Last edited by Dee; 02-26-2009 at 02:24 AM.
There is no option "I have no clue"
Otherwise I would've chosen it... :wink:
dontcha hate that?
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Originally Posted by Joy
Originally Posted by Mea
It's the vibe I'm getting from you.Originally Posted by dee
Enough. You're SEI.
Maybe, dee. SEI, perhaps you're a 9. I could quite easily see it.
Yeah, both are irrational with weak Te, weak Ti, and unvalued Ni/Se. The trick is... does she value Te or Ti? Let's hear what the ENFps have to say about this. Mea thinks SEI, I believe.Originally Posted by labcoat
Eh? She? I thought dee's a male?
I get the SEI vibe, but I'm not sure.
I think Te valuing is a possibility.
In that case, let's just say alpha/delta.
Agree with this "unvalued Ni/Se".
ethical and irrational seems apparent, too
Yeah, I think the verdict is in. Dee's SEI.
If you think you'd be more at home in Gamma than Alpha, it's likely that you're confused about the meanings of the terms "Gamma" and "Alpha".
dee, how old are you?
If you're a teenager (or perhaps your adult) that changes things. Also, are you male or female?
To be honest, I think Alpha is the likely quadra. I feel at home with Gamma, but it's not my quadra.
Okay look, you act like a teenage girl. If you actually are a teenage girl, then I could see more type possibilities (such as ENFp or even INFj) for you... but if you're not, then ISFp seems extremely likely.Originally Posted by dee
I'm not sure I follow. I'm never 100% certain of my typings.you look like you have gone through some sort of 100% typing accuracy course just now, i wonder how really real it is.
This means nothing unless you can be reasonably certain that your typings are correct. And you can't be.Originally Posted by dee
You're too new. You don't even understand your own quadra values or temperament yet. Once you do understand at least your own quadra values, a lot of things will just click and you'll be about 1000 times more accurate in your typings. They still won't be 100% accurate though. You always have to be open to the possibility that you've typed someone wrong.
taken in context (fuckheads), this is Te PoLR talkOriginally Posted by dee
The need to have someone explain something thoroughly before you're willing to truly consider or accept the information/opinion they're presenting is generally a Ti hidden agenda thing.
Te is about what works. Ti is about systems. You seem to be more interested in understanding systems than in just knowing "what works".
Did you read the posts I wrote about Te PoLR?
I must have posted this while you were typing your response.Originally Posted by Joy
heh, initially I quoted this to say not necessarily Te polr...but then i read it through again a few timesOriginally Posted by Joy
i think it's the "unless their reasoning behind it makes total sense" that might suggest Ti>Te
but i'm pretty sure that the 'i have to see it for myself' is a sign of Fp (I know infps, enfps, and esfps who need to see it themselves...not sure about isfps and the Fjs)
for myself (i'm not sure of the others), it doesn't matter whether or not their reasoning makes total sense...cuz...well..I can't follow the reasoning or get anything out of it if I can't see how it fits/works/links to my own life/experiences.
so, yeah, nevermind, i can see that first part combined with the second as being a possible sign of Te polr
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
It's evident from your reactions to my statements on this forum. You are always very eager to let know that you have understood very well what I said; even presuming to understand more of it than I intended to reveal (= empowering Ne interpreting limiting Ne). But, right after letting me know that, you ask for more concrete bits of understanding that I can not provide. In a way, you criticize my ideas by exposing that I don't understand them in the real 'working' Te way yet.i would like to hear your reasoning for this, please.
My second guess would be ENTp... The accepting Ne, which is "empowering" (speculative, freewheeling, deriving the whole from a part), is definitely there.
Another reason for thinking Fi > Ti is that you have the habit of calling people by name as a way of acknowledging them and giving them a quick jolt of attention. Somehow I never know how to react to that, and end up sounding blunt.
This actually suggests Fe > Te.Originally Posted by dee
I'm not interested in a big discussion about this, but here you go:
First and foremost, the tone of your post is, as always, very Fe.
Interesting use of "Te PoLR" as a verb there. (not necessarily type related, just thought I'd point it out)Originally Posted by dee
You're too focused on Te being about "outside sources". Most factual information originates from "outside sources". Te is about what works, what doesn't work, what would work better, etc. The only reason "outside" information is utilized because building information into a Ti structure is seen by Te types as an unnecessary expenditure of time/effort. Information is considered "accurate" in as much as it is useful. Of course, anything that doesn't make sense or that is proven to be untrue or that doesn't pass a "due diligence" examination is not utilized. Because Te types value real and accurate information, they put a reasonable/practical amount of time/effort into confirming that the information they use or provide is correct.-i don't mind gathering facts from outside trustworthy and realistic sources.
Who doesn't?-i speak of facts often and invent methods.
Not sure this is type related, and if it is, the reason why you "love" statistics matters more than the fact that you do.-i love statistics.
This is very Ti > Te. A Te PoLR is primarily about trusting one's own understanding of something over newly introduced information. The original source of either is irrelevant.-i'm not likely to trust someone's hands on experience (unless its trustworthy and i know it for sure) over factual knowledge of, again, trustworthy nature.
Fe creative types care about being in a pleasant environment. They're laid back by nature as well, so a lot of emotional excitability could be off putting, depending on who it's coming from I'd imagine.-i terribly dislike emotions and prefer conversations that are not emotionally charged.
lol... who doesn't?i feel guilty every time i act like an asshole after getting drunk and being all emotional and doing stupid stuff.
This would suggest Ne/Si > Ni/Se, particularly Ne/Si > Beta.-i terribly dislike loud laughter in companies.
lolas for IP, i keep getting IP in tests (gulenko 62, socionics.com long typing assistant, 72 yes-no test on socionics.org), can see myself in i and p descriptions well, IP temperamant i can relate to.
Sigh. Again, this is only as accurate as your understanding of those quadras is.also, gamma i relate more to than delta.
Yeah, any Fe type would work. If you identify more strongly with the IP temperament though, then ISFp is more likely. You do seem irrational, fwiw.
Originally Posted by dee, xx:39Could you elaborate? Because it looks like you just did a complete about-face in 6 minutes.Originally Posted by dee, xx:45
Originally Posted by Logos
Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.
I pity your souls
do you seriously think you are SLE?
I seriously cannot see you as anything besides a Fe type, dee.
100% agreeOriginally Posted by Joy
dee, if you look at how I have been dubbed a 99%-definitely-SLE, you will see that you and I are not alike.
Even if I haven't (I probably have) got it, no WAY have you got Se as a leading function.
If you're not Fe-leading, you value it. So Alpha or Beta for you. You're definitely not of the IJ temperament, and in my eyes, you could be any of the other three. Club is hazy for you at the moment.
You're a 6w5. I think ILE is not out of the question.
Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.
I agree with SEI for your type.
explain.Originally Posted by Ezra
After reading your responses to Joy, I'm more affirmed than before that you are most likely an ISFp. Not very sure about subtype, but Si subtype seems probable.