ArchonAlarion, ILI?

[strrrng]

Yup.

archon, think about it like this.

Se, Te, Ti, Si, Ne, Fe, Fi, Ni
concrete --------->abstract

Observe the multiple correlations you can derive from this. I fucking love it.

Correlations? So much for Ti polr.

im pretty damn abstract.

Yeah. Those words are just abstract simplifications. In this context, they're to be taken generally. Otherwise most creative/abstract people would immediately assume themselves to be positioned towards the right. Once you understand the cognitive processes behind the functions, the meaning of that sequence will become more lucid.

[strrrng]

Would having Ti polr render me unable to observe correlations?

Nope. But Ti valuers have a stronger propensity towards said thing, because it facilitates the growth of their framework.

[ArchonAlarion]

What would be some examples of someone using Ni?

[strrrng]

What would be some examples of someone using Ni?

That's a hard one. I'll try to come up with some examples, but you can check out the description I wrote of the Ne/Si and Ni/Se processes to get a general idea of how it works.

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...2FNe_really_do

[ArchonAlarion]

That's a hard one. I'll try to come up with some examples, but you can check out the description I wrote of the Ne/Si and Ni/Se processes to get a general idea of how it works.

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...2FNe_really_do

Hmmm, I feel closer to Ni/Se then. Abstractions connect objects. Its like a net that concrete things float around in. Completing the puzzle is completing the puzzle. The different ways you go about it doesn't change the fact that you are essentially doing the same thing. Concepts aren't physical, they exist in your mind and that's it.

Am I missing something?

[Steve]

wth. The book is a loose conglomeration of a shitload of interviews, with histories on the companies, events, their business techniques, how they're profiting from them, and their effect on globalization.

You just said in your Ti, description that this is what Te is like.

I meant it in a metaphorical sense, not in a literal sense. As Strrrng said these functions take place only within a human mind, not as actual events in reality. You only will get Ti from a Ti person, etc. With Friedman I believe his Ti-ness is demonstrated in his presentation of ideas in ostensible frameworks that are unified around a central criteria. Sorry that must sound abstract, but I'm having difficulty saying why a typed person is that type, it's just different things I see.

[ArchonAlarion]

Is that all you got from it though?

I see what you're getting at, idk how useful it will be on a more comlex level, however.

[ArchonAlarion]

well for instance, why is Ni the most abstract?

You'd need some reasons and just that single dichotomy scale is not enough.

[Steve]

well for instance, why is Ni the most abstract?

You'd need some reasons and just that single dichotomy scale is not enough.

It's organized on the basis that the internal element is more abstract than the external element, fields more abstract than objects, and dynamic more abstract than static.

The internal/external dimension is the most significant factor, followed by fields/objects, and dynamic/static is the least significant factor in determining the order from concrete to abstract of functions.

[ArchonAlarion]

It's not a single dictomy scale, that's the point. You don't need a shitload of "explanations". It's simple and effective. But if you're not really seeing the multiple correlations, then it's probably useless to you. Whatever.

yo Idk the jargon around here. I came to the forum to learn. Now that I understand where you were getting the concrete-abstract from, I can understand its usefulness better.

[Mediator Kam]

It's not a single dictomy scale, that's the point. You don't need a shitload of "explanations". It's simple and effective. But if you're not really seeing the multiple correlations, then it's probably useless to you. Whatever.

You're so fucking elitist <3

[Creepy-Cyclops]

ILI FTW

[marooned]

I agree with Ed Harris and the one-eyed monster.

[ArchonAlarion]

yeah Im still leaning towards ILI. Tryin to be open minded though and perhaps learn me some things, so Strrrng and Steve keep at it if you feel like it.

[Steve]

yeah Im still leaning towards ILI. Tryin to be open minded though and perhaps learn me some things, so Strrrng and Steve keep at it if you feel like it.

I mean, you seem to have said all the right things about which things you relate more closely with, idk I'll just have to observe you more. Good discussion though, a lot of good stuff was brought up.

[ArchonAlarion]

I mean, you seem to have said all the right things about which things you relate more closely with, idk I'll just have to observe you more. Good discussion though, a lot of good stuff was brought up.

Yep agreed, and I understand the IM elements better too. It erased some of my misconceptions about Si for sure.

[Steve]

Yep agreed, and I understand the IM elements better too. It erased some of my misconceptions about Si for sure.

Cool

[strrrng]

No, I wasn't getting it from that. I wasn't even aware that those were the reasonings behind it. It simply works well to explain the relation the functions and quadras have with one another without alot of gibberish.

Quit the act. Seriously.

[Steve]

If I remember correctly it was you that introduced the Se Te Ti Si Ne Fe Fi Ni thing, without ever giving an explanation behind the mechanics like Steve just did. It was never needed to understand the thing itself, so it never occured to me to need it.

I thought Ashton had first come up with that scale, and those were the bases for it, which seemed intuitively sound. I remember having that discussion with him on it. I didn't know strrrng was the one who introduced it to you.

[strrrng]

If I remember correctly it was you that introduced the Se Te Ti Si Ne Fe Fi Ni thing, without ever giving an explanation behind the mechanics like Steve just did. It was never needed to understand the thing itself, so it never occured to me to need it.

I introduced it to you, yeah. And I don't recall you asking for an explanation of the mechanics behind it. You seemed to already have a decent grasp of the functions, so putting the pieces together didn't seem too difficult.

And that wasn't even what I was referring to.

I thought Ashton had first come up with that scale, and those were the bases for it, which seemed intuitively sound. I remember having that discussion with him on it. I didn't know strrrng was the one who introduced it to you.

Yeah, you were the one who initially told me about it, explaining the bases as well. And it is very useful for general purposes.

[strrrng]

Yea, I think that was the time he was amused that I was so excited about it.

I was amused? lol.

[strrrng]

You'll figure it out eventually.

[munenori2]

Is it coincidental that the aristocratic quadras have the largest disparity between duals as far as being concrete/abstract as opposed to the democratic quadras?

[strrrng]

Is it coincidental that the aristocratic quadras have the largest disparity between duals as far as being concrete/abstract as opposed to the democratic quadras?

Yeah, heh. It also sheds light on the certain attitudes manifest in the quadras, i.e. alpha 'lightness', beta absolutism, etc.

[Steve]

Is it coincidental that the aristocratic quadras have the largest disparity between duals as far as being concrete/abstract as opposed to the democratic quadras?

What's interesting is that the democratic quadras have functions either in the middle (alpha) or on the two ends (gamma), while Beta and Delta have a piece from each end, but also a piece from the middle.

When you take into account subtypes, gamma dual types take the ends. Ni INTp with a Ni Fi emphasis and Se ESFps with a Se Te emphasis.

[munenori2]

Food for thought.

[aestrivex]

my first and only impression, fwiw, having watched one or two videos of archonalarion discuss socionics concepts, was that archonalarion generally espoused an Ni demeanor in his speech and interests. his topics could easily be interpreted to be from an Ni+Ti framework; his criticisms of augustas model of functions in terms of dichotomies (ie external statics of fields, etc) certainly seemed to be addressing a Ti perspective, but given what little I saw cannot at all preclude ILI for this reason; i think it's very reasonable that an ILI with limited exposure to the overall ideas presented behind the topic might focus on this type of theoretical structure for lack of other material to chew on. he seems superficially somewhat more sociable and active than might be expected from ILIs, but on this point too i have not seen enough of him to be very confident.

i have no particularly good reasons why IEI or ILI would be preferable over one another, but i'd probably tend to prefer them over ILE, albeit minimally.


i do not know why the socionix people seem to prefer ENTp to INTj. generally, they seem to tend to see ILIs as highly varied, but in this case i would have expected stereotypes to direct them quite pointedly to INTj. yet somehow they got it wrong. perhaps they are losing their touch.

[RSV3]

Some Se/Ni valuing type, either beta ST or gamma NT most likely.

[Lotus]

Clearly ILE. It was like talking to a chair in that debate thread—which is my typical reaction to arguing with Alpha NTs.

[strrrng]

i do not know why the socionix people seem to prefer ENTp to INTj. generally, they seem to tend to see ILIs as highly varied, but in this case i would have expected stereotypes to direct them quite pointedly to INTj. yet somehow they got it wrong. perhaps they are losing their touch.

What "socionix crowd"? Ashton and his dead forum + tri-posse? Ti colligations ftw. And I'm not sure what predication led you to believe that "we" see ILI's as "highly varied"; I sure don't, hence how I have two on my user list. And again, it seems like you're saying what you expect "us" to do—describing effects and then assigning causes. Textbook Ti.

As far as appearing to be an ILI, perhaps you are losing your touch.

[Warlord]

INFp > INTp

You basically say it here yourself too, the "inner you" is the real you, you probably hang out with nerdy type of people, so you have to use either Te or Ti to communicate with them, and you seem to use more Ti:

Basically, if you think it has any merit the enneagram 4 description describes my inner self extremely accurately and 5 (coming in equal to or close second on tests) is how I appear to people around me when I'm in a more analytical, and less reflective, mood.

Also might be the reason why you found the two first of Steve's videos boring.

I could go on more. But I'm lazy But I agree with the observations where people have said that you are Ni-dominant, value Ti over Te, and you are Fe-valuer.

[ArchonAlarion]

yeah, im boucin around alot.

I finally got what Ni was about and now im leaning again towards Ni.

So far I came up with these types as most likely (parallel to other people's suggestions): ENTp, INFp, INTp.

I have tossed around the idea of INFp. I am really at this point unsure.

[calenwen]

Archon - you sound exactly like my old ENTp boyfriend. woohoo.

[ArchonAlarion]

I do tend to analyze the "essences" of objects.

Like i enjoy and am good at making rules for games.

Take real world weapons, locations, environments, soldier types, actions, etc. and turn them into abstract stats and game mechanics. I like this alot.

I argue mainly idealogically. Experience and facts generally enter very little into my arguments.

So thats one reason for being ILE

Then again, I totally observe themes of my environment. Like noticing how a building invokes a feeling of centralized power due to its sprawling base and use of vertical lines. Or the fact that I've always loved symbolism and allegories. I put alot of power into symbols. I get all pumped whenever I see the tower of Barad-dur from the lord of the rings due to the sheer concentration of power it represents. It affects me very deeply. Symbols mean lot to me.

so idk

[ArchonAlarion]

yeah, plus arguments should be mainly idealogical, which is a point i often make.

[munenori2]

yeah, plus arguments should be mainly idealogical, which is a point i often make.

Why would you say that? Also, are you saying that was a reason you thought ILE?

[ArchonAlarion]

Why would you say that? Also, are you saying that was a reason you thought ILE?

Because arguments should be self contained and not require (much) going out and gathering of evidence. Premise - conclusion, defining, logicking, etc.

No im saying that arguments are often a Ti playing field and a type may use Ti in such a circumstance and may not be a Ti valuer.