Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 391011121314 LastLast
Results 481 to 520 of 537

Thread: Anyone want to help make socionics scientific?

  1. #481
    Number 9 large's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Baking bread
    TIM
    LSE 8w9 Sp/Sx
    Posts
    2,185
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    The thought of any psychologist taking this seriously is just lol.

    They must be thinking, "Oh boy, here we go again, yet another idiot who thinks that he has figured out the secret of the human psyche, just because he has read some ancient texts of Jung. Deep breath... this shouldn't take too long."
    yeah just cuz somebody who read ancient university texts for 4 years makes them better than somebody who studied jung

  2. #482
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    The thought of any psychologist taking this seriously is just lol.

    They must be thinking, "Oh boy, here we go again, yet another idiot who thinks that he has figured out the secret of the human psyche, just because he has read some ancient texts of Jung. Deep breath... this shouldn't take too long."
    ...

    The MBTI is practiced and administered to people by real psychologists.

    It’s also administered by many organizations to recruit and train their staff with, particularly in the US. When I underwent psychological counseling, my IEI psychologist talked to me about it (she typed depressed me ISTP then). When I studied business, my HR instructor (also happened to be an IEI) brought it, and other personality classification systems up too, as part of our course material.

    Personality psychology is a full blown field. Every psychology class I took in university referenced and touched upon it.

    Not to mention the other day when I went to a concert in Japan, the very famous, respected musician ended his concert with a quote from Carl Jung.

    Jung and his works and philosophies are actively used and respected worldwide. Be aware that if you don’t acknowledge this, it becomes apparent that you live in a hole and are a dumbass, for talking out of your ass.

  3. #483

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,113
    Mentioned
    219 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    And all I can say is lol.

    MBTI or Jung isn't taken seriously by academic psychologists. Unless you're Jordan Peterson. But then he's just a clinical psychologist, and they tend to take whatever that helps with "therapy".

    Of course psychology touches upon Jung and Freud, since they were a part of history of psychology. But they only mention about how much they don't work, and how they've been plenty of alternative theories since then.

  4. #484
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    And all I can say is lol.
    Laugh all you want. We are all fine with watching you laugh like a retard in lieu of the world’s reality.

    Also what the fuck at “just a clinical psychologist”.

  5. #485

    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,341
    Mentioned
    110 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    We are all fine with watching you laugh like a retard in lieu of the world’s reality.
    Maybe it's best you not speak for anyone but yourself, eh?

    I think his points are valid.

    It sounds to me like you are using intimidation to get your point across.


  6. #486
    idontgiveaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,870
    Mentioned
    163 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Imposiburu

  7. #487
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post
    Maybe it's best you not speak for anyone but yourself, eh?

    I think his points are valid.

    It sounds to me like you are using intimidation to get your point across.
    You just come across as being really easily intimidated tbh.

    Which of his points are valid? The one where he said at first “any psychologists”, yet later changed it to “academic psychologists, except for clinical psychologists”???

  8. #488

    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,341
    Mentioned
    110 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post

    Which of his points are valid?
    Mainly where he says that psychologists are very critical of Freud and Jung, and mention them to say how much they don't work.


  9. #489

    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,341
    Mentioned
    110 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    You just come across as being really easily intimidated tbh.
    This isn't about me.

    It seems like you are using what I call intimidation to get your point accross. Emotional pressuing would have been a synonym of that in this context.


  10. #490

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,113
    Mentioned
    219 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    Also what the fuck at “just a clinical psychologist”.
    Definition of clinical - Relating to the observation and treatment of actual patients rather than theoretical or laboratory studies.

    They don't work with theories.

  11. #491
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post
    Mainly where he says that psychologists are very critical of Freud and Jung, and mention them to say how much they don't work.
    Freud’s works are mentioned in that way, but not Jung’s that I’m aware of. MBTI which was adapted from his works are widely being used by psycholgists and in practice now.

  12. #492
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post
    This isn't about me.

    It seems like you are using what I call intimidation to get your point accross. Emotional pressuing would have been a synonym of that in this context.
    You mean saying the f word?

    LOL. Come on. Don’t make it impossible to be taken seriously.

  13. #493
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Definition of clinical - Relating to the observation and treatment of actual patients rather than theoretical or laboratory studies.

    They don't work with theories.
    Just look at him @Uncle Ave

  14. #494

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,113
    Mentioned
    219 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm pretty sure what we're dealing with is theoritical.

    Unless you're saying that Socionics is not theoretical, which I would somewhat agree.

  15. #495
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also @Uncle Ave , Singu is clearly not intimidated by me. So maybe it is just about you after all, hm?

  16. #496

    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,341
    Mentioned
    110 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    You mean saying the f word?
    No, this is an example of what I mean:

    LOL. Come on. Don’t make it impossible to be taken seriously.
    Argue your point with reason instead of saying things like this, or like this:

    Be aware that if you don’t acknowledge this, it becomes apparent that you live in a hole and are a dumbass, for talking out of your ass.
    I'm not gonna say what is wrong with this style of "argumentation". What about it is not wrong?

    If you cannot convince people thorugh reason it seems you resort to telling people that they live in a hole, can't be taken seriously, are dumbasses etc.


  17. #497

    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,341
    Mentioned
    110 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    Also @Uncle Ave , Singu is clearly not intimidated by me. So maybe it is just about you after all, hm?
    Keep up the gaslighting.


  18. #498
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post
    No, this is an example of what I mean:



    Argue your point with reason instead of saying things like this, or like this:



    I'm not gonna say what is wrong with this style of "argumentation". What about it is not wrong?

    If you cannot convince people thorugh reason it seems you resort to telling people that they live in a hole, can't be taken seriously, are dumbasses etc.
    No. This is my style. It’s not wrong. And you have no right to tell me what to do. When you act like this, people’s respect for you only goes even lower.

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post
    Keep up the gaslighting.
    I will. Keep up being batshit LOL.

  19. #499
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    These three lines one after another in one breath LOL

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post
    Argue your point with reason
    I'm not gonna say what is wrong with this style of "argumentation". What about it is not wrong?
    If you cannot convince people thorugh reason ..
    So... you canít convince me with any reasons whatís wrong with it?

    Youíre even worse than Singu!!!! Congraturations!

  20. #500
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Now mind your own damn business and quit being annoying if you don’t want more. I can make more at any time for the likes of commenting like this.

  21. #501

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,113
    Mentioned
    219 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This pretty much says all about the current state of Socionics. And they expect to be taken seriously...

    They need to step up their game.

  22. #502

  23. #503
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    I'm pretty sure what we're dealing with is theoritical.

    Unless you're saying that Socionics is not theoretical, which I would somewhat agree.
    The point to all this is that you shoot yourself in the foot because science is not just about the theoretical. It needs to be proven true via the hypotheses itís built upon being tested. A theory that doesnít work in practice isnít science at all.

  24. #504
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Uncle Ave And I only say Singu is being a dumbass by talking out of his ass because he lives in a hole, because it’s true. Relative to me. And I know that he can take it.

    By play pretending to “be the bigger person”, you only support and enable his willful ignorance. And you make yourself look pathetically, tastelessly patronizing.

  25. #505

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,113
    Mentioned
    219 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    The point to all this is that you shoot yourself in the foot because science is not just about the theoretical. It needs to be proven true via the hypotheses it’s built upon being tested. A theory that doesn’t work in practice isn’t science at all.
    Science is 100% theoretical dude.

  26. #506
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Science is 100% theoretical dude.
    You are like a dystopian version of Sol. I’m just ignoring you from now on until you stop being 100% wrong.

  27. #507
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I’m going to be really busy again and not around as much probably so message me on Facebook if you need me for whatever reason @ajsindri . I’m going to be marketing a robotics program I’m involved with so if there’s any connection there let me know.

    I’d recommend PMimg Myst too even though she’s often busy and is keen to help, just appreciate it and don’t overload her.

  28. #508
    ajsindri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    504
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    I’m going to be really busy again and not around as much probably so message me on Facebook if you need me for whatever reason @ajsindri . I’m going to be marketing a robotics program I’m involved with so if there’s any connection there let me know...
    Cool! That sound fun. I think we need to finish the math first, but when we do, I'll let you know ^u^
    Check out my socionics work [link]

  29. #509
    idontgiveaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,870
    Mentioned
    163 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sorry still won't help you

    Science is fiction

  30. #510

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,113
    Mentioned
    219 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If there were ever to be an "experimental test" of Socionics, then it must show that "types" stay consistent across different times, situations and cognitive circumstances.

    So for example, if there were a type that has been unquestionably typed as "LIE" by all typists, then:

    A) Does the LIE act consistently over time?

    B) Does the LIE act consistently across all different situations that he is put under?

    C) Does the LIE act consistently, if we try to change his beliefs?

    --

    I think the answer is that obviously, who does actually act consistently and predictably under all those different circumstances? Especially C) is almost logically impossible, since it is the particular belief that translates into particular behavior. Someone with say, a capitalist belief is going to be acting completely differently than someone with a communist belief. And if you say that people are "born" with certain beliefs, then that can't be explained by how genes cause certain beliefs. In fact, how can something like belief in capitalism be evolutionarily guided by genes? That has been created post-birth.

  31. #511
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    If there were ever to be an "experimental test" of Socionics, then it must show that "types" stay consistent across different times, situations and cognitive circumstances.

    So for example, if there were a type that has been unquestionably typed as "LIE" by all typists, then:

    A) Does the LIE act consistently over time?

    B) Does the LIE act consistently across all different situations that he is put under?

    C) Does the LIE act consistently, if we try to change his beliefs?

    --

    I think the answer is that obviously, who does actually act consistently and predictably under all those different circumstances? Especially C) is almost logically impossible, since it is the particular belief that translates into particular behavior. Someone with say, a capitalist belief is going to be acting completely differently than someone with a communist belief. And if you say that people are "born" with certain beliefs, then that can't be explained by how genes cause certain beliefs. In fact, how can something like belief in capitalism be evolutionarily guided by genes? That has been created post-birth.
    Why are you continuing to consider this even if Socionics doesn’t have a theory apparently?

  32. #512
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @ajsindri I hate waiting so I’ll try to help with the math if it’ll speed things up a bit.

  33. #513
    nefnaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    190
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    If there were ever to be an "experimental test" of Socionics, then it must show that "types" stay consistent across different times, situations and cognitive circumstances.

    So for example, if there were a type that has been unquestionably typed as "LIE" by all typists, then:

    A) Does the LIE act consistently over time?

    B) Does the LIE act consistently across all different situations that he is put under?

    C) Does the LIE act consistently, if we try to change his beliefs?

    --

    I think the answer is that obviously, who does actually act consistently and predictably under all those different circumstances? Especially C) is almost logically impossible, since it is the particular belief that translates into particular behavior. Someone with say, a capitalist belief is going to be acting completely differently than someone with a communist belief. And if you say that people are "born" with certain beliefs, then that can't be explained by how genes cause certain beliefs. In fact, how can something like belief in capitalism be evolutionarily guided by genes? That has been created post-birth.
    A) No

    B) No

    C) No

    Socionics is not a behaviorist theory. There will never be a 1:1 correlation between sociotypes and behaviors. If we allow that an individual's behavioral patterns can change over the course of time, and we do, then this is trivially the case.

    If you don't like socionics, why think about it so much? What is your purpose in doing this? Socionics is a highly speculative theory that isn't totally ready for mass consumption. Over time, it will either lead to some obviously useful results and gain mainstream attention, or it won't. If you are not interested in learning or contributing anything, then the best course of action is to just leave it well alone.

  34. #514
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Good, thanks you can take care of him now. BBL

  35. #515

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,113
    Mentioned
    219 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nefnaf View Post
    If we allow that an individual's behavioral patterns can change over the course of time, and we do, then this is trivially the case.
    Something must stay consistent, so what does? (Otherwise there's not much point in saying anything, it might as well be random). Socionics is saying that a type, or the entire person, stays consistent over time and in different situations.

    Does a physics theory for example, allow change? Yes, it allows the change of physical objects over time and space. But it is calculating that from the laws of nature and laws of physics that stay consistent and do not change over time.

    Socionics obviously does not refer to any "laws of nature" or "laws of psychology". If it's saying that it does, then it's saying that the functions are timeless and stay consistent over time. The problem is that the functions are apparently capable of generating many behaviors (or cognition), even unknown ones. We have no idea what kind of behaviors they are capable of creating. That's not how you "prove" the existence of functions, because you might just as well attribute anything to functions. And if anything can be attributed to functions, then what is the point?

    So the question arises: What does stay consistent in Socionics?

    Quote Originally Posted by nefnaf View Post
    If you don't like socionics, why think about it so much? What is your purpose in doing this? Socionics is a highly speculative theory that isn't totally ready for mass consumption. Over time, it will either lead to some obviously useful results and gain mainstream attention, or it won't. If you are not interested in learning or contributing anything, then the best course of action is to just leave it well alone.
    I'm trying to figure out why these kinds of communities try to shield itself from criticism by taking everything personally and not impersonally, which is not how you gain "mainstream attention".

  36. #516
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ^ Actually a pretty good post. I agree! Good job, @Singu .

  37. #517
    ajsindri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    504
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    @ajsindri I hate waiting so I'll try to help with the math if it'll speed things up a bit.
    That would be great! Do you want to work on the structure, or the statistical analysis?
    Check out my socionics work [link]

  38. #518
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    1,566
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajsindri View Post
    That would be great! Do you want to work on the structure, or the statistical analysis?
    Prob analysis but interested in either

  39. #519
    ajsindri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    504
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    Prob analysis but interested in either
    I really need to learn "structural equation modeling". But if you want to teach yourself that and then help us out, that would be super helpful! And if you can do basic programming, I would learn a free stats program called "R".
    Check out my socionics work [link]

  40. #520
    ajsindri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    504
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @sbbds and start small. If you can figure out how to analyze a small group system, like temperament, then we can scale that up to all of socionics.
    Check out my socionics work [link]

Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 391011121314 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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