it strikes me that the way i'm currently going about this issue doesn't really make sense.
consensus list question
it strikes me that the way i'm currently going about this issue doesn't really make sense.
Meh. I would say, no. But their self-typing should certainly be listed. (my, how this contradicts my first thoughts when this consensus thing first arose.)
Consensus is defined as: An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole.
Everyone here is a part of the group.
I say no, you're already listing their self-typing so it isn't as if you're ignoring their view.
I think a self-typing and a consensus typing are two distinct processes - I don't think they should be intermingled so easily.
this was more or less what i figured.Originally Posted by cracka
however, you guys are certainly muddling the situation here.
exactly. It should be taken into consideration, along with everyone else's opinions.
.
in a word: no. the data is already there. it's just an argument about how to best represent it.
I said yes. It's not less likely to be accurate than anyone else's... generally speaking....
I would say yes to include it. True, a person's self-typing may not be accurate if they do not understand themselves in relation to Socionics, but then again, the same problem also exists for the aggregate whole if the represented voices also fail to understand the person or Socionics. It would be good though to note the difference between a person's self-typing and the consensus (with their's included).
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
self-typings now count towards consensus.
<--Fall into same camp.
Has anyone gone through and added people's self typings to the charts?
yes.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote