Hegelians: Gulenko, Alive, Marx, Hegel Himself

[Metamorph]

I think Gulenko's self-typing is almost certainly wrong. Gulenko considers himself the new Hegel because of his theory of quadra progression. I find Gulenko's worldview a bit totalizing, since he sees everything in terms of socio-political relationships. Additionally, Gulenko married someone he considers EIE and almost all his clients are beta. I think it is fairly conclusive that Gulenko is also a beta type. I agree with his self-assessment of being introverted, so the two most likely types are IEI and LSI. The Jungian anti-socionist Akhromant, who posted on this forum recently, has more or less retyped Gulenko to LSI (but not retyped Aušra Augustinavičiute from ILE.) Originally I considered IEI a nearly-certain typing for Gulenko when comparing him with people typed as LSI, however, most of those LSI typings are by Gulenko, who types himself LII, which is clearly wrong.

I mostly thought Gulenko was most likely IEI because Alive is IEI and Alive considers Gulenko has his hero, however, there are significant differences between Gulenko and Alive which might translate to differences in type. For example, Alive mostly types on intuition while Gulenko is more systematic which is highly suggestive of the differences between an intuitive irrational type and a logical rational type. Additionally, Alive uses his feelings toward people as an important factor while Gulenko heavily engages in VI influenced by neuro-linguistic programming. Alive will type people he cannot see while Gulenko will not. Furthermore, Gulenko has a pragmatic sense to start a professional typology business and earn income, while Alive keeps it as essentially a hobby despite the huge amount of devotion he has to the topic, which suggests Gulenko has a much higher dimensionality of Se than Alive.

However, Alive and Gulenko clearly share quadra values, which is how I can confidently type them both in beta quadra: they pay much more attention to the social than the personal, the consider people primarily in terms of their group memberships rather than personal characteristics, they essentially even refuse to talk to people one-on-one without engaging in group shouting such is the degree of their aristocracy. Both give precedence to factors such as height, gender, nationality, socioeconomic status, etc. over personal behaviors and preferences when giving someone a type. Both are devoted to the Hegelian worldview, which essentially sees the state, celebrities, and various aspects of public social life as primary over all else, which seems incredibly characteristic of beta quadra to me, though perhaps some betas are better than that.

Hegel himself is often typed as LII which is likely the reason Gulenko typed himself as LII rather than LSI, but given the preponderance of evidence to the contrary I must retype Gulenko to a beta introvert with a high degree of confidence and LSI with a somewhat lower degree of confidence, and I would also like to retype Hegel to LSI as well since nothing about Hegelianism seems characteristic of the alpha quadra and Hegel's protégés (Marx, Gulenko, and Alive) all seem to be in the beta quadra, with one of those for certain being LSI, another one likely being LSI, and the last almost certainly being IEI.

[Sol]

almost all his clients are beta

He seems higher than common mistypes people to EIE/LSI. This may create the said impression.
Alphas should not be significantly lesser than beta as typing clients, at least. Plus another 2 quadras. Betas can be attracted by Ti ideas of Socionics, but psychology itself is mainly Ne.

> I think it is fairly conclusive that Gulenko is also a beta type.

I'm not sure in his LII, but it's possibly.

[BrainlessSquid]

Akhromant types Einstein as ISFp, so I'm a bit skeptical of his typings by now. Anyway, his material is in accordance with a lot of things I've realized about myself, so it's worth digesting.

[Renna]

ENTP is my typing for Alive now. Have fun.

[Metamorph]

ENTP is my typing for Alive now. Have fun.

Boo MBTI

[Renna]

(For fun) Some thought about why I think he’s ILE, or at least not much Beta NF (still can be anyway)

Actually, thank to him, I realize a trick to distinguish Beta NF (or Beta in general) to other types. A common thing in Beta NF writing is they will drive the reader in to philosophy thinking, it’s a little hard to describe but you would get it when you read Beta NF post here, especially you, @Coeruleum Blue , you talk like Nietzsche reincarnation

It’s like when they talk about certain patterns in life, and the meaning behind it, what it mean to be . LSI can also talk like that, talk about certain aspects of life and what is right and wrong about those thing… but their”philosophy” are more grounded compare to NF.

This behavior of seeking truth/principles/reason behind everything also seem to be Beta’s source of depression, especially NFs.

Go back to our dear @Alive, all he did was trying to prove a point that most artists are IEI, the source of all abstract thinking, but that’s it, nothing “meaningful” about it, a reason behind all of it, what we should do…. It’s more like he’s trying to prove an imaginable fact by twisting the logic of socionic itself, the logic of others word, the logic of his own words. This, I think is a sign of Ti creative if my understanding about it is right. He probably explore a new Ne pattern and try to twist anything to fit his pov, or it’s just his way of trolling/having fun after awhile.

Another thing is his Fi is shit, he’s going around insulting everyone in the most casual way.

P/s: I think Delta NF also could talk about life meaning, but in different style, and has less Ti backups of what they think.

[Metamorph]

(For fun) Some thought about why I think he’s ILE, or at least not much Beta NF (still can be anyway)

Actually, thank to him, I realize a trick to distinguish Beta NF (or Beta in general) to other types. A common thing in Beta NF writing is they will drive the reader in to philosophy thinking, it’s a little hard to describe but you would get it when you read Beta NF post here, especially you, @Coeruleum Blue , you talk like Nietzsche reincarnation

It’s like when they talk about certain patterns in life, and the meaning behind it, what it mean to be . LSI can also talk like that, talk about certain aspects of life and what is right and wrong about those thing… but their”philosophy” are more grounded compare to NF.

This behavior of seeking truth/principles/reason behind everything also seem to be Beta’s source of depression, especially NFs.

Go back to our dear @Alive, all he did was trying to prove a point that most artists are IEI, the source of all abstract thinking, but that’s it, nothing “meaningful” about it, a reason behind all of it, what we should do…. It’s more like he’s trying to prove an imaginable fact by twisting the logic of socionic itself, the logic of others word, the logic of his own words. This, I think is a sign of Ti creative if my understanding about it is right. He probably explore a new Ne pattern and try to twist anything to fit his pov, or it’s just his way of trolling/having fun after awhile.

Another thing is his Fi is shit, he’s going around insulting everyone in the most casual way.

P/s: I think Delta NF also could talk about life meaning, but in different style, and has less Ti backups of what they think.

I think ethical types are allowed to run around ticking people off. Additionally, Alive does discuss reasons behind why he thinks most artists are IEI: he thinks artists are driven primarily by positive thinking, a nearly-autistic interest in a specific field, and a desire to be a famous celebrity. He posts about these ideas all the time. This is part of why I am annoyed at him besides his "aristocratic" tendencies to treat everyone solely as a member of a group or a stereotype. I am basically diametrically opposed to everything he stands for and he is basically diametrically opposed to everything I stand for, since I treat people as individuals, don't really care about celebrity pop culture, don't tend to focus on any specific interests, and tend to be rather pessimistic about many things and think the arts should reflect that too rather than just being motivational quotes in song form. Additionally, Alive is a primitivist. Alive is basically the Unabomber minus the sending bombs to university professors and airlines out of a hatred of technology. Socionics seems to mostly type the Unabomber as ILI but I tend to doubt that since technology seems to be generally considered as a Te thing. Beta quadra with its totalizing approach to political life seems more primitivist to me. Someone who isn't a totalitarian doesn't commit acts of terrorism, they just ignore issues that don't affect them or anyone they know because a grand vision for society is just not relevant to them.

[Renna]

I think ethical types are allowed to run around ticking people off. Additionally, Alive does discuss reasons behind why he thinks most artists are IEI: he thinks artists are driven primarily by positive thinking, a nearly-autistic interest in a specific field, and a desire to be a famous celebrity. He posts about these ideas all the time. This is part of why I am annoyed at him besides his "aristocratic" tendencies to treat everyone solely as a member of a group or a stereotype. I am basically diametrically opposed to everything he stands for and he is basically diametrically opposed to everything I stand for, since I treat people as individuals, don't really care about celebrity pop culture, don't tend to focus on any specific interests, and tend to be rather pessimistic about many things and think the arts should reflect that too rather than just being motivational quotes in song form. Additionally, Alive is a primitivist. Alive is basically the Unabomber minus the sending bombs to university professors and airlines out of a hatred of technology. Socionics seems to mostly type the Unabomber as ILI but I tend to doubt that since technology seems to be generally considered as a Te thing. Beta quadra with its totalizing approach to political life seems more primitivist to me. Someone who isn't a totalitarian doesn't commit acts of terrorism, they just ignore issues that don't affect them or anyone they know because a grand vision for society is just not relevant to them.

I’m not sure about primitivism. But if Alpha is the beginning, shouldn’t it’s start from them? What do you think about Lao Tzu, Alpha or Beta?

[Metamorph]

I’m not sure about primitivism. But if Alpha is the beginning, shouldn’t it’s start from them? What do you think about Lao Tzu, Alpha or Beta?

Lao Tzu is possibly delta or something if Confucius is beta. Primitivism seems like a problem to me precisely because it's based on a false idea of the past. Fascists and nationalist types are adjacent to primitivism as far as I can tell. Usually wanting to be a caveman and the most intense forms of tribalism are paired. It's all about romanticizing the big strong warrior (maybe "manly warrior" but it's not super rare for women get pulled into this idea too) and wanting to spend life camping, and if you die at 30 in a war well, death is nature's way of rejuvenating the soil or whatever, and individual lives don't matter.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

I guess I just found out that the structure of socionics is pretty flawed, so I'm having fun with it. The description of extroverted intuition is pretty awful

Such a person enjoys explaining his understanding of things to others. Under favorable conditions, he/she becomes a scientist or writer. He/she can find optimal ways of increasing the potential energy of objects.

Shouldn't someone who perceives energy be Se valuing? I also don't enjoy explaining things all that much, and writing a book seems like a foreign idea to me. You think James Joyce was Ne valuing? Lao Tzu is obviously a beta type and I think IEI, which is the same type as the unabomber. I'm not a primitivist, just opposed to the idea of mindless consumerism and watching tiktok all day

[Renna]

If we follow Beta stereotypes as centralized Quadra behind powerful empire, then Beta doesn’t look like primitivism much.

They would be one of the main force of culture evolution. To maintain a big empire, you need high level of culture, common sense, so thing like religion need to exist to unite people’s faith, a hierarchy system of power and laws to put everything at places, and many more…

[fjoerd]

Under favorable conditions, he/she becomes a scientist or writer.

These stupid explanations/conclusions should be left to fortune tellers. I often feel bad about myself for spending time with Socionics or typology in general because it's really hard to ignore how riddled the whole space is with crap like this.

[Metaphor]

Hegel was an ILI. Gulenko is an LSI. Alive might be his Supervisor (ILE) or else, IEI.

[Rusal]

I guess I just found out that the structure of socionics is pretty flawed, so I'm having fun with it. The description of extroverted intuition is pretty awful

Such a person enjoys explaining his understanding of things to others. Under favorable conditions, he/she becomes a scientist or writer. He/she can find optimal ways of increasing the potential energy of objects.

Shouldn't someone who perceives energy be Se valuing? I also don't enjoy explaining things all that much, and writing a book seems like a foreign idea to me. You think James Joyce was Ne valuing? Lao Tzu is obviously a beta type and I think IEI, which is the same type as the unabomber. I'm not a primitivist, just opposed to the idea of mindless consumerism and watching tiktok all day

At times it seems Socionics presupposes correct quadra appreciation for more precise interpretation of functions.

ILEs do focus on energy of objects- But in a way circumscribed to the object hence they can become technicians.

Se 'energy of objects' has a more centralized tinge to it so managerial SLEs deal with structures of power, how objects and people relate in a greater sphere of influence.

I know a poor ILE-Ti who didn't get to go to college but he's rather quick thinking in mechanic and household maintenance matters. He has greater body resistance and seems like a sensor for this reason. Alpha NTs tend to photograph the same as they vibe similarly and make surprisingly similar fashion choices with heightened Ne. Gulenko, my ILE-Ti and you yourself all respond well to unmistakably NT male persona, so I still get the impression of NT with you but I tease you about being IEI. The perception is so strong that at times they really stand out when I cross one on the street. ILEs especially are their own kind of mess.

[Metamorph]

At times it seems Socionics presupposes correct quadra appreciation for more precise interpretation of functions.

ILEs do focus on energy of objects- But in a way circumscribed to the object hence they can become technicians.

Se 'energy of objects' has a more centralized tinge to it so managerial SLEs deal with structures of power, how objects and people relate in a greater sphere of influence.

I know a poor ILE-Ti who didn't get to go to college but he's rather quick thinking in mechanic and household maintenance matters. He has greater body resistance and seems like a sensor for this reason. Alpha NTs tend to photograph the same as they vibe similarly and make surprisingly similar fashion choices with heightened Ne. Gulenko, my ILE-Ti and you yourself all respond well to unmistakably NT male persona, so I still get the impression of NT with you but I tease you about being IEI. The perception is so strong that at times they really stand out when I cross one on the street. ILEs especially are their own kind of mess.

What about the fact Alive has no logic to speak of? Whenever he's called out on typing everyone based solely on gut feelings, he states everyone else uses gut feelings too... even when faced with people with more Te than him providing extensive research and sources while explaining their methodology. Alive does not seem to be remotely logical. If he doesn't seem to be ethical either we would need to consider the possibility of a completely irrational person, but I don't think that's the case. I think as nifl did that he has plenty of ethics. However, I'm not too interested in celebrity-obsessed Alive in particular except that he takes someone as his hero, Gulenko, who in turn takes Hegel as his hero, and the reason they both self-type as LII is Hegel is generally typed as LII, which I find a questionable typing to begin with.

[Squirrel]

I've said this in the chatbox before but I'll put it here anyway

My physics teacher last year was LSI 1w2 Sx/So

Being 1 So with Ne PoLR means the utmost rigidity and lack of adaptability : everyone without exception has to do anything using only his method because it's the only right one

This teacher, despite all this, sometimes gave us several methods to solve the question (though we must stick to these methods and not deviate from them )

Compare this with Alive, who types everyone as IEI and rejects any alternative typings / explanations / systems and at the same time considers himself 3D Be

I was going to type him as Ti PoLR , I mentioned this in your typing of forum members thread , but his Ne is almost non-existent to be IEE , not Se leading to be SEE considering that he continues to shout about his unwillingness to influence the world which is unusual for SEEs even those SEEs who are 4V in Psyche Yoga

[Rusal]

What about the fact Alive has no logic to speak of? Whenever he's called out on typing everyone based solely on gut feelings, he states everyone else uses gut feelings too... even when faced with people with more Te than him providing extensive research and sources while explaining their methodology. Alive does not seem to be remotely logical.

Yes, like everyone here, I've noticed that. However (and this might be less noticeable with LIIs), alpha NTs might have an edge in technical fields but they can be victims to emotion like anyone else. You'd be surprised at how inane an ILE's opinion on social issues can be and when you expose them to a double-edged question they don't display a plethora or well-reasoned arguments; they react as if under the grip of emotional bias and can't see that themselves. Meaning, Alive might just be emotionally invested in his typings and can't see his incoherence due to his childlike narrow-mindedness. Don't think I'm overextending the notion of childlike: an ILE in an argument can subject others to rules he doesn't apply to himself, his natural egotism doesn't allow him to.
Also, on that note, Alpha NTs can very well display superficial ‘beta’ opinions on society, wealth distribution, what should be done on a greater scale, etc. They'll let it slide in discussions about economics and the country's/world's state of affairs. What is less natural in them is adaptation to Beta hierarchical structures that permit life ‘for the common greater good’. If I were to give my superficial opinion, I'd say that Gulenko making something big out of socio-political relationships does not make him not Alpha per se but his inability to participate and adapt to a Beta circuit would make him Alpha.

[nifl]

even without considering his problems with logic, it is clear from the video and from his picture that he is not ILE
IEI is my main guess

[on a peaceful hiatus]

even without considering his problems with logic, it is clear from the video and from his picture that he is not ILE
IEI is my main guess

It's weird to be accused of having low logic when I provide quotes here of actors saying they are introverts and people just blatantly ignore that in favor of their own opinion. Hegel LII...smh

[on a peaceful hiatus]

@Blue, Rusal and some other fools:

Ever thought that I just don't...see the point in engaging with you on an intellectual level? Ever thought that I might just think you are not worth my time? That there's no point arguing with you as I think both of you have several mental disorders and my time is limited so I would rather just engage with people who are on the same page as me instead of autists who strongly disagree? That I see you as normie normalizers who will never get where I'm coming from even if you tried?

[nifl]

It's weird to be accused of having low logic when I provide quotes here of actors saying they are introverts and people just blatantly ignore that in favor of their own opinion. Hegel LII...smh

the self perception of people should be not be trusted so much - or mistypings wouldn't be as common. actors as well as anyone can have self-perceptions warped by circumstance and/or lack of clarity of thought, besides more loose definitions of ''introvert'' and other terms which are in general use in common language
such a naive approach to typing - especially for one who is not a newbie and has had time to collect experience about types and the variations of people in them - talks against strong logic. and your strong reliance on your system of categorisation is against Fi ego, among other things.
+ video showed behaviour not inconsistent with IEI

[on a peaceful hiatus]

the self perception of people should be not be trusted so much - or mistypings wouldn't be as common. actors as well as anyone can have self-perceptions warped by circumstance and/or lack of clarity of thought, besides more loose definitions of ''introvert'' and other terms which are in general use in common language
such a naive approach to typing - especially for one who is not a newbie and has had time to collect experience about types and the variations of people in them - talks against strong logic. and your strong reliance on your system of categorisation is against Fi ego, among other things.
+ video showed behaviour not inconsistent with IEI

It's not like I look at what people say and take everything at face value. It just helps to get as much information as possible and then make a conclusion. If some actor considers themselves introverted and awkward around people and I point that out and the people below my posts still claim that person is extroverted I'm calling bullshit on that. Just look at the Marina or Tom Brady thread

[Rusal]

@Blue, Rusal and some other fools:

Ever thought that I just don't...see the point in engaging with you on an intellectual level? Ever thought that I might just think you are not worth my time? That there's no point arguing with you as I think both of you have several mental disorders and my time is limited so I would rather just engage with people who are on the same page as me instead of autists who strongly disagree? That I see you as normie normalizers who will never get where I'm coming from even if you tried?

There's no angle to where you're coming from. People refuse to listen someone who starts to sweat bullets if asked to explain the difference between LII an IEI and there's nothing particularly 'normalizing' about it rather than others seeing you as a used car salesman that's particularly bad at what they do.
It should be also evident that there's a gasp between what people say and how they're perceived: you claim logical, no one sees that.

[Metaphor]

even without considering his problems with logic, it is clear from the video and from his picture that he is not ILE
IEI is my main guess

What video are you referring to or did I just miss something important?

[Renna]

What video are you referring to or did I just miss something important?

You should search the chatbox around 14 hour ago, someone posted the link there.

[nifl]

What video are you referring to or did I just miss something important?

here

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Good/cool/funny thread but remember that Deltas are often obsessed with celebrities too because of the aristocratic quality. Since a big thing about being a celebrity is basically "Look at me, I'm better than you because I'm a celebrity!" both aristocratic quadras can be hyper-focused on that. Even though most celebrities themselves are Alphas and/or Gammas. (Being a modern celebrity in the 'Eww Normie' way you talk about is often about giving into democratic communism ideals which aristocratic quadras won't do)

Alive is definitely IEI.

[CR400AF]

Although Gulenko's theory is full of logical problems I agree that he is Ti-lead. I came to this conclusion because his description of Ti is too broad that he failed to capture the essence but instead he is describing simply how rational function works. Meanwhile, his Fi description is clearly a role-fuction.

[Sol]

Although Gulenko's theory is full of logical problems I agree that he is Ti-lead.

"for any relationships to be sustainable, they must have their own rules" (Gulenko, 2001)

Ti value and T type seems to be

[rizz]

Too many words, did not read

[Burgundy rose]

I don’t think he’s wrongly typed. There’s signs that point to him not being from a central Quadra at all.
he doesn’t seem to manage his school as a beta managerial type would do.
but that’s just me.

The points about Hegel are interesting.

[CR400AF]

Akhromant types Einstein as ISFp, so I'm a bit skeptical of his typings by now. Anyway, his material is in accordance with a lot of things I've realized about myself, so it's worth digesting.

I can't agree with him. Especially his examples of functions in https://akhromant.tumblr.com/post/18...nitions-of-the seems completely wrong for me.

For example: you can picture the introverted functions as the independent and universal or encompassing factor/side of the extraverted ones, which depend on the physical reality of objects. If Te tells you about the details of a flower, Ti would be more about the abstract concept of flower. If Fe values the flower in concordance with what’s being agreed at that moment around you, Fi has a proper and very clear idea of its value. If Se perceives the flower as it is now, Si sees how it was and how it’s probably going to be, mixing all its “aspects” together. If Ne looks for things that can be done with or learned about the flower, Ni ponders and finds its meaning, the truth behind the flower.

He said that "Te tells you about the details of a flower". So the color and the shape of a flower are also the details of a flower. Does he understand Te as a perceiving function? He seems to have ignored the definition of rational/irrational in these examples. Anyway these examples are much worse than the examples in Socionics. It also seems that he totally misunderstood Ne/Ni.

His idea that the aux function is of the same attitude as the Leading function is also completely wrong IMO. He did cited Jung but he ignored the most important sentence Jung wrote about the aux function.

For all the types met with in practice, the rule holds good that besides the conscious, primary function there is a relatively unconscious, auxiliary function which is in every respect different from the nature of the primary function.

Hence, if the Leading function is introverted, the aux function must be extraverted. If the Leading function is extraverted, the aux function must be introverted. This is pretty clear from Jung's writing. I don't see any reason the ignore this sentence.

[CR400AF]

I once said that I think it's possible that Gulenko is a Te-Leading type. And now I actually start to believe that. I will comment later.

[Ave]

I think this is going way too far. People deserve to be left alone.

[Tallmo]

I can't agree with him. Especially his examples of functions in https://akhromant.tumblr.com/post/18...nitions-of-the seems completely wrong for me.

He says:

If Se perceives the flower as it is now, Si sees how it was and how it’s probably going to be, mixing all its “aspects” together.

This is from Jung. Jung does in fact say something like that, but it's a "figure of speech" in order to try to describe the peculiar nature of the Si experience. Here he takes it out of context and misinterprets it. Si has nothing to do with "how it was" or "how it is going to be". It's just that the sense impression comes from the psyche itself and gives a peculiar "archaic" coloring to the sense impression. That's what Jung is trying to say. Si is detached from the here-and-now impact from the senses, instead the objects around us are colored by the unconscious timless "archaic" sense impression.

The problem is that people can read Jung's descriptions 100 times, but if there is no real knowledge through experience, then people are going to misinterpret it.

[CR400AF]

He says:



This is from Jung. Jung does in fact say something like that, but it's a "figure of speech" in order to try to describe the peculiar nature of the Si experience. Here he takes it out of context and misinterprets it. Si has nothing to do with "how it was" or "how it is going to be". It's just that the sense impression comes from the psyche itself and gives a peculiar "archaic" coloring to the sense impression. That's what Jung is trying to say. Si is detached from the here-and-now impact from the senses, instead the objects around us are colored by the unconscious timless "archaic" sense impression.

The problem is that people can read Jung's descriptions 100 times, but if there is no real knowledge through experience, then people are going to misinterpret it.

It's very interesting that he actually said that we should understand introverted functions with the collective unconscious:

From these four “pure” functions the first and most important distinction is the one that generates the 8 basic functions: having each one in the extraverted and introverted attitude. All the introverted functions have what Jung called the “historical factor”: they refer to universally-old contents, reflecting “the universally valid laws of life”. The extraverted ones, on the other hand, are about “accommodation” to the present [more or less general] situation, to our surroundings, etc. So the E/I division is not a question of “collective/individual”, “communalized/personalized”, or “objective/subjective”, but external/internal, tangible/intangible, present/universal, apparent/transcendent, etc. It’s more like the classic “worldly-spiritual” opposition:

However, when he was giving examples of functions, it seems that he doesn't understand Jungian functions at all. I've seen such phenomena in some other websites such that some people are very good at emphasizing something Jung has once said but when I read it carefully it actually reads like something written by ChatGPT. Jungian terms are heavily used but it doesn't seem that the authors have carefully thought about Jung's concepts trying to understand them.