Till Lindemann

[Rick]

Again, thread about Lindemann, not me or your ego. I consider this to be as much of a note of acceptance of your failure as you are capable of writing. When you at some point run into this problem again, it would probably be useful to concentrate on the following concepts: A person saying: "I will not start a fight but by goddamnit I'm going to finish it." What type does this represent to you? It is a direct rebuttal of the beta way of life, but it is violent. Do you realize that such people exist and that such people have to have a personality type? A person who uses violence and aggression for the sole purpose of removing the further use of such is not violent or aggressive by themselves. In your dreamworld this might be different as gaining truthful knowledge doesn't appear to be an important issue for you.

As for what I'm using, it's pure Te from my point of view, but I have no doubt that you will mistake it for Ti + Se. That is if you continue to use structural analysis instead of personality , strategic or contextual communication analysis.

Your "delta" seems to be a mixture of alpha and delta issues and you seem to ignorant of how people who are delta-gamma behave. You are not the measure of every group you belong in. The Si comfort that you seem to be fixated in, is created by doing work. This work is not pleasant in and of itself but doing this work and doing it well, is an integral part of being ESTj and thereby delta. The fact that it is other members of your quadra that work their asses off to create the candyass comfort and luxury you seem to expect seems to escape you, and you seem to equate me with things that disgust me. I find this annoying on a personal level, something which you may have understood from analyzing my words, if you're not completely oblivious, that is. I will not accept untruths and I will not accept foul play. I will not compromise my message for your comfort. This is not a beta message. Everyone who is angry and clearspoken is not using Ti + Se. You need to learn to differentiate. Anyway, I'll stop reading this thread, I've said what needed to be said and I can't see any more good coming from this. Bye again and thank you for your nice tone throughout this difficult conversation.

It was you, not me, who switched from discussing Lindemann to accusing me of various evil motives. I suppose by my "ego" you mean answering back to your condescending comments? Herzy will have an enjoyable read when she gets back to her thread.

I honestly can't understand what you're saying in your first paragraph.

In the second, as I suspected, you see that as Te. And, yes, I do see such statements as Se + Ti, and that is the crux of the disagreement. In my opinion, you have a systematic error in your basic definitions coming from your personal interpretation of the Reinin dichotomies. Maybe your system is internally consistent, but it does not mesh well with classical definitions which play out very well on the level of intertype interaction, which is where I am coming from.

"That is if you continue to use structural analysis instead of personality , strategic or contextual communication analysis. "

I don't understand your terms here.

"I will not compromise my message for your comfort. This is not a beta message."

Well, I think it is ("I will not adjust my Ti statements to satisfy your Si and Fi"). As is this one:

"The fact that it is other members of your quadra that work their asses off to create the candyass comfort and luxury you seem to expect seems to escape you, "

So I'm a "bad" Delta type because I expect people to adjust their self-expression to preserve comfort and good feelings? That is an interesting interpretation of Si and Fi quadra values.

"This work is not pleasant in and of itself but doing this work and doing it well, is an integral part of being ESTj and thereby delta."

A Delta value is that work SHOULD be pleasant (Te + Si), and that doing work that is unpleasant just because it is your responsibility or position in life is not an admirable quality. Some EIIs do think that, but even they ultimately seek greater comfort rather than ever-increasing challenges and burdens. When they do have to do unpleasant work, they seem morose and fate-stricken instead of rising to the challenge with confidence.

"I find this annoying on a personal level, something which you may have understood from analyzing my words, if you're not completely oblivious, that is."

I have been more focused on responding to your accusatory tone than thinking about your feelings.

Each person in this argument has been using his type-given arsenal and probably looks like a condescending ass to some other readers. Chalk it up to a vivid intertype demonstration, if you will.

[Phaedrus]

This is a very interesting and informative discussion. And I think that it's a good thing that some differences in understanding of the types are surfaced.

In the second, as I suspected, you see that as Te. And, yes, I do see such statements as Se + Ti, and that is the crux of the disagreement.

I agree. And I am also convinced that it is not + but probably . I have often a tendency to talk in a similar manner, and I have seen this way of talking most clearly manifested in types.

As I have expected quite some time now, there really seems to be something wrong your understanding of some of the types, Rick, and you are not alone on this forum in having those erroneous conceptions. It is not that easy to pinpoint exactly what the problem is, though. But this might be a good starting point.

In my opinion, you have a systematic error in your basic definitions coming from your personal interpretation of the Reinin dichotomies. Maybe your system is internally consistent, but it does not mesh well with classical definitions which play out very well on the level of intertype interaction, which is where I am coming from.

Sorry Rick, but that is not the real problem here. The real problem seems to be that your understanding of the classical definitions does not correspond with reality. The real types don't seem to act in accordance with your understanding of them, which in turn seems to lead to mistypings on your part. There have been more than one example in the past where that has been rather obvious.

It's hard to tell from my perspective exactly what kind of mistake(s) you are making, but at least you seem to have a clear tendency to see some aspects of as . And you also might have a tendency to see some aspects of as . Other people here seem to have the similar problems, for example Ezra (he's just a random example -- not the only one).

[Rick]

Yes, Phaedrus, I am well aware that I have had the same disagreements about Te vs. Ti with you, too, and I believe the reason is basically the same -- you are a Ti type parading as Te and adjusting your functional understanding to remove the systematic contradictions. The result of altering your functional understanding is that the proposed intertype relations become hopelessly mucked up, but you choose to turn a blind eye to that. Or, you change your understanding of all the functions to allow your real-life interactions to retain logical consistency, but then encounter serious problems when discussing socionics with people on the forum.

Just a brief demonstration -- I am 100% sure that other IEEs and EIIs on this forum would have the same aggressive reaction to the statements I cited as being Se + Ti, which you and Smilingeyes see as Te. In Russian language socionics these statements would be almost universally attributed to Se + Ti, which makes far more sense when their affect on different types is observed in real life. Some types take such statements as normal or as signs that the other person has gotten a little worked up, and that's perfectly fine -- they just need to be appeased a little bit. Other types take them as a personal attack and get very defensive or aggressive in return. If you look at how different types react, it would make no sense at all to call that Te. I almost never hear such things from LSEs and SLIs, and yet as soon as the SLEs and LSIs on this forum get a little worked up, these statements start coming out naturally.

Out of interest, Phaedrus, what do you think Lindemann's type is?

My other challenge is to provide a functional analysis of my argument with Smilingeyes and/or past ones with you that explains what about each person made the other angry.

[Smilingeyes]

The conversation seems to move on, so maybe I'll return for an afterpost, not to speak to Rick since he hardly reads what I write and certainly doesn't answer to any of it. As background information for anyone not yet knowing this, Rick typed me as an INFp some time ago and at that point he acted if that typing was obvious for anyone and everyone. This is habitual of him. Now he calls me Ti+Se because I use strong vocabulary. Whatever... As he is unable to actually analyze anything and only uses analysis to support decisions he has already made I can't really support his habits of typing.

In this thread he continues to talk about anything but the subject matter. That is because his position is that to talk about your private heartaches has the same imagery as inciting grand scale violence. That this is not true should be obvious to everyone, but probably isn't. I'm going away from the forum again for awhile soon, and will leave Rick here to do his demagoguery. I sleep well at night knowing I have done my best to give information. I doubt Rick can say the same.

I'll just leave you with the lyrics of Metallica and Rammstein's first singles. See if you just might be able to find a small difference in them?

Metallica
Late at night all systems go
You have come to see the show
We do our best You're the rest
You make it real you know
There is a feeling deep inside
That drives you fuckin' mad
A feeling of a hammerhead
You need it oh so bad

Adrenaline starts to flow
You're thrashing all around
Acting like a maniac
Whiplash

Bang your head against the stage
Like you never did before
Make it ring Make it bleed
Make it really sore
In a frenzied madness
with your leather and your spikes
Heads are bobbing all around
It is hot as hell tonight

Adrenaline starts to flow
You're thrashing all around
Acting like a maniac
Whiplash

Here on the stage the Marshal noise
is piercing through your ears
It kicks your ass kick your face
Exploding feeling nears
Now is the time to let it rip
To let it fuckin' loose
We are gathered here to im and kill
Cause this is what we choose

Adrenaline starts to flow
You're thrashing all around
Acting like a maniac
Whiplash

The show is through the metal is gone
It is time to hit the road
Another town Another gig
Again we will explode
Hotel rooms and motorways
Life out here is raw
But we will never stop
We will never quit
cause we are Metallica

Adrenaline starts to flow
You're thrashing all around
Acting like a maniac

....

And now Rammstein



Insanity
is only a narrow bridge
the banks are reason and desire
I'm after you
the sunlight confuses the mind
a blind child that crawls forward
because it smells its mother

I find you

The track is fresh and on the bridge
drops your sweat, your warm blood
I don't see you
I only smell you, I sense you
a predator that screams of hunger
I track you for miles by scent

You smell so good
you smell so good
I follow you
you smell so good
I find you
- so good
I'm after you
you smell so good
I will have you soon

Now I have you

I wait until it is dark
then I touch your wet skin
don't betray me
oh don't you see the bridge is burning
stop screaming and don't resist
because otherwise it will break apart

You smell so good
you smell so good
I follow you
you smell so good
I find you
- so good
I'm after you
you smell so good
I will have you soon

You smell so good
you smell so good
I follow you
you smell so good
I find you
- so good
I touch you
you smell so good
now I have you

You smell so good
you smell so good
I follow you

Both have ST imagery, but the first one is about a collective experience of thrashing violently in a group, the second one is an account of personal obsession to something that causes intense pleasure. Again, Rick's position is that these two issues describe the same type, his and 100% of his companions. Right. Good luck with that.

Rick's case builds on the following: 1) He reacts badly to Rammstein and he is delta so every delta must react badly to Rammstein.
2) Rammstein talks about difficult subjects using harsh vocabulary.
Everything else he has said is a repetition or another formulation of these.

To contradict this: I react badly to Metallica and I react well to Rammstein. I can not see much similarities at all.
Thus 1) is contradicted and 2) is much weaker evidence than everything I've brought forth. I doubt anything anyone says will actually make Rick become objective or admit his failure anymore than he already has but if someone else actually has a good case for claiming Rammstein as beta I'd like to hear it. As I said in the beginning I could see someone making a decent case for Lindemann being ESTp. It remains something I find possible but not without good evidence. And it is in my opinion proven as much as it can be proven that the imagery of the two bands is quite different.

As for musical analysis. Rick's case is that a repeating beat must be beta. This claim must then also be applied to techno, trance, house and such, also to tribal african rhytmic music and japanese taiko music. If you happen to have any experience of the techno scene of ... well any country that I know of, you will know that the scene is not beta rendering that suggestion null and void.

On a level of purpose, delta is not only about maximizing comfort, but also minimizing discomfort. Thus delta is not only interested in comfort but also in discomfort. Rammstein's music is about discomfort and attempts to purge it. It sings about subjects it generally opposes. Rick's mistake is in that he sees any talk of a subject as proponing that subject, he is shooting the messenger, equating the opposition to an action with the action itself. I personally am currently focused in minimizing discomfort around me. I do that by taking the most difficult tasks around me and trying to do them well, so that I would not have to repetitively be bothered by these issues. Comfort does not exist by its very nature, it is something that has to be created actively. I do a lot of work by day so that I can afford to be comfortable by evening. No doubt Rick will again try to paint this focusing on minimizing discomfort as some esoteric form of Ti+Se, but I will attempt not to care. For your own safety and I suggest you think about these issues thoroughly before choosing your opinion. I too am obviously blind to where I fail, so pming me about where if anywhere I went wrong would be viewed as a friendly action.

As for what made me angry in this thread: lying and misleading. This is easy. I dislike foul play. I also find Rick to be a bad ENFp in the sense that he isn't using much of his Fi and he is using Ti almost as much as he does Fi. What I say is naturally not pleasing to his Ti. Neither do I give out as much Si as he would like. There's the functional analysis of the events. I would also like to remind everyone that since Rick is only trying to prove that Rammstein is beta since he doesn't like it, that there are other factors than socionics that are also quite possible as explaining factors of why one doesn't like a certain musical sound or message. Good night to everyone, sleep tight.

[leckysupport]

I almost never hear such things from LSEs and SLIs, and yet as soon as the SLEs and LSIs on this forum get a little worked up, these statements start coming out naturally.

I've seen Delta STs (including myself) act out like smilingeyes just has in grass roots politicial movements. These movement usually include a lot of ass kissing, straight out lying and misrepresentation of ideas for political gain or for the sake of the movement.

I find these movements tend to be very heavy populated with Beta quadra members, even in a situation where the orginal ideal of the movement is a Delta conception Beta types always move in and make the waters mirky.

So if smilingeyes is a LSE and he sees you as someone horribly misrepresents the truth for your own gains (or a annoying Beta type) then yeah it makes sense.

Edit: Also there's a feeling of complete and utter blind delusion and following in these movements that tends to irritate me to the nth degree.

[Phaedrus]

Yes, Phaedrus, I am well aware that I have had the same disagreements about Te vs. Ti with you, too, and I believe the reason is basically the same -- you are a Ti type parading as Te and adjusting your functional understanding to remove the systematic contradictions.

If I would -- purely hypothetically -- seriously suggest that you are not an IEE but some other type, would you then take me seriously? Would you then seriously start to question the correctness of your self-typing as IEE? I strongly doubt that you would, and why should you? It doesn't make any sense, because you know that you are an IEE. Nothing anyone says could convince you that you were wrong, because you have already reached the point of no return. Your understanding of Socionics has become so solidified, that if you would start to doubt which type you are, you could as well start to doubt your mental sanity.

Then one could ask this question: Why should I take you seriously when you seriously suggest that I am not an ILI but a type? Does that makes more sense than the scenario I just described? If you really believe that, then why should I have a serious discussion with you? It would be degrading on my part to accept such a behaviour from you, a behaviour that I think could be correctly described as insulting. Now, since people often perceive what I say as insulting, even though I almost always do not intend to be insulting, I don't bother to much about such things. But the result is of course that I loose some of my respect for your intellectual capacity.

If we are going to have a serious discussion, where we both could potentially learn something new and advance our understanding of the types, then you simply must accept that I am an ILI without questioning it. You are not in a position to determine which type I am with any reliability, at least not nearly as accurately and reliably as I can do myself.

If your understanding of my behaviour does not match the fact that I am an ILI, then there must be something wrong with your interpretation of the situation, and you should be interested in trying to understand, without prejudices, why you perceive me as a type, despite the fact that I am an ILI.

We can both question each others typings of other people, but now it's time to stop this ridiculous questioning of the other person's type. If we can agree on that, Rick, then I think we could have a fruitful debate. If not ... well, then I can only hope that someone or something will open your eyes to the truth some day in the future. I can't force you to realize your mistake if you refuse to be open-minded.

Out of interest, Phaedrus, what do you think Lindemann's type is?

The truth is that I don't know anything about Lindemann. Right now I have no idea what type he is. I have zero knowledge about him and his music. If I would get to know more about him, maybe I would be able to form an opinion, but it is way to early for that.

[Park]

This thread reminds me of the time when Rick thought Matt Damon was ISTj, who is clearly a Te type in my opinion.

[Phaedrus]

You could learn a bunch of new things if you never questioned any of it, but there's no guarantee that any of it will be correct.

Do you have any idea how many times I have questioned my self-typing as ILI? Do you have any idea how many attempts I have made to falsify that hypothesis? Do you have any idea from how many different angles I have looked at the types, how many times I have tried to make the empiricial evidence fit other types than ILI? If you did, you would be feel embarrassed by your own post.

[marooned]

I don't understand why endurance and hardship would be delta "motifs" (as Smilingeyes mentioned). I wouldn't think hardship is really about any quadra... endurance seems to be more about Se/Ni quadras. For some reason I think delta (insert gross over-generalization) would be more likely to resist than to try to bide their time and endure... maybe I have something backwards.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I don't understand why endurance and hardship would be delta "motifs" (as Smilingeyes mentioned). I wouldn't think hardship is really about any quadra... endurance seems to be more about Se/Ni quadras. For some reason I think delta (insert gross over-generalization) would be more likely to resist than to try to bide their time and endure... maybe I have something backwards.

I see what you mean, but for whatever reason, I endure.

[Expat]

I don't understand why endurance and hardship would be delta "motifs" (as Smilingeyes mentioned). I wouldn't think hardship is really about any quadra... endurance seems to be more about Se/Ni quadras. For some reason I think delta (insert gross over-generalization) would be more likely to resist than to try to bide their time and endure... maybe I have something backwards.

It's not you who have it backwards.

The classical quadra mottos are:

Alpha: to reflect and delight in
Beta: to conquer despite suffering
Gamma: to prosper with your loved one
Delta: to protect and to help

Which is more like "endurance and hardship"?

[Phaedrus]

Stop making this all about you, you're so narcissistic that everything is twisted to be about you and your type, are you so deprived of attention?

Am I making this all about me!!? I am trying my very best to focus on other, more important things than my own type, but people insist on focusing on my type, and questioning the correctness of my self-typing. That's the only reason this is a problem. And the problem will disappear when people stop acting like idiots.

People should be allowed to think for themselves even if they come to different conclusions. What you are promoting is simply duckspeak, and as such I have no respect for you.

People who think that they are so smart that their judgment here is more worth than my many years of self-typing analyses, typings of others, empirical investigations, etc, and that they are entitled to seriously believe that they are correct about my type, and that I am wrong about it -- those people don't deserve my respect. If you don't understand that, you are a retard.

[Trevor]

LSE

He, Robert Mitchum and my dad make for a fantastic LSE trio.

[Rick]

...
We can both question each others typings of other people, but now it's time to stop this ridiculous questioning of the other person's type. ...

I understand your position and have nothing new to say on the topic. I'm not that interested in the types of forum members I have never met and only brought up my opinion because of what I see as a systematic misunderstanding of some functions on your part. If you ever get around to writing up your views on the subject or on what you see as my misunderstanding, I will take a look and comment on it.

I'm always open to the possibility that I let subjective emotions influence my typings of people, and I'm aware of the risk of branding someone I disagree with as a certain type, but at least some of these feelings are extremely useful for typing, and ideally we should be learning to separate non-type-related feelings and impressions from feelings and reactions that arise as a direct result of the kinds of information other people are emphasizing and giving us.

[Phaedrus]

I understand your position and have nothing new to say on the topic. I'm not that interested in the types of forum members I have never met and only brought up my opinion because of what I see as a systematic misunderstanding of some functions on your part. If you ever get around to writing up your views on the subject or on what you see as my misunderstanding, I will take a look and comment on it.

I'm always open to the possibility that I let subjective emotions influence my typings of people, and I'm aware of the risk of branding someone I disagree with as a certain type, but at least some of these feelings are extremely useful for typing, and ideally we should be learning to separate non-type-related feelings and impressions from feelings and reactions that arise as a direct result of the kinds of information other people are emphasizing and giving us.

As far as I know, you are rather convinced that Jonanathan is an ILI, isn't that correct? And if so, don't you pay any attention to the fact that I have been, right from the first post I ever saw from Jonathan some years ago, totally convinced that he and I are identicals. Despite our numerous critical examinations of possible mistypings, I still have an extremely clear sense of identity when I read his posts, I nearly always find that he is making the almost exactly same associations as I do, and there are never any misunderstandings between us as far as I can tell. I understand everything he says with almost perfect lucidity. How would that be likely, or even possible if I was, for example, an LII?

Reading tcaudilllg's posts is a totally different matter, and I really have to strain myself when I am having discussions with "LIIs". I strongly believe that all three of Jonathan, niffweed, and Jarno are ILIs, and that I am the same type as they are. Doesn't that count for something? How do you explain such "anomalies"?

[Rick]

...How do you explain such "anomalies"?

Each person is concerned first and foremost with his own set of perceived anomalies and, once he has found a suitable explanation for them, begins looking for explanations for other people's perceived anomalies that don't contradict his existing explanations.