yes indeed, you are both the same type.Originally Posted by incognito
INTp :-)
Krig the Viking & MegaDoomer, Te & Ti [split from "Type changing"]
yes indeed, you are both the same type.
INTp :-)
I don't think I'm a perceiving type. I know, I considered ILI for a long time, but not anymore. At the moment, I'm quite confident about my self-typing.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Unfortunately I know I'm ILI-Te for more than 6 years now, dated the whole socion and saw each relationship work out with the typical socionics features. I've no reason to doubt my type.Yes, indeed, I think all three of us are the same time. I think you are INTj.
Cool.Nice. I've long suspected you were LII.I know that others did as well, or at least Alpha NT. But I can also understand those who see me as ILI, I was pretty convinced myself.
If you made that experience, I congratulate you. As I said above, intertype relations are not that easy and clear for me. I suppose I had a crush on my conflictor some years ago which would explain why it didn't work well.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
x
FTR: MegaDoomer, Krig the Viking, Subterranean, etc are the same type, namely LII Ne
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant
--> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
You forgot to say that you scored on a first date with an IEE
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
ah okay :-)
Since you all seem so certain, I withdraw my typing of megadoomer. You alpha's have a new member.
I think megadoom is INTp. He just seems more cautious than the average INTj and doesn't seem to have these typical ideosyncratic ideas that INTjs always hold fast to.
0.02c
Well, at least I think she is my conflictor, she might be some other type, too. However, it was mostly physical attraction imho. We were often misunderstanding each other and were prone to argue.
In this regard, I have taken the Oldham types test and I scored as Conscientious (correlating wiht MBTI ISTJ) rather than Idiosyncratic (MBTI INTJ).
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Which I don't suspect he is because he never EVER analyzes in a
Nice. I've long suspected you were LII.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 02-18-2011 at 02:57 PM.
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
^ I agree
I don't understand this "Live and let live" attitude toward's people's self-typings. It's not what type you think you are but what type you really are.
(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 might not demonstrate Ti all the time but if you think I'm ILI: where's the Ni then? Maybe it's because I don't fully understand the concept of Ni, but I can't really see it. Furthermore, I keep things always open if I can't totally narrow down something or don't fully understand the issue. I don't settle on something if I don't know every aspect of it.Which I don't suspect he is because he never EVER analyzes in a
Well, it's not that I changed from ILI to LII because I wanted to. I'm genuinely interested in typing myself correctly.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
I typed myself ILI before I started to learn the information elements.
When I learned about Ni I got confused. Never doubted my type, but just confused because I wasn't thinking about time all day. I don't see time. I don't experience time. Heck I'm even always late at work!
What I do however, is daydream a lot. Have conversations in my mind with people, and know how they react. etc etc.
Information elements aren't that important for typing yourself. They do more harm than help. It's even general consensus that you cannot see what your leading function is because it's to ordinary. So why try looking for it in yourself??
I just replied to Maritsas post. I don't know if one can identify their base function easily or not, but I don't think Ni is my base function.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
imho Krig could be ILI and Subt is EII.
i could be wrong about Krig, i guess he could be LII, but to me he is very "literal" and dry, and he likes to expound upon facts and write descriptions, substantiating and clarifying various information. for example stuff like this thread, i see as Te. what Expat used to do for general socionics concepts, Krig does for DCNH. he doesn't seem to seek Fe either.
Subt is too ethically-minded, i think his personal feelings and sentiments towards things and people come out very easily in his communication, even if he may not explicitly state them. it's something i see as Ethical, especially Fi.
I wouldn't say that I expound upon facts so much as I seek to correctly categorize information logically. Ti looks at the world and tries to sort it into static categories. Te looks at the world and tries to keep track of the changing states of the objects in it. Consequently, Ti is more focused on correct reasoning and precise definitions, while Te is more focused on empirical data and efficient actions.
My posts tend to be purely theoretical and almost completely void of empirical data, which annoys actual Te types.
I can see the similarities between Expat and myself, but since I haven't really tried to type Expat for myself, I don't really know what to make of that. I've wondered if he might be some kind of Ti type in the past, but haven't looked into it.
As for my Fe-seeking -- I mostly post here when I'm in the mood for intellectual exercise. People here haven't really seen me in my sillier moods.
Quaero Veritas.
This reminds me that I've noticed on this forum how hard it is for me to see Alpha NTs' Fe-valuing online. IRL, it's easy for me to connect with them around some very silly Fe.As for my Fe-seeking -- I mostly post here when I'm in the mood for intellectual exercise. People here haven't really seen me in my sillier moods.
Krig may not be indulging in extensive antics here, but he seems lighthearted enough. The way he expresses himself in writing is not too different from an LII I know very well, who can be quite dry and serious in his writing and sometimes very playful in person.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
I wouldn't say self-typings are irrelevant, though. It's generally a good idea to take them in account as strong arguments in their own right. To sum up the reasons for this:I don't understand this "Live and let live" attitude toward's people's self-typings. It's not what type you think you are but what type you really are.
1. people tend to have a tremendous amount of information about themselves unlike anything you can gather about them from an outside perspective, let alone through the internet.
2. the most basic claims of socionics aren't generally very difficult to understand. What's more, when people begin to study socionics longer they typically start delving into the more experimental side of the theory, which has the potential of confusing them more than improving their understanding. Hence, the argument that people that have more experience with the theory type better than people who are new is not a very strong one.
3. people typically take what others say about them in account, so if you tell them casually what your impressions are, this information is included in their self-typing.
4. the person him/herself is the one that has thought about their typing problem longer than anyone else.
General recommendation: don't type people. Help people find their type.
Last edited by krieger; 02-19-2011 at 05:23 AM.
The Ni is where you said when people don't take time seriously that makes you upset. Ne time is very different from that very statement alone. Keeping things open is a product of perception.I might not demonstrate Ti all the time but if you think I'm ILI: where's the Ni then? Maybe it's because I don't fully understand the concept of Ni, but I can't really see it. Furthermore, I keep things always open if I can't totally narrow down something or don't fully understand the issue. I don't settle on something if I don't know every aspect of it.
Well, it's not that I changed from ILI to LII because I wanted to. I'm genuinely interested in typing myself correctly.
About my type...
I never change it. I found out once and that's all it took.
I knew these things about myself:
1. I loved hunting for ideas so I had to have Ne in the ego block, because it was obsessive.
2. I love people, relationships, human beings. I love and value close relations and care for them very much.
3. I over-analyze everything.
4. I can not exert massive amount of energy. My senses are terrible.
5. I'm not organized. I can't organize things by color, shape, size, style, articles...pfff...no Te around. I'm not very practical, I'm very dreamy and creative.
6. I love, love, love, Si environment of rest, pleasantries, relaxation, warm hugs, warm teas, staying indoors and sleeping in, eating pasta and eating very good for you, healthy food; my internal states get confused and I don't know what I need so I need to follow lead with Si and Te.
7. I don't care about exact time. I care more about general time, Ne.
8. I ignore my own feelings in concern for empathizing with other people, animals, environment.
It's EASY to type yourself.
Dual type
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
you got that right, you freak!My posts tend to be purely theoretical and almost completely void of empirical data, which annoys actual Te types.
'-)
I never doubted that Krig is LII. That typing fits very well imho.
No, I disagree. I get upset if people are late for appointments or similar things, but that's pretty understandable. I just don't like it if people are independable. And as I said, I keep things open if I'm not fully certain about something. This is my way to ensure I don't make any mistakes. And referring to time: I'm always over-punctual because I'm not good at estimating time and how long something takes.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
You said this about yourself, not me. Second sentence, you're rationalizing why people could be late, that's trough a judgment function, not through perception of the qualities of time. AKA, you're being nice. Keeping things open again is a product of perception. Rationality doesn't work that way.
So, my mom, ILI, is alway over punctual because she cares about real time and being responsible; she cares about it so much that she calls me several several times before my bills are due to remind them they are due at a certain day and time. That's how your Ni's work, like having a third eye (the subjective preference for time) on the events that have to happen by a certain time. Ni PoLR would have this in their conscious block.
Dual type
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
@Maritsa:
I think this fits my use of Ni pretty well.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
well your posts make me think that you are very concerned with empirical data. when you talk about socionics you do not actually focus on the theory, you elaborate on a given concept, give examples (including your real-life experiences) and are interested in hearing such information from others.I wouldn't say that I expound upon facts so much as I seek to correctly categorize information logically. Ti looks at the world and tries to sort it into static categories. Te looks at the world and tries to keep track of the changing states of the objects in it. Consequently, Ti is more focused on correct reasoning and precise definitions, while Te is more focused on empirical data and efficient actions.
My posts tend to be purely theoretical and almost completely void of empirical data, which annoys actual Te types.
I can see the similarities between Expat and myself, but since I haven't really tried to type Expat for myself, I don't really know what to make of that. I've wondered if he might be some kind of Ti type in the past, but haven't looked into it.
As for my Fe-seeking -- I mostly post here when I'm in the mood for intellectual exercise. People here haven't really seen me in my sillier moods.
also, i disagree that Ti is concerned with "precise definitions." it is Te that is concerned with objective data and information such as "precise definitions". Ti (esp. from Alpha NTs) will cut things down to the nitty-gritty, the absolute fundamentals, even to the point where it may be hard for someone who does not have enough background information to understand it, but Te will elaborate and clarify things to make sure the information being explained is "objectively" accurate and correct - which is what i see you do.
i am not saying for sure you aren't LII, but based on your posts here i think there is good reason to think you might be a Te type instead.
Yes.
Ah, I see. I think you have a common misunderstanding of the nature of Te. While Te is concerned with objective data, that's not its primary focus. Te is a dynamic element: explicit dynamics of objects. It keeps track of the way objects in the world change and move over time, and understands how to cause and influence that change. The stock market is a good example. Your stereotypical LIE uses Te to keep track of how companies are changing over time, making and losing money, and uses Ni to extrapolate from the past to predict the direction that change will head in the future. While Te is concerned with getting accurate objective data on the current and past states of the companies, its goal in doing so is to figure out how that data changes and how to influence that change. Te is about profit, productivity, efficiency, practicality -- actions. It seeks the best method for doing things -- spending a lot of time trying to figure out exactly how to precisely define a thing would be a waste of time to a Te type; all they want to know is how to use the information they have, not how to define and categorize it.
On the other hand, Ti is a static element: explicit statics of fields. It seeks to understand the static, unchanging logical connections and categorizations of things. Data about constantly changing things (like the stock market) is uninteresting to a Ti type; they try to see through the constant changes in the world to the unchanging truths underneath. So a Ti type is more interested in things like philosophy, science -- something like socionics appeals to a Ti type, because the whole point is finding the unchanging commonalities underlying the seeming shifting chaos of the human mind. It's no coincidence it was developed by an ILE (Aushra). Ti is about categorization, precise definitions, logical frameworks, analysis -- sorting information into correct static logical systems. Understanding how to use information to accomplish some purpose is boring to a Ti type; they want to precisely and accurately sort information to arrive at a clearer understanding of the world.
Stereotypically speaking, Alpha NTs are pure scientists (seeking unchanging truth), while Gamma NTs are engineers (seeking the best method for making changes in the world). Clearly, I am the former: I seek to understand how the human mind is structured; I have no interest in figuring out the best method of using that information.
Quaero Veritas.
You would use Ti whether you decided on LII or ILI; difference being is that you wouldn't use Te if you were LII; so, I see you using more Te than Ti; where is your example of Te ignoring? and how about Fe valuing...I never see you around when BIG emotions are being pulled and where are you in pulling some yourself, or showing that you need your emotions pulled? Where do you ask questions and analyze?
Here you're pointing out empirical data to support your argument. You are relating to something but how do you apply it and where?
Dual type
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
Speaking as someone with plenty of big emotions, I have not experienced Alpha NTs IRL as always enjoying them. The ones I know respond well to a certain side of what I offer emotionally. But not the whole thing, and certainly not drama and negativity etc.
I assume this has something to do with the differences between Alpha and Beta Fe. But anyway, based on my RL experience, I would expect an Alpha NT not to get embroiled in forum threads where "big emotions" are being "pulled."
I find a lot of what people are saying here about Alpha NTs a little odd, tbh.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
Well, wouldn't they like Fe atmosphere? We have that here. HavaLucid likes it.Speaking as someone with plenty of big emotions, I have not experienced Alpha NTs IRL as always enjoying them. The ones I know respond well to a certain side of what I offer emotionally. But not the whole thing, and certainly not drama and negativity etc.
I assume this has something to do with the differences between Alpha and Beta Fe. But anyway, based on my RL experience, I would expect an Alpha NT not to get embroiled in forum threads where "big emotions" are being "pulled."
I find a lot of what people are saying here about Alpha NTs a little odd, tbh.
@MegaDomer
You contradict yourself when you say that you keep things open yet have settled with INTj typing.That's my Ti role
Dual type
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
Well, contrary to the wikisocion's statement about a LII's Te I'd say that I do keep track of my finances but otherwise, I think it also fits me pretty well. (Especially the sentences about 'aquiring skills based on interest instead of practicability) I don't know what I should reply to your claim you'd see more Te than Ti... it's your opinion.
As far as I know, LIIs aren't that expressive with emotion at all. And you might agree that emotional expression in a forum is not the same as irl. Your claim that I wouldn't ask enough questions or don't analyze enough looks a bit shallow to me. People of the same types may act differently, especially if one is older than the other. Anyway, this is not sufficient to rule out LII for me. At least in my opinion.and how about Fe valuing...I never see you around when BIG emotions are being pulled and where are you in pulling some yourself, or showing that you need your emotions pulled? Where do you ask questions and analyze?
I don't understand why you put so much emphasis on this single statement. You should try to see the bigger picture there. I've 'settled' on INTj because I was switching pretty often which was caused by the lack of a 100% correlation of my personality and a socionics type. At some point, I realized there is no 100% correlations and that's why I settled on it because this seems to be the most reasonable explanation and the best fit.You contradict yourself when you say that you keep things open yet have settled with INTj typing.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Please define your observation of what Te and Ti is.
Dual type
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
It's pointless. The mind can fool itself into thinking its doing what it thinks it 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
I think this leads nowhere. I probably have rather vague definitions of the IEs in my mind and I'd consult several sources if I need to think about them. Rehashing the knowledge posted in Wikisocion isn't necessary.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
exactly what I was leading into. MegaDoomer don't go by descriptions of type, go by functions.
Dual type
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
er no, i don't, but thanks
i predicted that you might reply in this way - i figured that if you are a Te type you'd seek to correct my knowledge (which you did), and if you are a Ti type you'd try to further clarify your own viewpoint (which you didn't do.)
also compare yourself to MegaDoomer in this thread, he doesn't try to correct Maritsa's knowledge when defending his self-typing to her. he just explains why he believes he's LII "according to my own understanding, i must be LII". you take a different approach: "according to the objective data, i must be LII."
hah, this kind of thing makes me understand why Reinin calls Ti valuers Subjectivists, and Te valuers Objectivists...
Hm, yeah. Knowing the IM elements is essential to understanding and identifying one's type. Two people can express the same IMEs in a different manner, so it becomes important to look at more than just superficial behaviors.
Johari/Nohari
"Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."
Fruit, the fluffy kitty.
I know that you believe I'm LII. And since you question that Krig is LII as well, you use my posts as an example to show the difference between us. But Maritsa is telling me now that exactly the same posts imply that I'm not LII. That means either one or even both of you are wrong. Whatever I 'choose', the members of this forum will never fully agree.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
i know. you don't have to agree with my opinions - it's not my goal to get everyone to think the same way. i agree that will never happen.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
