym I pasted my result in the old gulenko thread, got SLE-COriginally Posted by OnlyLurking;[URL="tel:1502028"
Wdym I pasted my result in the old gulenko thread, got SLE-C
Are you X type because G commands it? If so, your type is arbitrarily determined by G.
Or does G command you are X type because it is right? If so you are X type independent of what G says.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
I asked you because I seem to recall you saying something about how you don't think subtype changes in the shoutbox. I also respect what you have to say about it because you seem to know your way around Jung. Just thought I'd ping it off you to see what you thought.
I think that in some cases because people actually paid G for his 'expert'/'specialised' opinion, they want to trust it over the other opinions as being held in higher regard because they paid for it, and they don't want to see that money as 'wasted' in that regard, so they go with G > others' typings, when in some cases, G might not always be correct.
They don't see G as 'presenting another argument/angle', but rather as the whole truth. Some people just blindly agree and don't analyze the results as much as they should, and some don't disagree as much as they should if they think that G doesn't match up with A) their self-perception or B) their type guess.
And anyway, IMO, you are only X type in Model G. Yes, it mostly aligns with A in a lot of cases, but it doesn't always align. They are both separate systems and whilst they go complement each other, they're not the exact same and shouldn't be treated as so.
I also don't think that people should be forced into having a G typing in order to be 'verified' as legit. At that point, it becomes a hazing ceremony, and nothing more. People should take on G's typing if they are interested in his system, and want to hear what he has to say.
I, myself don't agree with everything that he says, but I see how and why they can be valued within the socionics community. The reason that I do tend to get annoyed by Gulenko fanatics is that they try and force Gulenko onto me. I think that if one wants to, they need to come onto Gulenko and come around to his ideas themselves.
I do not suffer fools gladly.
Some people haven’t gone through all 34 pages of this thread and it shows.
Socionics is a dangerous thing for a woman like me to have, but I have it.
I can't click “like” on peoples posts due to the poor functionality of the site on my end. Just know that if you quoted me and were nice to me that I’m psychically sending you a like from my heart.
Well, in my case, I do value G's opinion above that of others (except maybe Timur, who has almost equal value in my eyes) but this has nothing to do with money. You once commented on sedecology that I agreed with G's analysis "because he paid for it", which is untrue. I don't think 120 dollars is a lot of money, personally, though I get some people struggle more, but I can only speak for myself when it comes to why I agree with's G's analysis.
I pretty much agree with the rest of what you wrote, though. I don't think pressuring people to get typed by G is healthy, and if 120 dollars is alot of money for someone, it's probably not the time to get typed anyways.
120 dollars is not a lot of money to me, but it may be a lot of money to someone else. YMMV.
As for G presenting the whole truth, I think that’s a ridiculous notion. He’s just some dude in Ukraine. But however, he’s very good at what he does, so of course I’m going to hold more weight to his opinion, a man who has studied with the originator of Socionics and studied model A in depth, even creating a model to go in tandem with it, and give less weight to people/hobbyists who are working with largely outdated materials. Because that’s what they are and that’s what they’re working with, which is OK but not as accurate imo.
I do agree that with a DarkAngelFireWolf69 typing, that’s your typing in model G. But also in model a. They work in tandem and most schools don’t even look at model A afaik, so G is the closest thing. Of course there are different schools, and all of these are also fine, but not as accessible. I’ve made a list of people who do typings and only like 3 schools cater to the west, unless you count Talanov and his inventory which is gameable (I don’t).
As for the Hazing. The majority of people who have been typed by G have not shoved the idea that others have to be typed in order to be legit. I agree the typing should only be done if a person is interested in it themselves. As for the fanatics, I haven’t seen them around, nor have I seen people shoving his ideas around here on the forum. But I don’t know where you’re hanging out.
Socionics is a dangerous thing for a woman like me to have, but I have it.
I can't click “like” on peoples posts due to the poor functionality of the site on my end. Just know that if you quoted me and were nice to me that I’m psychically sending you a like from my heart.
Gulenko mentions various typing methods in his book, his preferred method is not by video, but an interview.
Complex diagnosis involves a combination of several techniques that
complement each other; for example, an interview accompanied by
observation or filling out a questionnaire with other testing instruments.
The complexities of diagnosis can be best handled by a qualified
diagnostician; they are more reliable compared to the untrained.
Until now, the Humanitarian Socionics School focused mainly on
interview techniques and parallel observation of facial expressions,eyes,
and body language. It’s time to think about how to apply more
objective tests, the results of which are expressed relatively instantly —
within minutes or seconds. Though the present difficulties are currently
with the instruments, technology, and above all, the limitation of
resources, making the exercise far more difficult.
Below, we consider the most important aspect about this interesting and
most common method of Socionics-diagnosis, which is like an interview
with a special algorithm.An experienced diagnostician cleverly pays attention to the auditory,
visual, and sensory channels of perception, which means listening and
watching while exploring objectively and empathizing with the subject. It
is important to make sure you are not covering one side, but instead
working on all sides. This method is performed when the diagnosis is
coordinated via socionic principles with a group of two people. One
focuses on verbal communication, asking questions and listening to the
answers while the other’s focus is on observing the respondent.The success of the experience rests on establishing a relaxed
environment: lively, nonjudgmental, relaxed body language, interested eye
contact, faintly nodding your head, body focused on the person perhaps
with a slight lean towards them, and a calm tone of voice. Signs of
disapproval, of course, will be the opposite: cold, slightly narrowed eyes,
fake smile, hands folded tight on your chest, frantically twisted legs, body
turned back or to the side, an irritated tone of voice.These are his words not mineThe success of the interview is often hindered by rushing, or conversely,
a drudging slowness, leading either to fatigue or confusion about the
conversation. The normal amount of time for an interview is about 25 to
30 minutes of continuous communication.
His video typing diagnostic wouldn't pass his own standards. So let's cut the bullshit and stop acting like this isn't just a cash grab.
ALSO, model G and model A are not separate theories. You can't be one type in model G and another in model A that is also..you guessed it...
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Seems like you are creating a false dichotomy.
I think you are being pedantic. It makes sense that say, a regular random video is not his preferred method, because he likes the information that can be gathered in interviews. But it’s also possible to do video interviews. This is why he sends out two sets of questions for two video interviews to be done. Typing can be done by normal random video using his methods, but the most information is out of an interview of some sort. He probably doesn’t even make as much money as he could from these. Some typologists charge upwards of 200 to 400 for 2 hours of work. The rate G charges is like 120 USD for 2 weeks to 2 months of work. That’s at least not very profitable in the USA, though it could be different in Ukraine.DarkAngelFireWolf69 mentions various typing methods in his book, his preferred method is not by video, but an interview.
These are his words not mine
His video typing diagnostic wouldn't pass his own standards. So let's cut the bullshit and stop acting like this isn't just a cash grab.
ALSO, model G and model A are not separate theories. You can't be one type in model G and another in model A that is also..you guessed it...
Socionics is a dangerous thing for a woman like me to have, but I have it.
I can't click “like” on peoples posts due to the poor functionality of the site on my end. Just know that if you quoted me and were nice to me that I’m psychically sending you a like from my heart.
Something I would actually pay to see is Gulenko breaking down why he thinks of himself as his own type, over video, or him answering his own questions over video. If anyone knows of the existence of this video already LMK
How much would you pay me for such information?Something I would actually pay to see is Gulenko breaking down why he thinks of himself as his own type, over video, or him answering his own questions over video
I would only pay G for his omniscience, not mere mortals.How much would you pay me for such information?
Damn.
updated list
Varlawend ILI-H
The Exception EIE
Shotgunfingers LSI-H
Aliengelic IEI-CN
Suspiria EIE-C
Chakram LSI-N
Sayonara ILI-C
Thegreenfaerie LSI-HD
Uncle Ave LSI-C
Aster IEI-N
Justalitnerd IEI-H
Lolita SEE-N
Mystery user who's identity I know but won't doxx EIE-N
Viktor SLE-H
Desert Financial ILI-C
Megedy IEI-C
Northstar SLE-C
Sachmet LII-N
Ouronis ILE-NH
Peteronfiree LSI-NC
Duschia EIE-H
Cyberpunk SLE-H
Ashlesha LSI-C
Dangerouslandsvape LSI
Cyberpunk SLE-H
Fay EIE-H
Wesleh00 LSI-C
Eudaimonia LSI-H
If I left out any forum members, please let me know.
Last edited by Ave; 02-14-2022 at 05:29 PM. Reason: I had forgot someone, updated
It's interesting to note that out of 28 forum members who got typed and who's results I know of (one person told me their results but I don't think would appreciate my revealing their identity, though I listed them as the mystery user), only 3 (North, Viktor, and Peteronfiree) got their self-typing (at the time of getting typed) back as a result. That's roughly 11 percent. There are actually two members who I am not sure about when it comes to their self-typing at the time of getting typed. If both of those members got their self-typing back at the time, that would be 5 out of 28, or roughly 18%.
I keep hearing people say they think they will get their self-typing, it seems they can't imagine another way of seeing themselves. I have told many people that it's very improbable to get your self-typing back as a result. And I would like to say it again: statistically, it is very unlikely you will get your self-typing back as a result.
I say this because I still keep hearing people say they expect their self-typing "if" they got typed. I think it's best not to delude yourself. Chances are you won't. There is at best a one out of five chance your self typing will be the one G gives you, and the number is probably closer to a one out of ten chance.
Last edited by Ave; 02-14-2022 at 05:24 PM. Reason: updated the numbers, and may do so again
I suppose there is some nuance to this though, in the sense that not everyone who got typed had a firm opinion on their self-typing, many were hesitating between several types afaik.
But the point is that it is still very bold to think G will agree with your self-typing. If someone chooses to get typed by G, it's best to just keep an open mind before getting into the process IMO. It's pretty unwise to go into the process looking for confirmation of your self-perception, and this has driven more than person into a worser state than they were in before. Forewarned is forewarned.
Gulenko is not open about his process, because there are large problems with it. You are buying a typing from him because he is Gulenko, there's no guarantee that he will type you correctly. People who have been typed are usually one of two people: followers of Gulenko are people who like their typing, detractors are those who don't agree with it. If it all hinges on your own self-perception for you to accept the type, why not just cut out the middle man, type yourself and save yourself some money?
This is a grift to make money off of clout. Like I said before he doesn't have superpowers, he doesn't know you, he can't read microexpressions and see your hidden intentions. Read the literature yourself and type yourself and ignore this nonsense.
Bound upon me, rush upon me, I will overcome you by enduring your onset: whatever strikes against that which is firm and unconquerable merely injures itself by its own violence. Wherefore, seek some soft and yielding object to pierce with your darts.
-Seneca
In case anyone was curious…
Alpha 2 (7%) Beta 22 (79%) Gamma 4 (14%) Delta 0 (rip)
EIE, my intent isn't to win in an intellectual fight. I'm actually trying to help people. Contrary to many people in typology communties who try to one up others by telling them they agree with their self-typings in order create "better" relations with others. This is especially toxic in socionics circles because of the ITR aspect of the theory. Saying you disagree with someone's self-typing, especially if they self-type as your dual/quadra member, often is interpreted as hostility, and not wrongly so since, it seems to me, such judgements are often based on one's interpersonal relation with the other person.
My point was that it can be dangerous to get typed by G or any other professional, if one isn't ready to submit (for lack of a better word) to their expertise, in a way. You must be "coachable". In other words, leave your ego at the door. I honestly think this is why so many struggle with G and other professional typings, it's because while we are all hobbyists, we have deluded each other into thinking we know everything and are on the same level as people with a structured approach because we read a few wikisocion articles.
I do agree that people who get typed by professionals are often "left hanging" in confusion by the analysis they receive (unless they pay for further services, such as classes) which is a real problem, but also why communities exist - this forum could be a place where we could pool information regarding what we do know about various schools of socionics, and help each other understand these results better, but it doesn't seem people use it for that. Instead we are bickering, though it is not my intent to bicker, but to help people. I do think egos are getting in the way of us helping each other, and it's counterproductive.
I don't see it as helpful to tell people what it is they want to hear. This is why we have forum members who report feeling confused, and depressed after getting typed. Perhaps typing services should offer more in terms of answering people's questions without making them pay for classes, though I also understand they can't spend hours of their time on it either or they actually lose money. So all we have is communities like this for the most part. And another's support. I don't see telling people what they want to hear as productive.
Also, I'm not saying anyone should agree with G's analysis. If you feel his analysis of you doesn't apply to you, this is likely the only angle by which you can counter such an analysis. But I feel like saying that since type is largely an automatic process, we are often not aware of it as hobbyists. If you get typed by G, it's likely his arguments will be true, and you will know it on some level. This is why I'm saying : don't get typed unless you are sure you are willing to be "coached" by someone who knows better than you. If you get typed, his arguments will something you will have to live with, not just for a few years, but for a lifetime. If that scares you, don't get typed. I think this should be a warning everyone should read beforehand. Spending 120 dollars for an analysis you don't agree with isn't a big deal compared to spending 120 dollars on an analysis you do agree with but aeren't ready to accept, causing your mental well being to deteriorate.
This isn't meant to sound threatening or dramatic, but it should be taken seriously.
I agree calling him a scammer is too cynical and not fair. He could believe in what he's doing but I stand by the rest of what I said.
Bound upon me, rush upon me, I will overcome you by enduring your onset: whatever strikes against that which is firm and unconquerable merely injures itself by its own violence. Wherefore, seek some soft and yielding object to pierce with your darts.
-Seneca
Yeah, I agree totally.
I think attributing nefarious motives to G is just silly. And it gets grating, especially since I'm pretty sure G wants to help people. Just because he doesn't do volunteer work with his typings doesn't make him Jeff Bezos, if he was SHS would be Amazon and everyone who got typed would be satisfied customers.
I agree we all have the right to choose what is relevant to us. Noone should feel pressured to get typed, then again, I'm not sure who's pressuring anyone.
This makes me wonder, we are in a time where a lot of people are struggling to get their point accross everywhere. As much as it isn't new, it's easy to see it happen everywhere with social media and all, everyone (but me) is on it.
I wonder if this exposure and discordant tendencies that are most people's everyday life isn't making everyone "beta-ish" in the sense that it looks like power struggles, rebelliousness, that kind of supposedly beta caracteristics.
People also critiscized G for typing too many historical figures beta. In general, historical figures were strong headed and had to push against others and odds to have their point considered and heard, that's also beta-ish. Even if they didn't and just did/wrote stuff that became well known, their ideas pushed others to the side by default, still beta-ish in a way.
Idk, just thinking thoughts for the sake of it.
This is interesting. I've written in another places about possible reasons why I think there are many more betas than others in the list, so I'm not gonna beat a dead horse topic, but it's an interesting bit of information, regardless of what you make of it.
I’ve heard people claim that betas are naturally more interested in socionics compared to deltas.
What’s interesting to me about this list of socionists is the number of self typed deltas and the sheer lack of betas- http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?t...ory:Socionists
Last edited by Poptart; 02-14-2022 at 08:32 PM.
I have nothing to add. That's really well said.
I think you certainly could be an EIE, though I see could the other extroverted feelers as an option also. Ultimately, I didn't want to give opinions on your type in our private discussions because I don't want to seem like I'm battletyping, and you seem attached to your self-typing, which is totally understandable and fine. So I didn't want to be a jerk.FWIW, if I had my way, I would much rather be an SEE in terms of ITR and strengths, but at least am aware enough to know that that's not me. There's a chance that I could severely mistyped but rationality has typically been my strongest trait.
I am leaning towards you being a Normalizing subtype based on what I know and have seen, though. But since we've spoken alot lately I actually feel like this may get in the way of me giving you a neutral typing. And like you said a typing assessment should be fully neutral. Which is why I often feel uncomfortable feeling as if I had to affirm someone in their self-typing, because it always feels personal. This is not just meant towards you, I've experienced this countless times lol.
What did you do to my quote? Who is DarkAngelFireWolf69? Don't misquote me, it's arguing in bad faith.
It's not pedantic by the way to say that this method is less effective and less accurate. An interview would be better, or would you say it's just as effective? It's not 2 weeks or 2 months of work its 2 hours of work at most.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
He talks extensively about the elements of how to determine type. He dedicates multiple chapters to it. He does not mention sending a 8 min video to determine your type.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
No this doesn't mean anything, they are all correctly typed. No delta has ever gone to him to get typed. It's much more likely to believe that then the mere possibility that Gulenko was wrong.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
@EIE I quoted the same exact quote that @Aliengelic did and Gulenko is there.Gulenko mentions various typing methods in his book, his preferred method is not by video, but an interview.
These are his words not mine
His video typing diagnostic wouldn't pass his own standards. So let's cut the bullshit and stop acting like this isn't just a cash grab.
ALSO, model G and model A are not separate theories. You can't be one type in model G and another in model A that is also..you guessed it...
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Looking at Gulenko’s typing pattern, I can’t help but wonder how he would type me. Beta NF? ESI?
I think it’s possible to respect Gulenko’s expertise and criticize the flaws in his typing service.
I wouldn’t be surprised lol. How does Gulenko explain the absence of Deltas in his world? If deltas don’t exist, then what does it say about their role in society?
Maybe it's worth asking, instead, why there are so many betas from this forum taking the test and not deltas.
There are some themes that changes G's name to darkangelfirewolf69 or something.
It's a joke from who made the themes I think.
Is my question not worth asking?
Valued Te draws them to the conclusion that paying Gulenko is a terrible investment.
It's been said in this thread that someone did test as Delta, and they posted their result on the Meetch app. So it's not fair to say that Deltas are absent on Gulenko's world. I also think it's really unlikely that the school he runs is bereft of Deltas... If that were the case I think he'd have too many skeptics to be successful. Moreover, he has Delta celebrity type examples on his website.
Paying Gulenko is not an investment; it's an entertainment.
I'd like to add myself to the list. I've more or less made up my mind about my type and it's probably the same as G. would type me. I think I'm mentioning this in case I do get typed and I post it and we have messages with “oh great, another Beta”. But I wouldn't mind getting typed as something else, just to add more interest.
Now, by the way things tend to be done by the community, that last statement would “indicate Ne valuing”; each week we get a new member that pretty much states he's come to dethrone people typing in Ukraine and Russia but don't really know what they’re talking about if you press them for answers; well-intentioned people give advice but we might not be experts, etc. But it all depends what you're looking for. For endless discussion on your probable type, stay around. For something closer to your real type, go to Timur or Gulenko or insert name. It is what it is.
You can trace back part of his process. His famous people section has ‘Reinin’ written all over it. Or rather, what we've come to call Reinin because I'm sure he was typing more or less the same way before 2003 but Reinin is the one to set it on paper in a way that is to G's liking and that’s why he mentions Reinin on his website. There are many outside of Russia and Ukraine who have written at large about communication and personality with similar hypotheses so it's nothing new. The rest is more theory and accumulated experience. On the other hand, I understand if he's not open about the process; people who sell their services in many fields rarely are. I also saw you mentioned that because of the typing format he might not have an understanding of people's intentions, but I'm not sure I'd put that much weight on that.
Last edited by Rusal; 02-15-2022 at 01:40 AM.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
There's that, but if it were the only determining factor, you'd see zero Gammas.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
