към началната страница psihologia.net
Сайт на преподаватели и възпитаници от специалност "Психология" в СУ
 
 Въпроси/ОтговориВъпроси/Отговори   ТърсенеТърсене   ПотребителиПотребители   Потребителски групиПотребителски групи   Регистрирайте сеРегистрирайте се 
 Профилпрофил   Влезте, за да видите съобщенията сиВлезте, за да видите съобщенията си   ВходВход   лични страници на възпитанициЛични страници

1. History of Jungian typology, short overview of socionics
Иди на страница Предишна  1, 2
 
Създайте нова тема   Напишете отговор    psihologia.net Форуми -> Соционика. Запознаване с школата
Предишната тема :: Следващата тема  
Автор Съобщение
Дмитрий и Марианна Лытовы



Регистриран на: 15 Дек 2004
Мнения: 54
Местожителство: Санкт-Петербург, Россия
Потребителски групи: 
[ семинар "Соционика" ]

МнениеПуснато на: 10 Яну 2005 19:40:47    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

2. The Origin of Socionics (continued).

The second regularity was called duality, or complementariness.
Above we have already described the regularity noticed by Jung – unfortunately, he did not develop his observations. Isabel B. Myers, the founder of MBTT, believed that the best case is when types complement each other by all the 4 criteria – for example, ENTP and ISFJ. However, her hypothesis was disproved by other adherents of MBTT.

According to Augusta, the so-called DUAL PAIRS are the pairs of best compatibility at close distance, for example in family. Here we will not discuss how she came to this conclusion, how she verified it – it is a very long topic. According to her, duality is the complementariness by 3 of the 4 criteria. The fourth (rationality/irrationality) should, on the contrary, coincide.

For example, the pair INT irrational + ESF irrational is a dual pair.
Later this theory was confirmed by empiric data. Several years ago psychologists Bukalov, Karpenko, Chikirisova from Ukraine researched a several plants in different cities. After putting together results of testing of the personnel, they found, that many of them were married with each other. An additional research of the married couples had shown that out of 16 possible intertype relationships, the greatest percentage of family relationships (more than one third) belongs to dual relationships [3]. An independent statistical research of family pairs performed by Filatova (St. Petersburg, 1999) has also shown very high percentage of dual pairs (17%) compared to other relationships.

(to be continued).
_________________
http://socioniko.narod.ru
Върнете се в началото
Вижте профила на потребителя Изпратете лично съобщение Посетете сайта на потребителя
Stoyan Novakov



Регистриран на: 27 Май 2003
Мнения: 676
Местожителство: София
Потребителски групи: 
[ Администратори ]
[ Випускници - психолози от СУ ]
[ семинар "Соционика" ]
[ Студенти випуск 2004 г. ]

МнениеПуснато на: 10 Яну 2005 20:06:28    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

Thank you for your comprehensive answer. So you step on the basic and first premise that psychological types are inborn, stable and universal (even in time) set of characteristics that are never affected by any social factors, but furthermore are inner regulator of our behaviour.
Върнете се в началото
Вижте профила на потребителя Изпратете лично съобщение Изпрати мейла
Дмитрий и Марианна Лытовы



Регистриран на: 15 Дек 2004
Мнения: 54
Местожителство: Санкт-Петербург, Россия
Потребителски групи: 
[ семинар "Соционика" ]

МнениеПуснато на: 10 Яну 2005 23:25:29    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

Replying to Stoyan Novakov:
Цитат:
As I can understand socionics is chiefly an approach towards human relationships. Is that correct?

Correct. It studies the relationships between psychological types. The main idea of socionics is that the type predetermines relations to certain extent.
However, socionics NEVER forgets about other factors (irrelevant to psychological types) that also influence relations, such as economic level, age, sex, culture, corporate traditions, occupation etc.
And the type is considered IN DYNAMICS. This means that the relationship between two types, e.g. INT-rational and ISF-rational, may have various options. This is probably its principal difference both from original Jung’s ideas and from MBTT: considering the type not as a “list of traits”, but rather as an “algorithm of traits”.
Цитат:
And is the notion "approach" adequate or we might use the definition "school" which brings us to something more complicated than "approach".

Initially, when socionics was isolated from the official Soviet psychology, it was a school, or even a “circle of adherents”. It was the only school that studied the dependence between human relations and human types. The official “Marxist psychology" said that everything is determined by the society: character, human development and, finally, human relations. At that time socionics was even declared to be a “new science” :).
But starting from 1990s socionics more and more integrates into psychology, somewhere between the psycho-diagnostics and the social psychology. So, for us it is unclear whether socionics today is a school or a method. Both answers are acceptable.
Цитат:
So my question is: Are human relationships the specific object of its scientific interest or there is something more beyond that?

The subject of socionics is the human relations in the broadest meaning: in family, between friends, colleagues, in large workgroups, sport teams etc. Socionics wants to answer the question where are the limits of human compatibility between people of different (or identical) types, how it is possible to help people to adapt to each other, improve productivity of their co-working; sometimes, when conflicts at close distance seem to be insoluble, socionics suggests to introduce a ”third party” in order to resolve a conflict, or to regroup people, or simply to redirect their attention.
Also, studying relations is impossible without studying profound mechanisms of human psyche. For example, actually several socionists (Talanov in St. Petersburg, Prof. Bogomaz in Tomsk, Prof. Okladnikov in Irkutsk etc.) study the problem how types are relevant to the brain activity. We both develop methods of experimental and comparative studying of the types. And so, so on.
Цитат:
About the method: It seems that the achievements of Jung are the fundament and the starting point of socionics. As far as I know, he pretends to demonstrate empirical disposition towards his objects of study (and often remonstrated against the pure philosophical premises when doing science). But as we know and as you mentioned his empirical work was mainly concerning mentally ill people who lived in a very different society (in time and space) from the one Augusta faced in the former USSR. So to what extend is the Jungian method used in socionics. What is the general methodological framework of socionics and its specific methods. If they are close the Jungian one how relevant do you think it is to our contemporary situation?

Socionists believe (of course hoping to verify it experimentally) that:
1) The psychological type is a structure more or less stable during the whole life; a type is an algorithm with various options (see above), but it cannot be “reprogrammed”;
2) The types are the same in all countries and in all times; at least, in our biographical studies we still have not discovered something impossible to describe in terms of Jungian typology;
3) Jung himself wrote that THE SAME psychological types could be observed among mentally ill and mentally sound people. Moreover, he wrote that people fall into neuroses when they cannot live “according to their natural types”, for example, when an extroverted person in a collective overfilled with extroverts has to play a role of an introverted person. In other words, mental illness, according to Jung, is often caused by the “treason of one’s inborn type”, when one attempts to be not what he psychically is.

Replying to Kalin Yanev:

Цитат:
Can you explain what did Jung mean by "subfunction"? And what does "secondary" mean in the second quotation?


OK. In his work Psychological Types Jung wrote about 8 basic functions, in Tavistock Lectures about 16 types. This means, that each 2 types have the same basic function but different secondary functions.

RATIONAL (judging) types have dominant Thinking or Feeling function, secondary Sensing or Intuitive function.

IRRATIONAL (perceiving) types have dominant Sensing or Intuitive function, secondary Thinking or Feeling function.

For example, the type INT-irrational has the following strong functions: Ni dominant, Te secondary.

The type INT-rational has the following strong functions: Ti dominant, Ne secondary.

Important: unlike Jung (and unlike socionics), in MBTT Rational is not the same as Judging, Irrational is not the same as Perceiving. They use a different model.
_________________
http://socioniko.narod.ru
Върнете се в началото
Вижте профила на потребителя Изпратете лично съобщение Посетете сайта на потребителя
Дмитрий и Марианна Лытовы



Регистриран на: 15 Дек 2004
Мнения: 54
Местожителство: Санкт-Петербург, Россия
Потребителски групи: 
[ семинар "Соционика" ]

МнениеПуснато на: 10 Яну 2005 23:27:29    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

2. The Origin of Socionics (continued)

The third regularity was called mirrorness.

The “mirror” pairs are those where the criteria N/S and T/F coincide, while two others are different.

Here are some examples of “mirror” pairs: ENT-irrational + INT-rational; ENF-rational + INF-irrational, etc.

Although different in appearance and behavior, they were found similar in their worldview, attitudes etc. – MUCH MORE similar than e.g. quasi-identical types.

For this reason, Augusta introduced graphical symbols for psychological functions.

She proposed to describe quasi-identical types by symbols of opposite color, and “mirror” types – by symbols of the same color.
Here are the 8 functions (in details we will describe them in the next topic).



Each extroverted type has an extroverted function dominant, introverted – secondary.

Each introverted type has an introverted function dominant, extroverted – secondary.

Each rational type has a rational function dominant, irrational – secondary.

Each irrational type has an irrational function dominant, rational – secondary.

Here are some examples of type formulas, according to socionics:


_________________
http://socioniko.narod.ru
Върнете се в началото
Вижте профила на потребителя Изпратете лично съобщение Посетете сайта на потребителя
Владимир Бодуров



Регистриран на: 23 Юли 2003
Мнения: 45
Местожителство: Канада, Ванкувър
Потребителски групи: 
[ Випуск 1999 г. ]
[ Випускници - психолози от СУ ]
[ семинар "Соционика" ]

МнениеПуснато на: 11 Яну 2005 10:55:11    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

Дмитрий и Марианна Лытовы написа:
Jung studied MENTALLY ILL people, for he was a psychiatrist. However, for the years of his studies he mentioned that even mentally sound people are predetermined to different mental diseases. Most of people for their whole lives have no opportunity to unleash this potential.


The main focus of Jung's interest has been the area of the clinical psychology. Are you working with mentally ill people as well and can we expect a little bit more details about this? Can we ask questions about the relationship between the different mental diseases and the types you are describing or this is beyond the scope of current discussion?
Върнете се в началото
Вижте профила на потребителя Изпратете лично съобщение
Дмитрий и Марианна Лытовы



Регистриран на: 15 Дек 2004
Мнения: 54
Местожителство: Санкт-Петербург, Россия
Потребителски групи: 
[ семинар "Соционика" ]

МнениеПуснато на: 11 Яну 2005 11:20:26    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

Vladimir, your question already concerns the next topic - the nature of type - which we are going to start today, very soon.
_________________
http://socioniko.narod.ru
Върнете се в началото
Вижте профила на потребителя Изпратете лично съобщение Посетете сайта на потребителя
Покажи мнения от преди:   
Създайте нова тема   Напишете отговор    psihologia.net Форуми -> Соционика. Запознаване с школата Часовете са според зоната GMT + 2 Часа
Иди на страница Предишна  1, 2
Страница 2 от 2

 
Идете на:  
Не Можете да пускате нови теми
Можете да отговаряте на темите
Не Можете да променяте съобщенията си
Не Можете да изтривате съобщенията си
Не Можете да гласувате в анкети


Powered by phpBB © 2001-2003 phpBB Group
Форумът е адаптиран от: Калин Янев и Иван Янкулов