# Thread: Points To Note When Determining Type

1. ## Points To Note When Determining Type

These are general; they've hit home before, and various people have propelled them, but some still forget them, and end up with absolutely nothing when determining their type.

Determining quadra values. The way this works is that you decide what you value between either Te/Fi or Ti/Fe. You will not find that you are Te/Fe or Ti/Fi. That would be illogical. Then you find out whether you value Se/Ni or Si/Ne. The same as the above applies here. Look at what your strengths are; those you value and take pride in (1st and 2nd), and those you are adept in, but do not like or really appreciate(7th and 8th). Look at what your weaknesses are. Not only this, but differentiate between those weaknesses you would despise someone attempting to help you with (3rd and 4th functions), and those which you really want help with (5th and 6th functions). If you're still having trouble attributing traits in your life to the functions, read up on the functions more. If you've been here for years and still don't know your type, this is because you haven't been learning.

Club and temperament. This isn't the best way of going about determining your type, but if you've already found your quadra, there can't be much harm in it. Now, chances are that if you are in Beta, you won't fit the SF club; if you're Gamma, you won't likely . If you do, reconsider whatever it is you feel a bit of doubt in; be it club or quadra values. Your temperament should usually help you to decide what function you have as base and creative. If this is wrong, reconsider the other possibilities. Perhaps you're not EJ as you thought you were. Perhaps you have fucked up on the quadra values. Maybe you are certain you are Delta NF, but think you're an IP or EJ. In essence, something went wrong. Sort it out.

Typing yourself through others. You have to be careful with this, but if you absolutely 100% positive that someone you know is a certain type i.e. no type fits them better, and they are certain that they are that type once you have guided them through it in detail, this can be an effective way of typing yourself - through your relationship with them. What is better is to analyse your previous relationships, and decide what they all were using the same method.

2. ## Re: Points To Note When Determining Type

Originally Posted by Ezra

Typing yourself through others. You have to be careful with this, but if you absolutely 100% positive that someone you know is a certain type i.e. no type fits them better, and they are certain that they are that type once you have guided them through it in detail, this can be an effective way of typing yourself - through your relationship with them. What is better is to analyse your previous relationships, and decide what they all were using the same method.
I really like this one. It's the most accurate (indeed if you are sure about the other person) and confirmes your type again everytime...

3. ## Re: Points To Note When Determining Type

Originally Posted by Ezra
These are general; they've hit home before, and various people have propelled them, but some still forget them, and end up with absolutely nothing when determining their type.

Determining quadra values. The way this works is that you decide what you value between either Te/Fi or Ti/Fe. You will not find that you are Te/Fe or Ti/Fi. That would be illogical. Then you find out whether you value Se/Ni or Si/Ne. The same as the above applies here. Look at what your strengths are; those you value and take pride in (1st and 2nd), and those you are adept in, but do not like or really appreciate(7th and 8th). Look at what your weaknesses are. Not only this, but differentiate between those weaknesses you would despise someone attempting to help you with (3rd and 4th functions), and those which you really want help with (5th and 6th functions). If you're still having trouble attributing traits in your life to the functions, read up on the functions more. If you've been here for years and still don't know your type, this is because you haven't been learning.

Club and temperament. This isn't the best way of going about determining your type, but if you've already found your quadra, there can't be much harm in it. Now, chances are that if you are in Beta, you won't fit the SF club; if you're Gamma, you won't likely . If you do, reconsider whatever it is you feel a bit of doubt in; be it club or quadra values. Your temperament should usually help you to decide what function you have as base and creative. If this is wrong, reconsider the other possibilities. Perhaps you're not EJ as you thought you were. Perhaps you have fucked up on the quadra values. Maybe you are certain you are Delta NF, but think you're an IP or EJ. In essence, something went wrong. Sort it out.

Typing yourself through others. You have to be careful with this, but if you absolutely 100% positive that someone you know is a certain type i.e. no type fits them better, and they are certain that they are that type once you have guided them through it in detail, this can be an effective way of typing yourself - through your relationship with them. What is better is to analyse your previous relationships, and decide what they all were using the same method.
yeah there is essentially no way to both determine your correct type AND know that you have determined your correct type.

if i am adhering to an incorrect structure of socionics theory, then uncertainty about my own type (likely brought about by this adherence to an incorrect structure) cannot possibly be cleared up by recognizing another person's type. it may be possible to adhere to a correct structure of socionics theory while typing others, and an incorrect one while typing yourself, but if that were the case, what would you gain by typing someone else correctly and yourself incorrectly, i mean insofar as typing yourself correctly is concerned? the problem is with knowing you have typed yourself or others correctly. i tend to get stuck there. i do not accept much as truth and while i may choose to study day and night to understand this theory, i cannot ever fully apply it to the real world. don't get me wrong, i can try, even benefit from trying, but the theory is always separate from the reality -- not saying that a theory can't express or support reality (or vice versa), but that theory is on a different plane and should remain there. would you ever claim that, in all algebra problems, x is always a 2? no, we understand that x is meant to represent a value and that there exists a 2 (apples, perhaps) apart from x , yet that x may equal 2 in a given problem.

4. No one can ever and will know their type for sure. That's why Expat, who is blatently an LIE, always says he is 99.5% sure he is an LIE. The same with Joy. Basically, you have to leave a little leeway, because there is a chance that you are not the type you think you are.

5. I agree. If you totally close your mind to the possibility that you could be wrong, you are wrong, even if you're accurate. That's the way I see it anyways.

Regarding your first post, good stuff.

If you've been here for years and still don't know your type, this is because you haven't been learning.
I don't know, I think some people just don't care to know. Perhaps they enjoy considering new type possibilities every few days or so?

6. Originally Posted by Joy
I don't know, I think some people just don't care to know. Perhaps they enjoy considering new type possibilities every few days or so.
exactly, it's not important to me to know my type. I handle social situations on another level than socionicswise that works perfectly well for me.

7. Originally Posted by Joy
I agree. If you totally close your mind to the possibility that you could be wrong, you are wrong, even if you're accurate. That's the way I see it anyways.

Regarding your first post, good stuff.

If you've been here for years and still don't know your type, this is because you haven't been learning.
I don't know, I think some people just don't care to know. Perhaps they enjoy considering new type possibilities every few days or so?
In other words, Alpha or Delta (Ne valuing quadras).

8. We like to consider new possibilities because we do the way we do, and it works, we're not god.

9. Not everyone will do it willingly though. Beta and Gamma for example.

10. Originally Posted by Ezra
Not everyone will do it willingly though. Beta and Gamma for example.
No, Ne-valuing is not the same as being open to the possibility that one might be wrong.

It's interesting how you and hitta are saying the same thing, except that in hitta's case, he says that this is "Ne+" so in his system, Alpha and Beta are the "open-minded" people and that Delta and Gamma are the "close-minded" ones.

Being open to the possibility that one might be wrong really isn't as type-determined as it might seem. Ne is more about recognizing and following unique opportunities and possibilities that one could act on.

People who don't "value" Ne are more likely to keep doing what works for them, when, from an Ne perspective, maybe they should recognize some newer or different opportunity. However, Betas and Gammas may still recognize that a certain path is "dead" or needs to be changed because it's not working right.

Also, Ni, Se, and Si may also lead someone to switch course or change direction, but for different reasons. That's one of the problems with saying "Ne equals possibilities." The issue is, what kind of possibilities. For example, an Se-dominant person, while not focusing on possibilities in an Ne sense, is nevertheless aware of different choices in his/her environment, and will choose those will appear to get the best result...which may mean switching course.

If you want to see an interesting contrast, also, consider Expat's posts. There's a common thread in what he says that equates Te with being open-minded in a certain sense. If he sees someone whom he thinks demonstrates a tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it, he'll often speculate that the person may have Te PoLR. Whether this is really Te PoLR or just Ti>Te, this is yet another theory on how IM elements make people seem "open-minded" or "close-minded."

It seems apparent that these are relative terms, and that identifying certain types as "oh, those are the people who are close-minded and just don't recognize how wrong they really are" is really deceptive, and it seems each person tends to choose different types as being those "negative, close-minded" people.

11. Originally Posted by Jonathan
If you want to see an interesting contrast, also, consider Expat's posts. There's a common thread in what he says that equates Te with being open-minded in a certain sense. If he sees someone whom he thinks demonstrates a tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it, he'll often speculate that the person may have Te PoLR. Whether this is really Te PoLR or just Ti>Te, this is yet another theory on how IM elements make people seem "open-minded" or "close-minded."
That's not exactly accurate.

If I see someone demonstrating a "tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it" - a clear example is Anatoly Fomenko's "new history" - I indeed speculate that that's Ti>Te, not necessarily Te PoLR. When I do say that I think it's Te PoLR, it's because I see some other argument in that direction.

12. Originally Posted by Expat
Originally Posted by Jonathan
If you want to see an interesting contrast, also, consider Expat's posts. There's a common thread in what he says that equates Te with being open-minded in a certain sense. If he sees someone whom he thinks demonstrates a tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it, he'll often speculate that the person may have Te PoLR. Whether this is really Te PoLR or just Ti>Te, this is yet another theory on how IM elements make people seem "open-minded" or "close-minded."
That's not exactly accurate.

If I see someone demonstrating a "tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it" - a clear example is Anatoly Fomenko's "new history" - I indeed speculate that that's Ti>Te, not necessarily Te PoLR. When I do say that I think it's Te PoLR, it's because I see some other argument in that direction.
Yes, but if a person is doing this, is it not only ignoring factual information, but also ignoring the possibility of being wrong altogether? Isn't that not valuing Ne?

13. Originally Posted by Expat
Originally Posted by Jonathan
If you want to see an interesting contrast, also, consider Expat's posts. There's a common thread in what he says that equates Te with being open-minded in a certain sense. If he sees someone whom he thinks demonstrates a tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it, he'll often speculate that the person may have Te PoLR. Whether this is really Te PoLR or just Ti>Te, this is yet another theory on how IM elements make people seem "open-minded" or "close-minded."
That's not exactly accurate.

If I see someone demonstrating a "tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it" - a clear example is Anatoly Fomenko's "new history" - I indeed speculate that that's Ti>Te, not necessarily Te PoLR. When I do say that I think it's Te PoLR, it's because I see some other argument in that direction.
Okay, I stand corrected on that. The main point is that a "tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it" may appear to be one definition of what may be interpreted as a kind of "close-mindedness." So by this definition, Gammas and Deltas may be seen as more "open-minded" in one sense (exactly the opposite of the quadras hitta thinks are "open-minded").

This loops back to the topic of this thread...determining one's type. Getting back to Ezra's initial post here, one thing that bothers me about using "Determining quadra values" to find one's type is that often people don't know how to determine their quadra values. They may have a sense, based on what they've heard and certain cultural values, that some IM element is good or "hot" (or "cool") to have and assume that they therefore value it.

However, here's another hypothesis, one that may help in terms of finding one's quadra values: The people who seem open-minded and amenable to just criticism are more likely to be in one's quadra (because they react positively to the kinds of things one points out), whereas the people who seem to trudge forward despite what appear to be obvious problems in their approach and seem impervious to just criticism are more likely to be from an opposing quadra (especially a quadra that doesn't value one's 1st function).

14. Originally Posted by Gilly
Originally Posted by Expat
Originally Posted by Jonathan
If you want to see an interesting contrast, also, consider Expat's posts. There's a common thread in what he says that equates Te with being open-minded in a certain sense. If he sees someone whom he thinks demonstrates a tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it, he'll often speculate that the person may have Te PoLR. Whether this is really Te PoLR or just Ti>Te, this is yet another theory on how IM elements make people seem "open-minded" or "close-minded."
That's not exactly accurate.

If I see someone demonstrating a "tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it" - a clear example is Anatoly Fomenko's "new history" - I indeed speculate that that's Ti>Te, not necessarily Te PoLR. When I do say that I think it's Te PoLR, it's because I see some other argument in that direction.
Yes, but if a person is doing this, is it not only ignoring factual information, but also ignoring the possibility of being wrong altogether? Isn't that not valuing Ne?
Well, no. That's just the point! Considering "the possibility of being wrong altogether" is not the definition of Ne. A lot of people here seem to think it is. But they don't seem to want to consider the possibility that they might be wrong altogether about that.

15. I don't think that's the definition of weak Ne. I think it's one of the possible "symptoms" of weak/unvalued Ne.

I think it's possible that you could prove me wrong; by all means, go ahead. But from what I know, this is Ne related.

16. Originally Posted by Gilly
I don't think that's the definition of weak Ne. I think it's one of the possible "symptoms" of weak/unvalued Ne.

I think it's possible that you could prove me wrong; by all means, go ahead. But from what I know, this is Ne related.
Well, I don't know if I have time to prove it to your satisfaction, but here's some evidence:

* Sometimes, LIIs are viewed by others as appearing stubborn, single-minded, and oblivious to certain criticism, despite having strong/valued Ne.

* Also, as I've pointed out in this thread, some forum members seem to observe that certain non-Ne-valuing types fit their model of "open-mindedness"

Look at it this way...consider the viewpoint that I'm bringing up...i.e., that open-mindedness (i.e., recognizing one might be wrong) is more related to intertype relationships than to any specific IM element. Wouldn't that make more sense, given that, for example, duals are supposed to get along well and accept each other's input?

See, if recognizing that one might be wrong were a quality found primarily only in Alphas and Deltas (or Alphas and Betas according to hitta's system), then duals who happen to be Gammas should clash, because they would both feel they're each right about everything. How could Gammas get along with each other if they're all naturally tending towards close-mindedness?

But Gamma duals and activity partners don't clash as you might expect, because they're accepting of advice from some strong in their 5th and 6th functions. If people are open to advice from those functions, then that means their activity partner and dual relation will seem to them to be particularly open, amenable, to what they have to say....which is exactly how the system is supposed to work. But that only works if "open-mindedness" is relative...that is, a perception in the eye of the beholder.

I know that may not be what you've thought up until now, and it seems to go against an ingrained cultural paradigm that "there are open-minded and close-minded people," but can't you see that it could be the way that I'm saying? Can you prove that it's not?

17. Originally Posted by Expat
Originally Posted by Jonathan
If you want to see an interesting contrast, also, consider Expat's posts. There's a common thread in what he says that equates Te with being open-minded in a certain sense. If he sees someone whom he thinks demonstrates a tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it, he'll often speculate that the person may have Te PoLR. Whether this is really Te PoLR or just Ti>Te, this is yet another theory on how IM elements make people seem "open-minded" or "close-minded."
That's not exactly accurate.

If I see someone demonstrating a "tendency to keep following along a certain line of thinking while ignoring facts that might disprove it" - a clear example is Anatoly Fomenko's "new history" - I indeed speculate that that's Ti>Te, not necessarily Te PoLR. When I do say that I think it's Te PoLR, it's because I see some other argument in that direction.
Ti isn't about ignoring facts. It's just about not accepting facts right away. It's about protecting your mind from "facts". Ti types don't accept facts until it is explained to them why. If something doesn't fit it needs to logically be explained to them. Once this occurs they then can accept the fact. I think that ignoring opposing information altogether is more a product of Ni while not accepting opposing information right away is more a product of Ti.

18. Originally Posted by Jonathan
Originally Posted by Gilly
I don't think that's the definition of weak Ne. I think it's one of the possible "symptoms" of weak/unvalued Ne.

I think it's possible that you could prove me wrong; by all means, go ahead. But from what I know, this is Ne related.
Well, I don't know if I have time to prove it to your satisfaction, but here's some evidence:

* Sometimes, LIIs are viewed by others as appearing stubborn, single-minded, and oblivious to certain criticism, despite having strong/valued Ne.

* Also, as I've pointed out in this thread, some forum members seem to observe that certain non-Ne-valuing types fit their model of "open-mindedness"

Look at it this way...consider the viewpoint that I'm bringing up...i.e., that open-mindedness (i.e., recognizing one might be wrong) is more related to intertype relationships than to any specific IM element. Wouldn't that make more sense, given that, for example, duals are supposed to get along well and accept each other's input?

See, if recognizing that one might be wrong were a quality found primarily only in Alphas and Deltas (or Alphas and Betas according to hitta's system), then duals who happen to be Gammas should clash, because they would both feel they're each right about everything. How could Gammas get along with each other if they're all naturally tending towards close-mindedness?

But Gamma duals and activity partners don't clash as you might expect, because they're accepting of advice from some strong in their 5th and 6th functions. If people are open to advice from those functions, then that means their activity partner and dual relation will seem to them to be particularly open, amenable, to what they have to say....which is exactly how the system is supposed to work. But that only works if "open-mindedness" is relative...that is, a perception in the eye of the beholder.

I know that may not be what you've thought up until now, and it seems to go against an ingrained cultural paradigm that "there are open-minded and close-minded people," but can't you see that it could be the way that I'm saying? Can you prove that it's not?
I never said that Ne-valuing types couldn't be stubborn; I just think one form of "stubbornness" is a symptom of Ne PoLR.

People are free to have their own views about what openmindedness means. This has nothing to do with how Ne is defined or what I've been saying.

19. Originally Posted by Ezra
Originally Posted by Joy
I agree. If you totally close your mind to the possibility that you could be wrong, you are wrong, even if you're accurate. That's the way I see it anyways.

Regarding your first post, good stuff.

If you've been here for years and still don't know your type, this is because you haven't been learning.
I don't know, I think some people just don't care to know. Perhaps they enjoy considering new type possibilities every few days or so?
In other words, Alpha or Delta (Ne valuing quadras).
I tend to think it has more to do with irrationality, but I definitely think "Reasonable" can come into play.

20. Originally Posted by Suomea
Ti isn't about ignoring facts. It's just about not accepting facts right away. It's about protecting your mind from "facts". Ti types don't accept facts until it is explained to them why. If something doesn't fit it needs to logically be explained to them. Once this occurs they then can accept the fact. I think that ignoring opposing information altogether is more a product of Ni while not accepting opposing information right away is more a product of Ti.
I agree that Ti types have a process they go through whereby they will accept something after taking some time to understand an internally-consistent logical perspective. However, what I think Expat is getting at is that in the balance of things, Ti-valuing types will emphasize consistency over more external criteria such as facts, applicability, etc. This doesn't mean that a Ti type can't be balanced and use Te along with Ti....but at the extreme, types that de-value Te do create the appearance of ignoring opposing information, or at least ignoring Te-related information.

21. Originally Posted by Gilly
This has nothing to do with how Ne is defined or what I've been saying.
Well let's clarify what you said then.

Originally Posted by Gilly
Yes, but if a person is doing this, is it not only ignoring factual information, but also ignoring the possibility of being wrong altogether? Isn't that not valuing Ne?
I.e., If someone is ignoring the possibility of being wrong altogether, that means the person isn't valuing Ne.

If all you're saying is that ignoring the possibility of being wrong could be behavior of someone who doesn't value Ne, that's possible. But I'm saying it can just as easily be the behavior of someone who does.

The issue I'm bringing up is that it all depends on what sort of information the person is ignoring. It seems clear from context that Expat was talking about Te kinds of information. So to say that this type of "ignoring" must also show lack of valuing Ne seems incorrect to me. It's just a bias that if someone doesn't admit that he or she might be wrong, it must be a deficit in Ne.

If a person were unwilling to consider some other perspective because it didn't seem applicable to them, or they didn't see the point, that might be a symptom of Ne PoLR, but that's quite different from what Expat was talking about.

22. Originally Posted by Joy
Originally Posted by Ezra
Originally Posted by Joy
I agree. If you totally close your mind to the possibility that you could be wrong, you are wrong, even if you're accurate. That's the way I see it anyways.

Regarding your first post, good stuff.

If you've been here for years and still don't know your type, this is because you haven't been learning.
I don't know, I think some people just don't care to know. Perhaps they enjoy considering new type possibilities every few days or so?
In other words, Alpha or Delta (Ne valuing quadras).
I tend to think it has more to do with irrationality, but I definitely think "Reasonable" can come into play.
Are you suggesting that Irrational types are less likely to consider possibilities or alternatives that Rational types? And what do you mean by 'Reasonable'?

23. Originally Posted by Ezra
Are you suggesting that Irrational types are less likely to consider possibilities or alternatives that Rational types? And what do you mean by 'Reasonable'?
I would think it would be the opposite...Irrational types are more likely to consider possibilities. Reasonables are a Reinin-dichotomy...I think they're the Ne-valuing ones, if I remember correctly.

So, if that's what Joy's saying, then I agree....ALL perceiving IM elements....Ne, Ni, Se, and Si....tend to be involved in considering possibilities of different sorts. Ne is only certain kinds of possibilities...mostly opportunities and theoretical possibilities that one might come up with in one's head and could act on, but aren't necessarily tied to what's practical or pertinent in an Se sense.

24. Here's another point that people should check out if they're clueless.

Ego

The first row of Model A (functions 1 and 2) is called the Ego block. These functions describe the aspects of reality that a person perceives with the greatest depth and clarity and verbalizes with the greatest ease. The Ego block also describes the most natural and common states of mind and behavior styles used when interacting with other people, and also a certain perspective that a person injects into the things he says.

The information aspects that corresponds to the Ego block elements are things that a person can't help spontaneously commenting on and is comfortable discussing out loud (especially true of the leading function). If something is not right in these areas, a person can barely continue until he has spoken out about it and done something to fix the problem. When problems arise, the people who are most likely to point them out are those whose perception of that aspect of reality comes from the Ego block.

The Ego block functions require a constant stream of new information and stimulation (whether by direct experience, observation, study, or reflection) and quickly sort through this information, recognizing what is useful and necessary and what is not. When exposed to the types of information corresponding to the elements of the Ego block, a person takes immediate note and quickly forms his own attitude or opinion on the matter. He is more confident of his own judgments in these areas than of other people's, even if those people are widely accepted authorities.

The Ego block describes a person's preferred and most comfortable and natural role or "mode of operation" when interacting with other people. When a person gets to use his Ego block functions in interaction, he becomes lively and confident and exudes an air of authority and expertise. These functions also have the most endurance; a person can use them longer than other functions without getting worn out.

The Ego block functions imply a certain perspective or set of values since they are the most preferred approaches to solving life problems, giving advice, and achieving one's goals. The individual wants to see society become more like himself and wants to instill his personal philosophy or values in his work activities, his living space, and the people around him. For a person to feel needed and fulfilled, he has to see that his unique perspective is making a difference somewhere. The areas where a person is most likely to make a difference correspond to the Ego block elements.

The Ego functions are mostly indifferent to praise, since it is very hard to tell a person something about these aspects of himself that he didn't already know (and can easily describe to others).
So, what's the logic? Well, study the functions, and see which ones correspond to this description for you.

25. Originally Posted by dee
wow, this is bomb useful, dude! where did you get that? what's the link?
Indeed very useful.