Typing Methods: Type of Information Metabolism

[krieger]

just for clarity's sake; i was an IM-enthusiast for most of the three years i first studied socionics. i believed in the fiction as fanatically as a lot of people here do. i started focussing on observable traits when i realized that the level of controversy raised by the practice was unacceptable. the only way to keep up the IM interpreting game is to engage in a kind of immature form of solipsism where you expect yourself to always be guessing right and others to be guessing wrong. there are never any verifyable predictions made and so never any risks of being exposed as a charlatan. from the cynical point of view, this makes anyone who joins the "game" a charlatan by default.

[Jarno]

labcoat, I see myself agreeing with every post you made in this thread so far. Funny cause we used to be a bit more opposites on these matters.

[buckland]

just for clarity's sake; i was an IM-enthusiast for most of the three years i first studied socionics. i believed in the fiction as fanatically as a lot of people here do. i started focussing on observable traits when i realized that the level of controversy raised by the practice was unacceptable. the only way to keep up the IM interpreting game is to engage in a kind of immature form of solipsism where you expect yourself to always be guessing right and others to be guessing wrong. there are never any verifyable predictions made and so never any risks of being exposed as a charlatan. from the cynical point of view, this makes anyone who joins the "game" a charlatan by default.

What's the difference between your method and the IMers? Your basis must be derived from a source population who were determined via "subjective" IM predictions. There's nothing quite yet that's objective about socionics, hence the disparity in typings consistently being produced.

[Jarno]

There's nothing quite yet that's objective about socionics, hence the disparity in typings consistently being produced.

There are other reasons for the disparity thinkable. Different and weak typing methods. Not experienced users of typing methods. Not knowing the typed person as well. Etc.

Overall there is a lot of objectivity in socionics. Everyone knows that extraverts are energy spillers and introverts are energy savers. Though IM's are less easy to define and therefor also lead more easely to confusion.

[buckland]

There are other reasons for the disparity thinkable. Different and weak typing methods. Not experienced users of typing methods. Not knowing the typed person as well. Etc.

All of these are subjectivities, or at least introduce subjective bias.

Overall there is a lot of objectivity in socionics. Everyone knows that extraverts are energy spillers and introverts are energy savers. Though IM's are less easy to define and therefor also lead more easely to confusion.

No, the only objective criteria that can be measured currently would be relationship statistics. Everything else is entirely subjective (or at least qualitative as opposed to quantitative), for example the above bolded bits and other stereotypes. They are useful as guidelines but no more than that.

[FDG]

this is a very complicated issue. It can't be solved with a logical imperative, I'm afraid.

[buckland]

this is a very complicated issue. It can't be solved with a logical imperative, I'm afraid.

[Jarno]

All of these are subjectivities, or at least introduce subjective bias.



No, the only objective criteria that can be measured currently would be relationship statistics. Everything else is entirely subjective (or at least qualitative as opposed to quantitative), for example the above bolded bits and other stereotypes. They are useful as guidelines but no more than that.

oh oke.

When I write objective I mean what the majority of the people agree on. Else everything would be subjective. But I see what you mean.

[mfckr]

.