Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
I like that introduction. I read it when I first came to the forum.
Ok cool.
I was wondering about the correlations bit between keirsey types (or was it MB types?) and Socionics...those are correct too then? Have you seen anything to contradict that? Your thoughts?
I think they're decent enough. What they do is explain the correlations (or lack thereof) socionists saw between two different types, and the socionics type different people with Myers-Briggs types identified most with. What they do not do is show that if you are XXXX then you are XXXx. Such an idea is foolish, and is only applied by people like Phaedrus, who don't really understand systems like socionics because they're so obsessed with correct logic.
It's not being obsessed with correct logic; it's being obsessed with perfect little Ti parallels that makes him reduce everything down to some one-dimensional level of "objective truth" lol.
Yes, correct logic. He thinks he is correct. Phaedrus' logic is actually good, and he likes to correct everyone else's poor logic. What is disgraceful about Phaedrus' thoughts are his really shitty premises.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote