Results 1 to 40 of 40

Thread: Why Socionics Doesn't 'Work'

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,309
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Why Socionics Doesn't 'Work'

    I was in an argument with someone: I was able to graduate at the top of my class with a philosophy degree, but I couldn't finish my degree in math. Why? Assumedly, it is because the information metabolism of philosophy is right and the other one wrong.

    I already had a degree in computer science, and I had a math minor with straight A's BUT over the years, the university assumedly changed how the degree is taught. Therefore, I could probably have finished before with the degree in math if they did not change the degree.

    And, on that note, aren`t there degrees that are generally taught well and others taught poorly? Aren't some math degrees harder to attain at certain universities over others? Why? Doesn't this mean that socionics does not add up?

    The problem is that in the real world, practical issues sometimes make a difference.

    Maybe math generally has the pefect information metabolism for you, but the degree you entered into is too hard or not taught properly, and therefore you cannot finish.

    And it is like this with anything. 'If you are LII why aren't you with an ESE?' Maybe again because of certain practical issues of availability, attractiveness, etc. The person who believes this has given no thought to issues of logistics, cost, availability, or use. These are not big concerns for me, but they are inherent in almost any practical endeavour. And they're relevant to anything socionics: a relation, career, etc. could 'work' because it's cheap, available, or easy. It could also 'not work' for the opposite reasons. Therefore, when you question one's information metabolism because 'they're in accounting instead of mathematics', please give this notion a second thought...
    Last edited by jason_m; 06-15-2019 at 10:27 PM.

  2. #2
    Aramas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,263
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    My addition: Socionics doesn't work because most people can't work it. You have to be good at observation and seeing subtle yet obvious patterns. 95% seem to have trouble with it. It has taken me years to learn the skills myself.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    15,766
    Mentioned
    1404 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    - it needs the correct typing (with average matches <20% it's a big and main problem)
    - there are important other factors besides types (average type description is not a concrete real human and with IR is the similar)
    - it needs the usage of correct theory (but not random bs alike Reinin's) and correct its understanding (alike duals are described as not interesting on the 1st look in some texts)
    - a part even of classical theory is wrong or doubtful, alike "polr" thought as the weakest function unlike at Jung

    @jason_m
    at 1st, it's important to understand correctly own type to notice how the typology works. with a videointerview you'd could to get opinions

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,026
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just don't think about it and get out of your bubble. Let life come at you without meta thought. Get messy and leave without a plan. Put yourself out there otherwise not a single thing will change and you will just have been a coward. The pieces will fall into play on their own in their own time.

  5. #5
    Aramas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,263
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timber View Post
    Just don't think about it and get out of your bubble. Let life come at you without meta thought. Get messy and leave without a plan. Put yourself out there otherwise not a single thing will change and you will just have been a coward. The pieces will fall into play on their own in their own time.
    You who? Rather ambiguous post.

  6. #6
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Socionics hasn't graduated beyond a classification system so it can't possibly 'work'; as such, it's relatively accurate but the models need work (excuse the pun). Success in school has more to do with motivation, aptitude for academics and intellect (in this order); type likely contributes to the attraction toward certain fields but not success in them. And, I've met so many who could ace the tests but not succeed in the associated profession - and there's no correlation with type. Many seem to erroneously try to associate IEs with specific outcomes when they only represent information preferences and processing structure. Preference plus structure may affect behaviour but it doesn't equal success......

    a.k.a. I/O

  7. #7
    Luk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    47
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    Many seem to erroneously try to associate IEs with specific outcomes when they only represent information preferences and processing structure.
    Before reading this post I was gonna feel stupid for asking:
    Which one's the Math IM element?

    Because I expected Math to be a combination of and things that have nothing to do with Socionics, like intelligence. Probably also some external factors like and motivation.

  8. #8
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luk View Post
    Before reading this post I was gonna feel stupid for asking:
    Which one's the Math IM element?

    Because I expected Math to be a combination of and things that have nothing to do with Socionics, like intelligence. Probably also some external factors like and motivation.
    You do seem to be with the vast majority on this site when you use IEs as adjectives for motivation. Motivation evolves more from upbringing, influences and environment than it does type. A type raised in poverty will likely have much different motivations from the same type raised in privilege. Various IEs combine to do maths in different ways; there's usually no one approach to accomplishing anything. It would be naive to say that only people with certain IEs could accomplish a specific task.......

    a.k.a. I/O

  9. #9
    Luk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    47
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    You do seem to be with the vast majority on this site when you use IEs as adjectives for motivation. Motivation evolves more from upbringing, influences and environment than it does type. A type raised in poverty will likely have much different motivations from the same type raised in privilege. Various IEs combine to do maths in different ways; there's usually no one approach to accomplishing anything. It would be naive to say that only people with certain IEs could accomplish a specific task.......

    a.k.a. I/O
    So if I usually feel motivated to act by Fe-minded encouragement, is that deep-seated appreciation for warm encouragement a part of my upbringing? Maybe. But Fe is Fe, no matter how somebody learned to appreciate those who are careful with it.

    If it truly is my upbringing that makes me appreciate warm encouragement (which it might be), and socionics predicts such a thing for the type representing me (LII), then my sociotype (LII) is equally part of my upbringing. I made no assumptions about where that appreciation came from before entering Model A. It is there and I can use the model to analyse its effects.

    I don't think your use of "upbringing" can discredit my socionic modeling. From a Model A standpoint (unless I'm missing something?), it doesn't matter where an LII's appreciation for Ti is coming from. The model cannot address those kinds of causes because I think they're far beyond our current understanding of the human mind. If it tries to address the causes, I will happily discard them and clean up the model. Genetics, upbringing, frustrations... they all play a part and are equally irrelevant when analysing things within such a model.

    The model addresses the effects of having a Base Ti, not the causes.

    So how is it relevant that my upbringing determines my appreciation for Fe-minded encouragement? It could have been used to make me want to learn Math, exactly in accordance with socionic predictions of LII. Therefore I can say that can be a motivator for someone to become good at Math.

  10. #10

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luk View Post
    Before reading this post I was gonna feel stupid for asking:
    Which one's the Math IM element?

    Because I expected Math to be a combination of and things that have nothing to do with Socionics, like intelligence. Probably also some external factors like and motivation.
    It's like saying "Which computer hardware is responsible for the calculator app?".

    Well the calculator app is a software and therefore it's just a bunch of programming codes. Socionics can't figure out what that code is, because it doesn't ask that question. It's like looking at a monitor and visually observing what the software does. But it doesn't try to look at its codes, and its hardware that's responsible for the whole thing is rather mysterious.

    If you could try to figure out how the calculator works, then you might have a chance at replicating it. But if all you do is observe some apparent patterns and thinking that pattern will repeat, then it's a hopeless task.

  11. #11
    Luk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    47
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    A three-in-one deal! 🎉 Feel free to skip it if you're not interested / I'm not replying to you. 😦 I'm feeling a little self-conscious right now.



    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    This has nothing to do with socionics. Socionics does not dictate what your career path should be.
    I pretty much agree, with a pedantic caveat: your career path is in large part dictated by your environment; people are a part of your environment and socionics models your interaction with those people.

    Intertype relations, at the very least, influence your career path, even if not in a neatly predictable way. It's all pretty personal.



    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    @Luk Fe refers to the way one would rationalize encouragement in comparison to some baseline reference or requirement but I've known quite a number of Fe-types that neither sought nor needed encouragement whatsoever. Externalized-F is interactive rationalization so group participation is sought for confirmation purposes, which is a broad category under which encouragement could fit - if one needed it. I've known copies of all types that've sought encouragement. I've an aptitude for maths so I didn't require encouragement and I've met copies of every type who didn't have difficulty with the subject - with or without encouragement....

    a.k.a. I/O
    "Fe refers to the way one would rationalize encouragement in comparison to some baseline reference or requirement"
    I don't think it does. Fe is not in any way limited to encouragement, though encouragement (emotional instigation, emotional support, enthusiasm) can be seen as Fe-related constructs.
    Inspiring fear into others by acting afraid is another Fe-related construct.
    Inhibiting excessive emotions in others can be another Fe-related construct, depending on the situation.

    They're Fe-related constructs because they're strategies that target a person's Fe-related information processing; their Fe function, which is what tries to model Fe information processing.

    If I scream in fear, your response will be partially dictated by how you process extraverted emotional information. That's not encouragement.

    "Fe-types"
    Every type processes Fe-related information, in different ways. Are you referring to Fe-ego? Are you referring to Alpha & Beta? Does it include SEE and IEE, who also process vast amounts of Fe-related information?

    "Fe-types that neither sought nor needed encouragement whatsoever"
    I'll assume that you're including EIE and ESE. I wouldn't expect them to be in much need of emotional encouragement of the kind that I was talking about. As far as I'm aware, EIE can be pretty driven. That doesn't invalidate the point. Some types might respond better to certain kinds of emotional encouragement than others, unless we are to say that all types respond the same to all kinds of emotional encouragement.

    "so group participation is sought for confirmation purposes"
    I didn't understand that.

    "I've known copies of all types that've sought encouragement"
    That sounds like every type is equally likely to respond well to every kind of emotional encouragement. I don't have a statistically significant base of socionic data, but dismissing the importance of Fe defeats the point of using socionics to model human interactions.

    If that isn't what you meant, think about what it means for at least some types to respond better to warm emotional expression. If they were taught Math in an environment that made them feel this kind of emotional comfort, they would be more likely to take Math seriously.

    I was never associating Fe with the content of Math. (I called them "external factors") I'm talking about the the typical Math classes and learning environment, which I believe discourage some sociotypes from taking Math seriously.

    "I've an aptitude for maths so I didn't require encouragement"
    Just because you didn't need it doesn't mean others wouldn't.

    "I've met copies of every type who didn't have difficulty with the subject - with or without encouragement"
    Again, just because they didn't need it doesn't mean certain types wouldn't benefit from various kinds of encouragement.


    If the student-teacher relationship can be modeled by socionics, my point still stands. (The point that started it all.) Socionics factors external to the content of Math affect somebody's Math interest, learning, and therefore skill in the subject. Not for those who are passionate or particularly good at Math, but the rest of the common folk.



    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    It's like saying "Which computer hardware is responsible for the calculator app?".

    Well the calculator app is a software and therefore it's just a bunch of programming codes. Socionics can't figure out what that code is, because it doesn't ask that question. It's like looking at a monitor and visually observing what the software does. But it doesn't try to look at its codes, and its hardware that's responsible for the whole thing is rather mysterious.

    If you could try to figure out how the calculator works, then you might have a chance at replicating it. But if all you do is observe some apparent patterns and thinking that pattern will repeat, then it's a hopeless task.
    I could never get behind the hardware/software metaphor for socionics models.
    • Metaphors for models are useful as educational devices. In a debate, a metaphor is counterproductive.
      • A metaphor adds another level of abstraction on top of a model. Models already abstract reality. Why make things more complicated?
      • To keep up a metaphor, you need to create a suspension of disbelief. Constant suspension of disbelief in a debate is counterproductive because it prevents you from grounding yourself in logic.
      • Metaphors hide parts of the underlying model.
      • Metaphors distort the underlying model.
      • If one is very attached to a metaphor, they should make a model from scratch using that metaphor and not add it on top of another model.
    • The human brain and a modern computer work differently. The main proof is that no amount of psychology can be applied to somebody's personal computer. You can find similarities, but they're not the same.
    • Sociotypes have little to do with hardware. I suppose the metaphor is trying to imply that sociotypes cannot change, but that's an added assumption on top of the primary model. Maybe sociotypes really cannot change, but that's irrelevant to the points I made.
    • Sociotypes have little to do with software. Sociotypes were created to describe and predict existing phenomena. No phenomena exist before somebody writes the firmware/software. They have different aims. One aims to predict or describe phenomena, while another aims to create phenomena from scratch. There are more differences than similarities.
    • Human behaviour has little to do with software. You can make the analogy, sure, but if I need to suspend my disbelief for all the differences between humans and software, it's not a useful metaphor.
    • The calculator app was created from scratch with a precise purpose in mind. It is a series of carefully written instructions. "Fe" is a collection of human behaviours aggregated from a wider population and amalgamated into a single, slightly vague concept. "Fe" has no purpose, but the calculator app does.
    • "But if all you do is observe some apparent patterns and thinking that pattern will repeat, then it's a hopeless task."
      Ancient tribespeople didn't know how the Sun worked. They saw the Sun rising periodically and made predictions we can still trust today.
      As far as we know, modern and medieval physics don't represent reality, but they're still very useful and got us pretty far.
      You don't need to understand reality to make predictions about reality.

    You might not agree with everything I said, but any single one of those points is enough for me to dismiss the metaphor. That's just a measure of how much I dislike it. 😛

    I can't dispute any points made within the metaphor, because to me the metaphor is already too shaky to hold a meaningful conversation.
    And my first instinct in a debate is to tear down all metaphors/obscurity anyway.

  12. #12

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luk View Post
    The human brain and a modern computer work differently. The main proof is that no amount of psychology can be applied to somebody's personal computer.
    We can, we just know no known ways of doing how. But nothing says that it's impossible. The human brain is no different in concept than a computer, it just uses neurons instead of silicones.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luk View Post
    Sociotypes have little to do with hardware.
    I'm saying that types and functions are observations of the results of software. Presumably, we're saying that the hardware is the brain.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luk View Post
    Sociotypes have little to do with software. Sociotypes were created to describe and predict existing phenomena. No phenomena exist before somebody writes the firmware/software. They have different aims.
    The entire point of "predicting" something is to guess what has never happened before. Socionics is about observing something, and then expecting something, a pattern perhaps, to repeat itself. That's not prediction... that's just expecting the same thing to happen again.

    You don't "predict" something that already exists. You predict the future - which doesn't exist yet.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luk View Post
    Human behaviour has little to do with software.
    Human behavior is largely affected by cognition - that's the software.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luk View Post
    The calculator app was created from scratch with a precise purpose in mind. It is a series of carefully written instructions. "Fe" is a collection of human behaviours aggregated from a wider population and amalgamated into a single, slightly vague concept. "Fe" has no purpose, but the calculator app does.
    Human behavior has no purpose, because it evolved more or less randomly. But how computers calculate and how people have the ability to do calculations more or less work in the same way. What makes humans unique is for their ability to be creative - as in, do something that has never been done before.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luk View Post
    Ancient tribespeople didn't know how the Sun worked. They saw the Sun rising periodically and made predictions we can still trust today.
    Again, that's not prediction, it's just expecting the same thing to happen. Prediction is about imagining something that has not even been seen before in reality. A so-called "counterfactual" - contrary to the facts.

  13. #13
    Number 9 large's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    4,404
    Mentioned
    244 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    I was in an argument with someone: I was able to graduate at the top of my class with a philosophy degree, but I couldn't finish my degree in math. Why? Assumedly, it is because the information metabolism of philosophy is right and the other one wrong.

    I already had a degree in computer science, and I had a math minor with straight A's BUT over the years, the university assumedly changed how the degree is taught. Therefore, I could probably have finished before with the degree in math if they did not change the degree.

    And, on that note, aren`t there degrees that are generally taught well and others taught poorly? Aren't some math degrees harder to attain at certain universities over others? Why? Doesn't this mean that socionics does not add up?

    The problem is that in the real world, practical issues sometimes make a difference.

    Maybe math generally has the pefect information metabolism for you, but the degree you entered into is too hard or not taught properly, and therefore you cannot finish.

    And it is like this with anything. 'If you are LII why aren't you with an ESE?' Maybe again because of certain practical issues of availability, attractiveness, etc. The person who believes this has given no thought to issues of logistics, cost, availability, or use. These are not big concerns for me, but they are inherent in almost any practical endeavour. And they're relevant to anything socionics: a relation, career, etc. could 'work' because it's cheap, available, or easy. It could also 'not work' for the opposite reasons. Therefore, when you question one's information metabolism because 'they're in accounting instead of mathematics', please give this notion a second thought...
    and how does this make socionics not work?

  14. #14
    jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,309
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Number 9 large View Post
    and how does this make socionics not work?
    What did I say? Because certain things aren't cheap, available, easy to use, (or maybe even designed properly) socionics will then break down in such situations. Please recall: work is in quotations - i.e., it's not exactly why it doesn't work.

  15. #15
    Number 9 large's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    4,404
    Mentioned
    244 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    What did I say? Because certain things aren't cheap, available, easy to use, (or maybe even designed properly) socionics will then break down in such situations. Please recall: work is in quotations - i.e., it's not exactly why it doesn't work.
    Did socionics say that everything is easy to use?

  16. #16
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Luk Fe refers to the way one would rationalize encouragement in comparison to some baseline reference or requirement but I've known quite a number of Fe-types that neither sought nor needed encouragement whatsoever. Externalized-F is interactive rationalization so group participation is sought for confirmation purposes, which is a broad category under which encouragement could fit - if one needed it. I've known copies of all types that've sought encouragement. I've an aptitude for maths so I didn't require encouragement and I've met copies of every type who didn't have difficulty with the subject - with or without encouragement....

    a.k.a. I/O
    Last edited by Rebelondeck; 06-16-2019 at 03:57 PM.

  17. #17
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This has nothing to do with socionics. Socionics does not dictate what your career path should be.

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,026
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    This has nothing to do with socionics. Socionics does not dictate what your career path should be.
    That's right.

  19. #19
    Number 9 large's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    4,404
    Mentioned
    244 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    This has nothing to do with socionics. Socionics does not dictate what your career path should be.
    It does to an extent

  20. #20
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Number 9 large View Post
    It does to an extent
    Sure, it can tell you what you're likely to be good at. But it doesn't mean that every Ti type has to be good at math. And dual relationships may or may not work out for a variety of reasons.

  21. #21
    WinnieW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    TIM
    alpha NT
    Posts
    1,695
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    But it doesn't mean that every Ti type has to be good at math.
    Applying math is much more ,
    creating math formulas and defining laws of arithmetic is

  22. #22
    Number 9 large's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    4,404
    Mentioned
    244 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    Sure, it can tell you what you're likely to be good at. But it doesn't mean that every Ti type has to be good at math. And dual relationships may or may not work out for a variety of reasons.
    Yep

  23. #23
    jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,309
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    This has nothing to do with socionics. Socionics does not dictate what your career path should be.
    Assume it's not related to work, then the same rule applies, whether you're dealing with relationships, interests, or anything. Logistics can make a difference. E.g., dual is 1/1000 people vs. 1/10. Doesn't this now make a difference whether you can find your dual? Or even if it is related to work: math has the perfect information metabolism for you. Now, what if the degree you enter into is not designed properly? (Another practical issue) It's not the fault of your personality type that you didn't succeed....

  24. #24
    Luk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    47
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    math has the perfect information metabolism for you.
    What is that information metabolism, specifically?

  25. #25
    jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,309
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luk View Post
    What is that information metabolism, specifically?
    I'm not certain, but I would guess: (generally) Te and Ti together with Ne or Ni.

  26. #26
    Luk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    47
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    I'm not certain, but I would guess: (generally) Te and Ti together with Ne or Ni.
    I'm inclined to agree. But therein lies my problem. Everybody can use at least two of those and learn to use at least one more in daily life. Your sociotype (as well as general personality) will determine the kind of mathematician you become and how you approach your work, but I think you can be successful regardless of your sociotype.

    I'm stereotyping, but an ESI might push through an impasse through hard work and methodically try all avenues, while an ILE might go to the caffeteria to relax and hope to gain some insights.

    They'll both be capable of using logic and intuition in a secluded environment, in slightly different ways. Mathematical intelligence is key.



    That reminds me!
    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    I've met copies of every type who didn't have difficulty with the subject - with or without encouragement....
    What were the SEE mathematicians like? 😮

  27. #27
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    Assume it's not related to work, then the same rule applies, whether you're dealing with relationships, interests, or anything. Logistics can make a difference. E.g., dual is 1/1000 people vs. 1/10. Doesn't this now make a difference whether you can find your dual? Or even if it is related to work: math has the perfect information metabolism for you. Now, what if the degree you enter into is not designed properly? (Another practical issue) It's not the fault of your personality type that you didn't succeed....
    So what? If you have realistic expectations about what socionics does and doesn't say, then it most certainly does work.

    This is like blaming the theory of electromagnetism for when your lightbulb burns out. I can see the headlines now: "Maxwell was wrong!"

    Get out of here with that clickbait

  28. #28
    jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,309
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    So what? If you have realistic expectations about what socionics does and doesn't say, then it most certainly does work.

    This is like blaming the theory of electromagnetism for when your lightbulb burns out. I can see the headlines now: "Maxwell was wrong!"

    Get out of here with that clickbait
    I repeat: work was in quotations. I.e., the message is for someone who is finding the theory to not 'work' that there can be external factors that affect one's success in the theory, and therefore it is in some ways a crapshoot. The point is not that the theory is simply wrong because of this...

  29. #29
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    I repeat: work was in quotations. I.e., the message is for someone who is finding the theory to not 'work' that there can be external factors that affect one's success in the theory, and therefore it is in some ways a crapshoot. The point is not that the theory is simply wrong because of this...
    It's still clickbait

  30. #30
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ^agreed, my SLI mum was a lil math freak, she used to say that math is beautiful as it always gives you the correct results.

  31. #31
    Chthonic Daydream's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    The Snail Spiral
    Posts
    1,245
    Mentioned
    171 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ooo View Post
    ^agreed, my SLI mum was a lil math freak, she used to say that math is beautiful as it always gives you the correct results.
    “I want the following word: splendor, splendor is fruit in all its succulence, fruit without sadness. I want vast distances. My savage intuition of myself.”
    Clarice Lispector

  32. #32
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chrysalis View Post

    I wish you continue to get wrong answers just make you feel better.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  33. #33
    c esi-se 6w7 spsx ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    the center of the universe
    Posts
    15,833
    Mentioned
    912 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Math is my polr

  34. #34
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Being a certain type does not automatically give one superpowers to do certain things.

  35. #35
    jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,309
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    People just want to argue and they aren't catching on. I'm just not responding to this thread...
    Last edited by jason_m; 06-17-2019 at 02:03 AM.

  36. #36
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    "so group participation is sought for confirmation purposes"
    I didn't understand that.
    @Luk If you haven't already read, this shows why I'm not on the same page as most:

    https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...tterns-by-I-O?

    a.k.a. I/O

Posting Permissions

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