Varlawend: Mysteries Among the Stars

In terms of objectivity: It is difficult to agree that this technique is more objective than other typologies. True objectivity is only when instrumentation measurements are made (and as far as I understand, these dichotomies are not instrumentally measured, this is an expert assessment, so this is still a convention), and this is, first of all, a study of the brain. Yes, it is based on expert methodologies so it doesn't reach a state of maximal objectivity.  The process of having to agree with your partner in a double-blind experiment does help build perceptions which more freed from the problems of subjectivity, in the sense that you have to objectively agree on the typing independently.  However, they are still limited by what the group of people are seeing, which may not be comprehensive, and eventually we will have to test these typologies by more instrumental, scientific methods such as neuroscience, genetics or machine learning.  I will make a detailed video...

Video Transcript: Hello again, it has been a long time since I have created this channel.   Busyness and motivations can change but I have a lot of content I still want to share, and I finally have some motivation to do so because there have recently been some debates between representatives of Objective Personality and Socionics.   I really like both of these systems of personality and I think they both offer a lot of value that no other theories do in terms of understanding ourselves and the human race more broadly.   The debate was between Jack Oliver Aaron, who represents the Socionics society he leads called World Socionics Society, and Binyamin Tsadik who was teaching and debating for Objective Personality, a system he has interviews lots of people for.   I’m going to split this video up into a series of discussions about common criticisms of Objective Personality and try to have a fair discussion of them.   Before I get into the meat of the discus...

(0:40) Te being a tribe function is claimed by OP, Dave and Shannon are both using Te, Jack isn’t using it in a valued spot, they could be a better authority on Te, Te is not necessarily tribe focused but objective focused from what I’ve seen, so other Te users will see the same thing because of the fact that it’s objective and because it’s all seeing the same kind of extroverted logic, one thing I’ve seen Te users do that they are getting everyone on board with a plan before executing it, for them it’s not the best thing unless everyone is on board, there is a tribe element but not necessarily as strong as OP says and since they are using Te we should learn it from them rather than from Jack or from some theory someone cooked up in their basement from looking at their spouse ---(Jack’s Response) But I do know people who use Te in a valued spot like Peter and Rita, and I’ve learned a lot from talking to them.   Te is my demonstrative function and strongest non-valued...

(2:50) A good number of similarities between the systems: I’m typed the same in the two systems, different things they’ve found but assigned to different areas (4:00) points of contention: the “objectivity”, it always seemed contentious, not a problem with the attempt at an objective methodology (cross-checks, typing in different rooms, attempt to put together a system of coins), but this isn’t intrinsic to OP over other typologies, is the theoretical infrastructure of OP really objective? It needs to be questioned in terms of objectivity and seems less objective than claimed (theoretical background using Jungian terminology and volunteering terms to describe concepts like self vs tribe and organizing vs taking in).   If you are being truly objective, you have to do the big five route and do factor analysis, see how concepts actually line up in reality through the lexical method.   That’s not flawless since language use can be flawed, but it’s close to objectiv...

-(around 5 minutes) Objective Personality Masculine and Feminine is similar to Static/Dynamic (immovable and movable) but not the same (Jack thinks it relates to Inert/Contact, and also feminine with agreeableness)… IEI more stereotypically feminine, SLE more stereotypically masculine… Binyamin brings up Aesop’s Fable the Willow and the Reed (feminine bends in the wind and doesn’t break) -OP allows every function to be static/dynamic, Socionics chooses decisively in each case.   Binyamin has a masculine and feminine graph with Se and Ni, all the functions fall on this spectrum, reminds me of Ibrahim’s spectrum and Gulenko’s hormones.   Socionics Se corresponds only to masculine Se in OP (feminine Se is more like Ne) -(12 minutes ish) Binyamin considers Si/Ne to use facts (Se doesn’t use facts in Binyamin’s opinion, but Jack points out that Binyamin’s Se definition is about collecting facts), Binyamin: Si idea of a fact is always true, Se idea is that ...