My Youtube video(type me)

[Hitta]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQXphgXVOlQ[/youtube]

[Creepy-bg]

r u stoned or just southern?

[Hitta]

r u stoned or just southern?

southern

[Animal]

LSI/LII?

[Slacker]

LSI

[Hitta]

why do you think ISTj?

[Creepy-bg]

LSI

I can accept that... the way he talks seems to be the same round-about get-to-the-fucking-point way that my friends husband talks. (no offense Hitta, it's a relationship thing ya know?)

[Slacker]

Look at a youtube video of an interview of Richard Dreyfuss and compare.

[Elro]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQXphgXVOlQ[/youtube]

Oh man...

[aestrivex]

honestly, from that video? IEI or ILI, leaning towards ILI but i don't really know.


i perceived most of it as the way Ni works; a long, drawn out flow of ideas that are really unfocused and have a semi-clear, barely conscious conception of something that they can't ever actually end up describing. the topic was focused primarily on the arbitrariness of ethical standards. in addition to this being a major source of confusion that i myself have grappled with (although i thought that this video was largely stating the obvious without really analyzing anything), i tend to see this as a very Ni-themed topic, as it relates to the discontinuities inherent between ethics on a day-to-day a sort of unified level and on a unified, "universal" conception of reality.

another thing that struck me as very Ni (possibly NiTe) was where he started talking about the contradictions inherent in his very speech.


also, that he poses a great deal of questions and inherent contradictions without actually presenting his own explanation and conceptual understanding of why that might be so (which i bet exists, on some level at least).


just one other tidbit: where he talks about being inactive and lazy... i think you get the idea.

[aestrivex]

this is actually very interesting because i never even thought about hitta as anything but Ti central, though i never really gave it any thought at all (i had him on ignore until opening up this thread so i could see his video, so i haven't seen much of him apart from arguing with his blatherings over at the wiki)


i'm now interested to see more of him.



if my conceptions are totally off on this, maybe i might not actually be ILI and instead be whatever type he is (LII/LSI/other?). i certainly can understand and, on a certain level, identify with some of what i saw as his Ti, including his +/- functional model. that is actually the sort of crap i might think up and jot down in order to kill time, but the difference is that i would be very unlikely to take it seriously without some real legitimate reason to do so.

[implied]

yeah, i am reminded of that chris langan guy. i don't know why i think LII/LSI over ILI/IEI. just a gut thing that makes me think of the Ti-dominants i know.


@niffy - his whole +/- functions is something i've thought about before, too, which is nearly odd to me because i do not really see myself as hitta-esque. but yeah, again, i don't think i'd seriously put that one out to be lambasted, either but more bc i'd find it a waste of my own time.



why is this funny to me?



i need to post a video on here one night when i am really tired/drunk/southerned out.

[strrrng]

hitta, you definitely strike me as INTp - deep thinker, in a philosophical/global way, lazy (as you mentioned) and seemingly laid back and casual.

Ok, onto your pretentious arguments.

"Everything we do....right and wrong....how we live our lives....is a social construct"
correct, it is.....and your point is what? frankly, anyone who scratches the surface notices this. So what if everything is a social construct? That may make it seem arbitrary - which, I agree, a lot is - but to just say "you can't say it's right or wrong because it's opinion" is inane. A lot of what you say I have thought about and I was able to follow your trains of thought with appreciation. However, I don't like the attitude you take towards ideas based on this belief that all shit is relative. just dig a little deeper to find some real conclusions. Why is everything relative, really? because we have minds with emotions? not much is objective, true, but in the context of our existence, in the limited framework of our consciousness, with our overall, best-it-can-be perception of 'reality', you must be able to say that it is 'wrong' for a grown man to molest a little boy with certainty. you cannot simply argue that that idea is a social construct - that doesn't make it illusory. If you had a son and heard he was molested, how do you think you would feel and react - that is the basis for 'that' social construct. It's not like some dude randomely made it up; it just isn't imbedded in the universe.

(although i thought that this video was largely stating the obvious without really analyzing anything),

indeed

[eunice]

I don't think an LSI would describe himself as a procrastinator and someone who is not assertive.

[strrrng]

I don't think an LSI would describe himself as a procrastinator and someone who is not assertive.

agreed

[implied]

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=fd7p1SGMuqU[/youtube]

[implied]

in any case i think some IT type works for hitta. ISTj (especially thinking subtype) seems plausible because might an ISTj id around with Si when they aren't HA-ing anything urgent to do? and Te is subdued IMO. (although IN(T)j would fit that criteria too. i don't think Se is weak enough for Ne-creative sub.)

agreed, agreed. i'm sure there are some Si-idding ISTjs out there at any given moment. creative Se doesn't have to be entirely in your face!

[strrrng]

strrrng, i would argue that your "argument to empathy" only "scratches the surface" of what many if not most people mean by such things as "truth" and "morality".

sorry if I was brief; I wasn't trying to really start a philosophical discussion of it. I was just trying to make a point quickly.

note that part of the reason I said 'pretentious' was because hitta used this argument in another thread about a college professor where it was kind of pretentious.

I liked and agreed with most of hitta's points, it was just that they didnt' really lead anywhere (hence my quote of niffweed)

[strrrng]

in any case i think some IT type works for hitta. ISTj (especially thinking subtype) seems plausible because might an ISTj id around with Si when they aren't HA-ing anything urgent to do? and Te is subdued IMO. (although IN(T)j would fit that criteria too. i don't think Se is weak enough for Ne-creative sub.)

this guy is relaxed and laid back....ISTj's are stern. they also have an aura of 'groudedness' which I didn't sense from him. and I highly doubt many ISTj's are procrastinators.....or philosphers.....

[Hitta]

the interpretations of what y'all think INTps and ISTjs act like is far from the way that I think they are like.

[aestrivex]

the interpretations of what y'all think INTps and ISTjs act like is far from the way that I think they are like.

that is not a surprise. whatever type you are, you clearly have a badly bastardized conception of socionics.

[Hitta]

the interpretations of what y'all think INTps and ISTjs act like is far from the way that I think they are like.

that is not a surprise. whatever type you are, you clearly have a badly bastardized conception of socionics.

or everyone else here does

[Ms. Kensington]

oh my gosh. I was laughing a lot at this. Ok, ive had enough.

I think he strikes me as INxp and possibly ISTj. I thought INTp, but he does seem expressive when he talks, in this face and hands, head movements (arg for Fe). I suppose if I allow ISTj based on the expression alone, I'll allow for INTj as well. But overall impression, vibe is INxp.

EDIT: actually i watched the whole thing this time and heard some more of what he said. Now i am thinking not ISTj. Two things He seems bothered that morality is not yielding to his analysis, and he talks about other people placing their moralities and ways of life on others.. this sounds like non ego Fe, Te, or Se. Being criticised by others in the area of being assertive. This sounds like non ego Se. ... being bothered by morality being "paradoxical" (taking morality as subject because he spends most of the video talking about that) is... a T type I think. So.. INTj, INxp. However it's strange.. INTps and INFps I've known don't really seem to care about death or ceasing to exist. I think it's their nature to take what comes their way, and thinking this is natural.

In my experience it's INTjs who are so caught up with their words being literal. ISTjs.. tend to have a less difficult time being satisfied with what they are saying. IME. I think that INTps tend to take long pauses like INTjs before speaking, but they revise what they've said less as well.

[Ezra]

r u stoned or just southern?

Fucking LOL

[Ezra]

No way is he LSI. LSIs don't sit their and philosophise. And they don't go topless on videos.

I'm with niffweed. ILI all the way.

[Ezra]

Ahhhhhh. Right. Maybe IEI then.

[eunice]

No way is he LSI. LSIs don't sit their and philosophise. And they don't go topless on videos.
I'm with niffweed. ILI all the way.

[aestrivex]

No way is he LSI. LSIs don't sit their and philosophise. And they don't go topless on videos.

I'm with niffweed. ILI all the way.

THIS is ILI http://the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14523

i'm not at all convinced that the guy in that thread is ILI; merely that he has ego Te. regardless, i completely fail to see why they can't both be ILI.

[strrrng]

i had my say on relaxation/procrastination. but the point about philosophy is interesting. have you ever asked an ISTj about that sort of thing? when they're no preoccupied, and if they trust you? i think what PotatoSpirit said about himself and philosophy is representative of that type. Ti ego + Ni HA seems to get them thinking from time to time, although the conclusions may be very cut and dry (not necessarily a bad thing, not from an ISTj's view, at least i would think.) the professor incident could be a good example of hitta possibly benefiting from some Ni (and possibly Fe.)

Ni hidden agenda leads to occasionally philosophizing, but not sitting around all day doing it. That's what it seems this guy loves to do - philosophize. It is characteristic of ILI's to "do nothing" physically but think very deeply - he said he wasn't active.

or everyone else here does

it's all relative

[aestrivex]

i had my say on relaxation/procrastination. but the point about philosophy is interesting. have you ever asked an ISTj about that sort of thing? when they're no preoccupied, and if they trust you? i think what PotatoSpirit said about himself and philosophy is representative of that type. Ti ego + Ni HA seems to get them thinking from time to time, although the conclusions may be very cut and dry (not necessarily a bad thing, not from an ISTj's view, at least i would think.) the professor incident could be a good example of hitta possibly benefiting from some Ni (and possibly Fe.)

Ni hidden agenda leads to occasionally philosophizing, but not sitting around all day doing it. That's what it seems this guy loves to do - philosophize. It is characteristic of ILI's to "do nothing" physically but think very deeply - he said he wasn't active.

or everyone else here does

it's all relative

the stuff about all relative is Te PoLR. facts not willing accept as universal facts as it's all relative.

if that is what you think Te polr is, you should really rethink your whole outlook on Te/Ti.

[aestrivex]

on gen discussion recently the point was made that Te POLR often involves assuming that Te is invalidated by political Fe motivations. that's not the impression i get from hitta. (if he values Fe i think he seeks it.)

political motivations? what? please explicate.

although this video here may seem like Ni-ing without much Ti, hasn't hitta done a profuse amount of Ti trying to revise socionics theoretically?

IMO, yes, he has. that's why this discussion is very interesting. obviously, this video is not definitive proof of hitta's type. however, if i were to type him based on this video alone, i would say it supports IEI/ILI.

[strrrng]

so yes, i realize Ni HA isn't typically a very sedentary function. on the contrary, it usually signals urgency. but if there isn't much in the present doing that signaling, then i think it combined with Ti base and Si id can be compatible with shirtlessly waxing philosophy and whatnot. additionally ISTj are aristocratic and have Ne POLR so maybe they have inertia in finding new things to actively Se-cre over.

for comparison consider the INTp's hidden agenda, Fi. and yet many INTp (perhaps undualized or just not in optimal interpersonal conditions) are known for bouts of misanthropy, which is not very Fi-seeking. point being hidden agenda can manifest in different ways. and speaking of INTp, got anything to address this?

ok, this guy was not philosophizing because he had nothing else to do; it seemed like a real hobby of his. that is why I said ILI. do you honestly think any ISTj is lazy, procrastinating, and not very active - all things he said he was.

hitta, do you tend to have more problems expressing your feelings or seeing other points of view?

[Ezra]

the stuff about all relative is Te PoLR. facts not willing accept as universal facts as it's all relative.

Absolutely not. In fact, a Te dominant is more likely to disregard 'facts' on the basis that nothing can be proved. Are you going to claim that Descartes had Te PoLR? And he doubted absolutely everything but that he existed. He found certain facts on which we can rely; they were few, but certain. One dubbing everything in the world as 'relative' has very little if nothing to do with Te PoLR.

[discojoe]

the stuff about all relative is Te PoLR. facts not willing accept as universal facts as it's all relative.

Absolutely not. In fact, a Te dominant is more likely to disregard 'facts' on the basis that nothing can be proved. Are you going to claim that Descartes had Te PoLR? And he doubted absolutely everything but that he existed. He found certain facts on which we can rely; they were few, but certain. One dubbing everything in the world as 'relative' has very little if nothing to do with Te PoLR.

You're being a little bit too general in your statements. There is a clear balance between knowing the limits of human knowledge and knowing when to believe something is true.

[aestrivex]

i can't believe there aren't people here to type a person straight away and present a hard fact evidence backed up by socionics of the type so there is no discussions like this. i think though the nature of info elements is still badly explored and known as well as the forum is still a long way, as well as socionics on the whole, to go. how many years, i'd say about 5.

jeez, you really know nothing about socionics, do you?

[Hitta]

If I had to guess niffweeds type, I'd say ISTp.

[strrrng]

i noted that with aristocracy and Ne POLR there might be some intertia in this for ISTj's. (but maybe once they are in their system they cease procrastinating.)

ISTj's are by-the-book people who value tradition.

[Hitta]

i noted that with aristocracy and Ne POLR there might be some intertia in this for ISTj's. (but maybe once they are in their system they cease procrastinating.)

ISTj's are by-the-book people who value tradition.

I promise you that I am no ISTj.

[aestrivex]

If I had to guess niffweeds type, I'd say ISTp.

why exactly?

[Hitta]

If I had to guess niffweeds type, I'd say ISTp.

why exactly?

I just get that vibe.