Jesus is the cruel sausage
Is typing approach type related?
If the way we perceive reality is defined by our ego functions, this probably also applies to the way we type ourselves and other people. How do various types go about typing?
E.g. I think IEEs probably go through typing by comparing (moral) character traits with those traits from people they have experienced in the past, i.e. they use transference to get to an impression about an another person and then compare that impression to memories of previous encounters, and going through a process of identifying genus and differentia come to a conclusion about which person from the past this new encounter comes closest to. Thus the method is Ne and Ti based.
Possibly other types use transference as well, but they use other aspects in the process. But I don't know this for sure.
Last edited by consentingadult; 09-14-2016 at 11:49 AM.
The future of Socionics:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
Personally I think that the same data is there on the table for everyone to analyze and as much of it as possible should be used to come to the correct conclusion. We can't be selective about it. Each example/trait to information element connection observed should be synthesized into a stable argument also, as this invites peer review and helps the subject and other typists to understand why it is more or less likely that someone is a certain type.
Alternatively, take the 16types blood test like everyone else is doing. Just ship a vial of your blood and like, I dunno... $1500 (cash) or so to me at this totally legitimate address. I'll tell you your type from that. As a bonus, I'll even check for midi-chlorians!
On fire || Inspire
As a negativist type I often see what the person is not first. "Not an introtim", "No democracy", "Not a merry quadra" - this is the stream of comments in my head. I am particularly keen on determining the PoLR because it describes a field of shortcomings in that type's life, determining lack of logical function usage seems to be my strength. I am always very sure when I determine that XY is ethical. When I am unsure, they are usually logical.
A weird method I use is observing my own emotional reaction to the person. Se type - I smile. Te type - I am concentrated. And so on. I have to be careful not to fall for sympathy = compatible type. Gamma Fi favoritism problems. So how difference in values makes me contemplative, angry, desperate, that's what I keep an eye on.
As a Ni base type... I imagine what the person would do in this or that situation as well, aided by factual data by my creative to keep it reality-based.
Using my victimness, I also look for moments when I get startled by behaviour Being SX/SP I focus a lot of the affective component, synergies, how energies interact.
Being a victim type makes me prone to rely on doubt, which isn't as useless as it may seem.
My demonstrative always has a lot of fun without me even knowing it. Reading past typings I made, I sound like a robot using all sorts of categorization tools and deductions, that's Ti. Sometimes I make lists :3 I also keep an IRL one with Model A, dichotomy descriptions, enneagram info and function analyses. I sort of glued it together, creative subtype at work
V.I. - again, I have a checklist. My observation skills got better since my SLE professor for image analysis kicked my oblivious ass. Unsurprisingly, I can spot Se with ease. Body language... my attention span is too short, my mind starts to drift away quickly.
Irrationality - I improvise, create chaos, change my perspectives. The way I type is a paradoxically organised mess.