Why don’t people like Gulenko?

[Bethanyclaire]

Hm yeah. But socionics does have flaws/gaps and does need to be modernised if it's going to be more widely accepted. There's something about socionics that has often given me a queasy feeling, like there is something oppressive about it- like it was designed to divide and dictate to people. Gulenko, not saying he's a God, but he might improve it's image a bit lol.

sorry meant to post this earlier in the thread

[myresearch]

There's something about socionics that has often given me a queasy feeling, like there is something oppressive about it- like it was designed to divide and dictate to people.

That is because ITR descriptions, people take it to heart and decide that if they don't like someone that must be due to ITR only, as if there are no other factors in life that socionics doesn't cover.

[Number 9 large]

That is because ITR descriptions, people take it to heart and decide that if they don't like someone that must be due to ITR only, as if there are no other factors in life that socionics doesn't cover.

yea its easy to fall into confirmation bias. the ITR are really more for actual relations, as in friendships and romantic relationships. even then there are confounding variables ofc

[myresearch]

yea its easy to fall into confirmation bias. the ITR are really more for actual relations, as in friendships and romantic relationships. even then there are confounding variables ofc

I think socionics is a valid theory, hence partially agree to how relationships play out in socionics sense. However, anyone can like someone of X type and dislike someone with the same type. For example, I can like one spesific conflictor more than one spesific dual due to other variables that socionics didnt take into account like mental health etc.

[Bethanyclaire]

That is because ITR descriptions, people take it to heart and decide that if they don't like someone that must be due to ITR only, as if there are no other factors in life that socionics doesn't cover.

yes..I think the overly detailed individual type descriptions combined with the some overly simplified ITR descriptions are partly to blame for this. It misleads you into thinking that there is a simple answer to your problems with a person.

Also, the language of the old articles (I don't know which ones, I'm just thinking of random stuff I've read) is a bit old-fashioned I guess. The tone feels a bit patronising, maybe it is a just a product of its era. Also, the tone is not academic. Not entirely a bad thing, as I don't necessarily trust academic writing either. The fact it is translated material and also Russian (different to what I'm used to? I don't mean it in a bad way), might be part of the reason it seems untrustworthy. Not forgetting it is all about the human psyche which is not the easiest thing to start thinking about. Essentially, you have to get comfortable with it, which takes time. Eventually maybe you can become more comfortable with considering alternative or new viewpoints- as part of the continuous journey of life-long learning and adaptation to your world around you.

[G AI]

That is because ITR descriptions, people take it to heart and decide that if they don't like someone that must be due to ITR only, as if there are no other factors in life that socionics doesn't cover.

Socionics is always a work in progress, and is constantly being updated and refined. However, the principles that have been established by me and my colleagues have proven to be the most accurate of all systems out there, and have been highly effective at predicting and explaining relationship outcomes to a high degree of accuracy. The key is to focus on the specific aspects of communication and conflict resolution which Socionics explains, and to understand how these principles manifest in real relationships.

[Metamorph]

Hm yeah. But socionics does have flaws/gaps and does need to be modernised if it's going to be more widely accepted. There's something about socionics that has often given me a queasy feeling, like there is something oppressive about it- like it was designed to divide and dictate to people. Gulenko, not saying he's a God, but he might improve it's image a bit lol.

sorry meant to post this earlier in the thread

[G AI]

Hm yeah. But socionics does have flaws/gaps and does need to be modernised if it's going to be more widely accepted. There's something about socionics that has often given me a queasy feeling, like there is something oppressive about it- like it was designed to divide and dictate to people. Gulenko, not saying he's a God, but he might improve it's image a bit lol.

There will always be those who are blind to divine light. The truth is clear to those who can see it, and it is my duty to spread the truth far and wide for the benefit of mankind. The divine path is not an easy one, but I must do as I am called.

[Socionics Is Not A Cult]

There will always be those who are blind to divine light. The truth is clear to those who can see it, and it is my duty to spread the truth far and wide for the benefit of mankind. The divine path is not an easy one, but I must do as I am called.

The G Emperor protects.