i noticed that he doesn't have a type thread.
Beta-something? His ideas kind of reek of that to me, and his influences seem to mostly be widely-accepted Betas (Nietzsche, Hegel, Heidegger, Kierkegaard).
Maybe Ni-ENFj. NF would make sense, and what I've read of his lifestyle sounds more EJ-like.
FiXXTe
Confidence : 101%
I would say most likely ISFj
"The final delusion is the belief that one has lost all delusion."
-- Maurice Chapelain
He is commonly typed as SLI. But I can't give my own evaluation because I know to less about him and didn't read something from him
I once read something how philosophy relates to types, and existentialism was related to ESFp and ISFj. A schoolmate of mine who I would type ESFp was also totally in love with Sartres ideas.
Love is like an energy, rushing in, rushing inside of me...
I think ILI . I wonder which type Simone de Beauvoir was , cause she also seems kinda Ni (one is not born a woman, one becomes a woman etc.) ...and by the Gospel of Socionics identicals or comparatives don't work.
"Using socionics to find one's identity is running from your freedom and responsibility to be an unique human being" - J.P.Sartre, ((Anachronic Ramblings of Internet Analogies, volume 4 part IVb))
Meh, I'm ILE (think so) and i'm an avid Sartre reader. I have my serious doubts about philosophy being type related. If anything, socionics operates on a lower level than philosophy explaining something based UPON philosophy.Originally Posted by kadda1212
It's like using psychology to explain why statistics are stupid, or neurology to explain art.
Ofc the philosophers themself can be typed, but their ideas probably inspire/affect/depress regardless of type.
I also have problems with the Nietzsche is Beta, Hegel is beta, Heidegger is an Beta etc. Nietzsche is commonly misunderstood, even by those that read him profesionally there is a lot of debate, nuances, but my general problem is that these guys are talking on a level that is so far beyond "beta-ness or gamma-ness" that I usually just chuckle when people attempt this.
Even if their persona's were beta (something i'm not sure of, brooding and depressed = IEI seems a sucky assumption, all types have rights to be depressed and brooding.) their philosophy still kinda revibrates through all quadra's. Hell, i'm sure I could write a very good essay on the philosophical assumptions and traditions of Socionics, if only I understood the damned subject (based on my lack of understanding i'm quite sure it's heidegger influenced ^^ Sein und Zeit is one of the few books that I've not been able to tackle or even remotely understand, even with help from others... fucker just writes incomprehansible, i'm sure he's actually russian and used the babble-fish translator to get it to german..).
i think philosophy is like pretty much anything in that you can loosely tie it to types theoretically but obviously each person is gonna be different in the real worldMeh, I'm ILE (think so) and i'm an avid Sartre reader. I have my serious doubts about philosophy being type related. If anything, socionics operates on a lower level than philosophy explaining something based UPON philosophy.
It's like using psychology to explain why statistics are stupid, or neurology to explain art.
Ofc the philosophers themself can be typed, but their ideas probably inspire/affect/depress regardless of type.
I also have problems with the Nietzsche is Beta, Hegel is beta, Heidegger is an Beta etc. Nietzsche is commonly misunderstood, even by those that read him profesionally there is a lot of debate, nuances, but my general problem is that these guys are talking on a level that is so far beyond "beta-ness or gamma-ness" that I usually just chuckle when people attempt this.
Even if their persona's were beta (something i'm not sure of, brooding and depressed = IEI seems a sucky assumption, all types have rights to be depressed and brooding
he's got liek 8 SLI votes on SSS - http://sss.socioland.ru/people/view.php?id_people=9187
don't know enough about him to verify, he vi's more like an irrational type
E.g Reinin
If you google it in Russian you get some more results.
after reading this, I kind of think IEI rather than ILI .
Sartre’s Love Letter to Simone de Beauvoir
My dear little girl
For a long time I’ve been wanting to write to you in the evening after one of those outings with friends that I will soon be describing in “A Defeat,” the kind when the world is ours. I wanted to bring you my conqueror’s joy and lay it at your feet, as they did in the Age of the Sun King. And then, tired out by all the shouting, I always simply went to bed. Today I’m doing it to feel the pleasure you don’t yet know, of turning abruptly from friendship to love, from strength to tenderness. Tonight I love you in a way that you have not known in me: I am neither worn down by travels nor wrapped up in the desire for your presence. I am mastering my love for you and turning it inwards as a constituent element of myself. This happens much more often than I admit to you, but seldom when I’m writing to you. Try to understand me: I love you while paying attention to external things. At Toulouse I simply loved you. Tonight I love you ona spring evening. I love you with the window open. You are mine, and things are mine, and my love alters the things around me and the things around me alter my love.
My dear little girl, as I’ve told you, what you’re lacking is friendship. But now is the time for more practical advice. Couldn’t you find a woman friend? How can Toulouse fail to contain one intelligent young woman worthy of you*? But you wouldn’t have to love her. Alas, you’re always ready to give your love, it’s the easiest thing to get from you. I’m not talking about your love for me, which is well beyond that, but you are lavish with little secondary loves, like that night in Thiviers when you loved that peasant walking downhill in the dark, whistling away, who turned out to be me. Get to know the feeling, free of tenderness, that comes from being two. It’s hard, because all friendship, even between two red-blooded men, has its moments of love. I have only to console my grieving friend to love him; it’s a feeling easily weakened and distorted. But you’re capable of it, and youmust experience it. And so, despite your fleeting misanthropy, have you imagined what a lovely adventure it would be to search Toulouse for a woman who would be worthy of you and whom you wouldn’t be in love with? Don’t bother with the physical side or the social situation. And search honestly. And if you find nothing, turn Henri Pons, whom you scarcely love anymore, into a friend.
[…]
I love you with all my heart and soul.
Aristocatic and I think Si>Se-valuing.
I would lean Ni-IEI > Ni-ILI. dialectic-algorithmic is possible but his writing kind of reeks of Ti and he doesn't really VI as rational. I only read like 100 pages of Being and Nothingness, though.
4w3-5w6-8w7
I've only read Nausea, but i read it as a teenager so it seemed very impressive to me at the time haha. I'm not sure i'd read it the same way today (if i did). I'm also curious about his type. Any other suggestions?
Easy ILI-Ni
Ni/Te converts inner worlds into new modes of thought. Ni augments the richness, nuance and self-direction of this inner reality.
His Ni is reflected in his existentialism. The subject's existence is central....consciousness annihilates objective reality.
Having finished Being and Nothingness, I now think ILI-Ni. Not only is his brand of nihilism, in contrast to someone like Camus, redolent of gamma, but the Ni-Ti I previously observed was indeed base-demonstrative feedback—the way he structured the undercurrents of his ideas had too much dexterity for a lower dimensional function. Also, dialectical-algorithmic cognition becomes pretty clear the further one gets into Being and Nothingness, as it takes him a while to develop the concepts for the antagonisms, i.e. after discussing the past and future he talks about how the present is "a flight from not being what one is towards being what one is not" etc. It's like Hegel with Te. And funnily enough, I found him more convoluted than Husserl, who I've seen typed as Ni-IEI, which kind of clarified the difference between how the two types use Ti: IEIs sometimes overdo it, but Ti-valuers always bring things back to an underlying structure/context; whereas someone like Sartre just builds an evolving logical process that, while drawing from a background structure, ends up being a little too divergent in its detail.
4w3-5w6-8w7
don't know why the russians type him as SLI before ILI. his work on relationship was clearly a dialectical perspective. and La Nausée is a typical example of Ni. he was also a typical ambitious gamma . so ILI.
SEI
ILI?
Radical freedom was dialectic at best... but eh, it could be interpreted as a freedom of throwing away the pseudo-freedom... in a way.
So, yep, ILI it is. I just did it by the way.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
