Tiny Tim: ILI or IEI?

[Timmy]

It's come to my attention that various forum members still see me as IEI. For the record, I still very much consider myself to be ILI, but having recently established a stronger forum presence, I'm curious to see where peoples' opinions on the matter lie. All opinions are welcomed.

Also, I forgot to allow multiple votes in the poll. If you feel that more than one option applies, feel free to leave a comment and say so.

[Aleksei]

I'd say ILI fits. You don't seem to value at any rate.

[woofwoofl]

I've noticed a lot of F from you, and it's of the variety

Te-ILI it is!

[aestrivex]

It's come to my attention that various forum members still see me as IEI. For the record, I still very much consider myself to be ILI, but having recently established a stronger forum presence, I'm curious to see where peoples' opinions on the matter lie. All opinions are welcomed.

Also, and I forgot to allow multiple votes in the poll. If more than one option applies, feel free to leave a comment and say so.

i think it is very plausible that you are ILI, but i think it is more likely you are LIE.

[Jenna]

Timmy is ashton, remember???

[redbaron]

lol! I thought you meant the real Tiny Tim! I was gonna say IEI to that. I don't even really know why...

[EyeSeeCold]

Timmy is ashton, remember???

Yes.

[EyeSeeCold]

Yes.

You:

That's nice, Ashton.

[Marie84]

I get the impression that you're Gamma Te, one of the few actual ones here, especially after reading your lengthy analysis of the SL-DJ conflict. You seem comfortable detaching yourself emotionally from a situation which seems to give you an upper-hand in effectively deducing what's going on making you sound like a just observer.
Unlike some of the Beta's here, I don't think you do this for entertainment, to get fans or to enforce your ideologies on others. (in other words, I don't see the Fe valuing).

[silke]

Fe-IEI, you're very responsive to various ethical issues (and no, it is not because you have a lot of tertiary Fi but because you are Fe-ego), probably so-primary or secondary stacking

[Timmy]

i think it is very plausible that you are ILI, but i think it is more likely you are LIE.

Having spent a significant portion of my youth enamored with an incredible girl whom I've long considered an ESI, I've mulled over the possibility that I may be LIE on several occasions. I've always wound up dismissing this typing on account of my total inability to square the EJ temperament with my most ordinary and natural behavioral tendencies. More recently I've grown especially disinclined to consider LIE an acceptable self-typing since developing very close friendships with a couple of honest-to-goodness LIE's. My interactions with them reveal stark differences between myself and them, and through my interaction with them I feel that I have acquired a decent understanding of the distinguishing characteristics of extroversion and rationality in a gamma NT context to the point where I feel confident in saying LIE doesn't doesn't suit me.

Finally, forum appearances notwithstanding, I sense that I am horribly inadequate where all things Se are concerned (or maybe my dearth of Se is apparent on the forum. Fuck if I can tell). I severely lack initiative, quickly lose motivation when I'm not stimulated or under the gun, and at times struggle over making the most trivial of decisions. Often I am extremely relieved when somebody whom I respect and trust simply gets the ball rolling for me and kicks me into action. And here's one last little detail: my entire life I've been given grief by parents and teachers for sitting and appearing to listen while, in fact, my mind is elsewhere entirely and nothing being said is sinking in.

So anyway, unless you are able to convince me that my handle on socionics is extremely poor, you'll have a very hard time dislodging my view that I am IP, and more specifically Se dual seeking.

ILI-Te your online presence has a heavier presence of Ni over Te from what has across to me. So far of all the users in this community, I feel most at ease with you around. I believe you have a good handle on Fi and are very well developed in Ni, Fi, and Te. You seem like a very likeable person and I am really glad you are a part of this community. : ) You've shown that ILI kindness that is very subtle but has a lot of power and protection. I don't at all see you as valuing Ti over Fi.

Aix, it's on account of people like you I stick around on this forum. I've nothing but respect and admiration for you and I'm honored to know you appreciate having me around as much as I appreciate having you around!

You seem comfortable detaching yourself emotionally from a situation which seems to give you an upper-hand in effectively deducing what's going on making you sound like a just observer.
Unlike some of the Beta's here, I don't think you do this for entertainment, to get fans or to enforce your ideologies on others. (in other words, I don't see the Fe valuing).

Whether or not you intended it as a compliment, I'm very grateful for your comment. Marie, you've depicted me just how I like to imagine myself on my more self-confident days!

Fe-IEI, you're very responsive to various ethical issues (and no, it is not because you have a lot of tertiary Fi but because you are Fe-ego), probably so-primary or secondary stacking

Thanks for your input Siuntal. I'm still not sure why you think that I'm an Fe ego. For whatever it's worth, I've self diagnosed my enneagram type as 5w4 sx/sp. A few years ago I would have considered the inclusion of So in my instinctual stacking an impossibility. I'm slightly more amenable to characterizations of myself as secondary So today than I was then, but I hold firmly of the stance that Sx/Sp fits me best.

[Absurd]

Voted ILI.

[Trevor]

I get the impression that you're Gamma Te, one of the few actual ones here, especially after reading your lengthy analysis of the SL-DJ conflict. ...

You always seem to get the same impressions that aestrivex gets. Especially if he happens to get 'n' announce them first.

I find it amusing.

[aestrivex]

i think it is very plausible that you are ILI, but i think it is more likely you are LIE.

Having spent a significant portion of my youth enamored with an incredible girl whom I've long considered an ESI, I've mulled over the possibility that I may be LIE on several occasions. I've always wound up dismissing this typing on account of my total inability to square the EJ temperament with my most ordinary and natural behavioral tendencies. More recently I've grown especially disinclined to consider LIE an acceptable self-typing since developing very close friendships with a couple of honest-to-goodness LIE's. My interactions with them reveal stark differences between myself and them, and through my interaction with them I feel that I have acquired a decent understanding of the distinguishing characteristics of extroversion and rationality in a gamma NT context to the point where I feel confident in saying LIE doesn't doesn't suit me.

Finally, forum appearances notwithstanding, I sense that I am horribly inadequate where all things Se are concerned (or maybe my dearth of Se is apparent on the forum. Fuck if I can tell). I severely lack initiative, quickly lose motivation when I'm not stimulated or under the gun, and at times struggle over making the most trivial of decisions. Often I am extremely relieved when somebody whom I respect and trust simply gets the ball rolling for me and kicks me into action. And here's one last little detail: my entire life I've been given grief by parents and teachers for sitting and appearing to listen while, in fact, my mind is elsewhere entirely and nothing being said is sinking in.

So anyway, unless you are able to convince me that my handle on socionics is extremely poor, you'll have a very hard time dislodging my view that I am IP, and more specifically Se dual seeking.

i am very open to the possibility of ILI but i am not currently convinced for a variety of reasons. i am open to discussing those reasons with you but not here.

[ScarlettLux]

You V.I. SOOOOOOO it's not even funny! But then again, stereotypes of smiling and bright eyes = Fe... ? However, what would V.I. be if not for these sort of assumptions?

I dunno, all I know is that I hope you're in my quadra but I voted IEI.

[Absurd]

Poor Tiny Tim, told you before, that gear you have is way too small.

[redbaron]

um, you don't have to be LIE to like an ESI. One of my FAVORITE boyfriends and indeed persons in all the world was/is ESI.

[Timmy]

I dunno, all I know is that I hope you're in my quadra but I voted IEI.

Whaddya say I call you SEE? If we can't agree on each other's type, at least we can agree over belonging in the same quadra!

[woofwoofl]

I dunno, all I know is that I hope you're in my quadra but I voted IEI.

Whaddya say I call you SEE? If we can't agree on each other's type, at least we can agree over belonging to the same quadra!

Hooray!

[silverchris9]

1) I've always thought Timmy was IEI, thought it made more sense. But he gave some explanation on his first type-me thread as to why he thought he was ILI instead, and it made sense to me, so I decided to go with his self-typing over my interpretation of his self-presentation on this site.

2) I could see ScarlettLux as SEE.

[Marie84]

Whether or not you intended it as a compliment, I'm very grateful for your comment. Marie, you've depicted me just how I like to imagine myself on my more self-confident days!

It's just an observation, but if you saw it as a compliment to your character I'm glad since after how I seen you deal with the recent fiasco on here I've gained a lot of respect for you

You always seem to get the same impressions that aestrivex gets. Especially if he happens to get 'n' announce them first.

I find it amusing.

Why is it amusing? Socionics isn't really a subjective theory IMO so people who are informed about it and have been applying it for some time should come to a similar analysis in most cases

[717495]

I see as it overbearingly overshadows your PoLR, and your comes across free-flowing and more natural, both more than what I expect from an ENTJ, and the way you talk is just like all other dominants on here, I get a distinct feel from. So INTP is a pretty good guess in that I can't see anything else. I think Se/Fi are both natural for all types in both quadras, but they distinctly appear certain ways due to temperament.

[Marie84]

Why is it amusing? Socionics isn't really a subjective theory IMO so people who are informed about it and have been applying it for some time should come to a similar analysis in most cases

…

hence why I added "IMO"

[silke]

Thanks for your input Siuntal. I'm still not sure why you think that I'm an Fe ego.

I will be happy to explain why I can't see you as anything but a Fe-ego, and in return would like to hear your reasoning for being ILI rather than IEI.

The very first post that has got me doubting your self-typing as ILI was the following one, in which you were replying to crazedrat on the topic of EIEs being supervisors to ILIs. You went on to describe how you proceed with social maneuvering against a person you don't like:

...I initiate a drawn-out campaign to shift the consensus against that person. I strategically lay traps for the person to get tangled in; I make a couple of pointed remarks when others are already beginning to have their own doubts about the person; I focus my efforts on managing the impressions of those with the greatest sway over the social situation.

Ultimately, my intent is to create as large a shift as possible in the underlying social dynamic with as little intervention as possible. The goal is to redefine the situation to my liking in such a way that few (especially the target of my manipulations) are aware that there has been any manipulation at all. A would-be Fe leading adversary to my scheme wouldn't have a clue that I was up to anything at all (especially my conflictor, ESE). By the time others' disdain for the targeted individual has become apparent in an Fe sort of a way, already the group's Fi/Ti disposition has shifted.

ILIs do not engage in this kind of engineering of group sentiments as you are describing of yourself here. As Fe-PoLRs they have trouble evaluating other people's sentiments objectively. They do not kep track of the likes/dislikes between others to later use this to masterfully turn social consensus against a person. This kind of picking on one individual out of the group is, however, often associated with Fi-PoLR types, such as SLEs and ILEs. Out of curiosity I've actually asked two real ILIs whether they have ever attempted to adjust public perception of somebody's reputation in this manner. Both of them have said that they have never felt the need to do this, that 'truth' should just be evident as one would expect from somebody who is Fe-PoLR and values Te.

In that very same thread you state that that Fe doesn't feel like your PoLR at all:

I just don't relate to being clobbered by Fe leading people -- neither personally nor socially.

In fact in that big Beta brawl thread between Gilly, DJ and Scarlettlux with all the Fe flying around you seemed very comfortable mirroring Gilly's Fe right back at him.

You do that very same identity randomization / re-invention trick that Jinxi was doing when he was trying to get himself typed and simultaneously resisting it. The smoke-and-mirrors "I'm serious, or am I?" "this is so, or is it?" tactic which you have happened to describe it yourself:

Fact: I speak in riddles friend. It's a defense mechanism (or is it?). Sorry for the smokescreen. Here's some more smoke. How's that smoke feel blowing up your ass?

And you are right. It is a defense mechanism. One which IEIs will sometimes resort to, but never ILIs. It probably has something to do with IEI being a Merry type and ILIs being a Serious type - ILIs are not prone to joking around with truth and reinventing it as their perception of truth is objective (Te).

You are very responsive to situations where 'objective' ethics are violated, such as cases where forum members are being rude to each other. Several times you have interjected to tell others how to behave properly though you are not personally very close with these people. In fact ethical criticisms account for greatest majority of all criticism that you have cast, which points towards ethical function being placed rather high on your value ladder. Likely in the ego block.

Your ethics orientation is extraverted. You are well aware of the explicit social contract that states that people should get along and be respectful with one another. When this doesn't occur it affects you emotionally that you feel the need to put the offender "in his place" as you commented about DJ:

As for my honest to goodness motive for bringing on this argument, I'm trying to put DJ in his place. He deserves it. He's always trying to put everyone else in their place ...

And as a Ti type you're aware of the social hierarchy where everybody has their place of course. When somebody over-steps his place likewise you think it should be evident to everybody that this person has become less deserving.

That your treatment of ethics is objective is also evident from that SL/DJ recap thread. In that thread you make value judgements on what constitutes right and wrong kind of behavior as if they are self-evident moral truths:

Honest consideration of the facts would lead any non biased observer to reach the conclusion that SL had every right to react as she did.

He had no good justification for treating Joy poorly.

And so on. In this same thread you do an unbelivably good analysis of relationships between people and their respective social standing for somebody claiming to be a Fe-PoLR type. This analysis does, however, sound impersonal - you speak of those involved indirectly in 3rd person as if they are just pieces moving through this unfolding story. There is no Fi in it. You were not even personally acquainted well with the participants of that conflict as Gilly has noted.

And I disagree with Marie that you are comfortable "detaching yourself emotionally". After participating in that conflict with Gilly, still riding the emotional high you posted in CKC/Gul's typing thread accusing him of being dishonest.

Galen seems pretty in control of himself to me, and I'm partial to the opinion that you're wasting our time with your disingenuous requests. Don't try to pass off contrived videos of yourself as genuine manifestations of a "friend's" routine behavior and expect us to deal candidly and reasonably with you.

Realizing that you're acting out of emotional impulse, you later decide to make amends for it. Btw who is this "us" you're talking about here? This sounds like Fe attitude rather than the Democratic individualistic Fi-valuing mindset of a Gamma. Some threads ago Korpsey poked fun of tcaud for the this kind of group-think phrasing.

I've already covered this before, in another thread you have mentioned that you have come to your typing as ILI through "gesalt" reasoning, which is associated with Vortical-Synergetic IEI cognition style in Gulenko's paper:

To be blunt, I arrive at ILI out of gesalt. Since I know myself better than anybody else, and since I am the common denominator in all of my inter-type relations, my self typing becomes the focal point around my understanding of socionics coalesces. Imagining myself to be different types is akin to playing around with the focus on a pair of binoculars. Everything comes out blurry at all focal settings other than ILI. At ILI, everything snaps into focus and I am taken aback by how well socionics premises appear to jive with my own experiences. Every other focal setting produces a jumbled mess of incoherence from which nothing of value can be gleaned.

There is more evidence for IEI typing but I'm too lazy to look through the rest. Overall your influence on this forum mostly harmonizing, peace-making, directed at building a positive reputation for yourself, not intellectually competitive as would be expected from and ILI type 5. It just doesn't add up. Unlike the very few individuals of the endangered Gamma species on this forum there is just no Te in you at all.

...For whatever it's worth, I've self diagnosed my enneagram type as 5w4 sx/sp. A few years ago I would have considered the inclusion of So in my instinctual stacking an impossibility. I'm slightly more amenable to characterizations of myself as secondary So today than I was then, but I hold firmly of the stance that Sx/Sp fits me best.

Personally from your posts I do not see an so-last, so/sx or sx/so seems more likely. You do sound a lot like silverchris whose self-typing is IEI sx/so. You say that you "manage the impressions of those with the greatest sway over the social situation" which implies that you keep track of the group dynamics and pay attention to whoever has the most power in the group. You do seem to like to associate with groups and concern with your social standing. This is often reported by individuals with so primary or secondary stacking rather than sx/sp or sp/sx stackings. When you write it does at times sound like you're writing for an audience. Crazedrat, who is sx/sp, has commented that to him it appears like "your sense of right and wrong comes from others", from the group that you belong to.

As for attraction between ESIs and SEEs and IEIs this is hardly out of the ordinary. Both of these kinds of relationships are classed as attractive in Socionics.

[Trevor]

Why is it amusing?

Just a personal idiosyncracy of mine. I seem to have a fetish for statistically significant correlations. Nothing to get worked about. Resume with your normal life.

[nanashi]

You are very responsive to situations where 'objective' ethics are violated, such as cases where forum members are being rude to each other. Several times you have interjected to tell others how to behave properly though you are not personally very close with these people. In fact ethical criticisms account for greatest majority of all criticism that you have cast, which points towards ethical function being placed rather high on your value ladder. Likely in the ego block.

Ideas:
I do this, too, though. It's partly from analyzing the situation and seeing how personal attacks just start side feuds from people needlessly hurting each other or being hurt and counterattacking. The actual issues at hand aren't being addressed. So....it's counterproductive.

Your ethics orientation is extraverted. You are well aware of the explicit social contract that states that people should get along and be respectful with one another. When this doesn't occur it affects you emotionally that you feel the need to put the offender "in his place" as you commented about DJ.

I have read of ILIs being laissez-faire until they see such behavior, and then they rally their forces to put down the perp. I do this, too. I'm not positive of Timmy's actual type, but I don't want to say ILI is incorrect quite yet.

There is more evidence for IEI typing but I'm too lazy to look through the rest. Overall your influence on this forum mostly harmonizing, peace-making, directed at building a positive reputation for yourself, not intellectually competitive as would be expected from and ILI type 5. It just doesn't add up. Unlike the very few individuals of the endangered Gamma species on this forum there is just no Te in you at all.

Intellectual competition isn't my one goal...the relationships I've been building on here have gotten me through tough days, so there is a direct reward from my putting effort into them. Harmonizing and peace-making are noble, imo.

Personally from your posts I do not see an so-last, so/sx or sx/so seems more likely. You do sound a lot like silverchris whose self-typing is IEI sx/so. You say that you "manage the impressions of those with the greatest sway over the social situation" which implies that you keep track of the group dynamics and pay attention to whoever has the most power in the group. You do seem to like to associate with groups and concern with your social standing. This is often reported by individuals with so primary or secondary stacking rather than sx/sp or sp/sx stackings. When you write it does at times sound like you're writing for an audience. Crazedrat, who is sx/sp, has commented that to him it appears like "your sense of right and wrong comes from others", from the group that you belong to.

I was definitely thinking about so-instinct for him. It's an option. Oh! what about, too...has he had major influencers in his life who are Fe or Fi egos? That has greatly affected me. All three of my non-twin family members seem to be Fi egos. (EII, ESI, ESI) My twin is ILI.

[Raver]

I see as it overbearingly overshadows your PoLR, and your comes across free-flowing and more natural, both more than what I expect from an ENTJ, and the way you talk is just like all other dominants on here, I get a distinct feel from. So INTP is a pretty good guess in that I can't see anything else. I think Se/Fi are both natural for all types in both quadras, but they distinctly appear certain ways due to temperament.

I had a similar impression of him when I saw him cam at tiny chat.

[Timmy]

I will be happy to explain why I can't see you as anything but a Fe-ego, and in return would like to hear your reasoning for being ILI rather than IEI.

Siuntal, you've raised a lot of interesting points. I apologize in advance if I don't adequately address them all.

ILIs do not engage in this kind of engineering of group sentiments as you are describing of yourself here. As Fe-PoLRs they have trouble evaluating other people's sentiments objectively.

I probably do have trouble evaluating others' sentiments, or at least this criticism has been leveled against me on many occasions throughout my life. I usually react to strong emotional displays with suspicion and unease. Such displays strike me as fake, contrived, and frequently unworthy of my serious consideration. When I do give heed to strong Fe reactions, I rarely accept them as ends in themselves. Rather, I instead attempt to psychoanalyze the motive underlying them (e.g. what is the purpose/intent behind this emotional reaction; how is this person trying to influence me, and why, practically speaking, is he/she attempting to do so). I'm aware that emotional reactions can be genuine (and I suspect most emotional reactions are at least partially genuine), but I'm terrible at differentiating between the contrived and the genuine, and so I am inclined to distrust and regard as false and meaningless the emotional reactions of those whom I distrust. Also, I am aware that even if an emotional reaction is genuine, this does not preclude the possibility that it is also capable of manipulating. Evolutionarily speaking, our emotional hard-wiring is designed to attain concrete, practical ends by way of their influence on ourselves and others. I'm always speculating as to what these objective ends may be so that I may deal with the Fe in a Te way (or at least that's how I interpreted my behavior in socioincs speak). Personally, I expend a great deal of energy (needlessly in many cases) attempting to gain the upper hand on my emotional sentiments. In spite of such efforts, I'm sure that I do act on on Fe impulses all the time, struggling (and often failing) after the fact to justify my reaction on Te grounds.

(ILI's) do not keep track of the likes/dislikes between others to later use this to masterfully turn social consensus against a person. This kind of picking on one individual out of the group is, however, often associated with Fi-PoLR types, such as SLEs and ILEs.

For starters, I was under the impression that likes/dislikes have as much if not more to do with Fi than Fe. More to the core of what you're getting at, I may have exaggerated my ability to turn social consensus at will (I do occasionally indulge in self aggrandizement), and when I do attempt to change the social consensus, I do so primarily via appeal to other's Fi. I can make bad faith Ti arguments for an individual's ethical degeneracy, but such arguments are grounded in Te/Fi objective (and Fe types often see right through the put up). On occasions when I turn against a person, I do so on account of my subjective feelings toward that person, not because that person fails to adheres to a favored Ti ethical framework. If someone I like mistreats a person whom I dislike, I'm much less likely to hold it against that person than if the roles were reversed. Furthermore, even if I feel justified in unleashing a shitstorm on someone, I immediately begin feeling bad if I get the impression that I have seriously hurt them.

To be concise, my judgements seem to me to lack a Ti sort of consistency and objectivity.

In that very same thread you state that that Fe doesn't feel like your PoLR at all:
In fact in that big Beta brawl thread between Gilly, DJ and Scarlettlux with all the Fe flying around you seemed very comfortable mirroring Gilly's Fe right back at him.

The point I was making in the thread from which you quoted me is that an individual's PoLR doesn't necessarily put him in a disadvantageous position with respect to his supervisor. In the right setting, the ability to overlook information pertaining to one's PoLR can work to that person's advantage against his supervisor. Also, I'm not 100% sure gilly is even an Fe leading type, so the example may not be a good one.

And you are right. It is a defense mechanism. One which IEIs will sometimes resort to, but never ILIs. It probably has something to do with IEI being a Merry type and ILIs being a Serious type - ILIs are not prone to joking around with truth and reinventing it as their perception of truth is objective (Te).

Where you have quoted me I was engaged in a game of mental gymnastics with Jarno. K0rpsey made a cryptic comment with which I suspect he intended to insinuated that Jarno was not ILI. The hint flew over Jarno's head and I, playing devils advocate, suggested that ILI's tend to pick up on one another's cues. I had intended to clue Jarno into the meaning of K0rpsey's post in a humorous and indirect manner, but he missed the hint. I didn't feel like clarifying my thought process at the time because I didn't want to mis-characterize K0rpsey's comment (and to be honest, I found Jarno's confusion hilarious), so I danced around the issue for a while playing an inane game of cat and mouse with Jarno, which he interpreted as trolling. My unwillingness to reveal my hand may have had something to do with uncertainty over whether I'd even interpreted K0rpsey's original post correctly. If it turned out I had not, the entire charade would have made me look pretty silly, and in this respect my vague responses were partially self-defensive in nature, but not on account of some nonobjective relationship with the facts of the situation.

You are very responsive to situations where 'objective' ethics are violated, such as cases where forum members are being rude to each other. Several times you have interjected to tell others how to behave properly though you are not personally very close with these people. In fact ethical criticisms account for greatest majority of all criticism that you have cast, which points towards ethical function being placed rather high on your value ladder. Likely in the ego block.

As I mentioned earlier in my comment, I'm pretty sure my moral judgements derive from 'subjective' ethics, or Fi, more so than Ti. The fact that Fi is subjective does not imply that Fi judgements cannot be transmitted or appealed to in others nor that it applies only in situations involving familiars.

Who is this "us" you're talking about here? This sounds like Fe attitude rather than the Democratic individualistic Fi-valuing mindset of a Gamma. Some threads ago Korpsey poked fun of tcaud for the this kind of group-think phrasing.

In writing "us" I was making a concrete reference to myself and several other commenter who did not appear to be taking Gul's thread seriously. Ability to detect sarcasm and to roughly gauge others' level of interest/tone/demeanor do not hinge upon strong Fe, but rather general intelligence and lack of autism.

I've already covered this before, in another thread you have mentioned that you have come to your typing as ILI through "gesalt" reasoning, which is associated with Vortical-Synergetic IEI cognition style in Gulenko's paper:

You're right, we already covered this territory in my first type-me thread. My position on the matter has not changed. Characterizing thought processes is tricky, and all types evidently use all of the thinking styles to a greater or lesser extent. I can't really refute your reasoning here, but neither am I willing to modify my self typing over something so trivial.

There is more evidence for IEI typing but I'm too lazy to look through the rest. Overall your influence on this forum mostly harmonizing, peace-making, directed at building a positive reputation for yourself, not intellectually competitive as would be expected from and ILI type 5. It just doesn't add up.

Never intellectually competitive? Perhaps you've overlooked my contributions in the following threads:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=35511
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=35481
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=35030
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=34920
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=35697

Personally from your posts I do not see an so-last, so/sx or sx/so seems more likely. You do sound a lot like silverchris whose self-typing is IEI sx/so. You say that you "manage the impressions of those with the greatest sway over the social situation" which implies that you keep track of the group dynamics and pay attention to whoever has the most power in the group. You do seem to like to associate with groups and concern with your social standing. This is often reported by individuals with so primary or secondary stacking rather than sx/sp or sp/sx stackings. When you write it does at times sound like you're writing for an audience.

I concede that Sx/So is a possibility. I suspect that if you spent a lot of time with me in person you'd see why I favor Sx primary and Sp secondary. Throw me in a room with a bunch of strangers and I feel tremendously awkward and out of place. I prefer a quiet night out with a close friend (or even curled up with a book) to a rowdy party filled with a bunch of strangers any day of the week. I realize that's a vapid and generic sort of a way to describe myself, but it's also an honest way of describing myself.

Crazedrat, who is sx/sp, has commented that to him it appears like "your sense of right and wrong comes from others", from the group that you belong to.

Rat's impression may have more to do with my weak, valued Fi than anything else. For whatever it's worth, I don't agree with Rat's impression in this particular instance.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Unlike some of the Beta's here, I don't think you do this for entertainment, to get fans or to enforce your ideologies on others. (in other words, I don't see the Fe valuing).

I don't think I try to enforce my ideologies on anybody. I do a lot of stuff for entertainment, because I do believe a big part in life is about lightening up and having fun. As for the 'fan thing' I don't think there's anything wrong with being a bit socially polite or 'fake nice' to get what you want in life. It doesn't necessarily mean that you are cruel deep down inside because you're like that. Fi-valuers will just sometimes hurt themselves being too honest about how somebody makes them feel.

They will also not realize how much they are hurting everybody else's chance at romantic happiness, because all they want is to get their way emotionally and it's like they're not thinking about the big picture at all, or anybody else's desires for twilight-ish bella romantic love. And I know that Fi doesn't necessarily relate to that shit, please try not to take my point out of context. And I don't think Fi valuers are being too mean. I really don't want to be misunderstood here because I enjoy conversations about socionics too from time to time but I know inevitably somebody is gonna take my post the wrong way.

[silverchris9]

@Timmy:

Okay, but everything you do is everything I do and I'm IEI so obviously you're IEI so there.

Seriously, everything you listed in your response reminded me of me. Especially:

Where you have quoted me I was engaged in a game of mental gymnastics with Jarno. K0rpsey made a cryptic comment with which I suspect he intended to insinuated that Jarno was not ILI. The hint flew over Jarno's head and I, playing devils advocate, suggested that ILI's tend to pick up on one another cues. I had intended to clue Jarno into the meaning of K0rpsey's post in a humorous and indirect manner, but he missed my hint. I didn't feel like clarifying my thought process at the time because I didn't want to mis-characterize K0rpsey's comment (and to be honest, I found Jarno's confusion hilarious), so I danced around the issue for a while playing an inane game of cat and mouse with Jarno, which he interpreted as trolling. My unwillingness to reveal my hand may have had something to do with uncertainty over whether I'd even interpreted K0rpsey's original post correctly. If it turned out I had not, the entire charade would have made me look pretty silly, and in this respect my vague responses were partially self-defensive in nature, but not on account of some nonobjective relationship with the facts of the situation.

Also, IEIs can be socially awkward in groups. I've slowly grown out of it so that I'm more comfortable, but on my first time meeting a group of people for a long time I would be extremely shy and uncomfortable. Even now, I'm not the type to just head into a room with a bunch of people I don't know and try to be anything but unobtrusive. If I'm in a group that is half-strangers and half-people i know, especially if I'm aware that I have relatively high status in that group, I'll absolutely be a "presence" in the room, loud, talkative, etc. But that's not something I at all default to in situations in which I am not already comfortable. In a group of strangers you might think I was ILI/not-a-feeling-type.


And I too feel quite bad if I have hurt someone's feelings, no matter how justified I initially felt in saying cruel things to them. You can just as easily account for this under "Ti morality" as under "Fi morality."



But to be fair, in your ILI favor:

-You tend to maintain this sort of detached analytical tone so often that I believe that it's your actual, relaxed style of speech. This sort of "Bob arrived late at the restaurant, which resulted in a bit of a fight between him and June. I may have egged June on just a little, and I do apologize for that. But, to be fair, Bob has a tenuous relationship to common sense."

I, on the other hand, imitate this tone often, in an attempt to sound intellectual or analytical, but my "true self" is as much or more in a more in tone that's more like: "fine, bob is an idiot, but the sun still rises and the moon still sets and you learn how to settle for what you get and you watch cabaret and life continues. So why is everyone being so ridiculous?" Which I think is Fe-related, however idiosyncratic it may be.

-In spite of my cloying insistence that you remind me of me, I do get an "ILI-ish" vibe from you. I expect a degree of social awkwardness in addition to that, but it could be that, since this is a writing-based social sphere with no real possibility of harmful social consequences, you appear completely self-confident and socially engaged, because you are communicating in a mode of which you have full command, and you are stripped of a layer of self-consciousness, because you don't really need to worry about saying the wrong thing---that won't really do you any harm; who cares about the opinion of people on the internet? So that could explain the whole thing with your apparent social ease on this site.

And that's all not to say that ILIs aren't socially awesome; most of the ILIs I know are. But they normally slip up every once in a while. One may have a tendency to excessive (and unintentional) bluntness (which I have not noticed in you, not without self-consciousness); another may alienate those not close to him/her by failing to show expected social emotions from a distance (the problem disappears when people are close to him/her and have a better gauge of the relationship between their internal state and external expression).

-I agree with you that reducing to people's motives is more related to Ni than Fe. The ability to change people's internal states is more closely related to Fe, but the deduction of motive part is very much Ni over Fe. So it is feasible that if you deduce people's motives, you can socially manipulate them through an indirect route. That is, rather than the sort of intuitive NiFe thing, where we constantly and unconsciously manage others' opinion of us, you occasionally, consciously act on motives, which you process in a way that an Fe-ego would call "dry"; that is, you treat motives as data with a complex set of interactions which can be manipulated. On the other hand, IEIs don't really treat motives at all---it's more like, we're aware of the result we want to achieve socially (if that), and just "do it" without an intervening step of processing (for most tasks of changing others' internal disposition).

We're aware of "I will make X happy by giving him attention." You may be aware of "Tommy is behaving poorly. Why? Because he wants attention. So how will I change his behavior? By giving him the attention he desires. This will change his internal state, which will in turn change his behavior." Obviously you don't verbalize it like that (no human being ever has or ever will), but the point is that your actions taken to affect the collective disposition of a group (or of an individual) may be more explicit and defined (Te) than an Fe-ego's more implicit and airy understanding of others' emotional states, an understanding which, when expressed, if often expressed indirectly or "poetically."



However, if you don't think gilly is EIE, I no longer trust in any way your typing ability, and as a result, freely retype you IEI.

[nanashi]

-In spite of my cloying insistence that you remind me of me, I do get an "ILI-ish" vibe from you. I expect a degree of social awkwardness in addition to that, but it could be that, since this is a writing-based social sphere with no real possibility of harmful social consequences, you appear completely self-confident and socially engaged, because you are communicating in a mode of which you have full command, and you are stripped of a layer of self-consciousness, because you don't really need to worry about saying the wrong thing---that won't really do you any harm; who cares about the opinion of people on the internet? So that could explain the whole thing with your apparent social ease on this site.

-I agree with you that reducing to people's motives is more related to Ni than Fe. The ability to change people's internal states is more closely related to Fe, but the deduction of motive part is very much Ni over Fe. So it is feasible that if you deduce people's motives, you can socially manipulate them through an indirect route. That is, rather than the sort of intuitive NiFe thing, where we constantly and unconsciously manage others' opinion of us, you occasionally, consciously act on motives, which you process in a way that an Fe-ego would call "dry"; that is, you treat motives as data with a complex set of interactions which can be manipulated. On the other hand, IEIs don't really treat motives at all---it's more like, we're aware of the result we want to achieve socially (if that), and just "do it" without an intervening step of processing (for most tasks of changing others' internal disposition).

We're aware of "I will make X happy by giving him attention." You may be aware of "Tommy is behaving poorly. Why? Because he wants attention. So how will I change his behavior? By giving him the attention he desires. This will change his internal state, which will in turn change his behavior." Obviously you don't verbalize it like that (no human being ever has or ever will), but the point is that your actions taken to affect the collective disposition of a group (or of an individual) may be more explicit and defined (Te) than an Fe-ego's more implicit and airy understanding of others' emotional states, an understanding which, when expressed, if often expressed indirectly or "poetically."

truly enjoyed reading these parts.

[Timmy]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Chris! There's a lot of great insight in what you wrote.

Also, IEIs can be socially awkward in groups. I've slowly grown out of it so that I'm more comfortable, but on my first time meeting a group of people for a long time I would be extremely shy and uncomfortable. Even now, I'm not the type to just head into a room with a bunch of people I don't know and try to be anything but unobtrusive. If I'm in a group that is half-strangers and half-people i know, especially if I'm aware that I have relatively high status in that group, I'll absolutely be a "presence" in the room, loud, talkative, etc. But that's not something I at all default to in situations in which I am not already comfortable. In a group of strangers you might think I was ILI/not-a-feeling-type.

Yep, I'm this way too. I agree that IEI's can be socially awkward in large groups consisting mostly of strangers. I'd say that (nearly) all introverts are somewhat out of their element in such settings. I might even go so far as to label this a defining feature of introversion.

I wrote about feeling out of sorts in large group settings not to support my ILI typing, but to support my Sx/Sp instinctual stacking. Although, that you consider yourself Sx/So and are no different from me in this regard might signify that my reasoning is unsound.

And I too feel quite bad if I have hurt someone's feelings, no matter how justified I initially felt in saying cruel things to them. You can just as easily account for this under "Ti morality" as under "Fi morality."

I've no doubt you do experience this as, I'm sure, do many other Ti valuers, but are you sure it's your Ti that is responsible for these feelings? After all, we are talking about "feelings," an expression infrequently used in conjunction with a thinking function.

However, if you don't think gilly is EIE, I no longer trust in any way your typing ability, and as a result, freely retype you IEI.

I'm more inclined to peg Gilly EIE than any other type, but I'm not particularly confident about this typing and neither is he. So, for now I'll remain undecided in the matter. You're of course welcome to consider me any type you should please. Just don't expect me to agree with you

For what it's worth, I'm pretty sure I give off an IEI vibe to certain people in real life too. There's an SLE girl who's had it in for me for a couple of years running now. She very much treats me as though I am her dual and is always trying to extract Fe responses out of me. I find it endearing and uncomfortable in equal measure.

And that's all not to say that ILIs aren't socially awesome; most of the ILIs I know are. But they normally slip up every once in a while. One may have a tendency to excessive (and unintentional) bluntness (which I have not noticed in you, not without self-consciousness); another may alienate those not close to him/her by failing to show expected social emotions from a distance (the problem disappears when people are close to him/her and have a better gauge of the relationship between their internal state and external expression).

Whatever social graces I have acquired over the years certainly haven't come naturally to me. As a child I was terrified of communicating with all adults besides my parents and was even more terrified of talking to girls my age . Basically, I could tell that I didn't understand the correct etiquette for interacting with anyone but family and my male peers, and so I chaffed at the thought of speaking with anyone else. I felt I'd make a fool out of myself if I I tried, and so instead I'd run off and hide. Only with lots and lots and lots of social experience have I come to resemble a minimally suave and non-awkward individual. Silly as it sounds, on account of the fact that I have a younger sister, who was the only girl with whom I had any substantial interaction growing up, I find that even to this day I am slightly more comfortable interacting unfamiliar girls when they are a bit younger than me.

Probably I do come across more self secure in my style of interaction from behind the wall of internet pseudo-anonymity.

[Timmy]

It's just an observation, but if you saw it as a compliment to your character I'm glad since after how I seen you deal with the recent fiasco on here I've gained a lot of respect for you

Pleased to hear it. Hopefully you don't lose all of that respect the next time I morph into a tyrannosaurus dickwad as I occasionally do.

[DirectorAbbie]

I saw you and heard you on tinychat.

You're obviously a joke account.

[Absurd]

I saw him naked, definitely ILI, clothes obscure typing for me, it's blurred, and I can't get a read this way.

[Timmy]

I saw him naked, definitely ILI, clothes obscure typing for me, it's blurred, and I can't get a read this way.

Does your Little Senior Excavator feel insecure next to supervisor Inch Long Impreggonator?

[woofwoofl]

I saw him naked, definitely ILI, clothes obscure typing for me, it's blurred, and I can't get a read this way.

Does your Little Senior Excavator feel insecure next to supervisor Inch Long Impreggonator?

gonna bring out my Smashing Every Entrance

[Absurd]

Does your Little Senior Excavator feel insecure next to supervisor Inch Long Impreggonator?

I said I voted ILI but forgot to vote in poll, now it is done properly although seeing your response I want to vote asshole

[Timmy]

Hmm, so nearly as many people think I'm a joke account as think I'm IEI. This would seem to me to raise troublesome questions as regard the meaningfulness of this poll.

Would any those who selected "joke account" care to explain their choice? I'm extremely interested to know what about my forum persona creates this impression.

[silke]

Hmm, so nearly as many people think I'm a joke account as think I'm IEI. This would seem to me to raise troublesome questions as regard the meaningfulness of this poll.

Would any those who selected "joke account" care to explain their choice? I'm extremely interested to know what about my forum persona creates this impression.

lol I'm going to go ahead and guess that it might have something to do with being a merry type