Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy8419 View Post
Ti PoLR? My logic is sound. And yes, it is exactly true. You do not know what you do not know. It is an assumption based on one's own pride to do otherwise.
Again Ti PoLR-ish

You first endorse the theory in all its entirety then you forget about all of it when you claim that the Typer cannot absolutely know a thing.


What isn't sound is to equate one's overall behavior to a timeframe that is a minority of one's behavior. Simple as that? No. You're making a ludicrous claim that people display the same behaviors independent of environment. If you're going to be in an environment, you adapt to suit it, or you clash with it. That's just common understanding of people and relationships. If you're not multi-faceted and display a single facet consistently, being a "TIM", that doesn't make you anything objective, other than "having no personality."
Lol, I never made such a claim. Lol. Reread.


There are better objective tools. It's called science, which socionics is not. You do realize the "objective" and "definitely something to it" aspects of socionics are all BS that's actually realistically covered and known under the actual sciences and things as simple as gender differences and culture, right? There's nothing actually "to socionics." It's just a goofy system for creative theory. You'd be better served taking entry-level college courses and paying attention to obvious social interactions.
Science of psychology lacks good enough tools and understanding too.

Yes, there are notions in academic psychology that do talk about the same as certain socionics ideas.

There is however some tenets in the socionics model (and in Jung's) that I've never seen anywhere else while they also seem to have some validity.

That doesn't make the socionics model perfect. Far from it. I'm not exactly accepting of all parts of it "as is".

Lastly, I don't exactly use socionics as my only tool or even a primary tool for social interactions, lol..