
Originally Posted by
Karatos
Socionics was developed by psychologists. Augustina was a psychologist, Kepinski had a background in psychology, and Jung was essentially a psychologist. Gannushkin, Leonhard, and Lichko all had backgrounds in psychology as well.
It's inconsistent of you to claim that modern research developed by psychologists should be taken with a grain of salt, while claiming the dated research done by these people who were also psychologists should practically amount to the gospel truth. Your viewpoint on the matter amounts to a rigid kind of fundamentalism that disregards empirical evidence and substantiated explanations for cognition and behavior. Even your definitions for functions amount to some of the most crude, reductionist, simple, and inaccurate shit I've ever seen uttered in typology circles. Functioning is not "Te." Purpose is not "Ni." That's fucking ludicrous.