Video type

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

Hi, please can anyone type me based on this vid?

[Aylen]

You are very expressive and talk with your hands. I do that too sometimes. I can relate to much of what you say. I see you as some type of NF, probably Beta. Welcome to the forum!



Edit: Watched more of the video. I am split on delta NF and beta NF. Enneagram 4w5 (maybe) either sp or so first on instincts. Your energy is pretty light.

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

You are very expressive and talk with your hands. I do that too sometimes. I can relate to much of what you say. I see you as some type of NF, probably Beta. Welcome to the forum!

Thank you! Could you explain why do you think I am a beta NF over a delta NF?

[Aylen]

Thank you! Could you explain why do you think I am a beta NF over a delta NF?

Hahah I guess I edited as you were posting. The only thing that makes me go with Beta first is the lightness in your energy and how expressive you are. IEE is also in the back of my mind. I have scratched EII from the list because you don't vibe like the EII I know irl or the ones on the forum. Heh, I have to use the supernatural to explain what is natural, sometimes.

So yeah, EIE, IEI or IEE is where I am after watching your video.

[Aylen]

I posted at 11:11

sorry, couldn't resist pointing out the irony in that.



If delta doesn't want you, beta most likely will. Can you maybe talk about more of your values and things you find important in life. How are you socially? Do you enjoy groups where everyone is laughing and making jokes? More free spirited environments where people will laugh with you and not at you? Even if insults are flying around. I do when I am into socializing but in general I would rather be left alone. I get bored in small groups where people are talking about things like cooking, their children and things like that. I would rather have intellectual or metaphysical discussions in small groups and kind of shun the mundane when possible.

I had to attend a group last year and it was filled with deltas who talked about their problems but their problems where so down to earth I could not relate. When I would speak I felt like they were looking at me like I was some kind of alien dropped into their little circle. Weird thing is some of them would want to talk to me one on one but in the group I felt alienated to a certain degree. Sometimes this guy who sat next to me would wink at me or take my hand, squeeze it and call me an angel. He knew I was so uncomfortable.

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

I posted at 11:11

sorry, couldn't resist pointing out the irony in that.



If delta doesn't want you, beta most likely will. Can you maybe talk about more of your values and things you find important in life. How are you socially? Do you enjoy groups where everyone is laughing and making jokes? More free spirited environments where people will laugh with you and not at you? Even if insults are flying around. I do when I am into socializing but in general I would rather be left alone. I get bored in small groups where people are talking about things like cooking, their children and things like that. I would rather have intellectual or metaphysical discussions in small groups and kind of shun the mundane when possible.

I had to attend a group last year and it was filled with deltas who talked about their problems but their problems where so down to earth I could not relate. When I would speak I felt like they were looking at me like I was some kind of alien dropped into their little circle. Weird thing is some of them would want to talk to me one on one but in the group I felt alienated to a certain degree. Sometimes this guy who sat next to me would wink at me or take my hand, squeeze it and call me an angel. He knew I was so uncomfortable.

lol cool ...
To be honest, I find it hard to characterize, or to categorize my values. But what I try to achieve mostly in my life is a certain level of integrity. I value being knowledgeable and I want to surround myself with people, that I see as smart, or intellectual. I value being independent and creating my own opinions, doing my own analysis of people and situation. I like to appear different, but aesthetic. I like good looking and stylish things, and hate everything cheap and focused on a front line. I value things with a certain character, originality and creativity and I myself try to create my own art.
When it comes to groups, I mentioned in the video, that I prefer to work alone and I am not really a team worker. In big groups I am absolutely silent and passive, the same with people I don't seem to like. I prefer small groups, I really enjoy people who can be philosophical and are able to deal with deeper conversations and topics, however I dislike it, when they take themselves too seriously. I like people who can make fun of their own self and lighten up the atmosphere. I like free spirited types and I don't mind insults as far as they are not too harsh. I even enjoy cynism and a certain dose of sarcasm, I myself use them a lot. I like people who are smart, intelllectual and philosophical, but at the same time are crazy and are up for any kind of fun. For example, I had a part time job as a receptionist at one very serious company. there was an older man, but very charming, he was an engineer, very smart and educated man, we had all of these debates about politics, health, alternative medicine, even economics and I very much enjoyed talking to him, because he was easy to talk to, funny and even flirty , which I found very amusing. Then there was the other guy, who was absolutely crazy and I loved his company . We still made jokes about each other, teased each other, insulted each other, once we ended up fighting with pens in a reception hall and I drew all over his suit lol , people around were just looking like, we must be crazy. Then people I didn't enjoy so much, there was for example an older lady, she was trying to help everyone around, but with kind of big noise about the whole thing, she was so temperamental, loud and passionate, that I simply couldn't handle her attention and how she was trying to get to everyone, talk to everyone, help everyone... for me it was like... just sit down for christ sake and don't talk for a while. I am not very socially skilled. There are certain types of people I like and enjoy, but I suck at dealing with people who are not really in my favour, or with people, that are to dominant, loud, or too extroverted.

[Aylen]

@SadbutTrue

Still relating to most of what you say. You are not going to make this easy. For years I spent most of my time with ILI just to bask in their knowledge and intelligence. hahah I found them very challenging but to compete and debate with them has taught me so much. I think they learned a thing or two as well. I think I am drawn to some LII for the same reason but the dynamics are different with them than the ILI. I admit to a certain amount of ILI envy but not in a bad way.I am like a sponge and soak up everything I find significant in life. I have described myself as a computer that stores knowledge that I can pull up when the time is right. I often surprise myself doing it. My circle of friends have included physicists, philosophers, engineers, computer scientists and technical librarians just to name a few. As well as some unsavory/seedy types.

I have spent much of my time pursuing knowledge, analyzing and uncovering the "true" meaning of just about everything. I was a bookworm since childhood but put down my books because I wanted to experience many of these concepts, I have read about, for myself. That is the only way I am going to understand any of it on the deepest level. I just have lots of fun while doing it (not always though ) but some of my ideas of fun might horrify others.

I attribute this to me being an E type 459 sx/sp. After reading what you wrote, so far, I am not sure if I can see your instincts but somehow you seem too light for contra flow. If you are familiar with the instincts what do you feel is your instinct stacking? I don't think it is easy to see other people's instincts 'cause it is so deeply rooted. These are the kind of new threads that get my attention. hahah First @Spider, @Limitless and now you. Perhaps a couple of others but those two come to mind first. It is making the forum more interesting for me.

Over use of smilies to test your smiley limits.

[Aylen]

EIE is my first impression.

After seeing her tumblr I concur. hahah It has an sp/sx feel to it but I will have to see the contra flow in posts to really see sp/sx.

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

@SadbutTrue

Still relating to most of what you say. You are not going to make this easy. For years I spent most of my time with ILI just to bask in their knowledge and intelligence. hahah I found them very challenging but to compete and debate with them has taught me so much. I think they learned a thing or two as well. I think I am drawn to some LII for the same reason but the dynamics are different with them than the ILI. I admit to a certain amount of ILI envy but not in a bad way.I am like a sponge and soak up everything I find significant in life. I have described myself as a computer that stores knowledge that I can pull up when the time is right. I often surprise myself doing it. My circle of friends have included physicists, philosophers, engineers, computer scientists and technical librarians just to name a few. As well as some unsavory/seedy types.

I have spent much of my time pursuing knowledge, analyzing and uncovering the "true" meaning of just about everything. I was a bookworm since childhood but put down my books because I wanted to experience many of these concepts, I have read about, for myself. That is the only way I am going to understand any of it on the deepest level. I just have lots of fun while doing it (not always though ) but some of my ideas of fun might horrify others.

I attribute this to me being an E type 459 sx/sp. After reading what you wrote, so far, I am not sure if I can see your instincts but somehow you seem too light for contra flow. If you are familiar with the instincts what do you feel is your instinct stacking? I don't think it is easy to see other people's instincts 'cause it is so deeply rooted. These are the kind of new threads that get my attention. hahah First @Spider, @Limitless and now you. Perhaps a couple of others but those two come to mind first. It is making the forum more interesting for me.

Over use of smilies to test your smiley limits.

My ultimate box of smiley boundaries is not yet fully loaded.
Hmm I guess you're an INFx ? Which one of the two are you? IEI?
Even though I am an intellectual and I enjoy such topics, I am not a book worm and I've never been a studying type.I enjoy learning by engaging in interesting conversations with people who have a lot of knowledge to offer and I enjoy debating and keeping my mind open to more informations and different viewpoints, that I later filtrate to fit in my own perception. My learning is fairly interactive, for example when I learned for a test at a highschool, my friend was basically teaching me, telling me the informations and we discussed the topics of our exams. Even when I read Jung, or Nietzsche immediately after reading a first few pages I felt a urge to discuss it with others to grasp other opinions and viewpoints. When I don't have anyone to discuss my theories with, I tend to withdraw from reading. For example, when I read Stephen Hawking book "Universe in a nutshell" I withdrawed from reading it and was making my own theories in my head, 'cause the book just inspired me to think further. It's hard to keep my attention, once I don't have enough of excitement, I just put off the work, or the project, or the book. I also find it hard to learn things, that are not in my particular interest. That's why I've never been a good student, I learned when I felt like learning and I didn't learn when I didn't feel like learning. Teachers almost hated me 'cause I was always doing something else, or I was just talking to my classmates and rarely really paid attention.
I think my enneagram core is 4, not sure about the rest, I might be 479, or 469. I also might be just a bit more introverted 7w6, or 6w7... lol who knows, so much possibilities.... I think my instincts are so/sx ... so dom works pretty well for me.

[Words]

EIE was my impression as well. EIEs can appear to be somewhat quieter at times and more thoughtful, thoughtful as in sensitivity and deeper thoughts, which is partly to do with their Ni, so if you are EIE that can explain some of your .... introspection? I can't remember the words but I remember you saying how you can be quieter in larger groups etc.

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

mkay... I have to ask, 'cause i don't know where's the Fe you guys see. In the video I said, that I dislike to work in groups and that in groups I am usually passive and apathetic and don't engage in team works. I said, that the most of all I value freedom to achieve my own goals and be my own self and I hate to be limited by relationships with other people. I also said, that I dislike being emotionally open with people and even when someone tells me his/her trouble I tend to be more rational than emotional about them. I also said, that i am sensitive, but I am sensitive in my own way and to some it might seem even like I am unemotional, even I know it's a lie. I also said, that I value my own individuality and integrity and freedom of my own self more than anything else,... that's kind of anti-Fe isn't it? idk... just tell me some more arguments why and where you see the Fe and I'll stop to nag.

[darya]

Beta NF

[Words]

mkay... I have to ask, 'cause i don't know where's the Fe you guys see. In the video I said, that I dislike to work in groups and that in groups I am usually passive and apathetic and don't engage in team works. I said, that the most of all I value freedom to achieve my own goals and be my own self and I hate to be limited by relationships with other people. I also said, that I dislike being emotionally open with people and even when someone tells me his/her trouble I tend to be more rational than emotional about them. I also said, that i am sensitive, but I am sensitive in my own way and to some it might seem even like I am unemotional, even I know it's a lie. I also said, that I value my own individuality and integrity and freedom of my own self more than anything else,... that's kind of anti-Fe isn't it? idk... just tell me some more arguments why and where you see the Fe and I'll stop to nag.

Someone else might provide the indepth analysis but imo there is Fe in your persona even when you are not 'smiling'.

IMO it's not uncommon for Betas to want freedom IRL, if we use a forum example look at the quadras section and look at the Delta section, it has the most activity and people talk forever about minute stuff. Group activity in terms of micromanaging or micromanaging details can be a Delta thing if you look at the popular threads there for an example. Betas here get on but also there is a flamboyancy of speech or an underlying sense of emotion or ... danger where it appears on the surface they're not.

Not being too caring about others problems is not really only type related but Betas can have an outlook for small stuff that you just need to man up and get on with it, and overcome stuff, but lead it on to bigger things.

I could talk all day now it seems and it might be an indepth analysis but someone might come along and dissect the little bits of your post, this is my impressions on your answers and BTW I may have just typed a bunch of stuff to make the informations fit what I want lol

[Aylen]

mkay... I have to ask, 'cause i don't know where's the Fe you guys see. In the video I said, that I dislike to work in groups and that in groups I am usually passive and apathetic and don't engage in team works. I said, that the most of all I value freedom to achieve my own goals and be my own self and I hate to be limited by relationships with other people. I also said, that I dislike being emotionally open with people and even when someone tells me his/her trouble I tend to be more rational than emotional about them. I also said, that i am sensitive, but I am sensitive in my own way and to some it might seem even like I am unemotional, even I know it's a lie. I also said, that I value my own individuality and integrity and freedom of my own self more than anything else,... that's kind of anti-Fe isn't it? idk... just tell me some more arguments why and where you see the Fe and I'll stop to nag.

Oh I am glad you brought this up. More stuff I relate to... In my first post to your thread I did get the feel of social first but then these things you mention here started to make me doubt my own impression. To me Fe is very influential in creating certain moods and atmospheres, It isn't all pixie dust. hahah I feel I can feel apathetic and then I notice everyone around me is responding with low energy. I have mentioned before that Fe is not the life of the party. I am not sure how to explain it. I just sort of notice it in the way people express themselves. Oh and yes for all intents and purposes, on this forum, I am IEI. Sometimes I feel Fe polr because I also can be influenced by people's moods and if I am not in the mood I will shut down.

[Aylen]

Beta NF

You come back to IEI now? 3w4 sx/so says so much...

[darya]

You come back to IEI now? 3w4 sx/so says so much...

I'll make a video and let you decide, fair enough ?

[Aylen]

I'll make a video and let you decide, fair enough ?

I actually felt weird about updating you to EIE-Fe in my typing thread and almost didn't. It felt kind of wrong but I think that is because you are confusing me with the enneagram influences so I could see the case for EIE but not taking E type into consideration I am still stuck on IEI for you.

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

If beta NF, would you say am closer to IEI, or EIE?

[Amber]

too dramatic and emotionally mobile for IEI.

EIE-Fe E4w3 so/sx

[Oaky]

This video doesn't do justice at all. Perhaps highly nervous making it. She's totally different then what she portrays in the video. I've met her in real life, and she's the most introverted most spaced out person I've met. Shows very few expressions beyond boredom spaced out look and happy. More unmoving in her opinions and has no wish to accommodate the person she speaks with in terms of emotional harmony. Also very passive. I'm willing to wager EII but not based on the video.

[Aylen]

This video doesn't do justice at all. Perhaps highly nervous making it. She's totally different then what she portrays in the video. I've met her in real life, and she's the most introverted most spaced out person I've met. Shows very few expressions beyond boredom spaced out look and happy. More unmoving in her opinions and has no wish to accommodate the person she speaks with in terms of emotional harmony. Also very passive. I'm willing to wager EII but not based on the video.

How do you mean spaced out? I have been told I look spaced out for most of my life but that is mostly because I tend to stare out into nothingness when some kind of impression or feeling comes over me. People think I am in a trance and that is a good word for it. I can do it right in the middle of a conversation and it freaks some people out. I tell them I am just stretching my eyes, unless I am close to them and those close to me know what is really going on.

I have met people from forums over the years and they have described me as very passive, shy and introverted. Having to ply me with wine to get me to relax. It takes me some time to warm up to people, maybe multiple meetings, but when I do I can take over the room until I feel exhausted and have to get away from everyone, so I don't know. From your post I can't tell if you guys have an ongoing irl friendship or just casual meeting.

From the video, I thought some people might actually type her EII because at the end she says a bit about disliking talk of the supernatural, which is kind of textbook EII description. Most EII I know have no trouble listing their values when asked, whereas she seemed a bit ambivalent on values (to me) except for integrity and knowledge, which happen to be things I value as well. I guess I just don't see Fi as a base function in her but you know her better and she knows herself best, I would imagine. I think she at one time self-typed ESI? I guess maybe some EII could weigh in on what they see but so far only beta seem to be responding. Other than you that is. Edit: And Sienna.

as a demonstrative (8th) function (LII and EII)

The individual is quite adept at following discussions on the developments of present trends into the future and at contributing to them on occasion if he feels so inclined, but he does not take that as seriously compared to investigating possibilities in the areas he is interested in at present. He usually dismisses supernatural claims as being silly, wishful thinking, unless they happen to be related to the very specific religion he feels inclined to believe in and which he may be inclined to make part of his leisure activities.

I do know some EII that are into the supernatural though so this description seems odd as a specific example.

[darya]

This video doesn't do justice at all. Perhaps highly nervous making it. She's totally different then what she portrays in the video. I've met her in real life, and she's the most introverted most spaced out person I've met. Shows very few expressions beyond boredom spaced out look and happy. More unmoving in her opinions and has no wish to accommodate the person she speaks with in terms of emotional harmony. Also very passive. I'm willing to wager EII but not based on the video.

Lol, then what's the point of making videos for typing purposes in the first place?? I'd type her IEI-Fe ftr.

[Words]

This video doesn't do justice at all. Perhaps highly nervous making it. She's totally different then what she portrays in the video. I've met her in real life, and she's the most introverted most spaced out person I've met. Shows very few expressions beyond boredom spaced out look and happy. More unmoving in her opinions and has no wish to accommodate the person she speaks with in terms of emotional harmony. Also very passive. I'm willing to wager EII but not based on the video.

Nothing there to say a person can't be EIE (or IEI)

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

How do you mean spaced out? I have been told I look spaced out for most of my life but that is mostly because I tend to stare out into nothingness when some kind of impression or feeling comes over me. People think I am in a trance and that is a good word for it. I can do it right in the middle of a conversation and it freaks some people out. I tell them I am just stretching my eyes, unless I am close to them and those close to me know what is really going on.

I have met people from forums over the years and they have described me as very passive, shy and introverted. Having to ply me with wine to get me to relax. It takes me some time to warm up to people, maybe multiple meetings, but when I do I can take over the room until I feel exhausted and have to get away from everyone, so I don't know. From your post I can't tell if you guys have an ongoing irl friendship or just casual meeting.

From the video, I thought some people might actually type her EII because at the end she says a bit about disliking talk of the supernatural, which is kind of textbook EII description. Most EII I know have no trouble listing their values when asked, whereas she seemed a bit ambivalent on values (to me) except for integrity and knowledge, which happen to be things I value as well. I guess I just don't see Fi as a base function in her but you know her better and she knows herself best, I would imagine. I think she at one time self-typed ESI? I guess maybe some EII could weigh in on what they see but so far only beta seem to be responding. Other than you that is. Edit: And Sienna.



I do know some EII that are into the supernatural though so this description seems odd as a specific example.

Well I am spaced out a lot of the time thinkig and feeling nothing and I just stare at an empty space, I just can turn off my mind and I find it relaxing, but I am also dreamy ad I like to make all sorts of stories and imagine different possible events happening in my mind and I dislike when people disturbe me during one of my daydream modes. But I am usually not spaced out because any kind of emotional tension, I do it simply because I want to relax, or I want to daydream, sometimes people get it wrong.

[Aylen]

Well I am spaced out a lot of the time thinkig and feeling nothing and I just stare at an empty space, I just can turn off my mind and I find it relaxing, but I am also dreamy ad I like to make all sorts of stories and imagine different possible events happening in my mind and I dislike when people disturbe me during one of my daydream modes. But I am usually not spaced out because any kind of emotional tension, I do it simply because I want to relax, or I want to daydream, sometimes people get it wrong.

Yeah I do that too but I also see all kinds of imagery streaming through my consciousness, no thinking or feeling involved, some of which cannot be put into words so I don't even try. I am actually very relaxed when it happens to me. I have snapped at people for interrupting one of my moments though so I am not as passive as some people think.

I have actually talked about this a bit on the forum. It is like meditation to me. I cannot do forced meditation though or any kind of organized step by step meditation.

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

Yeah I do that too but I also see all kinds of imagery streaming through my consciousness, no thinking or feeling involved, some of which cannot be put into words so I don't even try. I am actually very relaxed when it happens to me. I have snapped at people for interrupting one of my moments though so I am not as passive as some people think.

I have actually talked about this a bit on the forum. It is like meditation to me. I cannot do forced meditation though or any kind of organized step by step meditation.

I very much relate to what you're saying

[Oaky]

How do you mean spaced out? I have been told I look spaced out for most of my life but that is mostly because I tend to stare out into nothingness when some kind of impression or feeling comes over me. People think I am in a trance and that is a good word for it. I can do it right in the middle of a conversation and it freaks some people out. I tell them I am just stretching my eyes, unless I am close to them and those close to me know what is really going on.

I have met people from forums over the years and they have described me as very passive, shy and introverted. Having to ply me with wine to get me to relax. It takes me some time to warm up to people, maybe multiple meetings, but when I do I can take over the room until I feel exhausted and have to get away from everyone, so I don't know. From your post I can't tell if you guys have an ongoing irl friendship or just casual meeting.

From the video, I thought some people might actually type her EII because at the end she says a bit about disliking talk of the supernatural, which is kind of textbook EII description. Most EII I know have no trouble listing their values when asked, whereas she seemed a bit ambivalent on values (to me) except for integrity and knowledge, which happen to be things I value as well. I guess I just don't see Fi as a base function in her but you know her better and she knows herself best, I would imagine. I think she at one time self-typed ESI? I guess maybe some EII could weigh in on what they see but so far only beta seem to be responding. Other than you that is. Edit: And Sienna.



I do know some EII that are into the supernatural though so this description seems odd as a specific example.

Ah, well my reason for suspecting Fi as her leading function is that she's always determining the level of connection she's having with anyone. It's always a psychological scoping between her and the person she's speaking to. She'll not try to change anything though. No changing moods or that sort. Which is why I'm neither putting Fe as her leading nor creative function. She's not very expressive also, just nervous at times and when she's nervous she starts to get a bit like what she showed in the video. Kind of like some sort of panic energy, then she leaves and wants not to have anything to do with that kind of thing again. Does not try to affect it. I'm not inclined to see Fe as her leading nor creative function... at all. She's a 'let me do what I want and leave me alone' type person. Her mobility is highly stagnant. I've always had to constantly ask her if something was wrong because she'd sit there looking glum all the time. Very low energy. Never affects the conversation. Again, no accommodating, which isn't very Fe too. Getting her to even say a thought is difficult to do, and she'd take a hell of a lot of time just forming any sort of closeness with a person. Like she'll never say the name of a person unless she's almost practically brother/sister to them. Never said my name once and when I pointed it out she said she doesn't say the names of people she's not close to. A fair point I thought... but that's not Fe.

[aisa]

ok, here are a few questions (brace yourself, it's long - I know, but hopefully worth reading if you feel like not knowing the correct typing is annoyingly itching you a bit).

I didn't watch with sound on yesterday and thought so many Betas see you in their quadra that maybe that's it. Sth seemed off, idk.
Today I have some time and watched with sound on (also watched half of your other typing video, it's public in your channel so I hope it's ok).

I'm just gonna throw in some ideas here to stir the pot.

 

Basically what stands out is that you're intuitive and if it's your natural state and you didn't drink like 10 coffees, then you're extroverted (or at least I find EII typing a stretch).
You do come across as a manic pixie in the vids and this might be mistaken as Fe, but I don't really see too much emotional expression and your eyes are so spaced out, it looks more like strong Ne. You look kind of so-firstish, too which might add to the manic appearance on video. In the other vid you mention that in MBTI you score very high on perceiving (99%) and test as different types of intuitives (you mentioned all Ne-ego types and close results on thinking vs. feeling). I'd say that's a clue. Even though there are voices how MBTI is shit and everything, I still find it hard to conceive that an EIE could regularly score 99% on perceiving in MBTI. Also just sth about the way you talk.

The way you describe being goal oriented may sound Ej and/or Ni.
Some of the things you say do sound like unvalued Ne.
The way you talk about freedom to do what you like strikes a chord (but many people feel this way, so let's say NTR).
The way you describe smn you'd like spending time with sounds like either you want a partner who is a causal determinist or you're a causal determinist yourself.
Some of the things you say sound like aristocratic quadra.
Some of the things about giving advice and personal feelings could be either a very controlled Fe and valuing Ti or on the other hand, could also be strong Ti and Fi-PoLR.
The way you talk about boredom makes me wonder whether the reason you might appear introverted is simply because you're bored out of your brains and the moment you find sth interesting to talk about with someone, you light up. This could be NTR but not necessarily.

Also, what I noticed is that you keep saying "where's the Fe, there's no Fe in me" and you are getting ignored. You look cute, extroverted and intuitive and are a female. This is going to make a lot of people mention EIE or IEE. If Ti/Fe users relate to you, they're going to say EIE>IEE.
So far in this thread you haven't said anything that can't be attributed to perceiving either of the IEs Ni or Ne.

Also I went through a pretty similar typing process and this might cloud my judgement on the Forer side, so pls bare this in mind.
So that's that.

Personally I think you're either an EIE or ILE, but if the videos I've seen were made in a state very unnatural to you, then some other types are possible.

So that was a ramble.

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______________________

Here are some things for you to consider:

-> I think it'd be very interesting to find out how you relate to the following descriptions of information elements, which sounds most accurate to the way you operate?:

 

Ne as Leading Function

The individual is skilled at generating intellectual interest and curiosity in others and using others' curiosity to get them to do things. He easily sees parallels between different situations, areas of knowledge or skill, and people, and likes to establish contacts across different fields of knowledge and social groups, which allows him to be part of many things at once. He enjoys considering differing viewpoints and perspectives and seeing if they can be reconciled. He enjoys the beginning stages of just about anything - new projects, acquiring new skills, experiencing new people and relationships. Preparing for and launching something new is seen as having greater value than the process of experiencing what one already has and finishing what one has begun. The concept of "finishing" seems foreign to him. Instead of taking care to finish things and tie up all loose ends, he tends to drop things when he can't handle them any longer or realize that he has neglected them for too long (this might be equally related to suggestive introverted sensing).

Ne as Creative Function

The individual likes to apply his insight to specific situations, relating them to the bigger picture. He also enjoys discussing idealized circumstances or what could be rather than what is. Consequently, he usually has high standards, even unreasonably so, for those around him. He does not pursue ideas or new opportunities merely for their own sake, but for their application to specific questions and issues that he feels are important.

 

Ni as Leading Function

As a base function, Ni generally manifests itself through a lack of direct attention to the world around oneself, and a sense of detachment or freedom from worldly affairs. This can lead to a highly developed imagination and very unique mental world, but it can also result in a great deal of laziness and apparent inactivity. Because the individual gets his or her primary information about the world through imagination, a person with leading Ni may be able to thrive in situations where data are scarce, or where he or she lacks the usual prerequisite experience. However, this may also become a disadvantage if the person ignores real data about the world too much. The ability to transcend the axis of time and understand the cause and effect relationships that occur is also a feature, sometimes resulting in the ability to accurately predict general future trends and outcomes of certain events.

Ni as Creative Function

The individual likes to predict the further development of the situations and topics that he is interested in. The individual applies his highly developed sense of vision not as an end in itself, but as a way of promoting the development of his more central interests and activities.

-> also, you mention not knowing what happens around you and getting scared in competetive sports related environments (could be unvalued Se and/or Se-PoLR) - and as it might be related to how Se works in your case, which of these sounds more familiar?

 

Se as Mobilizing Function (in EIE and LIE)

The individual tends to feel capable of achieving his goals, but hesitates on whether the path he is choosing is the right one. In these cases he needs to feel the support of others in order to be motivated to finally choose. He likes to be involved in competitive and challenging endeavors and to see his will and personal power develop as he overcomes obstacles together with other people. However, he depends on others to provide the gusto and motivation for these endeavors.

Se as Role Function (in ILE and IEE)

The individual tends to criticize himself for being less disciplined and organized than he should be, and typically tries to improve himself in this area, with very limited success. He is almost unable to make himself (or anyone else, for that matter) do things that they do not want to do, and is more likely to abandon a situation where people don't want to do anything rather than figure out how to mobilize or organize them properly. Discipline, organization, and mobilization can occur on their own, though, when there is a situation that demands it (as opposed to trying to generate it by oneself). However, he grows increasingly tired and emotionally worn out from having to put up a fight, and begins to look for a different, easier route rather than continue to confront the challenge directly.
He resents any attempts to "push" him to do things and rejects the idea of people pressuring each other to do things. He himself avoids the use of pressure, preferring instead to entice and inspire. Only severe irritation can make him become forceful and demanding for brief periods of time until he calms down.

Se as Vulnerable Function (in EII and LII)

The individual tends to overreact to aggressive or confrontational behavior, taking it as a personal threat when it may only be a knee-jerk reaction or the result of a bad mood. He tends to avoid intruding on others' space or engaging in behavior that may be perceived as coercive, and tries hard to handle his needs by being disciplined and well-prepared himself - rather than relying on others to do things for him. If these strategies fail, his efforts at dealing with the resulting conflict make him look actively pushy in a way that appears awkward and unnatural to others. This opens him up to painful criticism and feelings of weakness and helplessness.
He is able to moralize and instruct others about what they should do and why, but he is not prepared for others' active resistance or refusal to do as he says. In his mind, this would require him to put aside reason and good feelings and simply make the other person do what is necessary. This is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for him to do.

I'd recommend reading up on Fi also.

-> And which cognition sounds to you like the way you think:

 

Causal-Determinist Cognition

Let us now examine the first cognitive form: It is analytic, positive, and deductive. We will call this style Causal-Determinist. Its carriers are Sociotypes ILE, LSI, SEE, EII (ENTp, ISTj, ESFp, INFj, respectively)

As Statics, their cognitive activity is stable and clear. As Evolutionary types, they think procedurally without overlooking parts and intermediate details. As Positivists, they aim towards singularly valid solutions.

Intellectual Sphere

Causal-Determinist cognition is known under synonymous names as formal logic or deterministic thinking, both of which emphasize its rigid nature. Speech in this cognitive style takes shape with aid of the connectives "because", "therefore", "consequently" (causal conjunctions). The mental process consists in constructing chains of cause and effect, reducing explanations to deterministic mechanisms. Using the example of Aristotle, who first pointed out four ways to explain phenomena, the reason for the existence of a sculpture is the sculptor who fashioned it directly.

In the scientific sphere so thinks ILE, in the managerial-administrative sphere is methodical LSI, in the social sphere SEE calculates chains of material interests, in the humanitarian sphere subject to the same categorical imperative is EII.

Social Sphere

Aristotle is considered the discoverer of this approach. The basic laws of formal thinking are outlined in his theory of syllogism. However, the first to consistently put them into practice was Euclid, founder of geometry. More recently, its principles grounded rationalist Rene Descartes in his 1637 treatise "Discourse on the Method". Then it finally took shape in mathematical logic. The Causal-Determinist paradigm reached its apogee in Logical Positivism, then increasingly began to decline in value towards the end of the 20th century. However, as the common stereotype of proof, it still dominates to this day.

I will touch its advantages. First, it is perceived by society as the most authoritative, most convincing, and singularly correct. In mathematics, it is formalized as the deductive-axiomatic method. Use of it requires great intellectual stamina. Second, attributes of greater clarity and concentration are inherent to this style. The type most characterized by singular concentration is LSI. However, the irrational SEE argues quite soundly, deriving one consequence from another, implying focus on the chain of events. If even one link fails for any reason, then Determinists lose their sense of rationale and find it difficult to act because they see no reason to.

At the same time, Causal-Determinism has its drawbacks. It is primarily the most artificial and removed from the laws of functioning life. Its efficacy extends to the 'logical' formulation of already existing results, the construction of operating mechanisms, but not fundamentally new discoveries. The first dead end which formalization risks is scholasticism, i.e. pointless albeit logically impeccable reasoning. The second intellectual dead end faced by sequential Determinists is the trap of reductionism, which they fall into on account of fragmenting wholes into their component parts. This deficiency was noted even by the ancient skeptics, as well as in modern times by Hume, who doubted that any event could be dictated by strict reason.

Indeed, in building a long chain of cause and effect, it is difficult to avoid the danger of circularity, the risk of falling into circulus vitiosus—a vicious circle in the proof. Kurt Gödel's theorem on the incompleteness of formal systems, asserts that any sufficiently complex system of rules is either inconsistent, or contains conclusions that can be neither proven nor refuted by the rules of that system. This established limits in the applicability of formal logic. Using the deductive-axiomatic method, the medieval Scholastics in particular, attempted to rigorously prove the existence of God. Resulting from closure of causes in terms of effects, they circularly arrived at a definition of God as the thought which thinks of itself.

Psychological Sphere

Causal-Determinist cognition forges a mentality poorly protected from indoctrination, or in extreme cases, even brainwashing. By skillfully combining memorable words and actions, it is possible to gain control over the behavior of specific individuals. Intelligent Determinists in particular, are characterized by a strong dependence on the events of childhood, which Sigmund Freud discovered in his time, though poorly understood in full. Habits in pronounced Determinists are comparable in their rigidity to conditioned reflexes.

Standard military interrogation procedures are designed to ensure guaranteed cause-effect impacts upon the psyche. It includes measures of exposure such as sleep deprivation, changes in room temperature and/or humidity, denial of food subsequently followed by its delivery as a reward, etc. Isolation of the detainee and the gradual imposition of regulations, bears fruit sooner or later. In time, the vulnerability of psychological destabilization is manufactured into dependence upon the interrogator.

It is noteworthy that extreme critical situations, trigger a 'slow-motion film' state of mind in Determinists. Thinking becomes particularly clear, but stretched out over time, such that seconds can subjectively feel like minutes. Along these same lines, due to an abrupt shakeup of their psyche, the stress of surprise severely impedes their cerebral activity until they can recover in deep sleep.

The psychological school of Behaviorism represents this model of the psyche. Its supporters believe that behavioral learning is achieved through reinforcement—rewarding adherence to rules and punishing their violation. B. F. Skinner formulated the principle of operant conditioning, according to which the behavior of living organisms is completely determined by the cause-effect of this conditioning. He proposed the method of 'successive approximations', in which students receive positive reinforcement in instances where their behavior conforms to that desired.

Behaviorists developed the concept of conditioned learning and established a rigid procedural method of action towards the goal as the basis for its operation.

Scientific Sphere

Formal logical thinking in its time gave birth to the deterministic cause-effect worldview. This is the worldview of classical physics whose cornerstone is Newtonian Mechanics, and was the dominant paradigm until the early 20th century. Rigid systems operate according to these rules—organisms and mechanisms. When faced with multi-factor processes (such as psychology or society), however, reductionism loses its explanatory power to portray complex phenomena in terms of their basic components. Additionally, this classic paradigm has been too influenced by the ideal of 'progress', in spite of numerous historical examples of regressive tendencies, setbacks, repetitions, etc.

A real-life model of Causal-Determinist cognition is given by information represented in the form of a chart or realistic illustration made using a direct perspective. In this technique, objects are depicted larger or smaller in proportion to their distance from the observer. By drawing in this way, following strict instructions, any object can be easily depicted.

 

Dialectical-Algorithmic Cognition

The second cognitive form is of particular interest: it is synthetic, negative, and deductive. The working name of this style is Dialectical-Algorithmic. Representatives of this style are Sociotypes EIE, ILI, LSE, SEI (ENFj, INTp, ESTj, ISFp, respectively)

As Dynamics, these types synthesize associational images. As Evolutionary types, they increase deductive complexity of them. As Negativists, they work well with contradictions and paradoxes.

Intellectual Sphere

The essential distinguishing feature of the Dialectical style, is a view of the universe as a unified struggle of opposites. In speech it often uses syntactic constructions "if-then-else", the predictive branches of a developing process. Within limits, the Dialectic strives to find an intermediate point of dynamic equilibrium between contrasting extremes. Dialectical cognition is born from the colliding flow and counterflow of thought, the consciousness and unconsciousness. Thinkers of this style are characterized by an express inclination towards the synthesis of opposites, the removal of contradictions, which they so keenly perceive.

Its advantages are obvious: it is the most subtle and flexible style. It can easily switch to an opposite direction, and possesses predictive ability, accompanied by an effective type of associative memory. Algorithmic thinking is also good at solving problems of classification, given their gift for recognizing complex patterns. Beyond the circumstantial conditions of a problem, it perceives a fundamental algorithm for its solution.

According to Aristotle, Dialecticals prognostic thinking explains reality on the basis of purposive causes. For example, the cause of a sculpture is an idea of it in the head of the sculptor. The main role is played by a program, the intention of the creator. Thus, it can be considered teleological, and hence the most 'religious' in its essential thinking. Many scholars of this type sooner or later come to faith (not necessarily a church confessional).

Social Sphere

Historically, the first representative of a Dialectical worldview would be Heraclitus. Epitomizing the Dynamic dichotomy, he was of the opinion that "you cannot enter the same river twice" because whenever you enter again, the flow is already of different water. In more recent times it developed into Hegel's comprehensive theory of a rational system. Since Dialectical cognition, compared to other styles, is the most oriented towards creative intention, it invariably leads to ideas of a creator, an absolute, a cosmic intelligence, etc.

Two of its representatives—EIE and ILI—are usually recognized in society as the most intellectual types. They form the backbone of intellectual elites, expert clubs, esoteric groups, etc. They are the best computer programmers, knowing better than other types how to work with moving structures—algorithms. Algorithmic diagrams consist of blocks and arrows showing the order of transitions, branches, and loop cycles. The crux of a program is its dynamic structure—pointers, rather than blocks. The formula "if-then-else" is, in essence, the core of any algorithm.

The disadvantages in Dialectical-Algorithmic cognition include instability and uncertainty. Algorithmics suffer from difficulty in making choices and embracing unambiguous decisions. This thinking is more comparable to a symphony of flowing interwoven imagery, rather than a mechanism of clearly established instruction sets. Another problem is increased criticality, which can be so high that it incurs self-destruction, plunging them into danger of total detachment from reality, and leading to mental disorders, especially in cases of hereditary predisposition.

Psychological Sphere

The psyche of Dialectical types is most prone to transformations. From a psychological point of view, an unstable oscillating psyche is fertile ground for suggestibility. Occasionally Dialectics lose control over the parallel streams of thought fluctuating in their heads. They need only tune out their internal oscillation between freedom of choice and fatalism, and reinforce the latter. Doctors know that a small but accurately timed shock can throw the heart into a state of fibrillation. Likewise, a successfully directed signal at the right time can throw the Dialectical psyche into a chaotic state.

The EIE Sociotype has a very suitable psyche for suggestive influence. It is characterized by so-called moments of imprint vulnerability. In these moments an intense suggestion is triggered—an imprint—the prerequisites of which are a state of extreme fear, confusion, or surprise. A 'No Exit' sign suddenly seen by a person of Algorithmic psyche at a time of severe emotional turmoil, may catalyze a decision about suicide. Exploiting this paradoxical nature of Dialectical types, shock therapy is capable of completely reprogramming their conception of reality, including core value judgments.
A certain, although rare sign of Dialectical cognition—accidents that lead to states similar to a deep trance or coma, followed by sudden enlightenment or the appearance of esoteric abilities.

The other version is slow suggestion, primarily based on entrainment through rhythmic vocalization and/or sound, multiple repetitions of the same phrase with variation. Variations in this case are particularly significant, working akin to the chorus in a song. Gradually a trance state is reached—external relaxation with internal concentration. The greater the monotony, the sooner a deep trance is reached. Hence why some people rapidly settle down and fall asleep under a monotone 'bubnezh' TV.

Scientific Sphere

Dialectical thinking best corresponds to the quantum-probabilistic worldview of modern physics. According to this paradigm, there are no immutable laws, only tendencies and probabilities. Quantum Mechanics is built on the counterintuitive principle of particle-wave duality, according to which microcosmic objects behave as particles and as waves. Two of the 20th century's greatest physicists disputed over this view—Albert Einstein and Neils Bohr. The former defended causal-determinism as the nature of the universe, the latter advocated a probabilistic ontology. In the aftermath, Bohr won. Though apart from its historical context, the dispute makes little sense, given that these cognitive forms are dual to one other. Jung's principle of 'synchronicity' also lies within the Dialectical paradigm.

Contemporary British mathematician Roger Penrose has suggested that the human brain uses quantum gravity as a means for intuitive insight. He's written several books ("The Emperor's New Mind" and "Shadows of the Mind") stipulating that the brain is a quantum computer, and that Aristotelian logical thinking is actually alien to human beings. If he is right, it follows that the integral type of humanity is Dialectical-Algorithmic.

A real-life model of this thinking—double-images periodically passing into each other. Simple example: a projection onto the plane of a truncated pyramid. After examining it awhile it alternately seems convex, with the top facing to the observer, then concave, with the rear wall receding into the distance.

One more graphical illustration of Dialectical perception. What do you see in the picture: a vase against a black background, or two facial profiles on a white background? It depends on which one for you is the background, and which is the figure. Some see a vase and the profiles turn into a dark background, others see two black profiles and the white vase goes into the background. But once a person sees both images, fluctuations of attention begin. The picture seems to pulsate: you see a vase, then the profiles. There is a dialectical exchange of background/foreground. Triggering negative reverse perspective, where distant or darkened objects are perceived more significantly than those located closer to the observer.

 

Holographical-Panoramic Cognition

In cognitive theory, the third cognitive form is the least studied: it is analytic, negative, and inductive. The provisional name of this style is Holographical-Panoramic. 'Holograph' originates from the Ancient Greek words holos "entire, whole" and grapho "write". This name is derived from the Holographist's ability to densely pack information via method of 'like to, similar' analogy. Sociotypes possessing this form are SLE, LII, IEE, ESI (ESTp, INTj, ENFp, ISFj, respectively)

As Statics, Holographers attain reliable precision of thought. As Negativists they periodically turn the object of thought to its opposite side. As Involutionary types, they sporadically change the angle of examination or criterion of judgment.

Intellectual Sphere

This cognitive style has much in common with the holographic principle in physics. A hologram (optical) is a statistically recorded interference pattern made by two beams of light which are transmitted and reflected from a single source. Holographic technology allows us to obtain a three-dimensional image of an object. The hologram itself is an aggregation of stripes and spots exactly resembling the embedded object. The two beams of light are superimposed in such a way that every part of the hologram carries information about the whole.

In this way, by mentally superimposing multiple projections of the same object, Holographists reach a holistic view. To do this, they look at the image and select a desired angle of examination. Holographic cognition often utilizes the grammatical conjunctives: "or-or", "either-or", "on the one hand, on the other hand". It actively uses the principle of perspective; unrestricted choice in point of view. The holographic approach is a progressive approximation towards the purpose, or away from it, accompanied by changes of perspective. The holographic process is carried out as if calibrating focus.

Holographic cognition has a characteristic penetrating, skeletal-revealing, 'x-ray' nature. It unhesitatingly cuts away details and nuances, giving a coarsely generalized representation of the subject. Take for example the two orthogonal cross-sections of a cylinder: the horizontal section looks like a circle, and the vertical section looks like a rectangle. Two different perspectives of an indivisible whole which, when superimposed in the mind, produces transition to a higher level of understanding about the object.

SLE thinks this way in battle. Analyzing the situation, they simplify it to two or three facets (frontal, flank, and/or rear), but then quickly go to a higher tier of understanding. LII grasps the problem from opposite sides, mentally rotating the situation in three dimensions around its semantic axes. ESI first draws near to a person, then moves away, seeming to probe the individual from all sides, cutting off those who could let them down. IEE detects the possible hidden motivations of a person, as if building their psychological 'hologram'.

The main advantages of Holographic cognition are as follows. First, it is multi-perspective. As already stated, because of this it attains a dimensionally holistic and complete depiction. Second, it values simplicity and clarity, avoids pretentiousness, and forgoes 'bells and whistles'. Holographists are particularly effective in crisis situations, when it is necessary to make decisions quickly, and there is no time to weigh all the details.

The obvious disadvantage of this cognitive style is that it appears too rough, lacking adequate consideration to details which become important when a process flows smoothly. Its information-dense constructs are often difficult to decompress and unpack; to outsiders, they may seem void of intermediate links for establishing coherency in their connections.

According to Aristotle, Holographic cognition corresponds to explanation by structural or formative causes. Aristotle called it the structure of form. Returning to the sculptor example, the cause of the sculpture is its latent form, which the sculptor merely sets free by cutting away excess marble.

Social Sphere

A vague idea of the holographic concept was expressed by Gottfried Leibniz's "Monadology". His monad, a microcosmic reflection of the whole world order, is analogous to a hologram. Ecologists regularly turned to it in attempting to understand why there is stability in nature. Relationships between living and non-living nature arising in a given territory causes biogeocenosis, or ecosystem formation. Ecosystems are primarily characterized by equilibrium of self-similarity over time, where long-term coexistence of opposites without merging (synthesis) is observed. Therefore, Static prevails over Dynamic in such communities. Therein lies the fundamental law of homeostasis in the ecosystem.

General systems theory was later formed on the basis of these ideas. It was founded by Austrian biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy, who introduced the concept of open systems, which exchange matter, energy, and information with the environment, thus resisting destabilization.

While Determinists attempt to explain the behavior of a system by its component parts and interconnections, Holographists find novel qualities illustrating emergent features in it that cannot be accounted for solely from its internal structure. Therefore, the Holographical paradigm can generally be called a systemic-ecological worldview.

Contemporary 'green' ideology is an epitomization of this cognitive form. This does not in any way imply that the ideologues of this movement are Holographical types—cognitive styles and proclaimed viewpoints may not necessarily coincide! Manifestations of one cognitive style through another are completely typical. The books of "quantum psychologist" Robert Anton Wilson are a good example of this, in which his Dialectical-Algorithmic form is laden with multi-perspective, holographic content [5].

Psychological Sphere

Holographical cognition corresponds to a stable, self-possessed psyche resistant to conditioning. In comparing the conditionability of an LSI psyche to its Involutionary Mirror SLE, observation shows that the degree of psychological resistance is much higher in the latter. How is this explained? By the durable cognitive infrastructure on which it is built. Complete panorama, which allows periodic change of perspective on the subject. Good balance between the immune and nervous systems, as well as the primary sense organs.

In neuro-linguistic programming, this principle is used in a technique called 'reframing'. Reframing changes the perceptual framework contextualizing an event. If we mentally place a familiar object into an unfamiliar context, then significance of the whole situation changes. For example, imagine a tiger first in a jungle, then in a zoo cage, then on the balcony of your apartment. The standard Socionics type is depicted as immersed in its 'club'. But what if you shift it to quadra? What if it turns out to be among types with opposite cognitive styles? The chain can continue indefinitely.

With reframing it is possible to see the familiar with fresh eyes. The type of the psyche in one who resorts to this technique remains constant of course, only their subjective relation to the object of attention is changed. The benefit of this method is primarily in the fact that new perspectives emphasize aspects of a situation that may have been previously underestimated, allowing the possibility of discovering new avenues of growth, and expanding one's existing range of choices.

Scientific Sphere

A real-life physical model of this multi-perspective intellect is the hologram—a superimposition of multiple images where each one can only be seen when looking at a certain angle. Change of perspective occurs intermittently and does not alter the system itself, only its priorities. In this way, multiple standards can be implemented, making it possible to work with a complex system as if it were a simple sequence.

Another real-life prototype of Holographical cognition are fractal objects, discovered by mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot in the 1970s. Geometrically, fractals are figures with diffuse outlines, possessing self-similar internal structures. For example, trees, snowflakes, coastlines, etc. They are characterized by multiple internal forms similar in principle to nesting-dolls. Like a hologram, any fragment of a fractal contains complete information about the entire fractal. The part is always structurally similar to the whole.

Socionics types are also like fractal objects. Hence my holographic concept of personality as a nested system of types, one inside another [4]. Which opposes the prevailing flat view of Socionics advocated by people with reductionist thinking.

 

Vortical-Synergetic Cognition

The fourth cognitive style: it is synthetic, positive, and inductive. Its most appropriate title is Vortical-Synergetic. This form flows in Sociotypes ESE, SLI, LIE, IEI (ESFj, ISTp, ENTj, INFp, respectively)

Synergetics—the science of how order emerges from chaos. The word 'synergy' in Ancient Greek means "concerted action". The concept of synergy continues to be discussed at present. In the West, it is called 'Chaos Theory' or 'Nonlinear Dynamics' [9]. For our purposes, it is important to note that it is characterized by so-called dissipative states—non-equilibrium, nonlinear, unstable.

As Dynamics, Synergetics think fluidly with tints of one thought cascading into another. As Positivists, they converge towards a point of attraction. As Involutionary types, they frequently turn backwards and jump over previous levels, displacing the flow of their thoughts like a vortex or fluctuating storm.

IEI as if in a kaleidoscope sees whimsical iridescent imagery, dissolving then receding in flux. LIE thinks very experimentally with many variants rapidly assorted and mentally tested on the fly for practical applicability. ESE initiates a social torrent leaving behind a trail of emotional turbulence. Thoughts 'swarm' and chaotically displace one another. SLI 'lies in a drift' as it were awaiting favorable wind. Once the situation becomes favorable, self-organization immediately takes hold and rapid thinking initiates, scrolling through incoming information, identifying options most and least likely to succeed.

Intellectual Sphere

Characteristic of a 'vortex' is its self-organizing nature, moving like a whirlwind. This manifests mentally as a rapid search for options, tests, and the subsequent screening of variants which do not yield results. It operates on basis of testing, advancing to the goal through trial and error. In a sense, it is comparable to a perpetual lab experiment in the brain.

The first advantage of Vortical cognition—liveliness and naturalness. It seems to simulate the actual processes occurring in nature. Another advantage—faith in success and luck. Synergetics do not confuse temporary setbacks with error; they will undertake attempt after attempt until success ultimately comes to them.

Its chief disadvantage is that the intellectual search is often blind and uneconomical. Another difficulty is its randomness and spontaneity. Synergetic intellect is a kind of chain reaction that catalyzes itself. The mechanism of positive feedback operates: if not curbed, then the concentration of effort first leads to an explosion, followed by dissipation.

Synergetic intellect explains phenomena through substantive reasoning. The very substance (material or substrate) itself generating phenomena through natural movement. In the Aristotle example, the cause of sculpture is the block of marble from which it was made.

Social Sphere

Vortical cognition developed into a unique intellectual paradigm that was deemed later than all others to have social merit, despite it being most akin to natural phenomena. It is known that in natural conditions, all processes run in cycles. For example, in laissez-faire economies operating on Adam Smith's 'invisible hand' principle, natural cyclical fluctuations in market supply and demand guide the natural equilibrium prices of goods.

Studying biological evolution, Charles Darwin discovered its origin as a struggle for existence against natural selection, and survival of the fittest organisms. The main engine of this 'evolution', is involution through events of random variation, which abruptly leave no intermediate gradual links between appearances of species.

Biological self-organization is catalyzed by mutation—sudden, unpredictable changes in genetic material. Involution generates pulsating chaos, as evolution simultaneously selects and propagates useful mutations.

Following in the involutionary trend of Darwinism, the concept of 'punctuated equilibrium' emphasizes the discontinuous development of species observed in nature. Authors Gould and Eldridge conclude from this fact that smooth gradual evolution of species is impossible under natural conditions. To survive, all organs must simultaneously be in working order; there are no creatures present with half-fin wings, half-hoof toes, etc. According to this theory, the lifetime of a species is divided into two unequal stages of duration. The first stage is stasis, long periods where no significant species change occurs. Then the second stage, a time of fracture when the species is rapidly converted into another form, or dies out.

In the 20th century, as I mentioned, the vortex idea was rediscovered and Synergetics adopted its armament. The motto of Synergetics—order through fluctuation. Such fluctuations (local perturbations in the system) are analogous to biological mutation. Order in the chaotic evolution of complex socio-psychological systems, Socionics understands through the law of quadra progression. However, we must not forget that in the irreversible progression of quadras is a series of involutional junctures—jumps, twists, and turns. Because of this, the real non-theoretical quadra progression curve is jagged and looped, its outline resembling the dancing tongues of a burning flame.

Psychological Sphere

This cognitive style imbues qualities of endurance and optimism to the psyche. However, the psyche of Synergetics is less stable than that of Holographers. Synergetic types are partially conditionable, but capable of discarding undesired habits. For restoration of normal mental life they need specific, and sometimes long periods of trial and error. Depriving their life of continuous forward movement exerts a bad effect upon their mind. Operating principle: As ambient momentum of circumstance declines, their self-determination atrophies. Lack of oncoming circumstantial pressures renders them increasingly worse off.

The best countermeasure in such situations is positive self-programming. Consisting of forcing disturbing thoughts to the background and dissolving them in positive scenarios. IEI before sleep visualizes a pleasant scene to remove disturbing experiences of the day. LIE casts a desirable goal in its imagination, optimistic it will eventually acquire the necessary persons and resources. ESE simply does not think about past mistakes and its mood is improved by itself. SLI is not the first place puts a positive scenario and awaits the moment possible to implement it.

It is often forgotten that the synergetic aspect of development makes extended forecasts futile. American meteorologist Edward Lorenz descriptively coined this phenomenon the 'Butterfly Effect'. Where a butterfly waving its wings in some part of America can, with specific confluence of circumstances, induce a hurricane somewhere in Indonesia. Complex nonlinear phenomena are unpredictable, because tiny initial influences with time can lead to enormous consequences. In conventional life, this same phenomenon is called the Domino Effect. Where the initial fall of the first domino successfully entails catastrophe of the series. The catalyzing action, whose event occurs on your will, determines which of the scenarios will run—optimistic or pessimistic.

Scientific Sphere

This cognitive form reflects the synergy formed by the current worldview. Within this paradigm during the 18th century arose the Kant-Laplace hypothesis about the vortex origin of the sun and planets from cosmic dust.

The Synergetic paradigm is opposed to Creationism; the emergence of complex systems explains spontaneous creation, not divine intervention. A typical example from the history of science is biochemist A. I. Oparin's hypothesis on the emergence of life from inanimate matter in the primordial 'broth' of Earth's early existence, which was largely confirmed in Stanley Miller's famous 1953 experiment.

Also hailing from the Synergetic paradigm comes the outlook of Nikolai Amosov. According to him it "explains the evolution of the world's self-organizing structures… miracles can happen, but are of no practical value." He sincerely believes demonstrative simulations can be recreated by computer models.

Synergetics recognize the critical role of chance and free will in transitional moments of history. Synergetically-minded scholars frequently consider alternative historical outcomes. British historian Arnold J. Toynbee in particular, explored this twist on the course of ancient history—what if Alexander of Macedon did not die (pessimistic version), how would the world have developed then (optimistic version)?

A real-life model of Synergetic cognition is the turbulent flow. Turbulence is a liquid or gas flow, in which there is rapid mixing of its moving layers. The behavior of such flows cannot be predicted. Whereas the preceding laminar flow phrase exhibits clear regularities deducible by Causal-Determinism.

Mathematical modeling of natural growth processes typically uses exponential functions. Such functions describe geometric progressions, rather than arithmetic values. Logarithmic (S-shaped) curves terminating in saturation points are common in dynamic modeling. Implying that self-organization is not omnipotent: after exceeding a certain limit, it exhausts its own momentum. At which point it becomes necessary to either yield to external structure, or create a new nexus of self-organization. Synergetic types naturally select the latter.

Lev N. Gumilev offers a Synergetic account for involutions of ethnogenesis in the birth, growth, and death process of societies. Social systems dictate rules of selection for specific behaviors of people. Charismatic-personalities (cranks, outcasts, dissenters) engender a variety of diverse social mutations. Society holds them at bay, until such time that it weakens for any reason (due to economic crisis, internal wars, cultural stagnation, etc.). Afterwards, the energy of a new order vigorously sweeps the decrepit system and begins to grow in its place. But sooner or later, the new order itself will age just the same and be forced to give way to an alternative system ripening in its depths, and so forth.

Vortical cognition is hardest to convey to people of Algorithmic cognition, since to them free choice and the game of chance opposes teleology, fate, the special role of a creator, etc. When Synergetics speak about the implicit order in chaos, if we translate their words to the language of Socionics, they imply that Holographical cognition, with its minimally convoluted ordering structures, is dual to the chaotic vortex.

Once you nail down your cognition, you're left with four types to choose from and when you realise which is your leading function - you're pretty much done (temperaments, quadra values, intertype relations etc. etc. aside - which can all be treated as a double check).

I'm really curious.

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

@aisaThank you for your contribution!
Well I do relate to different types of cognition and different functions, however I don't know if it make any sense for a type itself. I relate to Ne creative more, than Ne lead. I do relate to some point to the Ni, I am dreamy, in my head and inactive, often miss the happenings in a real world, however I still try to stand with my feet on the ground and be aware of the current reality and I dislike people who are extremely drown in their own fantasies and whenever I catch myself ignoring reality too much, I need something to pull me back, I like to have and to keep a healthy contact with my external environment.
I relate to Se as a role function.
I mostly relate to Vortical-Synergetic Cognition, but I could also see Dialectical-Algorithmic Cognition.

[aisa]

hmm, ok... let's try sth else then
so cognition-wise it sounds like IEI and LIE if given to choose from intuitives only or EIE or ILI.
relating to Ne creative puts EII and LII on the table and relating to Se role puts IEE and ILE on the table. So we have half the socion, lol.

However the way you speak about people who drown in their fantasies and your need of external push and contact with reality does sound a bit like Ne ignoring and Se seeking.
By the looks of things the above mentioned IEI typing starts to look quite realistic tbh. Oddly, given what you write about not caring about atmosphere and some other things in this thread, I wouldn't exclude ILI either. But this could be just focus on Ni and not caring too much about Fi in IEI too. Argh, options.

Do you relate to these descriptions? Which?

Se as Suggestive Function (in IEI and ILI)

The individual is often characterized by his inertia. If left to his own devices, he may choose to do relatively little to interact with the outside world. When he does interact with the outside world, he often finds his activities to be empty and unfulfilling. To this individual, life is often characterized by periods of stimulation. For him, however, true stimulation is often spontaneous, and interludes between periods of stimulation are often characterized by tedium, inertia, and apathy. He is often not very adept at finding new areas of interest, and may seek to continue to reproduce past experiences instead of moving on to new things. In order to break out of this cycle, he requires an outside stimulus of spontaneity and activity. With such a degree of spontaneity introduced into his life, the tedium and perceived meaninglessness is replaced by a constant state of activity in which he can experience new things and escape from the confines of his own mind.
He is additionally very indecisive. He may lack the ability to make important decisions, especially with regards to his own future. He may know what he wants to achieve out of life in a broad or long term sense, but will find it very difficult to set and finish the short term projects leading to it. In order to be able to act, he needs a tangible and definite stimulus from somebody well grounded in external reality and who has a clear picture of what must be done in a certain situation.

IEIs are capable of generating a large number of possibilities and ideas, but are likely to view such an exercise with disinterest as opposed to their more natural process of developing explanatory insights about the dynamics of a situation. They may be inclined to continually revisit and expand upon or better organize their existing areas of intellectual interest or mental concoctions instead of moving on to new ideas.

IEIs not uncommonly apply their cogitations to topics pertaining to morality, ethics, and relationships. They have a strong understanding of the breadth of their inner emotional responses and dispositions to others. However, they may be inclined to treat their internal ethical sentiments somewhat passively; instead they are often more concerned with the energy and emotional responses of others around them. They are more interested in the dynamism of their emotional surroundings and often are inclined to adapt their behavior or even their persona to fit the situation.

IEIs naturally conceptualize the people around them in terms of the emotional energy that they give off, and the way that they interact with the mood and energy around them. They are often especially sensitive to how others around them react to their own energy.
IEIs are generally very sensitive to the emotional atmosphere around them. They are often good at recognizing and influencing the moods of others, and at communicating the depth of their feelings or experiences. They tend to be adept at reading the reactions that others have to them and are often quick to make use of emotional cues in interaction. They frequently feel a need to look after the mood of those around them, and characteristically seek to awaken or innerve others' emotional energy. They may exhibit a propensity for good-natured, friendly, lighthearted banter and try to promote good will and inclusiveness. On the other hand, IEIs can also direct their emotional influence through a mode of expression that limits their affable levity; they may take on a formal, toxic, serious, or even shock-jock emphasis as situations require.
IEIs may feel the need to express the nature of their inimitable mental landscape and insights, and may feel a greater calling to make a difference in the lives of others. This is often manifest by championing intellectual, moral, social, or personal causes. IEIs may feel strongly about these types of causes and some may expend considerable effort towards expressing their avidity towards them, even posing toxic criticism to those that do not share these deep moral callings. However, many other IEIs may lack the impulse or motivation to take this type of action at all.
The emotional energy of IEIs can sometimes appear restless, moody, or gregarious, but much of the time it is inwardly-focused and self-contained. IEIs are often highly introspective and often have a rich and vibrant array of emotional experiences, which they may dwell over and seek to display to others.

given what @Oaky says about you, have a glance at this, too (what he describes pretty much fits an ILI girl I know, also you do come across drier and more concise than other forum IEIs in writing, and ILIs sometimes get hyper too, especially when nervous. I'd say more, but let's leave it at that to read):

Ne ignoring in ILI

Though ILIs often have deep intellectual interests, they are likely to be relatively limited in the range of ideas that they consider. Whereas Ne leading types may jump from idea to idea in quick succession, ILIs are likely to focus more closely on a more limited batch of mental themes in their ruminations. ILIs are also often critical of new ideas which do not correspond to their overall understanding of a subject.
ILIs often believe that a well developed understanding of a situation is of greater importance than a deep understanding of the potential outcomes. To an ILI, it would be a silly exercise to simply list a number of possible outcomes without considering the likelihood of their realization and why they may or may not come to pass.
ILIs may be more apt to take a more practical or imagination-oriented approach to evaluating the outside world. They are unlikely to generate comprehensive ideas about new and unusual concepts that they have just discovered; instead, they most typically incorporate new information into their database carefully and ploddingly. They may instead seek to expand upon aspects of things they already know or build upon their own internal realities -- such as thinking of possible characteristics or plots for inner mental universes. Additionally, they may seek to exert their mental faculties to deal with ideas in the real world, such as those pertaining to areas like economics, politics, or anything regarding the development of modern society.
ILIs often have difficulty adapting themselves to new intellectual interests. They instead seek to limit the amount of new information that they have to learn. Consequently, they may recycle interests until the same interests become a drudgery, even so much that intellectual progress becomes stunted.

Fi mobilizing in ILI
Fi is a strikingly influential factor in the mindset of an ILI. ILIs tend to deeply value feelings of attachment to those whom engage them in a deep and lasting emotional kinship. They have a hard time establishing these sentiments as they are naturally disinterested in most people, who seem outwardly unremarkable or having nothing in common with them. However, when the ILI has developed deep interpersonal bonds, they tend to hold on to such attachments very deeply. ILIs are almost always deeply unconfident about their social abilities and, consequently, they rarely speak of their inner bonds with others to common outsiders with whom they share merely superficial acquaintanceships. Feelings of this sort are rarely talked about with others, but the ILI may be painfully aware of these sentiments for fear of appearing overly sentimental or having feelings that are "out of line" or inappropriate to their present level of social interaction. ILIs may tend to love from afar and in their solitude if there is something or someone they love, because of their lack of confidence in their own feelings. Some ILIs may even be closet romantics. ILIs can also be quite sensitive, despite their outward emotional reservation, and are sometimes far more emotionally vulnerable than they demonstrate.
In general, ILIs are fundamentally good-natured and conscionable people who may place a great deal of importance on ethical principles. In fact, ILIs may have a very strong sense of good will and loyalty towards others if they find the others to be similarly reasonable, trustworthy individuals. ILIs do not always demonstrate this loyalty explicitly. As a consequence, ILIs are not always seen as kind people, instead more typically appearing standoffish, cold, or hostile. If ILIs are drawn in by sincere and engaging individuals, the ILI's sense of compassion may be realized and so surface. ILIs can be calm, attentive, and sympathetic listeners to the plights of their emotionally volatile duals, and can be very drawn to the state of deep bonds that they feel with them.
Many less actualized ILIs hold a far more vindictive attitude. This occurs, among other scenarios, when ILIs are depressed about people, and especially when ILIs are suffering from a lack of support from others. In these scenarios the ILI may aggressively attack people's intelligence, ideas, or character rather unrelentlessly. Even so, such actions may precipitate conflict which the ILI is liable to find highly tiresome and frustrating -- as well as blurring the ILI's mental image of the facts, thus making him feel as though his work is unfinished. Such people who have been blacklisted are often in the ILI's eyes very deserving of this role, but the ILI may find that other people do not agree and faces the choice of either withdrawing in order to avoid interacting with the object of derision, or else continuing to interact, thus perpetuating the process and compounding the ILI's frustration. Such judgments may be very difficult to extricate from the ILI; such a process requires a copious amount of often thankless moral support and truth; SEEs are the only persons equipped for this task, and may in their occasional naivete of others' motivations benefit from the ILI's rather harsh stances. Typically, however, if the ILI is engaged with people with whom he feels very close and respects, he sees little need to interact with such individuals that would inspire his aggression.
ILIs rarely, if ever, take it upon themselves to display emotional, social, or physical initiative. To engage other people, especially in unfamiliar circumstances, can be a harrowing task for ILIs, and one from which most ILIs usually try to refrain. Nonetheless, ILIs are often treated with uncertainty or dubitation by most others due to their large inability to give off clear emotional data; ILIs may appear overly polite, formal, and robotic in social situations. ILIs seeking emotional ties with individuals may find themselves forced to take the initiative with others, a task for which even friendly ILIs are poorly equipped and bogged down with uncertainty. Even when ILIs do take some initiative upon themselves, they almost never succeed in reaching a depth of emotional connection which satisfies them.
Realization and development of Fi in ILIs represents a process of growth. Some ILIs with minimally developed Fi can be far less aware of the importance of lasting emotions, and can appear far more insensitive, unfriendly, and antagonistic.

ILIs are typically out of touch with expressing their emotional states. They are often seen as cold, unresponsive, and undesiring of human contact (which is often not the case). As a consequence, ILIs tend to be somewhat reclusive and often feel out of touch with their social surroundings. The rules of social "games" are often not naturally understood by ILIs. The are often unconfident and uneasy in social settings, especially those in which they feel that are expected to abide by social conventions that they have little connection to such as tribesmanship or purposeless joviality. Additionally, ILIs tend to regard the development of trust with others with significant anxiety, fearing that their inner world or antisocial tendencies will be unfavorably looked upon by others, and that most of the good will and friendliness they see in others is a pretense of social interaction rather than an expression of genuine emotional reactions. Often ILIs eschew many social situations and neglect emotional association with groups, instead seeking deep emotional connections with individuals.
ILIs are often seen as especially negative, overly critical, and sometimes harsh in their judgments. This is in part because ILIs -- when serious -- tend to communicate in a direct, straightforward manner. They sometimes are unaware of others' reactions to their ideas and may avoid sugar-coating them. Many ILIs see their criticism as constructive and believe that they would be doing others no good by withholding their ideas. Because of their incessant criticism and negativism, ILIs are sometimes seen as haughty or arrogant.

Are you nervous in the video @SadbutTrue? Oaky mentions you being very different in real life interaction. Is this true from your pov? And if so - how would you describe the difference? When do you come this alive (like in the video) in a real life interaction?

P.S. Here's an offchance question: how do you react to hugs when you have a real problem and you're sad? Do you feel comforted or does it make you feel like you need to move away in order not to lose strength you have left?

P.S. 2 Here's another thing, if you hadn't considered the IEI and ILI typings before - go to personality cafe forum and read through a few (especially the sticked) threads in the INFJ and INTJ forums. Even taking into account that "half" of the people might be mistyped there, the transition between the systems etc. etc., this should roughly transfer you should know more or less where you feel more at home and find people who think alike.
(I know personally this only confirmed my self-typing, cause I feel the most comfortable in INTP and ENTP forums there and always felt out of place in others.)

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

hmm, ok... let's try sth else then
so cognition-wise it sounds like IEI and LIE if given to choose from intuitives only or EIE or ILI.
relating to Ne creative puts EII and LII on the table and relating to Se role puts IEE and ILE on the table. So we have half the socion, lol.

However the way you speak about people who drown in their fantasies and your need of external push and contact with reality does sound a bit like Ne ignoring and Se seeking.
By the looks of things the above mentioned IEI typing starts to look quite realistic tbh. Oddly, given what you write about not caring about atmosphere and some other things in this thread, I wouldn't exclude ILI either. But this could be just focus on Ni and not caring too much about Fi in IEI too. Argh, options.

Do you relate to these descriptions? Which?







given what @Oaky says about you, have a glance at this, too (what he describes pretty much fits an ILI girl I know, also you do come across drier and more concise than other forum IEIs in writing, and ILIs sometimes get hyper too, especially when nervous. I'd say more, but let's leave it at that to read):




Are you nervous in the video @SadbutTrue? Oaky mentions you being very different in real life interaction. Is this true from your pov? And if so - how would you describe the difference? When do you come this alive (like in the video) in a real life interaction?

P.S. Here's an offchance question: how do you react to hugs when you have a real problem and you're sad? Do you feel comforted or does it make you feel like you need to move away in order not to lose strength you have left?

P.S. 2 Here's another thing, if you hadn't considered the IEI and ILI typings before - go to personality cafe forum and read through a few (especially the sticked) threads in the INFJ and INTJ forums. Even taking into account that "half" of the people might be mistyped there, the transition between the systems etc. etc., this should roughly transfer you should know more or less where you feel more at home and find people who think alike.
(I know personally this only confirmed my self-typing, cause I feel the most comfortable in INTP and ENTP forums there and always felt out of place in others.)

After reading the cognitive functions descriptions, I relate more to ILI, than IEI.
In the video, I was quiet nervous, mainly because it was unprepeared and I had to think about what to say for a longer time. In real life I am more laid back in conversations. When I come this alive, it's usually because of some interesting topic of discussion. When I feel I know a lot about the topic and I want to express and show my knowledge, I can become this passionate.
I do not particulary like hugs. I do not like physical contact with people in general, unless they are very close to me (romantic partenr). I have my intime zone and usually back off quickly, when someone tries to be too physically close.
I am not very sure about being an NT. I've never seemed to share their interest. I do like philosophy, but I am not really into science, or technics. I like humanitarian sciences such as sociology, or psychology, but stuff like math, or chemistry are hell for me. I like art and I create my own and it's usually very emotionally sensitive.

[Skepsis]

"Even though I'm not a hard worker, I always seek the easiest ways to do things, and usually I find the easiest way."

This sounds Ip

Could you elaborate more on this? Why do you think you are not a hard worker? What are your reasons for finding the easiest way? Are you trying to make more time for your inner life?

What about tasks that you are passionate about? I assume you would invest more effort in those?


Your gestures seem more indicative of points you want to make or ideas you want to share and don't look as if they necessarily reflect an inner emotional state or are being employed to emotionally influence anyone else. I often talk with my hands and I do it without being aware, much like you did in the video. I do this to illustrate points, ideas, and concepts and not as a means of emotional expression. People often will pay attention to my hands, but I lack vocal color; it's usually quite flat and monotonal.

You do demonstrate some Fe in your facial expressions and gestures, but his does not mean you are Fe base or creative. Even those who prefer Fi will emote through Fe.

[aisa]

@SadbutTrue I'll refrain from my typing of you just yet, but at this point I do think IxI is likely and leaning ILI. I know an ILI who is interested in the same things, she was in a humanities class in high school, enjoys photography and singing (has a really nice singing voice), used to write some poetry. Recently she graduated from law school which she had chosen for practical reasons. There's sth very similar to her about you.
There's this stereotype that people who are not xxFx in personality theories notation aren't sensitive. This is bs. Sensitivity =/= wearing emotions on your sleeve, neither does it equal crying in public. There's a vast palette of how human sensitivity can work/present itself.
The thing is the ILIs I've met are much more no-nonsense and goal-oriented than IEIs - and that's how you describe yourself. You could be a 5w4 so/sx ILI and that would probably explain a lot. (I have a day off today and watched the rest of your videos.)

But this starts to sound like I'm pushing this typing on you, which is not my intention. IEI 4wX is def. possible (I always see options, so there you go ). I really think it's for you to decide which describes you better, because you know yourself and your internal workings best. I highly recommend glancing on the INTJ and INFJ forum links from my previous post for a double-check of sorts.

P.S. upon reading @Jimmers' post, which sounds more like your attitude?:

Fe as Vulnerable Function (in ILI and SLI)

The individual tries hard to never let himself "come apart at the seams" emotionally or even let out strong feelings publicly, because displays of passion do not come naturally and make him feel self-consciousness and vulnerable to painful criticism. This makes the individual generally seem emotionally neutral and politely indifferent to excitement and agitation around him. The individual deeply dislikes attempts by others to get him to "cheer up" or "join the fun", especially in the context of group activities with loud emotional expression.

Ne as Vulnerable Function (in ESI and LSI)

The individual is highly skeptical about ideas and opportunities that appear not to lead anywhere specific, and seeks assurance that new innovations will definitely bring material benefits. He prefers the kind of ideas and innovations that offer solutions to existing problems rather than the kind that have uncertain consequences and are likely to bring upheaval and unnecessary change. The individual may tend to forcefully restrict other people's activities in areas he thinks they have no natural talent in. At the same time, he or she is prone to make errors when judging whether or not a person is capable of doing something. The individual generally does not try hard to understand multiple viewpoints, but concentrates on developing only his own. He is not very good at intriguing others with his ideas, even when they have significant merit. The individual dislikes it when people evaluate others' potential to engage in activities or develop skills in which they haven't had experience yet; above all he is uncomfortable with such discussions by other people regarding himself. He is inclined to be either over-skeptical of his own potential or going to the other extreme and overestimate his possibilities in specific areas on occasion.

[Skepsis]

Personally, I get an unscientific, Gamma vibe from you.

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

"Even though I'm not a hard worker, I always seek the easiest ways to do things, and usually I find the easiest way."

This sounds Ip

Could you elaborate more on this? Why do you think you are not a hard worker? What are your reasons for finding the easiest way? Are you trying to make more time for your inner life?

What about tasks that you are passionate about? I assume you would invest more effort in those?


Your gestures seem more indicative of points you want to make or ideas you want to share and don't look as if they necessarily reflect an inner emotional state or are being employed to emotionally influence anyone else. I often talk with my hands and I do it without being aware, much like you did in the video. I do this to illustrate points, ideas, and concepts and not as a means of emotional expression. People often will pay attention to my hands, but I lack vocal color; it's usually quite flat and monotonal.

You do demonstrate some Fe in your facial expressions and gestures, but his does not mean you are Fe base or creative. Even those who prefer Fi will emote through Fe.

Well I can do alot of research on a topic of my interest, but once I am not interested in my work, it's extremely hard to start the project. I usually end up doing a lot of stuff at the last possible moment, with the minimum amount of information and hope none will notice it's a slacker job.
I am passionate about writing for example, but it takes me a lot of time to do an actual work. Once I get myself into work, I can write and finish the story in no time, I can't take breaks, or work based on schedules, 'cause I usually just don't come back to the started work and often leave it unfinished. I usually work on the spur of a moment and based on my current mood. If I feel active and like doing something, I am able to do an amazing work, if I am not in the mood you'll probably see no work at all.

[Skepsis]

After reading the cognitive functions descriptions, I relate more to ILI, than IEI.
In the video, I was quiet nervous, mainly because it was unprepeared and I had to think about what to say for a longer time. In real life I am more laid back in conversations. When I come this alive, it's usually because of some interesting topic of discussion. When I feel I know a lot about the topic and I want to express and show my knowledge, I can become this passionate.
I do not particulary like hugs. I do not like physical contact with people in general, unless they are very close to me (romantic partenr). I have my intime zone and usually back off quickly, when someone tries to be too physically close.
I am not very sure about being an NT. I've never seemed to share their interest. I do like philosophy, but I am not really into science, or technics. I like humanitarian sciences such as sociology, or psychology, but stuff like math, or chemistry are hell for me. I like art and I create my own and it's usually very emotionally sensitive.

NT is probably best understood as how you relate to others in a group setting, as opposed to your own intellectual interests and hobbies. There are many different reasons for why people like the things they like. ILIs interests vary from each individual and they can be an artist, scientist, entrepreneur, philosopher, technician, or computer programmer. There is much variability.

[aisa]

Well I can do alot of research on a topic of my interest, but once I am not interested in my work, it's extremely hard to start the project. I usually end up doing a lot of stuff at the last possible moment, with the minimum amount of information and hope none will notice it's a slacker job.
I am passionate about writing for example, but it takes me a lot of time to do an actual work. Once I get myself into work, I can write and finish the story in no time, I can't take breaks, or work based on schedules, 'cause I usually just don't come back to the started work and often leave it unfinished. I usually work on the spur of a moment and based on my current mood. If I feel active and like doing something, I am able to do an amazing work, if I am not in the mood you'll probably see no work at all.

that's the part that initially had me thinking Ne-leading type...
Idk, @Jimmers do you relate to this? Is it type related at all or is everyone guilty of this just sometimes for different reasons and it's NTR?

[Skepsis]

that's the part that initially had me thinking Ne-leading type...
Idk, @Jimmers do you relate to this? Is it type related at all or is everyone guilty of this just sometimes for different reasons and it's NTR?

Yes I do relate. Eps and Ips can appear similar because of dominant intuitive perceiving. I think there is a misconception as to how an Ip extroverts and what they look like, Ni-doms in particular. Overall, the difference is on how engaged you are with the world around you. Ips like to discuss ideas too and can become impassioned while discussing them, but most of the time they prefer solitude, and not sharing those ideas with most people. Not because they don't want to, but because they are cautious and selective as to who they share them with.

Nis are immersed in their own inner world and tend to accept a few ideas they've spent considerable time developing, and fits within their worldview. It can be changed with new information, but it is a very slow process. They are removed from the world, like an observer. Eps are extroverts and expose themselves to more ideas and possibilities just by being out around people more. The introversion of Ips contributes to a worldview that is not subject to change as they expose themselves to far fewer people than Eps.

Getting projects moving is a struggle for Ips. Once they get moving, there is a tendency to finish it. Think Newtons First Law of Motion. Eps have a tendency to bounce from one task to the next. Stagnation is boredom for them. Ips can become bored too, but this is where Se comes in to relieve it. Extroverted perceiving is something that Ips need, but can only take in small dosages.

She doesn't seem to have the outward energy of an Ep. I would say Ip>Ij>Ex

[Suz]

getting an Uma Thurman vibe from you... idk what that means though...

[Ananke]

Welcome!

EIE-Ni E4w3 sx/so

FINALLY an EIE E4 to showcase to those of you wondering if EIE E4s exist. Contrast her to EIE E3s like darya.