Gammas working to seem normal and acceptable

[Celeste]

Smilingeyes said in my topic about my type that Gamma likes to be normal. His exact words were, "People who are in gamma do a lot of work to seem normal and acceptable in the general population. To be 'unusual' or 'strange' would be a significant drawback except when the words are used in an expressly positive context as in extraordinary. Deltas and Alphas tend to deviate from normalcy. So if you are strange and you're gamma, and more to the point if you can accept yourself as strange, there's something... odd ... in the situation."

I'd like to learn more about this because the descriptions I've read of different types and dual couples make it sound like I'm probably ENTj, but I do not relate to what he described at all. Do the people in Gamma relate to his description?

[UDP]

...... ILI,with the Fe polr, could give less than two shits about "normal". To use the vernacular.

The SFs would be more concerned with appearances and social trends (in comparison to the NTs)

[Elro]

...... ILI,with the Fe polr, could give less than two shits about "normal".

"A shit" is less than two shits...

[aestrivex]

Smilingeyes said in my topic about my type that Gamma likes to be normal. His exact words were, "People who are in gamma do a lot of work to seem normal and acceptable in the general population. To be 'unusual' or 'strange' would be a significant drawback except when the words are used in an expressly positive context as in extraordinary. Deltas and Alphas tend to deviate from normalcy. So if you are strange and you're gamma, and more to the point if you can accept yourself as strange, there's something... odd ... in the situation."

smilex said that? that really doesn't apply to gamma at all. i'm starting to agree with some others that smilex may be a scheming fraud.

[UDP]

...... ILI,with the Fe polr, could give less than two shits about "normal".

"A shit" is less than two shits...

Obviously......

[Joy]

I don't think he's a fraud... I think he's well meaning and has put a lot of time and effort into helping other people understand Socionics. Unfortunately, as I said in Celeste's type thread, I don't think it's really possible to understand Socionics without at least knowing your own quadra values.

Anyways, to answer your question Celeste, No. The exact opposite is true.

[Joy]

Er...

Gamma SFs accept you into their "inner circle" if you're close to them. This is a lot more apparent with ISFjs.

[Smilingeyes]

Smilingeyes said in my topic about my type that Gamma likes to be normal. His exact words were, "People who are in gamma do a lot of work to seem normal and acceptable in the general population. To be 'unusual' or 'strange' would be a significant drawback except when the words are used in an expressly positive context as in extraordinary. Deltas and Alphas tend to deviate from normalcy. So if you are strange and you're gamma, and more to the point if you can accept yourself as strange, there's something... odd ... in the situation."

smilex said that? that really doesn't apply to gamma at all. i'm starting to agree with some others that smilex may be a scheming fraud.

Oh, christ. I guess I need to explain the particular way in which I mean this. Gamma Ni types follow what happens around them and take advantage of them. They try to retain position in which they can have authority over any situation that occurs. It is normal in the way that it's a dominant strategy to succeed in society. Gamma Se types are tempered to an extent by their Fi.

Deltas act in a particularly deviating from society way.
Alphas go on tangents and try to act special in any given circumstances.
Betas try to stand out and lead change.
Gammas are the most officious, most work-driven quadra. There's little personal effects that shines through. They're pushy to be sure, but not in an alpha, delta weirdo way. Gammas are business. Gammas try to solve things in a 'generally sensible way' with long-term results. They try to be 'not-quirky'. Accusing random people of deviating, of being charlatans and such is exactly what gammas do. When gammas happen to be correct when they do this, they provide a service. When not, they're a nuisance and do harm. When gammas stand out, it's a power-play, not a show of their miraculously enchanting personality. Gammas aren't weird. They're just loud and potentially obnoxious.

As with all quadras, the quadra values of gammas are a somewhat loosely linked to the actual system of socionics. Not quite as irreliable as VI or typing of societies or clothing but far more unreliable than some other aspects...

[aestrivex]

honestly, i tend to be dubious of descriptions like what you've just done with the quadras. there might be something to it; i don't know, but they don't make any sense in any kind of intuitive (not socionics speak) way.

"deltas act in a particularly deviating from society way. alphas go on tangents and try to act special in any given circumstances. betas try to stand out and lead change."

just what do these mean? how did you come up with them? how are these characteristics manifest? with the gamma one, you at least described it enough so i could sort of get a general picture. and, honestly, as far as i can understand what gamma is, i disagreed with at least as much of that picture as i agreed with. (i don't know though; i have something of a history with vehemently objecting to gamma descriptions in quadra values analyses. maybe i'm not gamma (?))


all of these sound awfully occupied with random sort of constructs, almost reinin-ish.

[Smilingeyes]

honestly, i tend to be dubious of descriptions like what you've just done with the quadras. there might be something to it; i don't know, but they don't make any sense in any kind of intuitive (not socionics speak) way.

"deltas act in a particularly deviating from society way. alphas go on tangents and try to act special in any given circumstances. betas try to stand out and lead change."

just what do these mean? how did you come up with them? how are these characteristics manifest? with the gamma one, you at least described it enough so i could sort of get a general picture. and, honestly, as far as i can understand what gamma is, i disagreed with at least as much of that picture as i agreed with. (i don't know though; i have something of a history with vehemently objecting to gamma descriptions in quadra values analyses. maybe i'm not gamma (?))


all of these sound awfully occupied with random sort of constructs, almost reinin-ish.

Well, first of all, I agree with your opposition with these and all quadra descriptions in general. I think they're weak and riddled with stereotypes and I think the best that can be achieved is some general description that some people in quadra relate to really well but most just sort of loosely recognize.

Okay... What do I mean with deltas... Well... I can see why some people would think deltas are the... peak of normality... but deltas are more like ... just quiet. Deltas try to keep their dirt away. I'm talking stereotypes here, obviously... But the delta stereotype would be perfectly achieved by someone who in public and at workplace tries to look normal, blend in and do what he can so that he can go home and do what he really likes to do. These would be people who in their homes collect toothpicks and make sailboats out of them, write bad fan-fics that they never reveal to anyone, build bomb shelters in case of world war six and generally do things the only purpose of which is some foible that is purely theirs, that they don't go around announcing as wittiness (alpha) that they don't try to turn into a cultural revolution(beta) and that serves no long-term practical purpose at all (gamma). Deltas retain the exterior aspects of social behaviour but not the substance. Being delta is to retreat. Try to create one's all small place of dreams. Externally, I guess deltas look normal, they want to do so, particularly the Te-Fi subtypes. They like to do their part, so that they can get back to their homes and be whatever they want. Conversely, if you go into someone's home and become surprised that you've wandered into a temple of freakiness that you would've never expected, you're probably in delta territory. ... Hmm... Actually, well... I'd think it's even better to use words like... depraved, queer or perverse in connection with delta rather than freaky, odd, special. Very low energy, kind of sad, something one would rather forget. (Though on the Si-Ne axis the two sort of meld.)

Edit-add: I don't think that heath agreeing with me on the basic substance of this is any kind of evidence but I do think that him subsequently erasing his post is a nice illustration of what I tried to explain in my own defective way.

[Birds]

Wow... that is very interesting, and I definitely see the trend.

And are you saying that Betas are the most "normal" out of all quadras (along with Gammas)? And if so, why?

[Smilingeyes]

Wow... that is very interesting, and I definitely see the trend.

And are you saying that Betas are the most "normal" out of all quadras? And if so, why?

No, definitely not. If there's a "normal" quadra I'd call that gamma. Gamma is coca cola, vanilla, ford, nokia, mcdonald's, walmart. Anything that is so loud, so convenient, so omnipresent it becomes invisible, background noise. It's "the establishment". People who maintain and uphold the working of any system, and yes, being an INTp wiseass who critiques the faults in "the system" is to be in the service of "the system". And yes, this is huge stereotyping but I do think one should know the stereotypes as well.

How betas relate to normalcy... it's kind of ... enforced normalcy of a sub-group. Trying to establish a new social order and to find a new dominant social strategy. Hmm... Trying to establish a new idea of what is normal. That would be it. Large-scale experimentation. A lot of "coming out" behaviour, public speaking of "important matters". "Change" and "value"-oriented politics. Social values that are sort of random and arbitrary but still sometimes enforced very strictly. Often a lot of fear and passion in this quadra. At heart though... I'd just call betas the opposites of deltas, behind all the theatrics and flash, betas are usually at heart pretty normal, but as you have to dig inside the delta to find the freak, you have to really dig inside the beta to find the human. (Observe Clinton, Obama and Edwards.) I'm not really sure that came off well. I'm not really happy with that, but it'll have to do for now.

[Birds]

Yeah, no, that made a lot of sense.

[olduser]

Edit-add: I don't think that heath agreeing with me on the basic substance of this is any kind of evidence but I do think that him subsequently erasing his post is a nice illustration of what I tried to explain in my own defective way.

are you assuming that i erased my post because i didn't want to appear abnormal?

i find all those gamma relations unsettling and absurd.

[discojoe]

Just keep in mind, everyone, that Ti = abstraction, and a tendency of Ti types is to make Ti observations that, while technically correct, are so abstract that they are essentially worthless and impractical.

[aestrivex]

Just keep in mind, everyone, that Ti = abstraction, and a tendency of Ti types is to make Ti observations that, while technically correct, are so abstract that they are essentially worthless and impractical.

you would classify such things as "technically correct?" how is anything like this "technically correct" at all?

[Smilingeyes]

Discojoe is another one who can't tell when someone is using Ti and when Si. This is not Ti. This is just an attempt to illustrate a complicated subject. Si. The links that I'm making in this thread are at best very weak. I mean... typing corporations, ice cream flavours... it's not particularly scientific. The problem is that some people like disco, joy, thunder and a bucket-load of others actually seem to use these very weakly linked traits instead of the definitions of the functions. For example discojoe here expects that anyone who is engaging in speculation is using Ti. That's wrong and not very smart. People should not make such an assumption. Yet time and again people do it.

For example, anyone in this thread can see that discojoe says:

Just keep in mind, everyone, that Ti = abstraction, and a tendency of Ti types is to make Ti observations that, while technically correct, are so abstract that they are essentially worthless and impractical.

Anyone can see that I'm not making an abstract connection, the claim that I made in the thread and personally refuted was that for example: gamma = vanilla. That's not an abstract connection, that's as concrete a connection as they come. Yet in his head he assumes that whatever I'm doing must be what he thinks I'm doing. He's himself engaging in this monstrous Ti, whatever it is. Basically, in some circles on the forum the simple naming of Ti has reached such proportions that they're mainly using it as a boogeyman to scare away people. And here we have discojoe doing exactly that. It's only funny because he's using Ti to critique Si with the claim that Si=Ti which anyone can see it's not.

@heath: I don't make any assumptions on why you did what you did. I just made a note that you erased a post. I don't have any statistical knowledge on whether delta-types do this more often than others. I'm just saying that I was happily surprised by the convenient occurrence. Sorry, didn't mean to butt into your affairs.

[discojoe]

Hey, I'm not trying to insult you. I just really have no idea what you're talking about.

[discojoe]

Just keep in mind, everyone, that Ti = abstraction, and a tendency of Ti types is to make Ti observations that, while technically correct, are so abstract that they are essentially worthless and impractical.

you would classify such things as "technically correct?" how is anything like this "technically correct" at all?

I was referring to Ti systems in general, because I think a lot of people listen to these kinds of ideas without realizing how far abstracted from "concrete reality" they are. I'm not saying that they don't necessarily possess merit, just that the necessary separation has to be made. I think Ti types can lose sight of what's objective if they fail to make this separation.

Bleh, anyway. Smilingeyes, I admit that I use Ti. So?

[Smilingeyes]

So, nothing. I wasn't attacking you. I think you're here as a direct reaction to my previous discussion with Joy and I respect you for that. I'm not trying to make trouble. This thread just started as a direct response to something I previously said being unclear to a number of people. I tried to clear things up and I'm happy with the situation at the moment. As for Joy, I think she has a good eye for types and the general know-how of socionics but I think she's very lax on her terminology and loud even when she ought not be. Also, I generally like reading what she says, that is when I'm not toning her out.

Anyway, I'm just going to continue typing stuff. No hard feelings I hope?

Bye.

[crazedrat]

Okay well I'm glad you care to listen but I'm still editing, as I usually do, until I am happy I've said something correct, so dont be suprised if I change everything
Ni/Te is interested in the construction of a chaotic system.. which is balance. This system transcends beyond the specific situation into the abstract time, it is all applicable. In other words, the Ni/Te systems compatibility is determined externally, it is reaching outward for validation, and not looking inward to its own integrity, to define its balance. Ni/Te is interested in creating and maintaining a system which possesses an ideal external compatibility. A system which applies to all situations, all possible frames of time. Meaning, the goal of Ni/Te is to have a system which can accomplish anything, or apply to anything; a system which is, essentially, nothing.
So INTps aren't inherently the upholders of society, they're like the deconstructors of society.... society and system are the same word. to the extent the INTp is actualized, and his thoughts are not fixated by society. To the extent they are fixated; invested in the content of society, they are upholders of society. But their tendency is toward deconstruction of it, returning it to the ideal nothingness where it began.
Balance... Social balance means everything runs in the world smoothly. Mental balance means there are no conflicting pieces of information in a system of thought. Linguisticly, balance means every words context is fully defined. Etc.
The INTp upholds whatever he has accepted. But the strong INTp accepts nothing

Se/Fi is concerned with bringing a specific circumstance into balance with itself. It is a focus on internal integrity, away from external compatibility. The situation, and not the abstract. It is directed toward nothingness, but this ideal nothingness is a nothingness of specificity and not generality. It is nothing, in it is not relevent to anything outside itself. It is completely unique to itself. Se/Fi is kind of the same form as Ni/Te, but focused on the specific moment.
Gona keep giong.
Still wondering how exactly Beta functions work from that perspective.
Ni/Fe... is interested in what? Like Ni/Te it is interested in returning deviations from chaos back to chaos, but this chaos is not transendental; it is not all-applicable, it is defined by and specific to a particular mental system or situation. It is interested in returning things which deviate from the system, back into agreement or balance with the system, but the system itself exists externally... I think. It's like a focus on external compatibility, of a specific circumstance or ideal situation. Unlike with Se, this ideal situation is a judgment and not a perception. Meaning, it is predetermined and not contingent on the immediate data for its existance.

[normal]

Well, I'm Normal, but I'm not sure If I'm Gamma

[astralsilky]

Well, I'm Normal, but I'm not sure If I'm Gamma

The guy in your avatar is probably ExTj.

[normal]

The guy of the avatar is me. Anyway, at this rhythm I'm going to be all the type! :wink:

[suedehead]

Bump.

[may]

I can sort of see the argument of gamma being the most normal quadra given the intersection of a few different qualities that they happen to possess. It seems they are competitive (beta + gamma), have more of a focus on productivity than creativity (gamma + delta), and are perhaps most importantly, mature in their views --in the sense of having conclusions match initial assumptions and results that match their initial purpose. As a group, their mature/long-term ambition combined with their democratic belief system means that the value of their social appearance is not only calculated along with all other resources in their lives, but it is calculated with consideration of as large a social net as possible. You could end up with an identity that is designed to be palatable by many. And so we have a representation that is more vanilla than chocolate.

Hmm. I'm a bit on the fence about it, but I can see it.

[ashlesha]

i don't know if i'm normal or not. i don't feel normal, but does anyone?
in broader social situations like work i aim to blend in, but in friendships and more one-on-one situations i cultivate my weirdness and think that it makes me easier to remember and more indispensible/of higher value. i've been described as both normal & weird by different people. probably based on what they consider normal.

i relate to the chloe sevigny quote, "i want to be more approachable, not less weird."

[blackburry]

I try to be normal but everyone eventually knows that I'm weird. and my mind works in weird ways.


quite a few LIEs in my life have said in various ways about how normal they are and how weird/overcomplicated everyone else is/makes things.

i don't know if i'm normal or not. i don't feel normal, but does anyone?
in broader social situations like work i aim to blend in, but in friendships and more one-on-one situations i cultivate my weirdness and think that it makes me easier to remember and more indispensible/of higher value. i've been described as both normal & weird by different people. probably based on what they consider normal.

i relate to the chloe sevigny quote, "i want to be more approachable, not less weird."

I thought this was such a cute to thing to say, I'm not sure why...maybe because I instantly associated with ~6w7. or because if a friend said that to be I'd instantly go.. "awww" ..I feel like I try to be normal simply because I've this idea that it would make my life more easy and logical and less...dramatic. woot woot (maybe my view is 6w5?)

[ashlesha]

actually i dunno if i can really say i try to blend in at work.

normal is decorating your cubicle with fake spider webs and pumpkins.

my attempt at blending in does not involve doing this. it only involves refraining from telling anyone how fucking stupid i think it is.

[InvisibleJim]

People try to fit in? Sure, okay.

[Rhaegar]

actually i dunno if i can really say i try to blend in at work.

normal is decorating your cubicle with fake spider webs and pumpkins.

my attempt at blending in does not involve doing this. it only involves refraining from telling anyone how fucking stupid i think it is.

This is the case for me as well. I tend to blend in and fit the mold to a superficial degree. There is no value in being unique in the workplace unless it is extraordinary in nature or will gather some kind of social currency I can use later.

Keeping my mouth shut about the stupidity of my coworkers unless it endangers a patient or puts me in an unsafe position is the primary way I blend in. I would say I appear distant but normal for all intents and purposes. I prefer it this way. It means no one is focused on me and I can remain in the background. No unneeded attention. I think that is likely the norm for many.

[suedehead]

I don't think I'm conscious of trying to blend in anywhere. I don't usually perceive myself as fitting or stand out. I guess I'm clean, and i dress up sometimes. I'm still in school and I'll probably want to be functional and have a stable job. I don't even know who I'd be comparing myself to. I'm kind of desensitized to a lot at this point and a lot of it just seems relative.

[Skepsis]

Focusing on being normal for the sake of being normal seems boring to me and would require a lot of effort. I lack the energy to try to fit the high standards required to be normal, but I also lack the energy to care about being unique. To me, if someone can do the job and do it well, it doesn't matter what they look like or what their preferences are. I expect people to treat me the same. Does not combing my hair and putting in nasty hair products in it effect my job performance? No. Basic manners and hygiene is all I require of myself and others, but anything else seems excessive to me.

[Lotus]

these are stereotypes and complete bullshit.

[Skepsis]

actually i dunno if i can really say i try to blend in at work.

normal is decorating your cubicle with fake spider webs and pumpkins.

my attempt at blending in does not involve doing this. it only involves refraining from telling anyone how fucking stupid i think it is.

It would be abnormal to decorate with real spider webs inhabited with poisonous spiders, that you have developed an immunity against, to keep others away so you can get your work done, which would actually be kinda cool.

[carrina]

If OP meant I try to appear normal to blend in, ok, you got me. If OP meant gamma are actually normal, I snickereth in thine face. I can appear normal in any social group, if that's what you mean. Like, in the most fucked up place there I am, not standing out. In the most upety place, there I am lookin preppy. Maybe its because I know how to effect my surroundings so well that I refrain from it because my environment is just too damn normal. I have no desire to submit to rediculous cultural norms. I also have no desire to ruffle grandma's feathers by rebelling. I guess we gamma are just really choosy about where and when we'd like to impact our fellow easily spooked man. ....then again allot of give zero faggs.

[Beautiful sky]

Gammaz overwork themselves because they see the need to harbor responsibility in some way. I overheard an SEE say "I saw things needed to be done so I kept working and taking up more work." This is where the SeFis need the time management skills of the NiTe who will guide them or rather dictatorize them into doing the next important thing. The problem is is there's always things to be done ALWAYS. A conflict of ILI and ESE drives ESE insane because ILI would rather work all day and get stuff done where ESE would like to pursue pleasure and avoid the work.

[Pookie]

I think theres truth to it. Thegrain of society tends to run on the gamma wavelength.

In relation to society:
Alpha: Disjuct and Parallel - Creators
Beta: Conjuct and Perpendicular - Rebels
Gamma: Conjuct and Parallel - Businessmen
Delta: Disjunct and Perpendicular - Farmers

At least in america, Society favors the aspects of Gamma in spirit. Productivity, Will to suceed, Sensing opportunity, and being morally fixed.

[Narc]

Gammas are probably the quadra most likely to dress simply, but personality-wise a lot of them are weird as shit or at least outsiders. They'd probably seem more obviously unusual and individual to others if they dressed differently.

[ouronis]

I'm not sure what normal means, I guess acceptable. I wouldn't say normal means acceptable though, but it's an interesting implicit admission.

Anywho, to me, rationality/irrationality dichotomy, and specifically rationality, is responsible for people who are closest to the store of socially acceptable norms, since there is some consistent rhyme and reason to their goings.

But Ji(Fi/Ti) are probably going to be seen as weird. I don't get Fi at all, they seem pretty irrational to me, although that may be me looking at them from the other side of Merry/Serious, since I'm most likely INTj/ENTp. Excluding them, and all perceivers, because perceivers are irrational and given to not caring about such things(note on this though, there is a caveat), you are left with Te/Fe or Je doms or EJs or the most rational rationals. It's these guys, because, not only do they follow the agenda that "society" aka this store of what rationality brings to the mind, the accumulation of concepts and structures to reason with, but they are commonly seen as taking up positions in society where they indulge in these roles regularly, and living by them, are confident about them when directing other people. So the very people that demand rational conformity, are themselves the most conforming and are double-bound to what is "normal" or "acceptable".

Also, my caveat about irrationals. So, according to Jung, irrationals don't have this rhyme or reason in the same sense that rationals do, or at least, most of the time, they don't. But this very irrationality allows for them to expect irrational things of others, and call them normal, or at least act as if the request is fully justified(might be, don't ask me). This may be part of the reason that some people are so unpredictable and unpleasant to be around, because there's no standard for you to work with, no consistent way to get on their good side, perhaps from some accidental things. So, it's likely that strongly patterned accidentals(aka rationality in the making, that is, accidentals over time are converted into the stringent mindsets of rationals, or at least is my guess) that are not quite to the stage of being fully accepted modes of being, are going to gunk up the works and make you also feel undecided about what is acceptable,normal, and if you're the type to worry about these things, you might get some contrived double-think going on...hmm, not exactly relevant but yeah.

Could have been more clear, but hopefully this is decent enough.