Varlawend: Mysteries Among the Stars

This time I had a live debate with Jack Aaron which can be seen here: My conclusions regarding the debate: "Some supporters of Model A believe that there is no need for an energy paradigm, but I want to argue that it is useful to have a variety of typologies and that Humanitarian Socionincs captures patterns in reality which are not captured by Information Socionics. The mindsets of the participants are very different, so this discussion is quite preliminary, since we have not yet reached many details, especially non-verbal signals. Thus, firm views will probably not be convinced by either side of this discussion, but this opens the way for new conversations in the future." Below is my attempt to summarize the various arguments made so that people can look through it more quickly in writing without having to scour through a video to look for individual pieces of information.  I'll also make further comments in parentheses about additional comments I have after the fa

Energy dimensions are based on the vertical blocks in Model G (Energo-Maximum, Energo-Optimum, Energo-Minimum, Energo-Pessimum), combined with Externalities having advantages over internalities. The Control is clearly the weakest function energetically, where a person knows a lot but restricts others according to their opinion, not being able to act according to their painful knowledge. The Brake function has more sophisticated handling than the Launcher function due to its ability to stop itself with the brake, but it avoids energetic loads and loses energy, whereas the Launcher charges and replenishes the person with its activity. The Manipulative function is able to store complex programs and patterns in the long term, but the type is more controlled and addicted to this function, whereas the Role function is able to play the roles are most suited to it in the short-term social context. The Demonstrative is better able to create sudden impulse change in the environment and attra

Critical thinking about Socionics is exceedingly important and we should not abandon it.  But what if we turn things upside down, and think Socionically about critical thinking?  jason_m on the 16types made a forum thread about this  (people think he is likely an IEE and I find this worth considering due to this initiative of -Ne), and this was my response: Naive Optimism The best relationship I can come up with for Naive Optimism in Socionics is Extroverted Intuition.  So caught up in the thrill of exploration, research, risk taking and making something new work, it sometimes tunes out well-intentioned and sober skeptical feedback.  In Humanitarian Socionics in particular, positivism can also lead to naive optimism.  However, in the case of positivism, if it is burned by once naive optimism, it might turn out the opposite and become distrustful to the point of paranoia. Open-Mindedness Open-mindedness itself isn't a misstep, because open-mindedness doesn't inherently

The Reinin dichotomies are subject to quite varied and controversial use in Socionics.  Different communities either have different definitions of them, use some more than others, or even scorn their use entirely.  Whole Socionics wrote a blogpost about this controversy in August , which I'll post my response to here (under each heading in the original blogpost) since there is quite a bit to discuss on this topic (I wrote most of this a while ago in a discussion on the 16types forum): What are the Reinin dichotomies? This introduction seems concise and unobjectionable to me. Where's the beef? I agree that the Reinin dichotomies aren't obviously meaningful, based on the operation used to produce them. The structure and scale of operation of the different Reinin dichotomies also needs to be freshly examined and not merely assumed. One difference I see with the Socionics dichotomies that can be used to produce Reinin dichotomies, as compared to something like "Men

Normalizing versus Hemispheric The right hemisphere is known to be responsible for figuratively sensory perception.  This includes, on the one hand, artistic thinking (intuition), but also, on the other hand, motor orientation in the physical space (sensory).  In particular, the high coordination of movements characteristic of athletes is proof of their right hemisphere. But how do opposite functions coexist?  - Nothing strange, I already wrote a lot about the equivalence of intuition and sensorics (in the case of the same vertices).  Thus, a right-hemisphere person is primarily a creative type variant.  It enhances the irrational functions, plus an additional function "E".  I add that harmonizers (H-subtype) are mainly related to the right-hemisphere ones, though they are still a transitional case. But what about the left hemisphere?  Purely left hemisphere is an N-subtype.  A moderate left hemisphere is a D-subtype. A good criterion for distinguishing hemisphere i