Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: common mistypings (based on intertype relations)

  1. #1
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default common mistypings (based on intertype relations)

    Is it common to mistake your benefactor for your identical?
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  2. #2
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,626
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    More likely beneficiary IME.

    edit: I just thought of a benefactor example. All of this probably doesn't mean much.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i don't think it's at all probable that it would be any more likely to subjectively type/mistype someone based on asymmetrical relations; for example if forum history and personal experience are any indication, the benefit pair of LIEs and SLEs often appear similar to each other and can be difficult to distinguish, but an LIE is often going to look much more like an SLE than an IEE, while an SLE is probably more apt to seem like an LIE than his own beneficiary.

  4. #4
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What about subtypes though? I would think that an intuitive subtype ENTj would seem more like an intuitive subtype ENFp than an ESTp of either subtype.

    Also, it's not about types seeming similar to others, it's about someone meeting someone else and thinking that they're similar. It makes more sense to me that one would mistakenly think they're similar to their benefactor than to their beneficiary. For example, I would expect ESTps to be more likely to mistakenly think they're similar to an ENTj than mistakenly think that they're similar to an ESFj.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  5. #5
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,626
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think it has to do with the use of the HA (accounting for personal typing biases, of course).

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    What about subtypes though? I would think that an intuitive subtype ENTj would seem more like an intuitive subtype ENFp than an ESTp of either subtype.
    disagree.

    Also, it's not about types seeming similar to others, it's about someone meeting someone else and thinking that they're similar. It makes more sense to me that one would mistakenly think they're similar to their benefactor than to their beneficiary. For example, I would expect ESTps to be more likely to mistakenly think they're similar to an ENTj than mistakenly think that they're similar to an ESFj.
    i would say so, but otoh i would also expect an ENTj to mistakenly think ESTp over ENFp. ENTjs and ESTps alike would probably have difficulty associating themselves as ethical types of any kind.

  7. #7
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    i would say so, but otoh i would also expect an ENTj to mistakenly think ESTp over ENFp. ENTjs and ESTps alike would probably have difficulty associating themselves as ethical types of any kind.
    Yes, I think in most cases that's probably right.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  8. #8
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    More likely beneficiary
    yes, that's how i think about it too.


    beneficiary looks like your identical because you notice that you have some kind of spiritual connection. That's probably the reason for the mistake.

  9. #9
    Khamelion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    U.S.
    TIM
    SEE-Fi 6w7 sx/so
    Posts
    3,828
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    What about subtypes though? I would think that an intuitive subtype ENTj would seem more like an intuitive subtype ENFp than an ESTp of either subtype.

    Also, it's not about types seeming similar to others, it's about someone meeting someone else and thinking that they're similar. It makes more sense to me that one would mistakenly think they're similar to their benefactor than to their beneficiary. For example, I would expect ESTps to be more likely to mistakenly think they're similar to an ENTj than mistakenly think that they're similar to an ESFj.

    The benefactor could easily think they are similar to their beneficiary. Probably in several ways, but the one I think of is they see bits of themselves in this person and therefore feel they have something to offer, to make them MORE like themselves (the benefactor).
    SEE Unknown Subtype
    6w7 sx/so



    [21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
    [21:29] hitta: and not dying
    .

  10. #10
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, I think a person of any type could mistake themselves as being somehow similar to another person of any other type, depending on other factors involved and how well they know each other. There's more to a person than information metabolism, after all.

    (Notice I didn't say "any type could mistake themselves for any other type".)
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •