Truth about MBTI and Socionics

[Hitta]

You are really dumb if you believe that the differences between the types are not caused by different brain structures. I am an empiricist, and contrary to you I have a scientific approach to all this. I rely on what can be verified by empiricial observations (or falsified by it). You refuse to look at empirical reality and instead believe in your own (incorrect) interpretation of a model. (That is the only argument in favour of your claim that you are an INTj, by the way).

Well there isn't a person on the Planet who doesn't think that what they are doing or what they believe is right. And I never said that different brain structures didn't cause differences in people that may cause someone to think they are a different type. You are putting words in my mouth. How are you gonna come to the conclusion that a type is absolute? What exactly are you basing it on? Do you have some type of bible that know one else has ever seen before? Also, the way that you use the word empiricist is incorrect. You are confusing empiricism with an objective type of way at looking at the world. Empiricism is actually a subjectivist branch of philosophy and science, in that we can only know what we see. Empiricist use probably, and repetition of certain things happening in the world to create theories and ideologies. We are all empiricists if you want to be technical about it. Empiricists are not absolute truth thinkers. I don't know who in the hell told you this or where in the hell you got that notion from, but it is a big load of bullshit.

For some reason you believe you have the truth for some reason, like you are subject to something else that everyone else doesn't see. You make assumptions and consider them to be absolute, then you call everyone else idiots for not considering what you believe law. How do you come to the conclusion that something is an objective fact? Its as if you are taking a bunch of your assumptions, and have turned them into some religion of absolute fact. Faith? Faith in your own reason, faith that whatever you believe will always be absolute. Just like the religions around the world you believe in something that is not absolute, then you try to force it down peoples throats as if its the truth. You are nothing but a scam, a simple con-artist. A mere shadow of truth. You believe as if you have come to a complete understanding of existence, and have left no reason for questioning or curiosity. You are a convinced man, I hope you die happy.

[Hitta]

I like Phaedrus, his stupidity makes me feel godlike.

[Phaedrus]

Well there isn't a person on the Planet who doesn't think that what they are doing or what they believe is right.

Well, there is at least one -- you. That conclusion is a logically necessary consequence of your premises.

How are you gonna come to the conclusion that a type is absolute? What exactly are you basing it on?

We can see the types directly by looking at reality (empirical observations).

Do you have some type of bible that know one else has ever seen before?

I don't close my eyes.

Also, the way that you use the word empiricist is incorrect. You are confusing empiricism with an objective type of way at looking at the world. Empiricism is actually a subjectivist branch of philosophy and science, in that we can only know what we see.

That's why I don't blindly accept a theory like you do. Instead I believe what I can observe, what I can see. And I can see the types directly in the people I meet. I know that types exist because I can observe them.

Empiricist use probably, and repetition of certain things happening in the world to create theories and ideologies. We are all empiricists if you want to be technical about it.

Wrong. INTjs are not empiricists. INTjs are natural born anti-empiricists (idealists, rationalists, anti-realists, relativists, social constructionists -- the same fundamental anti-empiricist attitude comes in different shades and shapes and has many names).

Empiricists are not absolute truth thinkers.

Wrong. If we don't accept the notion an "absolute (objective) truth", we cannot be wrong. That's the essence of relativism -- that you are always right because you cannot be proven wrong. Empiricism is the complete opposite to such an attitude. Science is based on the notion of an absolute truth. Science is all about finding the objective truth. If you are opposed to objective truths, you are opposed to science. Again, that is a trademark of INTjs, and your totally unscientific attitude is the only thing about you that indicates that you could be an INTj.

I don't know who in the hell told you this or where in the hell you got that notion from, but it is a big load of bullshit.

I am an expert on this, whereas you are a brainwashed beginner. Listen and learn.

For some reason you believe you have the truth for some reason, like you are subject to something else that everyone else doesn't see. You make assumptions and consider them to be absolute, then you call everyone else idiots for not considering what you believe law. How do you come to the conclusion that something is an objective fact?

I see that it is an objective fact. The difference between me and some others is that I keep my eyes open instead of closed. I evaluate the evidence, and I evaluate it objectively. And then I test hypotheses -- something you never do. You always refuse to compare your hypotheses with reality -- I always do that before I come to a conclusion.

Its as if you are taking a bunch of your assumptions, and have turned them into some religion of absolute fact.

It might look that way to you, because you can't see the tests I have done, you can't see the empirical investigations I have performed, and you can't see the research I have done in order to reach the general conclusions that are the inevitable consequence of all that research.