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

5. Functions, or How do Types "Move"?

 
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: 23 Яну 2005 10:48:58    Заглавие: 5. Functions, or How do Types "Move"? Отговорете с цитат

Let us try to understand what the 16 types look like in the real life.
Jung considered the 4 criteria as “dead”, “disassembled” parts of the whole body called type. When we see a human arm, or a leg, or an eye, they do not tell much to us about that person in the life, even when they are put together.
Jung used so-called FUNCTIONS, which in fact represent “active” combinations of certain dichotomies. Each type has one dominant function. Rational types have RATIONAL dominant functions, irrational types have IRRATIONAL dominant functions. Extroverted types have EXTROVERTED dominant functions, introverted types have INTROVERTED dominant functions.

THE 8 FUNCTIONS
IRRATIONAL FUNCTIONS (sensation and intuition).

Extroverted intuition is also called Intuition of Possibilities.
This function is “responsible” for considering the world in all its possibilities and alternatives, in generalization of what is going on and developing new concepts.
Bearers of this function are usually curious, full of ideas; they gladly look for new ideas in books, or make new interesting acquaintances. Usually they are not aggressive, and even being talented, often have troubles with getting a “reward”, recognition of their ingenuity. They usually see a lot of positive possibilities in other people. However, when their ideas are offended, they can be very persistent.
A negative trait: when they promise, it usually does not mean “I will certainly do”, often it means “I wish it would happen when somebody helps”.
Examples: Pierre Richard, Fannie Ardan, Jeff Goldblum, Jamie Lee Curtis, Albert Einstein.
Descriptions of these types (in English):
Intuitive-logical extrovert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/il.html
Intuitive-ethical extrovert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/ir.html

Introverted intuition is also called Intuition of Time.
This function, instead of lots of possibilities, considers people and the world as if flowing in a big and insuperable stream of time. What does people’s potential mean when it cannot be realized? Fate rules the world. Their usual condition is something like meditation. However, in spite of such “Buddhist” vital philosophy, they are very smart in adaptation to different crises that happen in life, and stoically tolerate even somebody else’s petty tyranny. They are intellectuals, but they do not often want to demonstrate their ideas, preferring that other people would pay attention to them, and for this reason often seem to be “passive”. In fact, they do not think they are “passive” – the “wait for the good moment”.
Examples: Franz Kafka, Ray Bradbury, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Stanislaw Lem, Woody Allen, Meg Ryan, Jennifer Aniston, and Carl Gustav Jung himself.
Intuitive-logical introvert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/tp.html
Intuitive-ethical introvert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/te.html

Extroverted sensation is also called Will Sensation, or Space-capturing Sensation.
Their sensation directs to occupation of space. They are usually demanding people, which like when other people fulfill their wishes and demands. Sometimes they become managers, and sometimes – good sellers that can sell even unnecessary things. They often (but not always) have athletic, somewhat roundish figure, quick and demanding eyes. They are very persistent in the life: "If I want, then it should be achieved”, and they often gladly help other people – those who accept their leadership. Their outbursts of anger may fear some people, but in fact they are short-term – in several minutes they become calm again and restore their good mood.
Examples: Vladimir Lenin, Gerhard Schroeder, Sylvio Berlusconi, Jacques Chirac, Mikhail Gorbachev, Anthony Hopkins, Sharon Stone, Goldie Hawn, Madonna.
Sensory-logical extrovert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/fl.html
Sensory-ethical extrovert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/fr.html

Introverted sensation is also called Feeling Sensation, or Space-settling Sensation.
Their sensation is more passive, it directs to getting as more pleasant feelings as possible, to reduction of quantity of unnecessary movements, to the quality of their work. They do not like to argue (if they began – it means that something VERY serious happened). They are often efficient in the work that requires attention to small details, monotonous chores etc. They like intellectuals, like new ideas, because these ideas make their life more diverse, but also ridicule intellectuals for their “impractical approach”.
Examples: Robert De Niro, Meryl Streep, Barbra Streysand, Nikita Khrushchev, Vladimir Vyssotsky, Gerard Depardieu, Kevin Spacey, Jerzy Stuhr, Adriano Celentano, Mel Gibson, Angelina Jolie.
Sensory-logical introvert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/sp.html
Sensory-ethical introvert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/se.html
(to be continued)
_________________
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: 25 Яну 2005 0:04:52    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

RATIONAL FUNCTIONS (logic and ethic).

Extroverted logic is also called Practical Logic.
It estimates everything in terms of efficiency: not abstract analysis, but "how to make it work?", and not systems, but methods. They are energetic, active, and mobile. As scientists, they are strong in improvement of methods, but often they choose a business career. However, people who work together with them, often blame these types of being "too dry, cold-hearted", even in spite of their high emotionality. In general, this type of thinking may be called “algorithmic”.
Examples: Brad Pitt, John Kennedy, Boris Yeltsin, Tony Blair, Helmut Kohl, Margaret Thatcher, Uma Thurman, Bruce Willis, Milla Jovovich, Alexei Leontyev, Jack London, Bill Gates.
Logical-intuitive extrovert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/pt.html
Logical-sensory extrovert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/ps.html

Introverted logic is also called Systematic Logic, or Structural Logic.
This type of logic is inertial. Instead of “making things work”, it rather focuses on elimination of contradictions, on systematization, or in more general meaning – on “justice” (if it only exists). The types for which this function is dominant are often not too energetic, they are rather stable-mooded, work without noticeable “falls” and “rises”, logical and reticent in their sayings and deeds. On the one hand, other people respect them for being “just”, for their cold and sober analysis of situations; on the other, they do not “feel people” well.
Examples: Vladimir Putin, Joseph Stalin, Harry Truman, Alain Delon, Patricia Kaas, Kevin Costner, Isabelle Huppert, Anton Chekhov, Clint Eastwood, Slobodan Miloshevich, Czar Simeon II (probably), Donald Rumsfeld.
Logical-intuitive introvert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/li.html
Logical-sensory introvert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/lf.html

Extroverted ethic is also called Ethic of emotions.
This function reflects person’s own emotions, his/her emotional, highly personal and passionate reaction to what is going on around. Types with this dominant functions are eloquent, often smiling, artistic, charming (but somewhat “fussy” and “too artistic”), can speak and persuade others, but they perceive situations too emotionally, too personally, and sometimes they “sink” in their own emotions, cannot calm down for long time.
Examples: Georgi Dimitrov, Leon Trotsky, Fidel Castro, Yasser Arafat, Mylene Farmer, Louis de Funes, Annette Bening, Juliette Binoche, Emir Kusturica, George Clooney, Liza Minnelli.
Ethical-intuitive extrovert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/et.html
Ethical-sensory extrovert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/es.html

Introverted ethic is also called Ethic of relations.
This function is inertial; many emotions are inside such a person, but they do not go outwards, and rather stay “conserved”. Such people are very passionate in evaluating other people, but from outside they seem to be “emotionless”, smiling just as much as etiquette requires. They are good spectators of relations: in a small collective, they very quickly feel who has which relations with whom. They can work with people – as lawyers, pedagogues, etc. However, being so attentive to people’s relations, they do not like, even more, they are afraid of “intellectual initiative”, do not like arguing, because it can “break” or just significantly change relations with other people.
Examples: Jeremy Irons, John Travolta, Michelle Pfeiffer, Susan Sarandon, Julianne Moore, Gwyneth Paltrow, Leonardo Di Caprio, Elisabeth II, Leonid Brezhnev, Jacqueline Kennedy, Marilyn Monroe.
Ethical-intuitive extrovert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/ri.html
Ethical-sensory extrovert:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/en/1.1.types/rf.html
(to be continued)
_________________
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: 27 Яну 2005 15:07:36    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

THE SECONDARY FUNCTION: WHY IS IT OF DIFFERENT “VERSION”?
In the topic # 3 we talked about the phenomenon of quasi-identity (do you remember the picture?). Let us consider for example the XXX-logical extroverts (i.e., intuitive-logical extrovert, Searcher, and sensory-logical extrovert, Legionnaire) and the quasi-identical to them logical-XXX extroverts (i.e., logical-intuitive extrovert, Entrepreneur, and logical-sensory extrovert, Administrator), their pseudonyms sound similar, and their "formulas”, according to the American system, seem also similar (ExTP and ExTJ). However, according to socionics, their strong functions are of different “version”: the first two have introverted logic as the secondary function; the second two have extroverted logic as the dominant function.

Why cannot extroverts have both of their strong functions extroverted, and why cannot introverts have both of their strong functions introverted? From the distance, we usually watch only separate criteria (intuition, extraversion etc.); only when we are “typologically educated”, we can “assemble” these criteria into functions.

The secondary function represents people’s CONSCIOUS activities. When we take the function of the opposite “version” (e.g., extroverted logic for an ENTP, or introverted logic for INTP), it brings very high scores in tests; however, it is not conscious, it is rather “standardized”, and when people of corresponding types meet a non-standard situation, this function fails, while their secondary functions keep doing its small but important work.
Now let us consider secondary functions on practical examples.
Secondary introverted logic (the types Searcher and Legionnaire, XXX-logical extroverts)

They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Entrepreneur and Administrator with the dominant extroverted logic) for their activity and logical way of thinking. The difference is, that both Searcher and Legionnaire are spontaneous types, who do not like to adapt to procedures. Their thinking is conceptual, not methodological; often they can even contradict to what they just have said, but they do not accept such reproaches: “What happened, I just considered the situation from different viewpoints!” Legionnaires (sensory) often are good as crisis managers, military commanders, heads of the state in crisis situations (Churchill, Lenin, Napoleon Bonapart), but quickly get bored of complicated procedures that exist in peaceful democratic states. They often like “cat-and-mouse” logical discussion, where important is not to find the truth but to win, to “kill” the opponent with arguments. Searchers (intuitive) often become scientists and specialists who present interesting concepts, but very rarely (and often with somebody else’s help) they succeed to transform their concepts into working technologies and methods. Their activity is not even: sometimes they are super-active, sometimes fall into periods of depression.

[b]Secondary extroverted logic (the types Critic and Craftsman, XXX-logical introverts)

They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Analyst and Inspector with the dominant introverted logic) for their calm logical emotionless manner of explaining their views, and for certain vital conservatism. However, the difference is, that they do not strive for being consistent and systematic in their thoughts – on the contrary, they strive for adaptation to ever-changing situation, and thus their sayings often look incomplete or vague. Carl Gustav Jung, although some typologists think he was an Analyst, not Critic, wrote in a very vague, ambiguous way, often left his ideas uncompleted, and even his typology was for him just a “by-product”. Often the facial expression of Critics and Craftsmen is skeptical, with a characteristic grin (Critic: Meg Ryan, Woody Allen; Craftsman: Meryl Streep, Harvey Keitel). They prefer not to present their own concepts but rather to criticize our people for imperfect, contradictory concepts. These two types may be also called “anti-enthusiasts” – they like to warn other people against insufficiently considered, unreasoned spontaneous actions, and hate very much excessive emotions.

(to be continued, hopefully in an hour).
_________________
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: 27 Яну 2005 17:12:51    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

Secondary introverted ethic (the types Psychologist and Politician, XXX-ethical extroverts)

They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Mentor and Bonvivant with the dominant extroverted ethic), because they are active, ever-smiling, often among people. However, their emotionality is quite different than that of rational extroverted ethic types. Both Psychologist and Politician do not like excessive emotions and try to negotiate rather than to awake excitement.

Secondary extroverted ethic (the types Lyricist and Mediator, XXX-ethical introverts)

They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Humanist and Conservator with the dominant introverted ethic) for their strive for good relations with other people, very mild and comfortable manner of communication. However, there is a difference: both Lyricist and Mediator are emotionally active and even often try to awake emotions in other people. By contrast, Humanist and Conservator rather strive to suppress excessive emotions, to release other people from redundant, unnecessary emotions.

Secondary introverted intuition (the types Entrepreneur and Mentor, XXX-intuitive extroverts)

They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Searcher and Psychologist with the dominant extroverted intuition) for their intellectualism and ingenuity, for the abstract manner of explaining their views, for speaking a lot about “possibilities” and future perspectives, for having a lot of ideas concerning how thing should go on correctly.

To understand the difference, let us consider a row of people representing the types Entrepreneur and mentor, i.e. with introverted intuition as the secondary function. This function entails certain kind of “prophet-like” or “preacher-like” behavior. Such people believe in magnificent perspectives, and they try to transfer their belief to other people, even when the situation is really bad and gloomy. Hitler, Reagan, Martin Luther King, Ceausescu, Trotsky, Goebbels, John F. Kennedy, Boris Yeltsin, Tony Blair, Che Guevara – some of these politicians had bad reputation, some are adored and admired, but they all had something important, a common trait that united them all – their “prophet-like” behavior, their capability to “infect” people with belief in the future, even when several minutes ago people were much dissatisfied of them.

Secondary extroverted intuition (the types Analyst and Humanist, XXX-intuitive introverts)

They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Critic and Lyricist with the dominant introverted intuition) for their being modest intellectuals who do not strive “into the center of events”, their certain idealism. However, the difference is remarkable: both Analyst and Humanist are consequent in their thoughts, often have well-structured speech (and often prefer to communicate in written than in spoken). They are rigid in their everyday life: while Critic and Lyricist can well adapt to changing circumstances, Analyst and Humanist rather suffer when plans change. And they both believe that people are full of positive potential, which should be discovered and developed.
(to be continued)
_________________
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: 27 Яну 2005 23:47:08    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

Secondary introverted sensation (the types Administrator and Bonvivant, XXX-sensory extroverts)

They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Legionnaire and Politician with the dominant extroverted sensation) for their energy, drive; men of these types often look like “machos”. However, these men more look aggressive than they really are; and women of this type are especially caring for the comfort and well-being of their families. They are ardent fighters for quality; when something is made too quickly, they begin to look for defects and usually find them. They are always in hurry, always feel "lack of time” and feel offended when other people criticize their tempo.
Examples are: George Clooney, Bruce Willis, Fidel Castro Ruz, Helmut Kohl, Margaret Thatcher, etc.

Secondary extroverted sensation (the types Inspector and Conservator, XXX-sensory introverts)

They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Craftsman and Mediator with the dominant introverted sensation) for their very accurate manner of clothing, for the order that reigns in their apartments, at their workplaces, for their thrifty manner of life. However, they are internally mobilized, as if waiting for a war or an emergency situation, they tend to split the mankind into “our people” and the rest, they are much conservative in their views. And communicating with them at close distance, you will quickly understand that they do not tolerate objections, even though they look so calm and moderate. Stalin, Brezhnev, Richard Nixon, Boris Gryzlov (head of the Russian Parliament), Donald Rumsfeld are good examples of this type of politicians. Women of this type are usually beautiful and calm, but very much demanding, examples are Michelle Pfeiffer, Glenn Close, Celine Dion, Jacqueline Kennedy etc.

THE SOCIONIC 16 TYPES IN LIFE
Now we have learned a lot of abstract information about the types, and we ask ourselves: what do these types look like in real life? How do they move, speak, and communicate, what are their characteristic traits?
It would be very long to describe this all. We propose you something else – just look at the characteristic representatives of these types, and you will probably memorize them at least partially.
http://socioniko.narod.ru/ru/celebr/index-celebr.html
Attention! All the pages under this link are titled in Russian, but please do not mind, look at the portraits of the type representatives. But please do not forget to SCROLL DOWN all the pages you will find under this link; sometimes people who visit it see only the first section, and then exit.

PSEUDONYMS (ALIASES).
Since it is difficult to memorize long terms, such as intuitive-logical extrovert, sensory-logical introverts etc., Augusta in 1980 invented aliases for the socionic types by names of famous people, which you must have found at the web pages previously referred. These pseudonyms are not used in scientific articles, but they are often used in popular literature, at early stages of learning socionics.

In the Myers-Briggs typology, an alternative system of aliases was invented in 1984 by David W. Keirsey who associated types with certain kinds of activities: Trustee, Author, Fieldmarshall etc. Socionists learned the Keirsey system at the end of 1980s, and soon Victor Gulenko proposed his own system of pseudonyms for the socionic types, which is actually a de facto standard.

Both systems of aliases are used on our web site (according to Augusta and according to Gulenko).

However, several years ago socionists began to criticize the Augusta’s system of aliases for probably wrong definitions of types of two-three persons. As a result, of these long discussions, most socionists accepted that the alias Napoleon used in early socionic works for the type sensory-ethical extrovert was in fact wrong, because Napoleon Bonaparte was most probably a sensory-logical extrovert, and the type was renamed to Caesar, instead of Napoleon:
http://socioniko.narod.ru/ru/articles/napoleon.html
(This article is also in Russian).

The rest of aliases remained unchanged.
(the topic will be completed tonight).
_________________
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: 28 Яну 2005 0:27:30    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

COMPARATIVE EXPERIMENTS AND THEIR RESULTS, or How the Difference between the Socionic and Keirsey Types Was Measured

In the previous topics we wrote that socionics and MBTT (Myers & Briggs Type Theory) use slightly different definitions of the 4 scales. Here are these 4 scales, ranged from the MOST SIMILAR to the most controversial one:
1. Logic/ethic (in MBTT: thinking/feeling).
2. Sensation (or sensing)/intuition.
3. Extroversion (or extraversion)/introversion.
4. Rationality/irrationality (in MBTT: judgment/perception).

If the scales differ, are the types also different? They surely are. When we read the descriptions of the MBTT types, they look APPROXIMATELY similar to the socionic types, but only approximately. Sometimes we meet such aspects in these descriptions that cannot be attributed to the corresponding socionic types, and vice versa.

For example, the type ENTJ in MBTT is described as a typical leader, an intellectual dictator, like Napoleon Bonaparte. In socionics, Napoleon Bonaparte is considered to be a different type representative, and ENTj (logical-intuitive extrovert) also looks somewhat differently - rather a quick and practice-oriented intellectual than a “dictator”.

And we remember, there is also the Keirsey typology, which is more similar to MBTT but is not the same, and which is much more different from socionics than MBTT.

How can we compare these 3 typologies?

There are several methods of comparison.

Method 1. We can accept that the descriptions of the 4 dichotomies (scales, criteria) are “approximately” similar, and feel satisfied with that, and forget about differences. This method is the most popular among beginners, but it is very dangerous.
We consider this “displacement of criteria” as the main reason why Americans, for more than 40 years of existence of MBTT and more than 20 years of Keirsey typology, failed to build a system of intertype relationships. There were only rare attempts to describe relations between certain types, but not a system of relationships.

Method 2. Let us accept the viewpoint of Isabel Myers that the judgment/perception criterion is not the same as rationality/irrationality but something different: the judging types are rational extroverts + irrational introverts, and the perceiving – vice versa.
What can we say? Such an approach leads to much greater misunderstanding. It does not only contradict to Jung – after all, Jung lived long ago, and there were many uncertainties in his typology and in his ides in general. But when we start comparing descriptions of the socionic types with the corresponding American descriptions, then we will find that ISFP (socionic) = ISFP (MBTT) and not ISFJ (MBTT), and the same rule is valid for the rest of sensory introverted types. The situation is more complicated with introverted intuitive types, but well, this rule is also invalid.

Method 3. Let us compare the very 16 type descriptions by their keywords.
And using this method, we discovered very interesting results!

We proposed the 16 descriptions of the Keirsey types to 108 socionists (this means, each of the 108 read ALL THE 16 descriptions), and we asked them to identify the socionic types in these descriptions.
The table below represents the result of this experiment:


And the next table represents one more result of this experiment. We asked the participants to indicate their own types, and to recognize their own types in these descriptions:


Do these tables represent the real correlation between the socionic types and the Keirsey types? We think they do not. They rather represent characteristic stereotypes of the socionics and the Keirsey typology. To compare these typologies objectively, we will need to test at least several hundreds of persons using both socionic and American methods. But at least we know now for sure that socionics, MBTT and Keirsey, in spite of their common origin from the Jungian typology, are not identical!
(end of the topic; now you may ask questions).
_________________
http://socioniko.narod.ru
Върнете се в началото
Вижте профила на потребителя Изпратете лично съобщение Посетете сайта на потребителя
Гост






Потребителски групи: Нула

МнениеПуснато на: 07 Фев 2005 2:10:44    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

[qoute]Carl Gustav Jung, although some typologists think he was an Analyst, not Critic, wrote in a very vague, ambiguous way, often left his ideas uncompleted, and even his typology was for him just a “by-product”.[/quote]

From the INTJ description on your website socionko.narod:

Цитат:
A representative of this personality type, Carl Gustav Jung, drew the underlying basics of the functional typology used in Socionics.


Which is it? Can you censor any contradictions in the typing.
Върнете се в началото
Дмитрий и Марианна Лытовы



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

МнениеПуснато на: 08 Фев 2005 11:22:24    Заглавие: Отговорете с цитат

There was a discussion among socionists dedicated to C.G.Jung's type. Jung himself wrote nothing about this problem. His disciples left contradictory opinions - either logical-intuitive introvert, a.k.a. Analyst or intuitive-logical introvert, a.k.a. Critic.
Finally socionists decided that he was the last (and we accepted this opinion too). Sorry for that old text - today it was removed from the page.

There are some significant differences between these types.
For example, the Analyst has well-structured speech. The Critic, on the contrary, prefers to explain his/her views in "multimeaning" way, always allowing alternative interpretations, and the last was characteristic for Jung. Jung even avoided to develop his typology, because the lack of knowledge about the nature of these types seemed to him an insuperable obstacle. By contrast, Analyst prefers to speak definitely even if he/she is not sure: "let us structure what we know, and then we will make further hypotheses out of this stuff". There are some other important facts from his biography. Actually, most of socionists think that Jung was the intuitive-logical introvert (or INTP, in terms of the Myers-Briggs typology). As far as we know, our American colleagues, the adherents of MBTT, have the same opinion.
_________________
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
Страница 1 от 1

 
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