Originally Posted by
ifmd95
Phaedrus applies personality theory in general inadequately. I don't think he is a typical counterexample. Perhaps you aren't, either. You did go through what seems like an above-average number of different self-types, but you aren't the first person to consider test results.
These are problems with any condensed "snapshot" of interaction, whether one condenses it to a test question, a description, or a narrative – yes. I have argued before that intertype relations are one of the strongest empirical basises for Socionics.
However there are personality theory applications where it is difficult to gather sufficient data in-depth and hands-on. These include distributional statistics, or even to an extent assigning any external characteristic like VI. It's possible these are fruitless pursuits worth conceding. But it's also possible to make up for loss of quality with quantity. This if there isn't some systematic bias. But we can check against biases by considering multiple detached sources and how they compare. I think what I said to Ezra about convergence and the materials applies here too.
I think I covered this earlier: "Even if all quadra values are obvious, one still must choose between a set of 4. Temperament and club can largely explain how one seperates functional usage within the quadra." To understand how a quadra together achieves its values, one still must identify interactions related to the foundational dichotomies.
My bottom line is that while I agree methods besides understanding intertype interaction have limited use in individual typings, there may still enough information available to make unbiased inferences about groups and the Socion itself, where accuracy less depends upon the precision of individual typings.