At first, I would like to express many thanks to you for very useful discussion (http://berezin-fb.livejournal.com/ and my http://leonardural.livejournal.com/) and deep gratitude to Live Journal’s for the opportunity to meet in it's territory.
Secondly, I would also like to note that, in my exhaustive opinion, you are the only major psychological physiologist, not only recognized scientist Carl Gustav Jung, and develop it in their studies. And in this way, we are in the one psychological space, and we understand the issue.
In the third, taking advantage of the open space, and I invite you and your colleagues (unfortunately, some of your outstanding colleagues passed away, and let the land they rest in peace) to the theoretical debate on Jungian psychology and its practical application in psychology.
It is you and your students have made to the development of this theory substantial additions to issue as reported to the practical application of the results, and therefore our discussion, simultaneously translated into English by Google (thanks Google also) will have some importance for the restoration of theoretical psychology to-date scientific knowledge.
And it would make sense for the American Psychological school abandoned its development, as found it unfinished.
With respect and gratitude,
PS. The discussion under the cut:
I am very familiar with many classifications that "innumerable", including listed in your letter, as well as foreign. From them, I refer to the most advanced Avgustinavichute and Myers-Briggs - Mbti, very, sorry, I missed the link to you: BBK B48 88.37 ISBN 978-5-9903210-1-4 Berezin FB Miroshnikov MP , Sokolova ED Methods of in-depth studies of personality. Structure, based on interpretation, some applications / Pre. T.Barlas. - 3rd ed., Rev. and add. - Moscow: Publishing House "Berezin Felix Borisovich", 2011. - 320.
They, including your school, based on the input theoretical psychologist Carl Gustav Jung fundamental functions have tried to develop a classification of 16 personality types.
That Jung were first formulated fundamental psychological functions that define a person's behavior and to propose clear their design is actually the psychological space, which I use in his research, which have been brought from four to eight pairs of uniquely identifiable psychological characteristics, Jung called the crystallographic axes, and therefore , 256 (2 in the eighth power) personality types, as opposed to 230 types of crystallographic groups Fedorov (!)
Also, based on the general laws of nature, formulated the basic psychological laws, three of which are obvious, and are recognized by all, because we can not get around them :). The remaining four are subject to additional review, as they require additional genetic studies, which are in the initial stage, and I want to bring it to this part of the consideration.
Before you reveal the secret of his great and tell a little about yourself. I am a physicist by training, doing structural chemistry and the love I have with the ninth grade in biology. (Seriously, that's when I fell in love with his future wife, and she became a biologist :-).
Psychology is part of the science in terms of "Biology - The science of life."
My main research interests are related to structural chemistry and the establishment of mechanisms of chemical reactions, you can ask to link Khalilov Leonard:Leonard Khalilov - Google Scholar Citations . Google is pretty good follow me :).
Here is our correspondence and, as many of your questions, I'll answer upon receipt of answers to me :), and you have consented to the open nature of the discussion, which I invite you in the first place, and your many outstanding students, and others seeking to develop The theoretical and practical psychology and psychology, based on current scientific data.
The discussion will be open, and it will be used by common rules for open publication in compliance with copyright panelists with reference to the author of this e-publication.
Re: (no subject)
When I spoke of the need to make comparisons, I had in mind a comparison to other classifications, although it, too, I will say a few words, because for me it was a complete surprise your assertion that there is only one accepted classification - the classification of Hippocrates. Classifications, in fact, do not find the number, but I will mention only those that are well known and are associated with the names of reputable scientists. But first comparison.
I was referring to the comparison of personal backgrounds of each of your allocated types, with the results obtained by methods that have long been widely used for the study of these features to be aware of the validity of the method, ie, that it defines exactly what you want to define.
One of the sponsors of our monograph (MMIL), the third edition of which was published in 2011, Mike P. Miroshnikov, wrote of innocence judgments about obtaining reliable data by analyzing the "revelation of the subjects to answer direct questions about his actions, behaviors, attitudes and intentions" . "On the one hand, - writes Mike Petrovich, - the subject may not have the necessary degree of introspection and not know yourself enough on the other - in communicating information about the features of the subjects and the reasons for his behavior more than anywhere else, is shown long-term effects of the existing installation. In the development of methods of personality questionnaires found that often the value is not so much the accuracy of the answers of the test, their relevance to the real facts of his life, as his personal opinion about it. "
I have been studying personality questionnaire method for over 40 years, and received ample evidence of what is important is not so much informative value responses as established in preliminary studies, the ability to differentiate from these people have answers or does not have certain personality traits.
Sometimes, a meaningful response in the study has a value opposite to the actual state of affairs. However, if you want to read it, I just can not address you to the monograph.
At the heart of your method is to obtain direct answers to direct questions. Because of these reasons, this material may not be reliable. I repeat that the comparison features you selected personality types with well-developed, the procedures used for decades, it would be highly desirable.
For existing classifications, to quote a few of them.
In the first half of the 20th century have been proposed classification Gannushkina P., E. Kretschmer, W. Sheldon, Carl Jung, K. Leonhard, Erich Fromm. In the second half of the 20th century were offered types D. Rotter, A. Licko, A. Augustinavichiute, A. Loewen, etc.
Your work has interested me the use of a systematic approach. I'll read what's available in your magazine and try to order your monograph, which was published in Ufa.
--- Leonardural wrote:
> In continuation of my letter, I want to say that the main ideas presented, albeit in adapted form on the first page. In earlier posts I have tried to give examples.
> Compare tests conducted almost nothing to as classification in psychology is virtually nonexistent.
> The only thing common is the classification of Hippocrates:
> 4 types of temperaments: choleric, sanguine, melancholic, phlegmatic, used me, but I think I understand the mechanism of classification. Introduced the concept of inertia measures of psychological type, a kind of psychological weight.
> You can, if you can, there is a lot of letters are lit, they do not fit in 10,000 characters, the tolerances letter format.
> So can leave comments open.
> --- Berezin_fb wrote:
Leonard >> Dear!
>> I can be in correspondence and public and private - as you see fit. But I do not see the object of discussion. I would like to see your question and see the answers in, understand what mathematical methods used to process the results and how you came to the number 256. Any number in this type of research is not enough to a large extent arbitrary, because every human person is unique, and it may be that the features, it is not reflected in the response to your question on the behavior of a person has a decisive importance. In addition, the self-thing, in my view, impossible, since formed a number of stable psychological mechanisms designed to ensure that people retain their individual identity and could give their identity more or less positive assessment. Negative evaluation of self, like any other form of masochism, this is kind of pathology. While this argument in general terms, because I have not seen your technique and do not know how it works. Our discussion, in my opinion, ought to begin with this.
>> I probably would have considered it appropriate to compare the obtained results with the results you test methods are well standardized and validated. In this case, there would be another criterion for assessing the adequacy of procedures. But, again, about all that will be possible only if I understood what was going on.
FA Berezin >>
>> --- Leonardural wrote:
>>> Good evening, Felix!
>>> You shocked me with his style, which is not seen me for a long time, ever since I read a live journal. And, if I may, I'll take your answer in your public journal, at least to show, as they say these intellectuals.
>>> I started the project as an experiment, can the normal people to soberly assess their psychological insides like a real writer. This tool allows you to compare yourself with famous people, and even predict its behavior in a given situation. And one would like to increase the sample, not only from students. Special attention I would like to give to young children whose parents could learn to recognize their children and recognize them have the right to their own opinion.
>>> And, in this regard, I would like to get a critical assessment of efficiency of the method, not only ordinary people but also intellectuals. And they just, absolutely incapable of sober self-esteem (unfortunately, my sample is limited to a few dozens of people who have the appropriate title :).
>>> In fact, intellectually I've finished my project codenamed "Psychological System", and now comes a lot of practitioners who can benefit from the results. And life will show how not crooked a psychological mirror.
>>> Yes, and I have now about 400 readers, but the commentary is not much, and all the time I say that we should really adapt my texts. Basically, I'm LJ Nome style, but even to have one reader in your face, I will write as well as I work with passion, even with one student, or even a foreign graduate student, Dr. Professor, Academician. Important for me to work with a professional.
>>> Will open our correspondence to you, but I think we have nothing to hide ...
>>> With respect and gratitude
>>> --- Berezin_fb wrote:
Dear Leonard >>>>!
Assuming >>>> my journal intelligent, I can evaluate only the present. I almost since the founding of the magazine is about 500 readers who do not want to abandon the subscription. At one time, the number increased slightly, then decreased again and was stuck on the same number. The total number is about 400 mobile part of the reading population that comes and goes. These people, probably. not of interest for the future. They go to the back streets fairs LJ come out of curiosity to various magazines, including mine, and just as quickly leave. 500 - this is the minimum for which the leading intellectual journal ceases to work, and that is not enough. My English-language correspondent says that the English-speaking intellectual magazines anymore. There they are willingly and eagerly read. He even suggested that I switch to English, but that my English is not enough.
>>>> Perhaps this question should be put larger: is there a future for intellectual literature in what is now Russia? I tried to consider probabilities, and they were close, about 50 to 50 - the presence in the future intellectual audience and its absence. This is a toss. To do on this basis can not be any valid predictions. I think that in the coming year will be a clear development direction. Probability can not be infinitely equal, they will move somewhere else. Then it will be something to suggest, based on a statistical calculation. In England there will be intellectual journals and intellectual audience. The same is true for Japan. I can do is repeat after Pushkin: "The devil pulled me to be born in Russia with intelligence and talent!"
>>>> However, a lot depends on you. If you want to have an intelligent Learn and will be working on this with the others, the chances of development in this area will increase.
>>>> --- Leonardural wrote:
>>>>> Good evening, Felix!
>>>>> I would like to ask you, is there a future intellectual LJ?