Type? I haven't read much about her type lately. I know a lot of people seem to not like this woman but i think she's great. I feel like we're soulmates.
<3
Nancy Grace
Type? I haven't read much about her type lately. I know a lot of people seem to not like this woman but i think she's great. I feel like we're soulmates.
<3
SLE (?)
-
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
omfg i hate her so much. she's an idiot gossiper who quite rarely has all the facts. her show is mostly speculations.
I fell asleep to Nancy on the TV. She really annoys me in the same way Bill O'Reilly used to.
She is being a kinder, gentler version of herself in this video. I wonder if she is a bit scared of 2 Chainz. She usually cannot keep her personal feelings as controlled as she seems to in this video. She appears a little starstruck too.
I really don't want to type her the same type as people I know and like but here goes I have considered. ESE, ESI and IEE. Is her Fe demonstrative?
I wonder what her stand on alcohol is.I don't even like to smoke but her reasoning irritates me.
I think she did watch too much "refer madness" as a child.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
she claims she's some hero/spokesperson for women but she comes off as annoying asshole, I remember her giving some gay porn star a hard time. She told him 'don't spray perfume on the pig' lol.
I guess her heart is in the right place but the cuntiness is annoying. Plus she dramatizes/exploits other people's tragedy for her own self-image... a pretty low thing to do.
This is an extraverted rational, what she's saying, does and her overall vibe, not SLE at all. Did you even VI her neck, @Maritsa? Clearly a rational.
Don't watch TV like that but I feel she'sbase though and
creative seems more likely than
I also was thinking she seemed Te based and could be ENTj with ESTj as the other option.
I was just guessing. She is TeOriginally Posted by Olly From Wally World
This is an extraverted rational, what she's saying, does and her overall vibe, not SLE at all. Did you even VI her neck, @Maritsa? Clearly a rational.
Don't watch TV like that but I feel she's
Dual type
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
LSE she's not Ni
Dual type
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
I say Beta. I thought EIE or SLE.
I'd love to see her argue with an intelligent ILI. They'd probably embarass her relentlessly. Hopefully.
Te doesn't seem 4D.
In regards to Ni creative, Nancy shows a distinct lack of penetrating insight into the essence of complex internal situations and this makes her a terrible analyst. Further, she avoids public introspection and rarely shows vulnerability or discussion into her own issues and how they effect the opinions she espouses. There is little eloquence and creativity in her principles which more often then not cater to popular public opinion. In promoting her opinions she is forcibly imposing. She does not look for internally contradictory situations, nor does she grasps their essences, nor even attempts to do so. These are modes of cognition that comes naturally and fluently to Ni-creatives. In fact, all these point to a person who is extremely weak in introverted intuition from the episodes I've seen.
Last edited by wacey; 01-29-2015 at 02:16 AM.
She's a snake and she's not even intelligent . I don't know what someone can admire about her .
Her type : Estp or Esfp imo
Shes seems like the type of reptile that would devour her young
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
i don't know this woman and she does seem a bit square _but_ rewatching that video i realize that the rest of the 4 ladies are the non-sensical ones (at least in this context), like little birds twittering and rubbing each other whereas she considers all options and proposes sth rational and objective like sober data gathering with regards to the deceased's entourage and an AWTAWPSAY
now giving some gay porn star a hard time is def a ticket to hell (still grieving over arpad)
and pls dont forget that we are all cunts
the thing is that her commentors are just as basic as she is (see the young turks) and i guess same goes for their audience
Last edited by Kalinoche buenanoche; 01-29-2015 at 07:52 AM.
You made me skip through the video again you monster.
I know nothing of the case
The question of "Who gave her drugs" and "who pushed her and let her drown" are atrocious in their obvious implication that someone has. They could only be appropriate without any evidence if the question was about little child who couldn't have possibly gotten the drugs himself or shouldn't have been bathing unsupervised. So she is screaming fire when there is no even smoke for the ratings. The worse forms of scumbag "journalism" retardedly inelegantly executed.
I haven't heard of her before but I imagine part of her success is her notoriety. If she was saying half way uncontroversial or dumbed down views probably wouldn't get the media attention/talk shows etc.
what if ppl like her exist only to make others look less dumb and more legit? is this a scumbag hypothesis?
Yeah everybody needs a villain whom they can exalt their superiority from
Except you sadly cannot pretend that viewer base of such is mostly sarcastic
In that case in terms of her supporters those who don't agree with her are the villains, reality is she's making good money out of it and no-one else is, despite how to dumb her views may be she's still the smart one in that regards.
Is that the criteria for you to admire someone regardless of such things as lack of journalistic integrity/responsibility?
I don't admire her, or care about her either way, I only found out about her through this thread, but I acknowledge she's successful in a monetary fashion because of the niche she's carved for herself.
So in the respect of being successful at making money and actually putting herself out there, then yes I think that calls for something to congratulate her for.
journalistic integrity/responsibility does not really end where she starts anyway
NEO
Hey now, she annoys me too but let's not hold that against her!
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Yeah, but what about sociotype?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
