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 06/02/2006, 04:57 PM
time is being time is being is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 108
Default entp-esfj-intj

my father is an entp, and my step mother is an esfj. i am an intj, and for some strange reason, i do not get along with my esfj step mother in the least. i know that she feels jealousy as my father and i have a good relationship. i know this because she has said horrible things when she gets angry. she also feels that my father favors me over the two children they had together, but i know my father does not feel that way. i remember seeing profiling for groups of people such as we three, but have not been able to find it again. any socionical ideas as to why this intj does not get along with this particular esfj? and yes, i am very sure of every ones type.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06/02/2006, 05:47 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,502
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

Maybe she just doesn't like you? And yes, ESFjs can say all sorts of nasty things when they are angry.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06/02/2006, 06:02 PM
time is being time is being is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 108
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

so how do you reconcile the issue of socionics not accurately describing a relation? the duality relation is one of the most interesting ideas presented (possibly the apex of the theory), yet i have experienced an instance where the situation was not predicted accurately. what role does environment play in socionics? can we bring into question the validity of the theory or do we always dismiss those observations that do not fit as special cases that do not need consideration?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06/02/2006, 06:06 PM
Nyx's Avatar
Nyx Nyx is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 226
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

Several things effect relationships, including past relationships, socialization, individual opinion, first impressions, degree of intimacy, personal fears and concerns, etc. The theory is just that: a theory. I don't always fit the INTJ description, and I don't expect to get along with every ____ (insert type here), just because the theory dictates that I should. That doesn't mean the theory is entirely inaccurate, it just means it cannot possibly predict how every person of every type will behave in every single situation.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06/02/2006, 06:14 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,502
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

Quote:
Originally posted by time is being:
so how do you reconcile the issue of socionics not accurately describing a relation?
http://socionics.com/rel/dlt.htm

I can't see any problem with this description, can you?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06/02/2006, 06:16 PM
time is being time is being is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 108
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

so socionics is just a rule of thumb, a kind of psuedo science that cannot be validated? is it just a system of parts that some people enjoying looking at for entertainment even though its purpose has been diminished? i wonder how much value the other posters assign to validation. what is it about socionics that keeps people tuned in? i suppose everyone has different motivations, but is there some reasoning that could explain why people continue to "believe" in something that may or may not deserve "belief"? "is it a perfect verse you tell yourself to help you get through"?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06/02/2006, 06:20 PM
time is being time is being is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 108
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

Quote:
Originally posted by SG:
Quote:
Originally posted by time is being:
so how do you reconcile the issue of socionics not accurately describing a relation?
http://socionics.com/rel/dlt.htm

I can't see any problem with this description, can you?
i cant seem to get past the point that it seems to cover its bases. its a bit ambiguous, and becomes a bit vague. i cant seem to exchange vagueness for accuracy.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06/02/2006, 06:22 PM
time is being time is being is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 108
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

and what are the "stages" in a relationship the description refers to?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06/02/2006, 06:34 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,502
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

Quote:
Originally posted by time is being:
so socionics is just a rule of thumb, a kind of psuedo science that cannot be validated? is it just a system of parts that some people enjoying looking at for entertainment even though its purpose has been diminished? i wonder how much value the other posters assign to validation. what is it about socionics that keeps people tuned in? i suppose everyone has different motivations, but is there some reasoning that could explain why people continue to "believe" in something that may or may not deserve "belief"? "is it a perfect verse you tell yourself to help you get through"?
I can speak only for myself and my intention was never to make people "believe" in Socionics. In fact if you want to make someone to "believe" you can just invent some stuff up that they would want to hear. Socionics works for me and so I thought it would be just fair to share it. There may be others who pursue different aims by propagating Socionics, but as I said I speak for myself only. In fact socionics.com is somewhat different from traditional Socionics they teach in Russia and I want to keep it this way. So this is what I think, if you can't make it work for you - leave it. So what do you think?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06/02/2006, 06:52 PM
time is being time is being is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 108
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

it is difficult to accept in an orthodox scientific framework, but so is psychology. the hope is that one day psychology will reach the development of say, physics. i cant help but be fascinated, yet sceptical. the fact that it is difficult to find any resources aside from the internet is troubling as well. (i dont understand russian). as far as the website is concerned, it is a worthwhile endevour. how did you learn of socionics? where can we find more resources? who is currently doing research?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06/02/2006, 07:25 PM
niveK niveK is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 24
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

Relationships are successful based on a variety of factors, type being a small factor of many. Duality will not be a work-free relationship because relationships require work. And if either side has some prejudice that prevents them from ever wanting to form a relationship, then a good relationship WON'T happen. The problems you've described in this relationship don't really have anything to do with socionics (which is mostly information metabolism and doesn't even pretend to be a complete personality theory).

Don't expect more from socionics than it's supposed to give and it actually works out pretty well.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06/02/2006, 09:59 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,502
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

Quote:
Originally posted by Bone_Roller:
I suggest you start by choosing an exagerated type you are relatively certain of. Choose a strong J type for example and observe how unnerved they are by uncertainty. Or a strong P and observe how a strict routine enforced upon them drains them and yet they brighten up when the situation becomes more fluid.
This is probably the closest you can get to some sort of scientific validation of Socionics.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07/02/2006, 08:19 AM
Bone_Roller's Avatar
Bone_Roller Bone_Roller is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 22
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

I am relatively new to the study of socionics and psychology in general, but it has already been invaluable to me in understanding and describing relationships. One thing that you must remember... "People are not types, they have types", quoted from somewhere on this site or another one I think.

Or another way: Socionics type does not define any specific personality completely or and often not even adequately.

People seem to be born with dispositions, certain preferences or comfort zones such as being more comfortable while using the mechanism of extraversion rather than introversion, or logic versus Feeling, etc. But life has a way of moving everyone in some way or another. Teaching, life experience, crisis, and any of a number of other things may reinforce or contradict our natural disposition, so that in the end our personality traits and behavior are determined to varying degrees by the admixture of life. The usefulness in socionics is that even through all the distortions and mitigations brought about by our experience in life, our underlying condation, our comfort zone remains relatively the same. So that knowing someones type serves as a great starting point, a good place to begin when undersatanding or predicting a persons behavior.

But by far the greatest benefit I have found in socionics is in uderstanding myself. And encouraging others to do the same. A well adjusted person is one who lives close to home with regard to his disposition. Often life bestows upon us personality traits that are conficting and detrimental to our disposition. Being able to identify where you have adopted behavior that does damage to your natarul order of functioning and therefore is detrimental to you psychologically or to your self-esteem can gain big rewards for you in personal fullfillment etc.

As far as the strict scientific approach it is somewhat difficult to apply to the gathering of the information, but not to testing it.

Feel free to observe behaviors and make predictions based on socionics and see how well it works. I suggest you start by choosing an exagerated type you are relatively certain of. Choose a strong J type for example and observe how unnerved they are by uncertainty. Or a strong P and observe how a strict routine enforced upon them drains them and yet they brighten up when the situation becomes more fluid.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07/02/2006, 08:30 AM
jsb'07's Avatar
jsb'07 jsb'07 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 160
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

That is ture. Science is sometimes like a religion. People want to get solutions believing into simple things. Not only in socionics where the readers think that duality is simple and just by meeting one easily will make life into perfect.It is in pshysics, medicine, in rest of the psychology. People look for things what make life easier without strain, which can be understood simple,but yet explain very complex things. People also need something to believe in so their existence would have some meaning. Once there was religion for this, but now people more and more are searching for their answers from the psychology.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 17/02/2006, 05:29 PM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
House Robot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,022
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

Some of you (SG, NiveK, Bone_Roller) accentuate the fact that socionics works quite well. Maybe it does, I don't want to argue against that, but I'm not satisfied knowing that something works - I also want to know why it works.

Socionics is a very interesting theory, and one interesting aspect of it is that it partly contradicts Myers-Briggs Type Theory. Can it really be that this wide-spread theory, backed up with years of research just like socionics, has made some simple, basic error without noticing it? Or could it be socionics that has made the simple error? Or have they both? I don't know, but it is very difficult not to think that at least one of them MUST have done it, and how that can be is still a mystery to me. As I've pointed out elsewhere at this forum, both socionics and MBTT seem to have identified the same type, which they call ISTj and ISTJ respectively. But on a theoretical level they disagree. Is this type, whatever we call it, structured TiSe or SiTe on a "molecular" level. Hopefully that can be tested empirically some day - or does anyone know of a way to determine for sure which theory is mistaken on this point?

One thing that seems to be unique to socionics in comparison to MBTT is that it has found that many people belonging to the same type often have similar, identifiable, physical characteristics. Visual identification really works quite well - it is definitely not just the result of wishful thinking and a vivid imagination. But if V.I. works it must be possible to validate it scientifically (maybe it has been already?), and to make falsifiable hypotheses about why it works.

The anomaly I mentioned above, about ISTJs and ISTJs, is irritating, though. Do we really know what type we have spotted? Have we identified a TiSe or a SiTe? Don't forget that both theories agree to a very high extent on how they want to characterize this type - they "only" disagree on which "molecule" it is. A relevant question seems to be how socionics define the types in the first place.

1. Are the types defined by the theoretical model (i.e. a ISTj is by definition a TiSe)?

2. Are the types identified empirically by how people behave, look like and so on?

3. Or are the types defined, at least partly, by their relations to other types (so if we know that a certain type is ENFp (NeFi), and we also know that it has a conflicting relation to our mysterious ISTj type, we can conclude that the ISTj must be a TiSe, because that's what the theory says it should be in that case?

Let us assume, just as a thought experiment, that we decide to define the types empirically along the lines of 2 and 3. We are certain that we have identified the ENFp as NeFi and we are certain it has a conflicting relation to the ISTj.

But then we suddenly realize (to our horror) that we had made a mistake about the essential nature of the ISTj, and that it was MBTT that was right from the beginning about the ISTj/ISTJ being a SiTe. What happens then?

Suppose we have identified the same type of conflicting relation between ESFp and another type we thought was INTj. How should we explain the fact that the same observable type of relation now exists between a NeFi and a SiTe and between a SeFi and ... a TiNe? We have got an asymmetry in our theory. If we haven't made a mistake in our observations, we must modify the theory somehow. Is it possible that the INTj also is another "molecule" - perhaps it is really a NiTe? Or perhaps it wasn't the INTj who had the conflicting relation to the ESFp in the first place but the INTp? But then we must have misidentified the types between which there is a conflicting relation. Or perhaps it is somehow possible to have a conflicting relation between types in an asymmetrical way?

If you don't want to buy the possibility of the above scenario, and insist that socionics is just fine the way it is, then I think we have to conclude that MBTT must be wrong. But what is the definite proof of that? And why hasn't anyone put it forward yet?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 17/02/2006, 11:43 PM
TheGeorgiaPeach TheGeorgiaPeach is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 12
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

http://socionika.com/experiencing_dual_relations.html
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 19/02/2006, 06:16 AM
Bone_Roller's Avatar
Bone_Roller Bone_Roller is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 22
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

Prom,

I think a lot of people have similar problems ingesting socionics. I am definately NOT anything close to an expert in socionics and have not done enough to say that I accept all of it or even close. But many problems and wasted effort arise when we assign too much significance where it is not suggested.

We are all familiar with the concept of significant digits. I cant say that 1.2+ 1.3= 2.5678654. It is not warrented. Personality and behavior is so much affected by the processes of life that any theory that does not account for them must be incomplete. Socionics as a theory does not claim to account for these differences in individuals, yet it doesn't claim to. Everything has its proper scope.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 19/02/2006, 04:53 PM
time is being time is being is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 108
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

maybe someone can explain this more clearly.

7. The leveling of dual energy. This phenomenon appears almost immediately. The duals should just to be together, just to seat close by, sometimes even without touching each other. The maximum term for leveling of dual energy – 40 minutes (it is a result of investigation) and after that duals renew their energy. It does not depend on the depth of the “energy hole”.

the translation is wonky, and perhaps someone that is knowledgable could give more detail. it comes from this page: http://www.socionika.com/experiencin...relations.html
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 19/02/2006, 07:08 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,502
Default Re: entp-esfj-intj

If you can find the original russian version I could translate that paragraph for you.
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 06:01 AM.


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