Behaviorism tells us that all behavior is unique: there are no underlying processes or objects driving the various behaviors we perform. While behaviors may cause other behaviors, a behavior is ultimately at either end of this causal chain. This destroys the basis of all psychoanalysis, and while the observations may possibly still hold, any and all interpretation or theory is meaningless. Freud and his followers were chasing an illusion.
When I look at Socionics, I am truly amazed at how everyone seems to fit into one particular type, given that they are not afflicted by any type of mental disorder. The accuracy of the descriptions are impeccable beyond belief. Jung really hit the nail on the head when he theorized his sixteen types.
Then tcaudilllg came out with his cross-dominancy theory. He must be trying to fit individual traits into specific types, we said. It's a common mistake to try and type every behavior you see. Still, if you use the theory in conjunction with Socionics, once again everyone fits into exactly one specific type, even cross-dominant types. But if his theory is wrong, then what exactly is going on?
Look at every other theory in personality: MBTI, Benis, James, Cattell, etc. Still everyone fits perfectly into one specific type, given room for individual differences. Every theory has its own proponents that swear the accuracy of each is impeccable. Contrary to popular belief, these people are not idiots, as we here at Socionics are apt to believe. If they are idiots, then we hold the exact same connotation.
Are we right? Is every other theory wrong? We see our theory holding up so well before our eyes; what could we possibly be missing? Could we have been chasing an illusion, just like our poor psychoanalysts?
We have to eventually realize that Socionics could very well be completely invalid. No matter how "accurate" the descriptions are, we must accept that it is all an illusion fooling our eyes. No matter how much evidence builds up in our favor, we are always missing the point. And no amount of evidence will prove Socionics if it's completely groundless.