True and pissed version of me

[Olduvai]

The lack of consensus comes from how typology fans all have different theories in their heads about concrete manifestations of the information processing.

Right, which is what you criticized me for doing. Even though everyone else does it. But apparently I'm superficial.

No because I can be doing both.

Not really:

No, not solid evidence

No, it can come from other factors.

This is even less related.

Nope, vague to me

Too many "possible" unverified correlations for my liking.

No, what I was referring to was the popular stereotyped thinking by MBTI fans.

No because I can be doing both.

criticisms delivered by Negativist types contains a higher proportion of negating, eliminating, or invalidating statements and propositions. Negativists are as if excluding, "cutting off", or barring information (or people) that they've found to be lacking by their standards.

If anyone is being dense here, that's not me. How on earth would it specify a *definite* type when something to base the type on is just "more often than not" related to type? Not better than my example number of 60%. Which is what my "doesn't help" comment referred to.

No, it's definitely you. Ease your standards for a bit, this isn't science. I understand what you're saying and I respect your opinion but I think you're being stubborn and closed-minded (if not for the right reasons).

Too many "possible" unverified correlations for my liking.

You're so picky.

That question was rhetorical, I know full well I'm S type, no need to analyse this.

I doubt that but okay.

I do in general like things that have a basis in reality and many scientific theories do. Socionics and its jungian origins are not considered scientific but I still prefer to link it to reality.

Basis in reality =/= sensation. Logic has a basis in reality.

No, what I was referring to was the popular stereotyped thinking by MBTI fans.

You're lumping my thoughts into the same category as your reviled MBTI fans (MBTI is such a dirty word! err... acronym). You're taking the easy way out. I doubt you've even seriously considered the possibility that MBTI fans might be correct in their "stereotyped thinking".

Sure, that theory is correlated to Big 5 and shit like that.

I don't know anything about the Big 5.

N PoLR also has 2D N HA so they can. And many topics can be processed by other IEs too as I said.

But if a topic is somehow inherently Ne, then it can't be processed by Ni. Not to mention there's behaviors that accompany these preferences, meaning someone with Ne-PoLR simply wouldnt be interested in exploring such topics, even if they're rudimentarily capable of processing them via Ni.