Why do people not like their types questioned?

[Minde]

Does it have to do with you feeling that your intelligence or ability to understand is lacking or under suspicion? Does it have to do with being invested in a type? Does it have to do with how the questioner questions, as in phrasing and tone? Does it have to do with... what?

Why is it like an attack to some? Why does it bother you?

I'm curious, because occasionally the strength or vehemence of some reactions surprises and baffles me. I would really like to know, particularly from those who find it offensive or bothersome, what it is exactly about having your self-typing questioned or disagreed with that you dislike?


And I would prefer personal examples and explanations above speculation about others' motivations or reasons, please.

[Gilly]

Perhaps it seems like someone suggesting that they understand you better than you understand yourself.

Or, for some people, like me, who are unsure of/concerned with how they appear to other people, it can mean that their self-image and what other people actually see in them are incongruous.

[Minde]

Or, for some people, like me, who are unsure of/concerned with how they appear to other people, it can mean that their self-image and what other people actually see in them are incongruous.

Yes, thank you. That's exactly the type of thing I'm wanting to know. (I'm needing new perspectives because at the moment mine is limiting me in my understanding.)

[Gilly]

omg, your perspective is limited? Are you SURE you're not ESI, Minde?

[Minde]

Nah, just human.

[Gilly]

If you say so...

*plots to overthrow your self-image*

[Errant]

So far it's been my experience that self-typing exists as a method of defining yourself and the relationships you share with people. A friend of mine strongly resisted any idea that she was one type compared to another similar one, simply because her current paramour was apparently the dual of the first type. Later typing of the guy revealed that he was most likely the dual of the SECOND possibility, which left her feeling a lot more comfortable in believing she was that type.

My own personal experience with it's just left me a bit confused so far. I feel most like an INFj in my outlook on life and behaviour, but according to most of the forum I'm some form of beta. So far the only saving grace is that none of them can agree as to what type.

[Kristiina]

Perhaps it seems like someone suggesting that they understand you better than you understand yourself.

Or, for some people, like me, who are unsure of/concerned with how they appear to other people, it can mean that their self-image and what other people actually see in them are incongruous.

This is EXACTLY what I thought when I saw the question. Word by word.

[anndelise]

I'm not keen on dealing with this again, but since you're asking for personal experiences to help you understand, I went ahead and wrote this for you, Minde.

As usual, I wrote too much and had to split it up into two posts.
***

When I listed my type, it was handing out intimate knowledge about myself. The kinds of things I enjoy, and the kinds of things I have issues with. What do I prefer to pursue, what do I avoid. What do I feel confident in, and what turns me into a nervous wreck. How much effort I have to put in (or not put in) to get a particular result/product. The process I went through to get that result/product. As well as the psychological trauma (or not) that occurred when going through that process and expending that effort. Also, how much pressure I must have been feeling to even do the process/expend the effort. When I say that NeFi describes me best, I'm giving you a LOT of very personal information, summarized into a mere 4 letters.

I don't like typing other people. Yes, I admit, I've gotten caught up in the crowds as well. I'm ashamed of that, too. But ask anyone who actually talks with me outside of the forum, and they can tell you that when they ask me 'what type is so-and-so', I usually try to avoid doing the typing. Sometimes I'll give non-socionics impressions I have of the person, such as "something about that picture sets me on edge", or "I really like those eyes", or "they seem like they'd be a fun person to hang around with, lots of laughing, jokes, smiling, easy going", etc. I don't know the person well enough to even feel as if I can make a guess as to what's going on in their mind. Well, not enough that I'd offer a label for it which might influence how others perceive them or interact with them. That's kind of like pre-biasing. Some people are easily influenced by that. Some people who ask are also asking "how should I perceive this person?" I don't know…get to know them and how well you two click and then YOU tell ME.

For me to attempt to type someone, I want to have personal knowledge of them. Not second hand information. Not reach some kind of consensus with others so we can all convince each other to perceive the person a certain way, especially not without direct input from the one being typed. I have lots of questions, and only they can answer it to the best of their ability, and preferably without using socionics' terms.

As you can see above, I consider the typing process to be a very personal thing. We're talking about delving into the person's psychology, fears, joys, efforts, idiosyncrasies, and neuroses. It's not really something to be taken lightly, imo.

I've told this before, and I'm telling it again.
When I first came to this forum, I was at wits end due to my own issues, my daughter's issues, and the resulting interactions and relationship between my daughter and I. I was desperate for something that would help me, help her, and subsequently help us. Some parts of socionics caught my eye as pointing to possible solutions. But to get to those, to get beyond the surface crap most people are happy to stick with (and normally I would have been too), to get to the stuff that I needed to help me figure out some solutions for us, I had to delve into areas I would have prefer to avoid. I couldn't do it on my own. I needed help. I needed input from others. I needed access to the interpretations and experiences of others so I could figure out how these aspects fit in with real people. I needed help in figuring out what the aspects were even referring to, as well as how to organize it in such a way that I could quickly reference it in a useful way for my daughter and myself.

So I'd do things like copy-paste something I'd found that I felt might lead me into the direction I needed. And I'd ask people for their input. I was asking for personal experiences, brainstorming possible ideas and meanings, and begging for constructive input. Instead I was called "stupid", told to ignore this (merely because the person saying to ignore had no personal use for it), and that I wasn't like what I'd been describing myself as. It was being told to myself and to other people that, in essence, that my psychology, my fears, my joys, my efforts, my idiosyncrasies, my neuroses, etc weren't mine, but that I had different ones from what I was describing.

So here I am, desperate for help, having to turn to the forum since it had people who had the most chances of saying something, anything, that might trigger an "ah-ha" in my mind so that I could find a solution for my daughter and myself. Yet some individuals of this very same forum was instead doing things and saying things and trying to force me into doing/saying things that detracted me from my pursuit. Instead of helping me, they were hindering me. Instead of realizing that they had nothing constructive nor helpful to offer me and thus keeping silent, they would instead make fun of me, call me names, imply/suggest that I wasn't...me…and preventing others who COULD help me from doing so. Did they mean to be so destructive? Probably not. They probably never even gave thought to the effects and affects of their actions and words. According to them, they were "just questioning my type".

For what purpose? To help give me insight into how to help myself and my daughter? Nope. I would guess that most, if not all, of the reason(s) were based on the idea that 'No NeFi could POSSIBLY grasp nor be motivated enough to pursue' the things I was trying to pursue. What was I trying to pursue? Possible solutions to help me (and the psychological issues I've mentioned about myself), my daughter (and her psychological issues SHE was having at the time), and our relationship (combining our issues created a lot of conflict that interfered with a the loving relationship we both wanted). Instead of taking those things into consideration, it was said and spread that I'm only delving into this stuff because I enjoy theory. So all these things that ann says about her needs, her fears, her daughter, her self, her actions and the affects those actions are having, aren't true.

When a couple of people first began questioning my type, it didn't bother me. In some cases it was pretty easy to laugh off. But as I pursued my attempts at finding a solution and asking people for input, ideas, experiences, and help… these people began discussing me behind my back, saying things about me, ignoring very pertinent details that didn't fit in with their preconceptions, and continuing to suggest to people that what I say isn't true, has no value, and that I'm the one not being open-minded enough to fall in line with their ideals and stereotypes. (ignoring, of course, that they aren't being open-minded enough to step out of their own stereotyping boxes and actually look at what's going on).

Everything I did began to be re-interpreted and twisted into something that would better fit their ideals, stereotypes, and will-fully ignorant conceptions. (I say willfull ignorance because they very often dismissed things I'd said or that others said as being irrelevant…when it was those very things that were relevant to my type as NeFi…but irrelevant to typing me as NeTi….so yes..willfully ignoring information that didn't fit their conceptions.)

If I copied-pasted something from a socionics site, it was claimed that I had created the information.

If I attempted by trial and error method to mentally grasp the ideas those sites presented and ask people for their input and ideas on it, it was claimed that I'm attempting to assert some kind of truth.

Some people would talk about supposed grandiose models I've created, but couldn't point to, link to, nor state even ONE model that I supposedly created. (And according to them, I've done it a lot.) When I would directly ask them what they are referring to, I'd sometimes get an answer of "oh, [name] told me about them" or "I don't really pay attention to what goes on in the forum".

Posts and responses I'd make as an NeFi, or describing NeFi, would be dismissed and/or ignored since I 'wasn't really enfp'. A small handful would even tell other people to ignore what I wrote because I 'wasn't really enfp'.

Sometimes I'd get responses like "we're not making claims on your knowledge of socionics, we think you have a good understanding of socionics", 'we're only questioning your knowledge of…'... enfp, istp, infj, estj, infp, estp, esfp, isfp, and how these types may relate to each other and to enfp.

But is all that the only stuff that was going on? Not even close.

(continued in next post)

[anndelise]

(continued from previous post)

I was dealing with the frustrations of having to delve into an area I didn't want to delve into, doing things I didn't want to do, pursuing something I'd normally avoid. I'm not exaggerating when I say that I was desperate!! So, imagine, if you will, taking any type, and forcing them into having to use their polr. In forcing them to pursue areas that are related to their polr. In forcing them to have to deal with information that is organized by/ for their polr…but not for them. And forcing them to have to make sense of it before they can get any benefit or ideas on how they can use it. It's nerve-wrecking!!

I was in tears most the time. I was suffering from severe headaches because of these attempts. I couldn't sleep, I was over-eating (comfort food much much needed). I was calling on family and friends to get them to help me in areas that they might be able to help on (still, my resources were limited). I'd crawl into a corner of the closet or under the covers to try to block everything out. I'd pull out hair accidently as I tried to work through the problems the info presented. And still, I had to deal with my own psychological issues, my daughter's issues, our interactional issues, make sure everyone was fed, clean, learning (homeschooling), house not in too much a disaster mode, paying bills, etc. Life didn't stop, and despite being in a relationship, I was/am still a single parent and having to be house-wife-ish (and I hate hate hate house-wife-ish stuff).

So here I am, putting a ton of effort, emotion, time, etc….asking people for input, experiences, help, etc… and I've got some idiots telling me and others that all this stuff is easy for me, that I [b]like[b/] doing this stuff enough that my ego-functions are centered around it. WTF?? If this stuff is supposed to be so enjoyable and much easier for me, then why the hell is it tearing me apart??? If I really am supposed to enjoy this stuff and actively pursue it…..shoot me now!!! Please dear god, please put me out of my misery!! Seriously, merely by saying "you're Ti", the person has instantly dismissed all that effort, emotion, time, tears, fears, trauma, etc as meaningless (to them…as well as to others).

Do you have any idea what that is like? No 'hey, that's a pretty decent job you did, especially considering all the crap you went through for it'. No 'hey, while I'm sure you worked hard on it, you made a mistake here, here, and here; what you should have done instead is this, this, and maybe this'. (it's called constructive criticism for those who don't know) No 'damn, I bet that was hell on you trying to do that'. None of that. But lots of 'oh that stuff is easy for her to do' and 'she enjoys doing that stuff' and 'yeah, it's crap, and shows how much of an idiot she is because she's supposed to be pretty strong with this stuff'. (As much as some of them might not believe it, my IQ is above 85. )

And then, to top it off, the only 'support' they would allow from me regarding my self-typing and how I believe NeFi describes me best…the only support they would accept from me…is if I Ti'd it for them. Which, I didn't, and since I didn't, then that meant I had no 'real' support, and thus, in their minds, they are right, I am a Ti ego type.


I often see how easy it is for certain people to blatantly and willfully ignore all the stuff that goes on behind the scenes as irrelevant. Why? How can they do that? Why aren't they "open-minded" enough to set aside their own conceptions and stereotypes and take the time to actually delve into what's going on behind the scenes. Particularly since they are attempting to place a label on that very same process. ??

But then, also, I keep having to remind myself that while I value the individual and their experiences, and while I'm intensely curious about their psychology, fears, joys, efforts, idiosyncrasies, and neuroses… not everyone is. Perhaps it's because I'm so curious about these things within an individual that I consider a type to be a short-hand description of those things and thus something to be treated respectfully.

But then, as I've said before, I shamefully admit that I've fallen in with the crowd mentality myself and have done my own share of 'persecutions'.

***

Minde, I hope this has helped your pursuit of understanding some of the issues that may be involved when someone is going though the "we're just questioning your type, be more open-minded" thing.

[Rick]

For the record, anndelise, I was wrong about your type when I thought ILE for a while. I agree with your self-typing.

[Minde]

I'm not keen on dealing with this again, but since you're asking for personal experiences to help you understand, I went ahead and wrote this for you, Minde.

Minde, I hope this has helped your pursuit of understanding some of the issues that may be involved when someone is going though the "we're just questioning your type, be more open-minded" thing.

Thank you very much, Ann. I greatly appreciate the time (as well as the risk of re-addiction!) you took in writing all that out for me. It does help, definitely.

As do everyone else's comments and answers.

[anndelise]

Rick:


Kioshi:

It's nice to see you addicted again … I mean … nice to see you again addict … I mean ann.

Hopefully I won't get addicted again.
*crosses her fingers and earnestly prays for protection*

....
My IEE friend who often reviews my posts and provides feedback often gets frustrated because by the time I'm through editing, I've pretty much eliminated anything personal. There is nothing worse than posting something very personal and having it misunderstood (often willfully). It's frustrating.

Kind of like how you keep deleting your posts from the forum?

(note, I didn't quote the rest since it was more personal and since you regularly delete such posts)

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Does it have to do with you feeling that your intelligence or ability to understand is lacking or under suspicion? Does it have to do with being invested in a type? Does it have to do with how the questioner questions, as in phrasing and tone? Does it have to do with... what?

Why is it like an attack to some? Why does it bother you?

I'm curious, because occasionally the strength or vehemence of some reactions surprises and baffles me. I would really like to know, particularly from those who find it offensive or bothersome, what it is exactly about having your self-typing questioned or disagreed with that you dislike?


And I would prefer personal examples and explanations above speculation about others' motivations or reasons, please.

Varying and different degrees of understanding of socionics, and perhaps even arrogance of someone to think they can work out another persons type without the other persons co-operation.

Personally, I don't mind discussing my type with people who I think are good at socionics or imo are reasonable headed people, and have done so in the past in such a one on one situation.

But I wouldn't take the time or make the effort to discuss myself with general forum, where many people I have observed have the most half assed reasons for suggesting types, and actually believing in those reasons rather than it just a suggestion.

Also.. Although this doesn't concern me so much, questioning someones type is also a means of bullying, look at Phaedrus for example, where it has been a witch hunt more than anything. So how can you be sure of someones motives when they do it? There is pack mentality to a public debate, at least on 16types forum, not forgetting varying degrees of competency and even differences of interpretation of socionics of those involved in said public discussion.

I think the aggressiveness of some of the discussions puts me off..and i'm also as sure as anyone can be of my type.

[Minde]

If you say so...

*plots to overthrow your self-image*

I am very cautious about doubting people's self-typings. The amount of information, knowledge and understanding that any person has about him/herself is impossible to approach from an outsider's position. For this reason, I consider the self-typing to be the most reliable kind of information to be found in the world of socionics.

So yes, to doubt a person's type is like saying "I know more about you than you have been able to learn about yourself through your entire life". It's an extremely pretentious, and, in my opinion, fatalistic thing to say. The vehement reaction is perfectly warranted in most cases.

I don't understand. Why does someone thinking they know more about you than you do bother you? Especially if you know it's not true? Unless you think it might be true...? Please explain. BG and Carla, I'd love to hear what you have to say on this, too.


Ok, so far, looking only at what people expressed as reasons for themselves, I've got:

- it's a threat to their self-image
- it confuses them (regarding their understanding of the theory, Errant?)
- casts doubt on their understanding of their theory (and thus intelligence? I'm not sure I completely understand the problem with this one unless it does indeed have to do with intelligence)
- people do it too harshly and abrasively
- they have to deal with the other person's (perceived) stupidity (thus wasting time and energy?)

Did I miss anything? Or misinterpret? If so, please correct / bring it to my attention. And, please, feel free to add more. But NOTE: The reason I don't want to hear "this is why other people shouldn't question other people's types" or "other people might not like it because [...]" is because I can come up with all of those possibilities and theories and whatnot myself. It's too detached and theoretical; and it's essentially just guesswork. What I don't already have access to and what I want here are people's own personal reactions, their actual thoughts and feelings when their types are questioned, and what it is of theirs that's getting prodded and poked.

I don't care what you think other people think and feel; what I care about is what you think and feel when your own type is questioned. I don't want to hear about "people"; I want to hear about you. I mean, you can talk about other stuff if you want, and it could be helpful, but... *shrug* it's not really what I'm looking for atm.

Although, perhaps this question is more difficult for people than I thought. Perhaps many of you don't really articulate to yourselves why you're reacting as you are? Perhaps some of you do not look at your own deeper motivations? I know for me, at least, it can be difficult to do so, especially in the heat of the moment (though sometimes those heated moments can lead to awful clarity). Or, perhaps this is just too personal a question. But, I don't know... <-- Anyway, you don't have to particularly mind this paragraph.

What I want to know is, when you genuinely get upset at someone for questioning your type, what of yours is getting threatened or hurt that would warrant strong reaction/retaliation?


EDIT: Perhaps I'm being too demanding here. Just answer how you like, I guess. But I really would prefer the personal over theoretical.

[Gilly]

Oh hush, I'm teasing you

^this (except for Gilly )

*sigh of resignation*

[Creepy-bg]

/edit feel free to replace the word "people" with "me" if it makes what I've written easier to digest



IDK maybe part of it is that much of the time people come to socionics while in the midst of a personal quest of sorts to find themselves. Then they have to deal with people TELLING them who they are and refusing to listen to their own self-knowledge, calling it faulty etc... forcing them to come up with arguments etc... to defend who they say they are. it just isn't what alot of people are looking for.

Also there's this thing where people don't just tell you that you're the wrong type... they talk about it over PMs and make consensus lists etc... it just gets annoying after a certain point and gives you a sort of jaded thinking towards socionics and the community.

Once a person gets a consensus typing they also have to deal from that point forward with having every disagreement or statement being dismissed with explanations of IM elements or quadra values.


idk its more annoyance than anything... like I've never gotten pissed at people for disagreeing with my self-typing (when I've made them). But the whole thing did reach a point where I just said "fuck it" because its a waste of time imo to argue that stuff with people. Even now, I'm hesitant to respond to this thread with my own words because I'm expecting to be questioned, questioned, questioned, in replies that I have no urge to clearify or have my responses further analyzed and used to "type" me further on down the road.


to be perfectly honest, even your last response minde made me go "....". I can't explain exactly why but there's something condecending about the summery of the responses (I know you don't mean it that way though). ugh I want to go back and erase this paragraph because I'm hearing annoying Joy and Niffweed voices in my head using this little perceptual thing as fuel for a further debate or confirmation of whatever they happen to believe.

anyways... hard to explain... in my case, it's just a matter of being sick of it all at this point. I have my understanding of socionics and it works for me. If people think I'm wrong, whatever.

[FDG]

IDK maybe part of it is that much of the time people come to socionics while in the midst of a personal quest of sorts to find themselves. Then they have to deal with people TELLING them who they are and refusing to listen to their own self-knowledge, calling it faulty etc... forcing them to come up with arguments etc... to defend who they say they are. it just isn't what alot of people are looking for.

Also there's this thing where people don't just tell you that you're the wrong type... they talk about it over PMs and make consensus lists etc... it just gets annoying after a certain point and gives you a sort of jaded thinking towards socionics and the community.

Once a person gets a consensus typing they also have to deal with that point forward with having every disagreement or statement being dismissed with explanations of IM elements or quadra values.


idk its more annoyance than anything... like I've never gotten pissed at people for disagreeing with my self-typing (when I've made them). But the whole thing did reach a point where I just said "fuck it" because its a waste of time imo to argue that stuff with people. Even now, I'm hesitant to respond to this thread with my own words because I'm expecting to be questioned, questioned, questioned, in replies that I have no urge to clearify or have my responses further analyzed and used to "type" me further on down the road.


to be perfectly honest, even your last response minde made me go "....". I can't explain exactly why but there's something condecending about the summery of the responses (I know you don't mean it that way though). ugh I want to go back and erase this paragraph because I'm hearing annoying Joy and Niffweed voices in my head using this little perceptual thing as fuel for a further debate or confirmation of whatever they happen to believe.

anyways... hard to explain... in my case, it's just a matter of being sick of it all at this point. I have my understanding of socionics and it works for me.

Yeah, I agree completely. Often, type-questioning is done to discredit another person's "reputation", so to speak, so that in the next debate his-her point of view will be readily dismissed by a one-liner such as "You can't understand this - you don't have Te/Ni/Fi/Se/etc in your ego block".

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Because I think we've already done enough liberal hand-wringing/intense introspection, plus the objective input of others. If you constantly harrass somebody on their type, its a bit prickish as you're taking their intelligence for granted.

If both you and your subjective reality and the objective reality agree on something, it always speaks the truth because that's all there is. I vi as IEI, I test as IEI, I agree that I'm IEI, and so do other people. Can this change? Yes, but its unlikely.

[Creepy-bg]

Because I think we've already done enough liberal hand-wringing/intense introspection, plus the objective input of others. If you constantly harrass somebody on their type, its a bit prickish as you're taking their intelligence for granted.

If both you and your subjective reality and the objective reality agree on something, it always speaks the truth because that's all there is. I vi as IEI, I test as IEI, I agree that I'm IEI, and so do other people. Can this change? Yes, but its unlikely.

exactly... the issue isn't so much "oh you questioned my type, boohoo!" as it is "k you think I'm a different type, now shut up about it already and stop following me around the forum with snide replys to everything I post".

[Minde]

to be perfectly honest, even your last response minde made me go "....". I can't explain exactly why but there's something condecending about the summery of the responses (I know you don't mean it that way though). ugh I want to go back and erase this paragraph because I'm hearing annoying Joy and Niffweed voices in my head using this little perceptual thing as fuel for a further debate or confirmation of whatever they happen to believe.

Sorry You're right - I totally did not mean for that summary list to be condescending. I meant it as a way for me to sort of summarize to myself what I had concretely gleaned thus far. It was more "note to self" and an opportunity for people to correct my understandings than "this is what is, people" or anything like that. Would it bother you if I kept updating/adding to my list publicly? Because I think it would help me understand more accurately if I rephrase in my own words, and then be corrected in my misunderstandings. And, if you could explain why it bothers you, that would be nice, too, but don't feel you have to. It would help me understand how not to make the same mistake again.

Your post was great, BG. Really, it gives me another angle on it, a view I had not yet come to. Thank you for giving that to me.

Honestly, a lot of what people are saying I already had an idea of and can perhaps even relate to. But I'm also gaining new bits and connections and views, which is really good. It's strengthening some thoughts, minimizing others, and adding new ones to my concept of it all.

Yeah, I agree completely. Often, type-questioning is done to discredit another person's "reputation", so to speak, so that in the next debate his-her point of view will be readily dismissed by a one-liner such as "You can't understand this - you don't have Te/Ni/Fi/Se/etc in your ego block".

Has this happened to you?

Because I think we've already done enough liberal hand-wringing/intense introspection, plus the objective input of others. If you constantly harrass somebody on their type, its a bit prickish as you're taking their intelligence for granted.

Just to be clear (because I like clarity), would it be accurate to change that quote to the following?

If you constantly harass me on my type, it's a bit prickish as you're taking my intelligence for granted.

[Creepy-bg]

Sorry You're right - I totally did not mean for that summary list to be condescending. I meant it as a way for me to sort of summarize to myself what I had concretely gleaned thus far. It was more "note to self" and an opportunity for people to correct my understandings than "this is what is, people" or anything like that. Would it bother you if I kept updating/adding to my list publicly? Because I think it would help me understand more accurately if I rephrase in my own words, and then be corrected in my misunderstandings. And, if you could explain why it bothers you, that would be nice, too, but don't feel you have to. It would help me understand how not to make the same mistake again.

Your post was great, BG. Really, it gives me another angle on it, a view I had not yet come to. Thank you for giving that to me.

ya i felt bad about saying that. I understand what you were doing with the summary so don't worry about it, it's your post/summary- feel free to update add. it won't bother me

further explanations will have to wait for tomarrow or the next day (actually have plans tomarrow that if all goes well, will involve a girl and NOT being on the internet lol ) I'll try to get back to ya though.

[Rubicon]

I don't mind it myself ... though it seems I use enough emoticons for my self-typing to be generally accepted ... but I prefer that someone give reasons for an alternate typing. That way you can let them know if you think they're on the wrong track, or take their suggestion into consideration if their reasoning makes sense.

[UDP]

Does it have to do with you feeling that your intelligence or ability to understand is lacking or under suspicion? Does it have to do with being invested in a type? Does it have to do with how the questioner questions, as in phrasing and tone? Does it have to do with... what?

Why is it like an attack to some? Why does it bother you?

I'm curious, because occasionally the strength or vehemence of some reactions surprises and baffles me. I would really like to know, particularly from those who find it offensive or bothersome, what it is exactly about having your self-typing questioned or disagreed with that you dislike?


And I would prefer personal examples and explanations above speculation about others' motivations or reasons, please.

In the past, it bothered me because at times there was a great sense of people not listening to my explanation about things, or outrightly disregarding it. I'll list some other things. Now, however, I don't care, because I don't see much of a reason to explain myself to anyone - I don't see a reason to try to correct inaccuracies that people suppose or assume about me. It's tempting, when someone says something about you that you think is very untrue or you disagree with. But, even then, you can do so much.

- People can just walk up to you and say "hey, doesn't this look like _____", when it's something you already went over yourself long ago, and explained to about 5 other people. Yet, to the other person, it seems that when they ask the question - they already inherently suppose that they are bringing some new information or insight to you. They seem to not realize that you could have considered such -- that's one thing that always bothered me.

- Numerous people lobbying against you and saying your type is this is extremely annoying.

- This is especially annoying when those people tend to have different opinions on you based on various factors that come up, saying you are "this", then you are "that", because of xyz explanation.

- In one sense, it unintentionally turns into you having to "defend" your "position" against arguments, attacks, and assaults from any possible angle; people can argue for any type or any valued function, and yet, you are limited to explaining why you have chosen ONE set of things. That is annoying.

- A sense that someone knows you better than you know yourself, or has "deep insight" into you. Someone trying to make you feel like they "know" you can either be seen as insulting, obnoxious, pedantic, or disturbing, among other things.

- Sometimes, there can be a sense that, for someone else to be right, you have to be a real piece of shit person who is messed up. For example, using myself, when some people in the past have labeled me as "LII", it was because of this image that I am some massive weakling, who is outrightly delusional about many things (to be hyperbolic, let's say). That's not particularly an appealing situation to deal with - someone is doubting your type and doubting you as a person, essentially questioning a lot about you.

- People labeling somewhat by default that, because you had an unfavorable reaction with someone, they are xxxx type.

-(others, I'm sure)

The reality is that many of the things I said here, and that other people have said in the thread, can lead to defensiveness. When people get defensive, or instigate that feeling in someone else, it doesn't lead to much, and can lead to a large blocking of communication and clear thinking. As soon as it turns into a matter of liking or disliking something about someone, or making someone feel disliked, etc, it's bad news (for real discussion, at least). I've been on both sides of this, mind you.

I think, when someone doesn't trust you or doesn't understand where you are coming from when you start talking about things like this, it can be more problematic. So if you want to avoid defensiveness, approach the situation in a more neutral way.

[Gilly]

UDP is no fucking LSE.

[Ezra]

I know this question was directed at a certain group of individuals of whom I am not a representative, but I'll answer anyway for the sake of a cross-reference of personal sentiment regarding questioning of type.

Why do people not like their types questioned?

Short answer: Because they're weak. They can't reason against a challenge.

In view of myself? Easy. Normally, because it's beyond all reasonable doubt, and I don't like unintelligent judgement. Generally though, I'm completely open to all forms of type-questioning concerning myself. For example, take Ashton's little endeavour a while ago, the one whereby he proposed I was an LSE and a cp6w7. One couldn't possibly claim this was not a judgement, and - to me - it was a poor one. There was a blatant lack of reasoning, and where there was any sign of actual observation of my character, it was hopelessly baseless or, more often, simply false. From an outsider's perspective, it could look as if I refused to have my type questioned. In reality, I was perfectly open to intelligent ideas, but closed to opinions that proved to be utterly flawed. And I still am.

[Rick]

My experience with people questioning each others' types is a little different, since I have seen it happen mostly in real life rather than online. I've been to gatherings where people go around and ask each other what their types are and express their opinion about it: "EII? Really? I never would have guessed" or "ILE? That's funny -- my first impression was ESI."

I have had two friends who were SEI and SLI, in my opinion, but considered themselves IEEs. Talking about their types was inevitable, because we talked about socionics. I thought their concept of socionics was pretty skewed because of their incorrect self-typings. The SLI, for instance, had decided that the more similar types are (i.e. identical, kindred, or mirrors), the better the relationship, and that she had never known any duals. There seemed to be no way around challenging their self-typings other than establish a rule of never mentioning socionics in any way, shape, or form.

Questioning people's self-typings also seems to be unavoidable online. All forums I have ever seen have people questioning each others' types. The only thing that differs is how polite people are about it, depending on the specific forum culture. Due to the nature of socionics (establishing objective/logical 'truth'), you can't bar people from questioning others' self-typings. My own experience is that roughly 2/3 to 3/4 of the time peoples' self-typings are correct (in real life, not online).

When I initially got into socionics, I internalized it very deeply and my self-identity was very much tied up with my self-typing. When my type was seriously questioned by people who seemed dumb or close-minded, I took it personally and would get angry. Since my self-concept at that point was so dependent on my typing, it felt like they were questioning my entire identity. After a while I stopped participating in any sort of socionics-related socializing, classes, or gatherings, because of all the negative emotions they produced, partly from having to 'defend' my type to people who would not be able to relate to me or "feel my type" in any case because they were too uneducated or unintellectual.

After a while, my self-identity moved on, and now I basically don't care if people question my type (admittedly, as long as it's a minority...). But it's probably still important to me that people I have serious socionic discussions with IRL acknowledge my self-typing. I personally prefer not to discuss my own type, as in "why I am an IEE," as it seems boring, pointless, and vain. Earlier on, though, it was very important to have someone with whom to discuss and analyze myself from a socionics standpoint.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

The SLI, for instance, had decided that the more similar types are (i.e. identical, kindred, or mirrors), the better the relationship, and that she had never known any duals. There seemed to be no way around challenging their self-typings other than establish a rule of never mentioning socionics in any way, shape, or form.

It doesn't mean that the 'opposites attract' model is any better. Socionics was created primarily by a female heterosexual, of course she's gonna think that.

People usually are fond of people that are like themselves. However, you need some differences to remain interested, excited -- so it's probably a mixture of the two. In my experience people shack up based on similar values and philosophies but opposite personalities. However, I don't know many people personally so even that is skewed.

And once again, people are romanticizing dual relationships, while I agree it's probably the best combo, seems sort of silly and rather juvenile. Socionics is mostly about society, so in my view should teach us how to be better objectivists, not astrology/compatibility nonsense, which you need to decide with your own subjective heart- nobody else's. The thought that anybody but ME can tell me who is the one for me, is appalling and arrogant, though I still try to respect the Fi-input from individuals. There are many generalized views of 'compatibility theory' that tend to have conflicting evidence.

My own experience is that roughly 2/3 to 3/4 of the time peoples' self-typings are correct (in real life, not online).

Anybody that's into personality theory is relatively biteless, since they tend to want to just make losers feel better about themselves, which is the noble goal of all humanity. So therefore, I have no reason to believe that people aren't being honest with me. They almost always are. It's just, online you can be a very exaggerated form of your real self.

[tereg]

When I initially got into socionics, I internalized it very deeply and my self-identity was very much tied up with my self-typing. When my type was seriously questioned by people who seemed dumb or close-minded, I took it personally and would get angry. Since my self-concept at that point was so dependent on my typing, it felt like they were questioning my entire identity. After a while I stopped participating in any sort of socionics-related socializing, classes, or gatherings, because of all the negative emotions they produced, partly from having to 'defend' my type to people who would not be able to relate to me or "feel my type" in any case because they were too uneducated or unintellectual.

After a while, my self-identity moved on, and now I basically don't care if people question my type (admittedly, as long as it's a minority...). But it's probably still important to me that people I have serious socionic discussions with IRL acknowledge my self-typing. I personally prefer not to discuss my own type, as in "why I am an IEE," as it seems boring, pointless, and vain. Earlier on, though, it was very important to have someone with whom to discuss and analyze myself from a socionics standpoint.

[Creepy-]

Does it have to do with you feeling that your intelligence or ability to understand is lacking or under suspicion? Does it have to do with being invested in a type? Does it have to do with how the questioner questions, as in phrasing and tone? Does it have to do with... what?

Why is it like an attack to some? Why does it bother you?

If someone were to question my type, I don't know that I would actually be bothered [as in upset]. But I would be interested to know why and would wonder whether it was because they see something in me that I am blind to or that I or misundretand the socionic implications of. I wouldn't see it as an attack, and I wouldn't take personal offense [assuming it was done in a non-insulting way], but I would start to question my own understanding of things.

I think that many people probably are mis-typed, and if others think that I am myself then it's only right that I should hear them out and really consider what they're saying. Typing someone over the internet - especially through forum posts - is clearly not the best way to go about it [I'm sure I would place more importance on the opinions/points of those w whom I've had the most contact], but maybe it offers some advantages as well.

I'm curious, because occasionally the strength or vehemence of some reactions surprises and baffles me. I would really like to know, particularly from those who find it offensive or bothersome, what it is exactly about having your self-typing questioned or disagreed with that you dislike?


And I would prefer personal examples and explanations above speculation about others' motivations or reasons, please.

I can't think of personal examples as to my knowledge my SLI-typing has not been questioned [or has it?]. If there were doubts, though, I think it might be helpful to know why/what they might be.

When it comes to others' types, I try to keep out of it in general, in part because I don't want it to come off like I am attacking the person whose type is in question [there have been exceptions, though].

[ZTCrawcrustle]

Why do people not like having their types questioned?

I'm reminded of a quote by Nietzsche, something to the effect of "A common misconception: the courage to stand by one's convictions. Rather it takes courage to attack one's convictions."

The above applies here. Because of the implications of socionics and intertype relations, whenever I change a person's type, it leads me to reevaluate the relationship, even though nothing has really changed and I was happy being ignorant. Changing my own type led to a reevaluation of multiple aspects of my life (did I understand my motivations here, was there another cause for what happened there) as well as all of my current relationships. One of the biggest problems is in thinking about what made you believe in your old typing and how erroneous it now all seems. If type change involved jumping quadras, I asked myself what convinced me that I liked the values of my old quadra, do I still have those values or were they brought on by my false typing, perhaps I was incorrect in believing that I fit those quadra values or that my values are attributable to some other socionics element. What was I searching for in my friends? Why do I get along with the people I get along with? etc.

[Jarno]

It would be nice if all the people who have challenged peoples types and were wrong afterwards, would openly admit they were wrong.

Unfortunately I haven't seen one example of that. So they can all kiss my ass.

[Brilliand]

I'm reminded of a quote by Nietzsche, something to the effect of "A common misconception: the courage to stand by one's convictions. Rather it takes courage to attack one's convictions."

Or perhaps, all things take courage; it is not that change is courageous, or stability, but the choice. Of course, courage can also be misplaced; murdering your neighbor can be courageous, and also vile. Courage is as inherently good as strong muscles.

[ZTCrawcrustle]

Or perhaps, all things take courage; it is not that change is courageous, or stability, but the choice. Of course, courage can also be misplaced; murdering your neighbor can be courageous, and also vile. Courage is as inherently good as strong muscles.

No, that wasn't it. I was really frustrated by not being able to find it and reread Beyong Good and Evil trying to find it. I think I got the word order and general structure close, but I do not remember the exact words he used.

[Brilliand]

No, that wasn't it. I was really frustrated by not being able to find it and reread Beyong Good and Evil trying to find it. I think I got the word order and general structure close, but I do not remember the exact words he used.

My post was my words, not Nietzsche's.

[crazedrat]

From what I see, people who do it are often pinning what you have to say into a particular functional makeup as a way of dismissing your point. If you make an argument, and your opposition says "you're INFp... not INTp" well they just said 'fuck off' to everything you've said without even having to really listen to you or draw up a reply at all. People will use it as a way of socially dominating you. Also, it's just stupid that someone will assume to know more about you than you do. Assuming you do know socionics, you should know your type; and if you claim to know your type, what kind of narcissism matched with stupidity would it take for one to think they know better? The smallest misconception about a type or a function in the mind of the socionicist can cause the most drastic mistakes when trying to type people. There is also that such arguments never end; and the arguers can seem to come up with a never ending string of justifications for what they believe a-priori all the while being completely wrong. This is the fundamental nature of socionics which is the problem; that we are speaking to things so basic that they are difficult to penetrate. All in all, the whole deal derails the entire discussion, and it even alters forum relationships, and in some ways alienates the forum member; because many people on here treat you based on your alleged type. It's a cocky, stupid thing to do. It's only necessary when the person in question ~knows little about socionics and / or is actively seeking help~. You will also notice that the worst socionicists on here are the ones who consistently question peoples self typings; Joy for example. (she is probably the worst at socionics on this board)

[Jarno]

From what I see, people who do it are often pinning what you have to say into a particular functional makeup as a way of dismissing your point. If you make an argument, and your opposition says "you're INFp... not INTp" well they just said 'fuck off' to everything you've said without even having to really listen to you or draw up a reply at all. People will use it as a way of socially dominating you.

Funny, I'm currently reading a book about discussion/persuasive tactics, and some part reminded me of this thread. I would like to make a post, but I see you've summed it up already in the above quote.

By saying, you are wrong about your type, you can undermine someones credibility and render him powerless. Therefor people don't like their types questioned.

[MellowMarcello]

I couldn't care less if someone didn't like their type questioned...

Branding a type onto my thrashing victim is a beautiful thing.

~Marcello~