club descriptions are part of classical socionics, but i'm at a loss for why people from similar clubs are likely to act similarly in any kind of significant way.
it's probably best not to pay too much attention to it.
club descriptions are part of classical socionics, but i'm at a loss for why people from similar clubs are likely to act similarly in any kind of significant way.
it's probably best not to pay too much attention to it.
Since the types in fact do act similarly in the way that is described in the Clubs, wouldn't it be even better to try to find the most accurate and correct explanation for this empirical phenomenon?Originally Posted by niffweed17
would you please just shut up already? nobody cares what you have to say.
this is trivial in the context of real socionics information.
If you would have some broader view, you would know how this fits in real socionics information.
No, sorry.
That's irrelevant. I can't force people to consider what I have to say, but they would benefit from doing it -- if they are interested in getting the types right. They would certainly not learn more by listening to what you have to say, because you have still some things to learn when it comes to the types. You still make typing mistakes now and then.
I think the point of clubs is to divide the types based on the strength of their functions.
Having functions of the same strength allows them to understand the same things, and this makes it more likely for them to engage in the same activities.
Obviously people of the same club but different quadra will have a different take on those activities, and will enjoy them for different reasons (which could go beyond socionics).
LSI
Assuming that the ego and id functions are strong, you may well be inclined to give preference to activities/interests related to those functions. However, they "act similarly" only in a superficial way, a sort of first impression.
Sure.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Reply With Quote
