Cyclops

[Ezra]

Calls himself SLI, and I think he values Ne.

However, his attacking style of behaviour I attribute to ILE, upheld by the fact that I believe he is Fe/Ti valuing.

[implied]

LSI

ya.

[FDG]

Well, he is actually similar to Phaedrus, but slightly different - with a different focus. If we consider ISTps and INTps lookalikes and we consider Phaedrus as an INTp, then his self type as ISTp would make sense.

Generally, I don't like the practice of going against one's own self type. So, let him be SLI.

[Elro]

LSI

ya.

Time until Kristiina objects: 5... 4...

[implied]

Time until Kristiina objects: 5... 4...

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Well, he is actually similar to Phaedrus, but slightly different - with a different focus. If we consider ISTps and INTps lookalikes and we consider Phaedrus as an INTp, then his self type as ISTp would make sense.

Yeah, I've noticed this myself, and I am similar to INTp's IRL, one difference seems lie in decisions..I am basically more certain of things, and INTp's tend to be more open ended, I guess for want of a way to put it.

Generally, I don't like the practice of going against one's own self type. So, let him be SLI.

Yeah. I haven't asked for my type to be questioned. I guess it might be interesting to hear what people say, or rather the reasons people put forward, to see how they view socionics and to see typing methods.

Time until Kristiina objects: 5... 4...

It's like that ED209 out of Robocop (I can't be bothered to look for a picture) but you know the one that goes, 'you have twenty seconds to comply'. Well, facing one of those things, without escape, and with the countdown - that's kind of how I feel before the dominant Fe guns start going aha!

[Kristiina]

Time until Kristiina objects: 5... 4...

3... 2...1...

Mhhh... what makes you guys say LSI?! Like really! He has acted like a stubborn jerk at times, but is it really reason to say LSI?

[Kristiina]

...and anyway... I'm not that predictable, am I?

[implied]

Time until Kristiina objects: 5... 4...

eh fwiw i might think ezra has a point with leading if only for some similarities i've noticed with users like meatburger.

@fabie - i have no idea why you're anti-questioning people's types. and the statement regarding phaedrus is only true if you consider phaedrus to be INTp which seems rather debatable by a lot of forum members minus phaedrus himself.

[Mea]

i remember pm-ing him asking his type cuz it's not in his sig.
i think he's LII. It's not on the poll. I think he values Ti.

[Phaedrus]

Well, he is actually similar to Phaedrus, but slightly different - with a different focus.

Exactly. I identify with Cyclops's description of what creative is to him. If neither of us has creative , then we are probably both deluded.

If we consider ISTps and INTps lookalikes and we consider Phaedrus as an INTp, then his self type as ISTp would make sense.

Yes, that's very reasonable. We certainly seem to have a different focus, and that difference seem to be related to the S/N dimension.

Generally, I don't like the practice of going against one's own self type. So, let him be SLI.

I can see no objective reason, based on everything Cyclops has posted so far, to question the correctness of his self-typing. Those who do, should be expected to put forward a really strong case to back up their claims. If they can't do that, if the only evidence they've got is some subjective impressions or some tiny functions analysis, they should not raise a different opinion.

[munenori2]

I've got a bad feeling about this...

As an aside, I don't really like to question other's types until I've had pretty extensive one-on-one contact to get to know them more closely. So I'm with FDG on this one.

[meatburger]

I've got a bad feeling about this...

As an aside, I don't really like to question other's types until I've had pretty extensive one-on-one contact to get to know them more closely. So I'm with FDG on this one.

Hehe yeah you're right. Whats your bad feeling about? I was an advocate of self typing, but people seem pretty hopeless at knowing their own type generally. I must admit there are definately times with Cyclops where i doubt his type.

[Phaedrus]

I must admit there are definately times with Cyclops where i doubt his type.

Why? You have no reason to doubt his type, and you still do it? How can you justify such an unscientific attitude? Are you a charlatan?

[meatburger]

Why? You have no reason to doubt his type, and you still do it? How can you justify such an unscientific attitude? Are you a charlatan?

Im not sure if your kidding or not, but who are you to say i dont have any reason to doubt his type? I know a lot of ISTp's and i have seen what i consider some elements of Ne in his writing. He's also very argumentative which i saw as perhaps a not so common characteristic of ISTp's. I am NeFi so i tend to go on hunches, until the peices fall together.

I do agree with the general concensus that typing over the net is pretty tough, and i would prefer to meet him in person before im sure of anything.

[Phaedrus]

Im not sure if your kidding or not, but who are you to say i dont have any reason to doubt his type?

I'm Phaedrus (no kidding). I and others have already explained the arguments in this thread. Don't you understand them? You simply have no legitimate reason to doubt his type, because all the evidence you have access to suggest that he is the type he thinks he is. You cannot doubt his type without acting illogically, irrationally, and unscientifically. Which means that if you understand that and still doubt his type, then you are necessarily a charlatan, and deserve no respect for it.

I know a lot of ISTp's and i have seen what i consider some elements of Ne in his writing. He's also very argumentative which i saw as perhaps a not so common characteristic of ISTp's. I am NeFi so i tend to go on hunches, until the peices fall together.

Every single argument you present here is very poor, and taken all together they make your case weak. The burden of proof is upon you to present a really strong case. If you can't do that, you should not question his self-typing. That was my point, and you should realize that you cannot ignore it.

I do agree with the general concensus that typing over the net is pretty tough, and i would prefer to meet him in person before im sure of anything.

So you agree that it was wrong of you to question his type. Good that we agree on that.

[Joy]

Ti/Fe introvert

[meatburger]

I'm Phaedrus (no kidding). I and others have already explained the arguments in this thread. Don't you understand them? You simply have no legitimate reason to doubt his type, because all the evidence you have access to suggest that he is the type he thinks he is. You cannot doubt his type without acting illogically, irrationally, and unscientifically. Which means that if you understand that and still doubt his type, then you are necessarily a charlatan, and deserve no respect for it.


Every single argument you present here is very poor, and taken all together they make your case weak. The burden of proof is upon you to present a really strong case. If you can't do that, you should not question his self-typing. That was my point, and you should realize that you cannot ignore it.


So you agree that it was wrong of you to question his type. Good that we agree on that.

Haha you are so arrogant it makes me laugh. You are so sure that you are right, that the evidence your looking at is perfect. Have you ever considered that i can see things that you cant? You see im an Ne dominant, its in my nature to question things. Its healthy to question things you see, but unfortunately you cant realise this. Cyclops type is not something ive given any real thought into, thats really up to him and thats why my argument was weak. I haven't even read this thread. And for the record, especially in person, i would place my intuition about people over your logic anyday.

[Phaedrus]

Haha you are so arrogant it makes me laugh.

Good if I can make you happy, but that is no excuse for you to ignore the truth of what I said.

You are so sure that you are right, that the evidence your looking at is perfect.

No, I have never claimed that, nor have I meant it. Why don't you understand my point? Is that because you are not trained to think scientifically? The evidence which both you and I have access to (the exact same evidence) support his self-typing as ISTp. You don't seem to understand what that means. It means that at this point neither you nor I have any objective reason to doubt his type -- even if it would turn out some time in the future that he is not an ISTp.

Have you ever considered that i can see things that you cant?

You probably do. I have never doubted that.

You see im an Ne dominant, its in my nature to question things.

But that is a totally irrelevant remark. It might be in your nature to doubt things, but that does not give you a legitimate excuse to do it if it isn't scientifically warranted. If anything, it confirms my suspicion that you are a charlatan. You reason like a dogmatic skeptic, which is wrong to be. If you have no legitimate reason to doubt Cyclops's type, then you simply shouldn't do it. That is not the same thing as believing his typing to be correct, of course. It only means that you are not allowed to have the belief that Cyclops typing is incorrect.

Do you understand the difference between not questioning his typing and believing his typing to be correct? It is very important that you do.

Its healthy to question things you see, but unfortunately you cant realise this.

It is only healthy to question something if you have reason to believe that it is not true. Otherwise you should have no opinion about it, or you should believe it to be true -- but only if you have reason to believe that it is true, of course. My attitude is that of a critical skeptic. Your attitude is that of an uncritical skeptic. Only critical skepticism is legitimate, whereas uncritical skepticism is a disease, partly caused by the current popularity of relativistic doctrines in a postmodernistic framework.

Cyclops type is not something ive given any real thought into, thats really up to him and thats why my argument was weak.

Correct.

I haven't even read this thread.

And still you question his type? Without having seriously considered other people's arguments, and without having made any serious investigation of your own? Disgusting.

And for the record, especially in person, i would place my intuition about people over your feeble logic anyday.

Even more disgusting. People like you are charlatans for sure. I hate your unscientific, totally irrational approach, your lousy arguments, and your polluding serious science with your personal, subjective "feelings" that you think are enough to give you the right to have an opinion and even question the arguments of people who take reason and scientific methods seriously.

[munenori2]

The above is partially what I meant by my 'bad feeling' intuition.

Other than that, I think a lot of the perceptions floating around cyclops at the moment are weighing his recent knock-down, drag-out bouts with GBizzle and Implied very heavily. I'm not saying this is altogether inappropriate in terms of its socionic ramifications, but at the moment I just can't bring myself to lay down with any confidence what motivations or thought processes are behind what's gone on recently.

I'm not saying this is proof of SLI. Neither am I saying this rules out this type for him. He's relatively new to the forum and I don't feel I've seen enough to make any sort of serious assertions about the kind of person he is or is not.

[hellothere]

Maybe I haven't read enough of his posts (he seems to post a lot), but my impressions of him have been quite positive. Sure he likes a good discussion, but that's no bad thing, and he seems to go about it in a very level headed manner. He strikes me as very reasonable - not sure where these "attacking" comments are coming from. But like I said, maybe I just haven't read the posts which have given some of you this impression.

(oh and I noticed the thing with implied/Garmonbozia, but I'm not really sure what happened with implied because apparently is happened through PMs, and from what I could see GB was just insulting him for no reason, though that isn't to say there was no reason)

Why Ti/Fe?

[meatburger]

Even more disgusting. People like you are charlatans for sure. I hate your unscientific, totally irrational approach, your lousy arguments, and your polluding serious science with your personal, subjective "feelings" that you think are enough to give you the right to have an opinion and even question the arguments of people who take reason and scientific methods seriously.

Look, the point is dude, i have EVERY right to question someones type and thats all i did. Its my life. It is YOU that needs to learn that people are entitled to their own opinion. Everything a person does in life is not scientific, and thats why your getting your nickers in a knot. I agree with you thats its great to consider other peoples arguments, but i dont really care about his type that much. Plus with all the faulty reasoning like yours floating around it will only serve to confuse the issue more.

What im trying to explain to you, but unfortuantely you are too retarded to realise is that even if the evidence is the same, by being a different type to you we process it differently. So in affect we dont have access to the same evidence because our brains can only process some parts of it affectively. I dont know what evidence from other people you want me to consider? I just read the thread and there is not a skeric of anything scientific in here?

So how do i work? Well the symbol cyclops gets attributed a number of intuitions and things that i notice in my mind. He seems like he is attacking people a lot lately, he seems like he has very strong reasoning skills, he was offended by implied remarks and wanted her blocked, he seems to like making puns as evidenced in numerous threads. All of this forms a picture i have of him and if it doesn't equal the picture i have of ISTp's i start to question. I never said he wasn't ISTp, just that i do wonder. What if he turns out to be on of the other 15 types you haven't considered? Your going to look like a tool for not realising that you dont have ALL the evidence.

Im not going to argue any more, becuase i have better things to do. I said one sentance and you go on accusing me of a charlatan. I really think you should take a long hard look at yourself Phaedrus. But you wont, because you live inside this little prism of your mind and cant see past it.

[Logos]

Even more disgusting. People like you are charlatans for sure. I hate your unscientific, totally irrational approach, your lousy arguments, and your polluding serious science with your personal, subjective "feelings" that you think are enough to give you the right to have an opinion and even question the arguments of people who take reason and scientific methods seriously.

Where is your sense of serious science?

[Phaedrus]

Look, the point is dude, i have EVERY right to question someones type and thats all i did.

You may have the legal right to do so, but you don't have the moral right to do so. So your statement is false.

Its my life.

So what? This is not about you or your life. It's about principles. It is about what is scientifically and morally right. Your life is a totally irrelevant aspect in this context.

It is YOU that needs to learn that people are entitled to their own opinion.

What exactly do you mean by "entitled"? As I said, you hava a legal right to think what you want, but who cares about that? It is irrelevant to the question: Which opinion is true and which is false? You are not morally entitled to believe what you want.

To believe that you are morally entitled to believe what you want without having to justify that belief is just a myth. You deserve no respect for your opinion if you think that people should stop criticizing your opinion if it is not scientifically warrented.

Everything a person does in life is not scientific, and thats why your getting your nickers in a knot.

Correct. But Socionics is a science, or at least it should try to be. If you don't take typing seriously, if you think that it is just a game, then you should just shut up.

I agree with you thats its great to consider other peoples arguments, but i dont really care about his type that much.

Even more reason for you to shut up then. If you are going to have an opinion about someone's type and make it public, you should be damn sure to take your typing seriously. If you don't take the typing seriously, your are blameworthy, almost an evil person.

Plus with all the faulty reasoning like yours floating around it will only serve to confuse the issue more.

My reasoning is simply not faulty. The fact that you say that proves that you are either unintelligent or can't think rationally at the moment. Your feelings probably make it impossible for you to think logically.

What im trying to explain to you, but unfortuantely you are too retarded to realise is that even if the evidence is the same, by being a different type to you we process it differently.

That is irrelevant. There is only one objectively correct interpretation of the evidence. If our opionions contradict each other, only one of them can be true.

So in affect we dont have access to the same evidence because our brains can only process some parts of it affectively.

Wrong. We have access to the same evidence in this case. That our brains may process different parts of it is another matter. You confuse concepts here.

I dont know what evidence from other people you want me to consider?

You have no evidence to consider other than Cyclops's self-typing, maybe his test results, and what he identifies with. Since you have no access to any other relevant evidence, and since your subjective feelings and "hunches" can safely be dismissed as clearly less reliable than Cyclops own self-typing, you should not have an opinion on his type. You have no right to question the correctness of his self-typing at the moment.

So how do i work? Well the symbol cyclops gets attributed a number of intuitions and things that i notice in my mind.

Which means that you are an unscientific charlatan, a brainwasher.

He seems like he is attacking people a lot lately, he seems like he has very strong reasoning skills, he was offended by implied remarks and wanted her banned, he seems to like making puns as evidenced in numerous threads. All of this forms a picture i have of him and if it doesn't equal the picture i have of ISTp's i start to question.

That you shouldn't do. You should not type people by that "method".

I never said he wasn't ISTp, just that i do wonder.

Liar. You stated an opinion. You said that you had doubted his type. And you are not entitled to do that if you have no legitimate arguments for that doubt.

What if he turns out to be on of the other 15 types you haven't considered?

That possibility can't be ruled out for sure, at least not by us. But just because something could be false, it gives you no right to believe that it is false, if the arguments for it being true are stronger.

Your going to look like a tool for not realising that you dont have ALL the evidence.

Here you confuse things again. You cannot think logically correct.

Im not going to argue any more, becuase i have better things to do.

Your arguments were very weak in the first place, which you have admitted. So, you are right about what you say here. You could have spent your time doing better things than polluding this thread by posting your subjective hunches.

I said one sentance and you go on accusing me of a charlatan.

Yes. And rightly so, as it turned out. You think like a charlatan, and you act like a charlatan. You are not taking typing seriously. You don't have a scientific attitude. That makes you a charlatan.

I really think you should take a long hard look at yourself Phaedrus.

That I have done so many times that you can't imagine.

But you wont, because you live inside this little prism of your mind and cant see past it.

You are so totally wrong about that. But you will probably never realize it.

[Mariano Rajoy]

Phaedrus is the reason I visit the forum.

[xyz]

Phaedrus is the reason I visit the forum.

Meatburger, I understand you man. I know what you're trying to say. To me it just seems Phaedrus is more interested in arguing than really resolving or understand why you think the way you do.

[meatburger]

Phaedrus is the reason I visit the forum.

Haha why? to watch a psychopath in action?

Meatburger, I understand you man. I know what you're trying to say. To me it just seems Phaedrus is more interested in arguing than really resolving or understand why you think the way you do.

Lets go get a beer or play some pool LV. Cylops can come too seeing how ive de-railed the hell out of his thread.

[implied]

i remember pm-ing him asking his type cuz it's not in his sig.
i think he's LII. It's not on the poll. I think he values Ti.

think i'm momentarily changing my vote to LII, but i'm relatively sure of Ti vs Te preference. at this time i think stating he values Ti is about as much as i can do. i thought perhaps unstable moods was some irrationality-related thing but this seems to be a problem among INTjs as well. if i were to construct an argument as to why i think Ti-dominance is more likely than Te-dominance, it would look something like rick's argument [*!] on the wikisocion consensus list for phaedrus being LSI, as i think a lot of the points he raise as to why phaedrus is more Ti than Te apply as well.

* rick's argument


@ ezra (& joy has done this, too) i wish you guys would give a full range of options when deciding to make polls on people.

[FDG]

The above is partially what I meant by my 'bad feeling' intuition.

Other than that, I think a lot of the perceptions floating around cyclops at the moment are weighing his recent knock-down, drag-out bouts with GBizzle and Implied very heavily. I'm not saying this is altogether inappropriate in terms of its socionic ramifications, but at the moment I just can't bring myself to lay down with any confidence what motivations or thought processes are behind what's gone on recently.

I'm not saying this is proof of SLI. Neither am I saying this rules out this type for him. He's relatively new to the forum and I don't feel I've seen enough to make any sort of serious assertions about the kind of person he is or is not.

No, but listen, if somebody argues with others, he MUST be Beta.

[hellothere]

^ the truth.

[munenori2]

No, but listen, if somebody argues with others, he MUST be Beta.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I've read through a few of the comments here. Some of the comments, especially those neural, open minded, and the occasionial open minded type analysis has been interesting, thank you, it's interesting stuff to read and consider.

Here's some general observations which I thought might be interesting:

1. For the (I guess minority) of guys who seem more keen on typing me something I think I am not, for whatever reason, we're on a few pages in now and how many questions have I been asked to narrow down my type? None. How can someones type be determined without asking them questions in this fashion. Such a strange method of approach.

2. I'd be interested to hear why you think I value Ne, or Ti for that matter (I feel somewhat unpleasant naming names for some reason, but it really does seem implied's the main driving force so far, which maybe isn't a suprise), preferably in your own words, rather than just using a second hand analysis by Rick which is in all honesty for someone else.

3. @meatburger: your reasons for not being ISTp don't make sense. How you perceive me sounds nothing like me (or at least IRL), but hey, supposing it does? I do remember you talking about your ginger headed ISTp friend who sounds in a lot of ways like your idea of what you are saying ISTp's are not, yet you say he is ISTp. Ok, fine, I realise your just passing some observations, but so am I, just to say that it doesn't really make sense. In regards to what took place between implied and I, you've got it a little incorrect, but I don't think it's the right thing for me to go into too much detail of it here, sorry.

4. I don't think i've seen anything so far that couldn't be applied to just about any of the types.

5. Perhaps entering discussions shows i've got a keen mind. If i'm on a discussion forum and I discuss stuff, why doesn't that imply I could be any of the types? (I could answer this one but it will be interesting if anyone produces something I haven't thought of) .. What should I be here for? I think fwiw, i'm quite fair and level headed and such stuff in the discussions. I think this may have been mentioned also

6. On point 5, It's amusing how some people seem to think they can type me off this forum. Do you think I walk around having random conversations about whatever topic of debate we're having for instance lol. Hey, maybe I do maybe I don't.

7. From point 6; Entering discussions doesn't mean someone beta. Being able to reason their arguments doesn't mean they are LII. If thats the case everyone on a debating team or everyone who entered politics would be LSI or LII or something.

8. I don't think (well I know) that no one here really knows anything about me, I'm not sure how much should be placed on hunches or rather, some tiny functionial analysis (and I can't help but think possibly biased in some circumstance) could type me with any accuracy. Not even aware of why i'm on this forum for instance.

9. In regards to knowing about me, it probably will not happen. After thinking about it: Why should I start divulging stuff about me, how would that benefit me? It seems it would possibly be more for some other peoples benefit, or at least it looks that way at the moment.

However, as you were , I never realised I generated so much interest and being called LII or ILE is quite the compliment, as it seems you guys associate it with intelligence, or something? (but oh noes, I think LIE and loads-all the other types can be intelligent too)

Anyway, I just thought I'd give my own post the thumbs up

[Phaedrus]

To me it just seems Phaedrus is more interested in arguing than really resolving or understand why you think the way you do.

And your impression is incorrect, because I much more interested in getting to the truth. I would prefer that I didn't have to defend the truth by arguing all the time. It's mostly frustrating, and it doesn't get us nearer the truth if people are not willing to check the evidence, study the material more seriously, and think more loigically correct. Too many people don't have a scientific approach, and that's real problem for people like me, who are genuinely interested in finding out the objective truths about the universe.

[Elro]

...and anyway... I'm not that predictable, am I?

Apparently not - I was 16 minutes early.

I would prefer that I didn't have to defend the truth by arguing all the time. It's mostly frustrating, and it doesn't get us nearer the truth if people are not willing to check the evidence, study the material more seriously, and think more loigically correct. Too many people don't have a scientific approach, and that's real problem for people like me, who are genuinely interested in finding out the objective truths about the universe.

At this point, I'm convinced that you're either severely deluded or a troll. It seems unproductive to try to talk with you either way...

[Phaedrus]

At this point, I'm convinced that you're either severely deluded or a troll.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I am neither. Interesting that people can get that kind of impressions from communications over the Internet, though.

It seems unproductive to try to talk with you either way...

It probably isn't ... but I don't know how to fix whatever problem you perceive in the communication situation.

[Elro]

Getting to the truth? I thought INTps already had an innate, irrefutable connection with objective truth? Unlike those INTjs who need to construct subjective systems that only simulate truth value. o_O

No, no. That's not INTps, that's only Phaedrus. Phaedrus defines truth. This makes him like a god, except without all the immortality stuff. Also unlike a god, Phaedrus' powers are hindered if everyone else plugs their fingers in their ears and goes "lalalalalalalalala" when he's talking.