Results 1 to 36 of 36

Thread: Is this accurate?

  1. #1
    ...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 Is this accurate?

    What makes the SLE and the LIE look so much alike is the way they take charge of things. Both of these types want to get things accomplished and get that achievable result as quickly as possible. They have a fundamental belief that it is worth the risk to go ahead and decide and trust they can take care of anything that comes up. They tend to make quick decisions. For them, there is no such thing as a wrong decision, just one that didnít work. Both tend to be very Directing in their communications and Initiating in the roles they take with others.

    SLEs have a core need for having the freedom to choose the next thing they are going to do with a drive to action and to make an impact, whereas LIEs have a core need for mastery, self-control, knowledge and competence. The LIE need for competence also resonates with the SLE. However, for the LIE, being competent ahead of doing something is crucial and they will want to understand something completely before they go ahead and act. The SLE, on the other hand, will be more likely to quickly grasp the essence of something and then go ahead and take action, gaining competence as they go. When hearing descriptors, they may interpret competence in terms of their love of skillful performance.

    Both types have a preference for taking pragmatic roles in a given group, so the freedom to choose the next action resonates to both types, as autonomy is the hallmark of pragmatic role taking. Pragmatism means doing what ever it takes to reach a goal, often ignoring rules or social norms. For the LIE, that freedom is around devising and getting others to follow a strategy. For the SLE, that freedom is more often about the necessary tactical actions to get something accomplished.

    Their differences come in noticing their use of language, with the SLE more likely to use language that describes things tangibly and the LIE language describes things conceptually. Also note that SLEs easily tune in to otherís motives and LIEs are much more interested in structure than motive. The LIE often engages in quickly reading the external environment and is drawn to act on and shape that environment. This can easily look SLE-like as they respond and adapt to what is going on, especially enjoying some of the more exciting activities. The SLEs are quite tuned into future payoffs and quite optimistic about what will happen in the future. They often get a sense of what is just around the corner and then want to seize the opportunities.

  2. #2
    Kristiina's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Estonia, Tartu
    Posts
    4,021
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've had similar thoughts about LIEs and SLEs. I approve of any opinion that really just describes my own opinion!
    EIE, ENFj, intuitive subtype.
    E3 (probably 3w4)

    Cool ILI hubbys are better than LSIs any time!

    Old blog: http://firsttimeinusa.blogspot.com/
    New blog: http://having-a-kid.blogspot.com/

  3. #3
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    SLEs have this way of having sex with you just by staring... it is hawt!

  4. #4
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beyond the blue horizon
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    13,088
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kristiina View Post
    I approve of any opinion that really just describes my own opinion!
    That's pretty much almost totally strange.
    ďWhether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.Ē

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  5. #5
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    What makes the SLE and the LIE look so much alike is the way they take charge of things. Both of these types want to get things accomplished and get that achievable result as quickly as possible. They have a fundamental belief that it is worth the risk to go ahead and decide and trust they can take care of anything that comes up. They tend to make quick decisions. For them, there is no such thing as a wrong decision, just one that didnít work. Both tend to be very Directing in their communications and Initiating in the roles they take with others.

    SLEs have a core need for having the freedom to choose the next thing they are going to do with a drive to action and to make an impact, whereas LIEs have a core need for mastery, self-control, knowledge and competence. The LIE need for competence also resonates with the SLE. However, for the LIE, being competent ahead of doing something is crucial and they will want to understand something completely before they go ahead and act. The SLE, on the other hand, will be more likely to quickly grasp the essence of something and then go ahead and take action, gaining competence as they go. When hearing descriptors, they may interpret competence in terms of their love of skillful performance.

    Both types have a preference for taking pragmatic roles in a given group, so the freedom to choose the next action resonates to both types, as autonomy is the hallmark of pragmatic role taking. Pragmatism means doing what ever it takes to reach a goal, often ignoring rules or social norms. For the LIE, that freedom is around devising and getting others to follow a strategy. For the SLE, that freedom is more often about the necessary tactical actions to get something accomplished.

    Their differences come in noticing their use of language, with the SLE more likely to use language that describes things tangibly and the LIE language describes things conceptually. Also note that SLEs easily tune in to otherís motives and LIEs are much more interested in structure than motive. The LIE often engages in quickly reading the external environment and is drawn to act on and shape that environment. This can easily look SLE-like as they respond and adapt to what is going on, especially enjoying some of the more exciting activities. The SLEs are quite tuned into future payoffs and quite optimistic about what will happen in the future. They often get a sense of what is just around the corner and then want to seize the opportunities.
    I think it's generally, if not entirely, accurate, as far as it goes; I think there's at least as much you can say about their differences.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The differences you describe, Ezra, are generally correct. And, as you are probably already aware of, you can find many of the same general differences between ESTP Artisans and ENTJ Rationals described in different chapters in David Keirsey's Please Understand Me II.

  7. #7
    aka-kitsune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    966
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The difference is that I don't find myself interested in SLEs in general. However, I have frequently made myself freely available as sidekick/lackey of the LIE.

    Somehow, beneficent LIEs tend to inspire my admiration and total devotion.
    socio: INFp - IEI
    ennea: 4w5 sp/sx

    **********

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Twain
    Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial 'we'.

  8. #8
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aka-kitsune View Post
    Somehow, beneficent LIEs tend to inspire my admiration and total devotion.
    Ha. I don't usually feel very grounded, and for this reason (among many others) I highly admire Se, but Te can have a grounding effect as well... if I don't perceive it as being really critical and cutting, then it provides helpful confirmations (or denials).

  9. #9
    I'm back, assholes! Herzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    5,098
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bionicgoat View Post
    SLEs have this way of having sex with you just by staring... it is hawt!
    Good to know.
    , Se-sub
    8w8-3w8-7w8 sx/sx

  10. #10
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    What makes the SLE and the LIE look so much alike is the way they take charge of things. Both of these types want to get things accomplished and get that achievable result as quickly as possible. They have a fundamental belief that it is worth the risk to go ahead and decide and trust they can take care of anything that comes up. They tend to make quick decisions. For them, there is no such thing as a wrong decision, just one that didnít work. Both tend to be very Directing in their communications and Initiating in the roles they take with others.

    SLEs have a core need for having the freedom to choose the next thing they are going to do with a drive to action and to make an impact, whereas LIEs have a core need for mastery, self-control, knowledge and competence. The LIE need for competence also resonates with the SLE. However, for the LIE, being competent ahead of doing something is crucial and they will want to understand something completely before they go ahead and act. The SLE, on the other hand, will be more likely to quickly grasp the essence of something and then go ahead and take action, gaining competence as they go. When hearing descriptors, they may interpret competence in terms of their love of skillful performance.

    Both types have a preference for taking pragmatic roles in a given group, so the freedom to choose the next action resonates to both types, as autonomy is the hallmark of pragmatic role taking. Pragmatism means doing what ever it takes to reach a goal, often ignoring rules or social norms. For the LIE, that freedom is around devising and getting others to follow a strategy. For the SLE, that freedom is more often about the necessary tactical actions to get something accomplished.

    Their differences come in noticing their use of language, with the SLE more likely to use language that describes things tangibly and the LIE language describes things conceptually. Also note that SLEs easily tune in to otherís motives and LIEs are much more interested in structure than motive. The LIE often engages in quickly reading the external environment and is drawn to act on and shape that environment. This can easily look SLE-like as they respond and adapt to what is going on, especially enjoying some of the more exciting activities. The SLEs are quite tuned into future payoffs and quite optimistic about what will happen in the future. They often get a sense of what is just around the corner and then want to seize the opportunities.
    given its length, this is probably the best description of types I've read in a while.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  11. #11
    ...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

    Interesting responses. Now, what if I told you that this was the source?

  12. #12
    Elro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    2,796
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Interesting responses. Now, what if I told you that this was the source?
    Fascinating!

    So, are you LIE now?
    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Holy mud-wrestling bipolar donkeys, Batman!

    Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.


    I pity your souls

  13. #13
    ...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

    I'm an ENTJ. I'm probably an SLE. Have been considering LIE recently.

  14. #14
    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

    Wow. I guess some Myersians get lucky? I thought it sounded mostly good, although a good bit of it is fairly vague. Probably some Forer coming into play here given our imminent understanding of Socionics.
    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...

  15. #15
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ^at last, confirmation that ABCD = ABCd!!!!!

  16. #16

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

    Default

    a lot of it seems fairly good.

    Also note that SLEs easily tune in to other’s motives and LIEs are much more interested in structure than motive. The LIE often engages in quickly reading the external environment and is drawn to act on and shape that environment. This can easily look SLE-like as they respond and adapt to what is going on, especially enjoying some of the more exciting activities. The SLEs are quite tuned into future payoffs and quite optimistic about what will happen in the future. They often get a sense of what is just around the corner and then want to seize the opportunities.
    i would take issue with this part of it. it almost seems to have them reversed in some places.

  17. #17
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    I'm an ENTJ. I'm probably an SLE. Have been considering LIE recently.
    I would have you as ESTP in mbti. why do you think you're SLE? I know a few people thought you were some delta ST.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  18. #18
    ...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

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    ^at last, confirmation that ABCD = ABCd!!!!!
    Even if you were joking, I'd love to believe you at this point, but I'd also love to see you come up with how the INFJ, the INFP and the INTP can be explained socionically.

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    i would take issue with this part of it. it almost seems to have them reversed in some places.
    I noticed that as well. I think it probably has something to do with the fact that in MBTT, the ESTP's inferior function is Ni, and this can - unlike in socionics - be perfected as the ESTP matures.

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    why do you think you're SLE?
    Because I've looked at the functional ordering, and most of it fits much better than any other type does. See my explanation of how Se, Si, Te and Ti (and even Ni) manifest themselves in me.

  19. #19
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Apparently some people think we're identicals, Ezra.

    Look at me, see your future, and despair.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  20. #20
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Even if you were joking, I'd love to believe you at this point
    Why?

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Because I've looked at the functional ordering, and most of it fits much better than any other type does. See my explanation of how Se, Si, Te and Ti (and even Ni) manifest themselves in me.
    Don't do that, please. That's probably one of the most common reasons people mistype themselves. You will find your correct type much more easily and more accurately if you look at dichotomies, type descriptions, and test results.

    You need to find a correct foundation to be able to understand the fundctions correctly. If you cannot link the functions descriptions to observable behaviour of some type(s) that you 100 % certain of independently of your understanding of the functions you will never know whether your interpretation of those functions descriptions is correct or not.

    The functions descriptions, as they are written, invite incorrect interpretations, because they are too abstract and/or vague and not directly related to empirically observable behaviours. Over and over again we have seen people interpret the functions in totally incorrect ways, resulting in endless mistypings. Don't repeat other people's mistakes, Ezra.

    If you really are an SLE, you MUST find a way to identify with being an Artisan and an ESTP. If that is totally impossible for you to do, you simply cannot be an SLE. If you are certain (but you probably are not that certain) that you are a Rational ENTJ you simply cannot be any other type than LIE in Socionics. And if you, hypothetically, are certain that you are a Guardian ESTJ, you cannot be any other type than LSE in Socionics. Now, don't dismiss this -- take it seriously, and find your correct type.

  22. #22
    ...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

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat View Post
    Apparently some people think we're identicals, Ezra.

    Look at me, see your future, and despair.
    Ahhh, science isn't so bad. It's just law is better.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Why?
    Because it would be far easier to type people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    Don't do that, please. That's probably one of the most common reasons people mistype themselves. You will find your correct type much more easily and more accurately if you look at dichotomies, type descriptions, and test results.

    You need to find a correct foundation to be able to understand the fundctions correctly. If you cannot link the functions descriptions to observable behaviour of some type(s) that you 100 % certain of independently of your understanding of the functions you will never know whether your interpretation of those functions descriptions is correct or not.

    The functions descriptions, as they are written, invite incorrect interpretations, because they are too abstract and/or vague and not directly related to empirically observable behaviours. Over and over again we have seen people interpret the functions in totally incorrect ways, resulting in endless mistypings. Don't repeat other people's mistakes, Ezra.

    If you really are an SLE, you MUST find a way to identify with being an Artisan and an ESTP. If that is totally impossible for you to do, you simply cannot be an SLE. If you are certain (but you probably are not that certain) that you are a Rational ENTJ you simply cannot be any other type than LIE in Socionics. And if you, hypothetically, are certain that you are a Guardian ESTJ, you cannot be any other type than LSE in Socionics. Now, don't dismiss this -- take it seriously, and find your correct type.
    This is where we part, I'm afraid. I care about socionics, and thus functions, not dichotomies, tests and type descriptions, or any other shitty typing paraphernalia you might pull out of you ghastly ass.

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    I care about socionics, and thus functions, not dichotomies, tests and type descriptions, or any other shitty typing paraphernalia you might pull out of you ghastly ass.
    I care about Socionics, and thus functions, more than you do, because besides the functions I also care about dichotomies and type descriptions -- which both are a central part of Socionics -- and I care about test results for scientific reasons, because they are usually far more reliable as a typing method than people's subjective interpretations of functions descriptions.

    So, you do in fact not care about Socionics and finding your correct type as much as you should. You refuse to look at the whole picture. You only look at not more than one half of the evidence before you make up your mind and state that you have find the truth.

    You might have found your correct type, but you don't know that, because you haven't been able (yet) to explain the anomalies that are still there in your profile. I know for sure that I am right in the things I say, because every single piece of evidence fits the whole picture.

    All of it -- functions, type descriptions, dichotimies, test results and everything else -- hang together, and not one of this aspects contradict another aspect when it comes to my own type. And when I type others I don't rest until I have got all those aspects right. I don't allow any anomalies or contradictions to exist in a person's profile, and neither should you.

  24. #24
    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

    Don't bite at that, Ezra. It's not going anywhere, and it never will.
    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...

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    Don't bite at that, Ezra. It's not going anywhere, and it never will.
    Gilly doesn't know a shit about MBTT and Keirsey, Ezra. Don't listen to him, if you want to get it right. Check it out for yourself.

  26. #26
    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

    Actually I only got interested in Socionics because I met Rocky at a mostly-MBTT site. My mother is certified and I've probably taken more MBTIs than Socionics inventories.

    I can't say I've read the Keirsey books, but I know more than enough to see that it is systematically incompatible with Socioics, regardless of whether or not the two systems generally describe the same times.
    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...

  27. #27
    ...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

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    I care about Socionics, and thus functions, more than you do, because besides the functions I also care about dichotomies and type descriptions -- which both are a central part of Socionics -- and I care about test results for scientific reasons, because they are usually far more reliable as a typing method than people's subjective interpretations of functions descriptions.
    I see type descriptions, the four dichotomies, temperaments and clubs in socionics as vastly inferior to functions.

    Gilly's right; there's no point even pursuing this matter. We'll never reach an agreement.

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    Actually I only got interested in Socionics because I met Rocky at a mostly-MBTT site. My mother is certified and I've probably taken more MBTIs than Socionics inventories.
    In that case it is almost totally incomprehensible that you are so blind to the truth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    I can't say I've read the Keirsey books, but I know more than enough to see that it is systematically incompatible with Socioics, regardless of whether or not the two systems generally describe the same times.
    Yes, you really are blind. As a big bat. And it's not funny. The three systems are almost completely compatible -- but we have to make some translations due to the different terminologies.

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    I see type descriptions, the four dichotomies, temperaments and clubs in socionics as vastly inferior to functions.
    But the problem is that you don't understand the functions correctly. You simply don't. And you cannot dismiss the type descriptions and the four dichotomies just because you want to. They are nothing but another perspective on the types. These different perspectives cannot contradict each other, and they don't contradict each other -- if you understand them correctly. Read the recent discussion between Rick and Smilingeyes. You might learn something there.

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee View Post
    why does Phaddy keeps emphasizing that he knows socionics better than anyone and is the only one around who has his type "in line with all the socionics theoretical prerequisites"? i personally find such behavior as very piss-offing, if such word exists.
    I find it piss-offing that some people here prove -- over and over again -- that they don't understand Socionics as well as I do, despite their claims to the contrary. If two persons disagree on which one of them understands something better than the other, only the person who actually has a better understanding of the subject can be tell that that is the case. And I obviously knows it better than you. So, why don't you do some more study?

  31. #31
    ...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

    Quote Originally Posted by dee View Post
    why does Phaddy keeps emphasizing that he knows socionics better than anyone and is the only one around who has his type "in line with all the socionics theoretical prerequisites"? i personally find such behavior as very piss-offing, if such word exists.
    He's intellectually arrogant, amongst the most arrogant I've seen. I'd love to see how he fares outside the world of ideas.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    But the problem is that you don't understand the functions correctly. You simply don't. And you cannot dismiss the type descriptions and the four dichotomies just because you want to. They are nothing but another perspective on the types. These different perspectives cannot contradict each other, and they don't contradict each other -- if you understand them correctly. Read the recent discussion between Rick and Smilingeyes. You might learn something there.
    I'm far further in my understanding of socionics than you are. You're hopelessly bound to MBTT and Jungian descriptions of the eight functions. You never seem to take on board the fact that Augusta doesn't give a shit about what they say about the functions, just that there are eight functions, and that she'll do what she damn well pleases with said eight functions; she'll order them here, she'll order them there, and it's her goddamn system; not Jung's, not Myers', not Briggs', not anyone's.

  32. #32
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    You never seem to take on board the fact that Augusta doesn't give a shit about what they say about the functions, just that there are eight functions, and that she'll do what she damn well pleases with said eight functions; she'll order them here, she'll order them there, and it's her goddamn system; not Jung's, not Myers', not Briggs', not anyone's.
    QFT.

    Sure, that's very clear if you read what she wrote, and what others (Lytov, Weisband, etc) have said and written about it. Jung was the starting point, not the end-all. The problem is that, since Augusta diverted from Jung according to her own purposes and views and observations, there are indeed, still, many resemblances between Jung's views of functions and Augusta's. And some people - for many reasons - seem to find Jung's descriptions appealing and resonating with their own impressions, so they take the path of saying that Jung's descriptions are the "true" socionics ones. Which is incomprehensible to me, since they should then just say that they are following Jung's typology (or creating yet another one based on it) rather than they are using "socionics".
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  33. #33

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    People here always return to the functions and point to the differences in how they are described by Jung, MBTT, and Socionics. And it doesn't seem to matter that I repeat over and over again that the functions are totally irrelevant in relation to what all three of them agree upon -- the types. You can do what you want with the functions, you can play your little games with them, but who should care about it if you continue to make typing mistakes?

    I am right about the types of the people I have a strong opinion about. I don't think I have made one single serious mistyping yet. People are free to check that claim against reality, and those who take it seriously will see that it is most likely correct.

    Ezra doesn't understand (and perhaps not even Expat does) that Augusta's starting point was the types -- not the functions, and not the intertype relations. She started with the types, and made observations about their relations to each other.

    The types MUST be established by other means than by looking at functions descriptions or interactions betwen people -- and that's exactly what Augusta did, just like Jung and MBTT and Keirsey. She started with the eight Jungian types and compared them with reality. That's how she discovered the intertype relations, the differences between seemingly similar types, as in the relations of quasi-identity, etc. Not until you people learn this simple truth, you will begin to understand the core of the subject. Until you do, you will continue to make typing mistakes.

  34. #34

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee View Post
    wrong. she have developed model A to explain intertypal relationships she observed. where did you even come up with this stuff? are you just trying to fool us into having you as our "authority" in socionics? i'm ok with that if you really do have merit, but so far i only see pretty and mostly vague and widely debatable and often wrong statements.
    I hate to have to explain the basics to idiots, and have lost count on how many times I have suggested that people should start with something simple, like reading Dmitri Lytov's introduction to Socionics. Now, you will do it, won't you? Or will you refuse to learn the most basic facts of Socionics. Will you continue to live in a world of ignorance, or will you start to do some serious study?

    You will find Lytov's text (in three parts) at the bottom of this page:

    http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/index.html

  35. #35
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee View Post
    wrong. she have developed model A to explain intertypal relationships she observed.
    That's what Igor Weisband himself confirmed to me, in Duesseldorf, when asked directly. Starting from her own less-than-happy marriage to a LSE.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    she have developed model A to explain intertypal relationships she observed.
    Yes, and have I disputed that? No, I haven't. I have said that she started with the types. She read stuff about different typologies, and she found Jung's model to be the most useful. So, she started with Jung's eight types, and moved on from that. She did not start without random people whose types she didn't have a clue about.

Posting Permissions

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