Originally Posted by
JuJu
As you say above, Morcheeba--you "just started learning Socionics..." So perhaps some of us should not be too surprised by your post.
You say Socionics is "simple." You're wrong. Socionics is complex.
To understand Socionics, one must understand the IM elements, (in theory and in their practical manifestations via actions, words, expressions, gestures, etc,) how they interact to form personality, how they influence all of the different intertype relations, how they manifest to create 16 general archetypes, which Socionics calls "personality types," etc.
Understanding Socionics has taken some very sharp minds years.
There are no shortcuts to fully understanding Socionics... Take a tip from one who's tried.
VI--the shortcut you espouse, Morcheeba--must be supplemented by research to make an informed typing... The old saying is true: looks can be deceiving.
Furthermore, despite what you wrote, no one "insisted the 16 types of people will behave and act exactly the same way." (No one even implied anything close to it, honestly... It seems as though that notion came straight out of your ass.)
This thread exemplifies well an overall trend among relative newcomers to this forum... Many of you are too quick to criticize--when frankly, most of you could benefit from reading the experts here rather than posting half-baked ideas that those of us who've been here for years have seen pass through, always unsuccessfully, multiple times (as yours now, Morcheeba.)
If you can explain--using Socionics--why the subject in question is a certain type, (as I did by explaining his use of Ni and Fe,) then great... We can discuss it like adults... If you "argue," yet cannot use Socionics to bolster your claims, you might as well use your time more constructively than posting about, essentially, nothing.