"Psuedopsychology"

[tcaudilllg]

I'm carrying the "pseudopsychology" conversation over from the BSNES thread and into here.

First, background. Socionics is a correct modeling of the psychological type aspect of personality first noticed by Carl Jung.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics
http://www.wikisocion.org/
http://www.socionics.us/
http://www.socionics.com/
http://www.the16types.info

Socionics has been researched in the Ukraine for many years. Until very recently, it had relegated itself to the research of its founder, who discussed only 16 types of people, the domain of a person's information metabolism and the scope of their (preferred) categorization of information. Now another type dimension previously unheard of -- the matter of exertion or preferred work -- is being explored.

I personally believe the west has ill-profited from its ignorance of technologies and theories that have developed in the former Soviet bloc nations. As regards the study of personality, it has fallen behind. MBTI is in use today by many organizations in the west, despite its inferiority to Socionics. The reasons for this are complex, owing to factors ranging from cultural ignorance to professional distrust, to matters of conflicting egos and entrenched interests. (the same as is the case anytime scientific process is obstructed, see also the MOND psychics theory)

Why socionics over MBTI? Besides its better accuracy, it defines psychological functions not as kinds of information, but as uses of information. Our uses of information, it turns out, are highly predictable. (if not the information itself) Because these functions are common to either of us, we have built our society as a means of coping with their existence. Socionics also posits the existence of relations between functions based on what information elements (which correspond to the functions used by MBTI) they use. These relations govern, in large part, our instinctual perceptions of others.

The eight functions described by socionics each take their turn, progressing from one point in the cycle to the next, and when the cycle is finished in starts over again with the new information. Independently I have realized that our positions in this cycle relative to other people determine how we feel about them personally. Complementary positions are natural friends; contrary positions are adversarial.

http://www.the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11079

I suppose most people here are playing -- or have played -- the new translation of Der Langrisser. Even through the telling of the story as well as it has been, a full understanding of the game's plot is impossible because the creators of the plot themselves, being unaware of these analytical techniques and objective awarenesses, could not know how they created it between themselves.

[Joe Camacho]

So, you are saying that because some japanese game developers years ago didn't know of some psychology theory developed in Ukraine, you can't understand the plot?

What's wrong with you?

[casualsax3]

obsess much?

[Deathlike2]

What's wrong with you?

Overanalysis ruins everything.

[tcaudilllg]

So, you are saying that because some japanese game developers years ago didn't know of some psychology theory developed in Ukraine, you can't understand the plot?

What's wrong with you?

No, I said they don't understand how they came up with the plot.

That said, it is quite obvious you don't understand it (the plot) yourself. As in, why it happened, not "what" happened.

Unless you tried to follow it by means of that thread I linked to regarding allies/adversaries. In fact, the empire fits the traditionalist model quite nicely, as do the descendents of light the reform model.

[indignation]

Is there something fundamentally wrong with not knowing how you created something? If you hadn't known of this theory, there would be no problem.

[Joe Camacho]

So, you are saying that because some japanese game developers years ago didn't know of some psychology theory developed in Ukraine, you can't understand the plot?

What's wrong with you?

No, I said they don't understand how they came up with the plot.

That said, it is quite obvious you don't understand it (the plot) yourself. As in, why it happened, not "what" happened.

Unless you tried to follow it by means of that thread I linked to regarding allies/adversaries. In fact, the empire fits the traditionalist model quite nicely, as do the descendents of light the reform model.

Well, I'm just playing it. But I doubt you need to know ANYTHING about this to enjoy a plot.


Edit.-
I doubt there is anything so complex that I should take some psychology courses to understand it "fully".

[whicker]

Pfft. Myers-Briggs explains enough.

Joe Carmacho's, Nach's and Deathlike2's personas here are hardcore _NTJ's.

[Joe Camacho]

Pfft. Myers-Briggs explains enough.

Joe Carmacho's, Nach's and Deathlike2's personas here are hardcore _NTJ's.

ENTJ or INTJ?

[Deathlike2]

Well, I'm just playing it. But I doubt you need to know ANYTHING about this to enjoy a plot.


Edit.-
I doubt there is anything so complex that I should take some psychology courses to understand it "fully".

Bingo, we have a winner.

Pfft. Myers-Briggs explains enough.

Joe Carmacho's, Nach's and Deathlike2's personas here are hardcore _NTJ's.

Can you explain this at a sane level that an average person can understand? At this point, I just want to kill someone for this extreme randomness.

[funkyass]

Japaneses don't think like anyone else. Occam's razor, apply it sometime.

[whicker]

Pfft. Myers-Briggs explains enough.

Joe Carmacho's, Nach's and Deathlike2's personas here are hardcore _NTJ's.

ENTJ or INTJ?

Hard to say because I don't know the "real" you, but you come across to me as an INTJ.

http://typelogic.com/intj.html

[Joe Camacho]

Pfft. Myers-Briggs explains enough.

Joe Carmacho's, Nach's and Deathlike2's personas here are hardcore _NTJ's.

ENTJ or INTJ?

Hard to say because I don't know the "real" you, but you come across to me as an INTJ.

http://typelogic.com/intj.html

Indeed, I read both already, although I would like to think I'm more tolerant that how the description says.

[whicker]

Nobody fits perfectly into a single box.

[Deathlike2]

Nobody fits perfectly into a single box.

Well of course.

Is there a specific one that I am?.. just for the sake of curiosity (I did spend some time reading your link and its links).

[megamanzer0]

There should be a test somewhere online.

[Gil_Hamilton]

Nobody fits perfectly into a single box.

Except Solid Snake.

"It's just a box..."

[whicker]

Nobody fits perfectly into a single box.

Well of course.

Is there a specific one that I am?.. just for the sake of curiosity (I did spend some time reading your link and its links).

kind of a mix between ESTJ and ENTJ; now that I look at it, leaning more towards ESTJ.

Unfortunately these descriptions read sometimes like horoscopes and other gobbledygook.

[PHoNyMiKe]

WHO FUCKING CARES

[densy]

what i am most interested in is

THE STUDY OF STUPIDITY

[kieran_]

Nothing will be achieved by this discussion, apart from getting your pee pees hard by fooling yourselves into thinking that you gots some smrts.

[PHoNyMiKe]

I saw this in an episode of "dead like me" (I really enjoy that show.) one of the persons was saying that throughout her entire existance there were only like 8 types of people. she claimed you could classify every person into just 8 varieties. but hey, it was a tv show!

[Nightcrawler]

I suppose most people here are playing -- or have played -- the new translation of Der Langrisser. Even through the telling of the story as well as it has been, a full understanding of the game's plot is impossible because the creators of the plot themselves, being unaware of these analytical techniques and objective awarenesses, could not know how they created it between themselves.

That's just plain silly. You're suggesting it's impossible not only for a player to be unable to comprehend the game's plot, but also for the creators to not comprehend it themselves because could not know how they created it.

Sure.... OK. You keep thinking that. Meanwhile, I'll continue understanding the plot of the games I play and understand plots that I may create for books or games I write myself.

[Clements]

Psychology is a cushy number.

[Deathlike2]

I suppose most people here are playing -- or have played -- the new translation of Der Langrisser. Even through the telling of the story as well as it has been, a full understanding of the game's plot is impossible because the creators of the plot themselves, being unaware of these analytical techniques and objective awarenesses, could not know how they created it between themselves.

That's just plain silly. You're suggesting it's impossible not only for a player to be unable to comprehend the game's plot, but also for the creators to not comprehend it themselves because could not know how they created it.

Sure.... OK. You keep thinking that. Meanwhile, I'll continue understanding the plot of the games I play and understand plots that I may create for books or games I write myself.

Obviously fiction needs to be crushed by history and facts. There is no other way!