How many of the types have you ever seriously considered as possible for yourself?

[Not A Communist Shill]

However you wish to qualify the question..I will answer myself so can you see what I mean. This turned out partly into a biography...maybe that in itself could be useful

In the dark days:
LII
ILE, EII
...at this time, seemed a poor relation of that I knew I either couldn't relate to, or that it was poorly defined as generally described. I knew I had a somewhat paradoxical personality in that I was naturally a very introverted person, and yet there was a part of me that could run completely contrary to that...to the external observer, this would be for short periods if at all (depending on the person\audience and also a seemingly random mood factor), or it would be for days or weeks at a time when I was filled with buoyancy). In actuality, except for periods of grave depression, the sense of engaging with others, whether living in the 19th century or joyfully telling a 'friend's girlfriend that she doesn't solely occupy his affections, rarely leaves me. And yet, as I say, I'm pathologically reserved and most of the time I'm far more interested in writing than arrangements like the beast of two backs.

later as I considered ILE and witnessed IEEs on this forum, it was naturally for to me also consider IEE.

...and IEI, which seemed the wrong sort of values and puzzling in comparison to SEI, which itself I knew to be unlikely despite those who thought this...because they simply did not understand the extent to which I'm one of the least earthly people you haven't met! It is possible around this time that someone or one or two people suggested ESE...I don't think I quite said 'bullshit' but I did say in the strongest words possible something to the effect of "I really do not think this is likely". In my defence, the historic use of 'really' was the same as that as 'actually'.

I currently consider myself EII.

So in summary, my answer to the question is that I've considered six types as somewhat feasible.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

I've looked at most of the types at some point or another, but I've only typed IEE, IEI, EII, and then ESI.

IEE was my original typing. I came in as an MBTI ENFP (which I have long since discarded), read a few of the types, and settled on IEE with others' backing. However, I still kept the dialogue open. Some people suggested EII, but I knew I could not be Rational or IJ. Shortly after joining the Socionics WS, I did some videos for Rick DeLong. His take from them, and from our conversation, was EII; when asked, he told me not to worry too much about the temperaments. Others (Niffweed and Expat, primarily), saw IEI. I think I actually did type IEI at one point. For a long time, I coasted on others' opinion of my type, but it did eventually become clear that I was valuing and not valuing. EII was always a bit hard to reconcile. I am an exceptionally mentally-focused person and not all that physically aware, but I'm also very territorial and focused on power (particularly making sure others do not have it over me and proving that if necessary), and I can be quite assertive when not worried about rejection. I also never identified with the Delta way of judging actions rather than people, and of seeing the potential in others for good and therefore not coming down on them too harshly. Niffweed's quadra pages were where I really started questioning, I think. I did eventually switch to ESI. Of course, it's not a perfect fit either, but it does allow for that part of me that isn't covered in Delta.

[Aylen]

ILI, EII, IEI.

No other types even felt remotely right. ILI was a contender the first couple of days here, since I had never heard of socionics before this site but I did know from MBTI and Keirsey (I paid for tests before I knew they were free) that I was INFJ so I thought EII was the translation into socionics but soon found it wasn't. I tried to adjust myself to an EII but it feels so wrong that I can not even give it anymore consideration. In the end I choose IEI and it is a comfortable fit, meaning, I don't feel any inner repulsion to having it as a "label" on this site.

Beta is the only quadra I really can identify with but I like mixed company in groups.

[DirectorAbbie]

1

[13iokenesis]

I came from MBTI and had difficulty deciding between INTP and INTJ. Once I figured out I was an INTP I assumed I would also be Ti-Ne in Socionics. I then confirmed it through type descriptions, IM descriptions, inter-type relationship descriptions, and Reinin dichotomies.

[Park]

101 or 110

[Narc]

LIE, EIE, ESI, LSI, ILI and SLI.

[Beautiful sky]

LSE or ILE

[Park]

LSE or ILE

ESE or EIE

[Beautiful sky]

ESE or EIE

no

[Phantom Shadow]

LII and LIE before I fully understood socionics.

[suedehead]

SEI, ESI, IEE-Fi, SEE-Fi, IEI.

[xerx]

just NT.

[FDG]

LIE, SLE, ILE

[Aquagraph]

I like how you don't seem absolutely sure about this unlike many who change their type, claim that it must surely be it, repeat.

However I would like to see you add a poll. Public enables people to call out one another making it a deterrent, private allows people to admit how often they changed their mind. I'd prefer public. It might not be able to do so but you can create a new thread or ask a moderator/admin.

I've played with three options.

[Radio]

EII, ESI, IEE but I haven't typed myself anything other than EII for any extended period of time. ESI seems like a good fit superficially but LIE is not my dual.

[Reficulris]

IEI LII ILE IEE EII ILE Rince and repeat

[ashlesha]

i've only seriously considered EII and ESI.

i've given brief thought to most of the types excluding the Fe/Ti extroverts, considering Ip types in particular.

[Joy]

ILE, SEI (very, very briefly), SLE, LSI, SEE (very, very briefly), LIE, SLI, LSE. Never any Fe dominant (not emotive, comfortable, or proactive enough in Fe matters), INxx (too comfortable using Se), or xNFx (too practical/pragmatic/literal) types.

[willekeurig]

In addition to EII I've considered LII, (IEE, ESI)

In the beginning I thought LII>EII because of a few tests and descriptions NBS made me take/read. Ever since I actually learned about the theory, I've felt confident about EII. I never self-typed as IEE or ESI, but I've analysed them as possibilities as so many other people have typed me as IEE/ESI in the past.

Overall, I feel like the three (mis)typings actually support my EII-typing rather well;

- 25% of them are Delta, 25% Alpha, 25% Gamma, 0% Beta. This makes Delta seem likely, as it's the opposing quadra for Betas (that got no votes) and also has characteristics from both Alphas & Gammas, being in the middle of them.
- I've been typed both as Ti/Ne dom and Ti/Ne polr; which makes me think I'm probably neither - people rarely get typed as their conflictor/supervisor/supervisee
- 2/3 of the types (IEE, ESI) suggest I'm ethical
- 2/3 of the types (LII, ESI) suggest I'm introverted
- 2/3 of the types (LII, IEE) suggest I'm intuitive
- 2/3 of the types (IEE, ESI) seem to suggest I have strong, valued Fi
- 2/3 of the types (LII, IEE) seem to suggest I have strong, valued Ne
- 2/3 of the types (LII, ESI) seem to suggest my temperament is IJ
--> EII all the way

[DaftPunk]

I've considered many types: LII, LSI, LSE, SLI, IEE, ESI, EII, ILI, LIE

More seriously I considered: LII, LSI, ESI, LSE and SLI

[anndelise]

I would never consider a logical type for myself, and find it irritating when others have tried pushing that onto me. It's like if they were telling a blind man he must have 20/20 vision because he managed to maneuver around a crowded room using his walking stick as his guide.

I value Si and Te too much to be anything but Delta. And the moment I read about NeFi with Ti polr and Se role I knew it fit. I could immediately see how so many of the things I struggled with were so simply described and/or implied.

So while I have casually, off-handedly looked at other type descriptions, I have only ever seriously seen NeFi as the best descriptor of how my mind works, pros and cons.

[Park]

I would never consider a logical type for myself, and find it irritating when others have tried pushing that onto me. It's like if they were telling a blind man he must have 20/20 vision because he managed to maneuver around a crowded room using his walking stick as his guide.

I wasn't the one who said that talking about relationships came unnaturally and was a learned skills.

I value Si and Te too much to be anything but Delta. And the moment I read about NeFi with Ti polr and Se role I knew it fit. I could immediately see how so many of the things I struggled with were so simply described and/or implied.

You've demonstrated an impeccable skill of misinterpreting basic thought constructs, so no wonder you've found something where it doesn't exist. And being scatterbrained doesn't imply Ti PoLR.

[Park]

FWIW @Subteigh, considering me as your potential dual (LSE) would imply that you're probably not LII, as I'm most definitely not ESE.

[darya]

I've always scored INFP in MBTI, so I should probably be EII by the functions in socionics. But I never saw myself in delta quadra or in the EII description, so I'm quite quite sure I'm IEI (which I score on all the socio test anyway, so I have no idea why I'm even questioning it The only other option really is EIE. I love betas and I want to fuck shit up hehe. If SLE's want to join me that would be ideal, but otherwise I will join them anyway

[Park]

I love betas and I want to fuck shit up hehe.

Beware of the Delta police, you never know where they await. Like it or not, order has to be preserved.

[anndelise]

I wasn't the one who said that talking about relationships came unnaturally and was a learned skills.

I never said you did.
And I've never said that about myself.
So your trolling failed.
Buhbye.

[SyrupDeGem]

From the first mbti test when i knew absolutely nothing of MBTI or Socionics and was just given a link by a random passer by on myspace (remember those days!) straight to the first page of the test... I tested ENFP and hugely identified with the descriptions of that type. I forgot about after a brief flirtation and was reintroduced several years later (approx 4-5 years ago) quite by chance. I then looked further into it, joined a couple of sites and confirmed my ENFP-ness with further tests, research and interaction. Other types I have considered have always been due to others observations and myself looking into them because I like to absorb the information and if for no other reason I try to find what it is others identify in me that I do not see myself.

In more depressive states I most certainly identify more with introversion and because I have been pretty reclusive and internally focussed I more recently test as INFp but I already know enough to understand that I am ENFp.

[Park]

And I've never said that about myself.

You're becoming senile.

[anndelise]

You're becoming senile.

Eventually maybe, but not on what was quoted.
If you believe otherwise, provide the direct link for proof so it can be reviewed if I did indeed claim that for myself.

[Destroypuppy]

This text ( you have to use google translate, its in russian) has helped me a lot.
http://socionicasys.ru/biblioteka/st...samonabludenij

[Destroypuppy]

Properties of fixation leads to the following inner feelings are typical for small functions and zones minus positive function :
desire to keep;
cutting (branch) from himself;
I do not want to hear / know / see / feel, etc.;
really want to hear / know / see / feel, etc.;
it's mine! / It's not mine!
feeling of inner barrier (the barrier is generally desirable in itself to probe all the time to monitor how it manifests itself in all functions);
condition, if stared at the wall;
feeling punching through something dense and viscous, etc.

[Destroypuppy]

This helps you identify your weak fonctions, I like the feeling like your punching through something dense and viscous, I am on the look-out for that feeling.

[epheme]

2 types

[strangeling]

IEI, ILI
LII
ESI, EII

As an introvert I relate strongly to Jungian Ni and Fi. But I've gone through periods where I've identified with Jungian Ti as well. But the Ni and Fi always seems to be there, whereas my Ti seems to be more neurotic, something I do out of necessity, but don't like doing too much; and so I try to avoid it for the most part, especially in dealing with people.

[Pookie]

1

^

[Olduvai]

You're becoming senile.

what's worse is that she's already retarded (because she thinks she's IEE)

[Not A Communist Shill]

I like how you don't seem absolutely sure about this unlike many who change their type, claim that it must surely be it, repeat.

However I would like to see you add a poll. Public enables people to call out one another making it a deterrent, private allows people to admit how often they changed their mind. I'd prefer public. It might not be able to do so but you can create a new thread or ask a moderator/admin.

I've played with three options.

I considered adding a poll (which I can still do), but I thought people would be too inclined to add joke answers and that if a person thought about the answer sufficiently to count them, it would just be best to post. I may add a poll.

In addition to EII I've considered LII, (IEE, ESI)

In the beginning I thought LII>EII because of a few tests and descriptions NBS made me take/read. Ever since I actually learned about the theory, I've felt confident about EII. I never self-typed as IEE or ESI, but I've analysed them as possibilities as so many other people have typed me as IEE/ESI in the past.

Overall, I feel like the three (mis)typings actually support my EII-typing rather well;

- 25% of them are Delta, 25% Alpha, 25% Gamma, 0% Beta. This makes Delta seem likely, as it's the opposing quadra for Betas (that got no votes) and also has characteristics from both Alphas & Gammas, being in the middle of them.
- I've been typed both as Ti/Ne dom and Ti/Ne polr; which makes me think I'm probably neither - people rarely get typed as their conflictor/supervisor/supervisee
- 2/3 of the types (IEE, ESI) suggest I'm ethical
- 2/3 of the types (LII, ESI) suggest I'm introverted
- 2/3 of the types (LII, IEE) suggest I'm intuitive
- 2/3 of the types (IEE, ESI) seem to suggest I have strong, valued Fi
- 2/3 of the types (LII, IEE) seem to suggest I have strong, valued Ne

--> EII all the way

if I follow that method, I get IEI.

FWIW @Subteigh, considering me as your potential dual (LSE) would imply that you're probably not LII, as I'm most definitely not ESE.

Perhaps there is some truth in that, but perhaps it's simply the case that LSE is far more likely for you than ESE. I just can't say that if tomorrow, I think my type is LII, that my opinions on other people's types will change.

[fairylights]

EII and ESI have been the two main contenders. In fact, they still are, though I lean ESI > EII.

I've considered SEI, IEI, and IEE too, but nope, they never did actually ring true.

[willekeurig]

Your reasoning here reminds of Krig's thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...mon-Mistypings

You sure you're not LII? : P

Heh, yeah. It feels wrong to say I have "weak & unvalued" Ti tho, as I hardly ever have any trouble using/following it when needed, and I quite like it too (just not to the same extent I like Fi&Te).
Not that I think you'd necessarily have to _like_ the functions you value - self-hatred actually gets you street cred in Finland - but having ESE for a dual was the final deal breaker for me. They're just gross. (<---see, I'm using Fi)