Anyone want to help make socionics scientific?

[Exodus]

It’s just because since you never mentioned or emphasized the empirical measures part, people assume you weren’t even considering using empirical data at all. We thought you didn’t have that side to your experiment.

And technically, since you haven’t fleshed that side out more yet, we still don’t have anything satisfactory yet. This would require a lot more discussion though, and hopefully not preceding actual hopeful leads to have a chance of carrying it out.

Basically yeah

All schools in socionics are measuring the same 16 types, but with different methods. If someone is typed with two methods, it makes sense to compare the results to see if they are consistent. If they don't agree, that means at least one diagnosis is incorrect.

I not only want to compare type outputs of any two given approaches to socionics, but all their parts as well.

I'm not sure how your approach addresses this - unless I'm missing something it's currently only in terms of type dichotomies. If you expand to 4/2-groups and conditional probabilities then it could maybe compare all possible approaches.

Also, this kind of thing may be a bit overkill - for example you can just as easily take two traits that are conjectured to actually coincide, like Ti suggestive and Fe leading. For this all you have to do is check how well the operationalizations correlate.

E.g., have the question "do you have difficulty organizing your thought process?"

and "do you naturally and confidently express your emotional state to others?"

etc. If you find correlations then that would be decent evidence for socionics.

To answer hotelambush's question: I think it's wishful thinking to think that the scientific community will revise the scientific method soon because logical/empirical positivism (ie. the view that only empirically verifiable evidence suffices to justify beliefs) generally prevails in the scientific community. This philosophy is practically hardwired in the scientific method because scientific observations ultimately have the final say in the body of knowledge produced by scientific inquiry. Furthermore, it's generally been the trend that psychology has moved from the more abstract (Freud, Jung, James) to the more concrete (neuroscience).

They may reconsider if someone makes significant progress on scientific questions using other means (e.g. rational/mathematical means).