Quote Originally Posted by Cone
I don't think cross-types are something that should be debunked because of "lack of substantive evidence". I think cross-types are a natural deduction from the consideration of only being able to have one bias in a specific area. Cross-types should be analyzed for flaws in its theoretical base and whether it is valid to assume that possibilities exist in this realm.
I am not really disageeing against crosstyping because of "lack of substantive evidence," there are lots of theories that I have accepted and studied in the past that had lack of evidence, but I only accepted them because they were all better alternatives. In this regards,"Crosstyping theory is not a better alternative above standard socionics theory and actually backtracks unnecessarily away from the theory without solid reason to do so" and therefore I can not accept the theory ahead of standard socionics theory.

I hate to offend people, but it is the truth!