Hitta: lungs is like a reverse tootsie roll pop
Hitta: sticky elastic external persona... strong core
Hitta: or a bukkake girl
Hmm. Regarding the Emotivist descriptions I think that both actually work for me to mean something similar. The one on the test suggests first perceiving the emotional implication of something (it need not be of the whole thing, it could simply be a reaction to one thing that ignores the entire broader picture) over the larger meaning. I could see someone who tends to do this also tending to perceive first the emotion behind someone's point while their own mood somewhat adjusts to it, rather than actually hearing the point which may not align with the perceived emotions. So inside one might throw an emo fit over one little point without evaluating the entire subject or even taking the time to. I really do see myself in some ways as being prone to this. I think I do it in a less emo way while still doing it. It's easy and perhaps intellectually lazy to zero in one thing (never mind if it's relevant) and have a reaction to it. I really think that I can tend to do this at times and I see it as a flaw. For instance you could say I did this in Aqua's Dead Cat Artist thread.
Anyway I think the description on the test and the one you quoted seem to kind of be getting at the same thing.
I've never really been able to apply the Reinin dichotomies and I don't really think they're going to be terribly useful in the end or even that they line up neatly to Model A. But this doesn't seem to stop me from posting. Sniff.
Lol at some of the alternative nicknames..
Sle or "voldemort" (EII as "Harry Potter" of course) Lsi - is "Stalin" "batman???", "saddam hussein" SEI "Winnie the pooh" IEE "donkey from shrek"
"Quickly absorbs new information, but because of poor digestion doesn’t keep it in memory for too long."
^^ I totally relate to this, I didn't know it had to do with being an intuitive.
This is a great tool.
I was left with these possibilities ENTp, INFp, ENTj & INFj.
wow, I'm impressed. It's so simple but effective. I like that you can choose just the traits that stand out to you the most.
Sensing, process-oriented, obstinate, strategic, objective... ESFp/SEE it is.
Genghis Khunt, drippin' like twater.
The ones based soley on your descriptions that felt most like me were: ethical, negative, declaring, emotive, result, carefree, and reasonable. The others I didn't feel strongly about.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
Introvert, Sensing, Asking, Result, Carefree, Reasonable
That's the first description I've read about SLI's public humiliation. Sounds more emo than the IEI description. True enough for me though. I used to get in fights for the dumbest things.
Like Slacker, I'm a bit skeptical of Reinin as well. Said many times before it is going to produce different results from your own self-typing leaving you confused. Applied on someone else as well, take the author of sociotypograph for instance and his Reinin typing of anndelise. All in all, you have to know what you're doing.
As for the tool itself - it is neat.
I slightly rewrote descriptions I found on another website, and those were nothing more than a very poor translation of so-so descriptions in Russian.
If you're an English native speaker, who's passionate about the language and would like to help the project, please contact me at email@example.com
Ok I'm doing this test on my phone and only portions of the directions showed up so correct me if i'm wrong, but we're supposed to choose 3-4 out of that whole list of traits that we feel like describes us the best? Doing this, I came up SLE.
For example, very few if any people doubt hkkmr's self-typing of NeTi. Yet it's blatantly obvious when watching hkkmr in forum posts and forum chatbox that he is a Declaring type. He rarely, if ever, asks questions unrelated to the functioning of the website, and even then it's usually in the form of a statement of some kind. Instead he goes off on long monologues, often ignoring the input/ideas of others. According to Reinin, this is not an NeTi trait.
Yet, it's also supposed to be the trait of the socion's "Psychologist". The type that's supposed to be aimed at grasping people's problems and interests! The one that likes to delve into people's minds and see things from a variety of viewpoints. How is monologuing and not asking questions supposed to help with that?? I can understand it when it's in say...written form mode, such as forum posts, or in "teacher" mode, but not when actually interacting real time with people.
So yeah, I wouldn't trust Reinin's dichotomies to accurately give a socionics type. I'd see it more as it's own typing system...or as flavoring.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Yes, you're supposed to choose 3-4 traits, then read the description of the matching type(s) and decide whether it fits (or which one fits better).
The dichotomy that always stands out the most to me is the asking/declaring. I can pick up on that so quickly with people. It just seems super obvious, in most cases.
There's a price to pay if done without knowing what it means, though. Sure, people on here can read, I don't dispute that, question is, do they know what they are reading and answering to.
As for a separate personality theory, it is one. It's not part of Model A. If my memory serves me right it was created by an alpha NT, at least so I heard.
Ahh yes, I knew something like that is going to be mentioned. To me, he seems to be ILE or at least Ne/Si quadra. I don't think he mistook Se role for Ne role.For example, very few if any people doubt hkkmr's self-typing of NeTi. Yet it's blatantly obvious when watching hkkmr in forum posts and forum chatbox that he is a Declaring type. He rarely, if ever, asks questions unrelated to the functioning of the website, and even then it's usually in the form of a statement of some kind. Instead he goes off on long monologues, often ignoring the input/ideas of others. According to Reinin, this is not an NeTi trait.
There's something else as well, I wrote about it many times in my bestseller socionics books, but I'm not going to blab about it now knowing most of yous can't read those - I'm just going to wait even though I'm a bit impatient. So crouching tiger, hidden dragon this time. I have to be sure before I pounce, don't want to go hungry. It's self-explanatory, so excuse me.
I want to say that I'm really close and going to get to it soon. As for people getting different result from their self-typing, you have to take into account that most of them know what they're doing and by that I mean, they pick those Reinin traits without prejudice/bias. Furthermore, I know some people on here accentuate their differences, as in, opposing quadra or neighbouring quadra at times but to me it's the same type, same quadra.
How about EII or LII? And no, this is not a legitimate typing of hkkmr.Yet, it's also supposed to be the trait of the socion's "Psychologist". The type that's supposed to be aimed at grasping people's problems and interests! The one that likes to delve into people's minds and see things from a variety of viewpoints. How is monologuing and not asking questions supposed to help with that?? I can understand it when it's in say...written form mode, such as forum posts, or in "teacher" mode, but not when actually interacting real time with people.
I said you narrow it down when in doubt, last resort so to speak.So yeah, I wouldn't trust Reinin's dichotomies to accurately give a socionics type. I'd see it more as it's own typing system...or as flavoring.
Would write more, but have to run/be some place else. Be back soon.
ftr, I wasn't questioning hkkmr's self-typing. I was just trying to point out how the Declaring/Asking dichotomy doesn't really make sense for the NeTi/NeFi types. The supposed Asking type does more monologues and debates than asking questions. While the supposed Declaring type supposedly grasps what's going on in people's minds and relationships, but without bothering to ask them any questions. Neither makes sense to me.
For myself, I see myself doing a mix of both. On the forum though is when I definitely do more declaring than asking. I didn,t start out that way when I first joined. But noone would answer my questions, forcing me into unfamiliar territory. Back then, the only way I could get people to talk about the things I wanted to know about was if I made some kind of assertion...and wait for their responses. Worse, it had to be as clearly written out as I could get it. Argh!
I am much more comfortable asking about and sharing stories of experiences.
Though, I guess I can see that maybe Declaring for "The Psychologist" came from the idea of sharing/expressing insights about what's going on in a person's psyche/relationships. But still...how could they gain insight if they didn't ask the people questions??
Argh...am still not a fan of combining reinin with model a.
Lol, this stuff is going to drive me crazy! I think I will take a break.
Maybe I'll go buy one of your books, Absurd.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Okay, scratch few things I said, this doesn't make any sense unless you know what you're up against. Anyway, I should of known before this is going to be posted by an alpha NT.
Some of these dichotomies seem far more valid than others. I don't really see how Asking/Declaring couldn't be simply equated with self-absorption.
"Now to taciturn-narrator. I can't but start with a quote of Slackermom and my answer to her...
Slacker Mom wrote:
OK here's a conversation my husband and I had last night. Introductory info - he bought a new welder recently.
Husband sits down. "My new welder isn't working right." (Implied but not stated question is 'what's wrong with my welder?')
I ask, "what isn't it doing?"
He says something like "It doesn't make enough of an arc." Or something. I know nothing about welders. Something about an arc.
I ask, "What would cause it to not do that? Not enough power? Didn't you say something about this welder being 'dual-power' or something?"
*silence* He goes into the garage. I hear welding sounds.
He comes in looking content and sits down. "It doesn't work as well on 110. It works better on 220."
OK so he doesn't ask a single actual question - although he has implied questions. And I sit and ask question after question. How does this fit with him being taciturn and me being a narrator? I just don't get it. I think I do fit "narrator" generally but not so much with him.
Also, why does he ask for my help about stuff like welders and carburators? He has an NeTi friend who actually knows how to weld.
That's exactly how taciturn people operate. But he's not asking you for help, he's just stating facts. It's you who provides the meaning, the narrative, of what do those facts mean. Taciturn = statement of concrete external issues and wondering their meaning. Narrator = providing a concrete internalized frame of reference and pondering the abstract external facts about how it all applies, how to make the story work.
How I've previously defined these two characteristics:
Has no complete, total system to guide it's life, but a number of selected items and ideas that it tries to fit together as best as it can. It tries to make sense of things, tries to solve inconsistencies. By its actions it turns 'extrovert' into 'introvert', something that is well defined into implications. It's speculative.
Has integrated his life into a sensible whole which it adapts into varying circumstances. It's collected and establishes a personal presence. Is willing to create seeming contradictions as long as they make sense to it personally. By its actions it turns 'introvert' into 'extrovert', something that has many possible effects and outcomes.
Taciturn is also 'static democratic' and 'dynamic aristocratic'. It characterizes people who negotiate over what to do to certain circumstances in the environment, often in an informal style, proactive pushers for a better environment. It also describes people who are inclined to immediately start doing their jobs so as to get their part done quickly as they can, repeatedly testing the environment and seemingly doing silly repetitive errors, while they are in fact repeatedly testing the nature of a matter for maximum certainty. A person who is satisfied that he knows the most important things.
Narrator is also 'static aristocratic' and 'dynamic democratic'. A person who is easily sceptical of people's intentons and has a tendency to manipulate groups to have hir own way. Also a person who looks for opportunities in the environment and tries to mobilize hirself and others to take advantage of them. These people often seem complex, knowledgeable, maybe a tad uncertain, rarely overcommitting and being quite good in managing the kind of resources they care about. A person who is satisfied that he knows enough about enough of things."
Last edited by Uncertainty; 05-19-2012 at 12:19 AM.
I was more sure about the individual traits than the rest.
static-negative-strategic-constructive = SLE.
I can also add extravert-logical-irrational easily.
I was able to pick with relative certainty as well: result-yielding-decisive.
and yes that fits my self typing.
where I totally get bogged down trying to pick: asking-declaring and subjective-objective, as I can kind of switch between those.
at least based on the descriptions in the test, I'm not familiar with reinin much.
edit: if subjective means merry, then I'm definitely that
Last edited by ambivalent existence; 05-21-2012 at 02:09 AM.
Declaring means that when you ask questions, it will sound more like statements and that you would rather 'say what you have to say' and then let the other person talk (rather than being 'interrupted' by questions). It doesn't mean you are not going to ask questions(what an absurd notion). Ignoring the inputs/ideas of others is NTR, furthermore I don't think this is an all encompassing/fair evaluation of HK. The way you interpret Hk seems to have to do with some weird blending you have done with Constructivist/Emotivist and Asking/Declaring.
Last edited by thePirate; 05-21-2012 at 02:38 AM.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is and not
First, I don't bother with the name of the dichotomy except to use as shorthand when referring to it. I prefer to utilize the description as given. If the description isn't clear enough for a person to utilize that test, then the description on the test needs to be worked on.
The dichotomy, as written in this test, distinguishes between
A) typically speaks in statements VS typically speaks in questions (I am well aware that "typically" does not mean "always"; Even after rereading what I wrote, I am not sure where you got the idea that I was implying that the dichotomies were an always or never kind of thing.)
B) Prefers monologues to dialogues. VS Prefers dialogues to monologues.
C) Tends to make detailed speeches. VS tends to use short remarks.
D) more interested in self-expression than hearing the other person. VS more interested in hearing the other person than self-expression.
Everything I wrote above was with these four differences, as written in the test, in mind. The term was only a means of referring to the entire description. If "Narrator" had been used, I would have used Narrator to mean the same thing. if "X"vs"Y" had been used, I would have used "X" or "Y" to refer to the same concept.
So if you are going to complain that I used "Declaring" to refer to "Typically speaks in statements. Prefers monologues to dialogues. Tends to make detailed speeches, because s/he is more interested in self-expression than hearing the other person.", then your issue is with the description as written, not me.
Secondly, I have no idea where you got the idea of having blended constructivist/emotivist with asking/declaring.
Unless there are problems with how Constructivist/Emotivist are described in the test. According to the test's descriptions, they refer to what a person perceives first (emotional implication or meaning), then which second. Then whether or not it's typical of the perceiver to adjust to the other person's mood. I didn't even get into who perceives what first, nor who adjusts to another's moods or not.
Perhaps my mentioning one way that I might be able to perceive The Psychologist's monologues and speeches as sharing/expressing insights about what's going on in a person's mind seemed like blending them? I don,t know. I hadn't even delved into that trait, as I've admitted in the past to regularly being confused with the "asking/taciturn/x/whatever" with the "declaring/narrator/y/whichever" and how they applied to types, particularly regarding the Ne base types in actual action vs theoretical action.
Thirdly, I already know not to use isolated scenarios. I've been one of the few people fighting for typers to expand the contexts in which they observe the typee if they want to get a more accurate typing. Nor am I the kind of person who jumps immediately into typing someone. I prefer to interact with them or observe them over time, and in a variety of contexts and a variety of topics.
As for hkkmr, I have been here for quite a few years. I have seen him in forum chatboxes and video chatting. And every time so far he has used the same style. It's partly one of the reasons why I avoid even trying to engage him in a conversation. He seems to just goes on and on and on, with little to no concern for the input other people might offer. He certainly doesn,t ask them if they would explain what they meant...he just...kinda...railroads over their input and continues on his way. And I'm not even referring to just me...I see him do it a LOT with plenty of others.
But...as I said in another post, I am not even questioning hkkmr's typing. I certainly wouldn't do it on one measly dichotomy (that I openly admit finding confusing regarding theoretical vs actual). So the comment on typing isn't even applicable.
Last edited by anndelise; 05-21-2012 at 09:02 PM. Reason: Changed the underlined from "he" to "they". Sorry for that error.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Ethical + Emotive + Objective + Democratic = ESFp
I like the little descriptions of each dichotomy, they help me actually understand the Reinin dichotomies that never made any sense. Yaaroslav made a test like this before, but without those descriptions it's rendered useless. Cool stuff.
"And above all, watch with glittering eyes the whole world around you because the greatest secrets are always hidden in the most unlikely places. Those who don't believe in magic will never find it." -Roald Dahl
It's pretty cool
"Yet, it's also supposed to be the trait of the socion's "Psychologist". The type that's supposed to be aimed at grasping people's problems and interests! The one that likes to delve into people's minds and see things from a variety of viewpoints. How is monologuing and not asking questions supposed to help with that?
I wasn't pointing out you having a hardline stance about it (although an implication can be drawn from your statement), but rather that 'not asking questions' is not a part of the Declaring dichotomy, which you seem to think it is for some reason (otherwise I don't know why you would say 'how is monologuing and not asking questions supposed to help with that' if you don't think it's associated)
I got the idea you were blending things from your description of HK which included information not directly relevant to asking/declaring.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is and not
Ok, so I will rephrase it to better get across the intended meaning....
"How is 'the tendency to monologue and make detailed speeches because s/he is more interested in self-expression than hearing the other person' supposed to help "The Psychologist" do what they are supposedly good at doing?"
This dichotomy in relation to model a has "The Psychologist" type being more interested in expressing their own self...than in listening to other people express themselves...and using that self-expression of the other person as information used to gain insight about that person's likes/dislikes, concerns, relationships, etc.
As for blending...no person uses one single dichotomy at a time, nor do observations tend to remove any other factor that may or may not be involved...unless maybe if one is Ti-ing things. If you expect strict Ti from me, then you will have a long time to wait.
imo, If the reinin's dichotomies demand strict Ti-ing to be of use...then they are of very limited use to the socion as a whole...and thus need more work.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
I agree with ann, the asking-declaring dichotomy appears to be garbage. A dichotomy at that "tier" may exist, but it needs a better description.
Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048
Ah yes, the war continues. Great results produced so to speak. I knew you're different Galen and I don't mean you being gay same for ambivalent existence.
Asking seems to be a clear one to me. I don't engage in monologue at all. In fact, I've pissed some friends off for it (for cutting in, injecting things. It's like some people want everyone to take turns or something.). I often ask questions. Sometimes just to get the wheels spinning/shoot the shit. I might only halfway pay attention after I ask.