Go Back   Socionics Forums > Ramble Mumble

Ramble Mumble Anything goes, but please make an effort to stay positive and keep it socionics related.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 13/05/2009, 01:23 AM
JWC3's Avatar
JWC3 JWC3 is offline
The WILDCARD!
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright View Post
Back to my original point, that doesn't sound like certainty to me. There ARE exceptions. Here's an example: I know a pair of fraternal twins who could pass as identical twins. They have the same body type and facial structure, but they have very different personalities. Since they look so similar, they would be VI-ed as the same type, but they aren't. VI isn't perfect, it has limitations, same as every other method of type identification. Also, you can't tell me with one hundred percent certainty that you didn't make a mistake, just like I can't tell you that you did. It's all introspective, which can neither be confirmed or denied.
Do you know they are not the same type? In my other thread some one said that personality =/= Type. So they could be the same *shrugs* but any way EVERYTHING is a matter of perspective, what is a sure thing for me may not be for you. but at the same time my sure thing is indeed a sure thing simply because that's how i perceive the world.

Secondly Things/actions/events/clarity are defined in the past, so say that person A believes strongly in VI and has 100% faith in their ability to VI any body and any thing (:O). And so far they have never been wrong.

Is person A going to VI their next subject accurately? It's impossible to tell, the future hasn't happened yet

Will person A Think that they are accurate the next time they VI? Most probably.

Does any of this matter to person B who has no faith in VI? Probably not.

Does either person's Faith in VI matter at all to the outcome? No.

Basically you are arguing perspective/opinion on a issue and really whether either one of you agrees or disagrees on how accurate VI is doesn't really matter to the science of VI

It's like arguing how to tell what color the grass is, one says just look and the other says examine the root system. Does it really matter which one you pick? NO, it's still grass.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by The wisest man alive
Religion = Lawn Chairs
"IT'S ALL DAY!"
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 13/05/2009, 01:32 AM
stanprollyright's Avatar
stanprollyright stanprollyright is offline
The Looks
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JWC3 View Post
Do you know they are not the same type? In my other thread some one said that personality =/= Type. So they could be the same *shrugs* but any way EVERYTHING is a matter of perspective, what is a sure thing for me may not be for you. but at the same time my sure thing is indeed a sure thing simply because that's how i perceive the world.

Does either person's Faith in VI matter at all to the outcome? No.

Basically you are arguing perspective/opinion on a issue and really whether either one of you agrees or disagrees on how accurate VI is doesn't really matter to the science of VI
We don't know whether he's right or not. We are arguing over how reliable his VI is as a source of information directing us to the correct answer.
__________________
So this one time me an' my bes' frien' Stan, we went to a church service. That preacher was talkin' 'bout hell. So Stan leans over to me an' he says, "I bet hell is like a PoLR hit every day."

An' I says, "Stan, you prolly right."
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 13/05/2009, 01:43 AM
JWC3's Avatar
JWC3 JWC3 is offline
The WILDCARD!
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright View Post
We don't know whether he's right or not. We are arguing over how reliable his VI is as a source of information directing us to the correct answer.
Nope, we sure don't know whether or not he is right, but the only way to tell if his VI is credible is to decide credibility retro actively. So once we know lazulisky's type then we can decide if he was accurate. What i am saying is that what either one of you think her type is, is irrelevant to what it actually is. It's still a matter of perspective and perspective isn't facts it's how you deal with them. So i guess as usual we end up arguing about something that we both actually agree on and we are just stating it in a different way.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by The wisest man alive
Religion = Lawn Chairs
"IT'S ALL DAY!"
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 13/05/2009, 01:47 AM
stanprollyright's Avatar
stanprollyright stanprollyright is offline
The Looks
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JWC3 View Post
Nope, we sure don't know whether or not he is right, but the only way to tell if his VI is credible is to decide credibility retro actively. So once we know lazulisky's type then we can decide if he was accurate. What i am saying is that what either one of you think her type is, is irrelevant to what it actually is. It's still a matter of perspective and perspective isn't facts it's how you deal with them. So i guess as usual we end up arguing about something that we both actually agree on and we are just stating it in a different way.
Again, talking of facts. There are no facts in socionics!
__________________
So this one time me an' my bes' frien' Stan, we went to a church service. That preacher was talkin' 'bout hell. So Stan leans over to me an' he says, "I bet hell is like a PoLR hit every day."

An' I says, "Stan, you prolly right."
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 13/05/2009, 01:52 AM
JWC3's Avatar
JWC3 JWC3 is offline
The WILDCARD!
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 217
Default

False, Your type and my type are facts. I can think and behave as any type i want to, so i VI as SLE, and Act like a SLE does that make me a SLE. Probably, sure it's not 100% certain but the FACT remains that i do have a type. Whether i know what it is, or think i know, or am 100% certain on what my type is. It is still fact that i do indeed have a type whether or not i am right in my certainty is irrelivant.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by The wisest man alive
Religion = Lawn Chairs
"IT'S ALL DAY!"
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 13/05/2009, 02:35 AM
stanprollyright's Avatar
stanprollyright stanprollyright is offline
The Looks
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JWC3 View Post
False, Your type and my type are facts. I can think and behave as any type i want to, so i VI as SLE, and Act like a SLE does that make me a SLE. Probably, sure it's not 100% certain but the FACT remains that i do have a type. Whether i know what it is, or think i know, or am 100% certain on what my type is. It is still fact that i do indeed have a type whether or not i am right in my certainty is irrelivant.
No, they are not facts. Socionics is a certain way of looking at people. Sometimes it's like fitting square pegs in round holes. It's a philosophy. Our types are not facts because the concept of "type" is a spectrum that is constantly evolving and changing. There is no experimental data to prove that your behavior is necessarily caused by type, and your introspection and observations are not a reliable enough to claim causality. Fact is something that under the present reality cannot be refuted, such as the existence of air. Socionics is refuted by a great many people who don't believe in it, because their experiences don't support the conclusions left by socionists. It's all theoretical and abstract. Facts are concrete. Being supremely confident something is true doesn't make it a fact.
__________________
So this one time me an' my bes' frien' Stan, we went to a church service. That preacher was talkin' 'bout hell. So Stan leans over to me an' he says, "I bet hell is like a PoLR hit every day."

An' I says, "Stan, you prolly right."
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 13/05/2009, 05:42 AM
Marie84's Avatar
Marie84 Marie84 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 84
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
Well, I can't force you to reconsider the facts and realize that you are wrong. But I will not agree to disagree, since I know that what you claim is false.
You haven't provided any facts, you made assumptions and stated them as facts.

Quote:
Neither am I confrontational just for the sake of it, I am just stating the facts. The body types of the INFj and the INTj are, on average, the most leptosomic/ectomorph of all the 16 types. And they seem to have a really hard time putting on weight, as if they are immune to being fat. The opposite seem to be true of some sensory types, like the ESFp and the ISFp. I am not quite sure which type is the most different from the INFj and the INTj in this respect.
Absolutely incorrect. Body shape and type do not completly correlate with each other, it's a trait passed via the genetics of the parents and can be controlled or maintained via lifestyle and diet.

My mother, for instance, is an IEE/ENFp and she has a lot of trouble putting on weight since she has a small appretite most of the time and she's generally quite energetic. She also has Lupus which also factors into this.
My father is an LSI/ISTj and he is overweight since he was raised on a typical old German diet of bread, meats and sweets. It's become so ingrained into his lifestyle that he can't find anything that isn't high in carbs satisfying.
I'm an EII/INFj and I have an hourglass type figure, if I don't watch what I eat and exercise I will put on weight easily, not because of type, but because I have a lot of estrogen. This is why women on birth control often will put on more weight than usual.

Visual identification has a place but when it rejects scientific facts or even the information used in Socionics that is crucial to determining type like intertype relations and function use, than it becomes a pseudo-science up there with astrology or MBTI.
As in, you can say this person is this type, not because you backed it up with facts but because you made arrogant assumptions and no one will be able to correct such assumption since you'd be so stuck in your ways that you reject any important contrary data.
__________________
INFj
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 13/05/2009, 01:52 PM
stanprollyright's Avatar
stanprollyright stanprollyright is offline
The Looks
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 369
Default

Thank you Marie!

I'm an ENFp, and I have trouble putting on weight as well, but I know more than one overweight ENFp. Body type is strongly correlated with type, but that doesn't make the system perfect. You can't say that if a person has a certain body type that they CAN'T be another type, and that certain socionic types ONLY have certain body types, because they are all generalizations and trends. Studying socionics is like studying statistics, where you make educated guesses based off of trends and patterns. It is NOT and never will be a science. To have science you need to have experimental data with specifically manipulated independent and dependent variables.
__________________
So this one time me an' my bes' frien' Stan, we went to a church service. That preacher was talkin' 'bout hell. So Stan leans over to me an' he says, "I bet hell is like a PoLR hit every day."

An' I says, "Stan, you prolly right."
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 13/05/2009, 02:29 PM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
House Robot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright View Post
You can't prove anything in socionics, nor can you disprove anything.
Total bullshit. Not even worth a comment really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright
Socionics is not a science and is based on absolutely no experimental data. It is a philosophy, a theory based completely on introspection and observation, neither of which can be proven or disproven.
I'm just highlightning the crap here so that people won't be fooled by this charlatan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright
Also, as this is a forum, where we discuss our opinions on said theory that has no "facts", my opinion is very relevant.
No, it isnt. In this particular case your opinion happens to be
1. false
2. irrelevant
3. uninteresting

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright
I would like to see some evidence to support your opinion, because you keep waving it around as "fact" and saying that everyone else is wrong and delusional and a beginner, but you don't qualify your opinions either.
One should actually question your right to have an opinion here, since you obviously haven't even studied the basics of socionic theory and what it is based on. Why don't you start with studying the socionic material provided by SG on this very site?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright
You have absolutely no reason or right to antagonize everyone else for their opinions that are based on their experiences and observations, just because they are different than yours.
I am not. I am not criticizing you for your opinion because it is different from mine, I am criticizing it because it is false. That's a very big difference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright
Marie and I disagreeing with you doesn't make us wrong.
It doesn't make you right either. And the fact happens to be that you are wrong. But that fact is independent of what I happen to say. I can't make you right just by changing my mind. The facts are what they are anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright View Post
Back to my original point, that doesn't sound like certainty to me. There ARE exceptions.
I didn't say that there are no exceptions, I said that the INFj and the INTj are -- on average -- the most leptosomic/ectomorph of all the 16 types. And that is a certainty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marie84 View Post
You haven't provided any facts, you made assumptions and stated them as facts.
No, I didn't make assumptions. I stated some facts.

Last edited by Prometheus; 13/05/2009 at 02:29 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 13/05/2009, 05:56 PM
stanprollyright's Avatar
stanprollyright stanprollyright is offline
The Looks
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
Total bullshit. Not even worth a comment really.


I'm just highlightning the crap here so that people won't be fooled by this charlatan.


No, it isnt. In this particular case your opinion happens to be
1. false
2. irrelevant
3. uninteresting


One should actually question your right to have an opinion here, since you obviously haven't even studied the basics of socionic theory and what it is based on. Why don't you start with studying the socionic material provided by SG on this very site?


I am not. I am not criticizing you for your opinion because it is different from mine, I am criticizing it because it is false. That's a very big difference.


It doesn't make you right either. And the fact happens to be that you are wrong. But that fact is independent of what I happen to say. I can't make you right just by changing my mind. The facts are what they are anyway.


I didn't say that there are no exceptions, I said that the INFj and the INTj are -- on average -- the most leptosomic/ectomorph of all the 16 types. And that is a certainty.


No, I didn't make assumptions. I stated some facts.
If you are going to continually call me wrong, back yourself up. You have given me no new information, you have just continually stated your opinion that mine is irrelevant. You have no evidence to support yourself. You say I am wrong but will not say why. And my opinion is just as relevant as yours, because I HAVE studied socionics. I have also studied psychology. Socionics, Myers-Briggs, Jung typology, and the work of Freud on which they are all partially based, are heavily criticized because they are not backed by experimental data, only introspection.

Just because you call me wrong and a charlatan and a beginner and call my opinion bullshit doesn't make you right. It doesn't make me right either, but I've stated a lot more reasoning than you have. Next time you post something, please give me some evidence. If you have none and are just going say that I am wrong and that what I say is false, please refrain, because your unrationalized opinion means nothing to me.
__________________
So this one time me an' my bes' frien' Stan, we went to a church service. That preacher was talkin' 'bout hell. So Stan leans over to me an' he says, "I bet hell is like a PoLR hit every day."

An' I says, "Stan, you prolly right."
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 13/05/2009, 06:16 PM
JWC3's Avatar
JWC3 JWC3 is offline
The WILDCARD!
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
I'm just highlightning the crap here so that people won't be fooled by this charlatan.
Ad Hominem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

I'd just like to point out that Stan being or not being a charlatan is in no way relevant to the correctness or incorrectness of his argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by prometheus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright
You have absolutely no reason or right to antagonize everyone else for their opinions that are based on their experiences and observations, just because they are different than yours.
I am not. I am not criticizing you for your opinion because it is different from mine, I am criticizing it because it is false. That's a very big difference.
You really are sorta attacking the person now and not the argument, and that's not really necessary or helpful to either one of you.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by The wisest man alive
Religion = Lawn Chairs
"IT'S ALL DAY!"
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 13/05/2009, 10:21 PM
itinerant_stapler71's Avatar
itinerant_stapler71 itinerant_stapler71 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 77
Default

how silly it all is.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 14/05/2009, 08:36 AM
Marie84's Avatar
Marie84 Marie84 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 84
Default

Honestly Prometheus, there is no point arguing with you. Someone asks you for facts and you reply with insults and pseudo-science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright View Post
Thank you Marie!

I'm an ENFp, and I have trouble putting on weight as well, but I know more than one overweight ENFp. Body type is strongly correlated with type, but that doesn't make the system perfect. You can't say that if a person has a certain body type that they CAN'T be another type, and that certain socionic types ONLY have certain body types, because they are all generalizations and trends. Studying socionics is like studying statistics, where you make educated guesses based off of trends and patterns. It is NOT and never will be a science. To have science you need to have experimental data with specifically manipulated independent and dependent variables.
No problem

I really don't think body type strongly correlates with Socionics type. Apply it to the real world and even Socionic user galleries like socionics.org you'll see a wide variety of body types for all the types, there really isn't any single type of shape for anyone.
VI seems to correlate more with facial features, expressions and body language in my experience.
__________________
INFj

Last edited by Marie84; 14/05/2009 at 08:36 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 14/05/2009, 08:47 AM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
House Robot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marie84 View Post
Honestly Prometheus, there is no point arguing with you.
Correct. It's a waste of time, especially for me. When you know that you are right, and yet people obstinately refuse to see the truth or investigate the objective facts, there's no point in trying to convince them that they are wrong. They won't see it anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 14/05/2009, 01:28 PM
Banter's Avatar
Banter Banter is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 586
Default

Moderators Note: I understand on occasion a topic may get some heated responses or is emotionally charged. This passion should remain in the discourse. However, please keep your posts respectful. Stick to the substance of the post and "attack" a user's view, opinion, argumentation but refrain from attacking another user in a personal way or making snide remarks.

Also remember, we can't all agree on everything and not everyone thinks alike (it would be a boring world, wouldn't it?), and respect that. Thank you!

Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 14/05/2009, 07:14 PM
stanprollyright's Avatar
stanprollyright stanprollyright is offline
The Looks
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banter View Post
Moderators Note: I understand on occasion a topic may get some heated responses or is emotionally charged. This passion should remain in the discourse. However, please keep your posts respectful. Stick to the substance of the post and "attack" a user's view, opinion, argumentation but refrain from attacking another user in a personal way or making snide remarks.

Also remember, we can't all agree on everything and not everyone thinks alike (it would be a boring world, wouldn't it?), and respect that. Thank you!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marie84 View Post
Honestly Prometheus, there is no point arguing with you.
Correct. It's a waste of time
I think the argument is over anyway. This is going nowhere.
__________________
So this one time me an' my bes' frien' Stan, we went to a church service. That preacher was talkin' 'bout hell. So Stan leans over to me an' he says, "I bet hell is like a PoLR hit every day."

An' I says, "Stan, you prolly right."
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 14/05/2009, 09:04 PM
Banter's Avatar
Banter Banter is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 586
Default

Actually, needless to say, but the same applies for each thread.


Back to topic ! (which was lazulisky)
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 17/05/2009, 04:33 AM
lazulisky lazulisky is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5
Default

Epic derailment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright View Post
Back to my original point, that doesn't sound like certainty to me. There ARE exceptions. Here's an example: I know a pair of fraternal twins who could pass as identical twins. They have the same body type and facial structure, but they have very different personalities. Since they look so similar, they would be VI-ed as the same type, but they aren't. VI isn't perfect, it has limitations, same as every other method of type identification. Also, you can't tell me with one hundred percent certainty that you didn't make a mistake, just like I can't tell you that you did. It's all introspective, which can neither be confirmed or denied.
It would certainly be interesting to see twin studies in socionics.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 06/07/2009, 05:30 PM
lazulisky lazulisky is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5
Default

FTR, I have since decided on SLI.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2007 SOCIONICS.COM