maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
dbmmama, is there a thread where you've posted about your mother in law? After all these comparisons, I'd be interested in reading something about her, I think. Reading facial expressions and tone is something I do automatically and without conscious thought though.
As for liking or not liking when people's words contradict their unspoken cues...I'm pretty sure that's just a personal preference. I mean, that contradiction is often what generates verbal irony and can be pretty funny. I suspect you're talking more about suspecting some form of dishonesty or an attempt to mislead you?
()
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
So, if being inept at expressing what you mean is "not the greatest Fe," how is "wanting the words to mean what the person says" - which is essentially conveying your true meaning - Te?Originally Posted by unefille
How could it fit? Her post completely contradicted itself. And it was just some convoluted garbage anyway.Originally Posted by dbmmama
What the hell, lol? How does you being ESFp make your ENFp sister look like an ISFp, and you look like Ne? Where the hell are you coming up with these conclusions from?Originally Posted by dbmmama
Ah, of course, cause you're Se.Originally Posted by dbmmama
This could be anything. Unvalued Fe - not wanting to look at the underlying dynamics; unvalued Fi - not wanting to interpret core motives; valued Ti - desiring clarity, etc....so it doesn't say much.Originally Posted by dbmmama
This sounds Fe'ish, but could also be Se related. And are you that confident? I'd like to see you talk to Allie and interpret her meanings, lol.Originally Posted by dbmmama
Agreed.Originally Posted by unefille
4w3-5w6-8w7
yes, it feels like the latter to me. even though, i know on some level it isn't. it still feels that way. THAT is what feels like emotional manipulation to me, the kind that makes my skin crawl. i call people on it and my sis warns me that i'm isolating people because of it.
what sucks is that almost all humans do this. i'm sure even me. why i've been kinda fearful/distrustful of the human/social realm.
i don't think this sounds SEE at the moment. i'm allowing my vulnerable side out. if this is attacked, i will retreat and not come back. seriously. if i don't feel safe, i will not come back. i'm only showing you all this about me to help type me. i try very hard to hide this shit about myself normally.
i didn't say i was good at interpreting meaning. i suck at it. that's why i prefer people to say what they mean.
i would be able to interpret her inner feelings through her facial expressions/gestures. yes. i'm very good at that naturally. but not good at changing them. better at allowing them within the person. but still wanting what i just read from them to match their words.
I still think dbmamma is beta. In several posts, also this one, she made statements that come down to that she wants other people to be straightforward ("if you don't like my spaghetti, just say so") and she rejects hypocrisy ("people should walk their talk"). People I've known that got 'worked up' others not being straightforward or direct, or being hypocrites, were mostly SLEs and IEIs.
The overall feel of dbmammas post (not the content, but the style) is rather 'dramatic', in an Fe style. We have a saying in Dutch: 'big mouth, tiny heart', a compliment meaning that behind the though appearance there is a sensitive person, who easliy gets sentimental when people show appreciation towards them. That's how she feels to me. Perhaps dbmamma can tell if she recognizes herself in this description.
It's just an intuitive thing, but I think she's SLE. And as far as I can tell, a nice one too.
“I have never tried that before, so I think I should definitely be able to do that.” --- Pippi Longstocking
Well the first part of that is Se, and yes I agree about that. But I still say the second part could just be extraversion + F type. People often mistake creative Fi for Fe around here.
She seems very much like an F type, and she seems very strong in Se, like leading-function strong. If she were an SLE she wouldn't be strong in Fe or Fi, she'd elicit it from others.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
“I have never tried that before, so I think I should definitely be able to do that.” --- Pippi Longstocking
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
i very strongly doubt that dbmamma is an SEE.
At first I wasn't sold on her, but she's kind of grown on me over time.
dbmmama <3
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
I somewhat agree with your overall sentiment, but I take offense to the bolded quote. How does being a shitty bowler make him incapable of doing actual work well? He's a pretty good basketball player. Is bowling "work" and basketball something else? I think what you are going for is some sort of standard of "work" as being what would generally be considered "blue-collar work." But how do his successful efforts as a law student, lawyer, community organizer, and law professor reflect in any way that Obama can't do any actual real work. I attended a good U.S. law school (no Harvard or Yale, but not that far behind) and I can tell you we did tons of actual work. It might have been intellectual work, but it didn't make it any less difficult than shoveling shit or picking up a 5-7 split. The fact that Obama was the editor of the Harvard Law Review (which is all based on merit btw) tells me that he is both a very capable and hard worker, and smart as shit to boot.
I've worked in politics and I can assure you that a good amount of the actual elected officials work damn hard. And I don't mean that they have long hours attending events and shaking hands, but they dive in depth into the issues to come up with working policy solutions. Not every politician is a puppet figurehead like Bush and Reagan.
INFj
Ah, SEE, I would have to rethink that type in some sense, but that could be possible type for dbmmama. I am just pretty damn sure that she's not EIE like people used to say all the time. And there is no way I would type her IEE. I would also exclude all IJ types. IP is quite unlikely, but not altogether impossible (ISFp Fe-sub can be very energetic). I'm totally leaning toward ego Fi/Fe because of the strong Fe in dbmmama's posts.
Mhh, altogether, I see no problem with SEE typing. ESE is still possible IMO, but if dbmmama says SEE, then I can wait it out and see if it's a passing type-phase or if it is actually the right type.
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/
I thought she meant she wanted other people to only say or use words to express their 'true' meaning so that she wouldn't have to think too hard about interpreting them or have to consider the way in which she was expressing herself either. From that, I thought she was implying that she struggled with non-verbal cues, thus weak Fe. And wanting other people to dispense with Fe and simply to focus on their words seemed Te valuing, rather than having Te ego herself.
But her next post implied that she is very proficient at reading non-verbal cues, she just gets annoyed about it for reasons that seem personal rather than related to socionics. So that killed the previous train of reasoning somewhat.
()
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
great stuff here unefille. i've got 4 kids and my hubby is like a kid himself. i'm reading cues left and right. yeah, i do it fine. but, i need a break sometimes! and just want to talk to someone where i don't have to think about doing that. yeah, i'll do it anyway, but it'd be nice if i didn't HAVE to.
You're not SEE, you're probably ESE. For one, you'd be the only ego type to constantly avoid answering me when I point out the flaws in your arguments, and you're extremely sensitive to a disturbance in your little bubble. But I'm not even going to go into that right now. First I just want to point out the major contradictions in your argument for Fi/Te Valuing.
Throughout this thread you've mostly been repeating yourself without clarifying a damn thing.
What you're really saying is:This is all true, no? I am assuming it is, and I'll expand on why it points to ESE, NOT SEE.
- You're best at understanding external emotional communication rather than external verbal communication.
- You are extremely confident in your ability to understand someone's meaning beneath their words but not the words themselves.
- Because of all that, you want someone who puts things into context.
In regards to point 1, valuing your understanding of someone's emotional communication over their verbal communication: Valuing.
Compare this to having Fe as a demonstrative function:Originally Posted by Fe Leading; Wikisocion ESE
Originally Posted by Fe Demonstrative; Wikisocion SEE
Based on what you wrote:
SEEs do NOT need external expression as a means of verification. You, however, are DEPENDENT on that.
(continued in next post...)
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
Point 2, finding meaning in expression rather than what is actually said:
What I bolded about taking for granted that feelings will result in external demonstrations of emotions, you've admitted feeling that way:Originally Posted by Fi Ignoring; Wikisocion ESE
You're completely ignorant to the idea that what someone is "really thinking/feeling" may be based on their VERBAL expressions. You clearly take for granted that feelings result in external displays of emotion rather than verbal displays. You say you actually feel manipulated when someone's emotional and verbal expressions are not congruent? How the fuck do you think you are not valuing?
So how would you react to me? He brought up my name for a particular reason. Because finding accuracy in my expression would be difficult for someone like you. You look for emotional cues and "vibes" which would mean I would completely throw you off. My verbal expression has "vibes" as well as tones, meaning, character, etc. To express myself I will word something a particular way. I don't regulate my emotional expression whatsoever. For anyone who has been to the Stickam chats and seen me on webcam I pretty much have the same expression all the time.
And finally, to point 3, wanting someone who puts things in context:
I think that accurately describes your dual-seeking function. Do you honestly think your dual is the ILI? You'd be constantly hitting his PoLR:Originally Posted by Ti Suggestive; Wikisocion ESE
Without outward emotional expression (which you've repeatedly said you're most comfortable understanding), all communication would be lost. Good luck with an ILI. lolOriginally Posted by Fe Vulnerable; Wikisocion ILI
Last edited by Lotus; 09-05-2008 at 06:59 AM. Reason: The AIM convo wasn't neccessary.
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
I don't want to get too involved in this, but I think you've twisted dbmmama's meaning a bit, or at least the socionic interpretation of it
how does this say anything about what she values? its just what she's better at - better at Fe than Te
again, strengths not valuesYou are extremely confident in your ability to understand someone's meaning beneath their words but not the words themselves.
not sure what you mean by this, but dbmmama's own words "i'd RATHER someone just say exactly what they mean" seems to suggest she'd rather have a dual strong in Te rather than one strong in FeBecause of all that, you want someone who puts things into context.
the first two points are consistent with both ESE AND SEE, while the third I'm less sure of, but it arguably points to Te valuing (or at least, her words support a Te valuing argument as much as they do an Fe valuing one)This is all true, no? I am assuming it is, and I'll expand on why it points to ESE, NOT SEE.
she didn't say that, she just said she was good at using external expression - strong in Fe, consistent with both SEE and ESESEEs do NOT need external expression as a means of verification. You, however, are DEPENDENT on that.
I can't argue with this; you may have a point, i'm not sure
perhaps, its arguable though - just because she's good at Fe doesn't mean she'd constantly use it around her dualDo you honestly think your dual is the ILI? You'd be constantly hitting his PoLR:
perhaps, I think it all revolves around what she actually meant by "i'd RATHER someone just say exactly what they mean" thoughWithout outward emotional expression (which you've repeatedly said you're most comfortable understanding), all communication would be lost. Good luck with an ILI. lol
hyperfocus much allie?
Read it again. You missed the point of nearly everything I wrote. And no, she's not "good at" Fe. But it is her leading function. She values it. She clearly says over and over again that she's only confident in what people are saying emotionally when they communicate, not in what they say verbally. She wants congruence or she feels manipulated. How else can I possibly make that simpler? How would she feel in a Quadra of people who don't express themselves with that congruence? Who don't need emotional expression to communicate? She said its the only type of communication she trusts, how could she possibly be comfortable?
*nods*
And I'm procrastinating. Sigh
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
I may have, but I don't think I did. And my point wasn't to argue your point but to question whether your basic premises could really be drawn from what dbmmama said (or at least, what you quoted of her). She seemed to be primarily talking about her strengths rather than her preferences.
She also said how she feels manipulated and bothered by people who don't express external emotional/verbal congruence. I honestly don't see how to make that simpler.
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
I think you're probably right with that; though I still think dbmmama should be given a chance to explain more clearly what she meant by that one line, and how she sees it fitting in with her type.
also:
I don't see why sensitivity to the flaws in her argument being pointed out can't be Ti-polr. Wouldn't an LII naturally do this? How can the LII be her dual if she doesn't like it when this happens to her?
FWIW when i met dbmmama IRL she did not seem to be ESE in the slightest.
i've been looking at the male-female type descriptions at the wiki lately. the gender aspect creates an enormous influence on type expression. i'd recommend, if anybody is struggling with their type, read that, it might help clarify some things. the ILE female one was pretty good.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
People with creative Fi are strong at Fe.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
Also, I thought this was the kind of thing she was talking about.
From wiki SEE description:
2. Introverted ethics
An SEE knows exactly how to make other people feel a certain way. He can offer genuine, believable praise to an individual he wants to reward, and likewise can make a person very upset and/or ashamed in themselves. However, if an offender changes their ways in favor of the SEEs point of view, the SEE will be quick to reward the offender with praise, and appreciation, treating them like a good friend. Moral ground to an SEE completely depends on the situation and is anything but set in stone.
"Fake niceness" rarely fools an SEE. The SEE can easily tell whether a person is being genuine or just selfishly trying to fulfil their own needs.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
I wish I had something to add
lol I just don't know though
actually, i agree with most of what allie has to say and think that she should take a look at herself under the lens of some of what she says about Fe.
Allie, Niffweed obviously knows more about you than you do... you need to listen to him.
I think it's quite clear that dbmmama is a Fe-valuing, probably Fe base, type.
i appreciate the interest and time people are putting into this for me, everyone.
to clarify what *I* meant. Slacker Mom has it right:
2. Introverted ethics
An SEE knows exactly how to make other people feel a certain way. He can offer genuine, believable praise to an individual he wants to reward, and likewise can make a person very upset and/or ashamed in themselves. However, if an offender changes their ways in favor of the SEEs point of view, the SEE will be quick to reward the offender with praise, and appreciation, treating them like a good friend. Moral ground to an SEE completely depends on the situation and is anything but set in stone.
"Fake niceness" rarely fools an SEE. The SEE can easily tell whether a person is being genuine or just selfishly trying to fulfil their own needs.
THAT is what i'm talking about. (the one thing i'd change is praise. i do not believe in praise but appreciation and yes, there is a difference. praise is judgment where appreciation comes from Fi. i believe praise to be an outside judgment. i want my children to judge for themselves and live with their own consequences of the choices they make)
It would be heaven if I was around straightshooting, straighttalkers that genuinely expressed their emotions when and if the time/place, whatever, called for it.
I think the reason people here see me as Fe valuing as well as Fe base is just because I like to play and have fun. and just because i can read vibes easily doesn't mean that's what i'm all about.
i'm not going back to find it, but allie said something about me expressing myself in an Fe way irl. NOT! if my sister read that one, she'd laugh her head off. this is ONLINE people! putting your finger on a button that makes a smiley face does not make one Fe. choosing to put a smiley face does not make one Fe. BEING Fe irl makes one Fe. that i am not. reading other people's vibes feels more like a curse than anything else. yeah, i do it, but PREFER that people talk straightup not all over the top "happy, giggly, fake emotions" all over the place. i sure don't do that irl. i was always my sister's "straight man" growing up.
and i never said that i couldn't understand what someone's words mean. i just prefer that emotions are expressed genuinely not to "keep the vibe going." now my sister on the other hand, that's her.
when my children express their emotions about something, i am the first to jump on the situation to see what can be DONE about helping them deal so that they calm themselves from within. i do NOT manipulate, i allow. emotional manipulation through "fake emotional displays" is the devil to me. that is the worst bullshit anyone can do to another. back, back i say!!
This description means absolutely nothing; an ESFj could do the exact same thing if they wanted to. If you're going to use stupid, superficial trait descriptions to type yourself, go back to myers briggs. This is about information processing, not petty behaviors.Originally Posted by dbmmama
I really doubt that's "what you're talking about" lol. Seems more like you just cherry-picked some generic ESFp description and used it to encompass all the random stuff you were saying before.THAT is what i'm talking about.
Appreciation does not come from Fi; I have no idea why you think that. Fi is not morals and personal sentiments.praise is judgment where appreciation comes from Fi.
4w3-5w6-8w7
allie,
you and i obviously do not see eye to eye. i understand that and i also understand that i've matured enough over my life (i am more than double your age) to know when to shut my mouth over things you say. it takes a strong will to do that. because when i was your age, my will came out in ways that would tear you apart (or at least we'd have one good fight about it.)
i appreciate maturing for many reasons. i will not further discuss this aspect to our relationship. it would do neither of us any good for what we want in life.