Blue

[Transigent]

Edited for gayness.

[Scrummy]

I'm quoting this before Transigent has the chance to delete it:

Feeling: Powerful and Direct
Usually does this by: Exerting and Apprehending authority
With help from a belief that: Health is meaningless if can be overcome through will


Feeling: Healthy and Sensations
Usually does this by: Creating and Keeping sensations
With help from a belief that: Power is meaningless if it can be broken through sickness


Feeling: Talented and Skillful
Usually does this by: Obtaining and Practicing skills
With help from a belief that: Belief is meaningless if it isn't backed up by skill


Feeling: Spiritual and Balanced
Usually does this by: Developing and Maintaining belief
With help from a belief that: Talent is meaningless without a belief and a purpose


Feeling: Knowledgeable and Productive
Usually does this by: Obtaining and Producing benefit
With help from a belief that: Logic is meaningless if it doesn't match reality


Feeling: Rational and Logical
Usually does this by: Sythesizing and Interpreting things
With help from a belief that: Knowledge is meaningless if you cannot see the connections


Feeling: Emotional and Expressive
Usually does this by: Seeing and Showing emotions
With help from a belief that: Love is meaningless if it brings no happiness


Feeling: Caring and Loving
Usually does this by: Feeling and Creating connections
With help from a belief that: Emotions are meaningless if they aren't backed up by love

I do believe you have gone certifiably insane, ******. But I agree with you!

Fundamentally speaking, function are emotional responses to everything our sensory facilities puts us into contact with. We've not only forgotten our friendly little functions, but also the concept of "information metabolism" without which Socionics becomes useless, meaningless, and contradictory. Type isn't about acting, but about being, and I'm sick to my stomach with "Type me! Type me!" threads that have, for the past one and a halfyears on this forum, failed to offer all that much insight into people's types. All we do in those thread is perpetuate stereotypes by aligning our own behavior with profiles or linking functions with observable "talents" or behaviors.

[Jimbean]

So if you are being emotional, your being this: ?

By asking this question, I am being this: ?

[Creepy-]

I'm quoting this before Transigent has the chance to delete it

I think this is good, Transigent. Please don't delete it for gayness! It's quite straight.

[Creepy-]

I wasn't sure if my typing myself would be welcome, but as Kraus has set the standard:

Se over Si
Ni over Ne
Te over Ti
Fi over Fe

I suppose that would make me some form of Gamma. I'm interested in what other people think of these descriptions before I take it too seriously.

[Rocky]

Nice post... though I don't understand the 8th function/Ti thing. According to your definition I'd like Ti.

And shouldn't Ni have something to do with knowing in advanced how things will unfold?

[Transigent]

Edited for gayness.

[Joy]

Functions aren't feelings. You're just talking about feelings associated with functions.

lols @ ******

[Transigent]

Edited for gayness.

[Joy]

Functions aren't feelings. You're just talking about feelings associated with functions.

Maybe. 6 in one hand a half dozen in the other. Just a different way of looking at it. Whether the feels come from functions or functions come from feels, doesn't really matter either way cuz there isn't any way to tell for sure.

lols @ ******

But objectively, regardless of whether or not they are associated with one another, or if one causes the other, they are two different things.

[Transigent]

Edited for gayness.

[Mariano Rajoy]

in a way, ****** has simply substituted thoughts for actions in our quest for evidence. the thoughts we have are evidence of psychic structures, instead of actions/talents.

it is still very very ambiguous as to the relationship between functions and thoughts, just as it is between functions and behavior/action.

socionics is interesting as an ontology, but i wonder how much that reduces its credibility as a science.