Talk:Socionics

Questioning that Ausura Augusta was the one who introduced the function shapes

The following text states thus:

"Of all the aspects of socionics study, "aspectonics", as the study of information elements is called, may be the most difficult to grasp. Although Augusta argues that every information aspect belongs to one of the eight elements, she does not submit that there cannot be further categorizations in the context of the eight. To impress upon her students that what was being spoken of were strictly intuitive abstractions, Augustinavičiūtė introduced geometric symbols for each information element. These symbols are still in use today, although other notations have been proposed. In common usage, Viktor Gulenko's system , which uses Latin symbols, is favored in Russia and other non-English speaking countries, while the two letter MBTI convention is favored in English-speaking forums."

Now, the statement here:

"Augustinavičiūtė introduced geometric symbols for each information element. These symbols are still in use today"

I challenge the accuracy of this statement. It says that Augusta was the one who first urged the acceptance of the geometric function symbols as a standard. How exactly does one really know that it was Augusta who introduced those symbols first as a standard? Since it was Bukalov and Gulenko who were the ones who refined the current system of socionics, and Bukalov apparently has been well studied into esoteric practices do you think maybe that it was really through Bukalov's urgeing that caused the socionics functions as symbol representations to become standard, especially as that he is so familiar with so many esoteric practices? Since it has been claimed by some (of a certain viewpoint) that Ausura Augusta wanted a scientific socionics, would not have Ausura Augusta herself have been opposed to any sort of standard that appears to be esoteric in any way? --Rmcnew (talk) 22:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Here is a source (my translation from On the Dual Nature of Man by A.Augusta, as quoted in Russian Wikipedia article on Socionics:

"A few words about the origin of the graphic symbols:

We have denoted extraverted sensing with a circle - a shape that creates the impression of the fullest contact with external reality, intuition with a triangle which fits into a circle perfectly. Logic and ethics are the external form and internal content of the same process. So, if we have denoted logic with a square as a symbol of rigor of thought, then a symbol that fits into a square must be chosen for the internal aspect of the same phenomenon of emotional intensity. That is how the square without a corner arose."

Here Augusta makes no reference to outside sources for her/their choice of symbols. The only question is, who is "we?" I would assume she is referring to her group of friends and associates in Vilnius with whom she discussed ideas and ultimately created the framework of socionics. I cannot absolutely rule out that Bukalov or Gulenko in Kiev were included in the "we," however, this seems highly unlikely. This article called "A Model of Information Metabolism", which uses the symbols, was first published in April 1980, in Lithuanian (according to footnote at bottom of article), when Bukalov would have been 20 years old. At Bukalov's bio page on socioniko.net, Bukalov's earliest publication listed is from 1991. According to information from my interview with Bukalov and Karpenko, Augusta worked on her ideas primarily from 1968 to 1980 in Vilnius. In any case, Augusta makes no suggestion of esoteric sources for the symbols. The Russian socionics community understands or assumes that Augusta introduced the symbols herself. For instance, in the Russian Wikipedia article directly before the quote I translated it says: "for graphic notation of the aspects Augustinavichiute introduced the symbols:..." --Rick DeLong (talk) 18:21, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Rmcnew

File:Tattwas.PNG

Air is blue circle. Earth is yellow square. Fire is red triangle. Water is crescent shape. Spirit is the black oval shape.

I have raised this point with you before, but you have done nothing to rectify the situation. You still insist on seemingly putting your own point of view into the article - why do you think it acceptable for example to say "Although it has been claimed openly (and falsely)..." - without justification.

also, "all evidence suggests that Antoni Kępiński, esoteric and cosmological understandings of the human body had a much broader influence over the development of socionics than Carl Jung, his theory and Myer-Briggs typology ever had" - all evidence...really?

and, "[...]though it could be said that all three typology theories have a foundational basis in esoteric cosmology and alchemy." "though it could be said" - yes, but said by who? you? This is just one sentence of Rmcnew's I object to - he does this throughout his contributions to the article, and I really wish he'd learn to write to the required standard. RudieBoy (talk) 17:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, this is actually related to a similar problem I have noted in the above paragraph. The entire "Information metabolism" section is completely and entirely unsourced, and yet it attributes things to Ausura Augusta that are attributed to the efforts of the other founders. I would even go so far to say that the whole couple of paragraphs below are "unsubstantiated original research concerning ausura augusta that is based on no sources whatsoever." Whoever wrote the "Information Metabolism" subarticle should rewrite a significant portion of it according to viable sources, with the correct credit being given to the origination of various portions of socionics theory. And by the "information metabolism" section I am referring to the following. --Rmcnew (talk) 18:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I would advise for everyone to do a collaborative rewrite of both that paragraph rudieboy mentioned and also the entire section below according to viable sources (at the same time): --Rmcnew (talk) 18:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

"Information elements

In socionics, Jung's functions are always introverted or extroverted, and are referred to as functions of information metabolism. These functions are said to process information aspects. To understand what an information aspect is, it is necessary to understand information metabolism as Augustinavičiūtė understood it.

Our world is populated by entities of various kinds, each of which have defining characteristics and properties. The brain processes incoming data in its quest for understanding of the world: it identifies relationships between these datum and thus, categorizes them as a recognizable phenomena for easy reference. As an example, consider the case of a child who sees an apple for the first time. If they have been previously taught that the color qualia we associate with "red" is red, then will they will notice that the color of the apple is red. They have recalled the color red upon being confronted with red colors. Now imagine that the child has not yet been instructed on the color red. They simply see a different color than they have seen before. They have two options: to infer the existence of a new color, or to dismiss its lack of recognizable color by saying there is no color. Barring these, the child could also choose to assert that it is of a previously recognized color, perhaps the color nearest in hue to what they now see. Whatever the child's determination, the apple's color qualia will be remembered as a unique concept in its own right, and will be referred to whenever that specific qualia is again encountered. In essence, a "copy" of the color data has been set aside for future reference, to be recalled when faced with familiar data. These "reference copies" are what we refer to when we speak of "information", and the process of creating the copy is what Augustinavičiūtė called "information metabolism".

Augustinavičiūtė held that there were eight functions of information metabolism, each of which processed a specific kind of information. Which function is chosen to process which aspect depends on what characteristics of an entity are being observed. Socionists have identified six categories of entity characteristics:

   :::* characteristics that are internal to the entity and private to it
   * characteristics that appear only in relation to other entities (termed "external")
   * characteristics that are considered "in flux" and prone to change in the course of their consideration (called "dynamics")
   * characteristics that are considered unchanging for the duration of their consideration ("statics")
   * characteristics that are apparent when the entity is considered as a field (meaning "a relationship between objects")
   * characteristics that are apparent when the entity is considered as an object

The categories are arranged into three mutually exclusive pairs (dichotomies). You cannot, for example, observe both an entities' internal and external characteristics at once, only in alternation. The exclusivity rule yields eight permutations in total. Although the categorization is conducted outside of our awareness, a given aspect can be successfully corresponded with its element through a technique of intuitive abstraction. This abstraction, called "aspect analysis", weighs the characteristics of the aspect considered between each of the three pairs, using the intuitive meaning of the characteristics as a vise by which to identify which element the aspect is "most like". The technique allows that a person's speech be scrutinized for usage of specific aspects, and the frequency of their use of elements quantitatively gauged. This method, called "semantic analysis", has resulted in some of the most significant and persuasive discoveries in socionics.

Of all the aspects of socionics study, "aspectonics", as the study of information elements is called, may be the most difficult to grasp. Although Augusta argues that every information aspect belongs to one of the eight elements, she does not submit that there cannot be further categorizations in the context of the eight.

To impress upon her students that what was being spoken of were strictly intuitive abstractions, Augustinavičiūtė introduced geometric symbols for each information element. These symbols are still in use today, although other notations have been proposed. In common usage, Viktor Gulenko's system , which uses Latin symbols, is favored in Russia and other non-English speaking countries, while the two letter MBTI convention is favored in English-speaking forums."

"

collaborative rewrite of "information metabolism" sections and also "Criticism of socionics theory (rational skepticism)"

We need to all work together to find viable sources that can be used to rewrite all sections of these two portions of the article at the same time. I am sure that Rudieboy especially would be interested in doing some of the work to find sources for the rewrite. As it stands several paragraphs in both are completely origional research and in the most extreme cases the entire "information metabolism" section has no sources at all to justify anything that is written there, so we should all work together on this to solve this issue in a positive way. Thanks. --Rmcnew (talk) 18:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

There is a huge difference between the two sections - the sections composed by you are full of weasel words and blatant untruths - the use of the word "obvious" by you for example in the sentence "although obvious correlations between socionics theory, occult and esoteric philosophies derived from such groups have caused speculation that this is the case". Also, speculation by who? You are making your 'argument' sound far more persuasive than it is. For example, the sentence "It is possible that she was not even aware during her life that her theory contains esoteric and occult elements, and that she perceived her activities to be normal and scientific" is completely unnecessary - why put such a speculation? Of course it's possible, but it is pure speculation.

Even if what you say is true, as you state that this section is full of "weasel words and blatant untruths". It is hypocritical to judge that one section when there are whole other entire sections, (which could be more credible) have no source credibility whatsoever. Especially when there are sources that justify the existance of esoteric methods in socionics theory. But let me tell you something. Either Ausura Augusta knew that her theory had esoteric principles, or she did not know and considered them scientific. Or she knew that the esoteric principles were not scientific, yet wanted to make something scientific out of them. Some of you are making insistent statements that ausura augusta considered her works to be scientific, and yet what ausura augusta basically did was take esoteric based philosophies and make them into something scientific. Let me tell you what is the truth here.

- According to dmitri lytov, the socionics function elements are considered to be derived from the central nervous system. The tattwa element in Tantra Buddhism are considered to be derived from the central nervous system. The hermetic order of the golden dawn considers the tattwas to be derived from the central nervous system. Many new age movement philosophies have always used the tattwas and declared the same, that the tattwas correspond to the central nervous system. --Rmcnew (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The central nervous system is a well-substantiated part of the body, and is as a matter of fact which is completely independent from these "tattwas". RudieBoy (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

- Official socionics researchers in both Kiev, Ukraine and Moscow, Russia have used corresponding chakra points with the socionics function elements (according to cosmological placements) to do psychological testing. Accupuncture specialists in Asia have used chakra points (according to cosmological placements) to tell where to place their needles. --Rmcnew (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean by "official"? Any "evidence" you have shown linking socionics and the use of chakra "theory" simply has no quantitative data, and certainly no substantiated link. RudieBoy (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

- Information metabolism theory as derived from both Kempimsky and Ausura Augusta are based on esoteric concepts of psychic energy, chakra placements, and cosmological comparisons to the human body. --Rmcnew (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I have seen no evidence whatsoever that Kempikski or Augusta were inspired by these "esoteric concepts". RudieBoy (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It is entirely substantiated to say that socionics has equal standing with other esoteric based philosophies, whether you like that stated or not. Whatever happens, I do thinks some portions of what I have written can be rewritten for quality. I just have to be sure that the other editors are interested in actually neutrally stating all information, which is something I have not been totally convinced about taking the behavior of some of the editors.

It's not a question of what I like - it's a question of what can actually be substantiated. I don't believe it is - you have failed to convince me of it. The fact that you say entirely substantiated speaks volumes about your approach. RudieBoy (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It is not a question of convinceing you, it is objectivelly representing socionics without a bias that appears to be from a "proponent of socionics", which is what you and several other editors have completely failed to do, and what I am succedding in doing. I completely expect other editors to disagree with this approach, but I will continue to do what I feel is right or necessary regardless. --Rmcnew (talk) 02:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

You are correct that "The fact that you say entirely substantiated speaks volumes about your approach," because what I am saying is 100% correct, and her is why:

First, off, Dmitri Lytov himself had stated that the socionics elements were associated with the central nervous system. The hermetic order of the Golden Dawn, Tantra Buddhism, and new age philosophies have stated that the tattwas are associated with the central nervous system. The socionic elements are a triangle, a square, a circle, and an L shaped crecent. The tattwas are a triangle, a square, a circle, a crescent shape, and an oval shape.

Second, chakras and their relationship to the information elements have been shown to be an intregal part of socionics theory, as well as chakras and tattwas have been an intregal part of hermetic philosophies, tantra philosophies, and new age philosophies.

Third, Bukalov has not only authored officialy hermetic and other esoteric/new age material for publishing from his official publishing house in Kiev, Ukraine, he allows esoteric methods in relationship to socionics theory to be published from his publishing house. If you are too oblivious or stubborn to note the substantiality of this fact in relationship to socionics theory, heaven and earth raining itself on you probably isn't going to change your mind on the matter.

Fourth, the sources themselves make blatant ommisions that esotericism is present in socionics theory, in various forms. It is futile to deny this. --Rmcnew (talk) 02:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Again, in the sentence "While the similarities between hermeticism and socionics theory are notable and apparent" - this is clearly your point of view.

No, it is not my view that "while the similarities between hermeticism and socionics theory are notable and apparent", it is a neutral truth which I will defend to the very latter. There is only one point of view, a neutral point of view and admission to these sort of things when you don't necessarily agree with the assimilation of certain information promotes neutrality, despite what you personally think should be assimilated. It would be unneutral to only present a "boxed" point of view that is purely only from a proponent of socionics, which is what many of you are unknowingly doing, and don't realize it. --Rmcnew (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

'Notable' and 'apparent' are not quantifiable words, and hence, naturally, they must be reflective of someone's point of view, even if you invented such a person. I am fed up with arguing over something which should be so obvious.RudieBoy (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

"Nevertheless, some socionists debate whether the esoteric material published through the socionics publishing house in Kiev, Ukraine is thoroughly representative of socionics as a whole. Some pro-science socionists with extreme anti-esoteric viewpoints have even denied the existence of esoteric applications altogether either currently or in the shaping of original socionics theory by Aušra Augustinavičiūtė, despite the persistent presence of socionics source material admittedly esoteric and published from official socionic publishing houses based in Kiev, Ukraine or elsewhere." - which socionists? Also, "pro-science socionists with extreme anti-esoteric viewpoints" is your point of view.

I am only interested in promoting a "neutral point of view", and I disagree with the other editors who think that exclusion of certain elements promotes neutrality, when the point of view is significant enough to mention. --Rmcnew (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

"It is debated by socionists whether the origional founders of socionics first intended the theory to be something esoteric or scientific, though the latter tends to be argued more than the former." - which socionists? Do you consider yourself a socionist? You are the only person I know of to claim that "the origional founders of socionics first intended the theory to be something esoteric".

This sentence "You are the only person I know of to claim that "the origional founders of socionics first intended the theory to be something esoteric" is innacurate. I have never claimed this. I have claimed that esoteric methods exists in socionics theory, decending from the founders themselves, but whether or not each individual founder wanted something scientific or esoteric I think is an issue of debate, because apparently (from the source materials) some founders were looking for scientific advancements with socionics and others encouraged or tolerated esoteric advancements in socionics theory. It was both, not one or the other ... both. This is very typical of later protoscientific movements before the development of more modern scientific methods. --Rmcnew (talk) 19:16, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The bits of the article not done by you may need better referencing (which I have addressed somewhat), but I don't believe that this part suffers from the blatant misrepresentations frequently occuring in the sections done by you. RudieBoy (talk) 23:38, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, please cite your source for the claim that "It is debated by socionists whether the origional founders of socionics first intended the theory to be something esoteric". RudieBoy (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

What you call blatant "misrepresention" is what I call the "road to a neutral point of view" and "away from the 'boxed in' view" of socionics that some of the other editors have been promoting. In fact, I believe that many of the other editors have encouraged "blatant misrepresention" with their unwillingness to the assimilation of valid socionics information that seems adjunct to the "socionics is like MBTI, Jung and not esoteric" point of view, which isn't the only point of view in socionics theory. A large faction of those practicing socionics theory do dabble in esoteric methods and mix those in with socionics. That fact should be represented in the article. Many of the esoteric methods descended directly found the founders, including ausura augusta. Did they consider those methods scientific, though they are esoteric in nature? I would say that is the case. --Rmcnew (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

As for the other article "Information Metabolism" there is absolutely nothing to substantiate the information there, while there are at the same time numerous sources that substantiate that esoteric methods of psychic energy, chakras, uages of tattwas, and hermeticism exist in socionics theory even as far back as "ausura augusta" was formulating socionics theory. Either the esoteric methods that exist in socionics theory are attributed to her or they are attributed to another founder, and which is that? It is either one of those two options. --Rmcnew (talk) 17:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Augusta was the sole founder of Socionics, and she made it quite clear that Jung's typology formed the foundation of her work. She does not refer to the role that "esoteric" subjects played in her modification of Jung's theory - she does however refer to empirical observations being behind the modifications. RudieBoy (talk) 19:15, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Augusta may be considered an origional founder who BUILT upon the theory of others. However, it is acurate to say that much of what you think is attributed to Ausura Augusta is not actually attributed to Ausura Augusta. Some things that are mathematically (or in other cases, esoterically) derived as a standard part of socionics theory are acutally attributed to Gulenko, Bukalov, and Reinin, even though some of these things are supposedly attributed solely to her. She did not do everything herself. As far as esotericism is concerned I have a good faith belief that the esoteric, hermetic, influence came as a result of Bukalov's and other founders work on socionics theory, and that Ausura Augusta was blindly following until she had no choice but to accept the developing mystic viewpoint. For that reason, Ausura Augusta would not have been aware that socionics theory had esoteric and occult associations until later on, in her old age, and she evidently had agreed with those associations. I agree that she probably (at least initially) intended socionics theory to be scientific, but taking her protoscientific methods (with esoteric links) her theory as it origionally came from her also fell signifigantly short of a modern scientific standard, and that should have been evident from the start (as it is completely evident now). --Rmcnew (talk) 19:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

She was the original founder, pure and simple. Any "esoteric" links made to Socionics after its foundation are irrelevant, as being esoteric, they are naturally unsubstantiated, and thus not worthy of merit. Hypotheses with some substatiation may be worthy of inclusion because they have been shown to have some link to the initial hypothesis, but otherwise, it is not Socionics as Augusta defined it. RudieBoy (talk) 19:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Let me start by stateing what I think is substantiated above:

The following: "She was the original founder, pure and simple." is substantiated.

The following statements are unsubstantiated according to source materials:

Any "esoteric" links made to Socionics after its foundation are irrelevant, as being esoteric, they are naturally unsubstantiated, and thus not worthy of merit.

This statement is unsubstantiated according to sources. The sources show that socionics is a protoscience, as it decended from ausura augusta. it is clear that socionics is a protoscience that is on par with philosophies similar to hermeticism. Hermeticism also has had scientific claims, that are now either labeled protoscientific or pseudoscientific. It is clear that the methods of ausura augusta are on the fringe of current scientific methods, and that while it is safe to say that ausura augusta may have believed her theory to be of a scientific standard, it was a protoscientific standard that also had esoteric qualities, therefore esoteric methods are also at the base of socionics theory as it decended from ausura augusta, despite her potential belief in the scientific development of her theory.

And in relationship to the following:

Hypotheses with some substatiation may be worthy of inclusion because they have been shown to have some link to the initial hypothesis, but otherwise, it is not Socionics as Augusta defined it."

There are no hypothesis'. Socionics is indefinatelly a protoscientific theory on par with the same scientific methods involved with hermeticism. This is the neutral truth. --Rmcnew (talk) 20:22, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

A protoscience most certainly can be a hypothesis. In the case of socionics, it has some case studies which have supported the initial hypotheses. Not only have you not shown hermeticism to have any scientific merit, but you have also failed to show how hermeticism has a link to socionics theory as derived by Augusta which has any quantifiable correlation - i.e. relevance. You have shown once again that you have no idea how the scientific method works. RudieBoy (talk) 15:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Tattwas.PNG

The tattwas. Air is blue circle. Earth is yellow square. Fire is red triangle. Water is crescent shape. Spirit is the black oval shape.

Once again I ask that other editors avoid making personal attacks, for example, the statement "you have shown once again that you have no idea how the scientific method works" obviously has nothing to do with editing the information in the article. Furthermore, the above statement has no validity in rebuttal other than for the purpose of ignoring the evidence showing socionics socionics to either be wholly hermetic or heavily influenced by hermeticism, and for the sake of making a personal attack, which according to established logic is a flawed way to make rebuttals. --Rmcnew (talk) 00:51, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

First, off, Dmitri Lytov himself had stated that the socionics elements were associated with the central nervous system. The hermetic order of the Golden Dawn, Tantra Buddhism, and new age philosophies have stated that the tattwas are associated with the central nervous system. The socionic elements are a triangle, a square, a circle, and an L shaped crecent. The tattwas are a triangle, a square, a circle, a crescent shape, and an oval shape.

Second, chakras and their relationship to the information elements have been shown to be an intregal part of socionics theory, as well as chakras and tattwas have been an intregal part of hermetic philosophies, tantra philosophies, and new age philosophies.

Third, Bukalov has not only authored officialy hermetic and other esoteric/new age material for publishing from his official publishing house in Kiev, Ukraine, he allows esoteric methods in relationship to socionics theory to be published from his publishing house. If you are too oblivious or stubborn to note the substantiality of this fact in relationship to socionics theory, heaven and earth raining itself on you probably isn't going to change your mind on the matter.

Fourth, the sources themselves make blatant ommisions that esotericism is present in socionics theory, in various forms. It is futile to deny this. --Rmcnew (talk) 01:06, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

"Third, Bukalov has not only authored officialy hermetic and other esoteric/new age material for publishing from his official publishing house in Kiev, Ukraine, he allows esoteric methods in relationship to socionics theory to be published from his publishing house. " -- What exactly are you referring to? Unless hermeticism is known by a different name in Russian, I have heard nothing of it in Russian socionics. Bukalov has dabbled in new-age topics such as astrology. However, I disagree with the claim that Bukalov had a significant influence upon the development of socionics theory. As I understand, and have had no reason to question, the theory was developed by Augusta within a group of friends and associates in Vilnius. Bukalov learned of socionics, I believe, when Augusta was giving public lectures on it in Kiev. A reading of Augusta's books in Russian shows that she treated the ideas as scientific hypotheses that were in need of further development and empirical studies. The tendency at socionics conferences in Kiev is increasingly to divorce socionics of proposed connections to the esoteric or nonscientific and to push for greater academic acceptance of the field.

Finally, my last name is DeLong, not Dulong, and I don't consider myself an "associate of Bukalov," as this would suggest some sort of professional relationship. "Personal acquaintance" would be accurate. --Rick DeLong (talk) 01:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I would like to respond to a number of things here:

"What exactly are you referring to? Unless hermeticism is known by a different name in Russian" - Rick Delong

Now, if you are wondering about "synergetics" and "cybernetics", they both come from the philosopher Buckminster Fuller, as is indicated by this google websearch: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=synergetics+cybernetics&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

It is known to socionics as "synergetics". Dmitri Lytov refers to the "hermetic science (yes, actually click on the blue link)" that was recently rederived as "synergetics", which comes from the esoteric philosopher Buckminster Fuller. This is Dmitri Lytovs account.

“Informational approach” (Alexander Bukalov, Olga Karpenko, Vladimir Ermak and others, and on the other hand - the alleged “Antisocionics” of Shiyan). Its adherents refer to socionics types as “types of information metabolism.” Moreover, they consider this concept not only applicable to the human psyche, but – in a more global sense – to “information” in general. It is significant that these ideas are extremely similar to some eccentric views, but also to synergetics (the theory of self-organizing systems), having recently sprouted from the depths of cybernetics. Unfortunately, very little is known scientifically about the relation of socionics with synergetics and, in a broader sense, with cybernetics. There is also the matter that the Kiev international institute of socionics is highly sympathetic to a number of esoteric approaches, rejected by the scientific world.

And the following below by Bukalov is recognizably "synergetics" and also "hermeticism":

Physics of Consciousness Boukalov A.V. Conscience and the Universe

It is shown that the universal vacuum if viewed as a conglomerate of relativist fields may be described as a giant computing system that controls movement of micro-particles and macro-bodies (planets, stars, etc.) Alike physical processes run in semiconductor crystals of modern computers used for construction of artificial intelligence systems. As an analogue of macro-computer, the Universe in total inevitably possesses attributes of consciousness and intelligence, and its particular subsystems interact with human consciousness and find their interpretation within the framework of religious systems and beliefs. Key words: consciousness, physical vacuum, computer, computations, religion. --Rmcnew (talk) 01:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

"Bukalov has dabbled in new-age topics such as astrology. However, I disagree with the claim that Bukalov had a significant influence upon the development of socionics theory." - Rick Delong

Bukalov is dabbling in more than just new age astrology, he is dabbling in hermeticism itself under the guise of 'synergetics', hermetics of which is actually the source of astrology. You claim that Bukalov has had no significant influence upon the development of socionics theory. That is different than what is claimed by Dmitri Lytov, who claims that it was Bukalov who redefined the current structure of socionics theory. --Rmcnew (talk) 18:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

This is what Dmitri Lytov says:

"Two researchers from Kiev, Victor Gulenko and Alexander Bukalov, reformed socionics: they defined its subject and methodology, and created its terminology, which is used until now. Due to their activity, Kiev (Ukraine) became an “informal capital” of the socionics. "

"A reading of Augusta's books in Russian shows that she treated the ideas as scientific hypotheses that were in need of further development and empirical studies." - Rick Delong

As far as what you said about Ausura Augusta believeing her theory to be scientific and empirical, I agree with that. But, her methods should be examed. She could have had a entirely different idea of science that conflicts the methods of science people recognize today. So, going by Ausura Augusta's word alone that her ideas are (by hypothesis) scientific is not enough to qualify her theory or even socionics in general to be scientific. --Rmcnew (talk) 19:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

As far as the tattwas and information elements are concerned, those are both a part of hermeticism and also tantra philosophy, so the tattwas through either one or both of those could have been the model for the derivation of the socionic shapes. --Rmcnew (talk) 22:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

It is about time someone decided to help collaboratively rewrite the esoteric development section

Finally! Good God ... I have been wanting people to help rewrite that section for ages.

The inspiration section and the criticism section should be separate. They don't normally go together. You are going into too much detail. We need only summarize socionics in this article. If you want to discuss your philosophy, then you should publish it in a reliable source and reference it here. This will allow you to receive criticism which will also make your point more reputable. Tcaudilllg (talk) 22:23, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

When you take a neutral position in writting thesis' and academic papers, you want to make sure that you acknowledge both sides of an issue. I am skepticle that following much of what you insinuated above would actually threaten neutrality, going back to when specific editors were being oppressive towards specific of socionics theory they did not want to be discussed in the article openly, when I am feeling now that what was written within the last few days being closer to a more neutral viewpoint. --Rmcnew (talk) 16:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

For example the following:

"The inspiration section and the criticism section should be separate. They don't normally go together." - Tcaudilllg

In order to take a neutral position in one sentence, you want to acknowledge each opposite view in the same sentence, useing subordinant clauses in the sentence. For example, a neutral way to acknowledge both the critics of socionics and the proponents in one sentence is to state something like "Though it has been argued that socionics is a mystic sciences by critics, authoritative proponents argue that socionics is a protoscience, working its way to become a legitimate social science. This is a neutral viewpoint in represnting both points of view.

Now, an example of breaking apart this neutrality would be to seperate the critic viewpoints and the proponent viewpoints, which is what you suggested and I disagree that this is appropiate. I also see the potentiality of a hint of the possibility of one specific individual intentionally abuseing wikipedia policy, for example, by isolating legitimate viewpoints in regards to socionics theory to one individual, whose credibility can be attacked in order to promote one viewpoint, to the exclusion of other viewpoints that should acknowledged, and are not actually connected to that one individual. This could lead to a "certain individual" setting another up for a "argument against the person" or Argumentum ad hominem, at least this looks highly suspecious that this is the case, espcially when it could be claimed that someones "credential" as say, a "theologian" could be used as a reason to "unneutrally exclude valid viewpoints in socionics theory that deserve acknowledgement and representation", which is not neccessarily a logically fallacy in itself except when used in the sense that an another individual wants to use anothers credentials to exclude away things that have no connection to that individual whatsoever, and thus promote unneutrality. And that is what concerns me about this "specific individuals" motive, espcially when that means promoteing the "Socionics is like Jung there is no esoterics viewpoints", which would be unneutral to promote unless it also acknowledged the point of view that claims that "socionics has esoteric roots, stemming from outdated science and mystic science". This point of view is a valid one that is disconnected from the opinions and research of "Reuben McNew" or "Theologians.

In regards to this:

"We need only summarize socionics in this article" - Tcaudilllg

Socionics IS being summarized in this article, and I am taking the suggestion as an unneutral suggestion and thus, I think it is a suggestion that would be bad for the article, taking that the actual inference is that anything that conflicts with the "socionics is only like Jung, no esoterics and should not be emphasized" viewpoint and mentions anything remotely "esoteric" should be taken out of the article, which is a thought and suggestion from you I believe to be unneutral. --Rmcnew (talk) 18:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

More Proof That Socionics Has a Heavy Hermetic Influence Through Synergetics, or Otherwise

There were two men involved with Synergetics and Cybernetics research. Hermann Haken and Buckminster Fuller. It should be noted that both men involved themselves with cybernetics and synergetics, as Dmitri Lytov claims that this philosophical theory has had an influence on socionics through the socionics school in Kiev. In any case, I found this weblink below to demonstrate the different emphases they had on the theory.

I call this third option synergetic evolution, recalling Buckminster Fuller’s emphasis on synergy (wholes greater than the sum of their parts). Physicist Hermann Haken explored synergetics as the dynamic of self-organizing complex systems. - http://zanngill.com/2dd.html

To complement the above statement from the link, I give these two following weblinks:

The world view of Hermetic philosophy - The hermetic world view can be integrated on a content level. However, instead of aiming at integrating duality by „remembrance“, S.T. instead aims at generating new states of organization as they have never existed before. Existence as a whole is in a continuous process of development towards unknown open „ends“. The polarity of mechanism on the one hand (God as clock-maker, everything is static) and vitalism on the other (causation can`t be accounted for in physical terms; teleology) has been transcended. - http://www.synergetic-therapy.com/Introduction/Introduction.html

By striving for comprehensivity, synergetics gives its student a means to translate inputs and discoveries from many walks of life into an efficient storage and retrieval system. In this sense, it links up with the memory arts as passed down through the hermetic tradition, is a kind of computer programming language. - http://www.grunch.net/synergetics/synintro.html

And these further two statements from Dmitri Lyton and Alexander Bukalov:

Alexander Bukalov - Physics of Consciousness Boukalov A.V. Conscience and the Universe - It is shown that the universal vacuum if viewed as a conglomerate of relativist fields may be described as a giant computing system that controls movement of micro-particles and macro-bodies (planets, stars, etc.) Alike physical processes run in semiconductor crystals of modern computers used for construction of artificial intelligence systems. As an analogue of macro-computer, the Universe in total inevitably possesses attributes of consciousness and intelligence, and its particular subsystems interact with human consciousness and find their interpretation within the framework of religious systems and beliefs. Key words: consciousness, physical vacuum, computer, computations, religion. --Rmcnew (talk) 01:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC) http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_0412.html#top http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_0412.html#top

Dmitri Lytov - “Informational approach” (Alexander Bukalov, Olga Karpenko, Vladimir Ermak and others, and on the other hand - the alleged “Antisocionics” of Shiyan). Its adherents refer to socionics types as “types of information metabolism.” Moreover, they consider this concept not only applicable to the human psyche, but – in a more global sense – to “information” in general. It is significant that these ideas are extremely similar to some eccentric views, but also to synergetics (the theory of self-organizing systems), having recently sprouted from the depths of cybernetics. Unfortunately, very little is known scientifically about the relation of socionics with synergetics and, in a broader sense, with cybernetics. There is also the matter that the Kiev international institute of socionics is highly sympathetic to a number of esoteric approaches, rejected by the scientific world. http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/articles/24685-information-metabolism-dmitri-lytov.html

REFUTATION: Your wording is very misleading here. You write "More Proof That Socionics Has a Heavy Hermetic Influence Through Synergetics." When we look into the sources, we find out from Lytov that members of the Kiev Institute of Socionics are "highly sympathetic to a number of esoteric approaches, rejected by the scientific world." If Bukalov writes that "the Universe in total inevitably possesses attributes of consciousness and intelligence, and its particular subsystems interact with human consciousness and find their interpretation within the framework of religious systems and beliefs," that does not in any way provide proof of your claim that "socionics has a heavy hermetic influence through synergetics." To support your claim, you would need to show that Bukalov's articles on the universe and its attributes of consciousness are foundational for the field of socionics. Any socionist would tell you that is NOT the case. These are his personal out-in-left-field ideas, to which most socionists would say, "whatever." To support this observation which is obvious to anyone active in socionics in Russia or Ukraine, a search of Bukalov's articles shows that the article in mention has never been cited in any other socionics articles. This check is possible through the "Citation Index" project, whose purpose is to determine the relative authority of different works on socionics, and of different socionists. Here we find a list of all of Bukalov's publications (per earlier discussion we can see that the first publication was in 1988, 8 years after Augusta's first publication where she includes the socionics symbols) arranged in order of how often they have been cited in other socionics works. The article "Consciousness and the Universe" is at line 154 with 0 citations. Now, how does that qualify as a "heavy hermetic influence" on socionics?? --Rick DeLong (talk) 18:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Proof positive that Alexander Bukalov is indeed studying, personally, synergetics theory

This is an abstract of an article that Alexander Bukalov himself wrote. Go to this link, find the paragraph below and see the key word: synergetics

http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ej/soc_98_1.html

A.V.Bukalov Quantum Changes of Informational Medium The notion is suggested of the quantum change and structuring as per functions of informational metabolism of the informational medium within the collective or society in general. "Primitive" group is considered; it is shown, that 8 functional roles of this group correspond to 8 functions of the model of informational metabolism (A model). E.g.: the "chief of the gang" belongs to the first, i.e. programming function. Attention is given to the roles distribution in administrative group and A model function. Key words: socionics, quantum changes of the informational medium, primitive group, administrative group, psychology, synergetics, model of informational metabolism.

REFUTATION: if you look up "synergetics" in Wikipedia, you get a disambiguation page. If you look синергетика up in the Russian Wikipedia, you get a lengthy article that roughly corresponds to the second meaning of synergetics in the Eng. Wikipedia -- that is, "Synergetics (Haken), a school of thought on thermodynamics and other systems phenomena developed by Hermann Haken". In fact, the Russian article says (I translate):

"A definition of the term 'synergetics' that is close to the modern understanding, was introduced by Herman Haken in 1977 in his book Synergetics."

A cursory look at Bukalov's article "Феномен квантования информационного пространства коллектива" (found through Google, fifth result) reveals that the "synergetics" he mentions (once) in his article is of the kind discussed in the Russian article, corresponding roughly to Synergetics_(Haken). Now, take a look at that article on synergetics and compare it to the one on Hermeticism. See a link? NONE AT ALL. --Rick DeLong (talk) 19:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

17th century hermeticism, with a revival in the 1950s onward

The conception of society as a system that could be modelled and controlled through information processing and feedback loops fascinated not only the cybernetics researchers but also architects, planners and designers of the time. The simple and hermetic systems of first-order cybernetics, working mainly with engineering and mathematical models, gave way to second-order cybernetics which dealt with 'open systems', or the interdependence of systems, be they social, natural or technical, including factors such as complexity and risk. Cybernetics also expanded into the late 1960s cultural moment of discontent, paranoia and movements for change, offering an epistemology that spread from the control-oriented planning of the government and the military into sectors as various as business, art and counter-cultural politics and technology.

Source: http://www.janvaneyck.nl/0_2_3_events_info/arc_08_systems_exposed.html

Hermetic books, ancient metaphysical works dealing essentially with the idea of the complete community of all beings and objects. Authorship of the books was attributed to the Egyptian god of wisdom, Thoth, whose name was sometimes translated into Greek as Hermes Trismegistus [Thoth the thrice great] and was therefore equated with the Greek god Hermes. The books treat of a variety of subjects, including magic, astrology, and alchemy, and were particularly influential in the 3d cent. with the Neoplatonists and in France and England in the 17th century.

Source: http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/society/A0823498.html

Hermeticism is a historiographical phrase describing the work that attempts to reconstruct the mode of thought held by 17th century scientists. It primarily traces out the connections of Renaissance (16th century) modes of thought with those of the Scientific Revolution (17th century). This type of analysis began with English historians of science in the 1960s. This category of history of science work has largely subsumed earlier academic philosophers' work on the problem of transition from Aristotelianism to 17th century science.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermetic_science

Analysis and Conclusion

Analysis:

During the 1960s, there was a revival of 17th century hermetic science.

Hermeticism is a logical system, which has been used to understand groups.

The revival of hermetic science sprouted several theories, such as synergetics and cybernetics.

cybernetics, as a philosophy, was intended to solve some of the social problems in the 1960s

Ausura Augusta and other socionists intended socionics to explain human relationships, as an empirical social science.

Hermetic science uses the tattwas, which resembles the socionics information elements.

Hermetic associations have associated the tattwas, to the central nervous system via chakras

Ausura Augusta and other socionists have made associations between the information elements, and the central nervous system via chakras.

Alexander Bukalov has written numerous articles with hermetic, cosmological, and other esoteric content, and apparently has studied synergetics, which sprouted from hermetic science.

Conclusion:

All evidence dictates that socionics is hermeticism

Only the evidence you used dictates that socionics is hermeticism. This is original research. If a notable person explicitly admits that socionics is hermeticism, then you mention in the article that said person said this, but it's still speculation, so it would likely be limited to a subsection about theories or to criticism. If the official socionics associations admit that socionics is hermeticism, then you can actually add it to the summary. You might be right, but even if you were, your own research has no place in this article. When I can google your name and see "PhD" beside it, your claims might make the criticisms section.

This is the kind of research that would be appropriate for a university thesis, but it violates Wikipedia:No_original_research. "To demonstrate that you are not presenting original research, you must cite reliable sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and that directly support the information as it is presented." Directly support, in this case, would be the publication of your claim on either http://www.socioniko.net/en/ or http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/, which are really the only two reliable online sources (besides e-books), because everything is peer-reviewed by a bunch of PhDs in Psychology. Really, I could remove anything and everything that isn't from those two websites or a book from this page. I'm not going to be the dick, though.

And I realize the redundancies in my comment, but I figured the more I repeat myself, the better the message will be conveyed. That, and I'm getting lazier and more annoyed after each of my replies. MichaelExe (talk) 23:04, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

If a notable person explicitly admits that socionics is hermeticism, then you mention in the article that said person said this, but it's still speculation, so it would likely be limited to a subsection about theories or to criticism.

http://www.socioniko.net/en/ was Dmitri Lytov's website before he sold it. In fact, there were artcles that I wrote linked from that website at one time. As far as Cybernetics and Synergetics goes in relation to the Kiev Socionics School and Alexander Bukalov, this is Dmitri Lytov's observation, and there are articles on the socionics.ibc.com.ua, one in specific written by Alexander Bukalov himself, that is notable synergetics theory in its own keyword title (this is listed on the website). Now, you say that both socioniko.net and socionics.ibc.com.ua are both credible websites, and also that it would require someone with a PHD to make the socionics-synergetics-hermeticism link credible. As far as education, I have not gone any further than a Masters Degree program, and I don't think I can find someone who has a PHD, who is also an authority in socionics, but I am pretty sure that I find someone with a PHD who can state that synergetics and cybernetics theory is hermeticism, because those theories are more widely known to people with PHDs, than say socionics. So, I'll just go find myself someone with a PHD who knows about hermeticism, cybernetics, sygernetics, and show that person all the evidence I have that socionics is just simply an offshoot of hermeticism. Have that person write a statement up that can be published, stateing such. If that is what it takes, I can do that. I know quite a few people with PHDs. --Rmcnew (talk) 01:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Ridiculous. As I said before, you aim only to confuse. You want to make socionics seem as unscientific as possible to as many people as possible. Tcaudilllg (talk) 23:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Or rather, Tcaulldig, you are upset that you can not frame socionics to be more scientific than it might actually be, which would result in the article being an unneutral mess that is biased towards a viewpoint that lifts socionics up as some neo-Jungian offspring divorced from anything seemingly outdated scientificwise or esoteric. How about this, why don't we agree to stop complaining and agree to represent all viewpoints neutrally? It is easier than you would think. --Rmcnew (talk) 01:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

sources (1-11)

Dmitri Lytov - "So, Augusta created a framework of socionics. But it needed a reform. The necessity of a reform became obvious in the last years of perestroika (1989 – 1991). Although official psychology was still under strong influence of the official ideology, more and more Western psychological books came to Russia, were translated and published. In the beginning, there were only few authors – Eric Berne, Sigmund Freud, Erich Fromm, Carl Jaspers. But from now on socionics had to compete with other trends in psychology, because Soviet (and later post-Soviet) psychology became pluralistic. Two researchers from Kiev, Victor Gulenko and Alexander Bukalov, reformed socionics: they defined its subject and methodology, and created its terminology, which is used until now. Due to their activity, Kiev (Ukraine) became an “informal capital” of the socionics." http://www.psihologia.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1503&sid=f39af7defe85e5b10864a55b2aac7381 --Rmcnew (talk) 22:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Dmitri Lytov - “Informational approach” (Alexander Bukalov, Olga Karpenko, Vladimir Ermak and others, and on the other hand - the alleged “Antisocionics” of Shiyan). Its adherents refer to socionics types as “types of information metabolism.” Moreover, they consider this concept not only applicable to the human psyche, but – in a more global sense – to “information” in general. It is significant that these ideas are extremely similar to some eccentric views, but also to synergetics (the theory of self-organizing systems), having recently sprouted from the depths of cybernetics. Unfortunately, very little is known scientifically about the relation of socionics with synergetics and, in a broader sense, with cybernetics. There is also the matter that the Kiev international institute of socionics is highly sympathetic to a number of esoteric approaches, rejected by the scientific world. http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/articles/24685-information-metabolism-dmitri-lytov.html --Rmcnew (talk) 22:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Rick Delong - After Aleksandr Bukalov established the International Institute of Socionics in Kiev, Ukraine, some rivalry or differences of opinion arose between Augusta and the group in Kiev, or perhaps with Bukalov himself. Augusta came to the conferences for several years, then stopped coming as her health worsened. Perhaps she felt marginalized by the socionics community. In fact, two volumes of her works were published without her approval by someone else, and she apparently did not receive any royalties from book sales. Now a pensioner, Augusta lived a very poor life like almost all elderly people in the former Soviet Union after its collapse. Emissaries from Kiev and Moscow schools of socionics would collect donations and bring them to her in person to help her subsist. In her final years Augusta became involved in mysticism, which drew criticism from many socionists. - http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Aushra_Augusta

I.P. Mameneva - Analytical Psychology Kameneva I.P. Psychical Energy: Symbols and Metamorphoses - C.G.Jung's ideas on psychical energy are considered in the context of his psychoanalytical experience set forth in his work Libido, Its Metamorphoses and Symbols. Symbols of psychical energy indicate the direction of its movement from the mother to other objects and images, which in general reminds dynamics of Kundalini energy in Tantra Yoga. In A.Augustinavichiute's model the scheme of informational metabolism of each type determines specifics of its energetic potential and in separate cases also aptitude towards certain esoteric practices. Key words: symbols, consciousness, unconscious, archetypes, psychical energy (libido), system of Chakras, psychical functions, informational metabolism, energetic metabolism, mental loop, vital loop, socionics. http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_0612.html

Rick Delong - Aushra Augusta, the founder of socionics, was an ILE, and this has been decisive for the field's development. Augusta discovered a logical system and formulated its key principles, but left much work undone. After her main period of work on socionics, she drifted into esoterism, and I know nothing about her post-socionics development - only that it is outside the realm of contemporary socionics. For most ILEs, the search is never over. - http://socionist.blogspot.com/2007/03/typing-religions-teachings-and_3955.html

Rick Delong - Augusta was the kind of person who broadcasted her insights far and wide, and I think she would have run around saying, "look, these ancient texts are saying the same thing I've been saying!" She was not shy at all about discussing possible connections between socionics and chakras, though her ideas were purely speculative. - http://socionist.blogspot.com/2009/03/development-of-english-language.html --Rmcnew (talk) 18:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Dmitri Lytov - In 1980—1995 socionics existed as a "club of adherents" outside the official psychology. Groups of socionists appeared in different cities of the Soviet Union, but this was not enough to make socionics recognized by official psychologists. On the one hand, such isolation from psychologists positively influenced socionics: it developed without Marxist-Leninist stereotypes that overloaded Soviet psychological works of that time. On the other hand, such isolation created an illusion among many socionists that socionics were not a part of psychology, it rather were “a new science” with its own methods, subject etc. This was a dangerous trend: there was a real danger that socionics would turn into something esoteric, mystical. http://www.socioniko.net/en/articles/lytovs-intro2.html

Olga Tangemann - The associative model of a human psyche is based on the model of the informational metabolism and psychoanalytic concepts, in which components of personality, socionic functions and colors of the chakras are considered as a dialectic interaction and expression of psychic energy. A human psyche seeks the harmony and balance between the mind and soul, between the physical and psychic components of personality. Traditional socionics study informational metabolism of a person and does not pay enough attention to the dynamic processes within the psyche and without those the informational metabolism could not be fully understood and explained. The Butterfly model (the associative model) of a human psyche is aimed partly to fill the gap in our understanding of a human psyche from the perspective of psychodynamics as well as to proclaim the indissoluble unity of the information and energy processes within the psyche from the perspective of psychology, socionics, philosophy and esoterics. http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_09_1.html

Dmitri Lytov -(За соционику без ошибок, translation: For the Socionics without errors), Lytov says: [translation] "I think sooner or later, we are forced to answer the question of how socionic types correlated with central nervous system." - which implies that the Socionics is generally considered to be associated with the central nervous system, but that at this stage (or at least at the time of the article in 2001), Socionics remains a theory about information processing, which does not go into how. I think this is significant because it shows that although the exact correlation between the types and aspects of the central nervous system have not yet been established, the Socionics elements have always been considered to be processes carried out by the central nervous system. - http://socionics.org/theory/Default.aspx?load=lytov_mistakes.html

Alexander Bukalov -Physics of Consciousness Boukalov A.V. Conscience and the Universe - It is shown that the universal vacuum if viewed as a conglomerate of relativist fields may be described as a giant computing system that controls movement of micro-particles and macro-bodies (planets, stars, etc.) Alike physical processes run in semiconductor crystals of modern computers used for construction of artificial intelligence systems. As an analogue of macro-computer, the Universe in total inevitably possesses attributes of consciousness and intelligence, and its particular subsystems interact with human consciousness and find their interpretation within the framework of religious systems and beliefs. Key words: consciousness, physical vacuum, computer, computations, religion. --Rmcnew (talk) 01:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC) http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_0412.html#top http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_0412.html#top

Rick Delong - Most socionists would agree that socionics is not a hard science like physics or chemistry, since it has no purely quantitative formulation. Its methodology is more on par with the social or soft sciences like sociology and psychology. At the same time it makes rather specific predictions unlike, for example, Freudian psychology. It therefore occupies an intermediate zone known as protoscience. http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Socionics_as_science --Rmcnew (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Rmcnews score (11) (12) - Tcaudilllg score (0) [scored in the amount of viable sources]

Well it's certainly Gulenko's view that socionics is a neo-Jungian discipline. And Boukalov's. But you're not a big deal McNew. We progressive socionists have no reason to waste our energy debating your senselessness. If you put anything in the article which seems to contradict the official position that socionics is neo-Jungian, then I'll revert you. Simple as that. And then someone else will revert you too. And eventually, hopefully, you'll give up and go back to playing on your webpage. But you're not going to profit anything here. Not at bit. Tcaudilllg (talk) 08:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Tcaudilllg, I found it quite interesting that you just made a boisterous claim that quoted absolutely no sources whatsoever, and even if you were able to quote some sources, I would probably agree with them. Because I seriously doubt you could quote any sources that would conflict much with anything that I have not already said myself. That being said, you just wasted your time writting the above paragraph. --Rmcnew (talk) 20:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

"Socionics — the science of the socion, the socionic nature of man and the socionic structure of society, different types of people's information metabolism (IM), and different forms of relationships between them — was born on the foundation of the typologies of C.G. Jung, E. Kretschmer, A.E. Lichko, and A. Kempinsky's theory of information metabolism." --Rmcnew (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

If you put anything in the article which seems to contradict the official position that socionics is neo-Jungian, then I'll revert you - Tcaudilllg

The bolden statement above by Tcaudilllg is obvious bullshit. If you want to start talking about official positions, then you should quote your sources, because an official position concerning socionics and Jung typology does not exists, other than that Carl Jungs theory played a small part amongs a few other theorists quoted by Ausura. Also, some osocionics authors have named a few other theories, such as Dmitri Lytov stateing that the Kiev socionics school has been influenced by synergetic and cybernetic theory, and that esotericism has been present in socionics theory. And I have never disputed that socionics has been influenced by Jung, and that socionics authors have stated that Jung played at least a small part in, and that it is your opinion that socionics should be emphasized as something solely neo-jungian, which can be argued in light of the fact that socionics is also neo-freudian, neo-kepimsky, neo-kretschmer, neo-Lichko and also, neo-synergetic, neo-cybernetic, and neo-hermetic. What I dispute is intentionally isolateing socionics purely to Jungian philosophy, promoteing Jung above every body else, and then useing Jung as a reason to dispell away any notion that socionics has been influenced by a whole host of other things that have nothing to do with Jung, which isn't the only view in socionics theory.. Neutrality is representing all viewpoints, such as those from Dmitri Lytov, Rick Delong, I.P. Mameneva, Olga Tangemann, Alexander Bukalov, and also those of Victor Gulenko. If you don't want to represent all of these viewpoints, then you are obviously uninterested in presenting a neutral point of view, in which case any instances where it is seen that you were to attempt to purely isolate socionics specific to Jung above all else, those edits deserve reversion. Now, as far matureity goes, I hope that, despite some perceived behavior from you that shows likewise, that you would choose to be a mature individual who values communicating with co-editors, in order to take a neutral position on these issues. That is all I am asking from you. --Rmcnew (talk) 16:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree with this, but you're still trying to get around wikipedia's article standards, by drawing your own conclusions, and "Wikipedia is not the place to publish your own opinions, experiences, arguments, or conclusions." What Tcaudilllg should have said is "If you put anything in the article outside of criticisms, which seems to contradict the official position of socionics, or does not have direct support, then I'll revert you." As I see it, you're both still tied with 0 - 0 (and wikipedia is not about winning). Either way, I've left a note on Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard and requested mediation. MichaelExe (talk) 23:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

"If you put anything in the article outside of criticisms, which seems to contradict the official position of socionics, or does not have direct support, then I'll revert you." OK, that's actually what I meant. I've never been precise with my wording. Tcaudilllg (talk) 07:35, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

The problem I see with Tcaudillig making claims of an "official position" is that tcaulldig could very well be intending to use this "vague claim" to tell 'white lies' in order fool people into not sideing against his position, while at the same time createing his own claims that are impossible to back up (with sources), as an excuse to make reversions to other peoples good faith edits. Tcaudillig has no right to make "white lies" in order to justify his -bad faith- reversions. That is bullshit. In fact, he has no right to revert anything on the basis of any vague claims with bad logic, such as a supposed "official positions". Tcaudillig should just stop making these ridiculous reversions for bad reasons (or even better: stop makeing reversions to other peoples edits entirely) - he has a history of doing that. --Rmcnew (talk) 16:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

And that is besides that fact that Tcaudilllg is also removing information concerning the represention of viewpoints that do indeed exists in socionics theory, that are questionable for some socionists, but have historically been a part of socionics theory even from the founding. Such as the comparison of the socionic information elements to hindu and esoteric orderings of chakras, on the human body, for the study of health and wellness. He seems to want to uplift socionics as some "Jungian offshoot" over these other viewpoints, which is disrupting neutrality. --Rmcnew (talk) 16:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I quote McNew - "because an official position concerning socionics and Jung typology does not exists, other than that Carl Jungs theory played a small part amongs a few other theorists quoted by Ausura."

What??? You are willing to claim that "Socionics Has a Heavy Hermetic Influence" -- which is easily refuted as I have done above, and which is claimed by no one but you -- and at the same time state that "Jungs theory played a small part amongs a few other theorists quoted by Ausura" (emphasis added) -- when A. Augusta mentioned Jung as the primary source of socionics in her works, going so far as to comment on how she modified the theory? And then you claim to be pursuing neutrality??? --Rick DeLong (talk) 19:27, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

rmcnews 12th source

Source: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://club.trios.e-gloryon.com/index.html%3Fpage%3D6507071433&ei=r16xStyuJ5P6MbnS7PIN&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=3&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%25D0%25A7%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BA%25D1%2580%25D0%25B0%2B%25D1%2581%25D0%25BE%25D1%2586%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BA%25D0%25B0%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG

Chakra - is energy-centers people in the etheric double as saucerization or vortices on its surface. They originate from the central energy channels (nadi) Sushumna passing inside the spine. All chakras are in constant rotation as the wheel (in Sanskrit chakra means wheel). In their mouth open continuously flows into the energy of a higher plane. According to Charles Leadbeater, a manifestation of life flows emanating from the second aspect of the Solar Logos: 'It is what we call' primary force ': Without this flow of energy the physical body simply could not exist. Therefore, these centers are active in every human being, although those who have not yet reached a certain level of development, the chakras are rotating very slowly and only form a knot, is necessary for the perception of energy, and no more than that. , , '. In more developed centers of these people are burning and throbbing life with light, and therefore passes through them much more energy, resulting in a man opened more ability and opportunity '.

Thus, the chakras perform several functions:

Energy - the saturation of vital energy (prana) of each cell of the human body, and therefore supports their lives and communicate with each other. You can think of points as the collectors of cosmic energies. Correct thinking about direct food most of the higher centers. Solar plexus absorbs the energy of each message and consciously fertilizes manifested centers. So understanding the fiery centers is the most essential task. Medical only able to identify the disease, when will know according to cosmic energy '(Agni Yoga. Hierarchy.).Each center corresponds to a specific nerve plexus, is responsible for the efficient work of certain internal organs. 'Sickness or disease of any part of the body are accompanied by insufficient flow of the Vital Force to that part' (Charles Leadbeater). Implementation of the relationship between human bodies to transfer energy and information from higher planes to the physical and vice versa. Information - each chakra is responsible for the transfer of certain types of information. Injected energy, passing through the spokes or petals centers, is divided into component parts or qualities that define their own radiation - a vibration. Therefore, when a person develops a certain moral quality, it increases the vibration of the corresponding chakra, which further lead to a gradual disclosure. As a result of increased energy-flow toward the center, and this will be an impetus for the development of mental skills and abilities of people, as well as improve the state of the internal organs to which the energy of this chakra. Agni Yoga says: 'Mental Health is the main basis of the health of the body. When the spirit can eat right higher energies, and it will prevent the body from the dangers - that's why - can not be a doctor not a psychologist and he can not neglect the wonderful psychic energy '.

In other words, the functions of the chakras - this is an information and energy exchanges both within the person and the person with the outside world, the degree of active centers depends on the mental and physical health.

According to T.N. Prokofiev, the subject of Socionics is a 'study of the processes of information exchange rights with the world and their impact on the psyche'. It is therefore important Socionics, having studied the energy-centers, to draw parallels between these ancient teachings and the young science socionics. Moreover, the study of this topic to determine the correspondence between the features and functions socionic awakened centers. In the future, this matter will give a new clue to the study of psychological, socionic and health problems of man, will open a new approach to study the causes of diseases

Tatyana Prokofieva has a recognized PhD in socionics

According to this link http://www.socionics.ru/index_eng.htm, Tatyana Prokofieva has a PhD. in socionics. This makes the below statement and the information, in russian (webtranslated), on this link credible.

(Edited Translated) According to [Tatyana Prokofieva], the subject of Socionics is a 'study of the processes of information exchange rights with the world and their impact on the psyche'. It is therefore important Socionics, having studied the energy-centers (chakras), to draw parallels between these ancient teachings (protoscientific and esoteric philosophies) and the young science socionics. Moreover, the study of this topic to determine the correspondence between the [socionic functions (IM)] features and awakened centers (chakras). In the future, this matter will give a new clue to the study of psychological, socionic and health problems of man, will open a new approach to study the causes of diseases --Rmcnew (talk) 18:46, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

(Origional Translated) According to T.N. Prokofiev, the subject of Socionics is a 'study of the processes of information exchange rights with the world and their impact on the psyche'. It is therefore important Socionics, having studied the energy-centers, to draw parallels between these ancient teachings and the young science socionics. Moreover, the study of this topic to determine the correspondence between the features and functions socionic awakened centers. In the future, this matter will give a new clue to the study of psychological, socionic and health problems of man, will open a new approach to study the causes of diseases

Translated from:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://club.trios.e-gloryon.com/index.html%3Fpage%3D6507071433&ei=r16xStyuJ5P6MbnS7PIN&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=3&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%25D0%25A7%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BA%25D1%2580%25D0%25B0%2B%25D1%2581%25D0%25BE%25D1%2586%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BA%25D0%25B0%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG</ref>

Socionics.ru website - Headed by PhD. Tatyana Prokofieva - has an article on Chakras

Origional: http://www.socionics.ru/chakry.htm

Translated: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.socionics.ru/chakry.htm&ei=8YmySrNcksQ2v9aVzQs&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=4&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%25D0%25A7%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BA%25D1%2580%25D0%25B0%2B%25D1%2581%25D0%25BE%25D1%2586%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BA%25D0%25B0%2Bsocionics.ru%26hl%3Den

(Translated) - In seeking a solution to this problem there are many different scientific concepts, schools of philosophy, psychological training. Study of the impact of information on the human psyche deals and Socionics, and neurolinguistic programming, and Dianetics, etc.

But the problem is not new. More than two thousand years ago the ancient philosophers of India decide this issue by studying the structure of meditative man, his thin shells. Thus were discovered and investigated energy information centers, or chakras. From the teachings of the chakras, the impact of them on a conscious, psycho-emotional life and human health and the connection of this theory with socionics introduces this article.

1. Part 1. Chakras

According to ancient Hindu esoteric psychology of man consists of seven bodies: the Higher, immortal, Triads, or the body of fire, and four lower, transient early man. For more than two thousand years ago, doctors knew the enormous influence the spiritual and mental condition of the person to his health. "Agni Yoga says:" The causes of disease lie at the root of the connection between the physical and astral worlds. The body reflects the investigation of claims originating in all the layers and depths of the cosmos. It would seem clear what the indissoluble relationship exists between the macrocosm and microcosm, but it also enlightened minds, this notion is not taken into consideration and not to go ahead with research ... The relationship between the bodies and the interaction of currents should be investigated, because the inability to accurately determine the status of the organism and his disease, not setting the fiery match. Fine study of the spiritual and physical condition will make it possible to find the fluids of decomposition. ... Because it is so important your doctor know the spiritual condition of the patient. When diseases and their control should be borne in mind the consistency of bodies and the inextricable link between them "(Fiery World. Part 3). Such a connection between the physical and other bodies carried through the Energy Centers rights, or chakras. Charles Leadbeater, a British priest, a member of the Theosophical Society of HP Blavatsky, wrote: "The chakras, or centers of power - this is the point through which energy is transferred from one body to another." So what is a chakra?

Request for informal mediation

A request for informal mediation has been opened at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2009-09-16/Socionics.

Named parties to the mediation are:

• User:Rmcnew
• User:Tcaudilllg
• User:MichaelExe
• User:Rick DeLong
• User:RudieBoy

I am offering my services as an impartial mediator for this issue. Discussion regarding the raised matter can take place at the Mediation link above.

Informal mediation is non-binding and seeks to find consensus. Although I am an administrator I do not exercise any of my administrative rights while conducting mediation. If any parties find me unacceptable as a mediator, please advise and I will attempt to find a replacement.

Manning (talk) 05:12, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree with meditation, but I do object to the fact that the initial premise of mediation is one which singles me out, when the problem is one amongst various other editors. I have already stated my own argumentation on the mediation page --Rmcnew (talk) 19:01, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Rmcnew - I have excised your lengthy comments and moved them to the discussion page for the mediation. This is NOT a criticism or assessment of your statements, merely a matter of mediation procedure. Also please do NOT be concerned with the wording of the mediation complaint. You will be given plenty of opportunity to present your side and the initial formulation has no impact on my opinions.

To all parties involved in the complaint: mediation is NOT a freeform discussion and it involves a degree of restriction on commenting. Mediation is usually employed because freeform discussion has broken down. I have explained how things will proceed at the mediation page. Regards Manning (talk) 01:27, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

The Sources I Find Unreliable

in this article are (including other links from the same websites):

1. http://www.socionics.us/index.shtml
2. http://www.socionics.com/advan/vi/vi.htm
3. http://socionist.blogspot.com/2009/03/development-of-english-language.html
4. http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/articles/24685-information-metabolism-dmitri-lytov.html
5. http://www.psihologia.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1503&sid=f39af7defe85e5b10864a55b2aac7381
6. http://www.magicalpath.net/articles/tattva.htm
7. http://golden-dawn.blogspot.com/2009/02/golden-dawn-tattwas-their-little-known.html
8. http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Aushra_Augusta
9. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Definitive-Socionics-Info/113529516599?v=info

A quarter of them don't even name the author, a quarter have insufficiently educated authors and half of them are forums, blogs, facebook or wikisocion. Most of them are not direct sources. Really, http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ is the most reliable English source (a decent amount of educated people), and http://www.socioniko.net/en/index.html to a lesser extent (a barely passable amount of educated people, so you'd have to see who said what before using anything). That's why books and translation (like rmcnew has done with the Google translator) are probably the best options, although you still have to notice the credibility of the authors. I didn't go through the Russian or translated articles. MichaelExe (talk) 01:57, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Credible sources

I am adding source links of what I think is credible here (sourcewise):

http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ <--- Kiev Socionics Institute - Alexander Bukalov - mostly russian and some english

http://www.socioniko.net/en/index.html <--- probably biggest credible english archive

http://www.socionics.ru/index_eng.htm <--- Socionics Institute in Moscow - Chief Director of institute: Ph.D. in Socionics Tatyana Prokofieva - russian and english

http://www.socionik.ru <--- russian only

http://socionics.org/ <--- russian only

http://www.socionic.ru/ <--- russian only

http://socionics.kiev.ua/ <--- russian only

http://www.socionika.info/ <--- russian only

http://www.socionik.com.ua/ <--- russian only

Sources from credible authors

Dmitri Lytov has an article in russian on the socionics.org website

http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fsocionics.org%2Ftheory%2FDefault.aspx%3Fload%3Dlytov_mistakes.html&lp=ru_en&btnTrUrl=Translate

The following could be credible or questionably credible:

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BE%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0

2006 Socionics conference in Kiev Ukraine.

I agree that socionics.us may not be as credible (sourcewise), but I include the following link, as it documents a lecture event at the Kiev Socionics Institute. It can be used to help discover credible sources from legitimate socionists. Pictures of professional socionists are included on the page (as well as some descriptions of them, and also talks).

http://www.socionics.us/interviews/conference_2006.shtml

Book sources that have not been translated professionally into english

I think actual print book sources that are not translated into english should not count as viable sources unless there is a viable other internet or similar source that could be compared, such as from Dmitri Lytov or similar person. Otherwise, it could be possible for basically anyone to make any rediculous claim that has no proof of backing (looking right at some specific editors, who have been doing this, ones name starts with a T), while using the "Dual Nautre of Man" or any other prime socionics book as a source. For example, some editor could claim that "Ausura Augusta" said such and such in "Dual Nature of Man", when very few english speaking people can even read this book. It can not be readily refuted in the event the editor was making a shakey claim. This book has never been professionally translated.

Translation and copying information from foreign language wikipedia - cutting down on origional research

I think another way to correct the origional research issue among the whole article in english is to copy translated aspects from out of the russian siconics wikipedia article.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F%25D0%25A1%25D0%25BE%25D1%2586%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BA%25D0%25B0

I was thinking the same thing, but we'd still have to go through all of the sources. It could provide us with some good sources, too, though. MichaelExe (talk) 22:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and translated a couple paragraphs out of there. I just have to include the links that were on the wikipedia, the way they are in the russian article. --Rmcnew (talk) 23:29, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I just got done adding the sources --Rmcnew (talk) 00:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Someone needs to call Signbot, because all those "anonymous" posts were by Rmcnew.

Wow, you didn't even mention Humanitarian Socionics. Way to npov Mcnew. Tcaudilllg (talk) 11:42, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Tcaudilllg, the fact that you mentioned and attempted to infer that wikipedia has a tendency to sign me out while editing is a bad thing on my part is completely rediculous, and trying to make me seem as though I have an unneutral position because I don't have the godlike ability to magically edit in every theory in existance concerning socionics theory over night is abusrd and rediculous, and transparently manipulative. I don't know how the hell you think you can keep being this way and expect to get away with it. --Rmcnew (talk) 18:55, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Just removed a signifigant amount of origional research and replaced with russian wikipedia information

I just got through removeing a signifigant amount of origional research and replaceing it with credible information from the russian socionics wikipedia article. I am going to add some more translated stuff tomorow.

I like, rmcnew, how you masked your bid to insert esoteric-related information behind a veneer of social responsibility. I had thought you capable of that in the context of my expansion model of Model B, and this act is proof of the idea. You appealed directly to paleoconservatism/empire. Yeah very interesting. On the other hand, the article in its current state simply does not reflect the opinion of leaders in the field. (Lytov is not a leader and it is frustration with that status that has lead him to withdraw).

Anyway you've yet to cite your sources. I never was a fan of the Russian article for reasons that should be pretty plain. Tcaudilllg (talk) 07:08, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I find it interesting that you are concealing the fact that I have contact with Gulenko through his blog and that he and I are of like mind on these matters. You are aware that I phrased the info metabolism intro so as not to fauxly intrude on the territory of the energy model, and to prevent confusion. You not only acted disingenuously, but made a point of exalting disproven hypotheses which contradict the energy model.

Of course that Gulenko wrote such a thing is not something we can cite on Wikipedia because the antiquidated rules preclude us from citing blogs as reliable sources. The point is that I understand the opinion of socionists on those matters, and that my "original research" represented. Although he doesn't want to admit it, Lytov has fallen out of the socionics mainstream because of regrettable personal biases. If he wants to correct his position, that is up to him. But Gulenko trumps Lytov any day, and Boukalov doesn't do public so Gulenko is the voice of socionics at this time.

I'll make this point: I just want to get people interested in socionics. That's the only reason I'm here. Once people get interested in socionics, I figure everything will take care of itself. (providing they understand the true spirit of socionics and not Rmcnew's delusional appraisals thereof, because if that happened it would be hugely detrimental to the cause of socionics and even Jungian typology.) Tcaudilllg (talk) 11:03, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Tcaudilllg, you can state your opinion on the matter, but that is all that it is ... your opinion on the matter. Though you seem to lack the ability to state your opinion on the matter respectfully and without resorting to bad logic with no foundational backing, such as using personal insults and biased extortation to back up your opinion. It is also quite obvious and transparent that your agenda is to exclude legitimate viewpoints in socionics theory that conflict with your understanding of Jung Typology, which is unneutral point of view on your part. I disagree with your methods to interest people in socionics, because you are simply distorting legitimate socionics for the cause of the gain of your own opinions on what is good or bad, and that attitude doesn't deserve to be reflected in the article, which is why the information in the russian wikipedia article is replaceing origional research from you and also myself in this article. --Rmcnew (talk) 17:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Tatyana Prokofieva, PHD, certified article mentioning tattva (same as tattwa) and socionics information element connection with hindu beliefs in chakras

File:Tattwas.PNG

The tattwas. Air is blue circle. Earth is yellow square. Fire is red triangle. Water is crescent shape. Spirit is the black oval shape.

Tatyana Prokofieva who has a recognized Ph.D. in Socionics, approved the following article for publication on her website, which represents the socionics stance of " The Research Institute for Socionics" located in Moscow, Russia. It should be noted that the following article is peer reviewed and PHD certified. The following article is peer reviewed and PHD certified. The following article is peer reviewed and PHD certified. The following article is peer reviewed and PHD certified. The following article is peer reviewed and PHD certified. The following article is peer reviewed and PHD certified. The following article is peer reviewed and PHD certified. The following article is peer reviewed and PHD certified. The following article is peer reviewed and PHD certified. The following article is peer reviewed and PHD certified. The PHD who certified the article is Tatyana Prokofieva who has a recognized Ph.D. in Socionics. Tatyana Prokofieva chairs theThe Research Institute for Socionics, as a Ph.D. in Socionics.

THE ARTICLE IS SIGNIFIGANT IN THAT, AS IT IS A PHD CERTIFIED SOCIONICS ARTICLE ON THE OFFICIAL "RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR SOCIONICS" WEBSITE. THE EARTH TATTWA, A YELLOW SQUARE IS EQUATED TO INFORMATION ELEMENT OF THINKING. THIS IS A PHD CERTIFIED ARTICLE ON AN OFFICIAL SOCIONICS WEBSITE.

Source: (origional) http://www.socionics.ru/chakry.htm

Source: (translated) http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.socionics.ru/chakry.htm&ei=8YmySrNcksQ2v9aVzQs&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=4&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%25D0%25A7%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BA%25D1%2580%25D0%25B0%2B%25D1%2581%25D0%25BE%25D1%2586%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BA%25D0%25B0%2Bsocionics.ru%26hl%3Den

According to T.N. Prokofieva, the subject of Socionics is a "study of the processes of information exchange rights with the world and their impact on the psyche." It is therefore important Socionics, having studied the energy-centers, to draw parallels between these ancient teachings and the young science socionics. Moreover, the study of this topic to determine the correspondence between the features and functions socionic awakened centers. In the future, this matter will give a new clue to the study of psychological, socionic and health problems of man, will open a new approach to study the causes of diseases.

1. 1. The lowest chakra - root (basal), or Muladhara ( "mule" - root "adhara - support).This chakra is considered as a link between the physical and subconscious worlds. It is located in the coccyx. Manages the processes of purification of the body and corresponds to the sacral nerve plexus. Its endocrine gland is the prostate is associated with male sex organs, rectum and colon. Of the organs of perception and action conform to her nose (sense of smell) and legs. When unbalance the Muladhara Chakra there hemorrhoids, constipation, sciatica, prostatitis, an inflammation of the ovaries......

1).....Indeed, the Muladhara chakra corresponds to the primary element (Tattva) earth, the planet Saturn.

2).....The most relevant Muladhara chakra socionic functions - business logic (P).

OLGA KARPENKO, Peer reviewed PHD article from http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua ... speaks on the relationship between Chakras, Hindu Philosophy, Astrology, and other Esotericism.

OLGA KARPENKO, from the KIEV SOCIONICS SCHOOL headed by ALEXANDER BUKALOV, discusses CHAKRAS, ASTROLOGY, and SOCIONICS as it relates to HINDUISM, NEW AGE PHILOSOPHY, and in a way consistent with SOMEONE WHO UNDERSTANDS AND BELIEVES IN HINDU OR SIMILAR PHILOSOPHY.

Source: (origional) http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/t/olly295.html

Source: (translation) http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/t/olly295.html&ei=cyK5SpvtG4eaMb-EudsP&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=1&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522%25D0%2595%25D1%2581%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B8%2B%25D0%25B6%25D0%25B5%2B%25D0%25B3%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B2%25D0%25BE%25D1%2580%25D0%25B8%25D1%2582%25D1%258C%2B%25D0%25BE%2B%25D1%2580%25D0%25B0%25D0%25B7%25D0%25BD%25D1%258B%25D1%2585%2B%25D0%25BF%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B0%25D1%2585%2B%25D1%2587%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BB%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B2%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BA%25D0%25B0%2B%25D0%25B2%2B%25D1%2582%25D0%25B5%25D1%2580%25D0%25BC%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B0%25D1%2585%2B%25D1%2582%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BB%2522%26hl%3Den

What are we talking about? 

В центре внимания соционики, безусловно, человек. The focus of Socionics, of course, man. Но в разных культурных традициях человека принято рассматривать с разных точек зрения. But in different cultural traditions of the people taken viewed from different points of view.

Традиция, обращающая основное внимание не столько на "информационное" сколько на энергетическое существо человека, выделяет определенные центры и уровни. Tradition, focuses less on "information" as to the nature of man power, allocates certain points and levels. Их число в различных источниках варьируется. Their number varies in different sources. Например: For example:

Эти центры, называемые в Индии Чакрами находятся не в нашем физическом теле, а в другом измерении, хотя концентрация в них бывает временами столь интенсивна, что у нас возникает острое локализованное физическое ощущение. These centers, called Chakras in India are not in our physical body, but in another dimension, although the concentration in them is at times so intense that we get a sharp localized physical sensation. На самом деле, некоторые из них довольно близки к различным нервным сплетениям нашего тела, хотя и не все. [Сатпрем] In fact, some of them quite close to the various nerve plexuses of the body, though not all. [Satprem] Если же говорить о разных планах человека в терминах тел или оболочек: физическое тело, эфирное, астральное, ментальное, каузальное, - то можно проследить некоторую закономерность: наличие в каждой оболочке "особых точек", определяющих, в конечном итоге, ход развития соответствующего тела. If we talk about the different plans in terms of human bodies or shells: physical body, etheric, astral, mental, causal - then we can trace a certain regularity: the presence in each shell of the "special points" that determine, ultimately, the course of development of the body . Так, если обратиться к физиологии, то развивающееся существо (особенно на ранних стадиях) обладает скрытыми (непроявленными) особыми точками, деятельность которых приводит к формированию органов и тканей тела. So, if we turn to the physiology, developing being (especially in the early stages) has a hidden (neuter) singular points, whose activity leads to the formation of organs and tissues of the body. Известен эксперимент, в котором на крыле развивающейся бабочки удалялась одна-единственная чешуйка - в центре будущего концентрического узора, и узор не просто нарушался, он вообще не возникал. Known experiment in which the developing butterfly wing in removed one single scale - in the center of the future of a concentric pattern, and the pattern is not just broken, it does not arise. Иммунологи пользуются гипотезой о существовании в человеческом организме единственной клетки, ответственной за процессы кроветворения и иммунитета. Immunologists favor of the hypothesis of the existence of the human body the only cells responsible for the processes of hematopoiesis and immunity. Б. В. Болотов говорит о клетке-лидере. BV Bolotov said of the cell leaders. Органы внутренней секреции и нервные сплетения являются центрами поддержания и регуляции функций нашего организма, подобно "особым точкам фазовой плоскости" нашего физического благополучия. Bodies glands and nerve plexus are the centers of maintaining and regulating the functions of our body, like the "special points of the phase plane" of our physical well-being. Аналогичную роль выполняют чакры в эфирном теле, определяя его "конфигурацию" и особенности функционирования. A similar role is performed chakras in the etheric body, defining its "configuration" and operating features.

Физиологи и анатомы изучают центры нашего физического тела. Physiology and anatomy study centers of our physical body. Тому, что сенситивы видят (ощущают) чакры и иные образования эфирного тела, мы уже не удивляемся. Tom, that sensitives can see (feel) the chakras and other education etheric body, we are not surprised. Несколько неожиданными оказались результаты опытов, проводимых А.В.Букаловым с сотрудниками [6], подтвердившие наличие неких энергетических образований, вполне соответствующих функциям информационного метаболизма. Several unexpected were the results of experiments conducted by AV Bukalova and colleagues [6], confirmed the presence of certain power structures, it is relevant functions of information metabolism. Более того, их локализация в проекции на физическое тело соответствует их положению в ментальном и витальном кольцах модели А: витальные функции в области живота (что, в свою очередь, соотносится с витальным планом), ментальные - в области шеи и головы. Moreover, their localization in the projection on the physical body corresponds to their position in the mental and vital rings model A: the vital functions in the stomach area (which, in turn, is related to the vital plane), mental - in the neck and head.

Можно представить такую многослойную, просвечивающуюся картинку, где каждый слой соответствует определенному уровню, где нервные сплетения, чакры, ФИМ, иные образования словно проявляют в различных фазовых плоскостях непроявленные, скрытые особенности, присущие тому ядру внутри нас - Я, душе, монаде, надевшей на себя все эти оболочки, эти все более и более плотные одежды, позволяющие воплотиться и существовать в различных пространствах, использовать их в качестве инструментов. I can imagine a multi-layered, translucent image, where each layer corresponds to a level where the nerve plexus chakra, FIM, and some education like a show in different phase planes undeveloped, hidden features inherent to the core inside of us - I, soul, monad, who had put on themselves, all these shells, these increasingly tight clothing, to translate and exist in different spaces, use them as tools.

Интересно, что янтры (символы), соответствующие чакрам, имеют в своем начертании некоторые нумерологические признаки - число лепестков, окружающих центральное поле. Interestingly, yantras (symbols), corresponding to the chakras are in their mark some numerological signs - the number of petals surrounding a central field. С этим числом можно соотнести некую классификацию по тому же количеству признаков (некоторую типологию), например, чакре муладхаре с 4-мя лепестками, находящейся в зоне физического, соответствует, в частности, типология 4-х темпераментов, идущая от Гиппократа (сангвиники, холерики, флегматики и меланхолики), или классификация по типам телосложения. With this number can be correlated to a certain classification of the same number of characters (some typology), such as chakra Muladhara with 4 petals, located in the zone of physical, corresponds, in particular, a typology of 4 temperaments coming from Hippocrates (sanguine, choleric , phlegmatic and melancholic), or classification by type of physique. Чакра анахата с 12-ю лепестками определяет астрологическую типологию по основанию 12 (зодиак, восточный круг животных), но существуют и менее используемые типологии по основанию 6 и 10. Anahata Chakra with 12 petals astrological defines a typology of the base 12 (zodiac, eastern range of animals), but there are less used the typology of the base 6 and 10. Чакра вишудха представляет для нас наибольший интерес, поскольку отвечает за возможность построения 16-ти типных классификаций, с одной из которых и работает соционика [4]. Chakra vishudha represents for us the greatest interest, as responsible for the possibility of constructing a 16-tipnyh classifications, one of them and works socionics [4]. Существует классификация и более плотного уровня по основанию 2 - разделение полов, присущее большинству биологических видов. There is a classification and a more dense level of the base 2 - the separation of the sexes, inherent in most species.

Каждая типология наиболее четко разграничивает понятия, касающиеся именно своего уровня, своего плана, и бывает беспомощной на других уровнях. Each typology is most clearly defines the concepts related to it on its own level, its plan, and is helpless on the other levels. Так, если астрологическая типология по основанию 12 по своей семантике привязывается к чакре анахате, то наиболее сильной ее стороной является выделение различных проявлений эмоциональной сферы человека, особенностей его витальных и астральных мотивов и устремлений. So if astrology typology of the base 12 and its semantics is tied to the Anahata Chakra, the most powerful of its side is a selection of different manifestations of the emotional sphere of rights, especially its vital and astral motives and aspirations. Физиологи любят работать с классическими темпераментами, выделяя их не только у людей, подмечая взаимосвязь функциональных особенностей организма с особенностями нервной деятельности (но физиологии нервной деятельности). Physiologists like to work with the classical temperaments, singling them not only from people noticing the relationship of the functional characteristics of an organism with features of neural activity (but the physiology of nervous activity). А соционика, обращаясь с понятиями, семантически близкими уровню чакры вишудха, наилучшим образом отличает нюансы ментальной (и все же более рассудочной) деятельности человека, значительно хуже описывая эмоциональную окраску его действий или физиологические особенности. A Socionics, referring to the concepts which are semantically close to the level of chakra vishudha that best distinguishes the nuances of mental (and still more rational) human activity, much less emotional in describing his actions or physiological features.

Типологии по разным основаниям в определенном смысле независимы друг от друга: встречаются "Габены" холерики и "Габены" флегматики, мужчины и женщины принадлежат к одним соционическим типам, под одним зодиакальным созвездием, даже в один и тот же день рождаются люди разных соционических типов и различных темпераментов. Typologies for different reasons, in a sense independent of each other: there are "Gabeny" choleric and Gabeny "phlegmatic, men and women belong to one of Socionics types under one zodiacal constellations, even in the same day are born people of different types and socionic different temperaments. И в то же время все эти уровни влияют друг на друга: особенности ментальной деятельности мужчин и женщин, а в конечном счете их соционические характеристики, различны, но общие типные свойства сохраняются; холерический темперамент представителей двух различных ТИМов может иметь одинаковые проявления; у родившихся в одном знаке зодиака черты сходства могут проявляться ярче их соционического (ментального) различия. And at the same time, all these levels affect each other: particularly the mental activity of men and women, and ultimately their socionic characteristics are different, but the general tipnye properties are preserved; choleric temperament representatives of two different TIMov may have similar manifestations, in-born One sign of the zodiac similarities may appear brighter than their socionic (mental) differences.

Итак, мы должны признать, что предмет соционики принадлежит совершенно определенному (и не наивысшему) уровню ментального плана. So, we must recognize that the subject of Socionics belongs absolutely certain (and highest) level of the mental plane. Это уровень речи, слуха, второй сигнальной системы, уровень собственно разума, мышления, коммуникации, общения. This level of speech, hearing, the second signal system, the level of your own mind, thinking, communication, communication. Соционика наиболее сильна в описании явлений именно этого среза сознательной деятельности человека. Socionics is strongest in describing the phenomena of this particular slice of conscious human activity. Существуют более высокие уровни: мышление не связанное с речью, невербальные каналы общения. There are higher levels: thinking is not associated with speech, nonverbal communication channels. Но поскольку наш разум пытается охватить и интегрировать все пласты нашей психики, то и соционика в своей модели пытается "открыть представительства" на всех уровнях сознания. But since our mind is trying to capture and integrate all the layers of our psyche, then Socionics in his model tries to "open a representation" at all levels of consciousness. И, возможно, роль таких "полпредств" отводится определенным местам функций в модели А. And, perhaps, the role of such "embassy" is given a certain duty functions in the model A.

Дело в том, что говоря о витальном кольце модели, о витальных функциях, мы практически не сталкиваемся с собственно витальными - подсознательными реакциями. The fact is that in talking about the vital ring model of the vital functions, we do not face the fact vital - subconscious reactions. Это скорее предсознание, некие смутно, но все же осознаваемые реакции. Rather predsoznanie, some vague, but still conscious reaction. Человек, даже не знакомый с соционикой, но имеющий высокий уровень рефлексии, способен вполне дать отчет о своих действиях и их мотивах по аспектам витальных функций. The man did not even familiar with socionics, but having a high level of reflection, is able to fully to account for their actions and their motives on aspects of vital functions. Но в таком анализе он все же не сможет сравниться с тем, у кого эти функции развиты в ментальных блоках. But such an analysis, he still can not be compared with those who have these features developed in the mental block. Если нам удастся услышать беседу двух таких людей, то, будучи достаточно чуткими, мы уловим, что за рамками разговора осталось очень много недосказанного (с ментального блока) и невыразимого (с блока витального). If we can hear the conversation of two such people, then, being sufficiently sensitive, we caught that in the framework of conversation left a lot of things to discuss (with the mental block) and ineffable (to block vital). Диалог дуалов, который в буквальном восприятии кажется не несущим информации, не стыкующимся ("про Фому и про Ерему"), тем и замечателен, что эти области недосказанного и невыразимого чудесным образом перетекают друг в друга, нет необходимости все проговаривать, достаточно лишь намекнуть, нет нужды все прорисовывать, достаточно лишь обозначить. Dialogue duals, which in the literal perception does not seem to carry information, not stick (about Thomas and about Eremu "), and the remarkable fact that these areas of unspeakable things to discuss and miraculously into one another, and no need to pronounce, it is sufficient only to hint do not need all the draws, we need only designate.

Но, обратившись к функциям ментального блока, мы замечаем, что и здесь все не так просто. But, turning to the functions of the mental block, we notice that here is not that simple. Об аспектах первой функции говорить не так уж легко - слишком свернута, спрессованна информация, ее просто не успеть развернуть за сколько-нибудь разумное время. On aspects of the first function to speak not so easy - too discouraged, spressovanna information, it simply did not have time to deploy for any reasonable time. Поэтому мы чаще оставляем больший кусок в тени, и только "тождик" или "родственник" способен его там рассмотреть: им-то слова не нужны, им самим приходится откалывать по камешку от той же глыбы. Therefore, we usually leave a bigger piece in the shadows, and only "tozhdik" or "relative" is able to consider it there: they are certain words are not needed, they themselves have to get off stone by stone from the same block.

Вторая функция оказывается в более выгодном положении. The second function is in a better position. Это уже не спутанный клубок ниток - за какой конец ни потяни - не знаешь, куда придешь. This is not the tangle of threads - for what end or pull - do not know where to come. Нет, тут аккуратненький моточек: покатился - вот тебе и дорожка. No, this is neat motochek: rolled - that is the path. "Хотите, мы все вам расскажем на этом языке, а не хотите - на том". "Do you want to, we will tell you in that language, but do not want to - on that. Словарный запас тут - подспорье в изложении - речь течет плавно, широко, полноводно. The vocabulary here - an aid in the presentation - it runs smoothly, well, deeper. И перевод с языка образов и смутных ощущений на собственно язык - прост и естествен. I translate from the language of images and a vague feeling in their own language - simple and natural.

А третья функция уже не дает такой свободы. A third function is no longer gave such freedom. Ее язык очень беден синонимами и оттенками, но зато предельно конкретен и точен - это словарь, а не поэма. Its language is very poor synonyms and shades, but very specific and accurate - this dictionary, not a poem. Лаконизм же четвертой функции способен другие ТИМы привести в замешательство. Conciseness is the fourth function is capable of other TIMy confusing.

Функции витального кольца еще труднее переводят свой "внутренний язык" в общепонятную речь. The functions of the vital ring even more difficult to translate their "inner language" in the commonly understood language.

Анализ этих явлений породил понятие размерности функции, или представление о разных векторах, составляющих механизм действия разных функций. Analysis of these phenomena has created the concept of dimension functions, or of the various vectors that make up the mechanism of action of different functions. Оба эти понятия достаточно изящно описывают разницу в восприятии различными ТИМами одних и тех же аспектов мира. Both of these concepts are quite elegantly describe the difference in the perception of different TIMami the same aspects of the world. Для нас же сейчас принципиально другое: на уровне нашей сознательной, мыслительной деятельности, на том уровне, которым, собственно, и занимается соционика, функции информационного метаболизма являются проекциями особых энерго-информационных образований различных уровней. For us it is fundamentally different: at the level of our conscious, intellectual activity, at a level which, in fact, engaged in Socionics, an information metabolism are the projections of the special energy-information education at various levels. Чем "глубже" ("ниже") этот уровень, тем "меньше размерность" функции или "слабее эта функция", чем "выше" (ближе к плоскости проекции), тем "больше размерность", тем "более развита" эта функция в ТИМе. What is "deeper" (below) this level, the "less than the dimension" function or "weaker than the function" rather than "above" (closer to the plane of projection), the "large dimension", the "more developed" this function in Thieme. Чем длиннее путь проекции, тем больше искажение, тем менее полно соционика описывает функционирование ТИМа по данному аспекту. The longer the projection path, the greater the distortion, the less full socionics describes the functioning of TIM on this aspect.

Итак, для нас принципиальными являются следующие моменты: Thus, the principal for us are the following:

1. 1. существуют различные планы человеческого сознания; There are various plans of human consciousness; 2. 2. уровни (и планы) взаимодействуют друг с другом, словно просвечивают один через другой; levels (and plans) interact with each other, like a translucent one over the other; 3. 3. соционика имеет дело с определенным пластом ментального плана; Socionics is dealing with a particular layer of the mental plane; 4. 4. на каждом уровне соответствующего плана существуют свои типологии; each level of the plan has its own typology; 5. 5. типы в типологии дискретны. types in the typology of discrete. Последнее положение требует некоторого пояснения. The latter provision requires some explanation. Человек (в норме) имеет генетически заданный пол, особенности телосложения и функционирования систем организма, которые выделяются методами физиологии. Person (normally) has a genetically defined sex, especially the constitution and functioning of body systems, which were isolated by physiology. Он рождается в определенный момент, и это задает его астральный тип. He was born at a certain point, and this gives him an astral type. Он принадлежит к одному типу ИМ. He belongs to one type of IM. И, при этом, он не исчерпывается ни одним из типологических описаний, ни какой бы то ни было их комбинацией. And, while it is not limited by any of the typological descriptions, or whatever it was their combination. Типы всех типологий суть координаты некоторого многомерного пространства, а человек представляется в этом пространстве некотором многомерным объемом, и все те заданности, о которых было сказано чуть выше, есть лишь проекции на соответствующие оси координат. Types of typologies are the coordinates of a multidimensional space, and the person appears in this space, some multi-dimensional volume, and all those assignments, which are mentioned just above, there is only a projection on the corresponding coordinate axis.

Длительное время обсуждается вопрос о возможности перехода из типа в тип. For a long time discussing the possibility of transition from type to type. Одна из сторон этого вопроса связана с особенностями любого рода проектирования: имея проекции на все координатные оси, мы рассматриваем лишь ту, которая, в силу выбранных нами критериев, имеет наибольшее значение. One aspect of this issue is connected with the peculiarities of any kind of design: having a projection on all axes, we consider only the one which, because of our chosen criteria that matter most. Чем более "объемный", сложный человек перед нами, тем менее полным будет такой взгляд на него. The more "volume", a complex man in front of us, the less complete will be a look at him. Другая сторона сродни проблеме вживания в образ у актеров. The other side is akin to the problem vzhivaniya in the image at the actors. Если у человека принадлежность, например, к астральному типу подчеркивает эмоциональность, то даже будучи логиком в соционической классификации, он чаще и проще, чем прочие логики, будет использовать эмоциональное воздействие на других (разного рода "этические штучки"). If a person belongs, such as the astral type emphasizes emotion, even as a logician in socionic classification, it is more likely and easier than other logic that will use the emotional impact on others (a different kind of "ethical things"). Если же на разных планах повторяются одни и те же черты (а наши возможности в их дифференциации ограничены хотя бы потому, что не безграничен наш язык), то такому человеку труднее "выскочить из типа", сыграть другой тип ИМ (хотя такая черта - способность к перевоплощению - тоже может стать типным признаком). If, however, on different planes repeated the same traits (and our ability to differentiate is limited, if only because that is not infinite, our language), then such a person difficult to "jump out of the type" to play a different type of infarction (although such a feature - the ability to to reincarnation - may also become tipnym sign).

В порядке отступления. By way of derogation. Очень интересными бывают попытки актера сыграть человека другого ТИМа (надо сказать, что, к чести режиссеров, они довольно точно подбирают на роли именно нужные типы, в тех ситуациях, где типные особенности достаточно выражены). Very interesting are the attempts of another actor to play a human TIM (I should say that, to the credit of directors, they fairly accurately pick up on the role of types is needed in situations where tipnye features quite pronounced). Зрителю, в случае несовпадения, часто приходит в голову, что события так тоже могли бы развиваться, но в их ходе есть некоторая натяжка, искусственность, игра. The audience, if different, often comes to mind, so that events could also develop, but in their course have some stretch, the artificiality of the game. Еще интереснее, когда, например, пьесу, написанную о героях из одной квадры, ставит другая (еще лучше - ортогональная) квадра. Even more interesting, when, for example, a play written about the heroes of a quadra, put another (even better - orthogonal) squares. В этих ситуациях постановщики часто идут к явному гротеску, шаржированию, иначе очень трудно осмыслить мотивы и логику поступков героев. In these situations, directors often come to a clear grotesque, sharzhirovaniyu, otherwise very difficult to comprehend the motives and logic of the actions of heroes. Да, достаточно лабильный, способный к перевоплощению, вживанию в образ, наблюдательный человек может изобразить, сыграть реакции, присущие другому ТИМу, но это лишь игра, которая не может длиться вечно. Yes, quite labile, capable of reincarnation, vzhivaniyu in the image, observant person can portray, to play the reaction specific to another Tim, but it's only a game that can not last forever.

В этом свете можно рассмотреть и проблему подтипов: не пытаемся ли мы очень часто выдать за подтипы ТИМов это "просвечивание" других уровней, ведь оно неизбежно будет сказываться и на построении соционических отношений. In this light, we can consider the problem of subtypes: do not try we often pass for subtypes TIMov a "translucence" of other levels, because it will inevitably have implications on the construction of socionic relations. Астральные влияния уже рассматриваются (Шульман) и существенно дополняют соционический анализ при разборе конкретных, жизненных ситуаций. Astral effects already discussed (Shulman) and substantially complement socionic analysis when examining specific, everyday situations. Также важным представляется аспект доминирования различных центров. Also important is the aspect of the dominance of the various centers.

Наблюдения показывают, что у дуальных супружеских пар с одним доминирующим центром процесс дуализации может столкнуться с проблемами на других, недоминантных планах. Observations show that the dual couples with one dominant center of the process of dualization may face problems in the other, nedominantnyh plans. Так, например, для пары с доминантой третьего (ментального) центра может оказаться затрудненным собственно эмоциональное общение, - люди жалуются, что при полном понимании друг друга не находят живого естественного отклика, ищут большей теплоты и задушевности. For example, for couples with a dominant third (mental) of the center may be impeded proper emotional communication - people complain that a full understanding of each other are not living a natural response, seek a greater warmth and intimacy. При доминировании второго (витального) центра могут не сразу гладко складываться именно физические, близкие взаимодействия, но имеет место глубокая душевная, эмоциональная связь, сохраняющаяся даже на расстоянии. With the dominance of the second (vital), the center could not immediately smooth shape is natural, close interaction, but there is a profound spiritual, emotional connection that even at a distance. В паре с доминантой первого (физического) центра часто неудовлетворенными оказываются ментальные потребности: трудно понять интересы, цели и дальние планы другого, хотя повседневная жизнь складывается благополучно. In tandem with a dominant first (physical) center are often unmet mental needs: it is difficult to understand the interests, goals and long-range plans for another, although daily life consists safely. Если же у дуалов доминируют разные центры, то картина иногда, как ни странно, смягчается, не находящие отклика внутри диады запросы обращаются вовне - к родным, друзьям, знакомым, социуму; если же этого "экстравертирования" не происходит, то отношения могут, напротив, резко обостриться. If you have duals dominated by different centers, the picture sometimes, oddly enough, is softened which have no response within a dyad inquiries turn outward - to family, friends, society, but if this "ekstravertirovaniya" does not occur, then the relationship may, on the contrary dramatically worsen. И все эти варианты - лишь оттенки дуальных отношений, которые партнерами расцениваются как вполне хорошие, но не идеальные. And all these options - only shades of dual relationships that partners are regarded as quite good, but not ideal. Реальный человек всегда выдает помимо сигналов собственно соционического уровня (чего ждет его дуал) прочие сигналы, определяемые, например, его астрологическим типом, темпераментом или иными особенностями. A real man always gives out signals in addition to the actual socionic level (which is waiting for its dual), other signals are defined, for example, his astrological type, temperament or other characteristics.

Возможно, что собственно ментальные подтипы, т.е. It is possible that the actual mental subtypes, ie связанные с особенностями деятельности разума, мы видим гораздо реже, чем все вышеперечисленные варианты - целостная природа человека неизмеримо богаче любого набора классифицирующих признаков. associated with the peculiarities of the mind, we see much less often than all of the above options - holistic nature of man is immeasurably richer than any set of classifying attributes.

Если многообразие проявлений различных людей в одном и том же типе столь велико, то закономерен вопрос: для чего же нужны эти типы и не было ли их выделение результатом некоего произвольного волевого (или мыслительного) усилия. If the manifold manifestations of different people in the same type of so great a logical question: why did we need these types and whether their selection was the result of a random strong-willed (or thinking) effort. То, что методы факторного анализа подтверждают наличие 16-ти типов личности, не устраняет вопроса: "зачем?". The fact that the methods of factor analysis confirm the presence of 16 personality types, does not eliminate the question: "Why?". Вероятно, затем, чтобы каждый тип выполнял свою особую, специфическую роль. Perhaps, then, that for each type, its special, specific role. Откуда же могла возникнуть такая специализация? Whence could such a specialization? Нельзя ли сказать, что некоторые из этих ролей лучше (нужнее, полезней, удобней), а другие - хуже? Can we say that some of these roles better (get a useful, convenient), and others - worse?

Вернемся опять к шкале уровней и типологий. Returning again to the scale levels and typologies. Первичное разбиение на 2: "+" и "-", мужское и женское. Primary partition into 2: "+" and "-" male and female. Выкрики сторонников (сторонниц) эмансипации или феминизации будут слышны еще долго. Shouts supporters (supporters), or the feminization of emancipation will be heard for a long time. Но вопрос оказывается более глубоким: признавая равноправие, равноценность, равнозначность полов, нельзя закрывать глаза на существование асимметрии. But the question is more profound: recognizing equality, equivalence, equivalence of the sexes, one can not ignore the existence of asymmetry. Известно: на создание женской гаметы идет значительно больше энергии, чем для мужской; мужских зигот достоверно больше чем женских; мальчиков рождается 105 на сотню девочек, но в дальнейших возрастах число уравнивается, а после 60 лет перевес женщин заметен уже и без статистики. It is well known: the creation of female gametes is much more energy than for men, male zygotes significantly more than women, 105 boys are born for a hundred girls, but in later ages the number of calls, but after 60 years, the preponderance of women is evident and no statistics. Что это, если не яркое выражение явной асимметрии? What is it, if not clearly expressed a clear asymmetry?

Иной пример: меланхоликов меньше чем флегматиков, холериков или сангвиников. A different example: less than melancholic phlegmatic, choleric or sanguine. Еще пример: и в течение года, и по месяцам, и в течение суток существуют подъемы и спады рождаемости. Another example: in the year, and for months, and within days there are ups and downs of fertility. Анализировались даты рождения многих видных ученых - явная асимметрия в распределении по годам и в течение года. We analyzed birth dates of many eminent scientists - is a clear asymmetry in the distribution by year and within a year. Да и в народной медицине накоплены многочисленные рекомендации, привязанные к различным временным периодам. Yes, and in folk medicine has accumulated numerous recommendations that are linked to different time periods. Не известны аналогичные исследования в типологии по основанию 16 - они были бы чрезвычайно трудоемкими, но что подобная асимметрия может иметь место - вполне допустимо предположить. There are no known similar studies in the typology of the base of 16 - they would be extremely time consuming, but that this asymmetry can take place - it is quite possible to assume.

Все типы равны, но их роли асимметричны. All types are equal, but their roles are asymmetrical.

В нашем асимметричном (в физическом смысле) мире социон также имеет асимметричную "конфигурацию" и потому роли одних типов проявлены, а других - скрыты, находятся словно по ту сторону нашей реальности, и в чисто социальном смысле непроявлены. In our asymmetric (in the physical sense) the world socion also has an asymmetric "configuration" and therefore the role of one kind of manifest, and others - are hidden, are like on the other side of our reality, and in a purely social sense neproyavleny. Подтверждение этому мы обнаруживаем в совершенно неожиданной области - в магической практике мексиканских индейцев фигурирует Команда Нагваля из 16-ти членов, описание ролей которых удивительно совпадает с соционическими описаниями ТИМов [11]. Confirmation of this we find in an unexpected area - in the magical practices of Mexican Indians appeared Nagual team of 16 members, a description of roles which surprisingly coincides with the descriptions socionic TIMov [11]. Цель, к которой они стремятся, может быть достигнута только совместным действием [15]. The purpose for which they seek can only be achieved by the joint action [15].

Признавая за каждым типом ИМ особую, выделенную роль не только в соционе, но и в Мире, нельзя не задаться вопросом о тех механизмах, которые наделяют человека ТИМом. In recognition of each type of them by themselves, highlighted the role not only in socion, but in the world, it is impossible not to wonder about the mechanisms that confer rights Tim. То, что новорожденный обладает определенным, но еще не проявленным, не обнаруживаемым обычными методами, ТИМом, было убедительно доказано в работе Букалова [2]. The fact that the newborn has a certain, but not yet manifested, not detectable by conventional methods, Tim, has been convincingly demonstrated in Bukalova [2]. На основании анализа исследований С.Грофа, в ней сделаны выводы, что фиксация в памяти, в психике индивидуума определенных фаз его перинатального развития является решающим фактором в формировании его типа ИМ. Based on analysis of studies S. Grof, it concluded that the fixation in the memory, in the psyche of the individual certain phases of its prenatal development is a crucial factor in shaping the type of IM. Но должен существовать какой-то механизм, выбирающий те моменты из 9-месячной истории развития плода, которые окажутся самыми важными, самыми "запоминающимися". But there must be some mechanism that selects the points of the 9-month history of fetal development, which would be the most important, the most "memorable." Особенно странными при этом кажутся факты, что ни объективный ход беременности (анализируемый с медицинской точки зрения), ни самочувствие матери не отражают сколько-нибудь полно (за исключением случаев значительных отклонений от нормы) состояние психики плода. Especially when it seems strange that neither the objective course of pregnancy (analyzed from the medical point of view), or being a mother does not reflect any complete (except in cases of significant deviation from the norm) state of mind of the fetus. Остается предположить, что уже при зачатии задается некоторый кармический сценарий, который вначале "проигрывается" в перинатальном периоде, определяя узловые его моменты, а затем становится скрытым движителем всей дальнейшей жизни человека. One could assume that even at conception is given some karmic script that initially "played" in the perinatal period, determining its nodal points, and then becomes a hidden engine of the entire future of human life. Подтверждением этому могут служить (пока немногочисленные) примеры совпадения целых "кармических блоков" в судьбах людей, принадлежащих к одному ТИМу. Proof of this can be (so far few) examples of coincidence entire "karmic blocks in the fate of people belonging to the same Tim.

К этому же вопросу можно подойти и с другой стороны, используя "сценарный анализ" Э.Берна [10]. The same question can be approached from the other side, using the "scenario analysis" Eric Berne [10]. Есть факты, говорящие о том, что сценарии различных людей одного ТИМа содержат очень похожие сцены, картины, действия. There are facts which show that the scenario of different people one TIM contain very similar scenes, pictures, actions. Если еще учесть, что мировая драматургия знает лишь 16 различных сюжетов, а все ее разнообразие - различные их производные и комбинации, то мысль о сценарии жизни и карме ТИМа покажется не столь уж нелепой. If you still consider that the world knows drama, only 16 different subjects, and all its diversity - the various derivatives and combinations, then thought about the scenario of life and the karma of TIM did not seem quite so ridiculous.

И тут в наших рассуждениях можно сделать еще один шаг: осознание своего типа ИМ, освобождение от жизненного сценария и искупление кармы суть проблемы взаимосвязанные. And here in our reasoning can make one more step: awareness of its type infarction, freedom from life-script and the redemption of karma are interrelated problems.

Мы рассматривали типологии на различных уровнях сознания и при этом обошли супраментальный уровень. We examined the typology of the different levels of consciousness and thus bypassed supramental level. Вопрос о существовании какой-либо типологии этого уровня представляется чрезвычайно тонким - о закономерностях этого плана можно судить лишь со слов тех, кто достиг этих высот. The question of the existence of a typology of this level is extremely thin - about the laws of this plan can only be judged from the words of those who have reached these heights. Но, вероятно, некие различия есть и там. But perhaps there are some differences there. Спускаясь же на низшие уровни, просветленные (аватары, риши, йоги...) неизбежно пользуются одним из существующих на этом уровне каналов передачи информации (на соционическом уровне - это ТИМ, на физическом - конкретное физическое тело). Going down the same at lower levels, enlightened (avatars, Rishi, yoga ...) necessarily enjoy one of the existing at this level of information channels (for socionic level - a TIM, the physical - the specific physical body). И человеку, чтобы открыть путь, необходимо осознать все инструменты, которыми он пользуется на различных уровнях взаимодействия с Миром. And the man to open the way to realize all of the tools which he uses at different levels of interaction with the world.

Enough

That's enough. I'm going to recommend that Reuben Mcnew be blocked from editing this page. He is plainly a PoV warrior. I am tired of reverting him. It's clear he's obsessed and is NEVER going to stop. Tcaudilllg (talk) 17:31, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

The legitimate peer reviewed and phd sources I posted on socionics speak for themselves. You don't even have a leg to stand upon with your claims, and blocking me from editing wikipedia isn't going to take away the legitimate peer reviewed and phd sources that have shown to exist. Are you going to just forget you saw those sources, hide that they exist and then try to claim otherwise after I am gone? I bet you would. --Rmcnew (talk) 18:59, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, because they aren't the slightest bit notable. It's a pity, Rmcnew, that you can't distinguish the notable from the non-notable. Are you obsessed with the unimportant? Tcaudilllg (talk) 21:13, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose you are also going to call the information that was taken from the russian wikipedia article as non-notable. I suppose you can even call a PHD peer review article non-notable. In fact, you can call anything non-notable. How about this ... when in doubt, just call anything you don't want in the english socionics article "non-notible", bullshit around, and hope that you can sneakily convince a wikipedia administrator to isolate your opposition out for you so you can reverse positive credible changes in the article, and fill it chock full of some "origional research" marketing bullshit that isn't even proper socionics, because you don't want people to know that socionics is what socionics is - And that is exactly why it is correct to replace the "origional research" in the english wikipedia article with the sourced information in the russian socionics article! It is chock full of this "hey look socionics is totally like Carl Jung and MBTI" marketing bullshit that not only doesn't belong in the article, it is skewing the article away from representing legitimate socionics, which totally deserves to be represented in this article over that bullcrap. Especially when the legitimate socionics involves articles from peer reviewed and phd verified sources, which are notable for that very reason and belong in the article. That information doesn't deserve exclusion simply because you don't want that in the article from a marketing standpoint. That's bullshit. And for that reason, your claim of non-notability is bullshit. Knock it off. --Rmcnew (talk) 21:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

And besides what I wrote above, the majority of your reversions were unjustified for your reasons stated, especially in light of removeing valid information with PHD and Peer review justified sources, that comes from official socionic schools. Calling someone a "filthy pigs" doesn't take the notable PHD and Peer review away from the people who publish these articles, no matter what the content and whether you agree with it or not. That information deserves to be there. Just stop being unneutral and illogical about it. Thanks. --Rmcnew (talk) 21:48, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Esotericism

"Socionic theorists have considered certain comparisons between aspects of hindu philosophy, the information elements and chakras as they relate to the central nervous system scientific. In socionics, (according to this article) the sociotypes, as they relate to chakras, can be studied as a means to understand disease, and thus find cures to disease and to create health. This is both the scientific position of the founder (according to this article)Aušra Augustinavičiūtė and also the official position (according to this article) of the Socionics Research Institute in Moscow, Russia, and even discussed aspects of these deductive scientific methods in her first book, "The Dual Nature of Man". Filatova, (according to article) refers to the interaction between psychic energy, chakras, and the socionics elements as "Био-энергетика", which translates to bio-energy. This corresponds to the same terminology used in hinduism and some new age theories, when referenceing chakras."

The links are not direct sources, and http://ru.laser.ru/authors/kudr/index.html doesn't seem to be working (the video isn't loading). MichaelExe (talk) 01:17, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

To my knowledge the only one that could be considered a non-direct source is the one from socionics.org that states, in the heading, that it came from another socionics journal. To my knowledge the other ones origionated where they are located. What exactly are you considering a direct versus non-direct source? --Rmcnew (talk) 02:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Most of them take their information from books; the direct source is the book. They're all basically essays, and it doesn't say much about the authors of the pages (if anything at all). MichaelExe (talk) 19:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe manning had made a comment about the PHD credentials of Tatyana Profieka. I considered giving you and answer here, but I would be basically saying the same thing that I told him about sources.

I suppose that I could tell you that Dmitri Lytov put a couple of his later articles on other socionics websites and in webforums after he sold his socioniko website, and that Filatova, who did alot of work and research with face typeing, is a poor and elderly russian pensioner living off of the government, who writes socionics books and contributes to socionic journals in her spare time. Naturally, telling anyone this wouldn't be any different than when Tcaulldig tried to justify his origional research by saying he agrees with Gulenko personally. So, you should probably just go see what I wrote to manning considering the notability of socionics of wikipedia. I also agree that many of the supposed PHDs in the socionics world may not be credentialed. I generally have doubts that there are many sources out there that would live up to wikipedia standards (of course, that has not stopped me from looking for those sources). --Rmcnew (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

MichaelExe, why are you continuing to discuss this with Rmcnew? Tcaudilllg (talk) 12:20, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Probably because they know that the only thing you are capable of is personal attacks and unjustified reversions. You don't seem to do much else other than these sort of unconstructive actions against other editors. You don't seem to have the ability to constructivelly look for appropiate sources either, just spam the main article with unjustified reverts and the talk page with rediculous and libelous complaints. That's all you do all the time. --Rmcnew (talk) 18:15, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

About the revert

I am in favor of several things that have been added to the article.

First of all, the Russian explanations are good. I maintain that the information metabolism section is needed as I wrote it with the intent of explaining precisely, without the use of unqualified assumptions, what information metabolism is. It is known that Augusta saw a person's type as unrelated to the work they preferred, although I will have to hunt the link to the letter where she expresses this view. (it's somewhere on Socioniko).

I believe Rmcnew should not be allowed to edit the article and hence I will revert any edits he makes from here on. However things like the "series on" template may be acceptable to me if they are inserted by other users. No information on esoterism is allowed because it is not notable. If it were notable at all, it would as an example of how a promising infant science can be hijacked by people looking to advance esoteric beliefs.

Rmcnew believes he can muddy the waters by making constructive edits while inserting his beliefs in them -- "in exchange for my effort, you must accept the presence of esoteric content." Or alternatively, "if I make constructive edits, then that will give me cover against my critics." There is nothing he can offer that we can't do ourselves. In my view Rmcnew is a troll who should not be fed. I recommend ignoring him completely. Tcaudilllg (talk) 14:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Tcaulldig, you have continually failed to post sources, while making ad hominem personal remarks. You keep talking about blocking me from wikipedia, and when I challenge you to post sources, you don't post them. You keep calling legitimate things concerning socionics theory 'non-notable', when those things are essential parts of socionics theory. And you also keep making unconstructive rereverts, that arn't really justified short of calling names and using dysphemisms. This is completely childish on your part. --Rmcnew (talk) 16:05, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

And you should stop saying that I should be blocked from the article, because it is probably just going to backfire on you and get us both locked out. Considering that you keep making these unconstructive reverts that are for ad hominem reasons. Personal attacks are not reasons to make reverts. Stop immediatelly. --Rmcnew (talk) 16:13, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Tatyana Prokofieva

Hi - I'm am still working through the extensive issues that surround this article so as to conduct the mediation. I have a question though...

This article seems to rely on the work of Tatyana Prokofieva to some extent. The article states that "Tatyana Prokofieva has a "recognized Ph.D.". However I searched for some evidence of Tatyana Prokofieva's credentials and could not find them. What institute awarded her the Ph.D.? Manning (talk) 15:26, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you manning. Her credentials are listed in english on the Research institute website. http://www.socionics.ru/index_eng.htm ... the institutes e-mail address is listed at the bottom. It might be more efficent for you to directly ask questions through the institutes e-mail address: socionics@socionics.ru ... --Rmcnew (talk) 16:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I've checked there and there is only a link to an "About Us" which doesn't work. An email response does not count as a reliable source, sadly. It is also possible to get Ph.D.s from all sorts of establishments that are not accredited to award them, for example this Californian school which offers "Ph.D.s" in Homeopathy. (Their fine print does admit that they are not accredited, however). I'm not saying her degree is fraudulent, however I have thus far been unable to identify where she submitted her thesis and which authority granted her doctorate. Generally even people who got there degrees decades ago in Soviet Russia are fairly easy to verify. Manning (talk) 16:41, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Her PHD is in socionics, so it would be through an institution that recognizes socionics. I would agree with your speculation that her PHD may not be credited through a recognized institution. In fact, socionics through that institute actually has alot in common with homeopathy as far as alternative methods goes, ironically.

As far as sources go according to wikipedia standards, socionics barely has enough notability to maintain a page on wikipedia, at least not without using alot of second hand or shady sources. That is why I stated that it would be right for the wikipedia page to be deleted when it was nominated for such, and also because the other editors were against representing legitimate socionics (or think it is something it is not), and wanted to twist it into something else altogether on the article, cutting out legitimate historical parts of the theory because of their own prejudices, meaningwhile turning it into some amalgimation that couldn't convey socionics neutrally. I have tried my best to represent the parts that these editors want to wrongly exclude from the article. Socionics would not be socionics without noteing this information.

If you want to have PHD peer reviewed articles, than you would have to recognize that people like Alexander Bukalov and Tatyana Prokofieva have PHDs that may not be certified by any credited authority. In fact, she may have gotten her PHD through another socionics institute or through someone else in the same institute. I wouldn't know how to verify this short of clarifying through written inquirey to the individuals or the institutes themselves. I would say that Tatyana Prokofieva's PHD isn't any more credible than Alexander Bukalovs in this regards. --Rmcnew (talk) 16:53, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

As far as any source of credible PHD authority for socionics, the supposed PHDs within the institutions are it. I think there are a few english speaking people who have PHDs in psychology who know about socionics, and talk about it; though, the same people don't seem to have written or said much publically that can be referenced. I agree that the PHDs in the socionics world may not have any more force than say a non-accredited PHD degree in homeopathy, accupuncture, or some metaphysical school. If socionics is to be included on wikipedia at all, those are the PHDs. Take it or leave it. There is not much more notability for socionics in general elsewise. --Rmcnew (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

PhDs in socionics are now awarded by the International Institute of Socionics. To my knowledge it is not an accredited instution of education, but established a council to award "degrees" within the community in order to help protect the professional community from quacks. The history and terms of these degrees is described at the Institute's website. FYI the Institute is not a physical location, but is a lofty name for a group of socionists that carry out individual research and produce regular publications who are trying to add some legitimacy to the field of socionics. It receives no government funding and is not part of the official academic establishment of Ukraine. --Rick DeLong (talk) 14:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Tcaulldig making unconstructive reverts

This is completely childish. Tcaulldig keeps makeing unconstructive reverts with reasons that are purely personal attacks. I have challenged him again and again to post socionic sources and he fails to to post any. He has no credible backup for any of his claim, while I have made a continued effort to find credible sources, and to rewrite the article accordingly. I have come to the conclusion that tcaulldig just wants to (passivelly) troll around and make unconstructive reverts, for reasons that equate to unnecessary personal attacks. His reverts and personal attacks should stop immediately. In fact, that is about all he has done for the past couple of months. --Rmcnew (talk) 16:32, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Isn't calling one's behaviour childish or like that of a troll equally a personal attack? MichaelExe (talk) 13:20, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, correct ... it could be considered a personal attack when directed towards a person. However, the difference is that I am specifically speaking about tcaulldig's attitude and behavior (in this perceived attack from me), where tcaulldig has been making attacks against my very person, as a reason unto itself. It is purely his attitude that stinks. I think he should be allowed to stay as an editor so long as he behaves, and that would mean actually helping the rest of us for once, instead of complaints, personal attacks, and reverts. He seems to think that his opinion is better than everyone elses, even for the sake of wikipedias rules, which isn't helping the cause of the article in the slightest. He obviously doesn't want me editing the article, and he has obviously said alot of pretentious libelous crap as a poorly logical attempt to justify why. It is hard to deal with that. --Rmcnew (talk) 22:00, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Cannot have "chakras" and "scientific" in the same context

Hmmm... the current version contains the following sentence:

Socionic theorists have considered certain speculative comparisons between aspects of hindu philosophy, the information elements and chakras as they relate to the central nervous system scientific. In socionics, the sociotypes, as they relate to chakras, can be studied as a means to understand disease, and thus find cures to disease and to create health. This is both the scientific position of the founder Aušra Augustinavičiūtė and also the official position (according to this article) of the Socionics Research Institute in Moscow, Russia.

You cannot have anything that gives the impression that any research involving "chakras" is in any way scientific. As chakras are a religious concept and are not scientifically verifiable, anything that builds on the use of chakras is by default, equally unscientific.

Please consult the disputes and ultimate consensus achieved at homeopathy for more about this issue.

We would need to either label this entire subject as a new-age type system and remove all references to scientific validity, or else relocate references to such non-scientific statements to a distinct area, separate then from the science relevant work and disallow anything that implies there is scientific validity to such concepts. Manning (talk) 18:41, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

You are correct that this would be the case, in the western world. Alot of what socionics calls scientific is not really scientific in the western sense. That is exactly what I have been saying over and over and over again. Hindu comparisons and chakras as they relate to health and healing is a part of socionics as it came from ausura augusta in what was a considered by her a "scientific" sense, as well as the development of protoscientific methods that could be considered alternative medicine. When one looks at how the methods were done by early socionists, that obviously wasn't scientific in a western sense, even though some of the proponents may have tried to claim such --Rmcnew (talk) 18:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

That's fine, but it can't go in Wikipedia in that form. The Arbitration Committee ruled on this a few years back (see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience. Hence we have a strict usage of the word "scientific" and only the western version is ever allowed. See Wikipedia:Scientific_consensus. Manning (talk) 18:59, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Changed the statement to "While considered unscientific by western standards, socionic theorists have considered certain speculative comparisons between aspects of hindu philosophy, the information elements and chakras as they relate to the central nervous system" and replaced "scientific position" with "position". --Rmcnew (talk) 23:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

If you're going to include that, then you're going to have to mention that such links are a point of serious contention. That will at least allow the scientific socionists to distance themselves from the non-scientifics. Tcaudilllg (talk) 14:55, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

What would be the consensus of the mathematical theories in socionics theory? The relationships as came from Reinin are basically just logic gates with the assumption that there is "energy between two different types of people" according to sociotype. So, basically some mathematical laws (booleon algebra) used to direct "electric currents" are assumed in socionics to exist in one to one curcumstances between two people, correspond to "information metabolism", and therefore influence mental perceptions and actions from their types by relationship. That is both esoteric and pseudoscientific in my opinion. Ausura Augusta even authored a whole book on the theory by Reinin, stateing that the mathematical deductions he made on socionics fits with the theory. This means that if the intertype relationships are to be included in the socionics article, then this information should also go along with other esoteric and protoscientific stances that are also a part of socionics theory. They came from Reinin's mathematics.

Basically, there really is not much that can be claimed empirical or scientific according to a western standard. Whether that means a movement to a categorization of socionics as a new age system, I don't know ... I do know that there is a bunch of unscientific nonsense in socionics theory that people are trying to claim is either scientific and/or turn into something scientific according to a western standard, but I do not really understand how that can be done short of abandoning socionics for other theories. There is just too much at its base that doesn't comform to that standard. --Rmcnew (talk) 19:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, so now mathematics is also esoteric? Tcaudilllg (talk) 18:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

taking the statements made above

Much of socionics would fit under the current category. Giving the time cube as an example, Ausura Augusta and some other proponents claim that socionics is scientific, when there are obvious non-scientific things about the theory, would put socionics in the same category as the time cube.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience#Obvious_pseudoscience

The scientific norms of the East

This is the first I've heard of the East's scientific norms being different from the West's. I think we should request of McNew a reliable source in that respect. Tcaudilllg (talk) 11:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

source 1

Source: http://www.psych.utah.edu/gordon/Classes/Psy4905Docs/PsychHistory/Cards/Logic.html

Logical arguments are usually classified as either 'deductive' or 'inductive'.

Deduction: In the process of deduction, you begin with some statements, called 'premises', that are assumed to be true, you then determine what else would have to be true if the premises are true. For example, you can begin by assuming that God exists, and is good, and then determine what would logically follow from such an assumption. You can begin by assuming that if you think, then you must exist, and work from there. In mathematics you can begin with some axioms and then determine what you can prove to be true given those axioms. With deduction you can provide absolute proof of your conclusions, given that your premises are correct. The premises themselves, however, remain unproven and unprovable, they must be accepted on face value, or by faith, or for the purpose of exploration.

Induction: In the process of induction, you begin with some data, and then determine what general conclusion(s) can logically be derived from those data. In other words, you determine what theory or theories could explain the data. For example, you note that the probability of becoming schizophrenic is greatly increased if at least one parent is schizophrenic, and from that you conclude that schizophrenia may be inherited. That is certainly a reasonable hypothesis given the data. Note, however, that induction does not prove that the theory is correct. There are often alternative theories that are also supported by the data. For example, the behavior of the schizophrenic parent may cause the child to be schizophrenic, not the genes. What is important in induction is that the theory does indeed offer a logical explanation of the data. To conclude that the parents have no effect on the schizophrenia of the children is not supportable given the data, and would not be a logical conclusion.

Deduction and induction by themselves are inadequate for a scientific approach. While deduction gives absolute proof, it never makes contact with the real world, there is no place for observation or experimentation, no way to test the validity of the premises. And, while induction is driven by observation, it never approaches actual proof of a theory. The development of the scientific method involved a gradual synthesis of these two logical approaches.

For a more comprehensive discussion of deduction, and induction, read the relevant sections of the book by Copi, referenced on this page."

source 2

Source: http://www.medicalacupuncture.org/aama_marf/journal/vol17_1/article2.html

In contrast, within the Western scientific tradition, theory plays a much more central role. The scientific method relies on theory to direct the gathering of data through experimental investigations, which then are used to further refine the theory. This is principally a deductive approach. As Thomas Kuhn points out, the theoretical paradigm is so important that data that do not conform to the theory are simply disregarded as anomalous.

The Chinese mind, conversely, is much more inductively oriented, holding the data to be of central importance. The data points in Chinese medicine are each unique patient encounter, the symptoms, course of action, and the final outcome. Each unique patient encounter is truth, and therefore takes precedence over any theoretical concern.

You expect us to believe a source from an acupuncture website? Tcaudilllg (talk) 22:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

The article was written by a medical doctor familiar with acupuncture and eastern medicine. And the link comes from a .org, which is typically more reliable than a .com --Rmcnew (talk) 22:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I see what's going on. So be it. Tcaudilllg (talk) 00:01, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

source 3

We note that in this chain of reasoning we assume an invariable correlation between what is inferred and the sign. Thus, in our example, we take it as a fact that a siren is always associated with an ambulance or a police car. On what basis do we take this to be case? On the basis of numerous past experiences. In other words, the reasoning based on inference is not an Aristotelian syllogism which is purely deductive, but an application of inductive reasoning. Inductive logic is at the root of empirical science.

Source: http://www.metanexus.net/Magazine/tabid/68/id/9287/Default.aspx

source 4

Is Science Entirely Inductive?

On the previous page, you learned that although mathematics is deductive in nature - that is, logical proof is the only acceptable evidence of truth - the process of mathematics is not entirely deductive. It is also true that although science is inductive by nature - observations are the only acceptable evidence of truth - the process of science can be deductive!

In particular, physicists make extensive use of mathematics as a powerful theoretical tool. Theoretical physicists often construct theories as "mathematical models" deductively, starting with assumptions about the inner workings of stars or atoms, for instance, and then working out the mathematical consequences of their assumptions. An essential difference between a mathematician and a theoretical physicist is that the physicist uses mathematics as a reasoning tool. The success of the mathematical model depends on how well its results agree with observations of nature - if they do not agree the physicist knows that this means that her assumptions - not the observations - need to be adjusted.

Source: http://www.batesville.k12.in.us/Physics/PhyNet/AboutScience/Inductive.html

See also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetico-deductivism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction

http://faculty.unlv.edu/beisecker/Courses/Phi-101/Induction.htm

I know it's against the rules but...

I'm going to be citing Viktor Gulenko's blog in this article. Technically his blog is an auxiliary to his published work. It also explains why I worded the information metabolism section as I did.

If there are any claims that the blog is an unreliable source, I will ignore them. Tcaudilllg (talk) 12:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

This is much worse than what Rmcnew has been doing. At least he tries to look for better sources and recognizes the one's that are unreliable when pointed out. You jump in the middle of everything, starting with the same type of unreliable sources as Rmcnew did (much earlier on) and immediately claim you'll ignore anyone's arguments against your edits. I give him credit for working with us. MichaelExe (talk) 13:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

You'd much sooner be banned from the article than him with this against you. MichaelExe (talk) 13:31, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Your judgment is flawed. You are unable to appreciate Rmcnew's zealousness for his cause. And if you think for one second that socionics has anything to do with esoterism, then you need a reality check. Chakras had no more to do with socionics than highly subjective interpretations of passages from Jung's Collected Works. A source of inspiration alone. It's like saying relativity is about cows flying at lightspeed just because Einstein says a dream about such inspired him.

I'll cite from Gulenko's blog if I please. There are citations from John Romero's blog in his article, so I'll be damned if I can't quote excerpts from the Humanitarian Socionics website. Check your sources next time, sir. Besides Wikipedia's blog policy is in need of revision: the public is clearly moving towards blogs as a medium for reliable source publishing. As I recall there are citations from the Huffington Post all over the political articles. Are you to "clean" those up too? Think about the spirit of the law, not the letter. Tcaudilllg (talk) 16:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll remove the citations from John Romero's blog, too, then. Just because someone with a PhD said it, doesn't make it true.

Also, I don't really care about politics, but I do care about policies (one of which you're about to break). If you go against Wikipedia's content policies, you'll lose all credibility in your arguments against Rmcnew, because you'll be accusing him of what you are also guilty. You're only going to perpetuate the dispute.

The only way this article will ever meet Wikipedia's standards is if we gather reliable sources and try to work from there, together.

And Rmcnew recognizes when his sources are inadequate after I point it out; I can at least work with that. MichaelExe (talk) 17:01, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Plus, whether or not Wikipedia's blog is in need of revision is your opinion. If the majority shared it, the policy would have changed.

Frankly, your opinion does not matter to Wikipedia, nor does Rmcnew's or mine, for that matter. MichaelExe (talk) 17:07, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

No but common sense does. Tcaudilllg (talk) 18:33, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Not as much as policy.

Look, I'm not trying to be a dick. If you cite unreliable sources, I won't revert you, but I will remove the links. That way, the content will still remain; you just need to find a better source. The "it's going to be my way, and don't try to stop me" attitude is not good for Wikipedia. Work with us, not against us. MichaelExe (talk) 19:13, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps I don't know the history of this dispute or all of Wikipedia standards, but in my opinion citing Viktor Gulenko's blog (Russian) could be appropriate depending on the context. It is written in essentially the same style as his articles and elucidates the same views, probably with greater clarity than his longer and more generalized articles. Just like myself, he has found the blog format useful for writing shorter articles. They're still basically articles though. --Rick DeLong (talk) 15:13, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Rick, do you think the esoterism stuff is notable in this article? Tcaudilllg (talk) 20:47, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I've given my opinion on the dispute page. --Rick DeLong (talk) 22:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I've given my response on the dispute page. --Rmcnew (talk) 15:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I think I should note that tcaulldig's presence would be much more appreciated in the case that he were to actually begin to help the rest of us, as opposed to spending the majority of time talking loads of crap about other editors, when that time would be more beneficially spent looking for credible sources that would justify the presence of the article as a whole on Wikipedia. --Rmcnew (talk) 20:55, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually all things considered, I'm spending my time very well. Tcaudilllg (talk) 23:36, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

That's better ... --Rmcnew (talk) 01:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Final Comments

It seems like it's 3-to-1 in favor of Rmcnew. It's clear to me that the socionics Wikipedia project now lacks all credibility. It is rife with NPOV issues and gives undue weight to a number of subjects. It's clear to me, again, that I'm outnumbered and it's just not worth the effort. Wikipedia's great weakness exhibits itself yet again: unmitigated discussion of even the most ridiculous ideas. It's clear that Wikipedia is impossible to change from within: it only responds to pressure from without. Thus discussion is pointless, because the outcome will only reflect external conditions. Tcaudilllg (talk) 13:00, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The reason there are NPOV issues is because there are editors who are insisting that there are sides, and are taking sides, and are thus promoteing their own unneutral points of view over finding credible articles to justify socionics having a wikipedia page. Just stop everything else you are doing and find credible sources for wikipedias standards. That is all the editors have to do. --Rmcnew (talk) 15:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

PHD in psychology associated with Moscow Socionics Research Institute

According to this link there are a couple of people with batchelors in socionics that run the schools as teachers and staff, and at least two PHDs in psychology with an emphasis in socionics leading and advising the institute. --Rmcnew (talk) 01:02, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Probably the most authoritative and credible reference to an introduction to socionics

The following is authored by Tatyana Prokofieva, PhD. in socionics. It would be found on this link. Information from here should go into the wikipedia article: http://en.socionics.ru/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=256&Itemid=37

Socionics.ru statement that the intertype relationships are compared to Dmitri Mendeleev Periodic table of the elements - connection to the theory of Synergetics and Hermeticism (counter-argument to Rick Delong's refutations)

In response to "Refutations of Rick Delong" (included at the bottom)

A detailed description of the periodic table is found here

It says this on socionics.ru -----

Aushra Augustinavichuite’s student V. Lyashkyavichus has worked out a table of intertype relationships, that is, relationships between personality types. This table is often and rightfully compared to Mendeleev’s table in chemistry. As Mendeleev’s table has made of description chemistry a science with exact rules and criteria, introduction of the intertype relationships table has brought objective criteria into the science of interpersonal relationships.

Source: http://en.socionics.ru/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=249&Itemid=109

It says this on www.ipst.umd.edu ----

Section 21.1 The search for regularity in the list of elements

O. Theodore Benfey, "Precursors and cocursors of the Mendeleev table: The Pythagorean spirit in element classification," Bulletin for the History of Chemistry, nos. 13-14, pages 60-66 (Winter/Spring 1992-1993)

Source: http://www.ipst.umd.edu/Faculty/brush/physicsbibliography.htm

It says this on www.unm.edu ----

While step 2 requires some degree of chemical knowledge or experience, it does compress the amount of knowledge needed to treat a large variety of analogous compounds. There are 50 representative elements, which can combine in 2,500 possible ways to form binary molecules. However, there are only eight families of representative elements. Thus knowledge of the properties of only 8 representative binary molecules allows one to predict the properties of the remaining (42-8)x(42-8) = 1,156 possible pairs. The advantage increases with the number of atoms in the molecules ((42 - 8)n vs 8n, for n = 2, 3, etc. atoms).

Source: http://www.unm.edu/~dmclaugh/PrinciplesPDF/8_Periodicity.pdf

It says this on deoxy.org ----

In the 1860s, English chemist John Newland showed that all the chemical elements fall into eight families. Since Pythagorean mysticism was unfashionable at that time, Newland was literally laughed at and rejected by the Royal Chemical Society. In the 1870s, with much more detail than Newland, the Russian chemist Mendeleyev proved once and for all that the elements do, indeed, fall into eight families. His Periodic Table of the Elements, an octave of hauntingly Pythagorean harmony, hangs in every high-school chemistry class today. (The Royal Society later apologized to Newland and gave him a Gold Medal.)

Source: http://deoxy.org/eoctave.htm

It says this on honolulu.hawaii.edu

4.3.1.7. are these just Pythagorean coincidences, or do they mean something?

Source: http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/distance/sci122/Programs/p29/p29.html

Click Dmitri Mendeleev for the wikipedia page. --Rmcnew (talk) 14:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Socionics - Buckminster Fuller, Hermann Haken, Periodic Table and Synergetics

It says this on deoxy.org ----

R. Buckminster Fuller, in his Synergetic-Energetic Geometry, which he claims is the "co-ordinate system of the Universe," reduces all phenomena to geometric-energetic constructs based on the tetrahedron (4-sided), the octet truss (8-sided) and the coupler (8-faceted with 24 phases). Fuller argues specifically that the 8-face, 24-phase coupler underlies the 8-fold division of the chemical elements on the Mendeleyev Periodic Table.

Source: http://deoxy.org/eoctave.htm --Rmcnew (talk) 15:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

It says this on zanngill.com ----

I call this third option synergetic evolution, recalling Buckminster Fuller’s emphasis on synergy (wholes greater than the sum of their parts). Physicist Hermann Haken explored synergetics as the dynamic of self-organizing complex systems.

Source: http://zanngill.com/2dd.html

Periodic Table of the Elements as it relates to the Synergetic Theory of Hermann Haken

It says this on complexsystems.org ----

HERMAN HAKEN The work of the physicist Herman Haken and various colleagues over the past 20 years in the science of "synergetics" should also be mentioned (1973, 1977, 1983, 1988). Synergetics is defined as the science of co-operation, and Haken pioneered the scientific analysis of hierarchically organized co-operative phenomena in physics, with applications also in biology and the social sciences. He was one of the early workers also in chaos theory and self-organization and was one of the first to recognize cooperative self-ordering in various kinds of dynamical systems. A contribution of particular importance was a recognition that complex dynamical systems are Janusfaced. In some circumstances, the introduction of small changes can enhance the stability of the system or cause no significant disturbance. Yet, in other circumstances, a small change can completely destabilize the system -- a phenomenon subsequently developed by other workers and given the name of "self-organized criticality" (Bak and Chen, 1991). Haken also pioneered in the study of hierarchical control in dynamical systems. In particular, he identified two very different kinds. One involves distributed, mutual control among system parts in order to maintain a stable collective state (homeostasis). The other involves the introduction of superordinate "order parameters."

Source: http://www.complexsystems.org/publications/pdf/synselforg.pdf

It says this on complexsystems.org ----

Synergy is clearly not a peripheral phenomenon associated only with drug interactions or corporate mergers. Though it often travels in disguise, synergy can be found in the subject-matter of most, if not all of the academic disciplines. In physics, it is associated with the behavior of atoms and subatomic particles, as well as with superconductivity, synchronous light emissions (lasers) and such esoteric molecular phenomena as scale effects -- the "broken symmetries" highlighted in physicist Perry Anderson's classic article "More is Different" (1972). Indeed, the periodic table of elements is a monument to the many forms of synergy that are responsible both for the naturally occurring stable elements and for the more unstable or even transitory creations of modern physics; various combinations of atomic building-blocks produce substances with very different emergent properties. Even the chaotic phenomena which have been the subject of intensive research by physicists and mathematicians in recent years exhibit many forms of synergy.

Source: http://www.complexsystems.org/publications/pdf/synselforg.pdf

Alexander Bukalov and Synergetics connection

It says this on socionics.ibc.com.ua ----

A.V.Bukalov Quantum Changes of Informational Medium The notion is suggested of the quantum change and structuring as per functions of informational metabolism of the informational medium within the collective or society in general. "Primitive" group is considered; it is shown, that 8 functional roles of this group correspond to 8 functions of the model of informational metabolism (A model). E.g.: the "chief of the gang" belongs to the first, i.e. programming function. Attention is given to the roles distribution in administrative group and A model function. Key words: socionics, quantum changes of the informational medium, primitive group, administrative group, psychology, synergetics, model of informational metabolism. --Rmcnew (talk) 15:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Source: http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ej/soc_98_1.html

It says this on the16types.info ----

“Informational approach” (Alexander Bukalov, Olga Karpenko, Vladimir Ermak and others, and on the other hand - the alleged “Antisocionics” of Shiyan). Its adherents refer to socionics types as “types of information metabolism.” Moreover, they consider this concept not only applicable to the human psyche, but – in a more global sense – to “information” in general. It is significant that these ideas are extremely similar to some eccentric views, but also to synergetics (the theory of self-organizing systems), having recently sprouted from the depths of cybernetics. Unfortunately, very little is known scientifically about the relation of socionics with synergetics and, in a broader sense, with cybernetics. There is also the matter that the Kiev international institute of socionics is highly sympathetic to a number of esoteric approaches, rejected by the scientific world.

Source: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/articles/24685-information-metabolism-dmitri-lytov.html

It says this on socionics.ibc.com.ua ----

Physics of Consciousness Boukalov A.V. Conscience and the Universe - It is shown that the universal vacuum if viewed as a conglomerate of relativist fields may be described as a giant computing system that controls movement of micro-particles and macro-bodies (planets, stars, etc.) Alike physical processes run in semiconductor crystals of modern computers used for construction of artificial intelligence systems. As an analogue of macro-computer, the Universe in total inevitably possesses attributes of consciousness and intelligence, and its particular subsystems interact with human consciousness and find their interpretation within the framework of religious systems and beliefs. Key words: consciousness, physical vacuum, computer, computations, religion. --Rmcnew (talk) 01:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Source: http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_0412.html#top --Rmcnew (talk) 15:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hermeticism connection to Periodic Table of the Elements

It says this on www.wpi.edu ----

With the fall of Rome, much of the early work of alchemists was lost for Europe allowing the Arab form of alchemy to take root in European science. With the arrival of the Moors in Spain, came their alchemical knowledge as well as Islam. Arab alchemists are credited with the first practice of modern scientific method, as they were the first to bring structure to the study of nature’s chemical makeup. In the eight century C.E., the scientist Jabir Ibn Hayyan took the classic elements and expanded the system into a table of 7 elements and chemical processes, becoming the father of the medieval periodic table. Islamic alchemists and medical scientists created many tools that still exist today including the first distillation apparatus. The 12th century also brought the first Arab medical schools and some of the first pharmaceutical scientists emerged based around alchemy and a motivation to create and test medicinal elixirs. Through conflict with the Holy Roman Empire, alchemy soon spread across Europe and became one of the pseudo-sciences in medieval times (Holmyard).

Source: http://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-043009-155538/unrestricted/McAliceMQP.pdf

It says this on www.wpi.edu ----

The evolution of empirical scientific thought began to replace abstract speculation. The motivating factors of prolonging and improving life are what still drive doctors, pharmacists and scientists today. Medieval alchemy became known as “hermetic science” because of its connection to the surviving work of the Egyptians, The Emerald Tablet. Many works emerged on how to prolong human life, find immortality, and create compounds to improve one’s health.

Source: http://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-043009-155538/unrestricted/McAliceMQP.pdf

Socionics connection to hindu tattwas and chakras

It says on socionics.org ---

Dmitri Lytov -(За соционику без ошибок, translation: For the Socionics without errors), Lytov says: [translation] "I think sooner or later, we are forced to answer the question of how socionic types correlated with central nervous system." - which implies that the Socionics is generally considered to be associated with the central nervous system, but that at this stage (or at least at the time of the article in 2001), Socionics remains a theory about information processing, which does not go into how. I think this is significant because it shows that although the exact correlation between the types and aspects of the central nervous system have not yet been established, the Socionics elements have always been considered to be processes carried out by the central nervous system.

http://socionics.org/theory/Default.aspx?load=lytov_mistakes.html

It says on donaldtyson.com ---

The tattwas or tattvas are primal energies that underlie the five elements of Hindu philosophy -- akasha or akasa (spirit), tejas (fire), apas (water), vayu (air) and prithivi (earth). The term tattwas means realities or states of being. How they found their way into the magic system of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn would be interesting to know, since most of the techniques of this Order were Western in origin, but they formed an essential part of Golden Dawn training in meditation, visualization, clairvoyance, consecration of instruments, making telesmatic images, and other aspects of the Golden Dawn system.

Source: http://www.donaldtyson.com/tattwas.html

It says on thelemicgoldendawn.net ---

The five Tattwas are Eastern symbols for the five primary elemental qualities in Nature. In the West, they naturally correspond with the five so-called Aristotelian Elements of Magickal Philosophy. They also correspond with the Elemental Sephiroth on the Qabalistic Tree of Life.

Source: http://thelemicgoldendawn.net/zelator/tattwasinstruction.htm

It says on golden-dawn.blogspot.com ---

The tattwas flow in regular rotation throughout the nervous system of the human body. exactly as in the Universe. “As above, so Below.” (Emerald tablet of Hermes)

Source: http://golden-dawn.blogspot.com/2009/02/golden-dawn-tattwas-their-little-known.html

It says on socionics.ru ---

According to T.N. Prokofieva, the subject of Socionics is a "study of the processes of information exchange rights with the world and their impact on the psyche." It is therefore important Socionics, having studied the energy-centers, to draw parallels between these ancient teachings and the young science socionics. Moreover, the study of this topic to determine the correspondence between the features and functions socionic awakened centers. In the future, this matter will give a new clue to the study of psychological, socionic and health problems of man, will open a new approach to study the causes of diseases.

1. 1. The lowest chakra - root (basal), or Muladhara ( "mule" - root "adhara - support).This chakra is considered as a link between the physical and subconscious worlds. It is located in the coccyx. Manages the processes of purification of the body and corresponds to the sacral nerve plexus. Its endocrine gland is the prostate is associated with male sex organs, rectum and colon. Of the organs of perception and action conform to her nose (sense of smell) and legs. When unbalance the Muladhara Chakra there hemorrhoids, constipation, sciatica, prostatitis, an inflammation of the ovaries ... Indeed, the Muladhara chakra corresponds to the primary element (Tattva) earth, the planet Saturn ... The most relevant Muladhara chakra socionic functions - business logic (P).

Source: (origional) http://www.socionics.ru/chakry.htm

Sources that show the links between socionics and various esoteric theories and yet are not considered reliable enough to include as sources on the socionics wikipedia page article

Dmitri Lytov - "So, Augusta created a framework of socionics. But it needed a reform. The necessity of a reform became obvious in the last years of perestroika (1989 – 1991). Although official psychology was still under strong influence of the official ideology, more and more Western psychological books came to Russia, were translated and published. In the beginning, there were only few authors – Eric Berne, Sigmund Freud, Erich Fromm, Carl Jaspers. But from now on socionics had to compete with other trends in psychology, because Soviet (and later post-Soviet) psychology became pluralistic. Two researchers from Kiev, Victor Gulenko and Alexander Bukalov, reformed socionics: they defined its subject and methodology, and created its terminology, which is used until now. Due to their activity, Kiev (Ukraine) became an “informal capital” of the socionics." http://www.psihologia.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1503&sid=f39af7defe85e5b10864a55b2aac7381 --Rmcnew (talk) 22:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Dmitri Lytov - “Informational approach” (Alexander Bukalov, Olga Karpenko, Vladimir Ermak and others, and on the other hand - the alleged “Antisocionics” of Shiyan). Its adherents refer to socionics types as “types of information metabolism.” Moreover, they consider this concept not only applicable to the human psyche, but – in a more global sense – to “information” in general. It is significant that these ideas are extremely similar to some eccentric views, but also to synergetics (the theory of self-organizing systems), having recently sprouted from the depths of cybernetics. Unfortunately, very little is known scientifically about the relation of socionics with synergetics and, in a broader sense, with cybernetics. There is also the matter that the Kiev international institute of socionics is highly sympathetic to a number of esoteric approaches, rejected by the scientific world. http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/articles/24685-information-metabolism-dmitri-lytov.html --Rmcnew (talk) 22:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Rick Delong - After Aleksandr Bukalov established the International Institute of Socionics in Kiev, Ukraine, some rivalry or differences of opinion arose between Augusta and the group in Kiev, or perhaps with Bukalov himself. Augusta came to the conferences for several years, then stopped coming as her health worsened. Perhaps she felt marginalized by the socionics community. In fact, two volumes of her works were published without her approval by someone else, and she apparently did not receive any royalties from book sales. Now a pensioner, Augusta lived a very poor life like almost all elderly people in the former Soviet Union after its collapse. Emissaries from Kiev and Moscow schools of socionics would collect donations and bring them to her in person to help her subsist. In her final years Augusta became involved in mysticism, which drew criticism from many socionists. - http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Aushra_Augusta

I.P. Mameneva - Analytical Psychology Kameneva I.P. Psychical Energy: Symbols and Metamorphoses - C.G.Jung's ideas on psychical energy are considered in the context of his psychoanalytical experience set forth in his work Libido, Its Metamorphoses and Symbols. Symbols of psychical energy indicate the direction of its movement from the mother to other objects and images, which in general reminds dynamics of Kundalini energy in Tantra Yoga. In A.Augustinavichiute's model the scheme of informational metabolism of each type determines specifics of its energetic potential and in separate cases also aptitude towards certain esoteric practices. Key words: symbols, consciousness, unconscious, archetypes, psychical energy (libido), system of Chakras, psychical functions, informational metabolism, energetic metabolism, mental loop, vital loop, socionics. http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_0612.html

Rick Delong - Aushra Augusta, the founder of socionics, was an ILE, and this has been decisive for the field's development. Augusta discovered a logical system and formulated its key principles, but left much work undone. After her main period of work on socionics, she drifted into esoterism, and I know nothing about her post-socionics development - only that it is outside the realm of contemporary socionics. For most ILEs, the search is never over. - http://socionist.blogspot.com/2007/03/typing-religions-teachings-and_3955.html

Rick Delong - Augusta was the kind of person who broadcasted her insights far and wide, and I think she would have run around saying, "look, these ancient texts are saying the same thing I've been saying!" She was not shy at all about discussing possible connections between socionics and chakras, though her ideas were purely speculative. - http://socionist.blogspot.com/2009/03/development-of-english-language.html --Rmcnew (talk) 18:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Dmitri Lytov - In 1980—1995 socionics existed as a "club of adherents" outside the official psychology. Groups of socionists appeared in different cities of the Soviet Union, but this was not enough to make socionics recognized by official psychologists. On the one hand, such isolation from psychologists positively influenced socionics: it developed without Marxist-Leninist stereotypes that overloaded Soviet psychological works of that time. On the other hand, such isolation created an illusion among many socionists that socionics were not a part of psychology, it rather were “a new science” with its own methods, subject etc. This was a dangerous trend: there was a real danger that socionics would turn into something esoteric, mystical. http://www.socioniko.net/en/articles/lytovs-intro2.html

Olga Tangemann - The associative model of a human psyche is based on the model of the informational metabolism and psychoanalytic concepts, in which components of personality, socionic functions and colors of the chakras are considered as a dialectic interaction and expression of psychic energy. A human psyche seeks the harmony and balance between the mind and soul, between the physical and psychic components of personality. Traditional socionics study informational metabolism of a person and does not pay enough attention to the dynamic processes within the psyche and without those the informational metabolism could not be fully understood and explained. The Butterfly model (the associative model) of a human psyche is aimed partly to fill the gap in our understanding of a human psyche from the perspective of psychodynamics as well as to proclaim the indissoluble unity of the information and energy processes within the psyche from the perspective of psychology, socionics, philosophy and esoterics. http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_09_1.html

Dmitri Lytov -(За соционику без ошибок, translation: For the Socionics without errors), Lytov says: [translation] "I think sooner or later, we are forced to answer the question of how socionic types correlated with central nervous system." - which implies that the Socionics is generally considered to be associated with the central nervous system, but that at this stage (or at least at the time of the article in 2001), Socionics remains a theory about information processing, which does not go into how. I think this is significant because it shows that although the exact correlation between the types and aspects of the central nervous system have not yet been established, the Socionics elements have always been considered to be processes carried out by the central nervous system. - http://socionics.org/theory/Default.aspx?load=lytov_mistakes.html

Alexander Bukalov -Physics of Consciousness Boukalov A.V. Conscience and the Universe - It is shown that the universal vacuum if viewed as a conglomerate of relativist fields may be described as a giant computing system that controls movement of micro-particles and macro-bodies (planets, stars, etc.) Alike physical processes run in semiconductor crystals of modern computers used for construction of artificial intelligence systems. As an analogue of macro-computer, the Universe in total inevitably possesses attributes of consciousness and intelligence, and its particular subsystems interact with human consciousness and find their interpretation within the framework of religious systems and beliefs. Key words: consciousness, physical vacuum, computer, computations, religion. --Rmcnew (talk) 01:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC) http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_0412.html#top http://www.socionics.ibc.com.ua/ejpsy/psy_0412.html#top

Rick Delong - Most socionists would agree that socionics is not a hard science like physics or chemistry, since it has no purely quantitative formulation. Its methodology is more on par with the social or soft sciences like sociology and psychology. At the same time it makes rather specific predictions unlike, for example, Freudian psychology. It therefore occupies an intermediate zone known as protoscience. http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Socionics_as_science --Rmcnew (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Refutations by Rick Delong (Everything above is a response to these)

REFUTATION: if you look up "synergetics" in Wikipedia, you get a disambiguation page. If you look синергетика up in the Russian Wikipedia, you get a lengthy article that roughly corresponds to the second meaning of synergetics in the Eng. Wikipedia -- that is, "Synergetics (Haken), a school of thought on thermodynamics and other systems phenomena developed by Hermann Haken". In fact, the Russian article says (I translate): "A definition of the term 'synergetics' that is close to the modern understanding, was introduced by Herman Haken in 1977 in his book Synergetics." A cursory look at Bukalov's article "Феномен квантования информационного пространства коллектива" (found through Google, fifth result) reveals that the "synergetics" he mentions (once) in his article is of the kind discussed in the Russian article, corresponding roughly to Synergetics_(Haken). Now, take a look at that article on synergetics and compare it to the one on Hermeticism. See a link? NONE AT ALL. --Rick DeLong (talk) 19:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

REFUTATION: Your wording is very misleading here. You write "More Proof That Socionics Has a Heavy Hermetic Influence Through Synergetics." When we look into the sources, we find out from Lytov that members of the Kiev Institute of Socionics are "highly sympathetic to a number of esoteric approaches, rejected by the scientific world." If Bukalov writes that "the Universe in total inevitably possesses attributes of consciousness and intelligence, and its particular subsystems interact with human consciousness and find their interpretation within the framework of religious systems and beliefs," that does not in any way provide proof of your claim that "socionics has a heavy hermetic influence through synergetics." To support your claim, you would need to show that Bukalov's articles on the universe and its attributes of consciousness are foundational for the field of socionics. Any socionist would tell you that is NOT the case. These are his personal out-in-left-field ideas, to which most socionists would say, "whatever." To support this observation which is obvious to anyone active in socionics in Russia or Ukraine, a search of Bukalov's articles shows that the article in mention has never been cited in any other socionics articles. This check is possible through the "Citation Index" project, whose purpose is to determine the relative authority of different works on socionics, and of different socionists. Here we find a list of all of Bukalov's publications (per earlier discussion we can see that the first publication was in 1988, 8 years after Augusta's first publication where she includes the socionics symbols) arranged in order of how often they have been cited in other socionics works. The article "Consciousness and the Universe" is at line 154 with 0 citations. Now, how does that qualify as a "heavy hermetic influence" on socionics?? --Rick DeLong (talk) 18:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Statement of consensus (original)

All who concur with DeLong's arguments on the matter of esoterism, post here. By posting to this list, you concur with the proposed consensus that socionics is not founded on esoterism.

1. Tcaudilllg -- Tcaudilllg (talk) 23:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

All available evidence indicates socionics has no relation to esoterism. As per WP:BURDEN, esoteric content may not be admitted into the article. Tcaudilllg (talk) 23:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

How exactly does socionics' possible relation to esotericism violate WP:BURDEN? Which line(s) are you referring to? MichaelExe (talk) 23:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The entire page. Specifically everything beneath Sources and all subsequent headings. All that is in reference to precisely this kind of scenario. Tcaudilllg (talk) 00:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

In relationship to the fact that wikipedia considers certain sources notable, regardless of personal opinions of editors. How come "ALL" of the esoteric sources are considered unnotable by you regardless of meeting wikipedias standards for sources? --Rmcnew (talk) 00:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

"Tiny-minority views and fringe theories need not be included, except in articles devoted to them." (which brings us to WP:UNDUE) Now, are the views that of a tiny-minority? Prokofieva Tatyana herself is a reliable source (whether the page in question is or not, we've yet to decide), and she has several others working under her, but it is still one single source. We also need to consider the amount of reliable sources we've got at our disposal for socionics. We may have to bug Manning some more (but try to keep the discussion on his talk small, and redirect it to the Mediation page, preferably; this, along with the below statement of consensus should probably be there, too). MichaelExe (talk) 01:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

A disaffected person looks at this page, not knowing what socionics is about, and thinks it has something to esoterism and is pseudoscientific, like a number of other theories under Rational Skepticism (which socionics shouldn't even be under), they aren't going to give it another thought. And worse, a person who tries to use the hard work, Well they come away from looking at this page thinking that they risk their reputations from even tinkering with it. Which isn't true at all, but they'd think such. Socionics is not hard science, but it is soft science which people depend on because it makes sense to them. Hell, you can't even get a job if you can't get an appropriate score on the testing instruments they give you... and yet none of those have been proven with hard data. Just because you can't prove an Aryan Nation member isn't "evil" doesn't mean you should ignore the fact that they are a member of that organization, or that they hold extreme views. Certainly there is something in the, something words can't reach. Should we really have judged Timothy McVeigh as anything but "evil"? Do we really think Osama bin Laden is going to leave us alone if we talk nice to him? For the next two centuries we will have to endure shaky premises in cognitive science because hard facts require hundreds of millions more research hours... we would not want to defer judgment of a person's intentions and character in leu of "hard facts".

And of course there's always the problem of what happens if the prevailing soft theories turn out to be right after all.... Finally, there is the problem of the suddeness and finality of any such empirical judgment of character when it becomes possible. It would sweep the world like a wave... and no one knows what would happen. Trait theories give us opportunity to debate the meaning of evil's possible existence in leu of its final appraisal. Tcaudilllg (talk) 01:14, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Most soft theories are treated as "right", regardless. I wouldn't say that the theories in psychology are wrong, but they could always be improved. Also, for a disaffected person to do so, they would have to ignore the several paragraphs we have/should have about what is held as fact regarding socionics' foundation. If you want to please these types of people, start the Simple English article. Again, the article shouldn't say socionics is esoteric or a pseudoscience, but that X says it might be. MichaelExe (talk) 01:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Now that's thinking I can respect. ;)

If you want to put her in there, that's fine. But it is necessary to state the opinion of Augustinaviciute's institute as told to us by DeLong. Something to the effect of "Augustinaviciute's students agree that socionics as a discipline is unrelated to esoterism." Tcaudilllg (talk) 01:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Prokofieva Tatyana is one lone PhD amidst a host of others who say there is no connection betwen socionics and esoterism. Aleksandre Boukalov allowed DeLong to interview him with the specific intent of conferring legitimacy onto him. DeLong has published an article in the Socionics Institute's journal. It may be that Tatyana has established an institute of her own; however, it worth noting that she was not one of Augustinaviciute's original students; Boukalov and Gulenko both were. The Kiev Institute remains the leading authority in socionics and has the last word on all matters with respect to Augustinaviciute's legacy. The Institute has given DeLong permission to speak on its behalf, so if DeLong says Tatyana's talking out of her ass, then Institute must be saying the same. (on matters of his opinion he is respectly stating thus, but as he has stated the esoterism issue is not a matter of opinion to him). Tcaudilllg (talk) 01:29, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

So "X says it might be, but Rick DeLong disagrees." You can't deny views simply by disagreeing; even in the psychology article, it states: "Criticisms of psychology often come from perceptions that it is a "fuzzy" science. Philosopher Thomas Kuhn's 1962 critique implied psychology overall was in a pre-paradigm state, lacking the agreement on overarching theory found in mature sciences such as chemistry and physics. Psychologists and philosophers have addressed the issue in various ways.".

I see that his translations were published, but what's your source for "The Institute has given DeLong permission to speak on its behalf"? MichaelExe (talk) 01:42, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

DeLong's website. http://www.socionics.us/interviews/conference_2006.shtml

If you'll notice, the third pic down features Rick speaking, with Boukalov sitting at the table next to him.

Also, DeLong apparently has access to Boukalov that the rest of us don't. He was able to obtain an article by Boukalov in its original .PDF form, direct from Boukalov himself, which I translated. (it's one of the sources for the Model B section)

Notice that Tatanya doesn't speak about esoterism at the conference. Nor does anyone else. She got her spurs by studying type masking/distortion. Tcaudilllg (talk) 02:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Funny, Tcaudilllg wrote and argued this much when he could have simply just made a small statement that Rick Delong has a PHD and left it purely up to that. Strange. --Rmcnew (talk) 01:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Uh, I don't think DeLong has a PhD, does he? Tcaudilllg (talk) 02:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

It sounded to me by what you were inferring that he has a PHD, or at the very least giving Rick Delong a higher than normal status that could be rightfully questioned about as fast as the sudden placement of a stray Gulenko blog source, that usually ends up in the wikipedia article as an unappropiate replacement for statements that have sources with more credibility according to wikipedia standards. --Rmcnew (talk) 02:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I am continueing my argumentation at this link : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Socionics#Debate_against_the_claim_from_some_editors_who_want_to_discredit_the_Moscow_Socionics_School_by_claiming_the_techniques_there_are_fringe_compared_to_other_schools

Statement of consensus

By posting to this list, you concur with the proposed consensus that socionics sources, in relation to esoteric sources or not, may be freely placed in the article so long as they meet wikipedias standards for verifiable sources. You also agree to never inappropiatelly remove portions of the socionics article that are supported by noteworthy sources, and for insufficent reasons.

Agree to consensus:

1. Rmcnew -- --Rmcnew (talk) 23:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
2. I obviously agree with the policies; there shouldn't be a need or consensus, tbh. If any exceptions are to be made, they should be by an Admin (Manning). MichaelExe (talk) 23:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Disagree to consensus:

1. XXXXXX

As per WP:BURDEN and WP:VERIFIABILITY, origional reasearch and portions of the article may be removed when there are no viable sources backing the material. Any content of any sort concerning socionics may be admitted into the article taken that there are reliable and verifiable sources to that effect, regardless of viewpoint of the editors, and according to official wikipedia policy. Editors should not remove content that is supported by sources worthy of wikipedias standards. --Rmcnew (talk) 23:11, 30 September 2009 (UTC) [edited because the consensus agree as first written here by tcaudilllig is against wikipedia policy]

From WP:NPOV: "Neutral point of view (NPOV) is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles and all editors."

"The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting perspectives on a topic as evidenced by reliable sources. It requires that all majority- and significant-minority views must be presented fairly, in a disinterested tone, and in rough proportion to their prevalence within the source material." MichaelExe (talk) 23:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

You edited my talk post! That's against the rules. Tcaudilllg (talk) 23:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

fix'd. And don't cry about the rules now; you've already got personal attacks against you. MichaelExe (talk) 23:41, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

What is happening here is contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia. Wikipedia was intended as a way for people to get reliable information about topics important to them without becoming confused by pseudoscientific arguments. That Rmcnew is exalting those very views in this article at the expense of scientific opinion warps the project's purpose, and you are helping him do it, MichaelExe.

Do you see what you are doing, MichaelExe? By exalting that woman's PhD., you are arguing that pseudoscience is science. And you are insisting that Wikipedia's rules demand her pseudoscientific work to be recognized as such. But that is not so. It only reflects that your interpretation of the rules is itself limited and flawed. Tcaudilllg (talk) 00:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

So long as you keep insisting that socionics is a science as known to western science, you are going to be hitting your head against the wall. What socionics considers science is not, by any means, western science. Stop trying to fight this fact. --Rmcnew (talk) 00:08, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

No one who understood science would make the claims you have. Science is objective and universal: that's why it's science. Tcaudilllg (talk) 00:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Than a scientific mind would, from a standpoint of objectivity, discern that socionic methods as they are derived from sources do not meet expected scientific standards according to the west. In fact, socionics simply just does not meet expected universal and objective standards anywhere. That is it, period. No more should be said. --Rmcnew (talk) 00:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Ridiculous. What's not scientific about categorical logic? If anything's unscientific, it's the post hoc assertion that just because socionics was preceded and deals with similar material as Hermetics, it's the same thing. That does not reflect critical thinking.

OK it's the same KIND of thing (categorical logic again) but it's not the SAME thing. It's not the same model of categorical logic... though it may well be the last. Tcaudilllg (talk) 04:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

It is not that categorical logic is unscientific, it is that you can not just use categorical logic alone and expect what you derive from it to be scientific. For example Hermeticism philosophies do indeed use categorical logic, which is how it derived the various axioms within the philosophy. Yet, Hermeticism, similar to socionics, when you follow the kybalion has also borrowed from eastern philosophy. So, it is not a matter of whether or not socionics is hermeticism, it is that socionics is following after the same sort of outdated scientific methods that shaped hermeticism. It is the usage of the same outdated science techniques, coupled with comparisons to things in ways that are pseudoscientific. It is the same sort of science that was used in the 17th century. This is the 21st century last time I checked. This means that socionics is based on a science format that came into existance 4 centuries ago. You are not going to make anything scientific out of it according to modern standards. Maybe socionics could work for someone while simply functioning as that persons philosophy, but calling it a science is rediculous. But if a PHD says that sonionics is scientific, despite just spouting some pseudoscientific or protoscientific garbage that came out of some comparison between Hinduism or the periodic table, it could be said that PHDs in socionics theory have called pseudoscientific or protoscientific things scientific. Yes, it makes socionics look rediculous. But it is the supposed PHDs in socionics that are making it that way, and that is not a reason to misrepresent socionics as something scientific according to western or modern standards. It is a complete waste of time. --Rmcnew (talk) 13:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

To all parties - I've been tied up elsewhere on an Arbcom case so I have only just come back on board to review where you guys are up to. Given that debate has managed to spread across the mediation page, this talk page and my user talk page I have some catching up to do.

As a general rule there are WAY too many acts of incivility going on. Now as I am acting as a mediator in this case it is customary for me to NOT use any of my administrative tools (blocking, etc). Should I feel it necessary I will recruit another admin to conduct an impartial review.

PS - MichaelExe - thank you for your faith in my godlike admin powers, but I am in no way authorised to grant any kind of exceptions to policy. I'm a janitor not a governor :) Manning (talk) 03:08, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that the mediation has failed. I don't see the point in continuing to discuss the article from rmcnew, who will not be moved from his position. It's not worth discussing anymore. Like you said, you don't have power over policy. What we need right now is a formal interpretation of policy, because the only issue is whether or not the view of that fringe minority should be represented in this particular article. Tcaudilllg (talk) 15:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I am going to point out a specific statement by tcaud here, a statement which I believe is actually a 'white lie' intended for tcaud to get his way with the article and is not really backed by anything.

Tcaudilllg - because the only issue is whether or not the view of that fringe minority should be represented in this particular article

I disagree. I think tcaud feels the mediation has failed, because he simply has not been able to get his sole way with the article. Therefore, he has resort to telling white lies in order to get his way. Calling legitimate methods in socionics theory 'fringe' is a white lie. And I won't be moved from my position, because I don't have a position on the matter. Therefore, there is no position to be moved from. Further, there are no fringe minorities in socionics, only socionists who have been doing alot of comparisons to new age, hindu, and alternative theories. Even PHDs in the field, such as Bukalov, have been allowing to be published speculative esoteric articles and have themselves been making comparisons between esoteric, religious, and socionics theory. Tcaud has no justification for any of his actions in relation to wanting to remove things that he finds embarassing about legitimate socionics theory from the article, which is what I believe is his real motive for wanting to do so. The material he has been removing is supported by credible sources and deserve a place in the article. He has a right to quit making unnecessary reverts for insufficent reasons. I believe that Tcauds claim that these view are a 'fringe minority' is a 'white lie' and manipulative attempt by him to get his way with the article, therefore leaving tcaud with an unsupported position. Credible PHD and peer reviewed sources deserve a place regardless of tcaud's opinion on the matter. --Rmcnew (talk) 16:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

If I don't get a sense that someone is listening to me within a week, I'm going to Arbcom by myself to get a judgment. Tcaudilllg (talk) 16:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Just go to Arbcom right now ... you say you are going to do it. Why wait? --Rmcnew (talk) 16:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Debate against the claim from some editors who want to discredit the Moscow Socionics School by claiming the techniques there are fringe compared to other schools

There are some editors who are attempting to isolate the credibility of a whole socionics school that is located in Moscow, Russia, for reasons that are insufficent to wikipedias standards. In comparison it should be noted that scientifically the socionics school in Kiev, Ukraine headed by Alexander Bukalov wouldn't be any more credible than the one headed by Tatyana Prokofieva in Moscow Russia. In fact, if you were to look at a webtranslated version of this article ( click here for help) from the Kiev school and compare this to the chakra article (click here for help) from the Moscow school you would see that it is absolutely rediculous to make a claim that any of the socionics schools are any more scientifically credible than the next. Because 2 or 3 editors sware up and down this material is a minority fringe isn't sufficent enough for it to be claimed as such, especially when there are several PHDs in socionics and other fields who are knowingly allowing (and even encouraging) these sort of strange research comparisons between socionics and esoteric and religious philosophies to go on, while there are no known reliable sources where any such PHD in the socionics realm has condemned these strange techniques. In any case, I am sure that this would be enough to help you make your decision. --Rmcnew (talk) 03:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Karpenko OB International Institute of Socionics, N 2, 1995 . Journal Socionics, mentology and personality psychology ", N 2, 1995.

What are we talking about

The focus of Socionics, of course, man. But in different cultural traditions of the people taken viewed from different points of view.

Tradition, focuses less on "information" as to the nature of man power, allocates certain points and levels. . Their number varies in different sources.

For example:

These centers, called Chakras in India are not in our physical body, but in another dimension, although the concentration in them is at times so intense that we get a sharp localized physical sensation. In fact, some of them quite close to the various nerve plexuses of the body, though not all. [Satprem] If we talk about the different plans in terms of human bodies or shells: physical body, etheric, astral, mental, causal - then we can trace a certain regularity: the presence in each shell of the "special points" that determine, ultimately, the course of development of the body So, if we turn to the physiology, developing being (especially in the early stages) has a hidden (neuter) singular points, whose activity leads to the formation of organs and tissues of the body. Known experiment in which the developing butterfly wing in removed one single scale - in the center of the future of a concentric pattern, and the pattern is not just broken, it does not arise. Immunologists favor of the hypothesis of the existence of the human body the only cells responsible for the processes of hematopoiesis and immunity. BV Bolotov said of the cell leaders. Bodies glands and nerve plexus are the centers of maintaining and regulating the functions of our body, like the "special points of the phase plane" of our physical well-being. A similar role is performed chakras in the etheric body, defining its "configuration" and operating features.

Physiology and anatomy study centers of our physical body.Tom, that sensitives can see (feel) the chakras and other education etheric body, we are not surprised. Several unexpected were the results of experiments conducted by AV Bukalova and colleagues [6], confirmed the presence of certain power structures, it is relevant functions of information metabolism. Moreover, their localization in the projection on the physical body corresponds to their position in the mental and vital rings model A: the vital functions in the stomach area (which, in turn, is related to the vital plane), mental - in the neck and head.

I can imagine a multi-layered, translucent image, where each layer corresponds to a level where the nerve plexus chakra, FIM, and some education like a show in different phase planes undeveloped, hidden features inherent to the core inside of us - I, soul, monad, who had put on themselves, all these shells, these increasingly tight clothing, to translate and exist in different spaces, use them as tools.

Interestingly, yantras (symbols), corresponding to the chakras are in their mark some numerological signs - the number of petals surrounding a central field. With this number can be correlated to a certain classification of the same number of characters (some typology), such as chakra Muladhara with 4 petals, located in the zone of physical, corresponds, in particular, a typology of 4 temperaments coming from Hippocrates (sanguine, choleric , phlegmatic and melancholic), or classification by type of physique. Anahata Chakra with 12 petals astrological defines a typology of the base 12 (zodiac, eastern range of animals), but there are less used the typology of the base 6 and 10. Chakra vishudha represents for us the greatest interest, as responsible for the possibility of constructing a 16-tipnyh classifications, one of them and works socionics [4]. There is a classification and a more dense level of the base 2 - the separation of the sexes, inherent in most species.

Actually, that's not true. In fact, Olga tannenmanis banned from the Humanitarian Socionics forums, that I know of, for talking about esoterism there. The socionist who calls himself Iceman made a point on another forum of stressing that the Humanitarian School does not concur with her claims. Another thing: recall that the magazine Olga submitted her article to saw fit not to publish more than half of it, because it went into a long foray about how she was inspired by esoterism to write it. Tcaudilllg (talk) 05:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I see you complete and utterly avoided listing a last name for the Olga you mentioned. [struck on account of tcaud editing in a last name after reading this] The Olga you are thinking about doesn't have anything to do with the above paragraph and she did not write it, who you are also claiming was banned from out of an internet forum that could be run by anyone. The person who wrote the above is Olga Karpenko. The article itself comes from an official publication from the "International Institute of Socionics" and is listed as "Journal Socionics, mentology and personality psychology ", N 2, 1995." That has absolutely nothing to do with some Olga being banned from an internet forum that could be run by just anyone. If something is published from a peer reviewed publication and authorized for publication by a PHD, namely Bukalov himself, than that article can be included as a source. Also, I should not that this article came about the same time that Ausura Augusta was alive and awarded a medal in recognation of a new discovery, meanwhile, esoteric things were being published in the official socionics kiev institute journal. And whether or not it is the same Olga is mute. This article was published in 1995, officially approved for publication, and was published. No more should be said about it concerning whatever else disconnected could be said about it. --Rmcnew (talk) 14:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)