I am a NEGATIVIST

[Park]

Therefore I can't be SLI.

[Creepy-]

Therefore I can't be SLI.

No. A negativist would have said, "I am not a positivist."

[Brilliand]

No. A negativist would have said, "I am not a positivist."

[implied]

Therefore I can't be SLI.

is that you, dee? ):

[calenwen]

Wow, Zach Braff's face looks extra square in this one.

I've found that I contradict quite a few of the dichotomies. It's actually kind of reassuring to remember that Socionics isn't an absolute truth or something. (;

[meatburger]

I find the Negativist/Positivist a little hard to wrap my head around sometimes. I have noticed that i personally expect and prepare for the worst. I always expect to do bad on assignments but typically i always do fine. Its my way of motivating myself. Im also constantly thinking about what might go wrong at work and trying to figure out ways in advance that i would fix those type of problems. For example right now im thinking holy fuck ive still got 30% of my assignment to go. Lol ive done 70% of it already! Or if you asked most of my friends who was more positive me or my EII friend i would say 99% of them would say me. When you look at us looking for jobs though he just applies to millions of them, where i am constantly thinking "hmm i can see that im not going to be good at this side of this, i can forsee that i would be quite uncomfortable doing this etc".

Still though, when it comes to human potential and what the future can hold i am very very positive. Ive seen SLI's and LSI's get mighty depressed about their situations and what the future might hold, but im never like that.

I personally think that negativists are less likely to take opportunites but more likely to handle negative outcomes better.

Positivists are more likely to take up the opporunities but when shit goes wrong it can hit them hard.

I think the dichotomy's are a bit bullshit though and i doubt you could generalise that easily.

[Creepy-male]

Actually, mb, what you described fits in with holographic thinking. Or, in Reinin-speak, negative/result.

SLIs are vortex: positive/result. I think the pessimism is due to being wrapped up in the little turbulences that that thinking style is all about, and not being able to see past them due to Carefree. ESEs are similar, but, being Farsighted, I think we're more circumspect, and thus our trademark optimism (actually, you have no idea how anxious and gloomy we can get sometimes... )

(Oh, and being Rational probably helps too.)

[Park]

No. A negativist would have said, "I am not a positivist."

LOL - true. fuck

But believe me or not, I actually thought about that before making the thread, and decided that "I am a NEGATIVIST" sound better, looks better and is more concise than any other variation I could think of.

[Park]

BTW, you look great in that avatar, song. Very alluring.

[Park]

is that you, dee? ):

Wait. What? Who?

Still though, when it comes to human potential and what the future can hold i am very very positive. Ive seen SLI's and LSI's get mighty depressed about their situations and what the future might hold, but im never like that.

I personally think that negativists are less likely to take opportunites but more likely to handle negative outcomes better.

Positivists are more likely to take up the opporunities but when shit goes wrong it can hit them hard.

I relate to this, and I think it makes sense.

I'm still a hard skeptic and generally a pessimist, though.

I think the dichotomy's are a bit bullshit though and i doubt you could generalise that easily.

I don't know. I was thinking, a strong subtype might neutralize some of those preferences?

[Creepy-male]

Well, Model T subs can alter the switch levels for the Model T dichotomies.

Unrelated, though.

As for the other dichotomies, I'm not sure.

[Creepy-male]

Reinin dichotomies are awesome!

The descriptions on wikisocion are not.

[Park]

Well, Model T subs can alter the switch levels for the Model T dichotomies.

Unrelated, though.

I don't think I can remember what Model T was. In which ways was it different from Model A?

As for the other dichotomies, I'm not sure.

Most of the other Reinin dichotomies are in line with me being ISTp, except for the Aristocratic/Democratic one perhaps, which I'm not really sure about.

[krieger]

It's not in any way surprising for an ISTp to identify with some of the characteristics of a negativist. Introversion and Te/Fi valuing preference both have aspects of negativism to them.

[Creepy-male]

I like to view Model T as complementary to Model A.

It describes (JESUS CHRIST THE Z-DOG LOOKS LIKE A ROBOT IN YOUR AVATAR) Obstinate/Yielding · Tactical/Strategic · Constructivist/Emotivist · Farsighted/Carefree.

Umm, in terms of how it describes them, I forget! But basically, in general, it's based off how each of your mental functions is engaged or switched off. Still works for intertypes (though, carries a slightly different interpretation due to condensing vital functions into the mental functions... again, not sure how).

And @ Isha: No. I got Brill to explain them to me

Wikisocion makes the error of trying to condense the descriptions of different combinations without explaining what those combinations are. So that's why it might seem slightly, well, useless.

[Hitta]

You lie, you all have aids.

[Park]

@Winterpark: why do you believe you are a negativist?

Because I think I lack the optimism IST types are supposed to have. Plus I tend to be overly pedantic sometimes and focus too much on the job at hand and the things I have started, rather than looking forward to get things done and move to the next thing etc. And I tend to get in very negative moods, where I get disgusted with almost everything and everyone and I start thinking how everything is going downhill and will fall apart and start blaming myself for things not working out and stuff like that... I am quite perfectionistic also.

Do your reasons for believing yourself to be a negativist themselves contradict you being an SLI?

Hm, I don't really think so. But who knows.

[Park]

It describes (JESUS CHRIST THE Z-DOG LOOKS LIKE A ROBOT IN YOUR AVATAR)...

You lie, you all have aids.

haha

[Brilliand]

I know that: the post was directed as much at him as at you.

I look through various models (Mainly Model T and Smilexian atm) and put together the pieces that make the most sense. I'm trying to bring Smilexian ideas under the Model T umbrella.

Model T actually says nothing about Negativist/Positivist, and I haven't been able to change that yet. However, I strongly suspect that smilingeyes got it right.

Summary:

Positivism is certainty of freedom and limited by the unknown. It goes both ways - freedom is associated with certainty and limitation is associated with the unknown.

Negativism is certainty of limitations and freedom in the unknown. It goes both ways - limitation is associated with certainty and freedom is associated with the unknown.

Long version:

Let's pick two children, one adventurous, spirited and energetic, one cautious, withdrawn, kind of scared.
Now let's say that these two kids are taken to a new place, an orchard somewhere. They are told nothing, they are left to their own devices. One of them will start climbing trees, tasting fruit, running after butterflies and such. S/he is empowered by this new environment. The other one becomes confused about what s/he's supposed to be doing, s/he will search the environment for anything familiar to latch on to, watching and looking for something important to show up and meanwhile doing little or nothing. The first one is empowered by hir own perception, the second one is limited by it.

Now after these two spend a while in the orchard the first child has eaten plenty of fruit and has a full belly but is also full of scratches and got an itch from the leaves of certain plants. The second one is hungry but otherwise quite fine. Now the kids share their information, the first one is annoyed by the fact that there are trees that are unclimbable, whole areas of the orchard surrounded by itchy plants and a number of trees with just bad-tasting fruit. S/he's tried it all and now s/he knows what the environment is like and knows what is good and what is bad and it starts to bore hir. The second child becomes happy as now s/he knows which trees are the good one's and which to avoid. S/he'll climb after the easy fruit and try to help the first kid overcome hir annoyance at the known limits of the situation. The first child is 'hot', enabled by what s/he perceives to be possibilities in hir environment and limited by what s/he knows for certain. The second child is 'cold', limited by hir perception and enabled by what is known for certain.

Now to the positive/negative, which fills the blanks in this cycle.

What I've written before:

Positive
It is inclined to scoff at limits, 'make itself known to the world', 'show itself', inclined to talk mostly about positives and possibilities, concentrates on what it thinks could, should and will happen. By its actions it turns the 'empowering' to the 'limiting'. 'I have the power to do whatever I want', I act of my free choice', 'I'm acting in my own interests'. Being empowered by the environment means being limited only by one's own viewpoint, creativity and motivation.

Negative
It is inclined to accept a restricted sense of identity, 'retreat from the world', 'hide itself', inclined to talk mostly about negatives and restrictions, concentrates on problems and solving them. By its actions it turns the 'limiting' into the 'empowering'. 'Once all the work is done, what remains is free time', 'once all the enemies are done with, what remains is friends', 'once I get rid of my chains, I'm free'. Inclined to make the atmosphere more negative, wary.

Again, the systematic view of these... 'Positive' equals 'concrete empowering', 'abstract limiting', 'hot democratic' and 'cold aristocratic'. I actually have the view that this is somewhat self-explanatory when seen in connection with the previous definition of limiting/empowering. This is the situation one has when one knows one is able to do of one's free volition and capability and with all required support the kind of things that are important to oneself. The concrete memory of capability and the abstract seeking of one's limits. The person willing to spend energy to create consensus, accepted theories and knowledge, to spread new information and show personal capabilities. Also the person who is a sort of guardian of wisdom, the person who is happy with hir role in the hierarchy of things and tries to turn this into an acceptable reality.

[DirectorAbbie]

That smilingeyes post was helpful. I'm proud to be a negativist!

[krieger]

It is inclined to scoff at limits, 'make itself known to the world', 'show itself', inclined to talk mostly about positives and possibilities, concentrates on what it thinks could, should and will happen.

Could have been a description of Extrovert (what smilingeyes calls Hot). The latter part could have been of Merry/Subjectivist, particularly when the emphasis is on "it thinks".

The main problem of smilingeyes writings is that they don't mention the stength of the influence of the descriptors anywhere. It's not like all of the descriptive terms in socionics are equally useful in typing. Negativist/Positivist happens to be a rather weak one in my experience. It's influence gets totally overshadowed by Introvert/Extrovert and Merry/Serious when either of these differs between the options that are being distinguished. Both of those dichotomies have characteristics that are extremely similar to those of Negativism/Positivism and they are both simply easier to notice.

It's not just some random failure that makes it so that Introvert/Extrovert and Merry/Serious (aka Ti/Fe valuing vs. Te/Fi valuing) are used extensively in practical typing on this forum, whereas Negativist/Positivist rarely is*.

* talking mainly about the regulars (people who have been here for at least 2 years).

[Park]

I do think that the reasons for "negativism" are more important than the label "negativism" itself.

Okay, I don't really get your point.

[Creepy-male]

Sounds like Farsighted and Constructivist.

ESE, SLE, SEE and LSE.

[Park]

Sounds like Farsighted and Constructivist.

ESE, SLE, SEE and LSE.

Say what? Who? Me? Isha? She sounds rather Emotivistic to me.

[Creepy-male]

Oh.

I meant you, WP.

[CareLess]

Because I think I lack the optimism IST types are supposed to have. Plus I tend to be overly pedantic sometimes and focus too much on the job at hand and the things I have started, rather than looking forward to get things done and move to the next thing etc. And I tend to get in very negative moods, where I get disgusted with almost everything and everyone and I start thinking how everything is going downhill and will fall apart and start blaming myself for things not working out and stuff like that... I am quite perfectionistic also.



Hm, I don't really think so. But who knows.

I have been there many times, but only when i have to redo the work or...don't understand, or even when i think there is to much.

I'm a realistic person and i know being realistic can some times come with being negative.

You think that can be your excuse for being negative?

[Smilingeyes]

Could have been a description of Extrovert (what smilingeyes calls Hot). The latter part could have been of Merry/Subjectivist, particularly when the emphasis is on "it thinks".

The main problem of smilingeyes writings is that they don't mention the stength of the influence of the descriptors anywhere. It's not like all of the descriptive terms in socionics are equally useful in typing. Negativist/Positivist happens to be a rather weak one in my experience. It's influence gets totally overshadowed by Introvert/Extrovert and Merry/Serious when either of these differs between the options that are being distinguished. Both of those dichotomies have characteristics that are extremely similar to those of Negativism/Positivism and they are both simply easier to notice.

It's not just some random failure that makes it so that Introvert/Extrovert and Merry/Serious (aka Ti/Fe valuing vs. Te/Fi valuing) are used extensively in practical typing on this forum, whereas Negativist/Positivist rarely is*.

* talking mainly about the regulars (people who have been here for at least 2 years).

Just a personal view... I find negative-positive to be the easiest thing to observe and type and just about the most useful thing in daily use of sociocins. It just doesn't stay constant for individuals over time so only people who believe in static types have problems. Sucks to believe in that paradigm.
...
But a more fundamental truth is that one is able to observe that which one trains to observe. Each dichotomy has it's uses. The "large-cycle" dichotomies seem more useful in analyzing the long-term character of individuals whereas the "small-cycle" dichotomies are much more important in daily interaction and a deeper level of comfort is required to be able to use them constantly in the give and take of discussion. In that sense I'd say that I gain more direct benefit from the small-cycle dichotomies. But that gives rise to some interesting issues, in particular, my current greatest weakness in the typing process is in differentiating a type and it's superego.

But I'm rambling again. Please ignore everything I said.

[Smilingeyes]

That smilingeyes post was helpful. I'm proud to be a negativist!

Pride. Hm. Ok.

[krieger]

Just a personal view... I find negative-positive to be the easiest thing to observe and type and just about the most useful thing in daily use of sociocins. It just doesn't stay constant for individuals over time so only people who believe in static types have problems. Sucks to believe in that paradigm.

Well, then at least you agree that the dichotomy isn't particularly useful in establishing the inborn type if us static-type believers happen to be right.

[Smilingeyes]

Well, then at least you agree that the dichotomy isn't particularly useful in establishing the inborn type if us static-type believers happen to be right.

Sure. It's one or the other.

[Creepy-male]

Random threadjack:

Smilex, have you considered static types with transblocks?

Like, using PoLR instead of creative. That would seem to explain why I "moved" from EIE to ESE (which would be in reverse order from what I've been told about your theory o: )

Additionally, that's still compatible with intertypes... BnD trying to type me as LSE is a great example of when a Supervisee lashes back with role-creative transblock.

[Gilly]

Actually he's your supervisOR.

[Gilly]

And smilex's theory is that our types mutate within temperament rings, so it is basically what you describe.

[Creepy-male]

Yes.

And I'm his Supervisee. I was using Te/Si to attack.

This does not contradict anything I said in my post above.

[Park]

I meant you, WP.

ESE, SLE, SEE and LSE.

Which one(s) would you consider plausible?


And why Farsighted?

[Park]

I'm a realistic person and i know being realistic can some times come with being negative.

You think that can be your excuse for being negative?

Hm, I don't know. If I were a "realistic" person, as you say, then shouldn't I be more relaxed and simply aware of the things that are making me negative? Why would a realist worry so much about unnecessary details and be afraid of how things are going to turn out? And be continuously self-critical to no avail?

[Park]

Just a personal view... I find negative-positive to be the easiest thing to observe and type and just about the most useful thing in daily use of sociocins.

So what have you observed in my daily online behavior in regards to this dichotomy? (If you have, at all.) I'm curious. Or do you have any opinion about my type at all?

Oh, and btw, I really liked those graphs you once made for the dichotomies course through quadras and type. Do they still exist somewhere online?

[Creepy-male]

Because I think I lack the optimism IST types are supposed to have. Plus I tend to be overly pedantic sometimes and focus too much on the job at hand and the things I have started, rather than looking forward to get things done and move to the next thing etc. And I tend to get in very negative moods, where I get disgusted with almost everything and everyone and I start thinking how everything is going downhill and will fall apart and start blaming myself for things not working out and stuff like that... I am quite perfectionistic also.

From the above: bolded farsighted, underlined constructivist.

As for which of the fur you are...

Quadra values? I dunno. I'm not you. You seem to have typical SLI "unpredictable" (for we crazy deluded Fe-bases that is )

I actually like SLI typing for you. Constructivist is the weak link tbh.

P.S. sorry for Russianspeak, but I'm on an unfamiliar keyboard here.

[Brilliand]

Additionally, that's still compatible with intertypes... What caused BnD to try to type me as LSE is a great example of when a Supervisee lashes back with role-creative transblock.

Fixed.

[Brilliand]

From the above: bolded farsighted, underlined constructivist.

I don't think perfectionism is Constructivist... more like Judicial.

I actually like SLI typing for you. Constructivist is the weak link tbh.

SLIs are Constructivist. However, they are not Farsighted.