Discuss how much you hate this type description!
http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/t...f-ILIs-Model-A
Sociotype.com Type Description
Discuss how much you hate this type description!
http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/t...f-ILIs-Model-A
How about his one on wikisocion.ws? (It's exactly the same) http://socionics.ws/wiki/index.php?title=ILI
In what do you disagree with aestrivex?
It's perfect and describes my mom very accurately. Jim, pick another type for yourself if you don't agree
-
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
Youre too controlling of yourself, others, and your environment to be an Ni dominant.Originally Posted by InvisibleJim
That's not the question Jadae, I want to know what people think of that description.
There was ample opportunity to discuss this in both of my type me threads. However, as an interesting aside Ashton thinks I'm not sufficiently controlling and aggressive to be ILI. Perhaps you two should talk and resolve that if you wish to do so. Either way these kind of statements are anecdotal and prone to hasty conclusions and the problems of individual interpretation.
Last edited by InvisibleJim; 12-14-2012 at 01:04 PM.
I think it is a good description, it is robust and ticks all of the appropriate boxes for what a typical ILI could behave like. I try to avoid liking it though because then it becomes the usual banal personal discussion.
I probably haven't read all of the descriptions and can't remember most of what I've read.
I find them okay as well, besides when you actually find fault in one, that means, all of them are, well not very descriptive. Like the weakest link in a chain, you deal blows to one, you deal blows to all of them.
You can even do that on this forum with people.
EDIT: Of course you're free to come up with a better description for yourself, written only by and for InvisibleJim, so a one Absurd can show up and find some holes in it like you did before.
So @HelenOfTroy we seem to have some sort of consensus that the description is good and the immediate contradiction/logical fallacy of arguments to the man; your thoughts on the type description and it's application?
You liek Ti, IJ?
Friend, how does one liek an information element?
Oh-oh. I liked it. I thought that was a super description of Ni... but is this the behaviour characteristics of Ni rather than the description of it as a cognitive function (internal)?. Actually it could be both, that's ever so confusing.
Looking through those descriptions i find IEE is still best fit for myself but it's not spot on... I'd prob have Fi, Ne, Te in that order... but yes i understand it's not allowed and it would break the system. I want to revolt.
Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.
In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.
When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.
So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.
InvisibruJim
The same way one lieks descriptions made up of information elements, brother, mate, colleague? That's a very tangible and concrete process of lieking...
Lol, Comrade!
Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.
In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.
When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.
So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.
InvisibruJim
Well, I think analytical psychology infers cognition attitude through behavioural medians and excpetional behaviours; but there are a lot of clear limitations and contradictions to that idea!
Tear down the walls Helen, blow up parliament.
I'm not sure it's that tangilble and concrete, lieking can change through experience; what at first appears benign can later appear lacklustre or even worse bad. The inverse can also be true. But this is more a function of the method of application rather than what it is.
It would be fair to say that value Ti's capabilities to reach conclusions. But I also value Te's capabilities to do the same.
I thought you'd never ask...Well, I think analytical psychology infers cognition attitude through behavioural medians and excpetional behaviours; but there are a lot of clear limitations and contradictions to that idea!
Tear down the walls Helen, blow up parliament.
Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.
In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.
When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.
So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.
InvisibruJim
It's not, but this is one of the ways you actually can get at something, it doesn't have to involve a bullseye/eureka feeling(?) when reading some, but in some cases it might get you closer. I'm sure people here read descriptions when they started out and not necessarily ended up the one they thought fits/none of them.
How is it in your case, IJ? You liek that ILI description?
I like it because it's a solid piece of work.
Comment: I haven't had the inclination to check it vis'a'vis other types to see if the types are clearly demarcated. This may change my opinion if I ever get around to it.
Alright, you liek that ILI description and do not hate it anymore. More threads like these, "please"...
Oh, I see now, my pun that I wanted to see how much others 'hate' the description is lost on the masses. ShameOne should be much more careful when reading what I write.
Socionics is opium for the masses. Very much sorry very, not.Oh, I see now, my pun that I wanted to see how much others 'hate' the description is lost on the masses. Shame
Anyhow, I don't know what is there to like and hate to begin with, it's a description, some people are going to find it alright and some not, just like with those Aushra ones, Filatova ones, etc.
Hell, people read Jung and advise Jung to other lost souls, and what? Same thing, some people still don't know. I don't have to mention Enneagram...
So it looks like this, people argue over and over about my dual/not my dual, alright description/crap description and nothing comes out of it, for, the next day it's the exact same thing.
So alright description here today, gone tomorrow. So do what you want with those descriptions is what I say, it's up to you.
Last edited by Absurd; 12-14-2012 at 03:09 PM.
Nothing of that sort, it's simple, lungs. Take any single one description and run it through the forum for people of the same Sociotype to decide upon and all hell breaks lose, that is, some of them will find it fine and fitting and some others won't, to hell with descriptions in that case.
You have any other ideas concerning it, though?
Is it your viewpoint that this is due to alternative intepretations of the same model or peoples individual models?
I will remove malice as I believe (don't think, little thought has went into it) that everyone is the hero in their own story.
There is a practical difference in the development idea rather than in the end result. How the idea is framed can also change the reconcliation of the ideas.
For example, if the models are different then you can accept the idea of alternative models giving different results. If the interpretation is different then you can accept that people are playing on the level and that the model is too uncertain to draw decisive conclusions.
Of course, these are in part both true, but one will have a larger impact than the other.
2 days ago to ath on TC
Do you have any comment on the topic? Your opinion would be very valuable.
That's fair.
*Shrug* It's up to you Ashton, you're considered opinion is always welcome; even if I occasionally disagree. Attacks not so much, for obvious reasons.
Not sure, what I know is, people find some descriptions okay and some don't, that's what I am sure of so far, as for those interpretations, hell, age can be a factor here, religion, the lack of it, culture and many, many other things that play a role. So like I said, some people can find different descriptions of the same sociotype fulfilling in some way whilst other, the more "classical" ones or whatever one calls them, not. No biggie, don't understand what is the fuss about in the first place.
And Model A is model A, just like Model B is Model B - same stuff in a new package. I mean same thing happened with Bible the moment numerous interpretations of one book popped up, seriously, how do you think those Christian sects even came into existence? Word of the Buddha and the many Buddhist sects? Hah, same thing.
And I have been correct, this is how much I rely on interpretations of interpretation of interpretations of interpretations.
yeah i did.
It directly relates to how you could possibly see this article, however, so it was the shortest possible answer. I could predict your responses to Helen, that followed the sentiment of, "How could anyone think but what I am thinking? This is what should happen. This is what everyone, including myself, should do." You do it all of the time here, and you do it so consistantly everywhere. People as objects + we should + self as thought. Easy.
INTp are not aggressive. They have a space-cadet quality. Ni is d e t a c h e d.
And again, this is what I have been saying all the time, descriptions my arse, I'll go with functions anytime.
That's great Jadae but I don't want to know what you think I think about the article. I know what I think about the article.
"Discuss how much you hate this type description!"
I dont have feelings for it? lol. Well, I tried dating it once, but you told me no.
Thanks Jadae, this is what I was looking for"Discuss how much you hate this type description!
I dont have feelings for it? lol. Well, I tried dating it once, but you told me no.
You editted, wtf lol. I said SEE in the article, not think. I was the one that thought. omg!!!!
Okay, sure, I'm not interested in what you think I SEE in the article. I know what I SEE in the article!
Either way, the thread has generated some interesting discussion.
but do you?!??! dun dun dun dunnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
