-
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 copied your post from the other thread.
From what I can tell, at the moment I am:
constructivist
negativist
statics
probably process
probably yielding
probably tactical
probably judicious
I may hurt my head unnecessarily trying to determine the others at some other time.
-
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
based on just the ones I've done today, according to teh Reinin Calculator:
30% - ENTP (Дон Кихот, ИЛЭ)
19% - ISFJ (Драйзер, ЭСИ)
10% - INFJ (Достоевский, ЭИИ)
7% - ENFP (Гексли, ИЭЭ)
7% - INTP (Бальзак, ИЛИ)
6% - ESTP (Жуков, СЛЭ)
6% - ESTJ (Штирлиц, ЛСЭ)
3% - ESFJ (Гюго, ЭСЭ)
3% - ISTJ (Максим Горький, ЛСИ)
2% - ENFJ (Гамлет, ЭИЭ)
2% - INTJ (Робеспьер, ЛИИ)
2% - ISFP (Дюма, СЭИ)
1% - ESFP (Наполеон, СЭЭ)
1% - INFP (Есенин, ИЭИ)
1% - ISTP (Габен, СЛИ)
0% - ENTJ (Джек Лондон, ЛИЭ)
I described myself in informational aspects in the other thread. I am now looking at this thread.
-
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
the Reinin Calculator tries to include such dichotomies as E\I, I\S, T\F, P\J in it, even though those aren't Reinin dichotomies. I didn't include those in the evaluation, but simply, I really don't consider myself an extroverted person, and I certainly wouldn't consider myself leading.
Ok. Objects. How do you relate to them? As they are or do you internalize them and manipulate them to produce another affect of them? When you're in the introverted world, what are you doing? Listening to music? What's in your dreams/visions/fantasies? Do you react then find yourself later having over reacted? or Do you think of the things to react on before you react?
When I look at an object, like curtains, for example, I can't see them from up close; the details confuse me and blur the picture; I see shape, which I consider to be Si and details of objects, I consider to be Se. Si base and activators like myself are more comfortable with shape not detail, so we can obscure, manipulate the object in our minds. I get more headache like when I have to look and remember details on things. My SEE friends are much better at looking at all the intricate details of things and can often be quite aesthetic.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 08-07-2011 at 07:32 AM.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
It is rather hard to evaluate how I evaluate objects in relation to other people, but I suppose I feel lazy-eyed and consider the objects in my head rather than consider what they are doing immediately. This doesn't mean that I am unable to interact with Objects in the real world though.
By introverted world, I presume you mean my head. In my head, when I am awake at least, what I see is a camera obscura-type image (I don't mean it's back-to-front, merely not as detailed) of past or imagined events for example.
My dreams/visions/fantasies are my own private business, but they tend to involve the past or the future rather than anything else but I would think all such dreams/visions/fantasies are timeless.
-
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 really like that you created this thread so I can have a monologue with you; thank you. I appreciate that very much as it allows me to do what I'm most comfortable with. I often get confuses and don't know what to post to or react to as many people contribute to a thread at once and it throws me off (you can say, overloaded sensations and a poor ability to judge which direction to focus on visually).
If you like this as well, than you and I are both EII.
-
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'm just one of those people that don't like things going off-topic too much...I don't think that's particularly EII-specific. I don't think I would have minded discussing this with many people at once (on a forum) either...as for discussing things in groups elsewhere, I don't think wanting to limit discussion to just a few individuals is an EII-only trait either.
There are eight types that fit into the Declaring group that might match these traits as it is, and at least one other Reinin dichotomy does so as well.
You are not good with analysis? You're very good with describing your internal state. That
You're not SEI, ESE, LSI or SLE because you're not a Merry type, you're serious.
You're not LSI because the are Emotives and there are very few emotional elements present in your posts.
You may observe that Mountain Dew, who I've typed as LSI and a Emotive type, in his beginning posts had a tone of emotional icons and elements.
Which brings you to Gamma and Delta types.
My stomach is acting up due to my ulcer but you can see how you would be excluded from Gamma.
You said you were a negative type and that would go either to SLI from the above or EII if you're a positive type.
-
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
-
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
Btw you still haven't typed me maritsa, or at least on that list.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
-
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'm sorry to hear that...
I'm not convinced that whether I'm an asker or a declarer can easily be answered, but I would think that my style tends to be on the side of being an asker, as I am often keen to get clarification on even the most tedious of points, perhaps as a means of accommodating other people or to prevent unnecessary conflict much later. There are other aspects between the two extremes I associate with, but it really is tedious trying to evaluate that.
Trying to place me into Merry or Serious doesn't do justice to who I am as an individual. I don't think I'm particularly bad at noticing the emotional background, I merely go into lulls where I don't care to do anything with it, or am able to change it myself...which would be more in tune with the Merry dichotomy. I think traditionally, it really has been more natural to be as the Merry dichotomy describes. I don't find work "necessarily fun", and yet I don't think fun is "a state of constant excitement that one cannot confuse with leisure or rest".
You are making an assessment of me using Reinin dichotomies I am unclear about to mold me into fitting the typing of EII. I don't have a problem with being typed as an EII, as I think there are good reasons for that typing, but I don't think the usage of Reinin dichotomies is helpful.
If you are still relying on wikisocion to provide meaningful reinen dichotomy descriptions, then you really need an UPGRADE
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
I used these ones http://forum.socionix.com/topic/3327...n-dichotomies/ and was surprised by the accuracy.
My position might have been similar to yours, in that I thought based on another source, ie. wikisocion Reinin Dichotomies had me at ILE. That test gave me INFJ, but it's just a test.
The article comes directly translated from the source.
Likewise, you can Reinin type me yourself. I've looked those over for myself with strong assurance that they fit quite well.
reinin dichotomies > subterranean
-
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
oh, reinin dichotomies > maritsa33 too
I have a good sense now that SubT, you may be SEI. I confirm that. There's a little puzzle of something that doesn't fit with SLI that I want to exclude but that would only make you fit into an SEI and i don't want to make you fit.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 01-13-2012 at 03:47 AM.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
It is years since I replied to this thread, but...how is it that I can be SEI taking the Reinin dichotomies purely at face value, when for example I'm certain I'm a constructivist, most likely a static and an asking type?
I expect the answer to be in the bolded part
I'm doing some digging around in Asking/Declaring at the moment, and there's a lot of cool stuff going on in there, but yeah, I never really expect the written descriptions of the more complex mechanics to always be entirely sufficient...
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
This thread has my head spinning.
I could not see Sub as SEI, even if I was a contortionist.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
@Maritsa, is this still your position? I had always thought that you focused heavily on Reinin dichotomies (e.g. frequently mentioning whether you consider someone a negativist or a positivist, often based on one sentence or even the use of one word), and often resort to simplistic ideas about Jungian dichotomies (e.g. "S" = details).
-
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