I think I'm ESE

[Cat King Cole]

Personal line of reasoning:

If you consider the base function as being a type's fundamental way of viewing the world, based on this page, this article, and finally this article, dominance is fairly plainly completely ridiculous, considering my perceptions are dominated by reading people's emotions, or reacting to my own feelings (which I previously described as "comfort", a misconstruction of what Si's domain actually is, which is specific and concrete processes happening in a person or thing in reaction to their or its environment).

My pushiness in resisting any rebuttals to my beliefs that aren't delivered on my own logical terms. (Fairly consistent in intellectual dominants. Gilly and Richard Dawkins should be the most obvious examples.)

My personal guidance from ethics (I can put them into words when I'm acting out of them, but there's no explicit rulebook I can call on from memory without some kind of starting point, so this is a potential weak link in my case. Another is that they're personally

My premeditation on everything. Even when I'm being "reckless" it's because I've decided that the reward outweighs the risks. Or, if I'm being genuinely reckless, it's because I'm in the sway of my emotions and my rational brain has momentarily disengaged. Both this and the "ethicalness" are Rational traits: relevant article.

The fact that I'm a living persona. Again: dominance. Extraverts have a poor grasp on their internal world because they're living out the external. ENps have poor understanding of the above-mentioned processes, dominants have poor understanding of a unifying logical context in which they're a singular genuine person who exists outside of other people's implicit emotional demands. Gilly's being a living identity crisis comes to mind.

In a similar family to the above: I liven up significantly once I have an audience, even if it's an audience of one, or just one of my LII buddies who needs to be involved in a crazy spectacle.

Strong reservations:

I may be E (and possibly J), but am I EJ? If I am, why do I spend so much time just adrift on a sea of information? (Counter-argument: for a supposed introtim, why am I so hands-on in managing and refereeing people?)

ESE also works as a nice magic handwave for:

My "apparent" (but fairly obviously false) dominance, especially considering that I'm either/or ILE or IEE depending who you talk to. IME this sort of dichotomy of inadequates usually hints at a potential other option that needs to be investigated.

Similarly, my ambiguity between SEI and ILE. Neither of these types should be ambiguous with the other. (Blind assertion, so feel free to prove me wrong on this particular point.)

idk, wdyt?

[Cat King Cole]

The main thing I'm interested in hearing, and the foundation of this argument:

While I currently evidently consider myself more or less certain traits compared to some other reference point of myself, how I compare to myself is irrelevant. What matters is thus:

How do I compare to other people?

[717495]

Maybe a new hobby?

[Absurd]

I think you're LIE.

[Cat King Cole]

Maybe a new hobby?

Too much time, too little news. I'm still coming to terms with the void in my life now that games are gone.

[WVBRY]

Ive spent periods of my life "lost" in information, and I am an Ej type, I dont see why that would mean you aerent then.

You wanted to know how you compared with other people, so Im telling you.

[Cat King Cole]

Apparent laziness and torpor as I just follow my curiosity around. EJs are typically described as having a lot of energy for doing things and meeting people, where I'm more socially introverted and have a tendency to lose focus and get all drifty.

[WVBRY]

Apparent laziness and torpor as I just follow my curiosity around. EJs are typically described as having a lot of energy for doing things and meeting people, where I'm more socially introverted and have a tendency to lose focus and get all drifty.

Well, Im pretty energetic, but I can actually be lazy without an LSI to kick me in the ass and get some work done. Thats when it comes to work, Im pretty lazy, and not very perseverant. But when it comes to socializing I have tons of energy, because thats where my can unroll. As you,ve probably noticed I love to talk. I dont know if that helps but there you go.

[The Ineffable]

I haven't read your links yet. I agree with this typing and yes, when it's Fe which deals with pleasure, passion, like/dislike, I agree again.

Regarding your question, aren't there a lot of thinkers (writers, philosophers, etc) who are Fe-Base? They wrote books and stuff, showing a deep understanding and rationalization of certain matters. I mean come on, a superficial thinking is immediately visible in statements.

I know an ESE who is the lead of an open-source community around. He is a geek in the true sense of the word (knows almost anything you ask about Linux), although the guy is pretty social - in fact the only OSS attendance I've ever made was one at his invitation on IRC, otherwise I'm not really into these things. Yes, he has ESE "stuff", among others he is kinda quick to judge (IMO) and a bit too decisive for my taste, but I admire his involvement and what's trying to accomplish in the local community (you know, translations, meetings, local repositories, etc). What I kinda dislike about him is his zeal to support "the center" and the "big guys" no matter what decisions they make, he doesn't really have a critical eye on things. At least this is how it all appears to me.
(sending you the link to the images from that meeting on PM)

[Galen]

Well if we go by your own line of logic, we're still in favor of ISFp.


http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...5&postcount=46


http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...86&postcount=1

 

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...0&postcount=34

Anyway, saying my Fe is forced doesn't hold up. Both Rubicon and an ILE friend of me have called my emotional displays "relaxing". Other people have called me "relaxing" in my own right, without pinpointing it to any particular element (due to socionics infamiliarity).

Just because you think it's forced doesn't mean it's weak. It means... hey! I'm putting on a show! That sounds rather "Creative", does it not? I act silly/extravagant as a form of play, and it's exactly the same as any of my other Fe displays, which can all be more subtle. Relevant quote:

"When someone is upset, you take it upon yourself to make them happy, through jokes and hugs and the like."

Definition of SiFe: Fe in service of Si. In plain English: influencing other's emotions in service of relaxation.

Just sayin'

[krieger]

why do I spend so much time just adrift on a sea of information?

Ti weakness?

[Cat King Cole]

why do I spend so much time just adrift on a sea of information?

Ti weakness?

Still ambiguously SEI.

I mean, right now I'm meant to be doing Stuff (like buying a keyboard stand), but I'm not, because I'm reading my news feeds and forums. That's what I mean by "adrift", I get all directionless from time to time.

[krieger]

I mean, right now I'm meant to be doing Stuff (like buying a keyboard stand), but I'm not, because I'm reading my news feeds and forums. That's what I mean by "adrift", I get all directionless from time to time.

i'm like that. *shrug*

[shindaiwa21]

Any type (especially N's, but really any type) can be spending time thinking about the future. Irrationals can premeditate a shitload, I do, but I hate making decisions because it buys me nothing and cuts off avenues of opportunity. Obviously I know I have to, and it's beneficial sometimes, but that's how it feels.

You do have a sort of point by point style of correcting people that is uncommon for ISFp's.

Re: ethical guidelines/rulebook also sounds more ESFj, ISFp's might have firm personal beliefs but generally don't really "apply" them to other people, and tend to be a bit more interested in harmony, or in the least in not really changing other people, just messing with them or pounding them into the ground, I rarely feel a will to change others.

ESFj's have a very different social style from ISFp's. ESFj's will come and be like, do this, perform something, do something, lets do X. ISFps just sort of, set the scene and see what happens. Like an ISFp would be like lets go to the forest and take some sandwiches, and an ESFj would be like, LETS GO TO THE FOREST AND HIKE UP THAT MOUNTAIN HEY LOOK TRASH YOU PICK IT UP ILL GET THE BAG, hey wild flowers, we should pick some. Like they tend to not mind assigning tasks or things to do to engage people together, you can feel that force pushing you around. Not all ESFj's I've known have been like that, but it seems like a general trend, especially with 6/8. Are you a stage-setter or a people pusher?

I would guess you are an ESFj or a 3 ENTp from your tone.

[woofwoofl]

I'm a bit too pooped to post anything that makes too much sense, but I'll see what I can do

I've been having a similar issue; I'm certain that I'm a part of Gamma, though I'm not always as certain where the IEs lie, and what type that would lead me to be. Irrational subtype is obvious as hell, but I'm not always certain whether it's or steering the ship, and I even at times consider parts of Beta and Delta briefly before ultimately coming to my senses.

You talked about defining where ends and begins, and vice-versa, and if you're in Alpha, I don't think it cleanly does when looking at your own use of it. I've had a similar issue with and when it comes with human relations; couldn't mentally separate the things, so I decided to go a different route, with nailing down things I could nail down, like Extratim/Introtim, Positivist/Negativist, and anything else I found that I could grab at; what I got from this solidified me as Se-SEE...

Types can be ambiguous with their Dual sometimes, as well as other types (I can understand typing Craig Ferguson as SEE or IEE, and Fred Durst as ILE or SLE; I go with the former in both cases). I've had some moments where I could pass for an Ni-ILI, and though I won't point out any specifics right now, I've seen lots of instances here of people being typed as their Dual. This is my third time of telling you this, and I expect a fourth time to happen - this type of looseness in people is a good thing!

The Fe-SEI girl I know is very outgoing, really bright, and is unmistakably IP in temperament, as well as an Ethical. I'm incapable of seeing you as anything other than an Alpha Irrational with an Irrational subtype, and since you remind me more of the SEIs I know than the ILEs, I'll put you with the SEIs.


Si-SEI it is for you, I say

[krieger]

i'd say an ESFj typing would help reconcile the intuitions i have about you of being an alpha SF type but being somehow more mentally active and maneuverable than the average ISFp... most ISFps seem to have a high "fuck it all" factor and behave passively and inert on that basis.

that being said, this superficially looks like another one of those "the grass is greener..." type shifting adventures that tend not to lead anywhere.

[Trevor]

I think I'm ESE.

Why should we believe you this time? You the-guy-that-changed-his-selftyping-so-many-times-and-still-continues-doing-so you.

[WVBRY]

I think I'm ESE.

Why should we believe you? You the-guy-that-changed-his-selftyping-so-many-times-and-still-continues-doing-so you.

Hes been SEI as long as I can remember.

[Cat King Cole]

How do you mean "grass is greener"?

[Trevor]

Hes been SEI as long as I can remember.

Yeah, well that's just...like...your memory...man.

I happen to remember better. I remember ILE, ESE, SEI, LII and IEI. Now, just as i started thinking he finally settled on a type, he does this to me and pretty much pushes believing him off of list of my priorities. From now on, i need reasons to believe; happy hour's over.

[Cat King Cole]

Was never an LII bro.

[Trevor]

But then you were joking!

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=25497

[Cat King Cole]

Yup!

@Galen: I'll get back to you on that once I don't have a headache.

[Krig the Viking]

I continue to maintain that you're IEE, probably with a strong SEI persona. My backup guess would be SEI with an IEE persona, though that seems less likely to me.

I'd say the reason that you can't firmly settle on a type is that you're having problems distinguishing between your persona and your core nature (the Jungian "Ego"); you unconsciously over-identify with your persona at the expense of your true nature, leading to deep internal identity issues. But I'm just a commenter on an Internet message board, so take my diagnosis with a grain of salt.

[Cat King Cole]

Well, I agree that I identify with "who I'm expected to be".

But, don't you think that sounds like Fe dominance? Because I don't even just have a singular persona, I'm a collection of masks without a man, that's just who I am: who you and groups expect me to be.

EDIT

In the spirit of friendly debate, a counter-point: if I'm a Serious type, why do I fit in better with Merry groups? (As in, more comfortable for me.) I'd say Alpha is definitely my home quadra because I get on with other Alphas with so little tension and so few misunderstandings. Meanwhile Deltas don't appreciate my attempts to add a bit of vitality to the mood, and Betas are a touch too intense for me.

[Mediator Kam]

Well, I agree that I identify with "who I'm expected to be".

But, don't you think that sounds like Fe dominance? Because I don't even just have a singular persona, I'm a collection of masks without a man, that's just who I am: who you and groups expect me to be.

EDIT

In the spirit of friendly debate, a counter-point: if I'm a Serious type, why do I fit in better with Merry groups? (As in, more comfortable for me.) I'd say Alpha is definitely my home quadra because I get on with other Alphas with so little tension and so few misunderstandings. Meanwhile Deltas don't appreciate my attempts to add a bit of vitality to the mood, and Betas are a touch too intense for me.

Yeah, you can never be serious. You are alpha for sure. You play with logic like a toy. SF! Yeah, either SF works for me. Except you can be C, and I am D. I come after. I am better.

[krieger]

merry is pretty much your most obvious trait.

[Cat King Cole]

Further thoughts:

role could certainly fit me. I often lead into social encounters with "Look at how knowledgeable and thoughtful I am".

As for intertypes:

Duality vs Activity is still ambiguous, so I won't go into it (lest I be forced to appeal to Filatova's duality descriptions). It also has absolutely no bearing on what I've said before about Identity and Mirror.

I still can't deny that I have a lot in common with SEIs, and almost nothing in common with ESEs, who are typically thoughtless imo. Maybe I just haven't met any intelligent or psychologically healthy ones, because the only two I can think of are rather shallow, and one is a textbook childhood trauma case. (Though to be fair I am too, so, idk.)

The latter can be explained fairly easily, however, in that I've been an outsider basically my entire life, haven't had much opportunity to develop my social skills, and was in a state of depression and personal confusion all through high school; meanwhile coming out of that I had the self-image of an SEI to live up to as someone who is very laid-back and passive: a lovely excuse not to develop my social skills. Shyness is something I struggle with because I want to be able to talk to people, I just have no idea how to initiate or keep a conversation going.) Still doesn't address why I have so much in common, consistently, with other SEIs though, so idk.

[Galen]

Yup!

@Galen: I'll get back to you on that once I don't have a headache.

How's that headache going? Or are you really just musing the idea of ESFj without truly setting on it?

[WVBRY]

Yup!

@Galen: I'll get back to you on that once I don't have a headache.

How's that headache going? Or are you really just musing the idea of ESFj without truly setting on it?

I think he is musing at the idea without settling on it, which could be an thing, but also Ive never seen anyone as objective about their type as he seems to be. No fronting on my part, he just seems sincere in his search for the Truth.

[DividedsGhost]

I know this has been mentioned before, but is there really much of a theoretical difference between a type and its mirror if they are both producing (creative) subtypes?

In terms of Jung it would just mean a balance of switching from the mode of two leading functions (one extroverted and one introverted). I've had someone with no knowledge of socionics admit to becoming very similar to another person I had typed as their mirror for a long while.

This is why I think it makes more sense that some people can have a leading function without evidently displaying one of the two possible creative functions. And they could also after developing one creative function cause it to become more pronounced than the leading. This would make the relations dependent on which function is then used because you could alternate between IXXj and Exxp and IXXp and EXXj.

It makes me wonder if it would just be easier to say there are 8 types - Alpha NT, SF, Beta NF, ST, Gamma NT, SF, Delta ST, NF of a fully developed ego and that the relations are dependent on what role each of those 8 types chooses to play.

This would also mean someone displaying a leading function without a particular creative function would not really fit in the socionics relationship model since only part of the super-ego is formed.

[WVBRY]

This is why I think it makes more sense that some people can have a leading function without evidently displaying one of the two possible creative functions. And they could also after developing one creative function cause it to become more pronounced than the leading. This would make the relations dependent on which function is then used because you could alternate between IXXj and Exxp and IXXp and EXXj.

I vehemently disgaree with this. The lead fucntion is always the lead and the fact that a person "uses" (read: insterts into their cognitive process) an ego function or another ego fucntion doesnt change the way the functions are ordered in their model A disposition. The Lead fucntion? Always the lead, regardless of subtype. The creative? always the creative , regardless of subtype. The role? same. The polr. same. The suggestive? same. The hidden agenda? same? Control function, you say? same. Demonstartive too? Same position end of story.

[The Ineffable]

I vehemently disgaree with this. The lead fucntion is always the lead and the fact that a person "uses" (read: insterts into their cognitive process) an ego function or another ego fucntion doesnt change the way the functions are ordered in their model A disposition. The Lead fucntion? Always the lead, regardless of subtype. The creative? always the creative , regardless of subtype. The role? same. The polr. same. The suggestive? same. The hidden agenda? same? Control function, you say? same. Demonstartive too? Same position end of story.

Yes, this is correct, it needs to be told.

Magna, I think you confuse some things. First of all, the two possible Creative functions that go with a certain Base are different than you suggest (at least how I understand it). For instance, an Ne-Base can have either Ti or Fi as Creative, so the types are ILE and IEE, not ILE and LII or something. Then no, Mirrors are different types, they work differently, one is Introverted the other is Extroverted, and so on.

[WVBRY]

Magna, I think you confuse some things. First of all, the two possible Creative functions that go with a certain Base are different than you suggest (at least how I understand it). For instance, an Ne-Base can have either Ti or Fi as Creative, so the types are ILE and IEE, not ILE and LII or something. Then no, Mirrors are different types, they work differently, one is Introverted the other is Extroverted, and so on.

*Agrees with you*

[Cat King Cole]

How's that headache going? Or are you really just musing the idea of ESFj without truly setting on it?

It makes sense in some ways, and offers a lot of Convenient Explanations, but fwiw I think SEI was like that as well.

I've already addressed the post where I use intertypes as the crux of my argument. "Supervision by LSE" is arguable, since thePirate brought up that they have much the same effect on him as I've said, and he's ambiguously Beta NF as much as I am ambiguously Alpha SF. The "supervised by LSE" argument would only be good if it was unambiguously the result of PoLR. Take this paragraph as me backing down from a "I'm certain" to an "I'm not sure".

FWIW I could easily say that IEIs supervise me with Ni by introducing uncertainty and doubt to things I think are unambiguous and concrete, which isn't something I can argue no matter how frustrating it is. Like ghosts, I have a perfectly logical EP argument against them, yet I was talking to an IEI who firmly believed and kept groping around with "I don't know" trying to resist "It's your brain telling you an area is dangerous" or "It's your brain jumping at potential figures, or reading facial expressions from the darkness".

But neither of those points really matters in the face of the fact that I'm not like any ESEs I know personally, or any of the ESEs who have come to this forum in my time like Malia and MD, certainly at least, not superficially (except when I was overdoing my own ). Cracka maybe, as what I've seen of him he seems like a pretty chill dude.

Anyway--

My IEI post, if you look at the date, was from when I was learning Socionics. Unless it has some argument in it of interest to you, I really want to pretend it doesn't exist, lol.

As for the xkcd post, my reasoning around the facts, which are clear, is ambiguous. I've certainly argued in my head that I've used "Si in service of Fe".

I put on shows for people on Stickam = fact.
That's Fe creative = non-sequitur = poor reasoning.

You know, the reason I make these threads is because I want people to check my reasoning and bold assertions, or give me logically certain answers.

[Galen]

It makes sense in some ways, and offers a lot of Convenient Explanations, but fwiw I think SEI was like that as well.

What is it that you're trying to explain?

But neither of those points really matters in the face of the fact that I'm not like any ESEs I know personally, or any of the ESEs who have come to this forum in my time like Malia and MD, certainly at least, not superficially (except when I was overdoing my own ). Cracka maybe, as what I've seen of him he seems like a pretty chill dude.

FWIW you don't remind me of any ESFjs I've ever known.

My IEI post, if you look at the date, was from when I was learning Socionics. Unless it has some argument in it of interest to you, I really want to pretend it doesn't exist, lol.

I actually didn't mean to post that, so let's not bother with it lol.

You know, the reason I make these threads is because I want people to check my reasoning and bold assertions, or give me logically certain answers.

The trouble with this, I find, is that you (3rd person 'you') can make logic say anything you want. Anything is true so long as you have a system that allows for it to be true. I'd much rather find concrete observations first, then draw the conclusions from there. Fe/Ti people would then probably argue something akin to "observations only have meaning depending on the construct through which you're viewing them," which is something I just can't work around.

[717495]

You're not ESE. You're too .

You can be an Fe subtype ENTP, because you focus on but it's not that good quality.

[Cat King Cole]

Says who.

Or, a better question: you're an Alpha NT now are you?

And if I'm a NeTi ego and a SiFe super-id, why is it that I consistently try to engage others through Fe and Si and consistently seek Ne and Ti from others? ILE is nonsensical!

[Hemoglobin]

Cat, I'm not convinced you're an ESE... I still see Si as your dominant function in comparison to Fe.

I still need to do a write up of my observations of you in a face to face situation, sorry I've been throwing myself into work like a good LSI.

All I can say is that I really do think you fit into a Merry Quadra... Bringing a massive My Little Pony plushie to a predominantly male party you were meeting for the first time? You're just lucky we were almost all Betas and not Gammas

[Cat King Cole]

Well, don't forget, I've typed myself SEI for quite some time.

To the extent that I "act my type", I've had close to a year of practice, abouts, of being a "lazy" and eccentric SEI. I'm also coming out of having merged with an ILE and internalising all of her expectations of me, many of which were really uncomfortable.

Right now I'm internalising an EJ temperament. Time alone will tell what's me and what isn't.

Still, I'm interested in your write-up. Just keep what I've said in mind.