For those who think I'm LSI

[machintruc]

What makes you think I'm LSI ? I don't understand. I started this thread to make you post things that suggest I may or may not be LII or LSI, or another type.

Besides, I don't think I'm "physical" and "maximalistic" enough to be LSI. Even for being the E1 variant.

I'm pretty sure I'm LII because I verified the whole pattern. My is producing, but weak, because when I try to act -like, it's mostly unaccurate and unnatural.

[aestrivex]

you are extremely narrow minded. one of the extremely obvious features of LSIs is that they are narrow minded. LIIs are also narrow minded, but not as much as LSIs. LSIs are more narrow minded than LIIs. you are too narrow minded to be an LII. in fact, you're so narrow minded that you wont understand this post. therefore you are LSI.

[aestrivex]

actually i think he makes a point of hyphenating the words narrow-minded. a critical oversight.

[machintruc]

LSI : brutal, hostile, pushy, rigid, misanthropic
LII : gentle, friendly, compliant, tolerant, empathetic

[Joy]

What makes you think I'm LSI ?

You do not appear to have strong or valued Ne.

[Joy]

LSI : brutal, hostile, pushy, rigid, misanthropic
LII : gentle, friendly, compliant, tolerant, empathetic

Is this supposed to be a case for or against your being LSI?

[machintruc]

You do not appear to have strong or valued Ne.

I appear even less to have strong or verbal . I mean, do you have any examples of my ?

[marooned]

I think Machintruc is usually being facetious and that this might have something to do with Fe dual-seeking. I think that he likes to mock looking at things from only one point of view, and that this actually reflects his creative Ne *because* it is deliberate.

For instance, perhaps his recent thread about the enneagram 4 being more Si than Ni was a sort of mockery of the "narrow-minded" view that 4 can *only* be an intuitive type.

I think that he just posts a lot of Ti stuff (well, duh)... and get the impression that he's responsive to what people say about it (even if he doesn't post an actual reply).

Though... he does seem to value "boldness" and he encouraged someone to have more conflicts in their life (don't remember who), and this sort of thing could appear to be Se-valuing (not sure).

(I could be wrong about any of this. It's just my current impression.)

Oops, Machintruc started this thread and I said all that in the 3rd person. Just pretend it's in the second person.

[machintruc]

Though... he does seem to value "boldness" and he encouraged someone to have more conflicts in their life (don't remember who), and this sort of thing could appear to be Se-valuing (not sure).

I'm only encouraging conflicts, not to be physical. Just in order to improve our model of Truth and reality, and make it more accurate. It's , not .

[marooned]

I'm only encouraging conflicts, not to be physical. Just in order to improve our model of Truth and reality, and make it more accurate. It's , not .

doesn't Ezra seem to encourage conflicts in a similar way?

[Expat]

You do not appear to have strong or valued Ne.

Yeah, I agree. My reason for thinking LSI - assuming I did, which I don't (I don't particularly care) would be more >, rather than directly.

[Brilliand]

I'm only encouraging conflicts, not to be physical. Just in order to improve our model of Truth and reality, and make it more accurate. It's , not .

That strikes me as . If there's any disagreement, it's a break in the logical structure, and it needs to be repaired (possibly by convincing the other person to change their part).

[machintruc]

Yeah, I agree. My reason for thinking LSI - assuming I did, which I don't (I don't particularly care) would be more >, rather than directly.

Then how do I relate to ?