Well, you see, at any given moment your brain is bombarded with literally a bajillion sources of stimuli. You look around, detect a familiar scent, feel an ache in your lower back, maybe you think about the meaning behind a friend's words, or the pain in her voice. Perhaps you can picture how something happens from origin to extinction and back again, realize how that might be broken into segments and improved in this or that way. Whatever it is you see, feel, and think, whatever forms the basis for how the world seems to you, that's only a fragment of everything there is. You only ever capable of receiving a piece of the puzzle.
Socionics is a theory that deals with how individuals most naturally deal with these sources of information and how they may fit together or butt up against one another. Someone seeing a pyramid from below may see a square while the person looking at the profile is presented with a triangle. Neither one is inherently wrong, their perspectives simply limit them from acknowledging how they might be reconciled if they recognize the extent of their own limitations. That's not to say that socionics is a theory about how everyone can always be right in their own way. The example just portrays one facet of a greater problem, which is that no one knows if there's a damn pyramid in the first place and that each of our vantage points obscures as much as it illuminates. We only experience what we are capable of.
Neither is socionics a theory leading necessarily into skepticism, however. All it does is point to potential sources of information and perhaps leave the individual with a greater appreciation of what we're talking about when we discuss the 'truth' of any given matter. Socionics also attempts to explain what kind of person provides the most complementary to the most opposing perspective to your own, which in theory tells you the ease or difficulty a potential relationship might present, as well as preventing you from ever getting laid again in your life.