Personal bias in typing
when you have feelings about a person you are typing that could influence how you type them...
to what degree should this be eliminated and the feelings ignored?
to what degree should this bias be acknowledged and incorporated into how you type them?
do you think that your opinion on this is related to your type - if so, how?
anything else?
For myself,Originally Posted by kassie
The feelings I have about a person are treated as information, just as anything else I perceive/understand about them. The feelings point out things that I should attend to, to aid my further understandings of them.
* What is it I like about them?
* What is it that annoys me about them?
* What is it about them that gets my blood boiling?
* And ultimately, are these things type related or not?
I may not always be aware of my biases, but if I were to ignore the ones that make themselves obvious, then I would lose out on learning (about them, myself, and whatever the situation entails).
It's quite possible that this is related to my type.
I'm comfortable and familiar enough with my emotions, as well as obtaining information from my emotions that it is a second nature to me. The idea of ignoring them, or eliminating them from the equation is akin to the idea of losing sight, or sound.
But if I were a person that was easily confused by my emotions, or easily dismissed them, then I can imagine that I wouldn't consider them to provide important nor substantial enough information to me. And so then, I might not even be aware enough of the emotional bias, or worse, aware that I'm biased, but be unsure how to resolve it.
Please note, that while I might conceive the possibility that logical types might have an easier time dismissing the emotions, it does not mean that I think that logical types don't have/use their emotions.
Nor does it mean that I think that all ethical types analyze their emotions with intent to obtain information from them.
Also, lol, nor does it mean that I don't find myself fighting against the idea of someone I really really can't stand, as being in my quadra, mirror, or identical.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
lings, nothing but these funny, funny
lings
Zero unless one is stupidly content to hide within a funhouse of masturbatory delusion. Doing so admits nothing of externalities that threaten fantasized immunity to human folly, nor those that introduce the risk of experiencing any but auto-erotic pain. Denying subjectivity grants it a deeper hold in the unconscious, populating the waking mind with caricatures and grotesques that serve the ulterior motives of continued self-seduction.
What the eye beholds it casts in its own light. The diligent analyst not only strives to stand at a remove from personal sentiment toward the analysand but also examines the causal roots of affectivity thereto. Approached with self-effacing candor, resultant insights can account for said reactions and improve their assimilation beside more objective data.to what degree should this bias be acknowledged and incorporated into how you type them?
Last edited by Korpsy Knievel; 01-23-2012 at 05:43 PM.
Keep your bias. It is one piece of data. You'll need more to type someone.
Impossible to ignore or eliminate bias, it's important to identify self-bias and account for it by constantly evaluation.
Assume bias, make predictions, record prediction, evaluate understanding based on accuracy of predictions over time.
Acknowledge that if you're consistently wrong with predictions that there is a error in the understanding.
Assume incomplete information, accuracy in one area of assessment does not suggest accuracy in another area or continued accuracy in that area. Ability to correctly type one sociotype also does not mean ability to type another sociotype.
Socionics requires a non-human mechanism to generate type suggestions, without self-reporting tests or practitioner guided interviews. There are general approaches to this sort of analysis, but no real road at the moment to make predictions and confirm them. One can build a engine to make analysis, but no mechanism to confirm anything.
I wouldn't say the feelings should be ignored altogether, but the nature of those feelings should be understood in the context of what you're talking about. Reactions towards manners of communication, philosophies, styles of cognition etc can be just as important in understanding the types as the philosophies and cognitive styles themselves. The one caveat here would be that what is type-relevant and what is not has to be cognitively understood first so you know how to gauge the subjective reactions in the first place.
how many typings can you have that are "correct" but don't match up in terms of who you like/dislike before socionics becomes pointless?
which is more important - typings that are consistent with theory, or typings that describe relationships in reality? why? (please humor me and choose one and don't say "both/compromise/blah blah")
You can go by 100 million typings a person has produced - doesn't mean they're correct at all. In fact, every single one of them can be completely invalid and something becomes pointless(?) after you realised you can see it through. Whether you have originated it or have accepted somebody else's stance, makes no difference.
Good one.which is more important - typings that are consistent with theory, or typings that describe relationships in reality? why? (please humor me and choose one and don't say "both/compromise/blah blah")
There is no such thing as consistency when it comes to theory. This is absurd. Theory is just theory, it is nothing set in stone. Consistency by definition forces the subject to act in a consistent way. From what I have seen on here, it is the opposite of that.
You alone can verify typings you have made in your life. You alone know whether it works and how comfortable you are with it. Option #2 for me.
If you really like them, and they really like you, then you are obviously duals.
CONFIMED!
Socionics is not a theory of likeability. It's a predictive theory detailing 16 types of interpersonal experiences you can have with people.
Socionics is like a carnival. Which ride do you want to go on?
(you won't necessarily like it)
(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
ugh i wish i could talk to people about this seriously without this stupid mocking bullshit. YOU DONT NEED TO LIKE EVERYONE IN YOUR QUADRA DERP *SLOBBER*
esc, if you don't like it, then what is the theory even for in practice? if you don't like most of the people you meet in your quadra i guess you could use socionics as nothing more than something to jerk off your brain with but its completely fucking pointless then. likeability may not be the be-all and end-all but anybody who says it doesn't have anything to do with how they type people loses my respect because they are obviously deluding themselves and are falsely arrogant about their typing abilities. its so annoying how whenever i bring this up i get stupid dogmatic crap about how there are factors other than intertype blah blah, i KNOW that and its an easy way to dismiss the question without thinking about it. also your patronizing tone is just gross because its so undeserved.
I think there's a difference between me liking everyone in my quadra, versus me feeling like I get where they are coming from, and also, if we don't like each other, it's not particularly upsetting to me. Whether I like them or not, I seem to be able to tolerate their particular shit okay.
Re. bias, seems unavoidable. I'll only repeat prior posts by saying that we can try to get better at recognizing our bias etc.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
The theory of Socionics is positive(contrast with normative) in that it's only describing what is, not what you should do. Based on what Socionics offers in understanding, you don't have to abide by it, it just a matter of personal choice like any other.
Nobody said it doesn't have anything to do with how people type people. Who are you critiquing?likeability may not be the be-all and end-all but anybody who says it doesn't have anything to do with how they type people loses my respect because they are obviously deluding themselves and are falsely arrogant about their typing abilities.
I responded to the post I quoted, the OP I wasn't addressing.its so annoying how whenever i bring this up i get stupid dogmatic crap about how there are factors other than intertype blah blah, i KNOW that and its an easy way to dismiss the question without thinking about it.
I'm sorry you perceived my post that way but since I didn't do anything intentionally, I have to say you biting back at me is also undeserved.also your patronizing tone is just gross because its so undeserved.
(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 don't know what you're saying. it know it attempts to describe what is, not what you should do, and i don't think i implied otherwise. however if it DOES describe what is, then you DO have to abide by it, because it is what it is. so what are you talking about?
anybody who types others on here in such a way that intertype relationships work for themselves and not for others and then deal with that discrepancy by saying "well there are other factors," conveniently. anyone who says "it isn't personal." its a long list and i've talked to a lot of those specific people about it myself. basically i started this thread hoping to get discussion more intelligent than the generic dismissals.
Socionics describes "what is", but that "what is" requires you to look at the world through a mental filter, which is Socionics. Socionics as a mental filter ignores the times when people do get along, because it focuses on some fixed and objective reasons why people don't get along. There are a million+ reasons why people would get along and that is where Socionics fails.
You don't have to abide by the reality provided to you by the filter. You can ignore it/forget it , and go after relationships with people you naturally relate to and enjoy being with.
I don't consider intertypes when typing people on this forum. I don't really care / focus on who I get along with. I just compare my understandings of types with the mental models of behavior of people on the forum that I have.anybody who types others on here in such a way that intertype relationships work for themselves and not for others and then deal with that discrepancy by saying "well there are other factors," conveniently. anyone who says "it isn't personal." its a long list and i've talked to a lot of those specific people about it myself. basically i started this thread hoping to get discussion more intelligent than the generic dismissals.
(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
if you believe that socionics describes reality, no, it is not that simple at all. if you believe that socionics describes reality, then the people you naturally relate to and enjoy being with should have a compatible socionics relationship with you. either the theory describes reality or it does not.
No, I don't believe Socionics describes reality. I believe Socionics is its own reality. One that you can choose to adhere to or not.
Socionics would be reality if it didn't need any explanation.
(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
thank you, that does help clarify. i think a lot of seeing someone as being straight-up horrible has to do with misunderstandings and that things arent really so easily separated, but i think i could sort out a distinction. maybe. in any case its interesting to hear more specific detail about inquadra vs outquadra dislike in a way that kinda makes sense.
Nope. Pretend games ascribe properties to things that weren't there before, like pretending to be a pirate when you do not loot, shoot and terrorize the seven seas.
Socionics works with properties people do have like being a person who strongly attaches oneself to one's own feelings, inclinations, and passions that they become victim to insensible and impractical lifestyle choices(what I take to be some manifestation of Fi btw).
It's a filter. Not completely false and contrived, but a filter. A slice of the pie. There's more to life than Socionics.
(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
Personally I take whatever bias I have into account but I don't put too much weight on it. In same cases, it plays a more vital role in typing than in others, particularly if the relation seems asymmetrical.
My new boss is LIE and I get really uncomfortable around her, avoid working around her if it's possible. I feel very nervous and vulnerable. I don't like her at all, however I often find myself trying to please her. I think this is a good example of supervision.
In general I think that Te/Fi types BOTHER me and Fe/Ti types ANNOY me.
With betas, even if I don't like the person very much, they hardly really bother me, but if I dislike them it's probably because they irritate me in some way. It's similar with Alphas, however I'm more likely to find them annoying and less likely to enjoy their company one on one, though it's okay in a big group.
Gammas are more likely to upset me, especially the rationals, but it's worse with Deltas. Of course there are some that I get along with but it's rare for me to see their PoV, at least in comparison to Betas.
Ok, if you want my serious answer. I think personal feelings and judgments of psychological distance are perfectly acceptable for typing. We are beings of emotion, still before logic. I think you should be mature enough to look at someone objectively, and decide whether or not the personal sentiments, likes or dislikes, are because of a cultural/personal value, or if they're from the style of communication the person is expressing.
I agree with Confirmed and octo in that I view socionics to be primarily about communication. I also see that there is a difference between having effortless communication with someone and having a good/compatible/rewarding/enjoyable relationship with them. The two aren't the same thing (although the former usually aids in the later). There is a significant emotional factor involved in the later which socionics doesn't touch or cover in any shape or form.
For example I'm reading a book right now by someone whose type I suspect to be IEE. Because of the style in which the author is relaying information in this book I'm having some trouble getting through it. It not anything major to the point that I couldn't understand what he is saying at all, but I'm aware of this light irritation it causes. This doesn't make me dislike the author on a personal level, however, I actually like a few of his views and ideas even though he is of type from opposing quadra. In comparison I was reading something by someone I type as LII and I was assimilating what he had to say somewhat easier.
Some of my experiences and reading I've done outside of socionics on topics of psychology and cognitive science also suggest that there are dualities that exist outside of socionics duality.
okay.
i'm just reminded of jessica's thread where she said she got on best with betas and related more to beta values and people were still saying she was SLI because...i don't remember. she seemed unexpressive on cam, or something. maybe she had an SLI cognitive style lmao. and its just like...ok then.
Mm, to me the Case of Jessica is confusing. She says she gets along better with Betas, but in the very thread you mention, she enters into a dialogue really easily with WA, and in general I'm not sure I've seen her interact much with Betas, although maybe I've just overlooked that. And in the video, she does remind me of people I have typed, or who have typed themselves, introverted Te ego. And she doesn't remind me of any supposed SLEs I know. And I'm not sure to what extent her life situation, work/social, might be affecting how she comes across.
I mentioned in chat that this scenario reminds me of Words/Cyclops, who some people thought was SLI, but who told me that he didn't agree with Delta values nor see himself as belonging to Delta quadra. I could see why he came to that conclusion, and I don't have any real explanation for why this would happen. I could speculate, but meh, it would be indeterminate.
So I don't know Jessica's type, but she asked for opinions and I at least had a little feedback to give. Sometimes I have no input at all on someone's type, especially if they are really inconsistent about it, like Joy or Mountain Dew ... I don't even want to touch that, no idea.
I do think that my perception of Jessica is filtered through some subjective stuff based on my own experience and understanding, and so I don't pretend it's objective. It's not really about whether I like or dislike Jessica, though. I do have this feeling that I wouldn't easily get closer to her if I wanted to, but that feeling could be wrong. And it may not have anything to do with SLI vs. SLE vs. any other type.
So if it were about type ... The truth is I'm not always "sure" how to get close to an SLE, but I do see that with SLEs, that sense of being unable to bridge a gap doesn't cause me any massive tension--I just do and say my usual dumb shit and they don't seem to mind. With people I have reason to think are SLI, there's an inherent tension. I feel like there's a wall and I am not sure how I would get past it. I feel like I should be extra careful. And what's kinda funny about that is that some of these supposed SLIs ... I kinda do admire them, they often seem really steady and skillful. But my good opinion of them doesn't make it any easier to get onto a decent footing with them.
So yeah. Subjective stuff, "feelings" about things ... not sure how I'd get away from all that.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
I mean, i think that its more than possible to "like" someone from a different quadra and "dislike" someone from your own quadra, just based on tons of NTR factors, maturity level, how psychologically close circumstances force you to be, etc. So just liking or disliking someone isn't enough information to necessarily justify a particular sociotype or quadra. Also keep in mind that half of each quadra is in the same club as half of its opposing quadra. People in the same club have common interests and can find themselves in similar circles with a lot to talk about.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Oh cool u mentioned me!
And cool that u noticed that...
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
I think you are spot on.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
"The limitations of our views and our knowledge are nowhere more apparent than in psychological discussions, where it is almost impossible for us to project any other picture than the one whose main outlines are already laid down in our own psyche." - Uncle Carl
I'm curious why you say that? I don't want this thread to be about me, I'm simply curious. Confimed, what type do you type yourself?
Mm, I don't know for 100 percent certain. I think at various times when I have seen you in a thread or in chat, I have said something where I am kind of fishing for a response from you and I don't get one? And I don't take it amiss at all, it just makes me wonder whether, if I were offending you, I would know or not know, because the feedback doesn't seem to automatically arrive. But this could be my imagination.
I type myself EIE.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
Oh, well okay that makes sense but I think it's all in your imagination because nothing offends me
yeah i've felt and done the same w/jessica.
Okay. Kiss my ass!!!!!
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
Speaking of biasness in typing, it reminds me of the issue in another perspective. I realised that quite a number of people (be it public figures or people I have known personally) whom I have typed tends to be a Delta type, and I guess it is partly because I tend to type people who intrigued me and whom I show some interest in, without me realising that they are in the same quadra as me.
I'M SO CONFUSED
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
