Because people want to share their results.Originally Posted by Myst
I don't gather data anymore as it's biased now.
People can make fit the test to the wanted result since the spreadsheet is available.
Nondescript's example was very revealing here.
I don't worryIt's just the data I got before the spreadsheet was posted is simply not sufficient.
What do you think makes you an Irrational/Perceiver? Just because I recently asked someone to explain why they thought they were an Irrational type and the explanation virtually defined Rationality itself.Not saying you are going to do the same but I'm curious because the devil's clearly in the details.
Eh, I didn't need the spreadsheet to know how the test worked. Wasn't it obvious to anyone else -after halfway through the test at least- that the adjectives are grouped by IEs and then by I/E and J/P?
In any case if you truly want to conduct an experiment and if you want to use such tests for it, you will need people who have never heard of Socionics yet know themselves well.
Clap clap, standing ovation.Eh, I didn't need the spreadsheet to know how the test worked. Wasn't it obvious to anyone else -after halfway through the test at least- that the adjectives are grouped by IEs and then by I/E and J/P?
In any case if you truly want to conduct an experiment and if you want to use such tests for it, you will need people who have never heard of Socionics yet know themselves well.
I am like the opposite of the bolded part. I know these systems just fine, but kinda feel like I don't know myself well enough. Often feel like both choices fit etc.What do you think makes you an Irrational/Perceiver? Just because I recently asked someone to explain why they thought they were an Irrational type and the explanation virtually defined Rationality itself.
Eh, I didn't need the spreadsheet to know how the test worked. Wasn't it obvious to anyone else -after halfway through the test at least- that the adjectives are grouped by IEs and then by I/E and J/P?
In any case if you truly want to conduct an experiment and if you want to use such tests for it, you will need people who have never heard of Socionics yet know themselves well.
Passivity and having a "I don't give a fuck" attitude. I tend to take life for a bowl of cherries and very rarely take things seriously. Where as other people always seem to be worried about getting stuff done I'm more focused on simply sitting back and enjoying things the way they are. I've even come into conflict with heavy j types sometimes for not being serious about my work. I dislike long periods of physical labor, avoid household chores, and procrastinate on just about everything.What do you think makes you an Irrational/Perceiver? Just because I recently asked someone to explain why they thought they were an Irrational type and the explanation virtually defined Rationality itself.
Yeah. Do more observation of yourself -and optionally others- while checking the theory -this theory, other theories, other people's observations on you- against that. You will never get anywhere otherwise.
No, you really need to spot things about yourself. It's ok if you let others do it first but you need to verify yourself. Otherwise you'll just continue bouncing around like you've been doing it for a while
The Reinins are even worse in terms of that, you will not get anywhere with grammatical analysis on them, you have to see your own thought processes that are never fully revealed from these written texts. Some Reinin dichotomies then do make sense to me but yeah, only if I ignore any external stereotyped manifestations and instead focus on the core concepts on how the thinking processes work. Other Reinin dichotomies still don't make sense, the ones where I cannot see such core concepts.
Eh, Irrationality is not about laziness or not taking anything seriously. I recommend you read Jung's concepts on Irrationality and Rationality. One thing's for sure tho', you are no EJ.I don't want to get into stereotypes here but this does sound like some sort of introverted Si valuer, I can't say more than that.
But, but! It's difficult and it hurts. Can't I just do a Higgs bozone occurence probability + environment calculation? Tbh, I'd prefer it.Yeah. Do more observation of yourself -and optionally others- while checking the theory -this theory, other theories, other people's observations on you- against that. You will never get anywhere otherwise.
No, you really need to spot things about yourself. It's ok if you let others do it first but you need to verify yourself. Otherwise you'll just continue bouncing around like you've been doing it for a while
The Reinins are even worse in terms of that, you will not get anywhere with grammatical analysis on them, you have to see your own thought processes that are never fully revealed from these written texts. Some Reinin dichotomies then do make sense to me but yeah, only if I ignore any external stereotyped manifestations and instead focus on the core concepts on how the thinking processes work. Other Reinin dichotomies still don't make sense, the ones where I cannot see such core concepts.
Eh, Irrationality is not about laziness or not taking anything seriously. I recommend you read Jung's concepts on Irrationality and Rationality. One thing's for sure tho', you are no EJ.
And I refuse to put my faith into something that is unproven. Unproven, uncertain things have a tendency to hurt people and I'm not into that...why get hurt if you can avoid it? ...meh what am I talking about-I'm like a constant test how much a person can get hurt while remaining invincible. Drab /meh .
Lol you like physics that much more eh.
To test in the way I described, you don't have to blindly believe it.
Why are you hanging out here though if you don't want to examine yourself?
lol at T focus. So oblivious to F reasons.
Because of hanging out nonchalantly. And because I have nothing better to do and I'd become crazy if I did nothing at all. Finally, to perhaps get something out of this because I've spent FAR too long with this and I just want to end with this with some kind of proven example / fact. A win / win situation until it's time to move on.
Hahah, well.Eh, I didn't need the spreadsheet to know how the test worked. Wasn't it obvious to anyone else -after halfway through the test at least- that the adjectives are grouped by IEs and then by I/E and J/P?
In any case if you truly want to conduct an experiment and if you want to use such tests for it, you will need people who have never heard of Socionics yet know themselves well.
I did when I came back to it later but at first I went by common definitions of the words. I was not thinking Reinin dichotomies. If I was I would have chosen yielding 3 and obstinate 1 just because I relate to that one more. In my defense I was sick when I took it the first time.I still am not sure why I scored 50/50 on j/p since I am pretty sure I went back and changed many of those 2s. I actually had like 24 2s that I narrowed down to 15 which was quite a feat because I really could not decide since it was about even on some. I imagine some people will mistype just by not knowing what the dichotomies actually mean even after reading the site. It took me a couple of reads to sort it and I had to ask about some. I did type myself by process of elimination at one point just by using Renin but then I went on to look at the IEs and it was clearer that way. I do admit for the longest I was confused about what Ne was. I was thinking it was some kind of magical element and I wanted it. When I finally understood it, I was like, "oh, sounds kinda tiring." lol
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Hahah, well.
It's not reinin dichotomies anywayI did when I came back to it later but at first I went by common definitions of the words. I was not thinking Reinin dichotomies. If I was I would have chosen yielding 3 and obstinate 1 just because I relate to that one more. In my defense I was sick when I took it the first time.I wouldn't worry about the J/P thing, this test is just a bunch of adjectives that may or may not work for typing someone correctly. Btw it's ok to go with 2 when you can't decide, the scoring treats the 2s the same way as any of the other answers, simply as a number between 1 and 3. So it might as well stand for the option of "a bit of both" or "neutral", etc.
What was revealing? I could also be misinterpreting myself-the common dangers of self typing. Self typing is what I'd recommend the least for a person to try-let others infer meanings and spot things within you. This is especially notable when trying to spot Reinins within you: static / dynamic and positive / negative in particular. In order to spot them, you have to use heavy duty grammatical analysis-a thing that could very well crush you and leave you exhausted. So, why not just leave to others to do that is what I always say.Because people want to share their results.
I don't gather data anymore as it's biased now.
People can make fit the test to the wanted result since the spreadsheet is available.
Nondescript's example was very revealing here.
I don't worry
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote