EAT DA POOPOO!!!!!!!
EAT DA POOPOO!!!!!!!
Shut the fuck up, dumbass.
lol you treat popper like your SLE bouncer
its a good thing he's dead because you'd find out what he really thinks of you, like when tool the band can't stand their own fans because of how they pretentiously and aggressively promote an image and meaning to the group the group itself disapproves of. im picturing a scenario where you meet your hero and he's like dude you don't understand shit, stop being such a loudmouth and alienating everyone because you personally think I'm your conduit. I actually like these people and don't want to be unilaterally roped into your bullshit
lol you've never even read Popper and think you can say something about it.Originally Posted by Bertrand
And this is supposed to be "Te-valuing", and this is why both you and Socionics are a joke.
yeah that's the thing, I don't have to read popper to know your read on the situation is wrong, because its so janky its like if someone told me Columbus discovered the moon and until I read his obscure personal treatise I can't object
its like ok, you live in your own world, got it
EAT DA POOPOO!
Can somebody just ban @Grendel from this forum for his constant spamming and harassment, thanks. Well I guess this is what this forum and Socionics has come down to, so I guess he is doing his job of destroying it and showing what a worthless endeavor this whole thing is.
ROFLOL, you don't even have to read it to know it, what a fucking lunatic you are, Bertrand. You are the very description of a sophist: To think that you know, when you don't know.
It's ok Bertrand, you don't have to keep talking about yourself.
Hey buddy, I don't treat Popper the same way you worship Jordan Peterson and Jung, ok? In fact I don't particularly care about the guy himself, it's just that he had the right ideas, and ideas can be abstracted away from the person. In fact I think the way he writes is a little boring, and it seems like he may have not even had a great personality, but who knows.
So nice projection, dumb fuck.
And it's a "good thing" that he's dead? Can you be any more disrespectful, you fucking sociopath?
Dude if there is anyone here that deserves a ban its you, I'm quite confidant mods would agree. At this point you are just straight-up attacking the forum with endless anti-typology threads and calling everybody idiots.
im not a lunatic you're a lunatic!
I don't spam and harass members like he does.
You call it anti-typology, I call it criticism, WHICH YOU DON'T EVEN ALLOW. So any criticism is labeled "anti-typology" now, as if no one can even criticize it, ever. That's just elevating the whole thing to a dangerous cult.
I mean they're all rational criticisms really, which none has ever managed to make a rational response: they're all personal attacks.
I only attack those who have attacked me first. What about all these dopes that are personally attacking me, right now? That's right, it's only right when you do it in the name of Socionics.
BRB, eating my own shit and dying cause I didn't pay attention to Sing's revelation of Logic™ and Reason™ over the backwards, oppressive dogma of edgy Soviet phrenology that only he fails to realize that we only practice ironically.
Maybe if we bury the hatchet, he'll let us watch Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Jordan Peterson, and Rick and Morty while stoned at his place.
There is a fine a line between providing criticism and trying to raise hell. By spamming threads, calling this place a cult and making arguments that are convoluted beyond any normal person's tolerance for reading them, you are in every way provoking the aggressive responses you are receiving.
@Singu You should really play Farcry 5. In that game you are fighting a cult that actually is crazy and violent and it's story contains a message that would really be useful to you.
Well please tell that to Bertrand or something, who takes it very seriously.
ROFL I have no idea why you would think that they're convoluted. I mean they're just normal arguments really. Maybe if you're not smart enough to understand them.
Why don't you direct your criticisms to @Grendel, who actually IS spamming threads?
There is no point in trying to reason with him. He's clearly a strong logic type with poor ethics. He has no ability to hold himself accountable for his actions, which ironically include poor use of logic and massive speculation. At this point, he is your standard internet troll; out of control logic with no ethical counterbalance.
I'm not "fighting a cult", I'm just treating it as a joke that it really is. Which makes some people like @Grendel upset enough to try and stop me from doing it, even though he's "practicing it ironically", and he knows that this whole thing is a joke...? I don't really know.
All the careful effort you're going to to oppose it, to rehash the same grievances in a million different ways to re-present it to the same audience, without any clear benefit to yourself or them, shows that you are taking it a lot more seriously than most of us, and suggests that it upsets you more than anyone. You can't act like we're the hysterical ones for being sick of your shit when you're the one starting it and actively keeping it going.
I'm simply responding in kind to what you're giving me.
Now, if you want to guarantee that nothing you ever say reaches my ears, even if you finally do say something I can stand out of the blue, please, feel free to ask me to put you on ignore. Of course I won't, since I'd rather take the chance that I finally hear you change your tone to something more bearable, than to plug my ears to someone who very well may be going on the same routine to my deaf ears for all I know. What can I say, I'm fatally optimistic in the hope of people changing.
That, and if I just sing la-la-la and shut you out, that won't stop you from fouling up the waters for others with your insipid posts and doing a great job at thinning out the userbase of an already sparse place.
Honestly, it was my hope that the meme magic would kick in and I wouldn't have to be the only one spamming you. But no, it's all on me to do the things no one else will.
Also, go ahead and ignore me if you want, it won't stop x-amount of other users who haven't ignored either of us from seeing the whole spat from above, and choosing whichever side most pleases them. But in a lot of cases, I'm pretty sure which side that'll be.
There is a fine line between criticism and harassment and you are on the harassment side.
If you don't like the theory then you can go ahead and criticize the aspects you don't like and add ideas on how to improve it. But you aren't doing that. All you are doing is infringing on the rights of other people to express their opinions, like when I had to kick you out of my thread. You don't care about discussing ideas and just want to win. That effectively makes you a troll.
And Socionics doesn't meet the definition of a cult. 1) there is no worship here. 2) we are not trying to force new members to join. etc.
You're the only person who is upset, dumbfuck. Now go back to 4chan to being the edgelord that you really are.
I've already put you on ignore, you dumbfuck. Why do you think that I've been ignoring you the whole time? Now if you don't like what you're reading, then why don't you put ME on ignore, you dumbass?
Maybe because all the other people aren't as stupid as you, at least.
Ok, and yet you ignore all the actual spams and harassments made by Grendel and Bertrand?
Look, the exact same things have happened to anyone who has criticized Socionics, ever. They've all received the same kinds of personal attacks and harassments, just because they've managed to criticize Socionics. It's like they, including you, don't even know why they're trying to automatically shout down any criticisms of Socionics. That just isn't healthy, obviously. It has all the hallmarks of a cult.
Lmao at Sing acting like he's the one keeping his composure and then sperging out with kindergarten-tier ad-hominems in the same sentence, as if he's so fucking rational his emotional judgments of others are to be taken as objective fact. The amount of cognitive disconnect here is astounding.
Look at him. Look at him and laugh.
LOL I'm laughing at you, homeboy. I'm just having fun at your expense.
EAT DA POOPOO!!!!!
Yes, just look at the edgy 4chan genius satire of Grendel. He truly is a secret genius that we never knew.
Bertrand isn't on my level but he is better than you.
Grendel, I don't know enough about him.
You are asking whether their actions are ethical or not. The question would be whether they are over-reacting? We could go down that route but it doesn't matter. There is no point in discussing that because your actions are causing their responses.
this is why I don't buy the Singu is a logical type, because he has no sense of how to evaluate his own work. if he could, he'd realize the major differences between "criticism" and what he engages in (and not be so surprised by what is self evident to most people--that the two diverged long ago, if indeed there was any overlap to begin with). Further he'd realize he could sum up his entire campaign in two sentences: "socionics is not considered a science at this time and therefore should not be treated as such. people who nevertheless use it as the only basis to draw conclusions about other people and in doing so treat them unfairly are wrong." this is not a controversial statement and I think everyone would agree with it. this would be the end of it, yet he nevertheless continues. this is where it becomes more about him than anyone else. at this point I think he exists in a state of doubt, and is looking for the environment to settle it, so he tries to provoke a reaction any way he can, not realizing this is essentially sadistic, because it treats people as his personal instruments to resolve his own doubts. not through logical argumentation but because he simply feels their reactions, thus when people get mad the conclusion is something like "oh I must be right because otherwise my blatant attempts to provoke would fail". this is all so he can evaluate his work. this is what I mean by its a kind of ethical evaluation of work. the underlying logic is incredibly simple and straightforward. the issue is open and shut, theres some weird ethical game at work that he's viewing the product through. its aimed at assuaging his own doubts, he's trying to derive logical certainty from an ethical game which is why it extends beyond all reason and goes on and on and on and on
I dunno, its not that big a deal once you can see it for what it is and realize he has made like zero effectual logical claims and this is about trying to sort out his belief system with recourse to a group consensus and continually testing on those grounds. seeking a reaction in this way is sadistic in the sense that it unilaterally enters everyone into a game centered around his own search for gratification. it is of course draped in "public concern" but that would only be valid if it had any chance of accomplishing something in the realm of objective logic. as it is it does nothing on that front which means it amounts to a mere annoyance in reality, hardly good for anyone
Model A doesn't include maturity. Both Jung and Myers Briggs touch upon that subject.
Singu is a logical type because all his arguments are in a logical form, not a theory, blah blah blah
With that said, his actual use or development of logic is very poor and he is making a lot of fallacies.
He is an immature/underdeveloped logical type.
I agree the logic is immature, its the "over confident teenager" logic, to me that indicates "HA." the -Fe is productive in its own way. in other words, its not the logic that is compelling, that is progressing things--its the -Fe. absolutely no one is moved by the logic, but lots of people respond to the provocations, myself included. this is why it seems like "a cry for help" not a serious logical addition to field of socionics or philosophy of science or what have you. its all energetic not informational. it is sophisticated in an energetic sense, look how he manages to ethically maneuver with a degree of deftness, painting himself as a victim out to help people and so on. people struggle to put their finger on what's wrong with that because its more subtle
Last edited by Bertrand; 05-20-2018 at 07:34 AM.
It's very difficult to make that evaluation online. Mobilizing function is unconscious and weak so it's difficult to see. Text is a limited media form.
yeah totally, I have long believed that at both ends of health (integration and neuroticism) type becomes harder to discern because the underlying mechanism is either so sophisticated or dysfunctional any number of possible things could be going on. type is a kind of normativity. it best explains a mid range
Well, I guess people are already doing a good job of turning Socionics into a joke that it really is. Jordan Peterson is already doing a good job of discrediting Jung with his insane "enforcing monogamy" comment. Nobody sane is going to take it seriously anymore.
First it was Socionics/MBTI, and now Jordan Peterson with his insane comment of "we should give the incels a chance by enforcing monogamy and reviving mystical Jungian bullshit!". Jung has done nothing but help create these insane cults and cultists.
Now let's do the same thing with Socionics, with people like Adam the Evil Overlord suggesting we should enforce duality by picking the right women for us to marry. And Adam's greatest archenemy, @Bertrand has come full circle by coming into defense of enforcing monogamy.
It's really time to kill off this insane cult called Socionics. It is clearly not helping anyone, all it has done is help angry young males like @Bertrand to find a (misguided) sense of purpose.
LOL just look at his post history, they're literally all spams.
The only misguided sense of purpose here is you seeing a derelict internet community as a threat to anyone.
Are you suggesting that these so-called "logical" types are automatically right, logical, reasonable, intelligent, can analyze things, evaluate, etc? What a fucking simpleton you are, Bertrand. You far idealize these "logical types" too much. It just shows that you can't even evaluate things by yourself, so you'd have to depend on these "logical types".
That's not at all what I'm saying, you dumbfuck. Maybe if you were intelligent enough to even understand what I'm saying, then maybe you'll get it. But there's no hope for that, since you're just a dumbass dopey moron. Fuck's sake.
"I'm such a pure-minded advocate of logic and reason that I get indignant when forced to face the cold hard fact that nobody cares!"
lol I make fun of sol for this all the time--no I don't believe that, but its your inability to parse all these factors at once with nuance that makes me think you lack sophisticated logic as a matter of personality, because if you did you wouldn't be making these claims littered with insults and so on. you'd be more cold blooded and precise to begin with
I think it's because you are ethics 2d and 1d so you have difficulty seeing the interaction of logics and ethics in people. If Singu listened to other people and wanted to learn and grow then he would learn rigorous logic. It's his ethics that is holding him back.
I think in the final analysis I would just settle on the fact he is illogical and thus probably not a logical type, since being an illogical logical type makes anything possible (you can prove anything from a contradiction). in other words, from that springboard its open season for speculation. at that point any conclusion is possible but all are dubious. all we can really say is we don't know for certain because hes so unhealthy it could be either
I guess you could make the argument that if we agree on unhealth then it inverts things such that illogical logical types are the norm for a degree of manifest unhealth. but Id also say that manifest unhealth often means being in the grip of inferior functions, so it sort of runs us around
A bad logical type (illogical) and healthy logical type (good logic) will both primarily argue logic. Likewise for ethical types. That is why he is a logical type. He makes very little references to ethics / ethical reasoning.
Posting Permissions
