View Poll Results: How Accurate is Socionics in Your Life?

Voters
37. You may not vote on this poll
  • Doesn't make any sense at all.

    7 18.92%
  • Doesn't work on myself, but works on some people I know well.

    2 5.41%
  • Doesn't work on myself, but works on people I know well.

    2 5.41%
  • Doesn't work on myself, but works well on most people I meet (I don't have to know them that well).

    1 2.70%
  • Works on myself, but only works on some people I know well.

    5 13.51%
  • Works on myself and works on people I know well.

    6 16.22%
  • Works on myself and works well on most people I meet (I don't have to know them that well).

    6 16.22%
  • Makes sense of pretty much everything.

    8 21.62%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 52

Thread: How accurate do you feel is Socionics in your life?

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

    Default How accurate do you feel is Socionics in your life?

    I'm just curious what everyone thinks since there are a lot of people that post that seem to give the impression that it hasn't been at all useful for them in understanding other people.

  2. #2
    Humanist Maritsa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,315
    Mentioned
    491 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's been great for understanding the people i already know and even making new connections; it's been terrible with connecting with my duals on a love interest aspect of it. It's extremely useful. Introverts often keep so much of themselves to themselves that it's hard to "read" them unless you're observing them, for me, observation isn't all that great, so I like knowing what motivates them using the tools I have in my Socionics tool kit.
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE

    Best description of functions:
    http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

  3. #3
    Marie84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,365
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Works on myself and works well on most people I meet (I don't have to know them that well).
    that's pretty much where I stand on applying it. It's played a more obvious role with the closer, long term, relations than anything else
    EII INFj
    Forum status: retired

  4. #4
    Slippery when wet Simon Ssmall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    ✈ ↺
    Posts
    2,238
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It works well enough, it is just not that important.
    Looking for an Archnemesis. Willing applicants contact via PM.

    ENFp - Fi 7w6 sp/sx
    The Ineffable IEI
    The Einstein ENTp

    johari nohari
    http://www.mypersonality.info/ssmall/

  5. #5
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    works better than a randomizer algorithm.

  6. #6
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,823
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It seems pretty accurate from what I've seen wtih people I know.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  7. #7
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,320
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    works very well.

  8. #8
    Le roi internet Bluenoir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Zeta Reticuli
    TIM
    Ne-LII
    Posts
    394
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Or we tell ourselves it works. Socionics is rife with the potential for confimation bias, and the forer effect.

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

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


    That said, I find the ideas within socionics interesting to contemplate. My main interest is the information elements and how they manifest. However, I understand that it is all hypothetical, I don't pretend that I am dealing with anything that can actually be demonstrated.

    I think there are people who need to take a step back with this stuff and get some perspective with it's real applicability, of which I am skeptical.
    The mode of goodness conditions one to happiness, passion conditions him to the fruits of action, and ignorance to madness.

    Chapter 14, Verse 9.
    The Bhagavad Gita

  9. #9
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    some people manage to interface with the phenomenon; some people fail.

    you can't always win. somebody has to be the weakest link.

  10. #10
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,823
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neotropic View Post
    Or we tell ourselves it works. Socionics is rife with the potential for confimation bias, and the forer effect.

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

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


    That said, I find the ideas within socionics interesting to contemplate. My main interest is the information elements and how they manifest. However, I understand that it is all hypothetical, I don't pretend that I am dealing with anything that can actually be demonstrated.

    I think there are people who need to take a step back with this stuff and get some perspective with it's real applicability, of which I am skeptical.
    It is rife with that potential, and I do see people taking it too far, but I still think there's something to it. There's that potential as well.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  11. #11
    "Information without energy is useless" Nowisthetime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    near Russia
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    1,030
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Works on myself and works well on most people I meet (I don't have to know them that well).

    Yeah, it works. Just one small example: I recently introduced socionics to a LII friend. He is now studying it (very systematically and at great speed). I told him that he is LII and I showed him some videos of women I type ESE and he was like "wow, I could just watch them talking forever, so adorable".

  12. #12
    Le roi internet Bluenoir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Zeta Reticuli
    TIM
    Ne-LII
    Posts
    394
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker View Post
    It is rife with that potential, and I do see people taking it too far, but I still think there's something to it. There's that potential as well.
    If I believed socionics had no merit whatsoever, I would put it in the same pile as astrology and be done with it. The fact that I am still here shows that is not the case.

    All I am saying, is keep this stuff in perspective.
    The mode of goodness conditions one to happiness, passion conditions him to the fruits of action, and ignorance to madness.

    Chapter 14, Verse 9.
    The Bhagavad Gita

  13. #13
    not gonna be around as much anymore
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    TIM
    C-IEE
    Posts
    1,258
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    works on me, and people I know well.

    Might've selected one of the last two options, if I thought I knew enough people's types outside of my immediate circle. But I don't. Not yet.
    My life's work (haha):
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/blog.php?b=709
    Input, PLEASEAnd thank you

  14. #14
    boom boom boom blackburry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    TIM
    ESI-Se 6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,259
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    so-so.

  15. #15
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,320
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neotropic View Post
    Or we tell ourselves it works. Socionics is rife with the potential for confimation bias, and the forer effect.
    no it's not. Socionics doesn't use the phrases that are typical for forer effect. Also the 8 functions have been proven by neurology scans to exist in different brain regions. Socionics is hardcore science nowadays. Everyone who disputes it just hasn't been paying attention to their relationships or people well enough. If you've met some duals and dated, you will know that socionics works very well. If you haven't experienced it, just means you're a noob. that's oke, but just don't think you can have an opinion if you haven't observed the phenomena well enough.

  16. #16
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,869
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Also the 8 functions have been proven by neurology scans to exist in different brain regions. Socionics is hardcore science nowadays..
    Very interesting. Have any link?

  17. #17
    وزير‎‎ lungs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    11,263
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Also the 8 functions have been proven by neurology scans to exist in different brain regions.
    do you have a source for this?

    edit: beat to the punch, lol
    Hitta: lungs is like a reverse tootsie roll pop
    Hitta: sticky elastic external persona... strong core
    Hitta: or a bukkake girl

  18. #18
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,320
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Director Trevor View Post
    Very interesting. Have any link?
    yes I have two. The video starts uninteresting but gets better. You might want to skip a bit.

    http://blip.tv/file/557221
    http://www.benziger.org/articlesIng/?p=34

    Also the 16 types have different brainwaves measured on EEG, I can look up the source for that if you need it.

  19. #19
    High Priestess glam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,401
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    yes I have two. The video starts uninteresting but gets better. You might want to skip a bit.

    http://blip.tv/file/557221
    http://www.benziger.org/articlesIng/?p=34
    thank you!

    Also the 16 types have different brainwaves measured on EEG, I can look up the source for that if you need it.
    please!

  20. #20
    I'm a Ti-Te! Skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    US
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    522
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It has only been useful to me as an introspective device and little more.

    Attempts to flexibly expand from that have been met with limited success in describing others to themselves, but not in their relation to those around them, i.e. it works for individuals IME, not groups.
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    |
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

  21. #21
    Le roi internet Bluenoir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Zeta Reticuli
    TIM
    Ne-LII
    Posts
    394
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Socionics doesn't use the phrases that are typical for forer effect
    Anything which is reliant on subjective qualifcation, is open for the forer effect. Why do you think there is so much decent over people's type. Hell I remember one guy going changing from LII to ESE. How could such a mistake be made? I wonder.

    Also the 8 functions have been proven by neurology scans to exist in different brain regions
    Not convinced. One website alone is not good enough.

    Socionics is hardcore science nowadays

    no, no, no, no, no!

    Real science is quantitative, testable, repeatable, objectictively verifiable and, most important of all, it lends itself to FALSIFIABILITY. Socionics does none of this.

    Everyone who disputes it just hasn't been paying attention to their relationships or people well enough
    Anyone who disputes it, just dosen't understand? Anyone who disputes astrology just hasn't been paying attention to their relationships or people well enough

    If you haven't experienced it
    You can "experience" anything you tell yourself. Anecdote is meaningless.

    but just don't think you can have an opinion if you haven't observed the phenomena well enough.
    Today 09:07 AM
    The mode of goodness conditions one to happiness, passion conditions him to the fruits of action, and ignorance to madness.

    Chapter 14, Verse 9.
    The Bhagavad Gita

  22. #22
    Restricted user
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    8,075
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Typology is legit—so long as you forget and/or avoid pretty much everything there is to read about it.

  23. #23
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    yes I have two. The video starts uninteresting but gets better. You might want to skip a bit.

    http://blip.tv/file/557221
    http://www.benziger.org/articlesIng/?p=34

    Also the 16 types have different brainwaves measured on EEG, I can look up the source for that if you need it.
    I was very excited by the video in the beginning, but got disappointed afterwards - not before wasting many hours with it . It's a simplistic array of facts about the brain functioning and bare assertions *somehow* connecting them to the functions. Functions which btw, are used as as MBTI *if anything* (eg the "undisciplined" ESFP - and Exhorter, adding Ne - is Fe dominant, or that INFP is fundamentally into organized religion) - it's all in that PDF.
    You talk about "the 8 functions" but you don't even know/care what are you refering at, as usual you take the names of the functions and types as their very essence, disregarding the inherent differences between those in Socionics and other Jungian-based determinations with similar names. That's gross equivocation. I beg you consider it, as it's not the first time...

    One thing is certain, the video describes the location of the functions differently than Socionics. In Socionics it was experimentally (allegedly, too) concluded that one hemisphere is dynamic and the other is static. However, this theory claims that one hemisphere hosts both of what we know as dynamic and static functions, aka left = Perceiving and right = Judging.
    ---

    It's a bunch of gibberish but containing very good observations about individuals of certain types, I like that (I also agree that the fundamentals of philosophy can be found in psychology and the other way around). I see no scientific experiment or demonstration of how those simple facts were used to infer so much, too.
    How does that prove anything, how is it "scientifically demonstrated" for instance that the functions are actually mapped on those areas of the brain as she claims? Or what proves the big H.M. case here, that Judging = long-term memory and Perceiving is short-term, or what's the idea? (this was not the case even in Jung, btw, there's no connection between memory type and Rationality, T/F, N/S nor I/E) Apparently scientists don't yet know what are the real functions of the hippocampus. These flat assertions also specify that cognitive functions are precise regions of the brain, while the full MBTI types are rather what we know as functions (connections in the brain which are used for information flow).

    There are also a lot of other amateurish assertions around, like erasing the border between physical bodies and objects, as used in philosophy/psychology, or between the perception and physical sensations - pretty much the same mistakes that anndelise has done at one point with a *very* similar video (they may even be related). Is that lady actually taken seriously in academia?
    ---

    Those EEG measurements sound interesting, if you feel like sharing.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  24. #24
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    And how were the two neuro super-duper scientific articles supposed to demonstrate the same thing as long as the video explains that all P are on the left and all J are on the right hemisphere, while the written article states that T,S are on the left, and N,F are on the right?
    Jung’s four Functions are rooted in four distinct areas of the cortex. Thinking is housed in the Left Frontal Lobe. Intuition is housed in the Right Frontal Lobe. Sensation is housed in the Left Posterior Convexity. Feeling is housed in the Right Posterior Convexity.
    (in case I'm missing something - I'm kinda tired right now)
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  25. #25
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,320
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Those EEG measurements sound interesting, if you feel like sharing.
    "it was also found that brain wave activity as measured by the EEG differed for each of the psychological types as assesed by the mbti (Gram, Dunn, & Ellis, 2005)"

    From the book theories of personality, schultz 9th edition.

  26. #26
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    "it was also found that brain wave activity as measured by the EEG differed for each of the psychological types as assesed by the mbti (Gram, Dunn, & Ellis, 2005)"

    From the book theories of personality, schultz 9th edition.
    Cool, thanks!
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  27. #27
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,655
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ^ aha, that means socio-/mbti-types are measurable?
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  28. #28
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    brain wave activity differs between all individuals. the result is still useless if there is not also a convergence in activity between people of the same type.

  29. #29
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,320
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    brain wave activity differs between all individuals.
    I would think that people who go study such a thing would be aware of this fact.

    Unfortunately I have no further information about the study...

  30. #30
    thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    5,874
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neotropic View Post
    That said, I find the ideas within socionics interesting to contemplate. My main interest is the information elements and how they manifest.
    That's a good place to start.
    However, I understand that it is all hypothetical, I don't pretend that I am dealing with anything that can actually be demonstrated.
    But with that attitude you'll never get anywhere.

    I think there are people who need to take a step back with this stuff and get some perspective with it's real applicability, of which I am skeptical.
    How long have you been studying socionics? You should keep an open mind.

  31. #31

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    3,624
    Mentioned
    284 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bolt View Post
    ... bare assertions *somehow* connecting them to the functions ... I see no scientific experiment or demonstration of how those simple facts were used to infer so much, too.
    If you do research, it is very common to present the key findings or your main conclusions in your video or powerpoint presentation or main body of the article, and keep the supporting data and details of your reasoning to yourself (probably because scientific communities are full of Ns who can care less for the details). Then if anybody is interested in your findings or conclusions, they can look through supporting information or correspond with you directly. So what you see in such presentations are essentially conclusions. Then if you have questions like how those conclusions were made and what concrete supporting information or experimental evidence was used, you can contact the author or see references to his or her presentation. (That is if you truly care a lot about this.)

  32. #32
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siuntal View Post
    If you do research, it is very common to present the key findings or your main conclusions in your video or powerpoint presentation or main body of the article, and keep the supporting data and details of your reasoning to yourself (probably because scientific communities are full of Ns who can care less for the details). Then if anybody is interested in your findings or conclusions, they can look through supporting information or correspond with you directly. So what you see in such presentations are essentially conclusions. Then if you have questions like how those conclusions were made and what concrete supporting information or experimental evidence was used, you can contact the author or see references to his or her presentation. (That is if you truly care a lot about this.)
    It's 17 videos of 12 - 72 minutes and a PDF of 698 pages lacking scientific method and sources, for the record.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  33. #33
    Le roi internet Bluenoir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Zeta Reticuli
    TIM
    Ne-LII
    Posts
    394
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    How long have you been studying socionics? You should keep an open mind.
    I've only known about socionics for about a year, and only seriously studied it for a few months, so perhaps I'm missing out on vital information ascertaining to it's validity. I am being open minded though, I never said socionics is with no merit. But the very nature of socionics is completely qualitative. As such, I have trouble swallowing it as "vailidified reality", as others seem to claim. Perhaps one of my biggest problems with socionics, is it's reliance on anecdote.

    Nevertheless.

    It's a fascinating idea, thats for sure. However, untill I see socionics making verifiable claims that repeatedly check out, that is not justified only by subjective qualification; then I'll never consider it,

    hardcore science nowadays
    On a side note. By skepticism I do not mean, automatic outright dismissal. What I am really refering to, is agnosticism untill the evidence convincingly points one way or another.
    The mode of goodness conditions one to happiness, passion conditions him to the fruits of action, and ignorance to madness.

    Chapter 14, Verse 9.
    The Bhagavad Gita

  34. #34
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,320
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neotropic View Post
    But the very nature of socionics is completely qualitative. As such, I have trouble swallowing it as "vailidified reality", as others seem to claim. Perhaps one of my biggest problems with socionics, is it's reliance on anecdote.
    every month I see a new member come along with the same arguments. After a while it goes away when you've witnessed socionics work out nicely in reality. Socionics hasn't made claims, it has just made observations. It's empirical, just as nearly everything in psychology is based on empirical observartions.

  35. #35
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Just because you can neatly frame a past experience after the fact in neat terms within a system of thought, does not make it science.

    That said you can make useful predictions using Socionics. I've definitely used it as a wonderful little tool for predicting how people will react to different things based on what I know about types and quadras.

  36. #36
    not a bumblebee octo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    TIM
    IEI 4-6-9 apparently
    Posts
    2,759
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neotropic View Post
    Or we tell ourselves it works. Socionics is rife with the potential for confimation bias, and the forer effect.

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

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forer_effect
    Confirmation bias definitely - Forer effect, no. Since socionics requires self-typing, and there are people who can say they are "definitely" LIE and people who say there are "definitely not", that directly contradicts the Forer effect.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Also the 8 functions have been proven by neurology scans to exist in different brain regions.
    I don't think you can claim that. MBTI is different to socionics. Also, proving the 8 functions exist in different brain regions requires accurate typing of a large sample of people who you'd then scan, and since at the moment there's no means to type people accurately and reliably, there's no "proof".

    Socionics is hardcore science nowadays.
    Lol. Personality psychology will never be "hardcore science".
    Quote Originally Posted by Agee The Great View Post
    Nobody here...besides me, seems to know what SLE is except for maybe Maritsa.

  37. #37
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by octopuslove View Post
    I don't think you can claim that. MBTI is different to socionics. Also, proving the 8 functions exist in different brain regions requires accurate typing of a large sample of people who you'd then scan, and since at the moment there's no means to type people accurately and reliably, there's no "proof".
    Yeah and also, the way I see it, the expectation to find the functions mapped onto the brain is baseless altogether. To consider the functions of being "something" that can be found somewhere is a reification that we regularily do, IMO, when we forget the premises.
    ---

    Maybe my metaphor will not be the best, but I see trying to find where the functions are located in the brain like "let's find where the gravity is located in the Earth" as the method to prove that gravity exists. Some easy reasons to understand this:

    - Socionics is based on a model we use to understand what's going on, to classify human personality; if someone becomes a thief for different reasons, will we find something in his brain differentiating him from the rest? He's what we know as a thief and his functions are stealing and robbery, or something;

    - the functions are themselves concepts to understand how information is used. It's IMO as impossible to separate bodies from the fieds, for example, as trying to separate a group from its members. Imagine how would that be if this community would migrate to socionix.com but all its members would stay here . Makes no sense as it makes no sense for someone to be Ti-Creative but loose the ability to be Fi-PoLR after a brain injury, as long as they're the same thing.
    Last edited by The Ineffable; 03-27-2011 at 07:10 AM.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  38. #38
    Le roi internet Bluenoir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Zeta Reticuli
    TIM
    Ne-LII
    Posts
    394
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by octopuslove View Post
    Confirmation bias definitely - Forer effect, no. Since socionics requires self-typing, and there are people who can say they are "definitely" LIE and people who say there are "definitely not", that directly contradicts the Forer effect.
    While I still think an individual can still fall victim to the Forer effect, when attempting to self type; I see where you're comming from. For the sake of avoiding derailing this thread into a argument of pure triviality, I will concede that small point for socionics as a whole concerning the said effect.

    I see a new member come along with the same arguments. After a while it goes away when you've witnessed socionics work out nicely in reality
    Just beacuse once skeptical members become convinced, does not vailidify anything in regards to it's actual applicability. This is nothing but an appeal to popularity.
    Last edited by Bluenoir; 03-27-2011 at 02:34 PM. Reason: just noticed a grammatical mistake
    The mode of goodness conditions one to happiness, passion conditions him to the fruits of action, and ignorance to madness.

    Chapter 14, Verse 9.
    The Bhagavad Gita

  39. #39

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    9,800
    Mentioned
    188 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's 100% accurate, I understand the theory really well, I can see how other people's relationships work out well, the problem is- is that it doesn't really help me actually 'do anything', it only explains what has already existed. So it has the equivalency of the 'absent-minded professor' who studies well and knows interesting things, but isn't practical enough to take care of their every day living responsibilities....

    Socionics isn't really helpful is what I'm saying. It's just incredibly interesting. It isn't practically purposeful, and isn't really helpful at all. It's just more like narcissistic knowledge-seeking. It just accurately explains what you already deep down what was true- the functions are so ingrained into reality that way.

    So it's intelligent but that's really all it is. It just sorta has the tendency to make everybody psychologically shout over one another and ego attack. Idk. I sorta have this urge to be all 'come back down to reality.'

    What is really good for you in life usually isn't all that 'interesting' at first, but once you lose it, you're like 'Oh fuck.'

    I tried to apply socioincs in my real life but it doesn't work because it's just too ingrained in reality like that. It's too deeply embedded. It's like trying to apply algebra in your real life you know? It's just too intellectual-ish. Like Gilly says 'the functions are already in everything, anyway.'
    inumbra: bnd is looking for the exceptional bullies

  40. #40
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,320
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by octopuslove View Post
    Lol. Personality psychology will never be "hardcore science".
    that's right. but socionics is more scientific than most psychology theories. You agree on that?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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