Originally Posted by
Adam Strange
I am guilty of doing this, but not because I think that typing by stereotypes and VI is the best method. I actually think that it yields correct results only about half the time, and typing by more formal informational methods gives better results.
When I first arrived at this forum, no one liked or believed in VI methods, and I was pretty terrible at being able to discern people’s correct types. I might be slightly better at this now, but I still suck at it.
The whole reason I first started to type by VI was that my purpose in learning Socionics was to be able to identify Duals for dating, and the largest source of Duals are online dating services, where you only get a few pictures of a person along with some very ambiguous notes from their life that they think are important. You can’t really give each of the one or two hundred people you might see in a dating site a Socionics test, so you have to fall back on stereotypes and VI, then text them and date them for a while to get more information.
I use VI, but I have sometimes been very surprised when someone whom I thought was one type eventually turned out to be a different type. In other words, my typing method, while quick and generally applicable, is not perfect because it misses certain pieces of information.
But I’d like to point out that every method of typing that I’m aware of will miss some information and will therefore make some mistypes.