reality
I'm curious to what you guys think is the most realistic type or the most realistic functions. How is this good or bad?
Btw, I do realize that this question is extremely subjective and possibly flawed, but I'm just curious as to what you all have to say.
ESFp-Fi sub
6w7 sx/so/sp
I think Se and Te are the most realistic... they are the most concrete and grounded IMO.
Delta ST = realism, IMO.
The Se function rest on all kinds of assuptions and investments in temporary and local factors. The way I see it, it is only realistic in relation to a particular time and place.
Last edited by krieger; 02-25-2008 at 12:23 AM.
Whatever my type is, obviously.
Originally Posted by Logos
Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.
I pity your souls
Good bet.
first thought was. probably
as well. so basically i agree with you all.
Is that a realistic proposition?Whatever my type is, obviously.
They're all parts of reality, so, taken literally, it's a bit of a pointless question. However, the most concrete, I agree, would be Se and Te.
All functions are aspects of reality.
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."
--Theodore Roosevelt
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
-- Mark Twain
"Man who stand on hill with mouth open will wait long time for roast duck to drop in."
-- Confucius
you beat me to it!
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."
--Theodore Roosevelt
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
-- Mark Twain
"Man who stand on hill with mouth open will wait long time for roast duck to drop in."
-- Confucius
what do you mean by realistic?
They're all realistic. They're all aspects of reality.
The most down to earth, practical, etc. types are going to be ST's, if that's what you're asking.
Actually I would like to add Si to this list, assuming a blocking with Te.
Also, Se would only fall here when blocked with Ti.
And of course these are both assuming "realistic" to mean objectively representing concrete physical reality.
External stuff? (As in, external vs. internal information aspects.)
I don't think the socionics definition of "external" has anything to do with objectivity in terms of being certain of whether or not something exists in external reality.
So, no.
Se, Si as base functions.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I'd say Se and Te.
"Those who make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities..."
- Voltaire
Hm yea the way realistic is being used here seems to have predetermined the answer in a way that's different from the basic concept of reality and moves towards what is real as what is "practical and concrete" which would probably be, as most people answered in this topic, Se and Te. This is obviously seen in INXjs or IXFps who are at times far from being practical(usually the latter set) and concrete(usually the former.)
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
True, but I think Si and Ti apply equally here when paired with the other's extroverted counterpart; indeed, when with Fi and Ni respectively, the relevance of Se and Te to this conception of "realism" diminish significantly.
You're right, because it seems here that "practical and concrete" can't just be separated into each distinct element arbitrarily, 'cause the term seems to derive from social necessity. Meaning, "practical and concrete" seem to be just be the common way to define the term "reality" in a way that society most often uses it and that separating them would negate its usefulness in describing reality in the way society uses it...which, I think is the way it's being used in the OP. So, yea, it seems really hard to separate the practical and concrete when it seems that practical and concrete need each other, and they're not as often found TOGETHER in say an NiTe type as a TeSi type. And, since it's basically useless to think apply the understanding of only one particular function in comparison with groupings of functions, it's also useless to say which particular function is "realistic."
Of course, in the PARTICULAR sense of reality, it's just as everybody else said...each function is an aspect of blah blah balh
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote