Socionics is considered pseudoscience, there's no proof it works and there's also no proof that Gulenko's methods are better than these of other socionists or random people on this forum. People have access to info, just many don't see it as a fact, but rather a more or less probable explanation of personality differences and relationships. I was actually surprised that some people treat socionics so seriously here, like I got into a sect. I treat typology as a psychological playground where I can learn about and test promising personality theories, choose these parts of theory that make sense, have some proof or whatever other reason, do my own research. I guess some just want to find their own Bible in socionics books.Originally Posted by shotgunfingers
Why is this important tho? All of this is established and explained both in Filatova's and Gulenko's books, including the methodology of sociological diagnostics.
I'm under the impression that people just don't have access to information.. all ppl need to do is acquire the information.
Reply With Quote