Socion or The Foundation of Socionics, and other articles by Aushra Augusta

[Axiom]

When people think of Augusta's writings, they usually think about Dual Nature of Man, when in fact she wrote much more than that. I am making this thread to share my own translation (I am Russian) of Augusta's other major work, Socion or The Foundations of Socionics:

https://classicsocionics.wordpress.com/socion/
https://www.wikisocion.net/en/index....=Socion_(book)

The first link goes to my personal website. I have other materials by Augusta in there that I either translated, or machine-translated and revised (but please note that the revision of the type descriptions, except ESI, is not finished yet):

https://classicsocionics.wordpress.com/augusta-index/

Eventually I intend to translate and upload more writings by her, including the remaining two type descriptions (LSI and ILE).

[Tallmo]

Thanks a lot. I owned a copy of the book in Russian, but I could never read it, so I gave it to a Russian guy. This is fantastic

To all forum members: Read Socion and the foundations of Socionics!

I find Aushra hard to read and I prefer Jung, but nevertheless your contribution to the forum is great.

[Axiom]

Thanks a lot. I owned a copy of the book in Russian, but I could never read it, so I gave it to a Russian guy. This is fantastic

To all forum members: Read Socion and the foundations of Socionics!

I find Aushra hard to read and I prefer Jung, but nevertheless your contribution to the forum is great.

How did you come to own a Russian book if you aren't Russian yourself? o.o
I also got a book which is basically a collection of most Augusta's writings. I used it to create an index of all her works in Russian, maybe I could post it here as well if someone wants to machine translate them for their own use?

[Tallmo]

How did you come to own a Russian book if you aren't Russian yourself? o.o
I also got a book which is basically a collection of most Augusta's writings. I used it to create an index of all her works in Russian, maybe I could post it here as well if someone wants to machine translate them for their own use?

I got it in 2012 from an American guy who had been in Ukraine. He knows Socionics (he's ILE). I then gave it to a Russian SEI whom I met at work. Here in Finland there are quite a lot of Russians also. The book looked interesting because of all the complex illustrations of functions, but now I can read what Aushra is talking about.

Btw, I think her Si description is really strange.

[Axiom]

I got it in 2012 from an American guy who had been in Ukraine. He knows Socionics (he's ILE). I then gave it to a Russian SEI whom I met at work. Here in Finland there are quite a lot of Russians also. The book looked interesting because of all the complex illustrations of functions, but now I can read what Aushra is talking about.

Btw, I think her Si description is really strange.

It is pretty abstract, as is a lot of her writing, but I find it refreshing. It speaks about Si as an interdependence of processes and factors creating a particular whole, which leads to Si leads being able to understand how the factors influence the whole, and modify the factors to modify the whole. Like the cooking example, which ingredients to use to create a particular taste, or how to draw a painting to create a specific experience.

[Tallmo]

It is pretty abstract, as is a lot of her writing, but I find it refreshing. It speaks about Si as an interdependence of processes and factors creating a particular whole, which leads to Si leads being able to understand how the factors influence the whole, and modify the factors to modify the whole. Like the cooking example, which ingredients to use to create a particular taste, or how to draw a painting to create a specific experience.

But this sounds like she is inventing too much. Si perceives impressions that objects evoke. Jung has a long Si description and it is very clear to me, but I am not sure if Aushra was on the right track.

[Axiom]

But this sounds like she is inventing too much. Si perceives impressions that objects evoke. Jung has a long Si description and it is very clear to me, but I am not sure if Aushra was on the right track.

I have not read Jung, so I can't really comment on his description of it. But when it comes to socionics definitions diverging from Jung's, I think it's useful to remember that socionics is not just a continuation of jungian typology, but rather a synthesis of at least 4 theories (jungian, Kepinski's IM, Ernst Kretschmer's work https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_...e_temperaments and Lichko's locus of least resistance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrey...nyevich_Lichko), and Augusta was also clearly inspired by some additional sources. This isn't to say that I know how exactly all of them influenced her idea of elements, though.

[Tallmo]

I have not read Jung, so I can't really comment on his description of it. But when it comes to socionics definitions diverging from Jung's, I think it's useful to remember that socionics is not just a continuation of jungian typology, but rather a synthesis of at least 4 theories (jungian, Kepinski's IM, Ernst Kretschmer's work https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_...e_temperaments and Lichko's locus of least resistance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrey...nyevich_Lichko), and Augusta was also clearly inspired by some additional sources. This isn't to say that I know how exactly all of them influenced her idea of elements, though.

Right. Augusta is talking about the same functions and types as Jung, I have no doubts about that. But she is influenced by her own extraversion. Jung on the other hand is hyper-introverted (LII) and traces the introverted elements back to their archetypal foundations. (Btw, jung has excellent function descriptions but they can be difficult. I recommend reading what he says about Fe)