I've typed T.E. Lawrence and Hunter S. Thompson as ENFj. Patton is a very clear ESTp in my opinion, especially in the film portrayal.
I've typed T.E. Lawrence and Hunter S. Thompson as ENFj. Patton is a very clear ESTp in my opinion, especially in the film portrayal.
Patton: "any plan that is excecuted violently and immediately beats a perfect one that is delayed".
ESTp mentality in a nutshell.
How do you end up mentioning him twice in the Se section when his Se is supposed to be "weak"?
The simpler explanation is that he just made Se-ish statements a lot, and made them convicingly to the point he got remember for them. And the simplest explanation of this is that Se was a very strong function to him rather than just something valued but weak.
Removed at User Request
The suggestion that an ESTj would be more likely to resort to a brute force approach than an ESTp is beyond ridiculous and completely removed from anything that has ever been said about the two types.I disagree, I think that's Ej, not only that SLEs are thoughtful and tactical, IMO, but it's dishonorable for them to base their success on brute force.
Removed at User Request
None of what you quoted even adresses the issue.
This
not too sure on Thompson but from what I've read Beta something makes sense
EII INFj
Forum status: retired
more
Holy crap that's a lot of quotes hahaha
How long have you been collecting those?
I am delighted.
I think you have a very different perspective of the IE's than that in Model A...
EII INFj
Forum status: retired
I'd like an explanation too, at least on the ones. and many of the ones seem clear, but the others could use some commentary.
There's a lot of things I'm confused about in this (and thereby the rest of this thread).These are some quotes compiled over time from people I found interesting in the process of typing them. Selected statements are those I felt demonstrated something that could give insight into "what a function is really like"—something to illustrate the way that individual experiences the world, what the associated thought and emotional processes of that function are in various positions of the psyche (1/2/5/6), its shapes one's motivations and overall outlooks on life, etc.
None of these statements should be considered 'pure' expressions of isolated functions. Real world manifestations of any apparent function in someone will always be colored in part by the other valued functions present in their psyche. Its expected that some statements will be suggestive of 2 or even 3 valued functions simultaneously; I picked the one that seemed most primary to the statement.
I'm not sure what you are referring to when you use some words. Perhaps you can add clarity to the following things I bring up below...
The first thing I was going to say was that the title and nature of the thread may benefit from you saying "These are Ashton's personal take on IM semantics" or something designating more clearly your own subjectivity. The first two paragraphs do that I suppose, but, it could be done more forcefully. I say this because, (especially when it comes to Semantics), those are subjective things. People's memories and associations, dennotations of words, phrases, and people, are all very different. Who an individual is, or what a word resonates within someone, those are very different things, and I believe they would influence something so delicate as semantics. It's good that you acknowledge that quotations should not be considered pure functions (elements?)
The second item is your use of the terms functions and elements. I'm on a small campaign against people using "function" when they mean information element. The actual link of this thread, and its title, references information elements - Fi Fe Te Se and so on. But you are saying, mostly(?) the word functions. Is that intentional, or do you not see a difference between the two things? I interpret function as being the actual "slot" the element is in; according to whatever model you are using. A function can be "valued" in the sense that any kind of element in that function is valued (if, say, the function is one's dominant function). Similarly, an information element in and of itself is only considered valued or unvalued depending on what functional slot it is located at.
Suggestion: you indicate that some quotes may contain various functions (elements?) at work, and I can agree with that. Maybe you could list some of the the elements that you see being valued or unvalued - I often see phrases as indicating "valued XX but unvalued XX". That may take more work, especially in creating or identifying context surrounding a quote or the personal disposition and inclinations, however.
The third item is, of course, related to the others: What is the model you are using? I remember you having various issues with socionics models in the past, and I don't know if you still have one you prefer or not, or what you are in reference to. I thought up several jokes about this point that have to do with your current signature and how all models are limited. Undoubtedly, some of your answers to the other items I brought up are related to your disposition towards socionic models.
Yes, I agree. Although I still am unsure about things, see above.Note to morons: Valuing a function vs. using it as an ego function are two different things. Don't confuse them.
Ashton, with your Fi quotes, you often mistake the Fi activators for ego block holders. They would essentially sound the same in certain situations or sayings.
-
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
-
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
-
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
“I'm a supporter of gay rights." SeTi (there's no Fi here what so ever) It's based on action only "I run; I support" etc.
"I feel that it's important to support gay rights." FiNe because it notes values/ideal -it's important to me so it should be that way to everyone -universal application of my singular idea.
"And not a closet supporter either." SeTi (again no Fi and no emphasis on how that makes him feel as a person, as an individual with ideals; it's just an action based statement).
ETC...analyze the rest... Look for should's, ought to's, feelings, feeling of ideals and relationship bonds,
From the time I was a kid, I have never been able to understand attacks upon the gay community. There are so many qualities that make up a human being… by the time I get through with all the things that I really admire about people, what they do with their private parts is probably so low on the list that it is irrelevant.” –Paul Newman (Fi-ESFp)
-
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
(γ) lol a butt
y thank u
i lost my shirt that had that image on it. i don't know what happened to it. i'm very upset by this, it was my favorite shirt from that collection. now i guess my favorite is the bastiat economic harmonies shirt.
though i also like nock's because it's similar "our enemy, the state".
That exchange was so retarded.
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.
Perhaps that's just the SEE's job in gammaland.
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.