Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: The funny part

  1. #1
    The Troll Slayer Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,009
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default The funny part....

    People can't even agree what a function is, and how each functions work. They go around building these being fantasy elaborations of things, yet they we can't even agree on the root information of a theory. Everyones idealization of every type is different, how is asking someone to define the function they are talking about "not efficient"?
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  2. #2
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    I award you the medal of honor for ranting.

  3. #3
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Searching for precise definitions is the beginning of everything.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  4. #4
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Not everything can be verbalized.

    Also, in a way socionics implies that people will see elements differently depending on their own type.

  5. #5
    The Troll Slayer Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,009
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aiss View Post
    Not everything can be verbalized.

    Also, in a way socionics implies that people will see elements differently depending on their own type.
    Isn't that even more of a reason to ask someone to define something? You always have a big debate that the people's opinions on the subject are so conflicting that they don't even understand what each other or talking about. It usually either ends up with people debating and arguing over socionics types, or it ends up with people just agreeing on random details because they want to look good to others because they like to look intelligent. They usually say stuff like "Yes Si is inquisitive environmental accessing protocol analyzer gadgetizer that allows us to facilitate the inequalities in our imbalanced self".
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  6. #6
    implied's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    7,750
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta View Post
    People can't even agree what a function is, and how each functions work. They go around building these being fantasy elaborations of things, yet they we can't even agree on the root information of a theory. Everyones idealization of every type is different, how is asking someone to define the function they are talking about "not efficient"?

    one of the few things i agree with hitta on. but good job basically summing up why socionics is useless.
    6w5 sx
    model Φ: -+0
    sloan - rcuei

  7. #7
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    He has a point though. People do this shit a bit too much: "Yes Si is inquisitive environmental accessing protocol analyzer gadgetizer that allows us to facilitate the inequalities in our imbalanced self".

    I loled when I read that.

    There has to be some objective definition we all agree on, some sort of foundation- or nothing works. That's why I think, you should see how well people understand socionics based on the most vaguest definitions that were created by the original founders. Ie what 'external dynamics of objects' means. Otherwise people have a tendency to twist the functions to mean what they want them to mean in their own heads..which is too easy to do because socionics is based so much on internal psychology, that people forget to be objective. And it happens sort of where people's brains turn neurotic and weird and creepy and sociopathic and too disconnected from raw reality.

    I guess to be blunt: Everybody acts like an asshole to people over the internet because it's fun/easy to do, but it makes serious debates too hard, and it intimidates others from sharing their perspectives and viewpoints. I'd love to see more debates where people can be cool and respectful. Where we can keep a truly intellectual discussion going without any personal insults...but to get there, people have to stop crappily and stupidly arguing over the raw foundations of the theory.

  8. #8
    Punk
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    1,659
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BulletsAndDoves View Post
    ...

    I guess to be blunt: Everybody acts like an asshole to people over the internet because it's fun/easy to do, but it makes serious debates too hard, and it intimidates others from sharing their perspectives and viewpoints. I'd love to see more debates where people can be cool and respectful. Where we can keep a truly intellectual discussion going without any personal insults...but to get there, people have to stop crappily and stupidly arguing over the raw foundations of the theory.

  9. #9
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah. I'm not holding my breath with that one.

  10. #10
    what is essential is invisible to the eye fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Space
    TIM
    Seer
    Posts
    12,809
    Mentioned
    368 Post(s)
    Tagged
    9 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta View Post
    People can't even agree what a function is, and how each functions work. They go around building these being fantasy elaborations of things, yet they we can't even agree on the root information of a theory. Everyones idealization of every type is different, how is asking someone to define the function they are talking about "not efficient"?
    Who cares? Not I.

    Let people go on believing what they want to believe. I mean, there's no use wasting your breath when nobody is going to listen.
    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    betas should be kept in zoos for children to stare and throw pop corn at.

  11. #11
    JohnDo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    LII-IEI
    Posts
    638
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Functions and elements can be described but not really defined. Defining them would be like defining colours.

    Define red! Define green! It doesn't work. We can just agree that blood is red and grass is green. But how can you know that I don't see blood as what you call green and grass as what you call red? It is conceiveable...

  12. #12
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The misunderstandings are part of the fun. Its probably going to be another decade before the public at large adopts my definitions. Until that time, I'll just derive entertainment from the way everyone still struggles.

  13. #13
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You need only roughly defenitions so you can find them in real life, and then extract your own more defined mental picture of what that function is.

  14. #14
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dynamicism View Post
    Doesn't seem out of reach.
    I don't think it is. You and I have had our disagreements in the past, but I think we've both had a lot more experience since we've had any serious debate, and I feel like our discussions thus far have been fairly productive; we've avoided any serious epistemological issues and have mainly kept to consensus type-relevant information.

  15. #15
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,099
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I guess we're low on haters.
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  16. #16
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •