im really bored and everybody else is doing it okay yeah i'm weak.
"Everybody is doing it" part is worth mentioning.
If all my friends jumped off a bridge I can without a doubt say that I would too... I mean all my friends just suicided themselves and now I have no one to talk to about itOriginally Posted by Absurd
Easy Day
*grabs lungs by the lungs and takes her with him*
That's self-explanatory. You're dead.If all my friends jumped off a bridge I can without a doubt say that I would too... I mean all my friends just suicided themselves and now I have no one to talk to about it
Aw man... *plays dead* I hate this game. Can I stop yet?
Easy Day
I voted for ESI, because being a standard chatter in IRC almost eliminates beta/alpha (except for some visitors who are kinda immune to the serious quadra charm) and I don't get the "holy"-vibe from you like from some other EIIs (since Fi looks like a good choice). I also don't think that Se is your polr, you don't seem to be too afraid of conflict situations or generally a thin-skinned person. Ne makes more sense as polr.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
i agree but i'm curious what this looks like from the outside since it seems to be pretty much taken for granted by most. and i wonder if it just has become a standard like when you first came and you were "either LII or ILI" and i was like duh ILI of course. and now SLI seems obvious but i wasn't taking that into account at first because the "standard" was INTx.
edit: when *i* first came. i see myself as omnipresent, apparently.
Fangs too. Voted ESI.
This is a very justified question. Of course, as everyone else, I'm influenced by the "public opinion". But as we know, you have to have at exactly one leading IE and since you are introverted in my opinion, there are only four left. I could also say that you appear to be more rational than perceiving, and that would basically leave Ti and Fi. You're also different from all those IEIs (and we have a lot) and Te fits you better than Ti.
It's similar to the approach how I tried to identify my type. I oriented myself on the IEs, their meaning to me and which I preferred and that quickly leads you to your preferred quadra, in a more or less reliable way. The last thing you have to do is to pick your type of those four.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
whenever I ask people who type me intuitive ethical extrovert its always come down to "you're like an EII but more easy going." are there any different reasons for this?
when I randomly spell things out its because of my phone being weird for the record. I don't just enjoy randomly spelling things out
It's probably your enneagram type that is giving them this impression. If you look at these correlations between enneagram types and Big 5 factors, 1s, 6s, and 9s all have a low Openness score, and so it happens that majority of ExIs are either type 6 or 1. Fours, on the contrary, score high on Openness, which is likely what people are picking up on when they tell you that you're more "easy-going" than other Fi doms that they've met.
Enneagram and subtypes, as long you buy into them plus social introversion doesn't necessarily have to mean you're not extraverted.
Thanks, siuntal. I was right when saying E8 is the extraverted type, and by that I mean the extraverted type. Time to kill Jadae.
You almost always remind me of Lucinda Ledgerwood.
She starts speaking @1:07
I am not saying that you're anything like her.
As to the poll. INFj-Ne is my choice, as almost always.
interesting, i remember you mentioning before but i can't remember if you said why or if it was just a vibe. i think she's lighter and more engaging than i am but maybe she's practiced at interviews and stuff. i think my presence irl is more like the woman next to her than her. (not exactly like that, but as a comparison.)
You seem very much Fi ego. I don't see SEE or IEE. ESI could work, but I just don't know. EII makes the most sense of the options in mind. You're sort of well-rounded and hard to pin down. Nothing wrong with that.
I wouldn't call ESIs more "easy going" than EIIs at all. I remember an ESI teacher who meant well, but was often a pain in the ass for her irrational students. Fi-types can be pretty strict, but on different levels. Both ESIs and EIIs are going to nag because people break their personal rules of "right" behaviour, but EIIs do it in a more abstract, holistic way than ESIs. The latter type is more focused on the immediate case, imho. I don't want to say that EIIs don't care for the practical implication of their general rules or that ESIs ignore a "theoretical backgroud" of their convictions, but that seems to be a difference to me.
EDIT: Due to my occasional inability to comprehend what I just read, please ignore the quote above and the reference to said quote. The rest still applies.
Last edited by Pa3s; 04-17-2012 at 11:41 AM.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
people almost never talk about anything real when they talk about my type and it makes me crazy. I know "fi" is all some people can think to say because the stuff that swirled together to make that conclusion can be hard to grab. but it doesn't really bring me insight to know I'm so ij or whatever. I need bnd or hitta or something. I am selfish and probably insatiable about this and I know other people don't define me but I just want and this is the place to get so I'm asking.
I know the theoretical fi base type nags about their personal sense of rightness but I don't think I do. do i? this this is what I mean. I'm not asking to have my opinion confirmed and I don't promise to accept anyones. but I want to be shown what I can't see.
I don't think you're weak.
"We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.".
ISFj is the safest bet at this point. if woofl, wookie and dolphin can be gamma SFs i don't see why you can't. but i still think you're the shittiest Ne-PoLR ever and i don't regret having been skeptical of it up to now.
thanks but I wont hold it against you when you change your mind again.
yeah I get confused when people type dolphin and wookie gamma sf but think I'm too good with abstraction. a different kind of abstraction? that's why I was confused by wookies vote.
I probably make a shitty ne polr as well as a shitty se polr. I also think I'm something more like fe/ti polr and the most attractive types are ips and only like two or three reinin dichotomies tops actually apply to me. cest la vie.
its probably due to not having a similar ISxJ to compare to and/or attributing the abstraction to "Ne role" or what not. ttytt i don't think they're entirely illegitimate arguments, although weak ones on their own.
i'm being told the same holds for me, so there is always a temptation for me to think you're going through the same thing as me and should just stick to what you've typed yourself from the start like i do. i personally think it's a bad mind warp to turn your back on past convictions. it creates this weird "this time is different" effect where you say "i was crazy then, but TRUST ME now!" i think if i ever found out i was mistyped, that would be the end of my interest in the theory. but the funny thing is, that is sort of what you describe you're going through. and all this reminds me of my old INTp type doubt episode i told you about as well.
the Fi base is in a sense more of a "core" to your personality than the PoLR, so i don't think the dislike of Ti/Fe is all that strange. that being said though, if you get any sort of supervision sense from my Ti you must be very good at hiding it.
about IP types: wasn't it Si base types particularly? i spy a little bit of selective citing there.
about reinin: ignore it
lol yeahh. i think thats a problem. the TRUST ME NOW thing. which is why ive found it necessary to relax about the whole thing and accept its just a theory. because its weird to me too, lol.
i don't feel any kind of supervision or "badness" from you really at all. the only thing i'd say is that you're quick to explain how things fit theoretically and to default to the "system" being right, in a way, and i see this in other LIIs too. and it chafes and i prefer a more "yeah its bullshit but you could explain it this way" approach - though to be fair there are Te egos who take the theory for granted too. and i get the chafing from you FARRR less than other LIIs here. i don't know if that's because you adapt to me or what.
it was Si base types mostly that i've dated in my life, not solely been attracted to. (and to be even clearer, that was largely hs "dating" - my only serious relationships have been with an ESI and an SLI.) my point was that, regardless, it doesn't fit. i like and am attracted to other introverts. i'm not drawn to EJs. though my dating history isn't really supportive of Se ego because i've only dated one victim (an EIE) and it was a joke of awkwardness lol. that said, having a self-typing of EII made a lot more sense to me when i first arrived at the forum and was going entirely off rl experience and i think my history and relationships on the forum make EII a bit ridiculous. and maybe thats because i'm typing wrong irl. or maybe its because the internet is "different." blah.
ignore what doesn't work and go with what gives you the results you want. got it.about reinin: ignore it
the "defaulting to the system being right" is just a matter of short hand to me. i do think in that "yeah its bullshit but you could explain it this way" kind of way but i don't always spell out all the saving clauses to my thinking because i expect people to read them into my writing. i also like the drama it raises sometimes.
well like i theorized before, N stuff might transfer through the internet more easily than S stuff* so there might be something to the idea that N types come across less "awkward" on the internet and this affects your relations with them. that's pretty speculative though.it was Si base types mostly that i've dated in my life, not solely been attracted to. (and to be even clearer, that was largely hs "dating" - my only serious relationships have been with an ESI and an SLI.) my point was that, regardless, it doesn't fit. i like and am attracted to other introverts. i'm not drawn to EJs. though my dating history isn't really supportive of Se ego because i've only dated one victim (an EIE) and it was a joke of awkwardness lol. that said, having a self-typing of EII made a lot more sense to me when i first arrived at the forum and was going entirely off rl experience and i think my history and relationships on the forum make EII a bit ridiculous. and maybe thats because i'm typing wrong irl. or maybe its because the internet is "different." blah.
* i associate S for example with acting on the fly in the heat of the moment and N with more deliberation. when writing forum posts, N types can take as much time as they want. so that's an advantage to them.
its the name of the game! you're getting the hang of it!ignore what doesn't work and go with what gives you the results you want. got it.
@lungs
In the recent reinin test thread, for yourself, you had chosen Introvert, Static, Constructivist, and possibly Tactical. For some unknown reason, I was curious which traits I would choose if I had to type you this method. The ones I came up with were Sensing, Asking, Rational. What do you think of those as applicable to yourself?
I chose Sensing because of "Slowly absorbs new information, but thanks to good digestion keeps it in memory for a long time." I chose this because you don't seem to jump on new information/ideas quickly, jumping to conclusions about the idea/situation/etc. Watching you in irc and many of your posts and questions regarding socionics on the forum, I can almost see you slowly chewing over the information, tasting it, smelling it, and testing it out, before temporarily swallowing it. If it seems to settle, then it 'sticks'. If it comes back up, it's rejected, at least partially. This does not in any way imply that I think you are slow. Far from it. Cautious might be a better term?
I also chose Sensing because of the variety of links you bring up from tumblr and such. And the pictures and music you collect or link to. The ones that seem your favorite are ones that seem to demand paying attention to it, in order to see what you found so attractive in it, much in the same way that you chew over ideas.
I chose Asking because on irc and in the forum, you do more asking than you do declaring anything. Even when you do declare something, there's a sense of unsureness about it, as if the sentence/statement ends in a question mark. As if asking "Does that make sense?" One of the things that I admire about you is that you ask questions. You don't pretend to know something even if you've only got a glimmer of an idea of it. You're willing to explore things, even if you don't particularly care for the subject. (like socionics
I chose Rational because it seems that when someone brings you information, it seems that you assess it almost immediately, and then "comes up with a response to the situation using his/her experience". The person gets feedback almost right then and there..almost..about how it might or might not relate to your own experiences/thoughts on it. This is one of the reasons why I enjoyed talking with you on irc. I ramble, you don't. And I could almost rely on you to help keep me focused on the topic/subject at hand, even though you probably didn't know that I did that. (Hope you're not bothered by that.)
----
Anyways, I was just curious what you thought of those three traits. Where my perceptions might differ from your own on these. Hopefully none of them were offensive to you.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Bah. I do see a similarity between you and dolphin. I officially hate Socionics.
I've seen you dualize with Ashton the gamma way.
It was like insulting...but for fun. I don't remember the details.
Some kind of IJ I think. ESI or LSI works. All of my efforts to communicate with you have been downright confusing.
@lungs
In the recent reinin test thread, for yourself, you had chosen Introvert, Static, Constructivist, and possibly Tactical. For some unknown reason, I was curious which traits I would choose if I had to type you this method. The ones I came up with were Sensing, Asking, Rational. What do you think of those as applicable to yourself?
I chose Sensing because of "Slowly absorbs new information, but thanks to good digestion keeps it in memory for a long time." I chose this because you don't seem to jump on new information/ideas quickly, jumping to conclusions about the idea/situation/etc. Watching you in irc and many of your posts and questions regarding socionics on the forum, I can almost see you slowly chewing over the information, tasting it, smelling it, and testing it out, before temporarily swallowing it. If it seems to settle, then it 'sticks'. If it comes back up, it's rejected, at least partially. This does not in any way imply that I think you are slow. Far from it. Cautious might be a better term?
I also chose Sensing because of the variety of links you bring up from tumblr and such. And the pictures and music you collect or link to. The ones that seem your favorite are ones that seem to demand paying attention to it, in order to see what you found so attractive in it, much in the same way that you chew over ideas.
I chose Asking because on irc and in the forum, you do more asking than you do declaring anything. Even when you do declare something, there's a sense of unsureness about it, as if the sentence/statement ends in a question mark. As if asking "Does that make sense?" One of the things that I admire about you is that you ask questions. You don't pretend to know something even if you've only got a glimmer of an idea of it. You're willing to explore things, even if you don't particularly care for the subject. (like socionics
I chose Rational because it seems that when someone brings you information, it seems that you assess it almost immediately, and then "comes up with a response to the situation using his/her experience". The person gets feedback almost right then and there..almost..about how it might or might not relate to your own experiences/thoughts on it. This is one of the reasons why I enjoyed talking with you on irc. I ramble, you don't. And I could almost rely on you to help keep me focused on the topic/subject at hand, even though you probably didn't know that I did that. (Hope you're not bothered by that.)
----
Anyways, I was just curious what you thought of those three traits. Where my perceptions might differ from your own on these. Hopefully none of them were offensive to you.
none of this sounds really off to me. what stood out to me as easiest to identify with was the metaphor for how i take in new information. i have to try it on and wear it for awhile before deciding if it like it. i still might reject it outright and i still might have opinions about it that might weigh on my final verdict (and i think this came in when you talked about rationality). whats kind of interesting is that some of the stuff you say about me in regards to sensing and asking are things i think people attribute to intuition - thinking things over instead of jumping to conclusions, being willing to explore ideas.
interesting what you say about the pictures i post. when i'm on tumblr i scroll through thousands of pictures and the ones that i put on my blog or share here are the ones that grab my attention out of the huge heap. so they do demand i pay attention, but i never really thought about it as "to see what you found so attractive" and i don't really get that part? i'm always curious about peoples' reactions to the art i like because i know that pictures strike everybody differently and its interesting to see how somebody else got something out of it that was so much different than i did.
i'm not bothered by anything you wrote and its nice what you said about irc. (: unlike me, you seem to always have something to say and to be able to keep things interesting so its nice having you around there.
lol, aw. i never noticed it was that bad. i can be a shitty conversationalist when i dont have anything to talk about so it might just be that. thanks for the input though. (:
SEI; I've already made my case.
-
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
yes, you did:
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
I think I was confusing her with someone else. There were three women who came here when she did at the same time, so I couldn't manage effectively (duh!!! for very obvious reasons, which I need not mention again -Te DS) who was who.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
