IR test (by Sol)

[User Name]

I'm quite skeptical about this way of testing.

First of all, I find it very uninteresting (it's not meant as an offense, just my impression). Actually, I prefer to test ITR in real life, which is more effective (and useful). I mean, you should interact with others rather than watch hours and hours of boring YouTube videos. That way, you can also practice your Socionics skills (typing others, discover which IE is being used). Also, we can't tell if people in the videos are correctly typed. This makes everything even more complicated.

[maniac]

I'm quite skeptical about this way of testing.

First of all, I find it very uninteresting (it's not meant as an offense, just my impression). Actually, I prefer to test ITR in real life, which is more effective (and useful). I mean, you should interact with others rather than watch hours and hours of boring YouTube videos. That way, you can also practice your Socionics skills (typing others, discover which IE is being used). Also, we can't tell if people in the videos are correctly typed. This makes everything even more complicated.

I watched the videos and the people that are supposed to be the same type are pretty different (i'll think one example is okay, then the other hell no), but on the other hand all of these types listed are similar. Like sp/so's. There's 0 social lasts there. Probably no 4 or 5s. All just average, boring people. I think that's Sol's style. Boring and average.

[Simo]

I'm quite skeptical about this way of testing.

First of all, I find it very uninteresting (it's not meant as an offense, just my impression).

offense taken
maybe this way of testing isn't very reliable since one person may like some of type x and hate the rest, also maybe the subject isn't interesting, etc. however I think @Sol is trying to filter out those NTR issues by you watching more videos since in average you should give a higher ranking for good IR than that of bad IR

the problem is as you said there is no interaction since videos only offer a one-sided delivery so you don't actually judge the friction between you and the one on the video, instead you intuitively judge whether or not you think there would be a good/bad friction based on your past experiences with people with similar vibe but since I read that from a distance a conflictor is more attractive than a dual, then your intuitive judgement may not really be trustworthy as in by watching videos you like your conflictor but if you interact with them you would go for a dual.

but even though I am skeptical I still think it is interesting

That way, you can also practice your Socionics skills (typing others, discover which IE is being used).

the problem here is you may link certain actions with the wrong IE or type & then your future typings will be based on a wrong association. I think when trying to type others irl one should be with an expert to act as a measurement tool for your skills and provide feedback about the things you seem to have trouble with so you will avoid making wrong associations
but I don't think it is a very practical idea, I mean it is not like socionics experts are available everywhere

Also, we can't tell if people in the videos are correctly typed. This makes everything even more complicated.

they may not be typed correctly, but since they were typed by the same person the typings should be consistent in some way at least

I watched the videos and the people that are supposed to be the same type are pretty different (i'll think one example is okay, then the other hell no)

I think @Sol focus mainly on the nonverbal clues only, so maybe if you try to type them while considering the verbal as well you will get different typings.
I haven't really watched more than 3 videos (first few seconds each) so far, so I don't know

[Myst]

the problem here is you may link certain actions with the wrong IE or type & then your future typings will be based on a wrong association. I think when trying to type others irl one should be with an expert to act as a measurement tool for your skills and provide feedback about the things you seem to have trouble with so you will avoid making wrong associations
but I don't think it is a very practical idea, I mean it is not like socionics experts are available everywhere

Maybe wrong associations but you can correct them when you notice inconsistencies. You just have to be up for refining things ...and eventually go beyond Socionics's framework

[Simo]

Maybe wrong associations but you can correct them when you notice inconsistencies. You just have to be up for refining things ...and eventually go beyond Socionics's framework

But most people don't like (or even fear) re-examining their understanding
It is not very pleasant to admit you were wrong so many avoid considering that they could be wrong specially if they had that biased understanding for a long time their pride doesn't let them admit being wrong I guess

[Myst]

But most people don't like (or even fear) re-examining their understanding
It is not very pleasant to admit you were wrong so many avoid considering that they could be wrong specially if they had that biased understanding for a long time their pride doesn't let them admit being wrong I guess

True that some people don't like to face cognitive dissonance.

[Chae]

Use examples only of other sex (which causes romantic passion)

This won't stop us gays



Idea's okay but step yer overall game up my friend.

[Chae]

I'm quite skeptical about this way of testing.

First of all, I find it very uninteresting (it's not meant as an offense, just my impression). Actually, I prefer to test ITR in real life, which is more effective (and useful). I mean, you should interact with others rather than watch hours and hours of boring YouTube videos. That way, you can also practice your Socionics skills (typing others, discover which IE is being used). Also, we can't tell if people in the videos are correctly typed. This makes everything even more complicated.

Ex! Act! Ly!