Yeah, I changed my mind between my first post and second post...Originally Posted by Galen
From "probably IEE" to "could well be ILI"...
How come? (Does something in particular say to you, "Not ILI" for him?)
Yeah, I changed my mind between my first post and second post...
How come? (Does something in particular say to you, "Not ILI" for him?)
<_<
I think Delta is likely, but ILI isn't totally ridiculous.
As far as goofiness, one of the goofiest people I know is my EII boyfriend. He's also very responsible though. It seems to me that IEE's tend to care about appearing intellectual more than EII's (based on a very small sampling).
There's a Ganin article I recently had the fate of reading recently which says: "if you think that someone is ESTp but surprisingly quite emotional and bubbly, which you might find doesn't go along with T, just remember, they are not T in the first place. So, to summarise all of the above..."
which many people will find unhelpful, and rightly so.
If you are IEE, as others have said, you are perhaps more melancholic in temperament compared to other IEEs...if you are notego, it is not immediately clear what else your leading function other than
. If I was to type you from scratch (and partly forgetting any past reflections), you would be a bit of a puzzle who would seem like gulanzon during one of his sombre moods.
"If you think someone else is a type, they may not actually be that type"
Sound advice?
I ain't nothing like gulanzon, get your head out of the gutter.If you are IEE, as others have said, you are perhaps more melancholic in temperament compared to other IEEs...if you are not
Sorry I was slow to get back to you. I can find quote-unquote evidence in your post for Ti-polr ("When . . . I'm confident that what I'm saying is right"; "I haven't prepared a counter-argument against it"), or at least Te-valuing. Neither sounds like something I think a T type would say.
And I could argue that this is Fi: "I have a pretty keen sense for when somebody is presenting themselves as inauthentic or brainwashed." At least, I've heard a couple of ENFps I know irl say similar stuff. (I tend to care about those things, but I think I frame my conclusions differently, such as seeing it as a clash of values and feeling very uncomfortable.)
I think you're somewhat softer in demeanor than some ENFps I am aware of. If I had to devise a bullshit typing for you, I'd say I see you as a very strongly Ne-sub version of ENFp. Nothing else makes much sense to me--I can't see you as T or rational. That leaves only ISFp, INFp, ESFp, and ENFp. The first two are laughable, and ESFp just seems wrong (where's the Se stuff?).
Ethical spin on "stupid" and presumably "wrong". Conflation of stupid, disingenuous and brainwashed for ethical and aristocratism(?).
For double implicit. Extrovert for more work.
So EIE or IEE.
Some of the IEE reindeer aren't wanting Galen to play IEE reindeer games? I think Galen is most likely IEE. Is there a place to vote? I will go back and check.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
they're jealous of how special i actually am
they can only dream of my privileged exemptions from their meaningless bourgeois livelihoods
I must say that I don't see the overwhelming Ne in you either Galen.
maybe i'm wrong, but wouldn't Ne want to hear from all sides of the argument? Including the ones of the one you have on ignore?
bear in mind I suck at typing.
((there is something though, CC has mentioned that a lot of IEE's here are no IEE in his opinion, and I might agree (with the clause that I don't see CC to be Ne dom either, i'd type him LII))
Back to galen; I think delta fits. Ethical fits. IEE could be possible but you wouldn't be like archetypical imho.
I assume you mean earlier in the thread with what's-his-name and the other one.
The ones I have on ignore have precedent for being wrong on almost every account, so why would I bother expending energy to play devil's advocate and hear out their half-assed, irrational, self-serving arguments that I'm just going to shut down anyway?
I'm no
Johari/Nohari
"Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."
Fruit, the fluffy kitty.
Would anybody?I'm no
no
hmmm, yeah that makes sense, from another pov than Ne. See, I do put people on ignore, but only if they're extremely rude or agressive, not because they're wrong. Actually, there are few circumstances where i think someone is wrong. There are oppinions I don't share, there are things that I find distastefull, but usually i'll STILL keep considering those points.
Maybe it's not Ne, maybe it's just ME ;-) but it's something to consider...
The dissemination of false information (at least false information I care about and have some personal investment in) tends to grind my gears.
Why though? I understand the importance of being objective and open to new arguments, but if the other party keeps posing the same arguments ad nauseum without variation or coherence then why continue to mull them over?
i love you galen
I can understand that and it's probably a very good stance to take
I'm not too sure objective exists and being open to new arguments is only part of the equasion for me. I think, in a sense, that for me the entire "phenemenum" exists out of all perspectives to that. What I'm trying to say is that even the repetetive "falsehoods" give me something, they remind me how I feel about the thing both what I believe is true, and what other believe is true.Why though? I understand the importance of being objective and open to new arguments, but if the other party keeps posing the same arguments ad nauseum without variation or coherence then why continue to mull them over?
That sounds kinda confusing...let me try again; it's makes a richer story, does that make more sense? It's like feeling compassion or empathy/sympathy with the badguy AND the good guy, it's like books where the perspective of the badguys gets the limelight as addition to the good guy. (The best books are where badguys are written in such a way that you consider them the protagonist).
Not sure I can convey this properly, and i'm certainly not trying to convince you that you should agree with me or anything. It's just something that I have which I attach to Ne, maybe/probably unjustified.
This just sounds really frustrating to me. If I believe one thing, and someone else believes another incompatible thing, then one of us is wrong. I'd rather try to suss out which argument is more coherent and reflective of reality than try to double-speak both "realities" to life.
That comparison sounds rather discriminatory too, no? You're still acknowledging that one person has a better handle on reality than the other.
My instinct is to say that's not right, but Breaking Bad is amazing so I shut myself up.
I imagine it'd be more of a Te/Fi vs Ti/Fe divide, if anything.
hmhm
I tried to convey the opposite, that there is no way to know which person has the better handle. (ofc i usually think I handle reality pretty well ;-) )That comparison sounds rather discriminatory too, no? You're still acknowledging that one person has a better handle on reality than the other.
It's being conscious of the choice the author made in which way to portray the events, and trying to see the perspectives that were left out.
^^My instinct is to say that's not right, but Breaking Bad is amazing so I shut myself up.
Quite possibly.I imagine it'd be more of a Te/Fi vs Ti/Fe divide, if anything.
Galen is actually a lion.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
ugh but I have a life now :/
Have you ever seriously considered ESI? (I apologize if I missed it in this topic.)
Nope!
I don't have time right now (and perhaps don't know you well enough to) write out a full explanation about why I'm suggesting this, but I will say you remind me of @Cuddly McFluffles/Ryene Astraelis, which is why the idea occurred to me to begin with. I've noticed a few instances where you demonstrate what seems to me (at least through text) to be strong Se.
On the surface ESIs can look like IxTx types as they often tend to focus on logic and are less emotionally expressive than many other types. They seem to feel pretty comfortable putting people in their place regarding interpersonal communication behavior (and other behavior) though whereas an ILI would focus much more exclusively on correct vs. incorrect.
Obviously I don't know you super well, but from what I've seen and the times we've interacted it seems to me like it might be a pretty good fit. While the times I've considered other types for you in the past I've always thought, "maybe this, but it doesn't seem quite right", I can't think of anything I've seen from you that screams "not ESI". Anyways, just a thought.
I've only browsed the first page ..
Imo Galen is EII ... the only thing that could appease this impression of mine would be some crazy subtype theory that dismantles intro/extro dichotomy to the core. As a rule he seems more Fi>Ne. But the whole "lion king" appeal could be a Ne drive. I have a hard time associating this image of "wild regality&theatricality" with EIIs I know. Unless it's only a matter of hidden astro messages that I'm blind to.
I think maybe it's because he literally looks like a lion.
I could go with EII too but in the dream I had of him I can see the lion as well. My dreams often help me see "hidden astro messages". hah It might just be the sx/sp but a lot of his energy seems to be contained/inner directed or something but sometimes it explodes outwardly. Like a male lion.. they typically do not show force until threatened if in a pride. The females hunt for the pride. I see Galen as a lion without a pride, for now. I feel weird posting it in terms of male/female but I am not thinking in terms of gender. Maybe more like masculine/feminine energy but not in terms of the body gender. Um, nevermind... I can see EII
“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
IEE-ENFp
Enneagram One.
E1 is like my enneantithesis
Ryene/Cuddly is typed as EII in many entries of this 16t typing spreadsheet: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...gs-Spreadsheet If that typing is accurate, you will see a whole lot of similarities between them.
EII was my tentative/solidified type for a long time. I changed my self-typing to ESI some time last year, a process that occurred on a different forum. Going into details would take too much time, and this is Galen's thread anyway; in short, I don't think most people here feel the need to re-evaluate their opinion of my type post-change, and my general lack of presence here probably contributes to that a great deal.
Johari/Nohari
"Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."
Fruit, the fluffy kitty.
Well @Galen is the king of the jungle and you are kinda the queen of the household, so your avatars have similaries
This keeps sticking with me
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote