That's not a suggestion. Someone get recruiting, NAO.
That's not a suggestion. Someone get recruiting, NAO.
My ISTj brother thinks socionics is Nazi witchcraft or something. He refuses to talk about it on a rational level.
I know one LSI.
He'd have to go on rehab before coming here. Spends his days playing WoW.
LSI girls are quite possibly the sexiest creatures to ever walk the Earth tbh
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is and not
Seriously, I want more people to join, of all types. JOIN 16TYPES!!! Then POST!!!! WE WILL BE FRIENDLY I PROMISE UNLESS YOU ARE DUMB!!!!! EVEN IF YOU ARE WRONG, WE WILL BE NICE, AS LONG AS YOU ARE NOT STUBBORN ABOUT BEING WRONG!!!!
*dumb = do not agree with me.
*wrong = do not agree with me.
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
Ha, I know an LSI who I've made interested in socionics, but I've specifically warded him away from this forum. I think he's become attatched to socionics workshop because of it.
A bit funny, considering this topic.
Lol, someone told him to "shut up".
Removed at User Request
So how is an Ne type supposed to react to your random allegations that they are ISTj. To reject the suggestion is to behave exactly how you think an ISTj would. To accept it is to fuel your delusions. No matter what one does, one ends up affirming your beliefs. And this is how you posess an important property of the stubbornness you describe yourself.
Removed at User Request
Lol. On the contrary. I've been investigating the possibility for 5 years as I checked each possibility of what type I might be through the course of getting acquainted with socionics. How long do I have to be at this before I may "abruptly reject" any typing? Ten years? Twenty? There has been a person whose opinion I respected greatly at the time (smilingeyes) who suggested I might be ISTj (he had to use a "type change" model to defend the typing but anyway) and I have spent a great deal of time trying to "see myself as" ISTj from that point onwards, but after two more years the excercise just proved hopelessly futile. I liked the idea of being ISTj. There are advantages to being of that type. I had to tell myself I wasn't ISTj exactly because telling myself I had the positive traits of an ISTj took too much wishful thinking.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
The only "rules" I ever come close to "adhering to" are the ones I've devised for myself after reshaping and reinventing everything I had been given to fit my observations. And even these "rules" are under constant revision. You say I use formal rules, but formality requires a set of common agreements, something that can never apply to a personal set of heuristics. Your entire image of me is fictional.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
I'm at the point where I find it totally inconceivable for either of these things to happen. You might as well postulate for the world to change into a giant mango.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
Everybody does realize and accept it, except some crazy kook who has been known to make dubious typings in the past such as calling ArchonAlarion and Arctures ISTjs. You can't possibly think anything other than calling you deluded and wrong is the simplest way to explain what is going on. You also talk about evidence without ever having provided any.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
I may or may not do this, but if I ever did, the opinion of the rest of the forum would at least be as important as yours. We already know that you have strange ideas about what the ISTj type comprises. There is nothing preventing you from applying them falsely a second time, and it would mean nothing beyond an affirmation of your delusions if you did.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
Removed at User Request
I just want to say that typing people based on text alone is not enough to get the full picture of a person's type. You can only really suggest and let them figure out themselves after learning as much as possible and hearing all arguments from the people around them because of this. Unless videos are posted where the person is displaying what they feel is natural, the typings are a bit sketchy.
It's really the best way. If Labcoat thinks he's INTj after spending so much time and thought considering the theory, he probably is. I would say he's most likely a Ti subtype. Anyway, if you really want to know what his type is I suggest invading his privacy by sticking cameras in his place of residence and later putting the incriminating footage on the internet for all to enjoy at a later date. Everyone will rejoice. And besides, you want to see him naked, Pinocchio, so it's win-win for everyone.
I could do with as few LSI personally in my life as possible, no offense to those helpful LSI, but I've spent the last week working my tush off trying to run the new SYSTEM my LSI boss just installed. If he wasn't so super focused on (keeping it real -istic). I could come on and hear me complain about him draining my energy reserves. I need a dual right now...exhausted.
-
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
Removed at User Request
Removed at User Request
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. lol. That made me really happy. I've never liked Kara. and Katy Perry looked so hot while she totally destroyed her. I'm seriously going to have to revise my I-hate-katy-perry stance. Just because she can't actually sing and her first hit was a piece of three-braincell dreck that was obviously excreted by a mentally handicapped elephant, doesn't mean she's not still really hot, and therefore awesome.
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
I don't use the Reinin dichotomies. Period. Like I said: your image of me is fictional. I only occasionally use their labels as a means of communicating facts about the various type groups in socionics. Since it is impossible to rationally communicate anything without to some extent agreeing upon names, I fail to see how doing so reveals anything about the way I think.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
I am well read up on theories like Smilexian type change, tcaudilllg's political types, dimensionality, DCNH subtypes, dual types and Reinin. I consider much of what this claimed in these theories dubious if not simply wrong, but I still speak about them where this is relevant to the discussions on the forum, and spend a great deal of time considering how parts of the theories might still have merit. The only one towards which I manifest the attitude of considering the input wrong to the point of malicious and unsuitable even for casual reference is you.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
The difference is that Brilliand doesn't have theories that are to a significant extent materialized. Your view of him is wrong in that regard. His level of investment in socionics is not comparable to mine, nor is that of any other INTj on the forum here except tcaudilllg.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
They knew very well that there was a million things wrong with their situation. It just suited them to pretend otherwise. You mention of their predicament in relation to me is a non-sequitur.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
You are the "crazy kook" in my comment, Pinocchio. If all it takes is a random type challenge for someone's type to be in question, nobody's type is certain. Just about ever person on the forum has a Pinocchio or Marista type of person claiming they are something else. I am as close to unanimously called INTj as one can get on a forum like this.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
I'm bolding this so people can look at it and consider what this means to their assessment of your mental integrity. Myself I have no idea how to respond to this on a matching level of communication. Should I sqwawk, froth and squeal? Should I throw my computer out of the window? Should I burn the building I'm in down and stark kicking people in the streets? How am I supposed to keep up with you?Originally Posted by Pinocchio
The reason for this is that the person's "will" coincides with one of the strongest arguments in favor of any typing in socionics: the self typing. If a person spends years trying to figure out their type and come to decide on a typing, this is a significant indication of what type they really are.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
Removed at User Request
Removed at User Request
Retype them all, Pinocchio. You have my blessing.
What on earth makes you think the "functions" are any less artificial constructs than the dichotomies you mention? Neither of these has scientific, empirical backing, so one always ends up accepting them on the basis of a mixture of faith and personal observation. The two don't differ in this regard. The annoying thing here is that you're accusing me of dogmatism and stupidity when it is actually you that refuses to review all of the possibilities. Dichotomies, functions, it's all the same to me. I can work with both. You have the more restricted attitude.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
Again, I only behave this way towards you. The things you've said to me have made me to such an extent convinced of the malicious falsehood of your views that I'm left with no other option.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
It is an association that people have picked up on. I'm not the only one mentioning the two of you together these days. Pretty soon you're going to have to call the entire forum crazy to keep your worldview consistent.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
Any random person on the streets could eliminate 12 out of 16 of the types the instance they get acquainted with socionics in the most superficial way. In my case one of the eliminated types is ISTj.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
SQUAWK, FROTH, SQUEAL!! *rampages through city Godzilla style*Originally Posted by Pinocchio
You don't have a guarantee that your understanding of the theory is correct either, Pinocchio. This is where you make the fatal philosophical mistake of engaging in solipsism (believing you are special, like some kind of "god"). To test your own understanding of the theory the only option you have is to test it against that of others. Since the self typing is the easiest and first typing anyone ever makes, without which any other typing has no right of existence, these should be seen as bastions of understanding. The way to test your understanding of theory best is to try to accept as many selftypings as possible and adjust your view of the workings of the theory to these.Originally Posted by Pinocchio
Really?
I feel too serious, painstaking, routine and depressed to be SEI, lol.
I also tend to get suspicious and paranoid of people (can't fully trust 'em) and imagine worst case scenarios.
...I also can't have fun unless I get my school work out of the way. (can get really uptight) Is that an SEI trait?
This description fits me pretty well. http://www.bestfittype.com/istj.html
I wish typing was easier.
Last edited by Computer Loser; 07-01-2010 at 06:12 PM.
Removed at User Request
Removed at User Request
Yes, been there, done that. I've actually been reading socionics stuff/descriptions like crazy for the past year...Often in secret (and when I get into something I find interesting, I REALLY get into it).
I'm also basing my type from observing my relationships:
My INFp brother and friend tire me out (activity), My ESTp and I always have interesting conversations, can get things done (mirror). And I always find myself telling my ENFj friend, "don't worry, you got this." Oh, and I just ejaculated in my pants thinking of ENFj women, but maybe that is not type related.
My ex was an ENFp...We couldn't plan anything out together. I remember trying to plan a BBQ with her, that was the worst. Communication was horrible. Superficial play is as deep as it got. My ISTp roommate...Sometimes I view him as lazy, too lax. I think he sees me as too strict, textbook.
I remember the Keirsey description said that my ideal match was an ESFP...And I'm like helllllllllll nah, (those guys are too party party for me) so I turned to socionics.
But yeah...Maybe I'm just crazy and making stuff up in my head, but I typed myself pretty carefully.
Last edited by Computer Loser; 07-01-2010 at 08:01 PM.
Haha, well when it comes to natural disasters/tornados I don't freak out. Pshh what are the chances, right? It's mostly duties, obligations, and people that do. If I saw someone I was "close to" and that person didn't say hi to me, I'd think in my head, "dude, why isn't that guy/girl saying hi. what a douche."
Is your girlfriend super-competitive? :wink: