Philosophy
============

Socionics is itself a kind of philosophical system whose terminology can
be used to describe key differences between schools of thought and to
summarize the key features of many cultural, societal, and political
phenomena. The :doc:`information aspects <information_aspect>` are
probably the most convenient tool for this kind of analysis.



Socionic logic and philosophy
=============================

When knowledge is accumulated and recorded in fields of science and
technology, a logical emphasis develops. This means that information is
expressed primarily through the use of the :doc:`element <elements>` of
:doc:`logic <ethics_logic>`. Within science and technology, however, you will find
fields and sub-fields where either :doc:`extraverted logic <Te>` or :doc:`introverted logic <Ti>` dominate (and sometimes other aspects as
well):

-  When |symbol_p.gif| dominates, attention is primarily focused on
   accurately describing facts, developing an empirical foundation, and
   testing hypotheses.
-  When |symbol_l.gif| dominates, attention is primarily focused on
   structuring information, analyzing methodology, and producing
   theoretical explanations.

Whenever a field leans too far in the direction of one of these
approaches, it attracts criticism: too much |symbol_p.gif| - for a lack
of theoretical development and overarching explanations, and too much
|symbol_l.gif| - for a lack of empiricism and testable hypotheses. One
approach focuses on the logic of external, factual reality, while the
other focuses on the internal logic of ideas and explanations
themselves.

Within :doc:`personality psychology <personality>`, the |symbol_p.gif|
approach is represented by the "trait" approach to personality, which
measures psychological traits along a continuum and provides little
theoretical understanding. The |symbol_l.gif| approach is represented by
the "type" approach to personality, where individuals are grouped into
discrete categories. This second method can provide a clear theoretical
understanding, but is criticized for lacking an empirical basis and
testable hypotheses.

|symbol_p.gif| and |symbol_l.gif| have played off each other in the
development of science. As technical progress allowed more objective
facts to be registered (|symbol_p.gif|), people's conceptual
understanding (|symbol_l.gif|) gradually accommodated the new facts, and
scientists took the new paradigm to its logical conclusion
(|symbol_l.gif|), anticipating many facts intellectually before they had
been demonstrated physically (|symbol_p.gif|).



Influence of socionic type on philosophers' views
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In philosophy, the difference between :doc:`Ti <Ti>` and :doc:`Te <Te>` is
mirrored in the analytic-synthetic distinction. It can be seen that
:ref:`ego <ego-block>` Ti philosophers (such as Christopher
Langan and Rene Descartes)
tend to favor reaching truth through mathematical, abstract means,
whereas :ref:`ego <ego-block>` Te philosophers (such as Karl
Popper) concentrate more on establishing useful
protocols and methodologies. Some (such as David Hume)
fall in between the two extremes, showing that the analogy is by no
means complete - at least not on the level of individuals.


The pinnacle of Te philosophy is
`pragmatism <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatism>`__, in both its
everyday and philosophical senses, whereas that of Ti philosophy is
`logic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic>`__ (likewise both formal and
informal).


.. |symbol_p.gif| image:: symbol_p.gif
.. |symbol_l.gif| image:: symbol_l.gif