Go Back   Socionics Forums > Ramble Mumble

Ramble Mumble Anything goes, but please make an effort to stay positive and keep it socionics related.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 04/01/2007, 08:42 AM
complicater-complexer's Avatar
complicater-complexer complicater-complexer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,374
Default Your Big work

Where's the big thing you wanted to finish for the christmas? Are you sure to be a j?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04/01/2007, 04:39 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,521
Default

Yeah, I know, nothing to do with my J-ness though. Something's come up and as you may have noticed I'm rarely around here too. The big work is still on my list, however there are also other priorities that are more important at the moment. I dunno, socionics.com is 10 years old this year, so that would have been cool to coincide it. Well...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05/01/2007, 12:01 PM
complicater-complexer's Avatar
complicater-complexer complicater-complexer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,374
Default

Can I ask you what are you willing to improve? What plans do you have?

Well, one of the things you can improve is the test. The big one/ the list of adjectives. I have done it twice during the last month, I got once INTp and once INFp and as you know I am S so something in the test should be improved. There doesn't seem to be a lot adjectives relating to sensing.( But when I do the humanmetrics test I always get IXTP with a moderate preferance for I, T and P and a slight one for either S or N. )

Maybe can you think of descriptions that make finding one's type easier.

P.S: Are there Socionics books you advise me to buy?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05/01/2007, 05:26 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,521
Default

What do you think the adjectives for S should be good to add?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06/01/2007, 12:43 PM
complicater-complexer's Avatar
complicater-complexer complicater-complexer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,374
Default

Likes sensory based pleasures. Remarks sensory-details easily. Sensitive to touch. Colour-sensitive...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06/01/2007, 01:38 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,521
Default

gimmie 1 word adjectives
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07/01/2007, 03:36 PM
complicater-complexer's Avatar
complicater-complexer complicater-complexer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,374
Default

hedonist, colour- sensitive, kinesthetic...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07/01/2007, 08:17 PM
Orion Orion is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 32
Default

Doesn't hedonistic apply more to Se and not much at all to Si? Well, I'm talking MBTI, so reverse those for Socionics. Also, I see kinesthetic learning styles as being more of an N thing.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07/01/2007, 08:27 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,521
Default

I could use hedonist. Got any more?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08/01/2007, 06:20 AM
Orion Orion is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 32
Default

I still don't see how one can use hedonist. Have you ever known an SJ who was at all hedonistic? Most of them are quite the opposite! ISTj and ISTj are both all about duty. It's like saying "randomness" applies to N in general, when it doesn't, it applies to Ne, not to Ni. There are fine distinctions here that need to be made.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08/01/2007, 01:26 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orion View Post
I still don't see how one can use hedonist.
Use for what?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08/01/2007, 04:03 PM
Orion Orion is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 32
Default

Use as a question on an MBTI/Socionics test to indicate S over N. An SJ type would likely choose against "hedonistic" and still are not Ns. Such a question would cause the test to lack construct validity. Is this not what we are talking about?

The adjectives would have to be general enough to cover both Se and Si, Ne and Ni, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09/01/2007, 08:15 AM
jas05 jas05 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 25
Default

Or maybe the adjectives could be accurate enough to make a difference between Se and Si. It's all about how the test works, whether it uses the functions or only I-E, N-S, T-F, and j-p scales. Right?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09/01/2007, 10:15 AM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jas05 View Post
It's all about how the test works
Couldn't say better myself
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10/01/2007, 12:46 AM
Orion Orion is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 32
Default

That would work too. I actually thought about mentioning that, but found it to be beside the point, since I figured you had thought of that, yet that is not the type of test we were talking about. If you make a test that distinguished between Si and Se, for example, then it would be fine to have adjectives such as "hedonistic" to apply to Se over Si. However, if you make a test that distinguishes between S and N in general, then adjectives like "hedonistic" will sap the construct validity right out of the test.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10/01/2007, 01:11 AM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,521
Default

Well. well. well. If you describe yourself as a hedonist, what are the chances for you to be an N rather than an S?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10/01/2007, 03:22 AM
Orion Orion is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 32
Default

That's a matter on the intuitive and sensing functions. I would have an easier time seeing Ne as hedonistic than Ni. The same goes for Se over Ni. Though probably Se over Ne. So, I propose this order: Ni, Si, Ne, Se.

In any case, this doesn't contradict what I was saying. Even if Ns as a whole are less hedonsitic than Ss, there is likely to be variance within each function as far as to what extent adjectives like hedonistic apply. A minor amount of variance might be enough to cause construct invalidity. This possibility could be avoided by throwing out adjectives like "hedonistic" and replacing them with ones that apply to S and N in general.

To tell you the truth, I'm not certain that Ns on average are more hedonistic than Ss. I have known Ne types that were pretty hedonistic in some ways. And I have known Si types who were the total opposite of hedonistic. By using adjectives like "hedonistic" in the type of test you are talking about, you are engaging in an oversimplification by ignoring the shades of gray that exist in real individuals.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10/01/2007, 07:46 AM
complicater-complexer's Avatar
complicater-complexer complicater-complexer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,374
Default

Type 7, the most hedonistic type in enneagram is full of extraverted intuitives (of course I mean by that Ne, I find it silly to say extraverted intuitive if one means ENXy).

All depends on how you define hedonism. Type 7 is hedonistic in the sense that he is always planifying for the future. His pleasures are mental. He wants mental excitement, new ideas, new projects...

My advisor is a 7, and as I have already said he is probably ENTp.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10/01/2007, 10:00 AM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orion View Post
That's a matter on the intuitive and sensing functions. I would have an easier time seeing Ne as hedonistic than Ni. The same goes for Se over Ni. Though probably Se over Ne. So, I propose this order: Ni, Si, Ne, Se.

In any case, this doesn't contradict what I was saying. Even if Ns as a whole are less hedonsitic than Ss, there is likely to be variance within each function as far as to what extent adjectives like hedonistic apply. A minor amount of variance might be enough to cause construct invalidity. This possibility could be avoided by throwing out adjectives like "hedonistic" and replacing them with ones that apply to S and N in general.

To tell you the truth, I'm not certain that Ns on average are more hedonistic than Ss. I have known Ne types that were pretty hedonistic in some ways. And I have known Si types who were the total opposite of hedonistic. By using adjectives like "hedonistic" in the type of test you are talking about, you are engaging in an oversimplification by ignoring the shades of gray that exist in real individuals.
Are you a hedonist?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10/01/2007, 04:40 PM
Orion Orion is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 32
Default

No, I am too concerned with duty to be a hedonist. I would love to be spontaneious and follow my impulses more, but I can't seem to do it. Maybe one day! Why do you ask?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2007 SOCIONICS.COM