Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 41 to 59 of 59

Thread: Is Socionics pseudoscience?

  1. #41

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Seattle, Washington
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    140
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    I was talking about what is science and what is not science because that's something that I've been personally curious about, but maybe many people may not care.

    Well I don't think "finding Fe in the brain" is all that far-fetched (they say that the brain is "localized"... in that specific functions of the brain are located in specific areas of the brain. But obviously that's a vast oversimplification. Another theory is that the brain has hundreds of thousands of different modules, and they all perform different things and they're all interconnected rather than specialized. So the brain is just a collection of many different modules that perform different things, and it's not exactly a coherent "one organ". That seems to make more sense to me.)...

    Anyway, there's not much in this that suggest that it conforms to the "Model A" theory, so I don't see why people should keep holding onto it.
    There is an Extraverted Feeling area of the brain, the right orbitofrontal cortex, lesions to this area cause various forms of social inappropriateness without the ability to modify behavior in response to social cues, especially facial expressions.
    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lane_Friesen
    So here is an independent researcher that has managed to integrate MBTI (renamed MBNI because of trademark infringement) with neurology. The inability on your own part to find the correct fit for a theory because you lack a coherent internal model isn't an inherent weakness of the theory. Not only that but I've known about these theoretical advancements for over a decade, I only mention this because the Keirsey Temperament Sorter says that the xNTx types are 'Rationals' that care about 'Competency' and it's important that you recognize when you've taken an incompetent approach to integrating your knowledge when you take up study/research projects. You should have been grounding the concepts and patterns into factual relationships SIMULTANEOUSLY to your study of Socionics.

  2. #42
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    TIM
    somethin'
    Posts
    1,644
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I really don't give two shits if socionics is psuedoscience or not, as long as there is something useful that can be learned.

  3. #43
    Metaphysician thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    7,154
    Mentioned
    203 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Do you really suppose that MBTI is any different than Socionics in a meaningful way? How?
    If you can't tell the difference between MBTI and socionics then either 1) you essentially don't know anything about socionics (and not nearly enough to criticize it) or 2) this thread may be applicable to you.
    Last edited by thehotelambush; 10-24-2017 at 11:46 PM.
    The higher, the fewer

    Articles - Questionnaire - Typology Network - Blog

  4. #44
    Slade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    138
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    If can't tell the difference between MBTI and socionics then either 1) you essentially don't know anything about socionics (and not nearly enough to criticize it) or 2) this thread may be applicable to you.
    I second this.
    Hey, feel free to PM me with any opinions about my type

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,282
    Mentioned
    439 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hatchback176 View Post
    There is an Extraverted Feeling area of the brain, the right orbitofrontal cortex, lesions to this area cause various forms of social inappropriateness without the ability to modify behavior in response to social cues, especially facial expressions.
    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lane_Friesen
    So here is an independent researcher that has managed to integrate MBTI (renamed MBNI because of trademark infringement) with neurology. The inability on your own part to find the correct fit for a theory because you lack a coherent internal model isn't an inherent weakness of the theory. Not only that but I've known about these theoretical advancements for over a decade, I only mention this because the Keirsey Temperament Sorter says that the xNTx types are 'Rationals' that care about 'Competency' and it's important that you recognize when you've taken an incompetent approach to integrating your knowledge when you take up study/research projects. You should have been grounding the concepts and patterns into factual relationships SIMULTANEOUSLY to your study of Socionics.
    The OFC's existence is not really proof for the nuances of the function model of MBTI's or Socionics's.

    Even studies like the ones proving that processing emotional information suppresses processing of mechanical information* and vice versa don't prove any such nuances and they never will because those are incorrect.

    Some generalities are true about Jung's/MBTI's/Socionics's ideas yes and a few observations about cognition are interesting also but these models are not ok for classification of concrete things. They are only ok for observing trends of patterns of preferences.

    *: Study for example: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23110882 (Full text https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...hms-424462.pdf)

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    434
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It is largely, but that doesn't make it uninteresting or unuseful either. Not everything needs to be purely "scientific." That said, some people around here rely on this stuff like it's a religion and that is far from a balanced or healthy perspective either.

  7. #47
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    INFj EII
    Posts
    373
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I believe the answer is no. There has been research into the theory behind it, although mostly in Eastern Europe, and it probably is good enough. I haven't really checked any of their research though.
    If I stop responding or posting, I've probably taken a break from posting stuff. This really taxes me for whatever reason. Said break could last anywhere from a month to a year. I will likely be back, as socionics is one of my interests. If I'm not on here, you can contact me on steam.

    I got a new computer, so I'll not type on mobile as much any more.

  8. #48
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,683
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    it's less pseudo-scientific than race realism.
    Capitalism is the belief that the rich don't work hard when they don't earn enough, and that the poor don't work hard when they earn too much.

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    none of your goddamn business
    Posts
    461
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It is 100% real & objective. We just don't have the tools to discover it fully enough yet.

    Of course just because it's real doesn't mean people need to nerdily obsess about it 24/7 or anything. I mean feces is also real, do you talk about it all day too?

  10. #50
    🍬ⓈⓤⒼⓐⓇ🍬🎩ⒹⓐⒹⓓⓎ🎩🍮Ⓝⓞⓔ 🍮 ApeironStella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Alcor's Mindscape
    TIM
    LII-Ne 9w1 972 s?/s?
    Posts
    390
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default



    That doesn't mean it is not an area worthy of research/time spent thinking about it or making observations related to it, though. Especially if it is a useful tool for people.
    -Statice-
    1-)(Statique)Something unchanging.
    2-)(Sea Lavender)They
    symbolize both
    fond memories and sympathy
    and can be used either in
    memorial wreaths and bouquets
    or in floral arrangements at
    reunions or meetings of old friends.

  11. #51
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    1,134
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm not sure if the line blurs - but no, I don't care about calling socionics as science, because in the layman term, no one will buy that, and rightly so.

    For talking, it's an interesting subject to discuss, and it sometimes works: but dangerous too, I've told people about it who think it does more than what it really can do.

    For me, socionics is useful for,

    explaining and locating my ideal mate (it seems to bear out from my experiments)
    some traits of people (eg is that person really depressed or are they the negative type of ILI)
    some awarenesses and coping mechs for weak areas (good advices by Gulenko on managing weaker function).

  12. #52
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    INFj EII
    Posts
    373
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No.
    If I stop responding or posting, I've probably taken a break from posting stuff. This really taxes me for whatever reason. Said break could last anywhere from a month to a year. I will likely be back, as socionics is one of my interests. If I'm not on here, you can contact me on steam.

    I got a new computer, so I'll not type on mobile as much any more.

  13. #53

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    494
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Anything that can't be empirically observed or logically inferred from observation fails to meet the criteria for science. This includes a good chunk of psychology, parts of the softer "sciences", and the cognitive portion of typology.

    For this reason, I don't think socionics is ever going to satisfy all of the criteria needed to be a science.

    The map is not the territory. However, the map still has its uses.

  14. #54
    Hiatus
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    EIE Sx/So 3w4 78
    Posts
    8,962
    Mentioned
    683 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Should we start embracing that we actually use magic? Would be interesting for sure.

  15. #55
    falsehope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    TIM
    ILE ENTp-Ti
    Posts
    388
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If socionics would not fit in any of these criteria, we would have theory for general artificial inteligence, which would revolutionize everything around us. Apparently humanity does not understand the nature of general intelligence in such precise way and we are still very far from that. Anyway, socionics is the best what we have and it's about something very significant, it's about brain, the most mysterious thing after the theory of everything if not before.

    Also, what is said to be not pseudo science is relatively simple and obvious to the point it is testable in easy way (sometimes less easy but still doable). And socionics is very complex and therefore it's hard to test it in simple way and good testing methods have not been invented yet but they may emerge. For example, DNA testing may reveal precise type which is scientifically testable. There might be Artifical Intelligence which would be able to precisely type everyone based on the simple interactions and VI.

    MBTI is false science because once invented it haven't changed or improved in many ways and contains some mistakes which were already disproved (like J/P). This theory is not also very liked by western academics and this might be the reason. Socionics is evolving and matures over time, there are many new ideas and new proposals to it. For example, subtypes, 16 functions (along with negatives). Socionics also predicts relationships and I can confirm that this is very true and testable, but testing is not easy because of complex nature of the theory itself, therefore there are people saying it's pseudoscience. It is active science, and it's not everything properly explained because it's extremely difficult subject and if we knew what every mental function precisely does and how connects with others we would be ruled by AI overlord by now.

  16. #56
    WinnieW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    721
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    My take on this:
    Neither Socionics nor MBTI are verifiable, because they are based on the theory of cognitive functions of C.G. Jung, an other hypothesis. It is not achievable to proof if cognitive functions are for real, neither you can disproove their existence.
    For now it's a workable theory to sort people based on their cognitive similarities.

    But it's quite common in science that scientists work with pure hypothesis merely based on mathematical models, if they don't contradict existing experience and known, proven laws of nature.
    (e.g. the existence of quarks as buildung blocks of atomic particles or the string theory)

  17. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    52
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Post modernist socionics: everything is everything. All angles are correct, not correct, and non-exsistant all at the same time, depending on which way you look. One persons LII is another's IEE and that's okay.

    This is liberal arts, not science, not even pseudoscience. It's psychological in that it takes place - sometimes but not really and yes really - in the mind. People that practise it have no consensus. Art is endlessly interpretable depending on the observer.

  18. #58

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,282
    Mentioned
    439 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by imarite View Post
    Post modernist socionics: everything is everything. All angles are correct, not correct, and non-exsistant all at the same time, depending on which way you look. One persons LII is another's IEE and that's okay.

    This is liberal arts, not science, not even pseudoscience. It's psychological in that it takes place - sometimes but not really and yes really - in the mind. People that practise it have no consensus. Art is endlessly interpretable depending on the observer.
    Eww

  19. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    52
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    Eww
    I know right? That's where its at these days.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

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