View Single Post
Old 14/03/2006, 07:52 PM
Epic's Avatar
Epic Epic is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 460
Default Re: The narrow-mindedness of Russian Socionics

Sergei, I appreciate how informative your information was. I think that you should post more information like that on your site.

See, by "ulterior"(sorry for my poor spelling) It seemed as though you reserved a bit of contempt about ENTp's and their strengths. It looked as though it manifested in a way which was directed at all ENTp's and people labeled as ENTp. It almost appeared as a plea for doubt or distrust at ENTp's. And I AM an ENTp and I DO have ideas and I believe they are of sound logic and also that I am a fair person with no biases. It seems like misinterpretation, translation, or ignorance which would make anyone seriously believe one quadra to be better than another. I agree that such misinterpretations are real and are common, but also that they are extinguished with time by their own invalidity.

More and more people in the Western World are becoming introduced to socionics. I base many fundamental opinions about people and the world around me on what I understand of socionics and how it relates to my objective reality. The more it expands the more balanced it will become, that is my belief. Things just reach a homeostasis, and equilibrium.

The "birth of idea" notion seems relative to the interests of alpha members and is by definition egocentric. In order to become recongnized by future quadras, in order for it to be born it must be "sold" to the other quadra. People don't submit to oppression by suggestion without potential gains. Alpha must convince others of the value of the idea and alpha lacks volition and material resources to do anything by "force" So the very notion that alpha is any stronger than anyone else is ridiculous. It is a ring, and each quadra is mutually dependent. It is a foolish illusion to believe in the supremacy of one quadra- and although I know it to be true that people will believe this, the reality, not the belief, will prevail and the illusion will no longer be. It's just how it works.

There is the illusion that America is run by rich old white Republican Christians. "They have all the money, they control the schools: "they oppress minorities and squander all the wealth! They came over and thought they had the right to kill off the indians and take the land. Their european culture represents everything bad about this world." Then there is the illusion that the Jews control America "They run the media and subvert the population. They are Zionists and think of everyone else as cattle. They control the wealth, they control public opinion, they control the elections!" and then there is the economic, global systems outlook. "its about oil, its about capitalism! It's about consumerism" then there is the "survival of the fittest!" perspective, or "universal equality of all men!" and then there is the "good, evil" approach, or the highly speculative scapegoating of secret societies and so forth, which are for the most part a combination of all of the above mentioned examples.

The truth about all of these perspectives is that they are typically egocentric perspectives encased in circular logic so they remain self justifying and seemingly logical. I think that they circular argument is the last line of defense in all of these philosophies. Some are ethical, some are logical. Some represent what is, some, what can be.

But it is a universal truth that what holds things together is coherency and understanding made possible by understanding the fundamental principles of intertype relationships. I could go on forever about this but I think I have made my point clear. I agree that there is the possibility for misunderstanding and discrimination, but i also see it as a universal inevitability and a catalyst for change. African, European, Asian, Jew, whatever- there is an interdependence and the false egocentric hope they "I am the best, i am worthy" idea which people need to believe in in order to get anything done.
Reply With Quote