Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 66

Thread: Jem's type thread

  1. #1
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Jem's type thread

    Seriously. Well, I really need Te!

    Guess I'll learn to appreciate my dual with age. :-/
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  2. #2
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Judging from the photo in your avatar, if you can't appreciate them yet I'd go for Mr. Right-Now.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  3. #3
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    define Te!
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  4. #4
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    oh i get it, because you don't value Ti.
    Do you want me to copy/paste from wikisocion?
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  5. #5
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    well I really meant to say, how do you need Te? :/
    I was reading some of the descriptions of Te-seeking .. how it says that Te-seekers appreciate reliable information rather than a finished analysis .. that's how I am I think. When someone gives me their opinion, I try to determine how they arrived at it, to extract the facts from what they're saying, and throw out the rest - then I feel I can make up my own mind. Also, Dad's LSE and Mum's LSI ... and I've always appreciated the way Dad thinks and explains things ... whereas Mum's style has always annoyed me.
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  6. #6
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Extraverted Thinking : The External Dynamics of Objects.
    Te covers algorithmic logic, specifics of events, activity, behavior, etc.
    In other words, Te is the information element which deals with the physical characteristics of objects in motion/events; the way things are done.

    If you love seeing this in people, and it just "completes you", you should find yourself to be an IxFj; you can easily figure out your creative function through means other than expression. If you value Se or Ni specifically, you are a gamma and, thus, ESI; if you value either Ne or Si specifically, you should be an INFj.

    To find the answer here, tell me which you find more attractive:

    1.Someone with a good work-ethic who thinks on a grand scale and is good at both predicting future events as well as seeing patterns in things which don't necessarily exist in reality. They like reading, architecture, and even the occasional tussle. This person is also emotionally close, yet finds himself at-ease playing sports.

    OR

    2.Someone with a good work-ethic who's thinking is more close to reality; they have an extremely good sense of how things work. This person is energetic but rarely gets over-excited. They like sex, good food, and fine wine. This person is emotionally close, and has no problem with analogies; they also have little trouble seeing the potential in things.

    Choose one and I'll tell you your type.
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  7. #7
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A TeNi White LIE View Post
    Extraverted Thinking : The External Dynamics of Objects.
    Te covers algorithmic logic, specifics of events, activity, behavior, etc.
    In other words, Te is the information element which deals with the physical characteristics of objects in motion/events; the way things are done.

    If you love seeing this in people, and it just "completes you", you should find yourself to be an IxFj; you can easily figure out your creative function through means other than expression. If you value Se or Ni specifically, you are a gamma and, thus, ESI; if you value either Ne or Si specifically, you should be an INFj.

    To find the answer here, tell me which you find more attractive:

    1.Someone with a good work-ethic who thinks on a grand scale and is good at both predicting future events as well as seeing patterns in things which don't necessarily exist in reality. They like reading, architecture, and even the occasional tussle. This person is also emotionally close, yet finds himself at-ease playing sports.

    OR

    2.Someone with a good work-ethic who's thinking is more close to reality; they have an extremely good sense of how things work. This person is energetic but rarely gets over-excited. They like sex, good food, and fine wine. This person is emotionally close, and has no problem with analogies; they also have little trouble seeing the potential in things.

    Choose one and I'll tell you your type.
    I don't know ... they're too vague! :-p What does "seeing patterns in things that don't exist in reality mean"? I guess the 2nd one. Mainly because I think of people who think on too grand a scale as being a bit bulldozerish and callous when it comes to the details and individual's feelings.
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  8. #8
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    I don't know ... they're too vague! :-p What does "seeing patterns in things that don't exist in reality mean"? I guess the 2nd one. Mainly because I think of people who think on too grand a scale as being a bit bulldozerish and callous when it comes to the details and individual's feelings.
    It was vague because they are general descriptions of a LIE (1) and a LSE (2); "seeing patterns in things that don't exist in reality" could possibly be better written as "has abstract patterns of reasoning", but I felt that might give too much away, depending on how familiar you are with what Ni is.

    Since you picked the second (LSE), and you say you're fairly certain about your base function (being Fi, that is), I would say you come out as INFj; you appear to value Si over Ni, which would be your dual-seeking function.
    If you're sure and I'm correct, welcome to Delta, dual?
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  9. #9
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    Recalling what you wrote on the wiki, you seemed like an Si and Ne valuing type. If you do value Te, then I think you are probably IEE or EII. An Si leading type would probably agree with most of this:

    (This was written by an SEI socionists and it's roughly translated.)
    I relate to all of that incredibly. lol But seems to me that those are all basic abilities to do with Sensing in general. Wouldn't Se be built on the same principles?
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  10. #10
    I had words here once, but I didn't feed them Khola's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    3,535
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Who cares! I like you, let's hug. ^_^
    Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .



  11. #11
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A TeNi White LIE View Post
    It was vague because they are general descriptions of a LIE (1) and a LSE (2); "seeing patterns in things that don't exist in reality" could possibly be better written as "has abstract patterns of reasoning", but I felt that might give too much away, depending on how familiar you are with what Ni is.

    Since you picked the second (LSE), and you say you're fairly certain about your base function (being Fi, that is), I would say you come out as INFj; you appear to value Si over Ni, which would be your dual-seeking function.
    If you're sure and I'm correct, welcome to Delta, dual?
    But I'm not sure and you might be wrong, so not so fast! Well, I knew which one was which, so I felt like I was choosing between LIE and LSE rather than your descriptions. :-p And I'm not at all sure about my base function.
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  12. #12
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    I relate to all of that incredibly. lol But seems to me that those are all basic abilities to do with Sensing in general. Wouldn't Se be built on the same principles?
    That is a more MBTI-related thought.

    Si is the external dynamics of fields; Se is the external statics of objects.
    They are both external, but so are Te and Ti.
    In opposition to Ni and Ne, Si and Se are easily picked out as "similar"; they are in the fact that they are external, thus dealing with physical states.
    However, Si deals with fields, and Se deals with objects; this is a very large difference.

    Se deals with an object's form, size, shape, and location (all of these things without activity); Si deals with the tangible interactions perceived through these objects, as well as how these events affect you physically.

    They are similar, but very different. "Si v. Se"="Physical Experiences v. Physical State"
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  13. #13
    Binky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Burlow, Fryeland
    Posts
    195
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So what's the difference between "field" and "object"?
    -
    It's Binky bitch.
    See not the unsmiling lips and icy eyes,
    And hear not the silence after.
    Look instead as the mime hypnotizes
    And listen to the laughter
    .

  14. #14
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A TeNi White LIE View Post
    That is a more MBTI-related thought.

    Si is the external dynamics of fields; Se is the external statics of objects.
    They are both external, but so are Te and Ti.
    In opposition to Ni and Ne, Si and Se are easily picked out as "similar"; they are in the fact that they are external, thus dealing with physical states.
    However, Si deals with fields, and Se deals with objects; this is a very large difference.

    Se deals with an object's form, size, shape, and location (all of these things without activity); Si deals with the tangible interactions perceived through these objects, as well as how these events affect you physically.

    They are similar, but very different. "Si v. Se"="Physical Experiences v. Physical State"
    I'm not sure what you mean by "without activity" ... how can you come to a non-theoretical knowledge of objects without interacting with them?
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  15. #15
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    But I'm not sure and you might be wrong, so not so fast! Well, I knew which one was which, so I felt like I was choosing between LIE and LSE rather than your descriptions. :-p And I'm not at all sure about my base function.
    Well, it was worth a shot, right? Once you know enough about the socion, there's only so many questions one can ask you to get an unbiased response. However, I thought that maybe if you saw them laid out in that way, it might be made a little more clear, regardless.

    As for your base function, if you're not sure, find out! The base is the easiest to see, and is visible in most of what you do. Which IME do you feel the most comfortable using, or feel that you use the most? Algl that takes is a little time to think about yourself and how you go about thins.

    Here are some better questions:

    1.Is it easier for you to see what things are, or what they might/should be?

    2.Is it easier for you to pick out what something is doing, or the thing's intent?

    3.Is it easier for you to see how something is physically reacting, or how it is mentally reacting?

    4.Is it easier for you to see how things are reacting regardless to, or based on, your personal state of mind?

    Answer and I can tell you what quadra you are in, at the very least.
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  16. #16
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Binky View Post
    So what's the difference between "field" and "object"?
    An "object" is something that can be studied without the context of the observer.

    A "field" is something that needs to be studied through the context of the observer.
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  17. #17
    Let's go to fairyland Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,078
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Tom, your brand of arrogance is kinda cute. I think I might keep you.



    Jem, I don't mind if you move over to Delta. From what I know, you seem fine as SEI. So... I know, I'm no help.

    Forgetting the T's for a second, what do you think about Fe vs. Fi? What are they to you and how do you react to them?

    By the way, I don't think wanting to and being able to form your own opinions on things is the same thing as not-Ti-seeking.
    Last edited by Minde; 01-12-2009 at 04:15 AM. Reason: name change -> irrelevant question removal

  18. #18
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Its not arrogance, its !
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  19. #19
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A TeNi White LIE View Post
    As for your base function, if you're not sure, find out!
    Oh, ok!
    1.Is it easier for you to see what things are, or what they might/should be?
    Well, I know that's Se vs Ne ... meh, Idk. Surely you'd have to see what things are first before you got into what they could be?
    2.Is it easier for you to pick out what something is doing, or the thing's intent?
    Again, I can't see how you could pick out the thing's intent before you picked out what it was doing. I'd determine what it was doing first, then the intent.
    3.Is it easier for you to see how something is physically reacting, or how it is mentally reacting?
    physically
    4.Is it easier for you to see how things are reacting regardless to, or based on, your personal state of mind?
    regardless to, I think - depends whether these are emotional reactions or not - I find it harder to be objective when it comes to emotional reactions
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  20. #20
    Let's go to fairyland Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,078
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    Well, I know that's Se vs Ne ... meh, Idk. Surely you'd have to see what things are first before you got into what they could be?
    Not always. Sometimes - maybe even often? - the picture of reality is incomplete, and the might-bes are based more on the should-bes and the prior vague impressions of what-ares.

    By the way, there is a difference between "might be" and "should be" - one I think is more perceiving and the other is judging.

  21. #21
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Let's talk on aim.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  22. #22
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    Let's talk on aim.
    who, me?
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  23. #23
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    FYI, I didn't know it was possible to sense your internal organs pre-socionics.



    Sure, Se types have excellent control over these things because of strong Si. However, their disposition is still oriented externally, so whereas an Si type might justify not feeling sorry about pain because it actually isn't painful, an Se type might justify not feeling sorry about pain because some external objective necessitated that he stretch his body in that way.

    Another example, according to the article, an Si type can "build a sensation" from a small piece of information about it.

    >
    A strong Si type will have a natural sense of what is the best sensation, and can indulge in the same sensation again and again (because it's the best), given that she fully understands the limits and capabilities of her body.

    > A strong Se type will have a natural sense of the correct sensation, but may choose to modify it slightly or completely to suit some special criteria, and to relish in this modification.

    A good example is my SEE friend who justifies eating a specific kind of chocolate bar because it's wrapped in golden foil and has an interesting design on the front. The chocolate still tastes good, but the reason he enjoys it so much vs. other chocolates probably has to do more with the fact that it seems ornate.
    Mm yeah - I relate to your Si examples over the Se ones.
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  24. #24
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    who, me?
    Yes
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  25. #25
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minde View Post
    Forgetting the T's for a second, what do you think about Fe vs. Fi? What are they to you and how do you react to them?
    Oh gah .. what have I gotten myself into? :-p

    Um ... I would say that I definitely appreciate Fe over Fi in general. In fact, sometimes I think I'm some sort of a Fe-seeker ... because exuberance of expression really relaxes me. But then I think that maybe I simply like it because it means I can slink into the shadows undetected ... and I've being conditioned to it, having a bunch of Fe relatives. We have extremely loud family gatherings. :-p But then I think that maybe the fact that it renders me so quiet isn't a Good Thing, and that my light is being hid under a bushel! :-p No .... actually I'm pretty verbose when I'm with ESE friends one-on-one - I just can't compete with a whole heap of them at once. :-p

    Fi, Fi ... it's hard to say. I guess my feeling towards Fi is mostly respect. It seems honourable and all that - just a little boring. :-p

    I'm running out of steam ... I might write more later. (c:
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  26. #26
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    Oh, ok! Well, I know that's Se vs Ne ... meh, Idk. Surely you'd have to see what things are first before you got into what they could be?
    Hmm, you are correct about the two IMEs, but I think this is my own fault for poor phrasing; "what" should be replaced with "the physical characteristics of what". Sorry.

    Again, I can't see how you could pick out the thing's intent before you picked out what it was doing. I'd determine what it was doing first, then the intent.


    physically
    ^ valuing. Alpha or Delta.

    regardless to, I think - depends whether these are emotional reactions or not - I find it harder to be objective when it comes to emotional reactions
    ^ valuing. Delta for sure.

    Now we just need to figure out your base, and we'll know the rest.
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  27. #27
    expired Lotus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    TIM
    Se/Ni sx/sp
    Posts
    4,494
    Mentioned
    99 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Glad to see you changed your username. (:

    But hey, Jem is Alpha for sure. You're simplifying all this.
    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

  28. #28
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Allie View Post
    Glad to see you changed your username. (:
    I'm quite happy with the change as well.

    But hey, Jem is Alpha for sure. You're simplifying all this.
    Now that seems to me like you are over-simplifying "all this".

    I asked her specific questions based on her preferences in the 4 groups.
    How do you know that she is an alpha?
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  29. #29
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Based on our aim talk, I see Jem as

    SEI >> ESI, at present.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  30. #30
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom View Post
    Hmm, you are correct about the two IMEs, but I think this is my own fault for poor phrasing; "what" should be replaced with "the physical characteristics of what". Sorry.
    I'd probably go with "what could be" then
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  31. #31
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    I'd probably go with "what could be" then
    That would say Ne-valuing to me. Again it adds to the argument of both Alpha and Delta.
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  32. #32
    diljs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    348
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Your comments sound Ne valuing > Te valuing. Maybe you're reacting against Ti+Se or maybe you're delta.
    ILE - Ti.

  33. #33
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I sort of feel like Iíve been misleading people in regards to my true personality. Itís those damn emoticons! :-p The thing is that whatever type I ďamĒ I can find reasons for being that type. And Iíve always thought that I had to be an ethical type because Iím a pretty emotionally-sensitive person. That I had to be a sensor, because I am good at sensor-related things. Well, I challenge that belief! :-p Why should that be the case? If the majority of a personís life has revolved around perfecting sensory activities, then naturally theyíre going to be decent at those sorts of things. And learning one skill doesnít just mean perfecting that particular skill, it means improving at every other activity in life that demands the same sort of coordination and technique. The problem is that we canít ever know how it would feel to process things differently, so of course we have to look at the externals. The way I approach sensory activities is with the belief that if I have enough control over my mind / concentration, my body can do pretty much anything I tell it to. I donít know whether thatís the way sensors approach those sorts of things. I can feel physical things intensely, but I can also tell myself not to feel things too much if it doesnít make sense to. If I know somethingís going to taste really bad, then I donít allow myself to taste it fully. Well, that means I have control of my senses, right? So Iím a sensor? So why is it that Si-dominants apparently feel things more intensely and find physical pain less bearable than other types? Wouldnít they theoretically be more able to control what they do or donít feel?

    The emotions I choose to show are pretty logical I think. I generally donít get worked up about things that I donít think it makes sense to get worked up about. Yeah .. I have spontaneous emotional reactions to things, but they usually come out of nowhere (from my perspective) Ö I just find myself reacting, and then itís over in a few seconds, and I ask myself whether my reaction made sense. lol If it did, I feel relieved Ė I can trust myself to act appropriately without having to think first! If it didnít, I backtrack, apologise, whatever .. because I donít think itís fair that people should have to deal with emotional reactions of mine that arose from some issues that arenít really related to the issue at hand. I always work it out in my head later though Ö so I know exactly why I reacted the way I did. I always have to know why I react to things the way I do. That way if I think I have some sort of faulty wiring thatís arisen from past experiences, I can correct it. :-p

    Iím pretty sure Iím Fe>Fi though. People that are judgmental and have strong principles and convictions about things make me uneasy. I can admire them from afar, but they scare me a bit. :-p I can appear pretty principled Ö and can argue against certain behaviour from a logical point of view Ö but I find it hard to get attached to any principles that arenít extremely vague. Like ďbe kind to peopleĒ Ö lol Ė that sort of sums up my moral philosophy :-/. Otherwise, I just look at things on a case by case basis to determine what the ďrightĒ thing would be to do. Sometimes, Iíll adopt a principle that I think makes sense .. but Iíll invariably come up against a situation where it doesnít seem to apply Ö so I think meh, and go back to just using my judgement in the moment.

    I like helping people out with Si-related things Ö but it makes me uneasy if they start to depend on me for such things, or if it starts to become my role. I feel like saying ďWell, you know Iím not that good at these type of things, donít you? You know that itís pretty touch-and-go whether this is going to turn out alright?Ē I feel like that even if I am reasonably good at the thing Iím doing. If someone says Iím a good cook, I feel like correcting them .. ďEh, no Ė I just made a nice dish Ė doesnít mean Iím a good cook in general. Even if I make more nice meals than bad ones .. doesnít really mean Iím a good cook Ė just that I can make nice meals given enough time. :-pĒ A good cook in my mind would be someone who it came relatively effortlessly to. Same with my piano-playing. If people say Iím talented, I think ďWell, how do you know that? I started when I was 3! lol I would have to be pretty daft not to have grasped an activity that I have repeated over and over for so long.Ē I like doing little random things for people mostly. Iím a perfectionist though Ö and I often hide how much effort I put into something or how long it took me to do the thing so as not to embarrass people, or myself. :-p I wouldn't want them to feel obligated just because of my own compulsion to get something perfect.

    That's all for now! :-p
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  34. #34
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    I sort of feel like Iíve been misleading people in regards to my true personality. Itís those damn emoticons! :-p The thing is that whatever type I ďamĒ I can find reasons for being that type. And Iíve always thought that I had to be an ethical type because Iím a pretty emotionally-sensitive person.
    I've felt the same way many a time.

    The emotions I choose to show are pretty logical I think. I generally donít get worked up about things that I donít think it makes sense to get worked up about. Yeah .. I have spontaneous emotional reactions to things, but they usually come out of nowhere (from my perspective) Ö I just find myself reacting, and then itís over in a few seconds, and I ask myself whether my reaction made sense. lol If it did, I feel relieved Ė I can trust myself to act appropriately without having to think first! If it didnít, I backtrack, apologise, whatever .. because I donít think itís fair that people should have to deal with emotional reactions of mine that arose from some issues that arenít really related to the issue at hand. I always work it out in my head later though Ö so I know exactly why I reacted the way I did. I always have to know why I react to things the way I do. That way if I think I have some sort of faulty wiring thatís arisen from past experiences, I can correct it. :-p
    I'm not sure to what extent this means this or that in socionics, but I tend to react in the same way. It can be really frustrating for me if someone wants or expects me to have that kind of understanding instantly at hand. Saying, "I don't know. That's how I feel about this right now. Maybe we can talk about it later?" I think sounds like a cop out to some people, but it's just me being honest. Even in a general sense though, I'm pretty cautious in talking about my emotions. It stings when people have accused me of hiding something from them or that I don't trust them. It's usually more that I don't trust myself. I have to think it over. I'm not sure other people will be able to make sense of what I say I'm feeling anyway, why would it be easier when what I'm feeling doesn't quite make sense to me? I'm not saying that that's an innately good or desirable way to be. If anything I think it's from a deep seated fear of being judged.

    Iím pretty sure Iím Fe>Fi though. People that are judgmental and have strong principles and convictions about things make me uneasy. I can admire them from afar, but they scare me a bit. :-p I can appear pretty principled Ö and can argue against certain behaviour from a logical point of view Ö but I find it hard to get attached to any principles that arenít extremely vague. Like ďbe kind to peopleĒ Ö lol Ė that sort of sums up my moral philosophy :-/. Otherwise, I just look at things on a case by case basis to determine what the ďrightĒ thing would be to do. Sometimes, Iíll adopt a principle that I think makes sense .. but Iíll invariably come up against a situation where it doesnít seem to apply Ö so I think meh, and go back to just using my judgement in the moment.
    That's not what Fi is about at all imo. If I had to write about how I go about reacting to or resolving something, it would be what you've written here, to the letter. Seriously. Sadly, that kind of approach apparently doesn't fly too well in philosophical ethics which was always disappointing to me.

    I like helping people out with Si-related things Ö but it makes me uneasy if they start to depend on me for such things, or if it starts to become my role. I feel like saying ďWell, you know Iím not that good at these type of things, donít you? You know that itís pretty touch-and-go whether this is going to turn out alright?Ē I feel like that even if I am reasonably good at the thing Iím doing. If someone says Iím a good cook, I feel like correcting them .. ďEh, no Ė I just made a nice dish Ė doesnít mean Iím a good cook in general. Even if I make more nice meals than bad ones .. doesnít really mean Iím a good cook Ė just that I can make nice meals given enough time. :-pĒ A good cook in my mind would be someone who it came relatively effortlessly to. Same with my piano-playing. If people say Iím talented, I think ďWell, how do you know that? I started when I was 3! lol I would have to be pretty daft not to have grasped an activity that I have repeated over and over for so long.Ē I like doing little random things for people mostly. Iím a perfectionist though Ö and I often hide how much effort I put into something or how long it took me to do the thing so as not to embarrass people, or myself. :-p I wouldn't want them to feel obligated just because of my own compulsion to get something perfect.

    That's all for now! :-p
    I relate to this less, mostly because I lack your talent! Usually when people ask me questions asking opinions on what music is good, clothing, or art I always get a little antsy. It's pretty much automatic for me to assume these things are extremely personal tastes. I mean, I know what I like, but to me that question has this undertone that you're supposed to share something that fits you and that the other person can appreciate. This makes me want to ask all sorts of questions to the other person so I can try to find a good match, otherwise I feel slightly paranoid about just spouting off on the things I enjoy. This isn't really an issue with people I'm not still in the process of 'meeting' or that don't seem like the kind to have that specific kind of look cross their face where you can tell they're mentally evaluating your every word and assigning it this or that value.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  35. #35
    Darn Socks Director Abbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Southwest USA
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    6,728
    Mentioned
    237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    define Te!
    Extroverted thinking. Productivity, efficiency, gathering information. The most orderly function, and the most robotic. But more like the hardware of the android than the software. The dictionary is a black square.

    ESTj
    1w2 sp/so 1-2-6
    Brilliand's Younger Sister
    Squishy's Older Sister

    Johari Nohari

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritella View Post
    Over here, we'll put up with (almost) all of your crap. You just have to use the secret phrase: "I don't value it. It's related to <insert random element here>, which is not in my quadra."
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
    Abbie is so boring and rigid it's awesome instead of boring and rigid. She seems so practical and down-to-the-ground.

  36. #36
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  37. #37
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You don't like Te, mune?
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  38. #38
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have a bad history with robots.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  39. #39
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munenori2 View Post
    I'm not sure to what extent this means this or that in socionics, but I tend to react in the same way. It can be really frustrating for me if someone wants or expects me to have that kind of understanding instantly at hand. Saying, "I don't know. That's how I feel about this right now. Maybe we can talk about it later?" I think sounds like a cop out to some people, but it's just me being honest. Even in a general sense though, I'm pretty cautious in talking about my emotions. It stings when people have accused me of hiding something from them or that I don't trust them. It's usually more that I don't trust myself. I have to think it over. I'm not sure other people will be able to make sense of what I say I'm feeling anyway, why would it be easier when what I'm feeling doesn't quite make sense to me? I'm not saying that that's an innately good or desirable way to be. If anything I think it's from a deep seated fear of being judged.
    I generally know why I feel a certain way ... but don't often like talking about it because the reasons are kinda private to me. Or they may be weird :-p ... so I'd rather not say. "Maybe we can talk about it later?" I should say that more. :-p If I do explain my emotions to someone though, I've thought them out pretty well .. so it hurts if someone doesn't believe my reasons or presumes to know me better than I know myself. :0
    That's not what Fi is about at all imo. If I had to write about how I go about reacting to or resolving something, it would be what you've written here, to the letter. Seriously. Sadly, that kind of approach apparently doesn't fly too well in philosophical ethics which was always disappointing to me.
    That's interesting ... I guess I don't understand Fi that well. :-/
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  40. #40
    Your DNA is mine. Mediator Kam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    4,481
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    I sort of feel like Iíve been misleading people in regards to my true personality. Itís those damn emoticons! :-p The thing is that whatever type I ďamĒ I can find reasons for being that type. And Iíve always thought that I had to be an ethical type because Iím a pretty emotionally-sensitive person. That I had to be a sensor, because I am good at sensor-related things. Well, I challenge that belief! :-p Why should that be the case? If the majority of a personís life has revolved around perfecting sensory activities, then naturally theyíre going to be decent at those sorts of things. And learning one skill doesnít just mean perfecting that particular skill, it means improving at every other activity in life that demands the same sort of coordination and technique. The problem is that we canít ever know how it would feel to process things differently, so of course we have to look at the externals. The way I approach sensory activities is with the belief that if I have enough control over my mind / concentration, my body can do pretty much anything I tell it to. I donít know whether thatís the way sensors approach those sorts of things. I can feel physical things intensely, but I can also tell myself not to feel things too much if it doesnít make sense to. If I know somethingís going to taste really bad, then I donít allow myself to taste it fully. Well, that means I have control of my senses, right? So Iím a sensor? So why is it that Si-dominants apparently feel things more intensely and find physical pain less bearable than other types? Wouldnít they theoretically be more able to control what they do or donít feel?
    I hold nearly the opposite reaction to senses Jem. I don't have too good of a control.

    Brussel Sprouts: I offer them to someone else, then refuse to eat them. They taste so bad.

    I was at a buffet one day, and I was forced to pass by these old ladies multiple times that had a really musty smell. I held my breath for about 8-10 seconds walking past them as fast as I could. Sometimes I get a bone in my mouth from my food and I throw up all the food in my mouth to look for the hard piece. I cannot handle things like fat or bones in my mouth, it is disgusting.

    Pain is pain Jem, but sometimes pain is enjoyable, like pain in your gums or something.

    The emotions I choose to show are pretty logical I think. I generally donít get worked up about things that I donít think it makes sense to get worked up about. Yeah .. I have spontaneous emotional reactions to things, but they usually come out of nowhere (from my perspective) Ö I just find myself reacting, and then itís over in a few seconds, and I ask myself whether my reaction made sense. lol If it did, I feel relieved Ė I can trust myself to act appropriately without having to think first! If it didnít, I backtrack, apologise, whatever .. because I donít think itís fair that people should have to deal with emotional reactions of mine that arose from some issues that arenít really related to the issue at hand. I always work it out in my head later though Ö so I know exactly why I reacted the way I did. I always have to know why I react to things the way I do. That way if I think I have some sort of faulty wiring thatís arisen from past experiences, I can correct it. :-p
    I do the same thing, pretty much to the T. But to correct my actions if I have faulty wiring, no. I don't have faulty reasoning, except maybe if my ideas need a slight tuning.

    Iím pretty sure Iím Fe>Fi though. People that are judgmental and have strong principles and convictions about things make me uneasy. I can admire them from afar, but they scare me a bit. :-p I can appear pretty principled Ö and can argue against certain behaviour from a logical point of view Ö but I find it hard to get attached to any principles that arenít extremely vague. Like ďbe kind to peopleĒ Ö lol Ė that sort of sums up my moral philosophy :-/. Otherwise, I just look at things on a case by case basis to determine what the ďrightĒ thing would be to do. Sometimes, Iíll adopt a principle that I think makes sense .. but Iíll invariably come up against a situation where it doesnít seem to apply Ö so I think meh, and go back to just using my judgement in the moment.
    Hmm, very interesting. I find that these vague principles are the absolute basis of every other principle that I have, so "be kind to people" is very true, but "be grateful for favors that have been bestowed on you" is related to someone being kind to you, who is following that basic idea that you yourself hold dear. Otherwise, I agree totally.

    I like helping people out with Si-related things Ö but it makes me uneasy if they start to depend on me for such things, or if it starts to become my role. I feel like saying ďWell, you know Iím not that good at these type of things, donít you? You know that itís pretty touch-and-go whether this is going to turn out alright?Ē I feel like that even if I am reasonably good at the thing Iím doing. If someone says Iím a good cook, I feel like correcting them .. ďEh, no Ė I just made a nice dish Ė doesnít mean Iím a good cook in general. Even if I make more nice meals than bad ones .. doesnít really mean Iím a good cook Ė just that I can make nice meals given enough time. :-pĒ A good cook in my mind would be someone who it came relatively effortlessly to. Same with my piano-playing. If people say Iím talented, I think ďWell, how do you know that? I started when I was 3! lol I would have to be pretty daft not to have grasped an activity that I have repeated over and over for so long.Ē I like doing little random things for people mostly. Iím a perfectionist though Ö and I often hide how much effort I put into something or how long it took me to do the thing so as not to embarrass people, or myself. :-p I wouldn't want them to feel obligated just because of my own compulsion to get something perfect.

    That's all for now! :-p
    I have the same reaction to compliments as you, but I have a slightly different rationale for it. If I made a dish or something and someone said it was nice, I would just look down and say thanks, thinking it wasn't a big deal/wasn't that hard to do. Same thing with academics, once you study and stick your hand in the fire, it shouldn't be hard to do well at it.

    lol perfectionism, especially with visual things, like getting all your words shaped the right way or making a picture look real good. But not on essays.
    D-SEI 9w1

    This is me and my dual being scientific together

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •