Jeffrey here. ENTp (ILE?), ENTP, 5w6 so/sx/sp 5-4-8. I am not as well read on Socionics as I am on MBTI and the Enneagram, mostly because I find the level of complexity associated with Socionics to be extremely high. This may be due to translation issues between Lithuanian and English, or cultural distinctions (perhaps both) but Socionics seems to me to be extremely "busy" personality system.
I joined the U.S. Navy out of high school, and started to get my sh*t together. Graduated college at 27 thinking I'd be a public school teacher; after 2 years, I was forced to seek life elsewhere. I completed a masters in CIS, and now work in satellite network support. I am basically a "knowledge junkie," I am nearly always reading or researching something, curiosity tends to fuel me more than money. I like interacting with others and seeing where the fusion of their ideas and mine meet. I am very interested in perspectives other than my own, as it seems to me the only way I can truly come to recognize the distinctions between the two. I tend to see how things fit into a "big picture" rather than dwelling on the finer details. My politics are independent, I firmly believe in compromise, but I remain wary of becoming too entangled in any one party.
While my non-fiction tastes span just about every subject, my "go-to" reading-for-pleasure genre is mostly Science Fiction/Fantasy, but not strictly so. I dabble into mysteries, suspense thrillers, and horror, on occasion. I am open to spiritual beliefs, but not so much to organized religions. I see organized religions (particularly in the West) as poorly disguised political organizations desperately trying to pretend to be spiritual ones. It seems to me "spirituality" is achieving the pinnacle of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs: Self-actualization and Self-transcendence. How one goes about this is a uniquely personal journey. We can share in some parts of that journey, but some of it remains our own to take. I am quite fascinated in how people like Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell illuminated human mythology, in all its many forms, in global terms. Cultural clothing can be removed as needed.
My self-identified defining symbols are fools, jesters, tricksters, and strangely enough, Don Quixote (I read it long before I ventured into any sort of typology). I do not like bullies, and I admire those who find unique and creative ways to stand up to them without sinking to their level. I prefer to work smarter, not harder, thus, if I can outsmart an opponent, and have them learn something valuable in the process, I call that a "win-win."
I don't fit the physical profile of an ILE, but most people are disconcerted about the notion of an extraverted type 5 whose primary instinctual subtype is social. I often wonder just how close we can possibly hope to get with all this typology; sometimes it seems like we might have a decent outline, but it seems there's plenty of room for each of us to color inside those lines any way we would choose. Perhaps this is a self-delusion, but I haven't seen anything in 44 years that has overcome it.
I'll be poking around now. Thanks for your time.