Originally Posted by
jason_m
But then why be attached? One must have some interests of some kind... Can one be a 'logical type' and have some attachment to a specific field or sphere of interests? What about strong interests? In socionics, how do we differentiate then between these different spheres in terms of what is 'logical' and what 'isn't'? That is my basic problem with the theory...
Even in my own life. I stopped picking up subjects like psychology and philosophy because they 'aren't the hard sciences' and 'aren't Ti.' I obviously like the hard sciences more, but I find my old reasons to be intellectually pretentious, and I have recently reneged on it And that is another point: why can't someone Ti sometimes like some of the softer fields? Why does every book have to be chemistry or biology? Is there really nothing logical about a philosophy or psychology book at all? This part of the theory is just pretense...