OkCupid Types versus Socionics Types: your Dating experience

[Creepy-bg]

um, but what about say a 40yo with only 4 sexual experiences
vs a 20yo with 30 sexual experiences?

Having sex 4 times is the same as having sex 30 times, so I think the question is irrelevant.

I'm sorry but your wrong. Especially when the age verses experience thing is considered.

[Angel von Himmel]

um, but what about say a 40yo with only 4 sexual experiences
vs a 20yo with 30 sexual experiences?

Having sex 4 times is the same as having sex 30 times, so I think the question is irrelevant.

I'm sorry but your wrong. Especially when the age verses experience thing is considered.

Sex is just sex, and that is all that it is ...

[Creepy-bg]

um, but what about say a 40yo with only 4 sexual experiences
vs a 20yo with 30 sexual experiences?

Having sex 4 times is the same as having sex 30 times, so I think the question is irrelevant.

I'm sorry but your wrong. Especially when the age verses experience thing is considered.

Sex is just sex, and that is all that it is ...

I don't know how to put this nicely, but I'll try... do you really consider your opinion on this matter to be informed? You have a distorted view on relationships and sexual matters in general. At least accept the possibility that after some experience your opinions now may seem a bit off.

Yes... sex can be just sex. Sex can also be so much more though.

[Expat]

What would Te be in this case?

Not reach "obvious" conclusions in the absence of evidence.

Yeah, because Te ALWAYS draws emperically correct conclusions

No. That is not what I meant, nor should it be understood like that.

At no point did I say that Dio's conclusion about that test being copied from MBTI was incorrect - it may well be correct as far as I know.

What I do say is that that conclusion is neither "obvious" nor "self-evident" in the absence of more evidence than the number 16, which is the essence of his evidence.

Also, of course also reaches wrong conclusions, most often precisely due to not choosing data well.

So I was not arguing that Dio was necessarily wrong, I was pointing out his over preference.

[anndelise]

um, but what about say a 40yo with only 4 sexual experiences
vs a 20yo with 30 sexual experiences?

Having sex 4 times is the same as having sex 30 times, so I think the question is irrelevant.

I'm sorry but your wrong. Especially when the age verses experience thing is considered.

Sex is just sex, and that is all that it is ...

wow, so any female who has had sex at least once is a whore?

[Expat]

Then what does Te do? Assumptions are required for evaluations of ANY kind.

cannot work without , and vice-versa.

A pure person would just collect data without being able to reach any conclusions from them. A pure person would reach conclusions without any data to back them up.

Dio is closer to the latter than to the former. That was my point.

The above is my understanding of the observations I have made.

[FDG]

wow, so any female who has had sex at least once is a whore?

I'd say that even if she had rode a bike once, her pureness is gone forever.

[FDG]

What would Te be in this case?

Not reach "obvious" conclusions in the absence of evidence.

Yeah, because Te ALWAYS draws emperically correct conclusions

Nonsensical. If they are only empricial, they are observations, they cannot be conclusions. If they are conclusions, they must have been filtered through Ti.

[stefana]

......

[FDG]

wow, so any female who has had sex at least once is a whore?

I'd say that even if she had rode a bike once, her pureness is gone forever.

Is that your definition of pureness or are you just kidding? What kind do you mean exactly? Physical, spiritual...

No no I was kidding In reality, they shouldn't even sit on a char, because there might have been casually placed an acuminate object, and poof.

[Kristiina]

wow, so any female who has had sex at least once is a whore?

I'd say that even if she had rode a bike once, her pureness is gone forever.

Is that your definition of pureness or are you just kidding? What kind do you mean exactly? Physical, spiritual...

No no I was kidding In reality, they shouldn't even sit on a char, because there might have been casually placed an acuminate object, and poof.

Lol!
I have heard of a Physical Education class, where 2 girls lost their virginity. They were jumping (on the sand, trying to jump as far as possible). But it doesn't normally happen that easily! Riding a bike or running or whatever doesn't usually have that effect. Still, I read somewhere: girls are so active (sports, etc), that most girls were supposed to have lost their "purity" before sex (either partially or completely).

[Joy]

um, but what about say a 40yo with only 4 sexual experiences
vs a 20yo with 30 sexual experiences?

Having sex 4 times is the same as having sex 30 times, so I think the question is irrelevant.

For this test, it's not a matter of how many EXPERIENCES, it's a matter of how many PEOPLE. And yes, both do matter.

wow, so any female who has had sex at least once is a whore?

mcnew: "oh wait, we were talking about women, not me and my experience? well in that case, most of them are whores. if they wash their boobs when they take showers or ever looked at a man's ass as he walked past, she's a whore."

[Gilly]

4 experiences is the same as 30? Try to tell someone who's had sex with someone with 4 experiences and 30 experiences that.

[Angel von Himmel]

um, but what about say a 40yo with only 4 sexual experiences
vs a 20yo with 30 sexual experiences?

Having sex 4 times is the same as having sex 30 times, so I think the question is irrelevant.

I'm sorry but your wrong. Especially when the age verses experience thing is considered.

Sex is just sex, and that is all that it is ...

I don't know how to put this nicely, but I'll try... do you really consider your opinion on this matter to be informed? You have a distorted view on relationships and sexual matters in general. At least accept the possibility that after some experience your opinions now may seem a bit off.

Yes... sex can be just sex. Sex can also be so much more though.

Well ... the vary fact that you considered what I have to say an 'opinion, says you don't think very highly of my attitude that sex is highly overrated, meaning that it isn't at all what people claim it to be. For example, I highly doubt having 30 sex partners or more would make anyone less 'subjective' about the sexual experiences they've had, probably more biased actually. So, if I do change my opinion, it would just be as equally biased and subjective as my current opinion. That might happen, but its not helping any.

And as far as my opinions being off, having sex isn't going to change much about my attitude, and I tend not to like wasting much time considering anything sex related anyhow, other than what I guage 'objectivelly' by studying and learning about peoples experiences. All in all there are so many more other things more worth exploring than experiencing the obnoxious crap that sex and relationships bring into your life. Maybe I'll consider it when I run out of better things to do or find someone I think I could tolerate living with for the rest of my life, and vice versa.

[Angel von Himmel]

um, but what about say a 40yo with only 4 sexual experiences
vs a 20yo with 30 sexual experiences?

Having sex 4 times is the same as having sex 30 times, so I think the question is irrelevant.

I'm sorry but your wrong. Especially when the age verses experience thing is considered.

Sex is just sex, and that is all that it is ...

wow, so any female who has had sex at least once is a whore?

No, I think any woman who openly displays sexual affection to multiple men in a brief short span of time is a whore, or that women who make promises to remain monogonous and break them irresponsibly or without consideration to responsibility are whores. It is pretty much the same way if a man did the same thing, and its a pretty good way to make people angry at oneanother.

[Ms. Kensington]

What would Te be in this case?

Not reach "obvious" conclusions in the absence of evidence.

Yeah, because Te ALWAYS draws emperically correct conclusions

Nonsensical. If they are only empricial, they are observations, they cannot be conclusions. If they are conclusions, they must have been filtered through Ti.

yeah when i read expats reply i thought about the same issue which is this:

if they are both thinking functions shouldnt they have the same.. er modality? why would one be data gathering and the other conclusion making? seems like they are the same sort of process or maybe smiling eyes would say the process is only in the realm of the perceiving functions. anyway none of you make sense to me on this point.

to me Ti sorts through inner structure, Te sorts through events (empirical happenings, facts if you like)

[Gilly]

What would Te be in this case?

Not reach "obvious" conclusions in the absence of evidence.

Yeah, because Te ALWAYS draws emperically correct conclusions

Nonsensical. If they are only empricial, they are observations, they cannot be conclusions. If they are conclusions, they must have been filtered through Ti.

So Te only makes observations? I disagree; perceiving functions make observations. Judging functions arrive at conclusions based on the data absorbed via perceiving functions.

[Angel von Himmel]

What would Te be in this case?

Not reach "obvious" conclusions in the absence of evidence.

Yeah, because Te ALWAYS draws emperically correct conclusions

Nonsensical. If they are only empricial, they are observations, they cannot be conclusions. If they are conclusions, they must have been filtered through Ti.

So Te only makes observations? I disagree; perceiving functions make observations. Judging functions arrive at conclusions based on the data absorbed via perceiving functions.

I disagree, I think it is the other way around ... perceiving functions make conclusions based on deductive/inductive referencing and judging functions make conclusions based on objective/subjective referencing.

And the aptitude to making empirical conclusions is based on sensory perception [not the judging process Te], which is anything but initially accurate. Intuitives usually do not need to naturally make empirical conclusions, typically on account of their tendency to narrow generalizing specifics down to accurate conclusions. Sensors tend to work from induction and as a result naturally make false conclusions initially, because they go by the senses and therefore tend to lack the ability to make appropiate deductions from their surrounds such as an intuitive person would, and therefore make empirical conclusions instead. Making empirical conclusions has nothing to do with judging functions, with the exception in making subjective/objective inferences along with what has been inducted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical

A central concept in science and the scientific method is that all evidence must be empirical, or empirically based, that is, dependent on evidence that is observable by the senses. It is usually differentiated from the philosophic usage of empiricism by the use of the adjective "empirical" or the adverb "empirically." "Empirical" as an adjective or adverb is used in conjunction with both the natural and social sciences, and refers to the use of working hypotheses that are testable using observation or experiment. In this sense of the word, scientific statements are subject to and derived from our experiences or observations.

In a second sense "empirical" in science may be synonymous with "experimental." In this sense, an empirical result is an experimental observation. In this context, the term semi-empirical is used for qualifying theoretical methods which use in part basic axioms or postulated scientific laws and experimental results. Such methods are opposed to theoretical ab initio methods which are purely deductive and based on first principles.