View Poll Results: phaedrus is probably...

Voters
25. You may not vote on this poll
  • Si/Ne

    3 12.00%
  • Fe/Ti

    12 48.00%
  • Ni/Se

    13 52.00%
  • Te/Fi

    6 24.00%
  • IP

    6 24.00%
  • EP

    3 12.00%
  • IJ

    8 32.00%
  • EJ

    3 12.00%
  • introverted

    13 52.00%
  • extroverted

    2 8.00%
  • sensing

    5 20.00%
  • intuitive

    8 32.00%
  • logical

    13 52.00%
  • ethical

    3 12.00%
  • rational

    7 28.00%
  • irrational

    5 20.00%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 41

Thread: phaedrus

  1. #1
    High Priestess glam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,388
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default phaedrus

    there's obviously not enough of these threads...

    now vote

  2. #2
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    great poll!

  3. #3

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

    Default

    So far the results seem to be in line with what I said in some of my posts in this thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...t=16917&page=5

  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 glamourama View Post
    lol, I wonder how many people will actually take it seriously
    What's there not to be taken seriously. What's wrong with you?
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    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
    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

    (I just noticed that the last post on this thread was written on 03-21-2008, but this thread showed up under "New Posts" which is why I replied.)
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    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.

  6. #6
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Someone voted.

    So, the highest scores are Fe/Ti, Se/Ni, Introverted, and Logical.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  7. #7

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    So, the highest scores are Fe/Ti, Se/Ni, Introverted, and Logical.
    Which means that many people here are very bad at estimating probabilities. I certainly wouldn't recommend them to put too much of their money on the stock market or on the poker table. Seen from their perspective, the odds are clearly in favour of whatever I say my type is, no matter what the objective truth happens to be.

  8. #8
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hold on, so you're saying that since people here are (according to you) bad at estimating probabilities (for reasons you have not given), it means that they're automatically wrong... and this somehow makes you automatically right?

    How does that work?
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  9. #9

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    Hold on, so you're saying that since people here are (according to you) bad at estimating probabilities (for reasons you have not given), it means that they're automatically wrong... and this somehow makes you automatically right?

    How does that work?
    I certainly didn't say that. You are making a logical error in reasoning here. (ENTjs are not very good at conceptual logic -- crazedrat is right about that part.)

    Even if people here would be right in their guessing of my correct type, they are making a mistake if they believe that the most probably type for me is some other type than the one I have claimed to be. From an objective point of view, my most probable type is INTp, because that is the type I claim to have very strong reasons to believe is my correct type.

    If people would have to put their own money at stake here, if they would place their bets on what they really think is my most probable type, then they would be making a mistake if they did put their money on some other type than INTp, because they simply don't know. They are only guessing, but they know that I know that I know myself better than any one else on this forum. I am in "insider", and it would be idiotic to ignore inside information when you put money at risk.

    It is irrelevant if my correct type really is INTp or not. People should place their bets on that type anyway -- if they want to make a rationally justified choice in a game theoretical perspective.

  10. #10
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    gotcha

    (I still disagree, of course, because I think that your behavior and reasoning are strong enough indicators that you are not ILI that even your saying that your type is ILI isn't very convincing.)
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  11. #11

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    gotcha

    (I still disagree, of course, because I think that your behavior and reasoning are strong enough indicators that you are not ILI that even your saying that your type is ILI isn't very convincing.)
    You are proving my point that LIEs are bad at logical reasoning (in comparision with ILIs).

  12. #12
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,624
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    You are proving my point that LIEs are bad at logical reasoning (in comparision with ILIs).
    Hey, this is a bad use of inference! Does this mean ILIs are worse than LIEs at logical reasoning?

    I would honestly be more hesitant to think that the way people are reasoning in regard to a socionics type is the same way they would reason in order to make a decision on the stock market. In fact I think your example is flawed by an omissis: people think that your conception of socionics is not good (this does not mean that I agree with them), thus a right analogy would be one where the person with the insider information is a bad business analyst.

    This said, my personal opinion is that the best methodology is (as you say) indeed believing in what a person says about his own type, especially if said person has studies socionics enough.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    Hold on, so you're saying that since people here are (according to you) bad at estimating probabilities (for reasons you have not given), it means that they're automatically wrong... and this somehow makes you automatically right?

    How does that work?
    It works because you're too closed-minded to take what we've already said about the man to heart!

  14. #14

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Hey, this is a bad use of inference! Does this mean ILIs are worse than LIEs at logical reasoning?
    Joy used a bad argument to support her dismissal of my general argument. She doesn't get the point -- that's why she is bad at logical reasoning. Besides that, I really believe that LIEs in general are worse at logical reasoning than ILIs. The LIE's main forte is not logical reasoning, and the LIE might feel inferior to the ILI in that respect, even if the LIE happens to be more intelligent than the ILI overall. That claim is based on several real life observations, and it is also supported by what we know about the types through type descriptions and other sources of information. But of course it has a lot to do with IQ too. You are clearly better than Joy at logical reasoning, and you know it.

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    I would honestly be more hesitant to think that the way people are reasoning in regard to a socionics type is the same way they would reason in order to make a decision on the stock market.
    I do not suggest that they do, but maybe they should.

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    In fact I think your example is flawed by an omissis: people think that your conception of socionics is not good (this does not mean that I agree with them), thus a right analogy would be one where the person with the insider information is a bad business analyst.
    Yes, I agree. But people should know that they don't know whether I am really a good or a bad analyst, and they should also take into consideration that analysts tend to be no better at predicting outcomes than pure chance, and that applies to themselves as well. They should be skeptical of their own analytical abilities here. They don't know that they are better analysts than I am, they only assume that without objectively good reasons to do so.

  15. #15
    JRiddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indian Territory
    TIM
    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so
    Posts
    838
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ROFL @ this thread

    As far as I can tell, Phaedy is a member of Epsilon quadra.

    JRiddy
    —————King of Socionics—————

    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so

  16. #16

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JRiddy View Post
    ROFL @ this thread

    As far as I can tell, Phaedy is a member of Epsilon quadra.
    Are you sure? Could I really have made such a mistake? ... I have always thought that I am a member of Mµ quadra ...

  17. #17
    JRiddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indian Territory
    TIM
    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so
    Posts
    838
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    Are you sure? Could I really have made such a mistake? ... I have always thought that I am a member of Mµ quadra ...
    Oh it's good to see you smile. Epsilon is the netherquadra for people like you and bionicgoat who are in exile from type for whatever reason. I rule over epsilon with a giant paper clip, and I say who's in and who's out, and you're in. Bwahahahaha!

    JRiddy
    —————King of Socionics—————

    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so

  18. #18
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    Joy used a bad argument to support her dismissal of my general argument. She doesn't get the point -- that's why she is bad at logical reasoning. Besides that, I really believe that LIEs in general are worse at logical reasoning than ILIs. The LIE's main forte is not logical reasoning, and the LIE might feel inferior to the ILI in that respect, even if the LIE happens to be more intelligent than the ILI overall. That claim is based on several real life observations, and it is also supported by what we know about the types through type descriptions and other sources of information.
    LOL

    Rest assured phaedrus, I most certainly do NOT feel inferior to you in my logical reasoning capabilities.

    (I wish slacker mom was here to see this. )

    But of course it has a lot to do with IQ too. You are clearly better than Joy at logical reasoning, and you know it.
    No... You just respect his form of logical reasoning because you're both Beta ST.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  19. #19

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    LOL

    Rest assured phaedrus, I most certainly do NOT feel inferior to you in my logical reasoning capabilities.
    I know that you don't feel inferior to me in logical reasoning abilities. But you are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    (I wish slacker mom was here to see this. )
    And rest assured that Slacker Mom's logical reasoning abilities are inferior to yours.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    No... You just respect his form of logical reasoning because you're both Beta ST.
    Maybe I'll have to take my last comment back.

  20. #20
    JRiddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indian Territory
    TIM
    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so
    Posts
    838
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Erm... I'm having a hard time seeing how any type with logic as their base function ( or ) would be worse at "logic" than a type that has it as their creative function. The creative function applies limitations that the base function does not. LIE should be "better" at "logic" than ILI. (ILI is NOT the best at everything!) This is because the leading function is up and running all the time, while the creative function goes on and off... on and off... on and off...

    Anyway, I'm am absolutely certain that ESE and EIE are "better" at than I am. Well, hypothetically. For instance an ethically brilliant IEI or SEI might be "better" at than an ethically daft EIE or ESE... so it depends.
    I think it is perhaps dangerous to conflate type with competency. Socionics describes personality, not technical abilities. Some very logical people have come from many types...including ethical types. Associating the more subtle and abstract concept of type with ostensibly observable abilities can lead to more blunt generalizations, like that S types are all better than N types at sports or something.

    "Logic", especially in the sense that Phaedrus uses it, does not refer to the action of a type, but rather the study of formal argument. This is a profoundly different thing than socionics Introverted and Extraverted Logic, and also different from boolean logic, which is different from algorithmic logic, which is different from economic rational logic, which is different from a lot of things. What I'm saying is that we can point to many decidedly different things when we say "logic".

    JRiddy
    —————King of Socionics—————

    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so

  21. #21
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Erm... I'm having a hard time seeing how any type with logic as their base function ( or ) would be worse at "logic" than a type that has it as their creative function. The creative function applies limitations that the base function does not. LIE should be "better" at "logic" than ILI. (ILI is NOT the best at everything!) This is because the leading function is up and running all the time, while the creative function goes on and off... on and off... on and off...

    Anyway, I'm am absolutely certain that ESE and EIE are "better" at than I am. Well, hypothetically. For instance an ethically brilliant IEI or SEI might be "better" at than an ethically daft EIE or ESE... so it depends.
    LIE's have Ti for their 7th (ignoring function). Phaedrus has is as his first (most likely), FDG has it as his second (most likely), and ILI's have it as their 8th (their hobby).

    Te dominants probably do care less about "logic" (Ti) than any of the other logical types.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  22. #22
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    I know that you don't feel inferior to me in logical reasoning abilities. But you are.


    And rest assured that Slacker Mom's logical reasoning abilities are inferior to yours.


    Maybe I'll have to take my last comment back.
    Ti valuing vs. Te valuing
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  23. #23

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Erm... I'm having a hard time seeing how any type with logic as their base function ( or ) would be worse at "logic" than a type that has it as their creative function.
    Yes, that's the problem with most people on this forum. They have an incorrect understanding of the types. If you would have studied the types in real life you would know that I am right about this. And you obviously haven't studied Smilingeyes's material either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki
    The creative function applies limitations that the base function does not. LIE should be "better" at "logic" than ILI.
    No. You misunderstand the roles of these functions. The LIE is only better than the ILI at what is typical of leading types to be better at than the ILI. And conceptual logical reasoning is not included in that set of skills.

    The leading function is so natural to you that you often don't think about it. It determines your natural temperament, but it is not something you focus on very much.

    ILIs are theoretical thinkers, philosophers, game strategists, etc. LIEs are better at organizing, systematizing, focusing on concrete practical results, etc. The LIEs produce more articles and books in scientific fields, but they are almost always not as deep thinkers as ILIs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki
    (ILI is NOT the best at everything!)
    I have never claimed that they are. They are worse than all the other types at many, many things. But conceptual logic is probably an area in which the ILI has no natural equal among the other types.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki
    This is because the leading function is up and running all the time, while the creative function goes on and off... on and off... on and off...
    Irrelevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki
    Anyway, I'm am absolutely certain that ESE and EIE are "better" at than I am.
    Of course they are better at those things that are associated with having leading . But you are probably naturally better at those things that are associated with creative . And it's the same with LIEs and ILIs. It is a big mistake to think of the functions in isolation. They manifest themselves very differently depending on where in the psyche they are situated.

    You must try to learn what the types are really like in real life -- not as you think they are due to your superficial understanding of them based on what you have read. You have obviously not studied the real types in action much. But they are out there if you bother to go out and observe them with your own eyes.

  24. #24

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JRiddy View Post
    "Logic", especially in the sense that Phaedrus uses it, does not refer to the action of a type, but rather the study of formal argument. This is a profoundly different thing than socionics Introverted and Extraverted Logic, and also different from boolean logic, which is different from algorithmic logic, which is different from economic rational logic, which is different from a lot of things. What I'm saying is that we can point to many decidedly different things when we say "logic".
    Exactly.

  25. #25
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Hmm... well the part of logic that is in nature... When Phaedrus talks about "logic" I think I agree that he means formal logic (as JRiddy was saying)... and "formal logic" is more of a thing.
    Exactly.

    What happened to the FDG = SEE arguments? (I can't recall who exactly was making them)
    Not me. I had briefly considered SEE as a possible type for him (someone had made a few good points), but ultimately Ti/Fe makes far more sense for him than Te/Fi, imo.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  26. #26

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

    Default

    Joy is a total moron when it comes to understanding the types. That is now a very obvious fact. Strangely though, she has got her own type right, even though she doesn't understand the functions and is very bad at typing.

  27. #27
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    Joy is a total moron when it comes to understanding the types. That is now a very obvious fact. Strangely though, she has got her own type right, even though she doesn't understand the functions and is very bad at typing.
    Too bad she does not recognize the same objective reality that you do or acknowledge the empirically proven superiority of the ILI over the LIE, LII, and ILE.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  28. #28
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,624
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    LIE's have Ti for their 7th (ignoring function). Phaedrus has is as his first (most likely), FDG has it as his second (most likely), and ILI's have it as their 8th (their hobby).

    Te dominants probably do care less about "logic" (Ti) than any of the other logical types.
    That's not true, I'm an obvious LIE. Don't spread lies around Joy! Remember that you have criticized my logic in order to build an argument for SEE; however now you are using exactly the opposite argument in order to build an argument for SLE! You should shut up at this point, because your reasoning is becoming a real mess.

    What happened to the FDG = SEE arguments? (I can't recall who exactly was making them)
    Loki...there's no need to add that sentence in brackets. Yes, you're perfectly right, she was shamelessly proposing exactly the opposite position since a week or two ago. She will also of course shamelessly deny it too.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  29. #29
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    That's not true, I'm an obvious LIE. Don't spread lies around Joy! Remember that you have criticized my logic in order to build an argument for SEE; however now you are using exactly the opposite argument in order to build an argument for SLE! You should shut up at this point, because your reasoning is becoming a real mess.
    You're right, your Ti doesn't stand out to me. Ti valuing does though, as does Fe valuing.

    Loki...there's no need to add that sentence in brackets.
    parenthesis

    Yes, you're perfectly right, she was shamelessly proposing exactly the opposite position since a week or two ago. She will also of course shamelessly deny it too.
    Negative.

    And why would I say that I haven't if I have? That makes no sense.

    Can you find any posts supporting this claim? You're welcome to look if you'd like, but I guaranty you won't be able to, and it's because aside for a short period in which I questioned whether you could be SEE (primarily because someone pointed out that you seemed to base your opinion of your type on your relationships with your girlfriends), I've thought of you as SLE for a very long time.

    But it doesn't really matter anyways. I have no interest in debating what my opinion of your type is with you. If you're really truly curious, send discojoe a PM. He and I discuss people's types every so often (largely to clarify examples of types in conversations about Socionics). He thinks you're SEE, and we have disagreed on your type for a long time.
    Last edited by Joy; 05-20-2008 at 01:19 PM.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  30. #30
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,624
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Fe valuing? Because I can get along with some Betas here on the forum? Doesn't seem enough of a justification to me, honestly.

    Maybe then I am confusing a post of yours with a post of Salawa, in regard to the SEE argument.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  31. #31
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Fe valuing? Because I can get along with some Betas here on the forum? Doesn't seem enough of a justification to me, honestly.
    No, there's more to it than that. This isn't the place to discuss it though, and even if there was a current thread about your type I wouldn't do anything more than post what I think your type is. No good would come of getting further into it than that. Your opinion on your type is your business, and I'm not going to try to convince you to change your mind.

    Maybe then I am confusing a post of yours with a post of Salawa, in regard to the SEE argument.
    Could be.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  32. #32
    ...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

    Why the fuck are we starting this shit with Phaedrus again? We know that he will never concede ILI, and that no one will ever be convinced.

    Ha, I just demonstrated Ni in talking about the future in relation to now. Hence, I am Ni leading. Also, I have looked at the facts about Phaedrus and other people who like to type him, and have utilised these in what I am trying to communicate. Hence, I am Te creative. Therefore, I am ILI.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  33. #33
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,931
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    If only there was someway to prevent this thread from being bumped.
    EII-Ne
    5w4 or 1w9 Sp/So

  34. #34
    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 Subterranean
    If only there was someway to prevent this thread from being bumped.
    Yes, if only.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    Therefore, I am ILI.
    Interesting, Logos is also ILI. They walk among us.

  35. #35
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,931
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Yes, if only.
    In that case, we have a mutual desire. I just thought I'd acknowledge this.
    EII-Ne
    5w4 or 1w9 Sp/So

  36. #36
    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 Subterranean
    In that case, we have a mutual desire. I just thought I'd acknowledge this.
    Wow. Amazing. A mutual desire. Okay, I don't really have anything to say. But I wanted you to know that I also acknowledge it.

  37. #37

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    Ha, I just demonstrated Ni in talking about the future in relation to now. Hence, I am Ni leading. Also, I have looked at the facts about Phaedrus and other people who like to type him, and have utilised these in what I am trying to communicate. Hence, I am Te creative. Therefore, I am ILI.
    *sigh* ... That's a strawman argument. Now I am Expat. Therefore I am LIE.

  38. #38
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    He was making fun of you.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  39. #39

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    He was making fun of you.
    So what?

  40. #40
    ...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



    Phaedrus, are you intentionally prolonging the length of this thread in typical Ezraesque fashion to maintain the attention? Hence, you are EP.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •