What's your typing of nanashi? I noticed that you didn't mention a concrete alternative to her being ILI; if you're that confident about her being mistyped, then provide a solid alternative.Originally Posted by The Ineffable
What's your typing of nanashi? I noticed that you didn't mention a concrete alternative to her being ILI; if you're that confident about her being mistyped, then provide a solid alternative.
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
Negation does not necessitate an alternative. It's possible one could be so focused on what is not, that they miss what is.
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
An admirable ideal to have
When someone comes barging in with this much certainty and accuses a person of "revolting bullshit" out of the blue like this, though, the bar's set a lot higher - can't just take a light tinkle on 6.25% of all possible typings and then run off like that.
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
Yea, Bolt's post was uncalled for(must be some history between them I missed).An admirable ideal to have
When someone comes barging in with this much certainty and accuses a person of "revolting bullshit" out of the blue like this, though, the bar's set a lot higher - can't just take a light tinkle on 6.25% of all possible typings and then run off like that.
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
I'm typing her IEE for a long time, I typed her ILE for a short period of time.
Stop bluffing that you "figured it out", you know that for sure from my post in Greta Garbo thread, I have no problem with her except for her feminist claims and denying facts. This "SEEs are shy and avoidant compared to an ILI" is audacious and is based solely on her mistyping, wishful thinking and total lack of respect for reasonableness (of which she was warned before). It has nothing to do with Socionics, how can one respect her when she does not respect others?
Neither she is ILI nor she describes SEEs, at least regarding the latter virtually anyone knows what the truth is, for this reason this thread is totally spurious.
Does this mean you didn't have to drug Parasite before dating her ?
Stop bluffing that you "figured it out", you know that for sure from my post in Greta Garbo thread
I'll stop you right here. No, I never entered that thread, nor have seen any disagreement between you two previously, so from my perspective it was uncalled for considering you had no previous posts in this thread.
I only concerned myself with the issue of people having to have an alternative idea of someone's type if they are to refuse the current one; and that you threw biting remarks at nanashi. That's it and nothing more.
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
Okay, I have no reasons to doubt you, especially since you're a Ne Irrational and can smell what's behind. Despite everything else, her remarks on SEEs are pure misinformation, my criticism is justified. And yes, she always rejected rightful corrections, therefore I had no intention to make an appeal to her inexistent reasonableness.
I don't see any connection with what I said. But if you're curious, we may talk about it in the feminism thread.
I just wanted to see whether or not you are typed properly and I'm not a feminist.
Who asked for your views? If you don't want to agree on an appropriate thread, then you don't want to hear my story.
What did she do to you in that thread to warrant IEE for her, just want to know whether you type her on the basis of that said thread or not.
Oh no, not based on that. It was like one or two years ago, based on different things that I explained at the time.
I have been typed by others on here who have interacted with me extensively. As to your accusation that I type my duals on a whim: I don't know why that is your assumption. It's true that I don't share every detail of evidential support for the alleged types of my dual-crushes on this, an internet forum. But, why would you assume that my not posting the online journals, home videos, and snapshots of these people onto the forum for your assessment is evidence that I type them on a whim? I have people on here type alleged duals because, even though I recognize Fi traits and expressions, I prefer having videos and photos from my crushes be typed by my friends here. I like having knowledge and testing it.
Is the Ineffable = Pinocchio?
you don't like me because I am egalitarian? I'm not sure if that is what you are saying. Do you mean you dislike some of my abstract claims because you see them as erroneous? or...do you just hate that I think personhood is of value? 'Cuz...I am anti-bigotry all around....
I'm not really INTO denying facts. I rather like knowing facts. Even if it's painful for me to acknowledge them at first. But, someone simply calling something a fact isn't going to convince me of factyness. If you have any facts you think I may not see, you could pm them to me and talk them over with me to help me understand them. If you post the facts here, I will probably be exhausted by dealing with the issues socially, since I am assuming these points of yours have to do with bigotry.
I haven't said this. I specified the Fi-subtypes of SEE, first off. This post is actually of great value because it goes beyond stereotypes to investigate and discuss and try to make sense of behaviors of Se+Fi types which cursorily seem counterintuitive. In support of the point I was making are the assertion of Galen (an EXFp-Fi) that they are unassertive and awkward, the observation of crazed that there can be formality with crushes more than with those to whom they are not as attracted, the sharing of a similar sentiment by WorkaholicsAnon, and Aixelsyd's multiple and appreciated descriptions here of her behavior toward people she likes and thoughts on not dating them. OH, and woofl's. And a few others said similar things.
(One of the men I described above MAY be incredibly self-preservational instinctually or may be ISFj, but the others are clear extroverts with Fi, so Hotel and TheIneffable may have a point that one of these men is ISFj..if he is ISFj.
It's not solely based on my alleged mistyping.It was based on comparison of the actual circumstances of interaction with my subjective view of Se at the time as vastly dynamic compared to me as an ILI.
I have explored other options for the personalities of these people. I have explored other options for my own typing for years.
I'm actually rather a fan of reasonableness.
Warning me of my alleged unreasonableness doesn't prove any unreasonableness. I kind of need some evidence for it to move forward.
It does...read the ESFp-Fi testaments on this thread. It does have to do with socionics. One ENTj on this forum typed the ESFp-Fi I am discussing.
I respect others. People could respect me even if I didn't.
I have not only typed myself ILI. Others have, too.
it's not outside the scope of a SEE's behavior to be diffident socially. http://www.slideconsulting.com/Eroti...groupings.html
Well if you like him then don't discuss him so flippantly, but you're a girl and they do that so put it in in the woman's section (or request one).or at least as shy. I mean.....I'm sx/so and Te subtype, so that means I'm more social than other ILIs, but COME ON. Dammit.
I can hit on you. I can ask you out. I can flirt. I can make the first physical move, I can come to your music show when you want me to so much, but IF YOU (according to my platonic guy friend) clearly like me a lot, stop being so damned skittish
. I keep thinking of
being forward, and I see your skittishness and think you are maybe not into me. AND IT IS STOPPING ME FROM HITTING ON YOU AGAIN.
And multiple experiences are making me feel weirdly firebally compared to you.
So, maybe that's good. This whole expression of my heretofore unexpressed feeling has resulted in me accepting this trait of yours, and I feel more "fine, I'll keep hitting on you."
Yes.
Because they're erroneous. I'm also against bigotry (in fact that's something anyone who read my posts should know), but ethics/morals/politics can't change the facts just like that, magically. There are two kinds of truths: the real ones, and the ones that are made by both the bigots and the so-called egalitarians. I don't accept either, even if the latter category of people only try to counter-attack the former.
Eg, say this is a fact: "black people run faster than white people".
- bigot: "white people are physically inferior to black people";
- egalitarian: "there are no physical differences between blacks and whites".
Or, when we talk statistically:
- bigot: "all whites run slower than blacks";
- egalitarian: "all whites run as fast as blacks".
Both are bullshit, assuming the first fact is true again, literally and respectively statistically. But I'm more bothered by the egalitarians, since the former have some seed of truth in them but follow some flawed reasoning, the latter are total bullshit, it's just covering your eyes and denying something that actually can be observed.
Okay, I will send you PM when I stumble upon them.
Such "evidence" is Chinese whispers, you can't type one base on another (neither through relationships) without validation from the theory. Agreements and applauses have no use, IMO.
The rule of thumb is: when someone doesn't sound like the type in the descriptions, he/she isn't. Also, my experience is different, so I can't agree either way, pointing my finger at the reference or looking around.
^define bigotry and what's wrong with it
That's an artificial construct. Dualization, doesn't work that way, it is you who are dualized by someone else, you can't be both at once precisely because they are the *two* sides of the same coin. The roles do not reverse.
Out of my own experience in a relationship with my Dual:
- it takes time (1);
- you don't actually "change", you become more "yourself", more than you could realize before. In fact the Base functions of the couple polarize, one is even more confident in the provision, without trying to compensate anymore;
- you borrow from the Dual's Creative/your Mobilizing (the HA), though. Just that's something internal, "between four eyes", without the support of your Dual it can't be used.
---
(1) - There are things one inherently does not want, but does as a consequence of the environment he/she lived in. For instance, interacting through righteousness, worth - if you don't have it in yourself, but lived in a family with such values, when you interact with your Dual you can't believe that you don't need that anymore, but your're still defensive for a while. There are countless such things, I just can't think of much right now, for example interacting with people who announce their intentions in advance VS taking you by surprise.
I think it's pretty self-evident what's wrong with it unless you're gunning to be a Grand Wizard or something.: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
IEE Ne Creative Type
Someand role lovin too. (
too...
!!!!!!
An extremely mature response.
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intoleranceNothing wrong with it. This is how nations have always survive. Difference is diversity.I think it's pretty self-evident what's wrong with it unless you're gunning to be a Grand Wizard or something.
Of course if you're against it take it up with your own country, USA? Who villify Taleban, or Arabs, as terrorists, or White people who celebrate their ethnicity as ku klux klan (note how you refer to Grand Wizard, but not Japanese who are monocultural).
I don't think that works from a distance, it must be real, living in. Think of the many who crave for an ideal life found in fiction, their insecurities are even more pronounced and sometimes they are not properly reacting to their environment (their personal way of course, but fit to the reality). Of course, I would like to believe that one, in order to be self-sufficient, but if I take Model A (1) for granted, I'm afraid it's impossible. The ones who have found social balance live like themselves here and now, it is not necessary to make a selection of information (ignore, dismiss or distort some things in order to be ok), the ones who found satisfaction in distant sources - including fiction, philosophy or simply a rationalized ideal - appear to be segregated from the outside as a rule.
I observed people who want to deal with everything themselves, but they are still fake and uncomfortable in certain areas. A Dynamic unconscious is a consequence of a Static conscious, and the vice-verse (2). Here's an example: when you're concerned of the ethical or logical aspects of something, it's appropriateness, consistency, principles, you're excluding its dynamic properties, whether it works or is good for you. In public life there's more than often a conflict between the needs and some static rules: security vs productivity, ethical principles VS entertainment, and so on (3). It is impossible to take both positions at the same time, if you're strong in one, you automatically dismiss the other, the only middle-ground is to not be physchologically active at all (4). This is the principle of complementarity, Duality is explained through it.
AFAIK, self-actualization is when you are allowed to freely be yourself, the Ego. I read Rick's articles regarding this and apparently I understand it the same way - I found no reference to functions to tell for sure, though.
---
(1) - which matches my experience, too.
(2) - it is not a matter of allocating resources disproportionally.
(3) - I would mention this, as an example of the way I see it:
(4) - which means you're neither, instead of both at the same time. Trade-offs can be made only in action, not in thought/position/attitude, alternating between them (relocating resources) stresses people who have no social/psychological support they need from outside, and that's where Duality is in theory the best remedy for neuroses. In such alternating situations you can't talk about "yourself", since there's more than one persona...Jung saw collective neuroses in politics: "Our world is, so to speak, dissociated like a neurotic" (Jung, 1964:85).
Socionics is bigotry, I see it here, this quadra, such type, realise this.
Because I'm fucking awesome
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
That's not nice. They can create a stable relations with someone who gives them what they need; that shouldn't give you a reason to be so judgmental because you're not getting what you want from them to fill your needs.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 07-18-2011 at 05:18 AM.
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Jealous?
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
group hug!
thanks thanks
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
" There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."
hah
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
The ethical subtype description may clear up some of the confusion I (and the poster of the thread I just linked in the above comment) may have had in interacting with ESFps who actually respond to our ILI advances and don't do all of the move-making, even though a lot of Se descriptions seem to indicate ILIs should expect SEEs to be this Energizer Bunny of move-making that won't let us pursue them, too, etc.
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...e=SEE_subtypes
ILIs make advances? You don't say
I do as long as they are Gamma SF and like me, too.
Here I am!! So when can you start?
Shayley: if you read sx/so descriptions, it makes sense.
I already pursue you friendishly.............You want a boy, though. So do I. WHY IS ONE OF US NOT A MAN??
How is this "revolting bullshit"? I do think this helps the socionics community,and I find it insightful, I dont see why shes mistyped simply because she isnt going around singing the high praises of duality and whatnot.
I am.I already pursue you friendishly.
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
My brother is an ESFp-Fi 6w7. He is about equivelent in his lack of shyness as I am. However, I am more likely to hold back for the sake of diplomacy and he is likely to not notice something because he can be obtuse. Sometimes ESFps are like this. They need something to spark their attention or something very, very direct. Otherwise, theyre just going to be on autopilot.
"Bullshit" because it redefines Socionics, "revolting" because it is done on a whim. How would you feel if I say that Earth is flat or that women are animals, because I say so? Speculation is not sufficient, there must exist some reasons for something to be true.
How does it redifine socions? Thats your interpretation. For the record saying women are animals isnt wrong like the earth is flat because all humans are animals, men too.
Its based on her personal experience and I think she just wanted to express frustration at the fact these guys are more shy than she is, not redefine socionics or make any big intellectual claims.
Wow, that decription of Sx/so sound so much like me! I wonder if I am in fact one, I identify less with the description of sx/sp(though I identify with it too) than sx/so. Seems like Gilly may have been right.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
