Quote Originally Posted by mu4 View Post
I'm not ad homineming you at all, since I don't disagree with you that socionics is not a science. Also X is useless is a value statement not a logical one. Science is supposed to be about truth not usefulness. Usefulness is determined by the design, you can design all sort of useless things.

My problem with you is entirely ethical and my criticism is that you have been doing this for 9 years with the same message, and you have nothing new too add and what you do is attention seeking. You're free to do this but it's very much a nuisance on my forum an/d I'm informing you of this. It's ok to do a lot of stuff on this forum, including what you do, but I thought people should know what I thought about your 9 years of the same ole same ole.

When you present a logical statement that I can deal with logically and analytically I'll consider it, until then your attention seeking is very annoying to me and of course others as well.

This isn't ad hominem since I'm not attacking your character to discredit your argument, I'm just question your character because your argument is stupid.
then feel free to use the ignore feature

Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
To find it useful you should type correctly people and think a little about people's behavior to notice this system. As for that video, - there is nothing to prove MBT or Socionics is totally wrong or hence useless.



It's Jung's theory. Sorry you did not know.
oh ok

Quote Originally Posted by glam View Post
not interested in getting involved in the debate in this thread, but why do people who think such-and-such typology is bullshit continue to hang around forums like this, arguing about why it's bullshit? i don't understand what the point of that is. the equivalent is like if someone hung around on astrology forums, arguing with people about how much astrology is bullshit. why would you waste your time doing that? lol
I don't know why people like that do such a thing.