Talk:Common biases in socionics

http://the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10757&highlight=top+biases Ann's post on top 12 cognitive biases on the 16types forum (some should apply and be usefull for this article I think)Bionicgoat 20:25, 27 June 2007 (CDT)

I remember there bit a bit more substance to that post than there was... oh well, I'll leave the link since whoever writes this may still find it usefull. Bionicgoat 20:35, 27 June 2007 (CDT)

I have added a bunch of material to this topic; what's here is just a rough outline. I chose categories that seemed to me particularly pertinent to Socionics, as opposed to a generic list of the kinds of cognitive biases people may be expected to have in general. I'm aware that my statements and approach here are rather subjective, reflect my own analysis, and don't contain any direct references. However, it's a start. --Jonathan 16:40, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

in other words you're biased :P Bionicgoat 19:59, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

This is a great start! (Admin 00:28, 5 July 2007 (CDT))

I agree... big ups :) Bionicgoat 00:32, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

"Other examples may be when sensers are described as being "focused on the here and now," or intuiters as being "impractical." " I am of course very guilty of the former, I never thought of it as a bias. How could the Si>Ni preference be more fairly, while still briefly, explained? Expat 01:59, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

I'm not sure. We need to find examples of how sensers themselves describe this quality. I thought of this as a potential bias because I don't believe I've ever heard sensers say it about themselves. (Admin 02:20, 5 July 2007 (CDT))

well because they take it for granted and assume it's what you should do; that doesn't mean it's a bias Expat 03:46, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

The section on INTp sounds too defensive (i.e. biased), and should be shorter. Better to condense some of the bullets, and include some other types as well. Thehotelambush 02:08, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

I agree that including some other type examples in that section would help. We need to find some other examples of types that feel that they've been described incorrectly. Actually, that category is very related to the one Rick added about describing types in language that's foreign to the type (although the emphasis is slightly different). Maybe we can get input from some Ethical/Sensing types. --Jonathan 08:18, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

Category?

Perhaps we need a category for "informative" articles such as this. --Admin 16:10, 18 July 2007 (BST)

National and cultural biases: Discussion

I was thinking...even here, on the wiki, LII and ILI sound so, so different from typical Russian descriptions. Basically, the Russian conception of LII sounds like some kind of dictator, but more idealistic than LSI. The Russian conception of ILI may be summarized as "pessimistic party-pooper."

But in discussions here and on forums, the conceptions are completely different. LIIs are seen here as academics, a bit out of touch with the outside world, kindly innovative mathematicians. ILIs are seen as much the same thing but more slothful and prone to use constructive criticism as a primary means of contribution.

Could it be that people in Russia are simply different from people in the U.S.? Perhaps much of the confusion people have about Socionics comes down to the fact that people are just different in the different places (?). --Jonathan 23:01, 25 July 2007 (BST)

I think you're looking at the wrong things, looking at outside behavior rather than the inside. If the choice of Robespierre as template by Augusta has influenced other socionists the way you are describing, it was unfortunate; but after playing with the hypothesis, myself, that Maxime was LSI, I read a full biography about him and the person described there in his private moments was a LII. Anyway, what Russian descriptions do you mean in particular? And I really can't see how any concept of LII should imply they are "kindly". Expat 23:10, 25 July 2007 (BST)

Well, okay, I'm over-generalizing a little bit. I'm thinking mostly of http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/li.html, and also some things Gulenko wrote. I was going to quote from Strat's, but I must admit that with the bad translation, it's possible that I misunderstand that one. Filatova's is maybe a little closer to what theHotelAmbush has written than are the others, although hers places greater emphasis on the obsession with order.

Anyhow, it's not that I'm looking at one thing as vs. another. My biggest interest is in the pure structural dimension of the information aspects. However, the beliefs about external behavior are clearly part of Socionics, and I think they're worthwhile discussing. Some people might say, "well, descriptions aren't really that important," but I think that bypasses the issue. If there are wrong descriptions or other misconceptions about the expected behaviors of types, then that should be noted, or at least discussed. That's all I'm suggesting here. :) --Jonathan 00:43, 26 July 2007 (BST)

As to "kindly"...well, it's just that LII descriptions here sound a bit more gentle. But really I meant to discuss LII under the LII discussion. My point *here* is the bigger trend...that there are differences in the way the types overall are described as a whole on this site and other places "in the West" as compared to how they're described by the Russians. I'm speculating that the history of Russia has made LIIs more subversive over there, ILIs more pessimistic, and so forth, than their counterparts in societies that have had a greater history of freedom. --Jonathan 01:09, 26 July 2007 (BST)

I don't think this has much to do with culture, really. My opinion on the matter is here. I think it has more to do with the socionists themselves being Alpha NT than anything else. There is much less emphasis on the superego in all the descriptions but LII, ILE, and IEI, if I remember correctly. Thehotelambush 02:28, 26 July 2007 (BST)

No, this is not a cultural issue. Note that when the first socionists were highly intellectual people, with ILEs and LIIs initially the most prominent in the community. Hence, early descriptions exaggerated the intellectual capacities of both. In real life Ukrainian LIIs are pretty much just like LIIs in the U.S. I teach English to an LII general manager who is not dictatorial (but does have the Ti "death stare" :))), recently I met an LII who manages a project at an NGO and is not really an intellectual, I taught an LII English who was just a "normal" web designer with some minor intellectual interests, and I have met lots of LIIs at socionics clubs who were just normal young people trying to enjoy themselves and make a positive impression on others. However, if you look at people like Gulenko and Yermak who have their own socionics schools, you can see where Weisband's descriptions might have come from. --Admin 07:38, 26 July 2007 (BST)