I'm bringing this up again, to a new range of people.
First theMime., then bee, now Kamajama.
I simply cannot see how a Four can be an SEI. And yet all of these people are adamant that they are Fours.
I'm bringing this up again, to a new range of people.
First theMime., then bee, now Kamajama.
I simply cannot see how a Four can be an SEI. And yet all of these people are adamant that they are Fours.
Everyone told me that, I don't really care. I am Bee. Should I care enough to prove it?
Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .
I have to agree with EZRA on this one. what stands about 4 is clearly an INtutitive type, and not an Sensory type. Even an ENXj has better chance of being 4 than SEI. All the problems assoicate with an 4 is their prone to fantasy part. How can an Dominant Sensor be like that? Also, their healthy level, their healthy cycle as well as problem are all assoicated with over indulgent of fantasy. I think MIME defend her E-types well about her being E-4. I dont know if BEE cares enough to know herself. and clearly KamaJama shows interest in him being a 4, but its confused with otehr types. Going back to MIME's type for a second, Maybe she is a E-type with an instinct combination that seem somewhat like a E-4? I can't say better than her as a thread about her E-type in socionix is very in depth explained by her.
Are you trolling Ezra?
A SEI is the stereotypical emo tortured artist type in socionics (some say that belongs to iei but poopie on those people), a 4 is the stereotyped emo tortured artist type in enneagram.
Now I don't mind stereotypical emo tortured artists. Some people can't stand them. I have no problem with them whatsoever as I enjoy how honest they are about their weaknesses. However they can remind people of weaknesses in themselves, something that types like 3s can't stand. (well only ones that aren't truly liberated which is most of them)
Nonsense. You have no idea what you're talking about. You are deluding this whole thing into fucking astrology. It's not much better than astrology granted, but it tries to be a lot more verifiable and testable than that.I have to agree with EZRA on this one. what stands about 4 is clearly an INtutitive type, and not an Sensory type.
(You're a cool guy numbers. And I hate to 'pull an Expat' on you here, but seriously- you're making no sense.)
A 4 is generally known as individualist (self-renewal, human-inspiring). They're not clearly an intuitive type, and they're only very 'clear' on certain complex detailed psychological processes that are usually explained quite poorly and crudely.
My ESFj mom is about as sensing as you can get yet fantasies way too much, and her behaviors and lifestyle show it. She's so hands on and showy yet insists on living this overly idealistic, tv show kind of life that's very stepford wives-ish. You can be very intuitive and still be logical, realistic and rational. It's not like all intuitors intuit off into some mystical blah-blah place.All the problems assoicate with an 4 is their prone to fantasy part. How can an Dominant Sensor be like that?
Also a fantasy isn't necessarily a problem, you have to take into account what a culture or society values. In typical American society, then yes fantasy is frowned upon however obviously not in all areas or all countries.
Please. Get a life.I think MIME defend her E-types well about her being E-4. I dont know if BEE cares enough to know herself. and clearly KamaJama shows interest in him being a 4, but its confused with otehr types. Going back to MIME's type for a second, Maybe she is a E-type with an instinct combination that seem somewhat like a E-4? I can't say better than her as a thread about her E-type in socionix is very in depth explained by her.
Ok people, looks like you better get out your drinking cups because I'm about to proclaim IEI again (but not really...)
Personally I think Fe subtype SEI can easily be 4w3. They tend more toward beta-isms anyway.
Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .
but truly, what are these beta-isms you speak of?
I shouldn't need to go into such detail, but I will.
When I was idk, in second grade, people stopped liking me. I was forced to think of myself as unique, simply because no one seemed to be like me, and it was like they didn't want to be like me, or something to that effect.
When I got into the puberty, I started liking girls, and the girls that I always fantasized about were the gothic, emo girls, which is a little strange for a socially retarded 13 year old. I didn't really want to be with them, rather I wanted to be like them, good-looking, and unique. You could say that emo kids aren't unique but rather they are conformist, but they look different and act different, you know? Which kinda explains my fascination with emo girls.
So that was my underlying theme, I was unique, and inside I was dying because I was kinda like everyone else in middle school. So when I went to high school, I attempted to be unique. I just seemed to be, so I just went with it. As of now, the idea of being just being like everyone else nearly makes me physically sick.
Idk, I'm not a 2 or 9 guys, and 4 makes a lot of sense to me.
D-SEI 9w1
This is me and my dual being scientific together
yeah SEI's can definitely be 4's
Fe ISFp - 4w3, 3w4
Si ISFp - 4w5, 5w4
Plus enneagram is only loosely correlated to socionics, so stfu.
The end is nigh
Hmm... different, but not socially so; perhaps different in work practices?
I think the SEI 4 might be related to DS, but there may be a difference between the SEI's +Ne and the SLI's -Ne... as in the SLI wouldn't be insecure about being different, but just know himself to be different (and be insecure instead about what that entails).
All guesswork, of course; does any of that resonate with you?
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
BulletsAndDoves, I am sorry. I must apologize to you for making bullshit claim in enneagram. Yea I dont know enough, or at least my opinion on this matter is different from you. So becuase I make a bullshit claim, I must now "get a life".
I hate to be rude. But it's like it's for your own good sometimes man. Seriously, life ain't all that complicated. Just arggggh. Y'all need to be shaken up a bit and stop analyzing shit that don't matter. It will just drive you insane.So becuase I make a bullshit claim, I must now "get a life".
LOL you are so pathetic, you are almost a fool to me, I read it the second time around and it is obivous that you anlayze things way too much you think your problem is also other people's problem. I think you need to clear your head, becuase mine is pretty empty.
Bjork: Si ISFp 5w4 sp/sx
The end is nigh
Thank you. "N" types are not more abstract, and "S" types are not more pragmatic; "T" types are not more logical, and "F" types are not more emotional -- for the last fucking time Plus, e-type is so much more deep-rooted and encompassing than any set of behavioral dichotomies or reductionistic traits assigned to cognitive tendencies, that correlations between socionics traits and enneagram traits are pointless. INFps are not 4s because they are dreamy romantics absorbed in their emotions; 4s are 4s because of a fixation on cultivating emotions and establishing an internal identity; INFps are INFps because their cognitions are wired to process information in a way that corresponds to a pattern labelled as "INFp" in a system. Sure, there are general frequency distributions between e-types and sociotypes, but anyone who claims to know or have proof of some direct neurological or psychological correlation between the two systems, is foolish.Originally Posted by BulletsandDoves
Oh, and ISFps can easily be 4s. Expel your bullshit stereotypes, people.
Yeah. I think 9w1 is a lot more likely than 5w4 for an Si-ISFp, and a fair amount of Fe-ISFps are 3w2s.
4w3-5w6-8w7
My experience with ISFPs has led me to believe the majority of them are 4s, especially of the Fe subtype. Although Si could be said to make ISFps a lot more "grounded" than the most blatantly four-leaning sociotype (INFp), that in no way makes them incapable of being 4s. Most of the arguments for ISFps being unable to be 4s are based on some supposed theoretical disconnect between an Si types's "pragmatism" with the "individualistic" nature of a 4. If you have ever met any ISFps, you'd probably realize that a lot of them are not into "pragmatism" all that much, and generally are much more concerned with things like beauty, love, dancing around their bedrooms, taking care of friends, etc. A lot of ISFps come across as very blatantly "emotional" people, and are frequently very sensitive and empathetic. This level of sensitivity, combined with a generally introverted attitude is a pretty good recipe for a 4. There is nothing inherently "intuitive" about being a 4.
Breakdown of ISFp Enneatypes (from my experience):
Fe-ISFp: 4w3 - 70%, 3 (of either wing) - 15%, 6w7 - 10%, 9w1 (maybe) - 5%
Si-ISFp: 9w1 - 65%, 4w5 - 30%, 5w4 (maybe) - 5%
Celebrity examples of ISFps with Enneatypes:
Fe:
4w3 - Kirsten Dunst, Paul McCartney, Regina Spektor, Monica Belluci
3w4 - Celine Dion, Hillary Duff
6w7 - Adam Sandler? (might be 4)
Si:
9w1 - Anne Hathaway, Alyson Hannigan, Adrian Grenier, 50 Cent, Kenny G
4w5 - Bjork, Beck, Amy Lee, Eliza Dushku, Andy Warhol
5w4 - Tilda Swinton?
JRiddy
—————King of Socionics—————
Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so
amazingly detailed discourse brother.
D-SEI 9w1
This is me and my dual being scientific together
yeah thats a good analysis Riddy.
I just hate how people try to de-abstractize Si, when Si combined with Fe is pretty damn abstract. ISFp's aren't just about baking cookies and being mom's
The end is nigh
I think imogen heap is a 4w5 or 5w4 sx/so Si ISFp
Btw Kam is a guy and my mom... so fuck you riddy
The end is nigh
All right, now let's talk about SLI 4s.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Originally Posted by Gilly
A Delta's abstract Ne would be more final than an Alpha's... in the sense of its decisions not being disturbed by anything else. If anything, it would disturb . So I suppose your being different might create insecurities in your understanding of people/relationships (as opposed to Alpha's insecurity about the difference itself as it relates to social life).
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
Thanks Brilliand.
I'm assuming you're not denying the possibility of an SLI being a 4, like many others would.
What would disturb ? Or did you mean to say that it ("Delta's abstract Ne") could be disturbed by ?
What I get from this is that a Delta (an SLI) wouldn't care about not fitting social norms (which would be an Fe/Ti concern?) and therefore will not regard their difference as a problem or something that needs to be fixed or feel bad about it, but instead, the SLI 4 will focus on getting people to see & accept them for who & what they are and can become insecure about their ability to maintain stable interpersonal contact and about their difference affecting this ability negatively. <-- Fi HA insecurities?
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Originally Posted by Gilly
Sorry, guys, I've lost interest in this thread almost as soon as a I started it.
I will say one thing though. I think SEIs will often try to make themselves stand out, but in a very different way to the Four. A Four will try, and will succeed. An SEI will try, and anyone with at least some common sense will catch on to exactly what they're doing.
lol
I don't think that's true either way. INFP's are not some 4 Gods who are masters at hiding their 4 fixation (if they are 4's). I find them to be just as (or not as) obvious as ISFp's.
And fuck that shit about standing out. I try and make myself standout and I usually succeed.
The point of the four fixation is that they've lost their identity and are trying to create one. So 4's can come across as "unique," but its more like that on the inside they are actually unique, but on the outside they are often fashionable conformists. Meaning that 4's try to hard and it ends up having the reverse affect. At least that can happen and I've seen it.
Now why can ISFp's (especially Fe subs) be 4's? Its pretty fucking simple
Ni/Fe - Internal dynamics of fields/Internal dynamics of objects
Si/Fe - External dynamics of fields/Internal dynamics of objects
So basically you are attributing being a 4 to Ni/Se. Well thats BS. I think being a 4 is more related to Fe and IP temerament if anything.
The end is nigh
Except an actual ISFp is a 9.
That is ridiculously unhelpful and also instigative
=)
The end is nigh
Hmm, well it seems that we're all going to end up agreeing to disagree, so I did mean it but at the same time I did think it was rather humourous given the "intense" discussions taking place.
Here's what I think: to be a 9 and to compare it to socionics; one needs to have an IP temperament and also be an F type (of course with IP temperament it will be an Fe type).
You don't necessarily have to have an IP temperament to be a 4, but the description does contain a lot of socionics intuitive correlations, and it's largely like an introvert.
I don't think an ISFp trying to find themselves is the same as an INFp trying to find themselves (or necessarily an intuitive type also) they usually know what they want and who they are but are unhappy perhaps that they don't have it (a partner they can limpit on to for instance).
So with a 9 being an IP temperament, an ethical description, ISFp's have got to be 9's. 4's have a lot of intuitive in their description, and ethical description and socionic introvert description so they are typically INFp's (but can sometimes be INFj's) INFp's with strong Fe subtype can also be 9's cause there's nothing really to contradict that, as opposed to ISFp's being 4's.
So there it is, i'm using what is basically classical socionics and real life observations to draw correlations. That you seem to say a lot that dichotomies don't exist, that ethical types are logical types or something (although when you say that I think you digress from socionics descriptions of these things) then I don't really see how anyone can reach a consensus. It's kinda like building the tower of Babel (babble) where everyone doesn't seem to be reading from the same hymn sheet in the same language to accomplish the same thing with no apparently useful translators, yar?
So I can equally say you're unhelpful
well what about the 9w1 INTj's and INFj's?
Once again this is an example of "ethical" and "intuitve", as Strrrng explained above, rearing their ugly heads and creating misconceptions. ISFp's are actually intuitive and abstract.
There is no direct correlation between enneagram and socionics because they are based on different parts of the psyche. Socionics is about passive input filters and the enneagram is about psychological fixations usually due to early childhood trauma.
Basically, this whole ISFp's can't be 4's is anti-Si bias.
The end is nigh
They don't exist. Ti doesn't fit in with a 9 description and Fi is too principled to be a 9.
I never read strrrng's post, he says much the same as you from past experience. If it was shorter I might have, but it's too long to read the same sort of thing for the X'th time. And nothing I have seen in theory or applying socionics irl disproves for me the socionic concept of logical and ethical. Dichotomies exist as two halves of a whole. That you can't acknowledge that, yet at the same time say that Si/Ne for instance are two halves of the same thing (or as I understand it, perhaps more appropriately you compare Si/Ni) is a result of paradoxical logic, to me it's Ti producing an outcome which is self contained and closed to Te. It just doesn't stack up with real life in my experience, nor does it stack up with socionics father Jung. Tower..of..Babel (again).Once again this is an example of "ethical" and "intuitve", as Strrrng explained above, rearing their ugly heads and creating misconceptions. ISFp's are actually intuitive and abstract.
Why not acknowledge Xi-Xe as a dichotomy also?
Well who's making claims now? Are you going to criticise yourself for being unhelpful like you did me?..There is no direct correlation between enneagram and socionics because they are based on different parts of the psyche. Socionics is about passive input filters and the enneagram is about psychological fixations usually due to early childhood trauma.
This lives in your own head. Anti-Si bias is the most stupid thing i've heard, and that you are saying it to me, an Si dominant, is preposterous.Basically, this whole ISFp's can't be 4's is anti-Si bias.
Last edited by Cyclops; 03-13-2009 at 02:59 PM. Reason: typo
I doubt you'll agree with this, but delta Si comes after Te in the quadra element cycle, whereas alpha Si is generated from Fe. So there are some differences between the quadras expression of shared elements.
Si is not just about comfort, relaxation, and health. Si is basically the physical/material version of Ni and shares its grand scope and abstractness.
So when you or others deny that Si is something other than silly, "lets work out and bake cookies" bullshit it pisses me off.
Frankly there is false stereotyping of every element, Si just being the one discussed here.
The end is nigh