Are DCNH subtypes nonsense?

[Absurd]

I don't understand why some people are so critical, it obviously works, it's not like Gulenko has invented this in a vacuum, it's based on observations, just like socionics is. For example Ni and Si is connected on a subtype level, it is so easy to see this, for example being sensual and spiritual in H persons. And the subtype relations work well too: D-N is a frequent combination in couples, so is H-C. It's all about taking the time to observe this, and understanding what to look for, but I don't think anybody can prove this. If you can get to know people of your own type but with all 4 different subtypes, then it's a good start. When you get further you can use 8 subtypes, it's often quite easy to distinguish between for example Ti- and Fi-normalizing etc. The really cool part is to see how these things occur in our culture. Gulenko has some examples, but it is easy to think of more.

Totally off the radar but his cognitive styles are ripped off and in opposition to themselves, that is, based on something old, something that was successfully used in political theory as well. As for his subtype system, didn't give much thought into it, was busy with other things, but I'll do.

[EyeSeeCold]

I don't understand the point of garnering social validation of a subjective opinion.

If the theory makes sense, and it fits your observations, then it works. If it doesn't then it doesn't.

You should be able to discern that using your own judgment.

[Absurd]

If the theory makes sense, and it fits your observations, then it works. If it doesn't then it doesn't.

Well, if and only if something makes sense as in fitting it in your frame of reality (thanks Ashton, couldn't find a better word), then I don't see a problem. I'm just blabbing not so out of the blue and noticing certain things. Things I have been exposed to/learned about in the past.

You should be able to discern that using your own judgment.

Hehe. You don't make it especially easy for yourself.

EDIT:Agape once PMd me this big list of subtypes multiplied by many and I ended up x/x axis, that is aquadra/quadra axis. Like I said ddn't think about it picking it, but time will come and best LSE in world is going to win the cup of socionics?

[EyeSeeCold]

Well, if and only if something makes sense as in fitting it in your frame of reality (thanks Ashton, couldn't find a better word), then I don't see a problem. I'm just blabbing not so out of the blue and noticing certain things. Things I have been exposed to/learned about in the past.

Yea. Truly that's all you can go on. If a theory doesn't make sense to you and it doesn't fit your observations, what good does other people attesting to its validity have?

I mean if it can't be demonstrated or proved.

[Absurd]

Yea. Truly that's all you can go on. If a theory doesn't make sense to you and it doesn't fit your observations, what good does other people attesting to its validity have?

Thanks. You have just attacked person(s) that say it is a no-no. Sorry for using you, won't happen again.

Cheers.