User talk:Admin/Theories of Everything
From Wikisocion
I wonder if having a "theory of everything" is really something unique to Alphas. Rick, I remember your site types Freud as possibly EIE. Wouldn't Freud's trying to explain the vast array of human psychology based on some simple base principles qualify as a "theory of everything" approach?
I also remember that Expat thought Richard Dawkins to be a Te type.
Also, I have some trouble with the idea that theoretical physics is an "NeTi field." If anything, it would seem that pure mathematics, in which everything is derived from axioms, would tend more towards Ti, whereas physics, which is based on the attempt to make sense of externally observed phenomena, would seem more Te.
I recall that some Socionics benchmark lists typed Richard Feynman as LIE, and Isaac Newton as ILI.
Of course, naturally if one were to spend the day with Einstein or some other person who may be ILE, and were talk to that person about what physics is like, one would likely get an idea that "physics is an NeTi field." But if one were to spend the day with an LIE physicist, one may get the sense that it's a "TeNi field."
Imagine being in the room with an LII topologist and an LIE astrophysicist....and the LII is discussing how great it is have a field where one can derive valid theorems just from self-contained logic, and the LIE is talking about how great it is to be involved in finding ways to explain all sorts observed empirical phenomena. Surely, it would seem that physics would be the more Gamma field and pure math the more Alpha field.
I'm not arguing that though...just the idea that we have to be careful about labelling a field as NeTi or any other Socionic label. --Jonathan 05:28, 20 December 2007 (GMT)
- Part of the misunderstanding is that non- formulations don't 'feel' like theories. For instance, I can find no theory in Freud's work. It's all descriptive. In Augusta's case, it's very clear what the theory is, and people like Bukalov extend it to everything possible, while keeping it in mode. Psychoanalysis has been applied to everything as well, but I don't recognize it as a theory because it is not described as such.
- If I look at the16types forum, for instance, I can see lots of types with "theories," but not a single LIE or ILI with such a theory.
- I think the real issue here is whether a 'theory' is to be understood in terms or . It would be great to list examples of both. --Admin 10:48, 20 December 2007 (GMT)
