I'm confused Please help with my typing

[Corwin]

Alright peoples, another person for you to type.

I'm getting fed up with having changed my type 100 times. I settled on LII with 95% certainty, but as I expected, that 5% has reared it's ugly head and is telling me "But... What if you're wrong?"

I feel that it's really important that I solidify my type first before continuing. I seem to try to use my type as a basis for understanding Socionics. When I start to doubt my type, my understanding of Socionics starts to crumble.

I've been reluctant to ask for typing advice on this forum. I guess mostly out of embarrassment. I feel like I should be able to figure it out on my own, and declare it confidently. But also, I feel I really don't know myself very well, and I usually avoid talking about my qualities.

I've "settled" on every intuitive type in the socion. I have never typed myself as an Se type, though sometimes I've considered Si types.

As I said, it's very difficult to talk about myself. I would feel more comfortable answering targeted questions because I seem to be unable to discern what information is pertinent and what is superfluous. But I'll try to give whatever I think is obvious.

I spend most of my time in my head. Unless something significantly interesting is happening, my thoughts will drown out reality.

I hate small talk. It seems backwards to me. I have to value someone's personality before I can care to know about irrelevant details like where they grew up, went to college, what sport team they like, what music they enjoy, how many kids they have, their take on the weather conditions, etc. I'll often just respond politely, choosing not to reciprocate the question in fear they'll answer it. But regardless, they often tell me anyway. Which makes me feel like they just wanted to talk about themselves in the first place.

I don't care about sports, unless I have a moderate bet placed. I don't like to classify myself or others by (Or take pride in) nationality and other things they had little to no choice in. I never judge people based on the music they enjoy, and I'm often irritated when people are ignorant to the subjective nature of music, literature, movies, etc.

It looks like I'm easily able to state things that I don't like, and what I don't like about them. But, I'm having a lot of difficulty coming up with things I do like and why. What I like is very... picky. I don't seem to understand the criteria with which I decide on things I like. I tend to like to solve things, and discuss ideas. But it depends on the things being solved, and the ideas being discussed. My mind gets fuzzy when I try to pinpoint these things.

With all of the above, I seem to be intuitive, negative, and democratic. Which narrows me down to ILI or LII. Both types are also logical, introverted, carefree, and obstiante. I can agree with these but not with certainty.

Leaving these dichotomies:
Static/Dynamic: No idea really, I have a hard time understanding the difference.
Interrogative/Declarative: Seems to depend on the situation and subject matter.
Tactical/Strategic: I don't thing I'm goal-oriented, but I'm not sure.
Constructive/Emotive: Both are kind of important me. Can't tell which is greater.
Rational/Irrational: Probobly irrational. Pretty flexible, can't decide on things, almost never finish anything.
Evolutory/Involutory: Don't know, depends.
Reasonable/Resolute: Probably reasonable, I'm pretty lazy, often take breaks, care more about working conditions
Subjective/Objective: Not sure.

I'm most confident about irrational and reasonable. LIIs are reasonable and rational, and ILIs are resolute and irrational. So obviously, I've done something wrong somewhere. If I take my weak confidence in being tactical that makes me an ILI. If I consider yeilding and tactical, that makes me an ILE and still fitting with irrational and reasonable, but makes me positive instead.

Please ask questions, as I said before I feel much more confident in answering questions than trying to pick out useful information on my own. Your help is greatly appreciated. Thanks for reading.

[Corwin]

I could totally be ethical instead of logical. I really do have a hard time understanding Socionics in terms of a unified understanding. But I really feel like I need to understand it, or I should be able to. That could mean a role. And since really clicks with me, especially in contrast to (which I seem to hate), that could very well define me as an EII.

I really kinda suck at this... It's been over a year that I've been studying Socionics (pretty extensively in all honesty) and I can't even decide on my own type. I'd like to believe that this is just because I don't really express my base function as much as most, but I think that really is just alleviation of frustration and embarrassment.

Admitting that I don't know what I'm doing and asking for help is honestly very hard for me. Especially since I don't really know what it is that I don't understand. I hope you guys can help.

[Beautiful sky]

Corwin, you're neither an LII nor are you an EII; how about start from defining and understanding the functions.

http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

[Dionysus]

Corwin, you're neither an LII nor are you an EII; how about start from defining and understanding the functions.

http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

Considering that he has been studying socionics for a year, this is probably not that helpful.

Corwin, can you give any relationship analysis? Do you think you know other people's types, and can you measure your own based off of your interaction with them?

[strangeling]

@Corwin

[Corwin]

Corwin, you're neither an LII nor are you an EII; how about start from defining and understanding the functions.

http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

Considering that he has been studying socionics for a year, this is probably not that helpful.

Actually the description of these functions on this page are bit better for me to understand since they have more concrete examples I can relate to.

I was able to relate to the irrational elements much more than the rational ones. And I really clicked with (Always have really). The rational elements are harder to tell. Though, from the linked descriptions ILE fits far better than IEE. And I think ILE fits with all the stuff I said before.

Corwin, can you give any relationship analysis? Do you think you know other people's types, and can you measure your own based off of your interaction with them?

My Ex typed her self once and she decided on LSE. I have a hard time defining our intertype relationship without reference to types. But if I go with ILE and LSE, that makes her my Benefactor. It fits well, our relationship always felt asymmetrical, I did kind of want her to change, but I could tell that I wasn't holding my end so I never pushed it. Eventually she stood firm on her desire for me to change in ways that I found too difficult (Have a stable job, be more outgoing and meet new people, stop being so mistrusting and judging of her friends). I tried many times, but I was never able to maintain it.

[Beautiful sky]

Considering that he has been studying socionics for a year, this is probably not that helpful.

Corwin, can you give any relationship analysis? Do you think you know other people's types, and can you measure your own based off of your interaction with them?

didn't you notice the title of this thread? or can you not read

[InvisibleJim]

Considering that he has been studying socionics for a year, this is probably not that helpful.

Corwin, can you give any relationship analysis? Do you think you know other people's types, and can you measure your own based off of your interaction with them?

There's only the Maritsa way, or the wrong way. :

The right way, is an entirely foreign phenomenon for the discussion that is about to ensue.

[Dionysus]

didn't you notice the title of this thread? or can you not read

I can't read.

[Corwin]

I'm just going to run with ILE unless anyone has two cents.

[tejing]

My advice is to try to understand socionics by first getting a good understanding of the individual IM elements. In terms of doing that, this is a page I've found quite helpful. Also, here is a page that may be helpful in terms of differentiating the types themselves.

[griggerplease]

Try a different approach, go broader, try subtypes and DCNH

[Dionysus]

I'm just going to run with ILE unless anyone has two cents.

That's impulsive considering what you just told us? A year? (I really like to say, "considering" don't I?)
Based on what you wrote above about your relationship that seems relatively accurate. Also if that is a picture of you in your avatar that's what my VI would be.

[Beautiful sky]

I can't read.

Se PoLR

[Beautiful sky]

I'm just going to run with ILE unless anyone has two cents.

Why don't you try ALL the types and then you can settle for the one I suggested in the first place

[Beautiful sky]

That's impulsive considering what you just told us? (I really like to say, "considering" don't I?)
Based on what you wrote above about your relationship that seems relatively accurate. Also if that is a picture of you in your avatar that's what my VI would be.

Yeah, inconsistency runs in Beta

[Corwin]

After reviewing the links provided by tejing as well as researching DCNH as suggested by negern and considering Dionysus's typing, I would say that I'm a C-ILE.

[Corwin]

Why don't you try ALL the types and then you can settle for the one I suggested in the first place

You never suggested a type, you eliminated two.

[Beautiful sky]

You never suggested a type, you eliminated two.

LSI probably.

[Corwin]

LSI probably.

Oh ya, you did suggest that a while ago. What makes you think I have Se though? I don't see it.

[tejing]

C-ILE sounds right to me. I can't say I'm able to distinguish subtypes in others very well, but if I had to pick I'd probably go with the same.