Jordan Peterson

[imarite]

Real, proper Se might be to pushy and forward for his tastes. (not the romantisized Se) Ethicals in gamma are pretty fucking Fi and I would imagine it rubbing him strongly. Dono though maybe he would appreciate/desire/move towards that.

He's hard to read as a sexual creature, very "head" type, even the way his hair looks wet styled doesn't say "touch me".

Yeah this post is all about sex and had no purpose.

[The Reality Denialist]

well, I get what he means with life. You go there and make best of it. It is best if you go towards positivity. Me: But what about... and does it generate unhappiness in somewhere else for instance? It is a very LII like state of being or better to put it more or less left spin type whereas right spin types are more gloomy, pessimistic and dramatic (and I'm right about that ).

[Exodus]

Again, no way is he any kind of Si valuer.

[ashlesha]

Again, no way is he any kind of Si valuer.

would an si valuer talk about this in a different way, or would they avoid this altogether?

[azbestos]

Ok, so I actually registered specifically to reply in this topic since I started watching videos by Jordan Peterson and let me solve the mystery for you...

First of all, I am the same type as he is and I'm sometimes struck by the fact how similar conclusions he draws from his totally different experiences. I tend to combine multidisciplinary topics to pond on the human nature and make speeches about it to my friends... There are so many ways I could compare myself to him that I might not exhaust the topic ;].

I am an EIE Ni subtype.

I have studied, learned and applied socionics in life for more than 10 years in case you want to know.

He clearly operate the Ni as you have noticed. He very often mentions the power struggle between people and the significance of social status (Se), then he clearly admits that he doesn't know some things or the details of their workings and seeks Ti5 support, although he insists on the purpose of being useful and applying knowledge in a useful manner (Te3), but his goal is to draw your attention and make you think, guide you, be your Mentor. You have a pretty much an archetypal example of this type of EIE.

His view on the weakness of human nature, yet striving for a perfect world and the internal struggle, and battle between good and evil and a sense of responsibility, both individual and global are expressed in such sentences as:

Until the whole world is redeemed, we all fall short...

We're one execution away from utopia.

They are culprits of beta philosophy.

[Myst]

Again, no way is he any kind of Si valuer.

Not an Si ego. No way this guy is Se valuer tho', based on the earlier stuff about just speaking your opinion of what you think is true and no further considerations beyond that... as if this guy is in a vacuum and not in real life.

[Myst]

Ok, so I actually registered specifically to reply in this topic since I started watching videos by Jordan Peterson and let me solve the mystery for you...

First of all, I am the same type as he is and I'm sometimes struck by the fact how similar conclusions he draws from his totally different experiences. I tend to combine multidisciplinary topics to pond on the human nature and make speeches about it to my friends... There are so many ways I could compare myself to him that I might not exhaust the topic ;].

I am an EIE Ni subtype.

I have studied, learned and applied socionics in life for more than 10 years in case you want to know.

Where's his Fe base?

[ashlesha]

Not an Si ego. No way this guy is Se valuer tho', based on the earlier stuff about just speaking your opinion of what you think is true and no further considerations beyond that... as if this guy is in a vacuum and not in real life.

I've gotten similar advice from an uncontroversially typed forum ILI before. Something in the context of realizing you cant force people to understand, not casting pearls before swine, sort of thing, if I recall correctly.

I don't know Petersons type though, so whatever, I do agree with not-EIE

[someoneaskedmetofly]

I think it depends if there's a large chance of the other person negatively affecting your/others' future with his opinion (I'm pretty sure an LII would act if it meant his demise).

[azbestos]

It's there all the time. It's not like he's going to sing or dance if you're expecting this sort of Fe but it's more in trying to relate to the audience as a vulnerable human being and trying to create an emotional impulse in them through his storytelling (like when he talks about his family, in fact he loves talking about his "personal" experiences as a point of reference). Yes, the EIE-Ni is way dimmer and much more philosophical than the outgoing and extroverted subtype, probably also even more paranoid. I also score as LIE on some socionics tests (depending on the day) because I consider myself a logical and painfully pragmatic person but the truth is I'm driven by passion and emotions. I see a clear gap between myself and LIE and how I interact with other types. I am totally drawn to Ti and their "reliability" and attention to facts and details and I lighten up when there's more Fe-types around who can crack jokes with me.

Also digging in the duality of human nature is the essence of the Hamtlet. Peterson often admits that life is suffering - also a staple for the type.
His dynamic posture and fast talk suggests Ej temperament.

If there were videos of him interacting with other Fe-valuing types, especially IEI or EIE, you'd see him engaging in it quickly. The academic setting won't allow to create any special aura of Fe, you have to remember that but that's a comfortable setting for this type.

[Myst]

I've gotten similar advice from an uncontroversially typed forum ILI before. Something in the context of realizing you cant force people to understand, not casting pearls before swine, sort of thing, if I recall correctly.

I don't know Petersons type though, so whatever, I do agree with not-EIE

It could be 1D Se in general, but TBH the context you give for the ILI's assertion does make sense to me. The original Peterson statement talks about not affecting the outcome. The ILI's statement I interpret as not wasting your time on some things that do not lead anywhere. See the difference? (BTW that's very ILI about not wasting time like that lol.)

It's there all the time. It's not like he's going to sing or dance if you're expecting this sort of Fe but it's more in trying to relate to the audience as a vulnerable human being and trying to create an emotional impulse in them through his storytelling (like when he talks about his family, in fact he loves talking about his "personal" experiences as a point of reference). Yes, the EIE-Ni is way dimmer and much more philosophical than the outgoing and extroverted subtype, probably also even more paranoid. I also score as LIE on some socionics tests (depending on the day) because I consider myself a logical and painfully pragmatic person but the truth is I'm driven by passion and emotions. I see a clear gap between myself and LIE and how I interact with other types. I am totally drawn to Ti and their "reliability" and attention to facts and details and I lighten up when there's more Fe-types around who can crack jokes with me.

Also digging in the duality of human nature is the essence of the Hamtlet. Peterson often admits that life is suffering - also a staple for the type.
His dynamic posture and fast talk suggests Ej temperament.

If there were videos of him interacting with other Fe-valuing types, especially IEI or EIE, you'd see him engaging in it quickly. The academic setting won't allow to create any special aura of Fe, you have to remember that but that's a comfortable setting for this type.

Thanks for the detailed answer. OK, first off, I don't equate Fe with singing or dancing. I find EIE-Ni a bit more random, less linear in their direction and expressions compared to EIE-Fe but on the whole it is still expressive and directed enough to be Fe base (actually, more freely expressive, too than EIE-Fe, supposedly). I don't find Peterson does that at all. He does philosophize but it seems like in a dry way for the most part. Not simply emotional "reasoning". (I'm not counting in his personal intensity for that. That's not sociotype.) Off topic: I don't know you but I can believe it if you say you are not LIE, sure, don't want to contest that. Your last sentence though makes me wonder about IEI. Again, off topic and I don't know you lol so take this for whatever it's worth, again I don't want to argue this either. Just noting it bc you mentioned your own typing.

[falsehope]

He haa looks of primary Ti and secondary Se, therefore LSI, which at the moment, has most of the votes.

[The Reality Denialist]

Gulenko's EIE-N (aka teacher) description is the closest when it comes to his beta descriptions.

[Myst]

He haa looks of primary Ti and secondary Se, therefore LSI, which at the moment, has most of the votes.

He looks too unfocused to me for Se ego.

[azbestos]

It could be 1D Se in general, but TBH the context you give for the ILI's assertion does make sense to me. The original Peterson statement talks about not affecting the outcome. The ILI's statement I interpret as not wasting your time on some things that do not lead anywhere. See the difference? (BTW that's very ILI about not wasting time like that lol.)

I'd think the same. I hate wasting time with people if we don't benefit from each other, that's especially apparent for EIE males. In fact this is one of the reasons of the resentment towards humanity. We judge people's stance, worldview and values in order to build a holographic picture of the person and what he/she's capable of and how I we can relate to this person and benefit from them. And we're capable of deciphering a person in seconds. That's why we hate the superficial, commercialized, immoral, corrupt or unjust system or whatever is typical for the age we live in. Because the people not worthy of our attention are the representation of what's wrong with this world ... but we have mercy for their poor little souls! But I have to admit - Peterson is pretty restrained in his opinions and that's what probably earned him a professor degree. If you were drinking whisky with him, he would tell you honestly what he thinks about this or that .

[Kill4Me]

EIE for Peterson is totally absurd...

[azbestos]

What do you see here? This video is more revealing than his lectures.

And here's another...

[Myst]

I'd think the same. I hate wasting time with people if we don't benefit from each other, that's especially apparent for EIE males. In fact this is one of the reasons of the resentment towards humanity. We judge people's stance, worldview and values in order to build a holographic picture of the person and what he/she's capable of and how I we can relate to this person and benefit from them. And we're capable of deciphering a person in seconds. That's why we hate the superficial, commercialized, immoral, corrupt or unjust system or whatever is typical for the age we live in. Because the people not worthy of our attention are the representation of what's wrong with this world ... but we have mercy for their poor little souls! But I have to admit - Peterson is pretty restrained in his opinions and that's what probably earned him a professor degree. If you were drinking whisky with him, he would tell you honestly what he thinks about this or that .

I can't relate to any of this.

What do you see here? This video is more revealing than his lectures.

Still way too stoic reasoning for EIE.

[The Reality Denialist]

It is rather clear that his that would strive ILI in detailed realm seems to lack – a lot. He is not in no way in appropriate place for ILI. He also has clear states in his videos (goes static inwardly to search for solution). Well, I suppose EIE's would do it as well as LII's.

LII's (like Gulenko) can be very proud of lack of detailed focus, though.

Also he seems to accept facts rather than question them and from there continues subjective extrapolation.

His variety in / realm makes me think intuitive creative.

[silke]

well, I get what he means with life. You go there and make best of it. It is best if you go towards positivity. Me: But what about... and does it generate unhappiness in somewhere else for instance? It is a very LII like state of being or better to put it more or less left spin type whereas right spin types are more gloomy, pessimistic and dramatic (and I'm right about that ).

His brave soldiering on towards some idea of a brighter future reminded me of this LII description:

" ... Part of socionic community, mainly consisting of their enthusiastic female duals Hugos (Hugo men, as we recall, in socionic community are almost nonexistent), admire Robs [LIIs] for their ability to deconstruct and put into strictly hierarchical shelves any very intricate theory, to explain on their fingers the most complex idea, while managing to avoid calling their conversation partner an idiot, not even hint at it, as well as for their impenetrable idealism, and fascinating ability to adamantly head through a thorny path towards some absolutely unattainable goal."

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-Profiles-Ever

He haa looks of primary Ti and secondary Se, therefore LSI, which at the moment, has most of the votes.

Se-creative is about manipulating objects and he isn't about this. He's manipulating ideas, which is creative intuition Ne/Ni rather than sensing.

[Bertrand]

https://youtu.be/gwUJHNPMUyU?list=PL...EEr7p5b&t=1744

here I believe he's criticizing hamlet/maxim. doesn't mean he isn't one, but he's "new"

[Exodus]

Not an Si ego. No way this guy is Se valuer tho', based on the earlier stuff about just speaking your opinion of what you think is true and no further considerations beyond that... as if this guy is in a vacuum and not in real life.

Did you watch the video? And which source are you referring to? Betas do value free expression after all.

[Myst]

Did you watch the video?

I looked, but it would be better if you described what it is you think is devalued Si.

And which source are you referring to? Betas do value free expression after all.

This: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1251624

[Number 9 large]

his tendency to not follow systems but to generate categories momentarily is Ti-.

That would be ti demonstrative/creative; not caring about systems but generating them on a whim to prove a point is demonstrative tho, in no way is it 4D, which is permanently adhering to a system (traversing the axis of time)

[esq]

This one's good because he takes critique here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OD-VCRNIp-U

But the comments section still, like with all his videos, is filled with disgusting sycophants.

[Exodus]

I looked, but it would be better if you described what it is you think is devalued Si.

Skip to around 3:00, it's entirely about Se (the concept of play fighting).
It would contradict the idea that he is unaware of real-world political relations, he spends quite a bit of time dissecting them.

would an si valuer talk about this in a different way, or would they avoid this altogether?

An Se Vulnerable type would probably not be comfortable talking about an Se topic directly for so long.
But most Si valuers would tend to find the kind of information he is presenting to be a somewhat distasteful subject, at least not one they would bring up themselves.

This: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1251624

"You don't know what you want" and "accept the outcome" doesn't imply passivity at all to me (in fact it sounds rather forceful). I'd like to see the quote in context.

[Myst]

Skip to around 3:00, it's entirely about Se (the concept of play fighting).
It would contradict the idea that he is unaware of real-world political relations, he spends quite a bit of time dissecting them.

Analyzing the concept of playfighting instead of doing it doesn't sound like Se lol.

"You don't know what you want" and "accept the outcome" doesn't imply passivity at all to me (in fact it sounds rather forceful). I'd like to see the quote in context.

How the hell is that forceful?? And it's anything but actively managing actual things in the world to get what you want.

[Exodus]

Analyzing the concept of playfighting instead of doing it doesn't sound like Se lol.

He used himself as an example...

[Myst]

He used himself as an example...

Did he do it to win for real even beyond the point of light fun or just to play? The former is Se valuing, the latter is Ne valuing. There was some thread where LIIs described how they only do the latter.

PS: Do you get my point on how I find that quote passive?

[Exodus]

Did he do it to win for real even beyond the point of light fun or just to play? The former is Se valuing, the latter is Ne valuing. There was some thread where LIIs described how they only do the latter.

I don't agree with that. People don't engage their Vulnerable function "just for fun". Play fighting is far more characteristic of Se valuers.

PS: Do you get my point on how I find that quote passive?

It's forceful in the sense of being abrasive and telling people what it do - tell people to "accept the outcome" of their actions is very much an Se/Ni way of thinking.

[nokomis]

Those thinking this guy has an ounce of Se have really jumped the shark.

Seriously, open your damn eyes. The guy is pretty soft underneath his prickly shell.

LII. Maybe IEI but I doubt it.

[Kill4Me]

I know I've already posted this but for those who think he is LII what do you make of this video?

“Life without depth is by definition shallow and meaningless”.
I don’t know any Alpha who would honestly care about their life being shallow. Sometimes I feel like they almost prefer it that way because they want everything light and positive and carefree. They just want to relax with some good food and make jokes and pleasant conversation.

“Life is not that simple, life is complex and tragic and difficult” <— this is the antithesis of everything Alpha

Well, first, I would object to that characterization of Alpha values if we were to take the quadra values mythology seriously.

Second, even assuming you have properly characterized it, I would reject Quadra Values as a basis for typing anybody. If we start with quadra values as a basis for typing, then only Ne that cognizes light, positive and carefree possibilities and envisions light, positive and carefree innovations counts as Ne for the purposes of typing somebody ILE. It's like chopping off 3/4ths of Ne.

Things he is emphasizing in the video:
The quality of your life depends on how meaningful it is (Ni)
You need to have a wide range of emotions to deal with life, not just happiness (Fe, the Beta kind)

These are just conclusions he's drawn from studies of people and research in his particular field. So it really goes to Ti/Ne data collection and his value for competence (that's the 800 pound gorilla in the room).

I have an LII brother and there’s only so long I can talk to him about heavy serious topics like this before he will get uncomfortable and drained or try to make a joke out of it. And ESEs (the LII’s dual) would haaate hearing something like this. This is pure Ni. There are no open possibilities (Ne) in anything he is saying. Go to a group of Alphas and say something like this and I guarantee you wouldn’t be invited back lol.

his reasoning is way too mechanical for Ni-dom imo.

[Myst]

I don't agree with that. People don't engage their Vulnerable function "just for fun". Play fighting is far more characteristic of Se valuers.

The thing is, that kind of play that I'm speaking of isn't real Se. Anyway LIIs have stated this themselves... that they do this. I won't disagree with actual facts just to follow some abstract theory prediction. I don't expect every LII to do this one specific thing but clearly some do it.

And since I'm not a Ne type, I don't know what exactly Ne sees in it but apparently it can see something fun there... I don't.

It's forceful in the sense of being abrasive and telling people what it do - tell people to "accept the outcome" of their actions is very much an Se/Ni way of thinking.

He tells people about a general and very abstract idea. That's not Se, no matter how convinced he may sound otherwise, that's just Ti. You also sound convinced of your ideas while those ideas are general and not about concrete action for a concrete goal.

And, accepting the outcome without influencing it isn't Se/Ni, lol, though idk if some IEI philosophers can say something like that, or those buddhist ones. I would say it's definitely very foreign for Rational Se/Ni at least tho', the ones I've known try to influence outcomes, for sure.

[Myst]

I don’t know any Alpha who would honestly care about their life being shallow. Sometimes I feel like they almost prefer it that way because they want everything light and positive and carefree. They just want to relax with some good food and make jokes and pleasant conversation.

Way to do black and white stereotyping...

In this video Peterson makes closed off, single line of thinking statements.

I often see LIIs doing that. Wonder why.

[darya]

I'm not going off a stereotype just my own personal observations . I come from an Alpha/Delta family (with quite a few LIIs) and most of my friends throughout school were Alpha and this is genuinely what I noticed. Can't imagine an LII really being big on suffering through life and aiming your soul at something and profound meaning over happiness and all that. LIIs in the thread can let me know if I'm wrong though. @LIIs do you identify with how JP talks about the nature of life?

Not relating to Peterson's type, but dude, LII's are generally pretty serious and contemplating people. They are e5 majority of times, does that sound fluffy to you?

[Number 9 large]

He dislikes the fact that people don’t feel comfortable expressing their true feelings of suffering because of the demands for a happy atmosphere all the time.

This is obviously fi> fe valuing. Hes not a beta mate. Agree on the ni valuing tho. This makes him gamma nt

[The Reality Denialist]

He is not ILI. He is not gloomy. Better future and all that stuff with non ignoring . No sense of intricate and brilliant strategy. I can understand LIE >> ILI.

He has apparently been quite inventive as well with his practices. He also tries to guide people for better future with practical steps (like helping people to get jobs very hands on way) which is also very reminiscent of LIE's and not ILI's.

[Myst]

I'm not going off a stereotype just my own personal observations . I come from an Alpha/Delta family (with quite a few LIIs) and most of my friends throughout school were Alpha and this is genuinely what I noticed. Can't imagine an LII really being big on suffering through life and aiming your soul at something and profound meaning over happiness and all that. LIIs in the thread can let me know if I'm wrong though. @LIIs do you identify with how JP talks about the nature of life?

I agree with what @darya said. LIIs often take life seriously and are serious in mood a lot too. And often depressive too. Trying to find meaning and whatnot in life.

Overall I think anyone can pick a philosophy for various reasons.

@ 3:00: "Your pointing your eyes at it, your pointing your whole damn soul at it. Your aiming at something and you're trying to get your behaviours and perceptions in line and organized so that you can attain that aim. That's what people do: we throw rocks at things, we fire arrows at things, we shoot guns at things. We AIM at things. Our whole body is that platform for for aiming." <-- doesn't get anymore Ni/Se than that.

If only the bolded got left out of it... that to me was too removed. Whatever that says about his type. Intuitive type is no news anyway

He is not ILI. He is not gloomy. Better future and all that stuff with non ignoring . No sense of intricate and brilliant strategy. I can understand LIE >> ILI.

He has apparently been quite inventive as well with his practices. He also tries to guide people for better future with practical steps (like helping people to get jobs very hands on way) which is also very reminiscent of LIE's and not ILI's.

LIE is practical in a different way (more enterprising than philosophical), but it's good points about how it's not ILI either.

[Exodus]

@ 3:00: "Your pointing your eyes at it, your pointing your whole damn soul at it. Your aiming at something and you're trying to get your behaviours and perceptions in line and organized so that you can attain that aim. That's what people do: we throw rocks at things, we fire arrows at things, we shoot guns at things. We AIM at things. Our whole body is that platform for for aiming." <-- doesn't get anymore Ni/Se than that.

Yep.

Honestly LII isn't a terrible typing for him, it fits partially at least. But I have no idea who these LIIs are that @Myst is referring to, it's completely foreign to my experience (of me and other LIIs).

[Kill4Me]

The possibilities themselves don’t always have to be positive but there does need to be open possibilities. An ILE who doesn’t create open discussions with room for various possibilities or who doesn't want to explore different ideas at all isn’t an ILE.

Peterson is open to possibilities when it comes to making the same point through ten different arguments. When they say reason is a slave to the passions, it's also true that cognition in socionics is a slave to the passions.

It's key to distinguish between motivation and cognition. Let's take ILE 1s. Type 1 is an idealistic black and white thinker and believes they know the right way (a perfectionist); when unhealthy this idealism turns into a punitive drive to perfect the environment by removing what it perceives to be wrong. Say you have an ILE 1w2 that believes kids should be homeschooled due to his religious beliefs in combination with horrible life experiences in the public school department. His Ne/Ti will be adept at coming up with arguments that go against the conventional wisdom in favor of his belief that homeschooling is right. In debate, he will have an immediate sense for the possible imperfections in the arguments of an anti-home schooler. If he is an so/sp or sp/so, he may cognize possible avenues in the political realm to increase the opportunities for kids to be home-schooled. But nonetheless he stays closed off from ever changing his position that homeschooling is the right way.

It doesn't only have to be the motivation to be right. It could be the motivation to win. An ILE 3 attorney is motivated to win a case for his or her client. According to you, an ILE wouldn't make a good attorney because an attorney has to advocate for one side as if it's their own. Yet, ILEs make some of the best attorneys because Ne reflexively dismisses facts which don't cut in favor of their vision (which in the case of the ILE 3 is to win and be the best). If being the Best means not being open to other possibilities/arguments, then the ILE 3 will simply use their cognition in a more closed-off, black and white fashion.

All in all, the notion that Ne means not being able to choose one position over another is clearly not true. Even if they eliminate all possibilities save one, they are still embodying the possibility. Take an ILE 7w6 sp/so engineer who envisions a flying car and becomes obsessed with developing one. He will be open to numerous possibilities on how to design the flying car but he will hear no argument that it's not possible for cars to fly. Ivan Boesky is an example of an ILE-Ti 7w8. He singlemindedly pursued an accumulation of wealth through Machiavellian ploys. Ne/Ti merely gave him a cognition for the possible schemes that would allow him to subvert the rules of Wall Street but did not deter him from his drive to subvert the rules of Wall Street.

Ne cognition doesn't foreclose the ILE from being able to set themselves down on one end-point, it just opens up avenues for them to get to that end point that other extroverted types would not see. At the same point, it can lead them out into the middle of nowhere.

In this video Peterson makes closed off, single line of thinking statements. It’s like he’s saying this is how it is and this is the only way it is. He doesn’t leave room for discussion or any other options. It's very Ne ignoring. This kind of thinking (at worst) makes Ne valuers feel boxed in and depressed or (at best) they just find it boring. Ne discussions always have a certain level of ambiguity and openness for exploration.

That's just Ti-leading. Take note of what Gorky says about Ti as leading function in LII:

"very attached to his understanding of something, his thinking, his logic and concepts, confident and conservative in these. It is impossible to convince him otherwise, as he "lives" by this, but does not necessarily share his understanding with others. If his understanding does not converge with facts, then at times he will judge the facts to be of lower value. Any attempts at criticizing his understanding make him feel irritated. He knows how reason logically, but does not like to defend his vision of the situation: "Those who understood - understood, the rest don't have it in them". Thus he often surrounds himself with those who accept his logical judgments and who do not make attempts to dispute them. Changes his thinking with great difficultly and needs a lot of time to reflect on mistakes. Likes it when everything converges with the way he understands it. If this cannot be achieved - experiences irritation. Therefore, one can only persuade him using solid arguments. He is often skeptical of new information, if he is unsure in something: everything must be carefully weighed before saying "yes." His thinking is like a foundament - it is solid, something that can be "leaned on" in any situation, thus in this matter there cannot be any risks. It is difficult to require from them to immediately approve someone else's views. In general, he tries to understand everything first, and only then accept it for himself. If it is something he cannot understand, then mastering new information progresses slowly, since it is difficult to accept it for himself. Thus he can spend very long time learning something before utilizing it, even if the question is very simple."