An example of the way ILEs-ENTps think

[mikemex]

I found this page:

http://solomonreborn.wordpress.com/2...0/hello-world/

And I found it quite amusing. Some concepts there are really bright but it's obvious to me that he doesn't have the slightest clue of what Fi is.

This guy fantasize way too much and takes his assumptions for granted. Mostly because he doesn't seem to understand how other people really thinks.

Overall, the main tone is to demonstrate how bright he is. But he's sincere in his pedagogical goal, as all Alphas are.

[mikemex]

I had dated the same 28 year old woman for nearly 11 months and hadn’t shown any signs of being ready to “take the next step... Now I wouldn’t have taken so much offense to this scenario if it were framed differently. If my girlfriend simply “wanted” to take the next step, that would be one thing. I still wouldn’t have done it, but I would have understood. Instead, she and her troop of Femcops insisted she “deserved” it and that I owed it to her since she was the greatest thing since sliced bread and I’d been awarded the pleasure of her company.

This is a good example of Fi PoLR in action.

[The Ineffable]

I find him Aristocratic Irrational something. I don't find very ILE to label that much - and especially durably - talk about alpha males & shit, "how to" do stuff (with women and whatever). He has pretty much that Aristocratic attitude I encounter to claim he knows how things work (optionally how they always worked) on this Earth. Besides he seems too human-oriented IMO to be even logical - all his world revolves around trifles about people, interactions, relations, attitude, etc - things that don't even have a palpable soundness. This is arguable, though. I always find funny such "teachings", but I don't remember Alphas relating much to them, nor an ILE using these notions of hierarchy in vieweing the social life - "higher than", "under" someone, references to one-upping and status in the pack.

BTW, I don't believe in this "alpha male" thing when it comes to humans - except using it as a metaphor. Of course if there's some public guy who is beautiful, smart, strong and rich, most women would want him but for obvious reasons. But I don't think he can stir up *all* the society around him by some sort of animal magic, I'm sure there are quite a lot of people who don't give a shit about his "position" or all this social game. Yeah in some groups you can find such a de-facto worshipped stag, but it's a certain kind of people who follow - and again, it can be all explained in simple psychological terms (not that I know everything about it). I don't think this male "alpha-ness" is a certain property, IMO in humans if another later possess the same or a greater amount of assets as the former, he will automatically become an "alpha male" - no mystification is required.

Having lived among Aristocratics, I remember a lot of shit like this. I remember for instance two guys arguing about a girl (none's GF) and one of them (SLI this instance) telling the other "Fine dude I give her to you just stop fucking my brains". That was like what the hell?... She was not even "his" girl, or whatever he meant. I was associated to "macho", "alpha male" or "Rasputin" by the Deltas in my family (especially my IEE father) only because my girlfriends were agreeing with me, which they found unexplainable having my intransigent nature and appareny being insensitive to them - though they knew shit about the insides of our relationship. I am totally nothing like those stereotypes. I hear psychoanalytical shit like the first man you tell a girl she will marry she will always remember, and then that he - or anyone similar to him - will always have power over her. I guess that mesmerizing male figure has to have a name... the "omega male"?

Check this out, from that guy's blog:

Those of us who write and read these blogs are no smarter than the average man. The only thing that gives us a leg up in the dating and marriage arena is the fact that we take what most men intrinsically know and give it proper terminology. We then use that terminology to define a situation and react accordingly using proven strategies. I guess what I’m getting at is that while most men are busy ranting A, B, C, D, E, F, G… we quickly assess the situation, call it the alphabet, and keep on moving.

I don't think so, I don't believe things are that simple to take an immediate practical approach on every case. Sounds like the kind of advice I heard from Betas. Of course, these are not things to take literally, or too seriously, just I see no reason to associate them with the ILE, a type that has a a view on these matters that is curious, wondering, critical, free of judgments or rules of thumb.

[Gilly]

Not ILE
No.

[chriscorey]

I found this page:

http://solomonreborn.wordpress.com/2...0/hello-world/

And I found it quite amusing. Some concepts there are really bright but it's obvious to me that he doesn't have the slightest clue of what Fi is.

This guy fantasize way too much and takes his assumptions for granted. Mostly because he doesn't seem to understand how other people really thinks.

Overall, the main tone is to demonstrate how bright he is. But he's sincere in his pedagogical goal, as all Alphas are.

Be the lightening in me that strikes relentless ...or BUZZ off.

Some people are pretty damn wordy as far as intuitives go ...

[chriscorey]

I find him Aristocratic Irrational something. I don't find very ILE to label that much - and especially durably - talk about alpha males & shit, "how to" do stuff (with women and whatever). He has pretty much that Aristocratic attitude I encounter to claim he knows how things work (optionally how they always worked) on this Earth. Besides he seems too human-oriented IMO to be even logical - all his world revolves around trifles about people, interactions, relations, attitude, etc - things that don't even have a palpable soundness. This is arguable, though. I always find funny such "teachings", but I don't remember Alphas relating much to them, nor an ILE using these notions of hierarchy in vieweing the social life - "higher than", "under" someone, references to one-upping and status in the pack.

BTW, I don't believe in this "alpha male" thing when it comes to humans - except using it as a metaphor. Of course if there's some public guy who is beautiful, smart, strong and rich, most women would want him but for obvious reasons. But I don't think he can stir up *all* the society around him by some sort of animal magic, I'm sure there are quite a lot of people who don't give a shit about his "position" or all this social game. Yeah in some groups you can find such a de-facto worshipped stag, but it's a certain kind of people who follow - and again, it can be all explained in simple psychological terms (not that I know everything about it). I don't think this male "alpha-ness" is a certain property, IMO in humans if another later possess the same or a greater amount of assets as the former, he will automatically become an "alpha male" - no mystification is required.

Having lived among Aristocratics, I remember a lot of shit like this. I remember for instance two guys arguing about a girl (none's GF) and one of them (SLI this instance) telling the other "Fine dude I give her to you just stop fucking my brains". That was like what the hell?... She was not even "his" girl, or whatever he meant. I was associated to "macho", "alpha male" or "Rasputin" by the Deltas in my family (especially my IEE father) only because my girlfriends were agreeing with me, which they found unexplainable having my intransigent nature and appareny being insensitive to them - though they knew shit about the insides of our relationship. I am totally nothing like those stereotypes. I hear psychoanalytical shit like the first man you tell a girl she will marry she will always remember, and then that he - or anyone similar to him - will always have power over her. I guess that mesmerizing male figure has to have a name... the "omega male"?

Check this out, from that guy's blog:

I don't think so, I don't believe things are that simple to take an immediate practical approach on every case. Sounds like the kind of advice I heard from Betas. Of course, these are not things to take literally, or too seriously, just I see no reason to associate them with the ILE, a type that has a a view on these matters that is curious, wondering, critical, free of judgments or rules of thumb.

Oh my GOD! I agree! But I could have said it in two sentences! YOU blatant Ti dominant! Or Fe something you shit talker ...I just read a bunch of "I don't care" I take it back ... You're SF something ...No, no, you're just a shit talker and I apologize to all quadras for my idiocy.