Quote Originally Posted by Transigent
I don't know if it is obvious to anyone else Woodie, but you seem to choose a type for yourself and then "innocently" interpret things your own way to arrive at your already expected conclusion.
Well, I'm just trying to construct an argument and see if it holds the test of time (or something). But yes the approach is: choose a type, build an argument, start a discussion, after discussion decide whether the argument still stands or not. This can be done for maybe 6 types at the moment. But not to others. For example I can't build a case for ENTj.

Quote Originally Posted by Transigent
The only way to really know your type is to see how you relate to others, and that is a little beyond the scope of what anybody here can really know for certain.
True. But I try to be honest when talking about my relations as I perceive them. And of course how I relate here to others have some meaning. But I'm working on this in real life too. You can almost call it a hobby Problem being I don't have too many friends interested in socionics (I try to involve couple of people and sometimes my wife but they are not interested enough to get really involved) so I can't know their types for sure (and I may perceive our relationship wrongly) which means I can't trust my real life interpretations 100%. I'm more likely to be discouraged one way or another by the possible interpretations of my real life observations if I do them alone which kind of sucks I guess I have to meet some socionist face to face or something to get to the bottom of this.

But I'm positive. I'm making progress and I'm down to about 6 types for sure.