Jung, plus a bunch of people on here whose observations I can trust ( @anndelise, @Ashton, @k0rpsy, @siuntal) and personal experience
Yes
Some of them. I'm still not convinced that several of them are at all relevant to type (asking/declaring, tactical/stratetic, etc)
lol no
Yes. In a more immediate sense I'd say that instinct stackings are far more important than socionics, but in the long run socionics plays approximately equal importance.
As interesting as they may sound, I haven't developed a good enough sense for how they manifest in people, assuming they exist at all. As such, I wouldn't say I use them; rather, they're more of a passing interest.
Kinda maybe almost?? I surely don't take them literally, maybe on a more archetypal scale there's something to them but I wouldn't place much stock in it.
Given MBTI's poor retestability, I'd call it crap.
As much as I can. I don't expect intertype relations to match up 100% of the time for 150% of all people and there are always outliers, but in general there's gonna be some overall pattern of who really gets along with who best and why when all else is equal. So I guess I'd say 7.5 - 8.
6. I prefer to take intertype relationships in context of the instinct stackings, plus other possible problems like world view, culture, etc and so on. Most relationships end up failing anyway



Reply With Quote