eunice

[XoX]

I am still having doubts about INFj. Why did you / she arrive at this conclusion? Do other INFjs relate to her opinions? Any other Quadra who is willing to claim her? Do you see her Fi>Fe or Fe>Fi and why?

Edit: I don't know her very well but my first impression is kinda Fe:ish instead of Fi:ish. Dunno why.

[eunice]

This discussion has been going on and on for quite some time. It's time to move on.

[XoX]

This discussion has been going on and on for quite some time. It's time to move on.

It is time to move on when you actually say something positive about _any_ other Delta. But of course you don't "believe in intertype relations" and thus you see no problem in being are a Delta hating, Beta loving INFj? What was your original typing before you changed to ISFj/INFj? I have lost my memory trace regarding that.

[marooned]

If it looks like a duck, and acts like a duck, and sounds like a duck, and identifies with other ducks then maybe it is a duck, rather than a goose that looks like a duck, acts like a duck, sounds like a duck, and identifies with ducks.

[implied]

first, i agree w/ eunice that her type discussion has gone on for too long. i'm sure she doesn't want to create the 2nd longest thread on the board. (;

fwiw, i think imfd95's post makes a lot of sense. i still think she's more Ne/Si than anything and i suppose this could cross over into alpha values. what he's said about an ESFj being a "less boring" dual at this point seems really good, imo. i suppose INTj could be something else to look into. but yeah, i highly doubt that she's identifying so strongly with INFj profiles for this long for no reason at all.

[aestrivex]

This discussion has been going on and on for quite some time. It's time to move on.

it is time to move on, but it's time to get it right first.

[implied]

it is time to move on, but it's time to get it right first.

i agree with this, but it might already be right. something i've noticed is that eunice isn't the first INFj here to express a lot of dissatisfaction with ESTjs as a dual. i can name at least 3 others who have pretty much said, "ESTjs aren't that great and have many negative points."


correct me if i'm wrong, but it seems like you and expat both sort of subscribe to this idea that you cannot dislike your dual, or dislike a person who is your dual.

[aestrivex]

@ implied: get real.

[implied]

@ implied: get real.

@niffweed, get over yourself.

[misutii]

i agree with this, but it might already be right. something i've noticed is that eunice isn't the first INFj here to express a lot of dissatisfaction with ESTjs as a dual. i can name at least 3 others who have pretty much said, "ESTjs aren't that great and have many negative points."


correct me if i'm wrong, but it seems like you and expat both sort of subscribe to this idea that you cannot dislike your dual, or dislike a person who is your dual.

Adding to this it seems reasonable that types from quadras that don't value Fe (Gamma+Delta) will be more prone to speaking "ill" of their dual. I notice that gammas and deltas in general, when speaking of people they're close to, often don't speak too highly. It's kind of like the "I recognize these faults but love them regardless" type thing.

[UDP]

time for another video

[Expat]

correct me if i'm wrong, but it seems like you and expat both sort of subscribe to this idea that you cannot dislike your dual, or dislike a person who is your dual.

I will correct you. I have consistently drawn a distinction betweeen individuals who are of your dual type and your dual as a concept. Of course you can dislike individuals of your dual type, just like you can like individuals of your conflictor type. It depends on the kind of interaction, circumstances, etc. I do think though, that everything else being equal, you're far more likely to like a dual person than a conflictor person.

And I do think that it makes no sense - no sense at all - for you to dislike your dual - unless you dislike all types - as a concept. Just like if makes no sense to dislike your own type as a concept.

If you type yourself as, say, ISFp, but you keep saying that "gee, ISFp as a type sucks, I wish I was an ENTj instead" - then, assuming that you do understand what the types are about, I think it's very unlikely that you are, indeed, ISFp.

And, if you type yourself as INFj, but at the same time say things like, "gee, why do I have to have ESTj as dual, I think ESTp is much cooler" - then, again assuming that you minimallly know those types, I think it's unlikely that you are INFj.

[aestrivex]

just one tidbit: i think it could make perfect sense to dislike one's own type as a concept in terms of "why do i suck so badly at my superid functions?" one might rather say "i wish i were my dual or activity" rather than "i wish i were my conflictor."

[Expat]

just one tidbit: i think it could make perfect sense to dislike one's own type as a concept in terms of "why do i suck so badly at my superid functions?" one might rather say "i wish i were my dual or activity" rather than "i wish i were my conflictor."

That makes more sense than the conflictor example I used; however, would you (for instance) really wish you were better at at the expense of your focus on or ?

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I believe it's possible for someone to be under the impression that they are not compatible with their dual. This usually occurs if the person has not been able to have had much interaction with them, because if you haven't, the concept of them can at first seem very different to who you are. It improves with more contact with them, or contact with people you are not particularly psychologically compatible with..as this way you begin to realise what you don't want, so in effect realising what it is you do want.

[eunice]

That she bought Beta extrovert Ashton's reinterpretation of Socionics line, hook, and sinker arguably strengthens the trend. Also see her replies to the "Examples of Fi" thread.

I'm not so sure Eunice is Beta though. The arguments for Si > Se in the past struck me as plausible. She has considered herself ISFp at times and some INTj type wouldn't be far off from INFj-Ne. (I suppose an ESFj might embody the superficial attributes of ESTj's she has said she liked -- but without being so "boring".)

Ashton is not Beta extravert. Alpha NTs who have meaningful discussions with him will attest that he is way more Te than Ti. I don't agree with strictly adhering to Classical Socionics and I kind of agree with some of his opinions as I have observed them myself irl.

As for having INTj as my type, it is highly unlikely that I am a dominant Ti.

[XoX]

That makes more sense than the conflictor example I used; however, would you (for instance) really wish you were better at at the expense of your focus on or ?

Introverts would probably be more likely to have this kind of thoughts than extroverts.

[Elro]

Ashton is not Beta extravert. Alpha NTs who have meaningful discussions with him will attest that he is way more Te than Ti.

In what way/why?

As for having INTj as my type, it is highly unlikely that I am a dominant Ti.

I agree with this.

[implied]

I will correct you. I have consistently drawn a distinction betweeen individuals who are of your dual type and your dual as a concept.

then the issue would be in word choice, right? is eunice talking about bad ESTjs she's met? or ESTjs on the whole? i haven't been following any eunice type discussion *that* closely, but i do get the idea that her perception of ESTjs comes from individuals of the type. i also recall kim & anndelise thinking that people were getting too swept up in the idea that duality is some magic bullet and problem free.

Of course you can dislike individuals of your dual type, just like you can like individuals of your conflictor type. It depends on the kind of interaction, circumstances, etc. I do think though, that everything else being equal, you're far more likely to like a dual person than a conflictor person.

i agree with this. i didn't mean to imply that you should like your conflictor better than your dual (and i hope you caught this.) only that stating dissatisfaction doesn't mean you aren't your type.

And I do think that it makes no sense - no sense at all - for you to dislike your dual - unless you dislike all types - as a concept. Just like if makes no sense to dislike your own type as a concept.

i agree very much.

If you type yourself as, say, ISFp, but you keep saying that "gee, ISFp as a type sucks, I wish I was an ENTj instead" - then, assuming that you do understand what the types are about, I think it's very unlikely that you are, indeed, ISFp.

i generally agree with this. although one has to keep in mind that some types are more prone to self-criticism, too (again, this is something that i mean "within reason.") straight up saying, "ISFps really suck, and i can't possibly imagine being this type because bla bla bla." maybe that's something else.

And, if you type yourself as INFj, but at the same time say things like, "gee, why do I have to have ESTj as dual, I think ESTp is much cooler" - then, again assuming that you minimallly know those types, I think it's unlikely that you are INFj.

i don't know if she's ever stated this explicitly. i know that niffweed is of the opinion that she's probably IXFp but i'm not sure i see enough Fe to really buy it, either. we had a conversation about this that didn't really go anywhere, as i think some of his beta typings are a bit odd.

[Expat]

i don't know if she's ever stated this explicitly. i know that niffweed is of the opinion that she's probably IXFp but i'm not sure i see enough Fe to really buy it, either. we had a conversation about this that didn't really go anywhere, as i think some of his beta typings are a bit odd.

I was speaking generally, not about eunice in particular. Scratch "INFj" and replace it with "ESTp" and "INFp as dual"; the general point remains.

[Expat]

i also recall kim & anndelise thinking that people were getting too swept up in the idea that duality is some magic bullet and problem free.

There's a big distance between that and essentially saying that you prefer other types for companionship over your dual.

[implied]

Adding to this it seems reasonable that types from quadras that don't value Fe (Gamma+Delta) will be more prone to speaking "ill" of their dual. I notice that gammas and deltas in general, when speaking of people they're close to, often don't speak too highly. It's kind of like the "I recognize these faults but love them regardless" type thing.

yeah, i remember miss kensington pointed this out once -- that she thought gammas were quite into criticizing their family/loved ones as a matter of showing they care, almost, whereas she didn't really understand it. basically i wonder if perhaps this isn't getting turned into some interpretation of a merry type. i've heard self-proclaimed INTps go on about how horrid ESFps are as well, although that's not such a surprise. (;

i'm not sure how closely it correlates to the merry/serious dichotomy. i think some merry types are also prone to saying awful things about their mates -- and getting their mates approval. some types will really push the limits with this. although, i think in the cases i'm talking about, the motivation here is something different. possibly related to just being a jerk. (;

[implied]

edit: ah, i see now, where eunice has stated that she finds beta types on average more attractive than delta types. hmm. i just wonder if this couldn't be a case like snegledmaca, where he says things that contradict his self-typing of INFp and it leaves others confused about his type. although i do agree that that seems like a major point for beta > delta.

[leckysupport]

I wouldn't even bother typing (online at least) people based on relationships formed after they first heard about socionics. Even if they get their type right the concepts of intertype relationships and duality really messes with some seriously deep rooted spiritual notions about relationships.

[implied]

Maria... how many times have I said how hawt I find Betas or Deltas...

you find a lot of type hawt haha. however, i cannot imagine you calling gammas hot!

[aestrivex]

That makes more sense than the conflictor example I used; however, would you (for instance) really wish you were better at at the expense of your focus on or ?

it depends. at times, yes.

[aestrivex]

Ashton is not Beta extravert. Alpha NTs who have meaningful discussions with him will attest that he is way more Te than Ti.

according to you i'm an alpha NT, and i have had some meaningful discussions. he is not Te > Ti.

[implied]

I notice emeye and I are frequently typed gamma NT and have said a number of negative things about ESFp's -- but maybe we aren't INTp's. (I also think I might have confused some ESTp-Se's for ESFp's but I digress.) In any case, Expat, liveandletlive, and [if you buy his self-typing] Jarno all seem to have a lot of positive things to say about their alleged duals. I think there may be something to Serious types being more bluntly honest with their close ones. But I don't think that necessarily correlates with increased negativity towards their protypical dual overall.

you could, at least in expat's & liveandletlive's case, say it's due to their being positivists as opposed to negativists (you do read that negativists are more inclined to criticize instead of praise. best explanation i can really come up with.)

[implied]

INFj's are likewise positivist.

good point, and i hadn't thought of that. but this also makes niffweed's INFp suggestion a little nil. let's scratch the positivism/negativism idea, then. ):

[Creepy-Cyclops]

good point, and i hadn't thought of that. but this also makes niffweed's INFp suggestion a little nil. let's scratch the positivism/negativism idea, then. ):

Hurray!

[eunice]

In what way/why?

His approach to Socionics seems to be like this: "this is what I observe irl, so this theory is valid/invalid. In the case of invalidity, this theory should be revised", rather than "this theory says "this and this", so according to this theory, "this and this" must happen irl and fit this theory. If what I have observed does not correspond with it, then what I have observed doesn't belong to this system." This is just my personal opinion of how Te vs. Ti are like respectively. Ti seems to be about strictly adhering to the system and judging things around you according to that system as if it is the "universal truth".

The ideas of yours you described in the "Examples of Fi" thread strike me as highly Ti > Fi. And those of yours in the "favorite subject(s)" thread struck me as highly Ti > Te. Additionally a number of Fi types did not identify with your "examples of Fi" ideas at all.

LOL. It reminds me of some Alpha NTs forum members who have mentioned (both in PMs and in their posts that it is more likely that I belong to a Ti quadra.

then the issue would be in word choice, right? is eunice talking about bad ESTjs she's met? or ESTjs on the whole? i haven't been following any eunice type discussion *that* closely, but i do get the idea that her perception of ESTjs comes from individuals of the type. i also recall kim & anndelise thinking that people were getting too swept up in the idea that duality is some magic bullet and problem free.

I don't really see duality as a magic pill which will solve all my problems. I regard my dual as someone who is compatible to me and someone whom I can easily understand. Ironically, one of the things I don't really appreciate about ESTjs is that they always orientate themselves in seeking for flaws and solving them, and mentioning the weaknesses of others to help them improve. On the other hand, I am generally someone who is too aware of my weaknesses and tend to judge myself based on that at times. I don't want someone who is like me, and I prefer someone who is more optimistic, fun-loving, daring and comfortable with pushing me to my limits, rather than been too matter-of-factly and serious. Another thing I don't appreciate about ESTjs is that they can be too contented with their surroundings and too comfortable with their current status. I am not talking about "status" as in "social status" btw. There are other things about ESTjs which I disagree with, but I guess I will stop here for now.

[Mea]

His approach to Socionics seems to be like this: "this is what I observe irl, so this theory is valid/invalid. In the case of invalidity, this theory should be revised", rather than "this theory says "this and this", so according to this theory, "this and this" must happen irl and fit this theory. If what I have observed does not correspond with it, then what I have observed doesn't belong to this system." This is just my personal opinion of how Te vs. Ti are like respectively. Ti seems to be about strictly adhering to the system and judging things around you according to that system as if it is the "universal truth".

Uhh. I may be wrong, but this really sounds wrong.

[eunice]

Uhh. I may be wrong, but this really sounds wrong.

As in, my understanding of Te vs Ti?

[Mea]

As in, my understanding of Te vs Ti?

yes

[Mea]

as a creative(2nd) function (ILE and SLE)

The individual easily generates logical systems and formulations to explain a set of phenomena that he has experienced or studied. However, these logical systems or explanations are not viewed as permanent or all-encompassing, but can be improved upon or even discarded as new experience and information is added.

http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Ti


Really sounds like what you're describing

[meatburger]

I don't want someone who is like me, and I prefer someone who is more optimistic, fun-loving, daring and comfortable with pushing me to my limits, rather than been too matter-of-factly and serious. Another thing I don't appreciate about ESTjs is that they can be too contented with their surroundings and too comfortable with their current status. I am not talking about "status" as in "social status" btw. There are other things about ESTjs which I disagree with, but I guess I will stop here for now.

Hmm seems to me then that your describing ESTp > ESTj. Tell me, have you successfully identified your friends types? How do you feel around Betas and deltas? I just cant fathom you being an INFj and actually being around an ESTp and thinking their amazing for a long period of time.

[Ritella]

Hi,
I'm relatively new here.
I'm pretty positive I'm INFJ, and Eunice, I totally identify with your comments on ESTJs. I can write more about my own feelings toward them if you're interested. I actually had a train wreck of an experience with a guy I'm pretty sure was an ESTJ. It left me completely skeptical...
I also wanted to comment on the discussion about it being unlikely that a type would: 1. want to be another type, 2. dislike his/her dual's type.
I think that it's neither unlikely, nor does it imply that the person has been mistyped. I have actually experienced both. (Btw, I'm not using myself as evidence. I understand that I could be mistyped. I'm just commenting on my own experiences.)
I think that in order for either of those 2 reactions to imply a mistyping, there is an assumption that every person is very consciously aware and appreciative of his/her leading functions and desires to maximize these, while mitigating use of the others. This is not self evident to me. Particularly with INFJs, who tend to see so much potential in other people and have so much criticism for themselves, they are often unaware or completely dismissive of the (value of) their own talents. For example, I always read INTJ descriptions and think "I want to be THAT type." Just because I think I value Ti over Fi doesn't mean that I'm not actually spending the majority of my days doing Fi typical things (unbeknownst to me). And with respect to seeking out their duals, INFjs are often very set on the idea of self-sufficiency and not having "weaknesses." IMO these are both impetuses toward duality, for which admitting one's weaknesses is practically a prerequisite. (Interesting how this coincides with the age old advice on how to find true love!) Also, INFjs tend to reject what they know to be beneficial for them when their self-destructive tendencies are in full swing...
Finally, I think that it's very likely for any type to dislike descriptions of his/her dual. I can't speak from experience, but I'm of the opinion that the value of one's dual is something that can only be "felt," rather than something for which we can be cogniscant from theoretical speculation. A good analogy to this might be a career. After quitting a job that I "thought" fit me, I went to career counselling, where they recommended various careers that made me say "I can see why I could like that, but I don't think I want that." On a leap of faith, I tried one of the suggested jobs (which used a whole lot of Fi with respect to my previous, Ti dominated one). Only now that I'm in the job can I realize how natural it is to me. AND, only now that I'm beginning to grow more confident in my own self, can I appreciate and value these qualities that the work requires I demonstrate. (My thinking since childhood had been more along the lines of, "If it comes easily to me, it must be an easy skill, so then it must be worthless.") I think that my career experience may shed some light on my response to duality: though I may not be sold on the idea of my dual, I will be able to realize the value of my dual once I feel that the relationship is working in line with my most natural self.

[Khola aka Bee]

What about............*shameless plug* typing bee in the thread nearby

[eunice]

If I am ever another type, ISFp would be the next probable option. If not, INFj. In comparison, even ENFp makes more sense than INFp.

[meatburger]

Hi,
I'm relatively new here.
I'm pretty positive I'm INFJ, and Eunice, I totally identify with your comments on ESTJs. I can write more about my own feelings toward them if you're interested. I actually had a train wreck of an experience with a guy I'm pretty sure was an ESTJ. It left me completely skeptical...
I also wanted to comment on the discussion about it being unlikely that a type would: 1. want to be another type, 2. dislike his/her dual's type.
I think that it's neither unlikely, nor does it imply that the person has been mistyped. I have actually experienced both. (Btw, I'm not using myself as evidence. I understand that I could be mistyped. I'm just commenting on my own experiences.)
I think that in order for either of those 2 reactions to imply a mistyping, there is an assumption that every person is very consciously aware and appreciative of his/her leading functions and desires to maximize these, while mitigating use of the others. This is not self evident to me. Particularly with INFJs, who tend to see so much potential in other people and have so much criticism for themselves, they are often unaware or completely dismissive of the (value of) their own talents. For example, I always read INTJ descriptions and think "I want to be THAT type." Just because I think I value Ti over Fi doesn't mean that I'm not actually spending the majority of my days doing Fi typical things (unbeknownst to me). And with respect to seeking out their duals, INFjs are often very set on the idea of self-sufficiency and not having "weaknesses." IMO these are both impetuses toward duality, for which admitting one's weaknesses is practically a prerequisite. (Interesting how this coincides with the age old advice on how to find true love!) Also, INFjs tend to reject what they know to be beneficial for them when their self-destructive tendencies are in full swing...
Finally, I think that it's very likely for any type to dislike descriptions of his/her dual. I can't speak from experience, but I'm of the opinion that the value of one's dual is something that can only be "felt," rather than something for which we can be cogniscant from theoretical speculation. A good analogy to this might be a career. After quitting a job that I "thought" fit me, I went to career counselling, where they recommended various careers that made me say "I can see why I could like that, but I don't think I want that." On a leap of faith, I tried one of the suggested jobs (which used a whole lot of Fi with respect to my previous, Ti dominated one). Only now that I'm in the job can I realize how natural it is to me. AND, only now that I'm beginning to grow more confident in my own self, can I appreciate and value these qualities that the work requires I demonstrate. (My thinking since childhood had been more along the lines of, "If it comes easily to me, it must be an easy skill, so then it must be worthless.") I think that my career experience may shed some light on my response to duality: though I may not be sold on the idea of my dual, I will be able to realize the value of my dual once I feel that the relationship is working in line with my most natural self.

Hello Ritella. I think you made some good points and you do sound INFj from my experience. I agree that conceptually the idea of your dual may not sound awesome at first. Ive found that as ive thought about it though and felt it i very much like the idea of my dual.