Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: How Socionics works

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default How Socionics works

    Socionics is a theory of induction, which is about making generalizations from observations, which is wrong, because that's just not how science works (hint: science is about coming up with explanations, through deduction).

    So here's all the amazing things that might be happening at the Socionics lab with all the amazing Socionists to come up with this theory, complete with translations of what they really mean.

    Socionist: Look at this video here, and this person, he is showing his emotions, this is Fe.

    Translation: "Durr, as if anyone with half a brain couldn't simply OBSERVE that he is showing emotions. But since I'm so totally stupid, I will call it "Fe" for no reason other than to confuse you".

    Socionist: And here, did you see that? Look at how he suddenly came up with connections, how he sees into the future! This here, is called intuition. It's like magic!

    Translation: "Durr, I'm too stupid to come up with a possible explanation or a theory on how this "intution" actually works, so I will simply call it "intuition" from now on for things that I simply do not understand or cannot explain, since I'm totally stupid and hate science".

    Socionist: Wow! Look at this SLE here, look at how graceful and forceful her movement is! This here, is called Se.

    Translation: "Durr, I'm going to be making even more brain-dead observations which will bring no further insights at all, because I'm totally stupid. I'm gathering all these observational data to come up with my own 'theory', which is wrong, because that's just inductivism, and totally forget that I have come up with the WHY of things and offer no explanations, since I'm totally stupid"


    And so on.

  2. #2
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    i've noticed IEI is always trying to tie millstones to things and throw them overboard. in this case its socionics + induction, but the bottom line is they're both defensible on independent grounds so even if they're linked, in any case, they swim not sink. its like you stopped at hume, which predates socionics,which relies on Kant, who answered hume, to "torpedo" socionics. its like you're in a weird time machine, not recognizing that socionics is founded on the resolution of the problem you pose as fatal. messing with the time factor is precisely how people manipulate narratives, but its a false economy when used like this. I could see how this could do work when aimed at low Ni but this is just silly as an objective argument

    I think its a complex of the six thing

  3. #3
    bye now
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Same preaching, different thread. More proof you are LSE.
    good bye

  4. #4
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Dude these threads are getting really old. Most of the people here already recognize that socionics isn't a hard science and is something that should be taken for a grain of salt. No one gives a shit so just stop.

  5. #5
    yeves's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    TIM
    Si 6 spsx
    Posts
    1,359
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Socionics is a theory of induction, which is about making generalizations from observations, which is wrong, because that's just not how science works (hint: science is about coming up with explanations, through deduction).
    Induction is how Charles Darwin discovered Evolution. He made observations of animals on different islands and came up with a generalized explanation for how they evolved. Science can be done with either approach. If you don't make any observations and measurements, your explanations will be impractical not having any objective basis to them.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •