Freud's thoughts on Socionics

[Cone]

It is a mistake to believe that a science consists in nothing but conclusively proved propositions, and it is unjust to demand that it should. It is a demand only made by those who feel a craving for authority in some form and a need to replace the religious catechism by something else, even if it be a scientific one. Science in its catechism has but few apodictic precepts; it consists mainly of statements which it has developed to varying degrees of probability. The capacity to be content with these approximations to certainty and the ability to carry on constructive work despite the lack of final confirmation are actually a mark of the scientific habit of mind. -- Sigmund Freud

Isn't this Socionics in a nutshell?

But really, I have to agree with Freud in this aspect. Ideas do not need measurable proof to be used constructively. Just because you can't see something in a concrete form, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. A speculation is just as valid as a proven fact. If it wasn't, society would still be in the stone age. In fact, most great discoveries began as simple speculations, and guess what? Socionics is just a speculation. Yet it works enough to help people out.


Your INTp friend,

Cone

[metaiwan]

Yeah I totally agree. I think psychology in general has always had this problem, hopefully to be resolved in the next few decades for everyone's sake. There is nothing tying down psychology to hard science, mostly. Especially in Freud's time. Now, especially Socionics. Although it's just a theory, it's a theory that make a hell of a lot of sense alot of the times, and seems to be helpful when used right.

[CuriousSoul]

But really, I have to agree with Freud in this aspect. Ideas do not need measurable proof to be used constructively. Just because you can't see something in a concrete form, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. A speculation is just as valid as a proven fact. If it wasn't, society would still be in the stone age. In fact, most great discoveries began as simple speculations, and guess what? Socionics is just a speculation. Yet it works enough to help people out.

I have to disagree with you on this one. The problem is that once you have a theory you are quickly blinded by the theory. You see the world in the light of the theory, and however flawed and misleading the theory may be, once it has gained a position of authority most people will accept it blindly and follow its precepts without much regard to common sense and their surrounding reality.

Siegmund Freud is a very good case in point. He was undoubtedly a gifted writer and a charismatic personality, but unfortunately also an egomaniac intellectual charlatan whose theories on Oedipus complex, penis envy, etc. have been taken as literal truth by thousands of parents, doctors and teachers and have caused untold of suffering, and hampered the progress of psychology by replacing scientific inquiry with mythological stories.

It is much better to openly admit our ignorance and not to have a theory, than to act upon an overreaching theory of everything whose only real function is to replace independent thinking with pre-packaged answers. Thus it is, for example, far better for socionics to remain an obscure, new age, nonsense quackery, rather than to go mainstream until there is an ample body of undeniable hard evidence to support the many and contentious claims of socionics - and even then better to proceed with great caution, for I can clearly see the many dangers lying ahead:
-No, you should not try to date that cute, preppy ESTJ girl - since you are conflicting types it would never work anyhow.
-Oops, It seems we got your type wrong, you would actually have been perfect for each other, oh well, nevermind.
You see by now where I am coming from?

[metaiwan]

I see where you are coming from all too well. I tend to keep all of my observations to myself, like socionics is one big experiment. I like to watch types interact and understand the different types of relationships, and how people's personalities and quirks effect that. I very very rarely openly discuss socionics, I prefer to use it in hidden but never nefarious ways. This often comes out as advice such as (to an INTP and an INFJ in a bad relationship) ... if you don't get along with each other, I doubt that's ever going to change. Getting away from the relationship might just do you both good.

I think the best way to use socionics is the common sense even insightful common sense that comes from it. IE There are no bad types, only bad relationships. Personal relationships hardly ever change. etc