What is the most important thing in life to you?
What is the least important thing in life to you?
What is the most important thing in life to you?
What is the least important thing in life to you?
I do, on both counts; although 1) I'm more likely to want to try and figure out my own plan rather than get help from books or whatever, or else read a self-help book and analyze the instructions to see if I can improve on them (usually by connecting to something else related I'd learned previously), and 2) more often than I'd like I lack the self-discipline to follow through on self-improvement plans.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
I have a very good understanding of what it means in MBTI (reliance on memory, past events, collected data, learned skills and principles, etc), but I don't know if it's the same in Socionics.
Ooh, that's a tough one. The most important thing in life for me, is probably success and living the good life. I wanna be rich, I want the finer things in life, and especially I want plenty of leisure time to enjoy it all. Secondary to that I want to be respected and admired, and I want to have good relations with people. I want good friends, love, and though it's not a major goal I would certainly not mind being famous.In particular though, I crave being surrounded by intelligent people I can have interesting conversations with. I can get along with pretty much anybody, but I prefer talking to fellow nerdlingers.
EDIT- Scratch that, wrong order. Correct order: 1) Intellectually stimulating social interaction, 2) good relations with people, 3) the good life (in the material sense), 4) leisure.
Least important thing? Hmm, probably the world's major problems, save where those problems put me or mine in jeopardy. The spotted tortoise (or w/e) can go fuck itself. :wink: I do have a strong theoretical interest in political theory, but in practice, lately I just don't give much of a shit.
Last edited by Aleksei; 06-13-2010 at 10:03 PM.
I like this guy. Can I claim him for my quadra?
Which one of the below do you value for you more then the other?
Fe -traditional values and morals, that which your parents or your family traditions have passed down to you
Fi -your personal values and morals, the things you have determined to be true for you, these may be drastically different from that of the tradition you come from.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Fi, most definitely.
ok so that is really high on your list; let's try the next one
Se -when in a room of "attractive" women do your eyes scan for the pretties
Si -when in a room of "attractive" women do your eyes scan for the one who you derive or can feel special sensation for and she may not be the prettiest.
Se -do you go for the prettiest person in the room
Si -do you value the special feelings you get from someone and how they make you feel
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Se
Without any exaggeration, I must say that the above description is the worst contrast of Fe and Fi I've ever seen.
Do you have a better one?
Take a coin and flip it. If the result is heads, pick Fe. If the result is tails, pick Fi.
The descriptions Maritsa has supplied you with could remotely work in an MBTI context, but they don't apply here. Put simply, Fi is the IM (function) of "relationships," in the sense of recognizing psychological distance and focusing on the status of a relationship with someone. (in a simplified manner, recognizing friend v. foe) By contrast, Fe is the function of "emotion" in the sense of recognizing the moods of others and stimulating the emotions of others.
Of course, that is a description of using either as a strong function. And Ethical ("F") type is strong in both Fi and Fe, while a Logical (T) type is weak in both, so the above description should help little.
The issue here is function value. A "T" type, someone with weak Ethics (note the capital letter; "Ethics" here merely refers to the function) values behavior in others that establishes their valued form of ethics in the environment.
I encourage you to read the wikisocion descriptions for the various functions. Function value comes in pairs. (IE: Te/Fi are always valued together, as are Ne/Si, Se/Ni, and Fe/Ti) For a contrast of behavior between Te/Fi and Fe/Ti valuing behavior, I recommend you read this page on wikisocion:
Judicious (Fe/Ti) and Decisive (Te/Fi)
Maritsa's egregious misrepresentations of Fe and Fi are simply too "off the mark" to point out every instance where they stray from the actual functions. It's simpler to point out a more correct understanding.
As Aiss pointed out, any "newbie" should be wary of Maritsa. She practices her own convoluted idealized version of Socionics, widely rejected by virtually everyone on this forum. One may read what she writes, but this must be held in the context that what she says carries virtually no weight regarding Socionics and should not be mixed with an actual understanding of the theory.
My sister, ESE, and I, EII, were raised in the same household, with the same values, traditions and morals. My parents are type ISTp and INTp and both are Fi valuing more then Fe; my sister, ESE, stuck to tradition, that Armenian women must marry Armenian men to have Armenian families and Armenian kids, and tradition....Fe valuing. I, however, developed my own personal values and judge new information to my own personal values and not Fe, which is the traditional values established in a culture or community. My personal values about Marriage that are different from that of my ESE sister's is that I marry the person I love, who provides me with Si and hopefully lots of it..lol (sorry!) and that the person can be from anywhere in the world as long as he's LSE type, my best fit...see how the two of us are so different?
Same with ******..he valued Fe, which is to say, a strict Arian race rather then his personal
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Aleksei, I feel that you may not be Alpha or Beta quad that you may instead be Gamma or Delta for sure.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
In either case, I'm sure my answer will not change. I'm very Fi. Can we move on, please?
EDIT: Thanks, Maritsa.
Yeah, going by that, I'm going have to move to delta.
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
Removed at User Request
Ahh, I see. Thanks.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
