Xox's type, and Grek0s
After some level of linguistic analysis, I'm concluding that Xox is INTp-INTj. Futher, I conclude that Grek0 is INTj-INTp, especially after considering his stance on ENFps as expressed in the latest "ENFp/INFp - how to distinguish" thread; particularly his reference that they "are the ones who don't shut up."
I was wondering if you factor knowledge of socionics in to your type analysis?
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Not at all. Remember INTjs are like to pressure ENFps to be quiet because they tend to use us as a reservoir of absolute certitude... surely you've experenced this?Originally Posted by UDP III
I also did some linguistic analysis. Check it for yourself.
Re: Xox's type, and Grek0s
Interesting claim. However would you elaborate further on what INTp-INTj and INTj-INTp mean? Does this mean socionics and MBTi types (and if so then which is which?) or is it related to crosstypes?
Re: Xox's type, and Grek0s
I still don't know where I can read about your types and the differences between them. What is the difference between an INTp-INTj and an INTj-INTp? And what do you think about other INTps and/or INTjs on this forum?
Re: Xox's type, and Grek0s
So apparently INTp-INTj and INTj-INTp are crosstype concepts? Since when have INTx type been split to two different types? This would be a good place to elaborate further on the issue.I still don't know where I can read about your types and the differences between them. What is the difference between an INTp-INTj and an INTj-INTp? And what do you think about other INTps and/or INTjs on this forum?
This thread discusses it.
oldforumlinkviewtopic.php?t=9865
Everything you've heard about crosstypes before now, forget it. In fact, don't even look at the crosstype information on my psychorelativity site. (unless you look at the "new model" thread) The MBTI-Jungian approach has been superseded in favor of compatibility with socionics.
Basically, what goes on in your head and what you set your energy towards doing, while related, are not necessarily similar type-wise. People are not "1 type" but two. Similarly, pure relations are rare; the norm is to experience a relations that sets the stage for the experience of another relation, which in turn leads back into the first.
So although the two of you will never have a hope of understanding each other from a subjective standpoint, that doesn't mean you can't come to a common understanding with all of your respective quasi-identicals.
I assume you can be a crosstype of more than two types? E.g. a cross type of let's say seven different types? I guess XXXx is somekind of crosstype of all types. Are there some limits how crosstypes are formed i.e. is it possible to be a crosstype of a randomly selected group of types or are there some rules which restrict that some group of types can't form a crosstype?
I can hear the wheels turning.
If everyone is a crosstype (two types), and XoX is an INTp-INTj, then I must be an INTp-INTj too, mustn't I -- unless the claims made by those who see me as an INTj are even more unfounded?
XoX, Niffweed, me, you, we all span the quadras. Then everything is solved.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote