intj based on your posts and picture.
intj based on your posts and picture.
Entp
ILE
Who just voted INFp and for what reasons?
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
Who's paranoid?Originally Posted by MysticSonic
From this test result, what would you conclude my type to be?
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/beta3test...205641240.html
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
It looks like a pretty clear TiNe type, except you are still a percieving type. I think that can be explained by the Braintypes theory, though. I remember Dmitri Lytov saying something like both the Logical-sensory Introverts and Sensory-logical Introverts test high on the judging scales, while both the Intuitive-ethical Extraverts and Ethical-intuitive Extraverts test high on the percieving scale. BrainTypes says the same thing in that some types are naturally more judging or perceiving than others, regardless of them being a J or P. Supposively, the J/P doesn't exist (in socionics or BrainTypes). Socionics does it by dominant function, whereas BrainTypes does it by Right/Left (brained). That's why I think both NiTe and TiNe types can test as percievers (because intuition is more closely realted to P, and sensing is more closely related to J).
Make snese, Mr. LII?
Try reading this. I've got a feeling the words will be pretty easy for you.
http://www.bartleby.com/173
Which implies, you're his type. (if my hypothesis holds good)
Yes, it is fairly easy for me to read, but I don't particularly buy into that idea; any justification for it being true? In other words, do you have any justification for the idea that text a can indicate type b?
If it's any help, the people on this board whose writing style I can most identify with and can most quickly comprehend is snowyc's and Cone's.
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
I tend to copy your writing style when I'm feeling analytical.
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
INTj - if you look at the global weakness and strength in functions sensing is your lowest possibly indicating a sensory PoLR and intuition and logic seem to be enduring a bit of competition against one another. Between those two points, I say socionics INTj.
MysticSonic,
I struggle with that book. The precision of expression, devoid of any pretense of "context", tends to become a slur of words with me wondering "what does that mean?" and "WHAT?" Only through intense concentration and "assimilation" to the style of thinking that produced the text am I able to make any sense of it. I have made sense of the book's material, but only through many hours of very intensely focused study. I studied the book so hard I even found a flaw in its explained connotation between light and gravity. (which does not at all interfere with actual tenant of the theory, I learned only much later) So to say, although his descriptions work well for light as a wave, they don't explain light as particles that simply zoom from one atom to the next at c, or why light in that form would behave the same under the circumstances of the experiments. I found only much later that the theory does indeed account for light in that form, too, through a book written by someone else. (and no, I couldn't make any sense of the mathematics past the first few chapters)
As an INTJ, I can skim through the scientific journal of James Clerk Maxwell, and the work of Planke is no stranger to me. But the book at that link taught me to think at a higher level, and by no means was it easy. If you can skim its text, then there is no question you are his type: INTx.
I'm rather surprised actually. It was evident that you weren't an INTJ to me from the start, but the freeness of your expression left me with no impression you could be an INTx.
If you can read that book easily, then you must experience a cross between judgement and perception, at least. That's all I can tell you... and here's why:
If it is possible for traits to be crossed at the perception/judgement level, then the door is open for them to be crossed at other levels, also. (E with I, S with N, T with F) In particular, the cross between T and F is possible, and this would entail an ability to notice the logical consequences of emotionally-oriented action, and the emotional consequences of logically-based action. "Either way I go, someone is going to get hurt", "You're damned if you do, damned if you don't". These are statements that people who solidly prefer either T or F, but not both, don't make. The logical conclusion is always better than the emotional one, and vice versa; that's how most people think. But this select subgroup, if it exists, doesn't see either option as better than the other in their subjective experience. So they are more likely to consciously choose the choices that benefit them. Instant gratification is a way of life for them, whatever their other traits may be. Over time, "instant gratification" as a motivator tends to draw these individuals away from the rest psychologically. They act deviantly both socially and as a way of thought. We would recognize this behavior as inline with many DSVM disorders, particular antisocial-personality disorder, psychopathy, and even psychosis.
After treatment, do these disorders decline in the personality, or does the ego simply create relatively (as in, relative to most of us) arcane contortions of logic and values to preserve itself in the face of punishment? What if you could look at a person, and tell they were psychotic, or psychopathological? Ever wonder why Nancy Grace hasn't lost a case, or why she's so much of a "character" on TV?
http://www.okcupid.com/profile?tuid=...30161189943446
Notice the resemblance?
What if you could argue that the prosecutor who argued against you in court was a psychotic, despite a very good professional record on the part of the prosecutor? What if you could attack a political candidate, or even a House Speaker, for the same reason? How would the revelation that psychosis is related to how a person looks, if it were true, be handled by the media, by society in general?
The consequences are enormous. Cross type holds so many keys to so many mysteries in history, it's baffling. And the deeper you explore the concept, the more comes brilliantly, penultimately to light. Do you think such a profound, consequential theory would make it out of a psychoanalytic school? I'd like to see it tried.
You should note that by "fairly easily" I meant "after I read one of the sentences about three times." Isn't that what one would consider a "fairly easy" philosophical text?
"I'm rather surprised actually. It was evident that you weren't an INTJ to me from the start, but the freeness of your expression left me with no impression you could be an INTx. "
Freeness of my expression? What do you mean by this? The way in which my thoughts manifest themself; are you saying as if they appear to rise through free-association rather than through means such as deduction and whatnot?
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
.. exactly what I thought..If you can skim its text, then there is no question you are his type: INTx.
I'm rather surprised actually. It was evident that you weren't an INTJ to me from the start, but the freeness of your expression left me with no impression you could be an INTx.
As for cross-dominant J/P, how about this. I think you know that most of the time, most people try to solve a problem with only one hemispere of their brain. If it is true that the right brain is the more Perceiving one, and the left brain is the more Judging one, AND some people are actually crossed between their J and P traits, then wouldn't you think that the cross-dominant types are actually just people who tend to use both sides of their brain, simultaneuously, without having to pick one over the other? At least most of the time? This would lead to a lot of cross traits, such as an NiTe type (Einstein) showing a lot of heavy Ne and Ti as well.
Well, then maybe you are an INTJ, and not an INTX.
I still haven't heard much about INTJs that like doing math, though.
LOL
I hate math!
I like Physics and Geometry, however.
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
So are you implying that a crossed-T/F person holds NO judgment whatsoever? Or rather, no NET judgment? So I would expect "instant gratification" to result from a choice depending on complete self-absorbed benefit, i.e. this person is 100% self-centered and makes all decisions based on self-centered thinking, somewhat like a preoperational child?
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
BTW, I can relate to Jung's writing well, but not so much with Einstien. But, how many people can you honestly say, read through the theory of relativitey the first time and fully get it? You know what, my dad is an ILI, I wonder what he would think about that...
Yes, that is exactly what the T/F person experiences. In Freudian terms, the id holds complete dominance over the ego. Very impulsive, very self-destructive. However, the rate of self-destruction varies depending upon the alignment of the other conscious forces in the personality.So are you implying that a crossed-T/F person holds NO judgment whatsoever? Or rather, no NET judgment? So I would expect "instant gratification" to result from a choice depending on complete self-absorbed benefit, i.e. this person is 100% self-centered and makes all decisions based on self-centered thinking, somewhat like a preoperational child?
Through experience and treatment, the nihillistic urge may be subjectively contained by the ego, although "recovery" may never be full because the personality was never "damaged" in the first place.
Codominant rationals have a distinct "warped" countenance in their faces. Their meer presence may radiate uncertainty and even fear amongst their peers. Most dangerous of all are those individuals who experience crosses in the rational and meaningful dimensions of their personality, to whom we owe the gratitude of the great atrocities that permeat our history. They are forces of ill-tidings that often look for help and often they get it, and learn to lead semi-normal lives. (nothing is ever "normal" around them) But invariably some fall through the cracks, and we're usually the worst for it.
A friend of mine who tests xNxx describes "hope for the future coupled with a toppling nihillism." She predicts the eventual triumph of one of the two, and she says she's "rooting for the former".
I'd say that's bizzare, for a genius to realize their own destiny, in a sense, long before they actually experience it. But apparently it's quite common.
Updated general consensus?
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
You remind me of me half of the time.
Yet somehow, you scream INTj.
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
INTj. I can't see INFp at all, btw.
What you mentioned about INTjs... is that really a type thing? Do other types like INTp do that too (besides ENTp of course)?
Uh, that's really, really old information loaded with enmity. It would be best if you ignored it.
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
Are you claiming that it is biased so it might not be true or that you don't want to say something offensive? Those are my best guesses as to what you meant.
Gah, I am really sorry. It really bothers me that sometimes I can't even understand (or be sure that I understood) a simple sentence because the meaning is tied to how emotions (or things that is trivial to people in general but just not to me) really work. What are the implications of a piece of information that is loaded with enmity?
Well, often times I use the wrong words anyway.
What I meant is that the paragraph shows how my enmity toward specific people is generalized to the entire type they embody. So I am stereotyping.
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
MS you are a TiTi.
Why is this on the front page? This topic contains so much inaccurate information about me.
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote