View Poll Results: FDG seems:

Voters
45. You may not vote on this poll
  • EP

    28 62.22%
  • EJ

    7 15.56%
  • Se

    22 48.89%
  • Ni

    5 11.11%
  • Fi/Te

    14 31.11%
  • Ti/Fe

    9 20.00%
  • Ethical

    5 11.11%
  • Logical

    22 48.89%
  • Other

    2 4.44%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1 of 10 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 394

Thread: Fdg

  1. #1
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Fdg

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    I don't know, if Joy wants to open a new type thread on me, I'm okay with that
    Okay.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  2. #2
    force my hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,334
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I always thought ESTp fit, but that's an assessment of bias because it's what I'm used to.

    Not a good basis, I agree.

  3. #3
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Definitely Se dominant. Not sure which.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  4. #4
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by force my hand View Post
    I always thought ESTp fit, but that's an assessment of bias because it's what I'm used to.

    Not a good basis, I agree.
    Yeah. SLE is generally my preferred choice for him, but I've seen good arguments for SEE.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    Yeah. SLE is generally my preferred choice for him, but I've seen good arguments for SEE.
    yes.

  6. #6
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    FWIW I've found myself "correcting" his obviously sloppy Ti on multiple occasions.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  7. #7
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    SEE. Maybe ESTP in MBTT, but SEE. This is extremely evident to me.

    FTR, Expat agrees with me, so it must be true.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  8. #8
    Creepy-Diana

    Default

    .

  9. #9
    implied's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    7,750
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diana View Post
    Are you playing, or serious? What exactly is wrong with his Ti?
    curious about that, too. what were you correcting?

  10. #10
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by implied View Post
    curious about that, too. what were you correcting?
    The latest thing I noticed:

    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...t=15640&page=7

    Post 4. That's pretty damn bad Ti.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  11. #11
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    FWIW I've found myself "correcting" his obviously sloppy Ti on multiple occasions.
    Yeah, I didn't want to come right out and say so because I didn't want to criticize, but a Ti PoLR seems quite feasible. Lots of comments and jokes that are totally out of context with the conversation, using information from socionics sources out of context, saying things that directly contradict things he'd said like a page earlier. And the fact that his type changes when with every new girlfriend doesn't exactly suggest Ti > Fi, either.

    But at the same time, I've often gotten the impression that he's Ti > Te. I don't know.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  12. #12
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    Yeah, I didn't want to come right out and say so because I didn't want to criticize, but a Ti PoLR seems quite feasible. Lots of comments and jokes that are totally out of context with the conversation, using information from socionics sources out of context, saying things that directly contradict things he'd said like a page earlier. And the fact that his type changes when with every new girlfriend doesn't exactly suggest Ti > Fi, either.
    Oh wait, aren't the out-of-context jokes typical of LIE type descriptions?

    Btw, I don't think information can be used of context. Basically, we're not writing a formal academic paper so we're free to use information as we please, given that there is no objective standard we can refer to. Right? At least, that's what generally happens in message boards. Oh, and please don't make a type-thread into a smear-campaign thread. Why do we have to discuss people's type starting from their PoLRs instead of their strongest functions? It'd be better to just discuss their qualities instead of their shortcomings.

    By the way, if we may quote one of the many LIE descriptions...

    7. L - structural logic

    Is not given special importance to a strict order around itself. Among the scattered things will always find that to it is necessary. It attempts to follow performer discipline and observance of the comprised plans. However, regulation and control of the process in it are ineffective. It is obstinate in its understanding of situation or problem. Development forecasts too mechanically, because of what its iridescent plans frequently suffer crash. He is either the supporter of a strict systematization, deriving all consequences of one and the same diagram or, on the contrary, not at all it will structure information, giving it in the arbitrary, random sequence.
    It doesn't surprise me, given that Ti is not a valued function in the gamma quadra. Still, it's just one description, so it may be argued that it doesn't count (by gulenko, btw).

    Gilly: I was just trying to escape your reasoning. I wouldn't call that "real" Ti, just a fake attempt in order to avoid conflict. Wasn't even constructing an argument, honestly.

    Btw:

    He takes whatever thing has seized his attention at the moment (Smilexian socionics, Gulenko's forms of thinking, his apparent intertype relation with his new girlfriend, people he thinks he is like, etc.
    Yeah. These are not separated instances. It's not like when I study forms of thinking I have forgotten Smilexian Socionics - I still use it as my first choice, it's just that I have added upon it what I find useful. It's a choesive whole of evidene. There's nothing conflicting between Smilexian socionics, gulenko's forms of thinking, my girlfriend, and people I think I'm like. Actually, this is also evidence of synergistic thinking to me.

    By the way, the lack of a cohesive body of structure in one's own long-term thinking and decisions is often related to dynamicism and extraversion (as opposed to staticism and introversion, that with an introverted judging function as primary tend to automatically form the structure that the EJ is lacking).

    I don't really understand where you see that I cannot truly "get into it" and "parrot" things. I mean, I reach my conclusions exclusively by myslef and don't like to partecipate to extensive discussions on functions because I don't see the point of trying to impose my opinions on others - given that they work strictly for myself. This is also why I don't clarify everything I say (another motivation is because it would take too much time, but if it's necessary, I may try to "prove" my real understanding of socionics in this topic).
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  13. #13
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sometimes I get the impression that we're all a bunch of a-holes trying to tell each other who each other is. Call me crazy but idk what it's like to be a bat (Thomas Nagel reference, sorry for the obscurity).

    Misunderstanding seems the most common sort of communication these days (well, always).
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post

    Yeah. These are not separated instances. It's not like when I study forms of thinking I have forgotten Smilexian Socionics - I still use it as my first choice, it's just that I have added upon it what I find useful. It's a choesive whole of evidene. There's nothing conflicting between Smilexian socionics, gulenko's forms of thinking, my girlfriend, and people I think I'm like. Actually, this is also evidence of synergistic thinking to me.
    it is perhaps worth noting that all of your constructs (excepting your perceptions of other people you think you're like IRL) are basically formented from Ti ideas. all of the works of smilex and gulenko are extremely Ti systems, as is anything whatever ashton has developed (if you could call it coherent enough to be a system at all). all of your methods of "synergistic thinking" might be very synergistic, but they appear to be incorporating Ti concepts. essentially, i think you'd be hard pressed to find an LIE that would do that, and to take everything as seriously as FDG is doing.

    ftr i'm not trying to argue against a Ti polr here. user liveandletlive does precisely what i've described with the Ti constructs, only she doesn't appear to have any understanding of the Ti models she's trying to use.

    also i can't really evaluate FDG's understanding of the Ti constructs because i think they're such bullshit anyway; whether he correctly understands a concept that is inherently flawed is pretty meaningless.

  15. #15
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by munenori2 View Post
    Sometimes I get the impression that we're all a bunch of a-holes trying to tell each other who each other is. Call me crazy but idk what it's like to be a bat (Thomas Nagel reference, sorry for the obscurity).

    Misunderstanding seems the most common sort of communication these days (well, always).
    MM yeah, you're right.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    it's also very distressing how what ashton thinks is getting any mention at all.

    can somebody remove ashton's cerebral cortex and nail it to the nearest wall already?

  17. #17
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    it is perhaps worth noting that all of your constructs (excepting your perceptions of other people you think you're like IRL) are basically formented from Ti ideas. all of the works of smilex and gulenko are extremely Ti systems, as is anything whatever ashton has developed (if you could call it coherent enough to be a system at all). all of your methods of "synergistic thinking" might be very synergistic, but they appear to be incorporating Ti concepts. essentially, i think you'd be hard pressed to find an LIE that would do that, and to take everything as seriously as FDG is doing.
    Not sure I take them seriously. I mean, there isn't much in life I take seriously, lol, lest of all some socionics construct.

    I tend to disagree that the two theories outlined are Ti - Guleko's form of thinking is just a bunch of observations, if you read the article you'll see that the author himself says it's only a rough outline without any systematization.

    Smiligeyes' system is much more structured, yes - even if I disagree on its static nature, but I won't get into this debate now - but may I point out that I tend not to use the most Ti construct available here - which is Model A?

    ftr i'm not trying to argue against a Ti polr here. user liveandletlive does precisely what i've described with the Ti constructs, only she doesn't appear to have any understanding of the Ti models she's trying to use.

    also i can't really evaluate FDG's understanding of the Ti constructs because i think they're such bullshit anyway; whether he correctly understands a concept that is inherently flawed is pretty meaningless.
    Eheh...I'm only interested in whether a concept works, or doesn't. If it's flawed, it won't work (in my world). Vice versa would not be a logically correct procedure given that there would be a small probability of casually reaching the right conclusions following a wrong logical path, but given that in reality this probability is negligible, and given that I don't use socionics to save people's lives, I can live with it.

    it's also very distressing how what ashton thinks is getting any mention at all.
    Doesn't my openness about new theories contradict straightly what is stated on the Ti-as-vulnerable-function description? I seem to do the opposite of black-and-whitely either embrace or reject theories. Which can be a weakness, sure.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post

    I tend to disagree that the two theories outlined are Ti - Guleko's form of thinking is just a bunch of observations, if you read the article you'll see that the author himself says it's only a rough outline without any systematization.

    Smiligeyes' system is much more structured, yes - even if I disagree on its static nature, but I won't get into this debate now -
    bullshit. this stuff is incredible Ti. i don't even know what "gulenko's thinking" refers to but it doesn't matter. everything to come out of his mouth is a Ti system, even if it's broken up into discrete factoids of information. if you disagree with that, there's nothing left to talk about.

    smilex is similar. it's treatment of the dichotomies is pure Ti and could not possibly be ever measured in any way. i'm not saying that it's general principles of the dichotomies can't be correct (if they even exist), but that it's not measurable, and hence it's Ti.


    but may I point out that I tend not to use the most Ti construct available here - which is Model A?
    i would disagree that model A is the "most" Ti construct, but this is quibbling over semantics.

    frankly, model A is only a guideline. finding functional preferences, if one understands the nature of the functions, is more important than is model A. if you look at expat or joy talk, for example, they'll say things like "it's obvious that Te > Ti." they would never make any kind of type diagnosis (which is a Ti construct in and of itself, although one which has successfully stood up to verification on a purely personal level, sort of) without basing it on functional preference, which completely de-emphasizes Ti.

    Eheh...I'm only interested in whether a concept works, or doesn't. If it's flawed, it won't work (in my world). Vice versa would not be a logically correct procedure given that there would be a small probability of casually reaching the right conclusions following a wrong logical path, but given that in reality this probability is negligible, and given that I don't use socionics to save people's lives, I can live with it.

    you're just blathering. this is so poorly and incoherently written that i don't think you have any clue what you wrote here, or care.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Doesn't my openness about new theories contradict straightly what is stated on the Ti-as-vulnerable-function description? I seem to do the opposite of black-and-whitely either embrace or reject theories. Which can be a weakness, sure.
    i don't know. i don't know what description you're looking at but, regardless, i wouldn't put very much stock in it; it's more important to understand the function and see how its role is manifest on a more personal level.




    either way, the fact that you've even considered ashton's insane theories with any legitimacy probably does not point to strong Te. consider the amount of Te types that regularly post on ashton's board. by my count, there is exactly one, and at least one person disagrees with me that that person is Te at all.

    i understand that Te is supposed to consider all theories "objectively," but still...

  20. #20
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    you're just blathering. this is so poorly and incoherently written that i don't think you have any clue what you wrote here, or care.
    ...

    Maybe if you tried to read before giving the opinion, it would come out better.

    Anyway, I was saying that I don't care where a theory comes from or what its nature is. I only care whether it's applicable to reality, or not. My criteria is: if it can be applied, it's true.

    Then I said it's not a logically correct criteria because there's still the probability of a co-causation: that some process which is common to both events is the source of the apparent cause-effect relationship. I said then that given how this is not likely, I don't mind it.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  21. #21
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    i don't know. i don't know what description you're looking at but, regardless, i wouldn't put very much stock in it; it's more important to understand the function and see how its role is manifest on a more personal level.
    And how does it?
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    And how does it?
    i'm not sure yet.

  23. #23
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    i'm not sure yet.
    So have you understood my "blathering" now?
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    ...

    Maybe if you tried to read before giving the opinion, it would come out better.

    Anyway, I was saying that I don't care where a theory comes from or what its nature is. I only care whether it's applicable to reality, or not. My criteria is: if it can be applied, it's true.
    i found the statement very difficult to make sense of. if this is all it says, then i find it perhaps Te valuing but mostly meaningless.


    i should clarify this. in short, a Te valuing type would say this. so might an SLE, even if it weren't necessarily true according to the systems produced.

    Then I said it's not a logically correct criteria because there's still the probability of a co-causation: that some process which is common to both events is the source of the apparent cause-effect relationship. I said then that given how this is not likely, I don't mind it.
    why on earth would it matter if something is the cause of its own manifestations? if that's the case, then ostensibly it is, indeed, manifest, and you have some good data to work with.

  25. #25
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    either way, the fact that you've even considered ashton's insane theories with any legitimacy probably does not point to strong Te. consider the amount of Te types that regularly post on ashton's board. by my count, there is exactly one, and at least one person disagrees with me that that person is Te at all.

    i understand that Te is supposed to consider all theories "objectively," but still...
    I mean, why shouldn't I consider them. I take what I find useful/right/can be applied to my knowledge-everyday experiences, and leave what I consider useless/wrong/can't be applied.
    Not to consider something just because of the name of the user that writes it would me much worse for me.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  26. #26

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    I mean, why shouldn't I consider them. I take what I find useful/right/can be applied to my knowledge-everyday experiences, and leave what I consider useless/wrong/can't be applied.
    Not to consider something just because of the name of the user that writes it would me much worse for me.

    and you find his theories useful??????


  27. #27
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    i found the statement very difficult to make sense of. if this is all it says, then i find it perhaps Te valuing but mostly meaningless.




    why on earth would it matter if something is the cause of its own manifestations? if that's the case, then ostensibly it is, indeed, manifest, and you have some good data to work with.
    Well english is not my first language so sometimes when I have to formulate more complex thoughts I may have some difficulty.

    Anyway it'd matter if you have, say X and Y. Y happening after X. At first sight this might look like causation BUT X and Y have actually the same cause, Z, and the causation between X and Y is not real. It's actually a pretty common occurence when you do regressions-find correlations etc that's why factor analysis is performed, for example.

    and you find his theories useful??????
    I think he has good insights on the distinction between fields-objects and internal-external and static-dynamic, and also on . I mean, I could be wrong, that's just my opinion.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Well english is not my first language so sometimes when I have to formulate more complex thoughts I may have some difficulty.

    Anyway it'd matter if you have, say X and Y. Y happening after X. At first sight this might look like causation BUT X and Y have actually the same cause, Z, and the causation between X and Y is not real. It's actually a pretty common occurence when you do regressions-find correlations etc that's why factor analysis is performed, for example.
    fine. but that wouldn't matter in terms of its effects.

    say X and Y happen because of Z. X and Y still happen. if you can use Y to your advantage in some way (ie socionics) who really cares why it happens?

    similarly, under the assumption that socionics exists according to whatever model you'd like, who cares why it happens? that doesn't seem relevant to the discussion at all, particularly because nobody here is a neurosurgeon with legitimately good data on why anything in the brain happens.

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    I think he has good insights on the distinction between fields-objects and internal-external and static-dynamic, and also on . I mean, I could be wrong, that's just my opinion.


    tell me about his insights and why they're good.

  30. #30
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't get into it in debates because they'd waste my time. I get into it via PMs that are imho more useful for this kind of exchange. In any case:

    Yeah, currently there is no conflict -- but how about that guy who was self-conscious about being half-naked in front of a girl? You seemed to be so certain of being SLE before that, but then all of a sudden you can't be anything except his type?
    Well he was so like me (and also very similar to some other people that I say are "like me" - yes, it's possible for people to actually look like each other) and reasoned so much like me that it's impossible we are of a different type.

    Besides, don't extrapolate only the point that supports your argument, that is not an objectively good debate technique. I did not exclusively point at that for evidence of Si Polr-non Se dominance in that guy.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  31. #31
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    fine. but that wouldn't matter in terms of its effects.

    say X and Y happen because of Z. X and Y still happen. if you can use Y to your advantage in some way (ie socionics) who really cares why it happens?
    I agree, that's what I said! I said that it doesn't matter, I still use it even if the causation may be untrue!

    similarly, under the assumption that socionics exists according to whatever model you'd like, who cares why it happens? that doesn't seem relevant to the discussion at all, particularly because nobody here is a neurosurgeon with legitimately good data on why anything in the brain happens.
    I agree, that's why I use all the available models!
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  32. #32
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salawa View Post
    It doesn't even matter what type you thought he was or whether being self-conscious when half-naked has anythign to do with any IM element, the point is that you were prepared to abandon your previous apparent certainty because you thought you were alike.
    Obviously. Evidence comes before any theory. Isn't that the point of having Te preference?
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  33. #33

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Obviously. Evidence comes before any theory. Isn't that the point of having Te preference?
    not in terms of discarding available evidence based on solid theoretical concepts in favor of extremely fleeting evidence based on a relatively short and unimportant experience.

    (we are assuming here that socionics represents a set of "solid theoretical concepts." in short, if used appropriately, it does.)

  34. #34
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    not in terms of discarding available evidence based on solid theoretical concepts in favor of extremely fleeting evidence based on a relatively short and unimportant experience.
    I don't know if the evidence of me being SLE has ever been solid and based on strong theoretical concepts. It seems like there's always been some indecision there. If I had changed to ISFp and then went back to ENTj your objection would be welcome - but as it stands now, I disagree.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  35. #35
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salawa View Post
    Sure -- and it is clear that I do think you probably have Te preference, if you check my userlist and basically every comment I've made about your type recently -- but what of all the evidence you saw before then?

    This is precisely what i was talking about when I said you take one thing and basically ram it against everything else, to the point where you just don't make sense.
    Well you didn't even talk about this when you referred to that instance, it seems like you are moving your target along with my objections narrowing your options down as you go.

    In any case, see the point above I have made to Niffweed. I had been typed as LIE before, there wasn't a truly "strong" body of evidence either way.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    I don't know if the evidence of me being SLE has ever been solid and based on strong theoretical concepts. It seems like there's always been some indecision there.
    well, yeah, ok, fine. but when i say "strong theoretical concepts" i'm basically talking about the coherence of socionics theory as a whole. you can disagree all you want about trying to masquerade as having a Te preference, but i think it's really obvious that you have very strong Se, according to those socionics principles that i find legitimate (here defined as the classical definitions of information elements) and, for a time, so did you.



    the more i start to think about it the more i see you as SEE.

  37. #37

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    I think he has good insights on the distinction between fields-objects and internal-external and static-dynamic, and also on . I mean, I could be wrong, that's just my opinion.
    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    tell me about his insights and why they're good.

    i'd still like to hear some about this.

  38. #38
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    well, yeah, ok, fine. but when i say "strong theoretical concepts" i'm basically talking about the coherence of socionics theory as a whole. you can disagree all you want about trying to masquerade as having a Te preference, but i think it's really obvious that you have very strong Se, according to those socionics principles that i find legitimate (here defined as the classical definitions of information elements) and, for a time, so did you.
    I'm not truly trying to masquerade. I only see what you people present as evidence and discard-accept it accordingly to what my behavior so far has been.

    For example, what is said in the Ti as vulnerable function on Ishy's page obviously doesn't apply to me based on my forum behavior.

    But some Se-base behavioral traits might apply to me, it's just that they have never been listed yet. For example I'm the first to say that much of the vocabulary associated with Se on wikisocion is a good representation of the way I write when I'm being an ass - which is all the time except when I'm discussing seriously.

    the more i start to think about it the more i see you as SEE.
    It's a hypothesis that can't be rejected. Still, I'd be a complete failure as an SF!
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  39. #39
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    i'd still like to hear some about this.
    I can link you some things, but I thought this was a thread mostly about my type.

    (this is one of the reasons I avoid partecipating to many of the longest threads on functions - they take hours)
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  40. #40
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salawa View Post
    I personally see plenty of evidence to suggest that

    1) You are Se EP
    2) You are not LIE

    and I am obviously not the only one.
    Ok. What I meant was that before, when I typed myself as LIE, nobody ever questioned it saying that I actually was SLE. This was take to me as signifying that the other hypothesis did not contain any particular flaw (Joy has suggested that even Eidos was SLE recently...bogus).
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

Page 1 of 10 12345 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •