Article Translation Requests (Please put your requests here!)
I want to get kick start articles translations(automated and manual) again, so I would like to hear what you guys want to see translated/edited. I will work on manually editing the google translation and posting them into the CMS.
Please submit your requests in this thread.
The Dual Nature of Man - Aushra Augustinavichiute
(partial done by @Rick : http://socionics.us/works/dual_nature_of_man.shtml )
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...gustinaviciuteOriginally Posted by Subteigh
There is a in-progress translation at the moment on this.
Nice. I was actually just thinking about having translation requests. I'd like to see Ausra's IEI description translated since it breaks it down by Ego, Superego, SuperId and Id.
http://socionic.ru/index.php/2010-10...-esenin_aushra
http://lurkmore.to/Соционика
This article that @zap found is somewhat critical of socionics, but is still more valuable than most of the articles I've read on the subject.
I googled "Соционика не реально не существует" to find the article, Subt. I've recently become sure that socionics is nothing but BS (& even earlier became sure enneagram aka enneascam is bs) thus I googled. btw @mu4 care to restore my erased posts itt? there was some good stuff there. plz?
I am interested in a translation of Model B.
Eugene Gorenko, Vladimir Tolstikov, "Nature of self". I usually start with reading them description of itr. I would love to read more from it.
Those who want a translation of some Socionics book, take into account the existence of officially translated to English: Filatova E. "Understanding the People around You: An Introduction to Socionics", 2010
Popular Socionics books have much of similarity and if you are a novice then this one is not bad source.
he standard diagnosis of type – Myth or Reality?
This article is in Russian in need of translating. If you translate it for yourself, please, share it with others. Thank you!
http://socionics4you.com/post-6710
School of Associative socionics: http://socionics4you.com/
Translation here.
So what are you proposing, that stuff such as quadras, reinin, and model A be ignored when typing someone? IMO, everything available should be used. But my prefered method are tests, and then VI.
Also, what is this Talanov questionnaire?
What's wrong with Model A & the IEs?
If you 'correctly type' by Augusta standards (Model A & IE) for a number of people (IRL or celebrities) you should get a good idea of the behavioral aspect of the types vs the psychological and from there you can VI. Only VI by typical expressions the IEs convey.
Last edited by Jake; 01-07-2017 at 11:05 PM.
ENFp and ISTp Duality Relations Article by Stratiyevskaya
http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...Stratiyevskaya
Can someone please provide a more detailed and clear explanation of the Duality Relations between ISTp and ENFp article by Stratiyevskaya? Link above.
It would greatly be appreciated.
@Sol, need ur help thanks
what are they on about?!
The girl on left is IEI which thinks herself as EII. She practice as astrology consultant and tells banal things about this.
What makes u think so? is it because she smiled?
how she smiles and shows nonverbal generally. I type by impressions, they are closer to IEI than to other types
compare her with my examples of EII and IEI girls
ok, what about this?
http://www.newsocionicsmodel.narod.ru/tabl.html
Anyone up to translate this? It's long, so long in fact that Google Translate will only do half the page for you. It's the owner of the site's personal typing list of 1000 famous people.
I need some help. Is it possible to have access at this database: https://www.famo.ru/etalon/? Are there any other socionics celebrities databases around? I need big data.
@Sol, @silke, @Aylen, @Olimpia, @thehotelambush
http://sss.socioland.ru
the problems of famouses databases:
1) mostly opinions are not independent. people much copy other opinions, have significant conformism. any noob may create own list by taking "typed by everyone else" and agreeing with any bs he sees. many lists are such, but not created by those who types many people offline and IRL, watches behavior of people for long with knowing their types
2) opinions are based on bad info. such is for any famous human without videos - there is no good nonverbal. also often no good other data too - biographies, interviews etc are much filtered and biased.
"ethalon" list there is made by opinions which match often between typers. but they match much because of conformism as people knew opinions of others before geting own one. conformism is also higher when there is no enough data - like when are typed people who lived in the past. that "ethalon" list have many historical people because of this
I do not recommend you to trust much to famouses lists and especially to historical people in those lists. I suppose >50% of any today famouses' list is wrong.
thanks @Sol, but that page gives some problem and when I try to search for someone, the page of the result have no data and redirects me nowhere..
im working with this atm https://www.socionics.ru/types/2009-01-09-00-56-09
also Im gonna add the other results (wikisocion, socioniko, socionics.con + filatova, delong, talanov, aushra), yeh as you said, often don't match with each other
seems does not work now. mb later will be fixed
that is open database for famouses' types. anyone could to upload own opinions. lists by some authors were uploaded by admin (alike mine from 2009)
Famouses' lists in Russian (English names are transcripted often):
1, 2, 3
Those lists are >10 years old. Typers may change some opinions after a time.
I recommend only my bloggers list for types examples. Bloggers are better than wide public people - lesser filtered data. Also I trust only to own accuracy as have real matches with other typers <50% as anyone.
thanks @Sol, I need people on which there's a good consensus, bloggers are too isolated and I can't extract the kind of information I need from them (dont let me get into details, I dont wanna spoil)
you need correct examples. the best are my bloggers
the conformistic consensus about actors and lived in the past people is not good approach
all lists have general accuracy <50%, while conformism and bad data for typing reduces the use of consensuses
I'm the only who checked IR with me during the typing, used mostly nonverbal (what is better for distance typing than texts) and meanwhile trained much in such typing. Also bloggers have lesser distortions than public people. My bloggers list should to have lesser % of mistakes than any today famouses list or any possible list of consensuses.
> bloggers are too isolated and I can't extract the kind of information I need from them
besides nonverbal, many bloggers tell about their life, show how they do something and make comments. you may see how people of different types behave based on them not worse than on actors.
anyway, nonverbal would be enough to study a typing by examples. in life you'll can't to gather much of needed typing data, except nonverbal. too much factors create the behavior you may see from other people. except close ones or which made typing questionnaires/tests you'll never know people good enough. you'll need to type by nonverbal mostly, anyway. it also allows to quickly understand types - sometimes it may take several seconds to assume a type and then it takes minutes of talking to become totally assured, despite how long and good you'll know that human then. it's what nonverbal typing allows and no any other. that nonverbal allows to type not worse than methods based on common behavior I've proved experimentally - it gave close typing matches to typing questionnaires (of socioforum experiment) and IRL interviews (of SRT-99 experiment)
to study nonverbal typing and my bloggers examples is the best what you may do to study the typing by examples
You can try Sedecology: www.sedecology.com
hmm I just looked through their ILE typings and there are quite a handful of examples that I disagree with. I wonder if there will ever be a consensus on famous types...
I mostly visit Gulenko's gallery of types. I agree with many of his typings:
https://socioniks.net/famouspeople/
I also remember visiting this site occasionally:
http://dm.sakinorva.net/index
cool, I've just created an account. in general, I don't pay much attention to other people's typings. It's better to research the type yourself. I feel like most people don't know enough to type people and it just confuses me when I'm confronted with an opposite opinion. I'm noticing it with this forum right now. there are many paradoxical typings from forum members.
"I feel like most people don't know enough to type people" - yes.
The way to not get confused is to pay attention to people's arguments rather than their conclusions.
yeah it's hard to reach consensus, some socionists I tend to like often have questionable typings too, I guess it depends on what they make out of their functions/descriptions/etc. For example Talanov has a massive databank and I agree with many of his typings, but even his methods are questionable, he created a lot of graphs and tests out of many people so to find patterns like "Delta NFs like bread" or other silly statements of the like, but point is.. who did he test? were they all russian people? russian people live in the past of 50 years in respect to the western world, how can we trust their stereotypes to apply worldwide?.. etc etc. Often though, you'll find diff typings but within a range of slight differences, for example there's who types Schwarzenegger as LSE or SLE, not that much of a difference.. and that's interesting too for the work I intend to do.
There is no good typing match even for special typing IRL interviews. In average, it was <20% in SRT-99 experiment.
The concsensus can be when there will be objecively highly correct typing methods to trust. For famouses or others.
also
There is no good typing data about famouses, in general. Except for VI typing. It's easy to be misleaded.
The typing skills can be very different, so the meaning of match mb very different too between concrete 2 typers.
Typing matches gotten when people knew external opinions beforehand are higher than real would be, due to conformism.
This one: https://www.publishing.socionic.info...icle/view/2822
Bukalov, A., Donchenko, E., Elyashevich, A., Gritsak-Groener, V., & others, etc. . (2022). Be careful - Russian Wikipedia: a story with socionics, or watchmen against academicians. Psychology and socionics of interpersonal relations , (1-2), 42–51. retrieved from https://www.publishing.socionic.info...icle/view/2822
CH-EII-1Ne | 4(w5)96 sx/so | ELVF | INFP
Please help my baby dragons grow by clicking on each one!
Thanks for the suggestion @necrosebud, this was a great article. Here is the translation:
Glad I saw this thread. I have a site I came across and was putting through automatic translators for text translation, but it has images with text that were left untranslated, and I’d like them to be. I think this site is a treasure trove.
The information on this site draws theoretical constructs from classical Socionics and discusses how they correlate to empirical data, but it also feels more substantial than just that. It appears to be a modern look descended from Talanov’s questionnaire data and lots of literature that’s been written over the years. I think it would be a worthwhile translation project.
When I first found it I was poring through it for days. Having read what it has to say on different pages, I believe them that this might just be the most general comprehensive look at socionics.
https://danidin.ucoz.net/index/svodnye_tablicy/0-40
I’d be super grateful if anyone took my suggestion to give this a proper translation.
“Sometimes you recognize that there is a category of human experience that has not been identified but everyone knows about it. That is when I find a term to describe it.”
— Brian Eno
-Ne
IN(T) INFJ 5w4 514 so/sp RCOAI
Here’s the first image translation, I’ll update this post with the others when I finish them:
Here’s the first image translation, I’ll update this post with the others when I finish them:
Echo, aren't these Talanov based definitions ?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
