"Relational"...not "rational"?Originally Posted by Maritsa33
"Relational"...not "rational"?
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...overted_ethics
Ok, I give up maybe I'm just too tired for tonight.
-
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
Her next sentence talks about people interacting based on a commonality.
Fe does observe the group emotional environment; that is what Alpha supports; Delta is more individual.
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...e=Alpha_Quadra
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
She,s referring to individuals interacting with other individuals that they would not normally interact with.
The term "people" can be confusing this way as it can both refer to a group as one entity, or as many individuals (plural form thing).
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
But she's not talking about her own interaction, her own subjective addimixture; she's just observing the emotional interactions and what that's creating.
Object A interacts with B interacts with C creating this emotional environment; it's not I interact with B and observe my emotions about B
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
Also from that site: http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...overted_ethics
Introverted ethics () is an introverted, rational, and static information element. It is also called Fi, R, relational ethics, or white ethics
See all that focus on relationships with others based on both people's emotions??
And that,s only the beginning of the Fi relational descriptions.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
The benefit of Delta Ne is that it allows a person to step out of their own emotions, their own values/judgments and step into someone else,s. This is part of the process of empathizing. Being able to see, feel, and experience things as the other person sees, feels, and experiences it.
It,s also an abstract way of talking about all this...another thing that Ne helps with...(it being an element that deals with abstracts).
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
yes, so? That's not what she's doing. She's completely focusing on how others are interacting with me; she's not empathizing with me and saying again "I feel for you" She's describing how others are emotionally interacting within that circle.
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
Why the fuck would she empathize with you?? You don't care about anyone else,s emotions but your own. You're expecting something from her that you won't/don't do yourself!!
Yes, she focused on how others interacted with you...their relational distance to you..and their relational closeness to others because of you. Fi. Fi. Fi. Read the fucking page about Fi's relational ethics that I linked you to.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
You interact with Jedi, that creates a relationship right? You get feelings from your interaction with Jedi. That's you and how you feel about Jedi. I can see that and say, "yeah, those two must really like each other." based on certain clues like laughing, hugging, etc, and making a judgement, in my mind because I'm making a value judgement for my morality of what's going on between you two and say that's good, "that interaction is really nice, good, and ideal." She sees you, Jedi, and I interact and she looks at what feelings are bouncing off of one another Feelings like trust; she makes no personal subjective value/moral judgements for her own self derived from our personal interaction but observes that of others when others express it. If we change the emotional atmosphere to fun, she will see it as fun.
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
She's still not doing Fi. She's not doing relational stuff with her and someone else she's just observing the emotional atmosphere between people. She sees how we are interacting...not our subjective like of one another.
(dynamic) perceives how objects are interacting on an emotional level. One and the same object can interact very different with a stable set of other objects depending on a variety of factors.
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
She doesn't have to include her own emotions/values/judgments because SHE is capable of abstracting from them and what she reads that others wrote. Also her values showed implicitly. (NFs deal with implicit info)
You insist that the personal emotions must always be explicitely included because YOU have difficulty abstracting from them. (socionics' SFs have similar issues regarding abstracting away from their personal experience)
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
One is subjective Fi; within the person's own emotions; takes time to see how the personal relationship develops emotionally.
One is objective Fe; can be quick because all you're doing is looking at what's going on. All she needs to do is look at us interacts. Internally, she has no idea how I feel about you or how you feel about me because that's not what she looks for.
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
Everything but the first sentence (and that "" ending sentence...which was quoting a saying regarding emotional profit...a Te saying actually) were dealing with the relational distance/closeness of people towards you and towards each other. (People meaning plural individuals, not a group.) She was basically saying that some individuals like each other because the other person dislikes you.She's still not doing Fi. She's not doing relational stuff with her and someone else she's just observing the emotional atmosphere between people. She sees how we are interacting...not our subjective like of one another.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
YES she does; otherwise she's doing objective Fe looking at the atmosphere and saying what's going on.
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
YOU're the one who "failed" a freaking online IQ test!!
It doesn't require Fe to read people arguing with you, you being a bitch to anyone who won't conform to your demands, nor reading when individuals say that they don,t like you!! All that,s required is basic reading comprehension...ANY type can do this...just not YOU!
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
And now i guess we've reached the point where we go back and forth saying "yes she does", "no she doesn,t".
Good night maritsa. i hope your health improves.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Why can't you understand that when you talk to someone you're trying to determine your own likes and dislikes; when she does in that post she's not talking about her likes and dislikes; she's talking about what she perceives dynamically between myself and others and that doesn't make it Fi because it doesn't involve her own subjective feelings about me, you or anyone else; why can't you understand the things I say to you...gosh darn it.
Just go on ignore permanently.
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
Because you're flat out wrong!
And because you can't...or don't bother trying to...comprehend anything anyone other than you says.
Which means not only can't you comprehend what I'm saying...but you can't comprehend what she was saying/did.
[/login]
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Because you want so bad to see that there are subjective interpretations in that paragraph when there aren't any. Look at that Wiki list again on Fi common sayings.
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
Ahhh unfortunately I'm in a hurry so I can't contribute much to this thread yet, but I think you should include the whole post in here and not just a few sentences that are out of context. Now that I look at it I think it's a textbook example of delta NF analysis. There is empathy there, too, even towards you. Why did you remove the first sentence from the paragraph you were quoting, btw?
This is the post I was responding to:
Yeah I know what you're talking about, but fortunately a lot of good things can come out of it, too. : )I sometimes feel I'm a bad person for criticizing her online and I sometimes feel that it's not right to attack her from all sides. It's also not right what I'm doing now there's a lot of evil in me.
I believe there is a possibility that Maritsa eventually will or already has realised she's been wrong about something. It surely is hard to admit something like that aloud when there's a whole group of people on the other side that doesn't like or respect you too much, and many would just continue arguing to "save their face" even if they secrectly knew they were wrong. Or then just disappear, that's another easy option. So, even if we'll never get to know this kind of learning has happened, she'd know it herself and maybe be that much wiser in her future interactions with people.
Also, altough it's not necessarily very nice that someone is turned into a scapegoat, I think Maritsa's presence has positively affected the "team spirit" of this forum. People that wouldn't otherwise have interacted much or necessarily liked each other have talked & can have a way to feel they have something in common. Maritsa has become an inside joke of a sort, and that kind of things make people feel closer to each other and trust each other more. "The greatest happiness for the greatest number of people"
Hmm, what else.. I don't think anyone questions the benefits of bad examples. It's healthy to understand the limitations of socionics and the dangers of overconfidence etc, when you see how stupid someone else looks making that kind of mistakes it'll maybe become a little easier to admit you've been wrong or say it aloud that you're unsure about something. Aaand... I guess some people may have felt more confident about discussing things here, as there is always Maritsa who's considered worse as a typer than them and there is no danger they'll be turned into a joke like her. Someone else may have learned about logic/fallacies while reading the debates etc. One benefit for Maritsa could be that if she truly believes she is right and everyone else wrong, it must be nice to feel so confident about oneself/one's abilities. Though it could also result in loneliness if you can't relate to people or think anyone understands you. Go figure.
Also, why are you talking about Fe/Ti valuing? You typed me SEE, and SEEs have a Ti polr; they most definitely don't value it. Am I alpha or beta now? I thought you were "never changing your typings".
She has been cornered and won't probably answer. I remember when you were SEE like me in Maritsaland. But she also called mybullshit at one point so that it sounded like she also changed my typing.
But SEE is mentioned in about 25-35% of her typings as a possibility, most often, as the only possibility.
“I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
So, basically, you pretend to see something that's not there to rationalize for the logical inconsistencies in the world. Which is to say, you use your type as an excuse to justify your shitty behavior, your inability to make any coherent sense, poor perception, lack of any shred of intelligence or insight. And of course, you retype people as another something other than INFj because you rationalize that an INFj must be on the same wavelength as you are, that they must be able to understand you, and since no one on here does, you retype them as ESFp because they show infinitely more insight into issues than you could ever do.
Now I understand why others can't be EII. It's because no one is as criminally retarded as you are.
I'm adding in that you are forgetting that infj also use Ne:
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...rted_intuition
is generally associated with the ability to recognize possibilities, create new opportunities and new beginnings, recognize talent and natural propensities in others, reconcile differing perspectives and viewpoints, rapidly generate ideas, and be led by one's intellectual curiosity and stimulate curiosity in others.
So, in essence, what I believe you have done, is that in your insistence in trying to show that Agarina can't be FiNe, is that you confused Fi-working-with-Ne, ...and confused it as Fe.The individual likes to apply his insight to specific situations, relating them to the bigger picture.
------
And now that Agarina has included the entire post, it becomes obvious that you ignored all the blatant Fi+Ne so you could "prove" your point by nitpicking on one paragraph that pulled together differing viewpoints about how individuals felt about you. and then twisted it to try to suit your purposes.
----
I think Agarina made a decent observation as well. That it's sometimes hard for someone to admit that they were wrong. Especially if they pushed for something else really hard. Imo, And most especially after they make comments like the one you made that had to be spoilered.
But please keep in mind, that most Delta NFs (and I think most people on this forum) would actually appreciate, even thank you or praise you, if you'd admit when you're wrong...or even the possibility that you could have been wrong or could have misunderstood something someone wrote.
Making mistakes is part of being human...and part of the learning process. Interactions don't go perfectly every time, either. Misunderstandings occur a LOT between people. So when someone insists that they never make mistakes...what they are really saying is that they never learn. And someone who acts as if she is 100% right in everything she does (while learning/applying a theory like socionics), it becomes obvious that she really has a lot more to learn...either about the theory...or about the people.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
I'm applying my insight of two ideas here. I generated the idea of taking one post and using the static/dynamic to demonstrate how those two ideas can be combines. And I related it to the bigger picture by saying it can also be applied somewhere else.
"I guess some people may have felt more confident about discussing things here, as there is always Maritsa who's considered worse as a typer than them and there is no danger they'll be turned into a joke like her."
Another Fe comment because she doesn't talk about her feelings of likes and dislike; she talks about their feelings; other people's emotions as she observes their interaction of the atmosphere
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
Extroverted ethics (
I guess some people [a group of people and not A effing person] may have felt [inability to describe the actual feelings suggest that she's not using Fe first but secondary by assumption or whatever impresses upon her] more confident ........
compare this with Fi
"She feels bad about the situation but I understand because I feel bad too; I especially feel worse when she feels bad because I don't like to see her that way."
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
As i already said, "people" is a misleading term in that it is often used to refer to multiple individuals, and/or to a group.Extroverted ethics (
I guess some people [a group of people and not A effing person] may have felt [inability to describe the actual feelings suggest that she's not using Fe first but secondary by assumption or whatever impresses upon her] more confident ........
compare this with Fi
"She feels bad about the situation but I understand because I feel bad too; I especially feel worse when she feels bad because I don't like to see her that way."
You yourself often refer to "people" when you have various individuals in mind. For example, your recent post "... as well as very angry that some people are ...". This is precisely what she was doing. Another case of where you allow it for yourself, but won't allow it in others..
And, as I said...I strongly believe you confused her Ne+Fi as being Fe, or deliberately twisted it to try to prove something. Especially since you took that one paragraph out of such lengthy blatant Fi+Ne.
She wasn't trying to build a sense of community, nor was she trying to make others experience certain emotions. She was just stating an observation, and in doing so she reconciled multiple viewpoints...just as a Delta Ne type would. The rest of her post included plenty of her personal values in regards to the topic. Stop ignoring that part of her post.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
If ppl can observe patterns between this thread and that of Ne base Slater than they can compare the general outline to his thread in here:
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...alog-v-digital
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
some people are stupid?
That's a true statement
but the differences is she observes how these people 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
They joke about her...
She recognizes other people's mood; what they are doing emotionally.
I ignore that...
Ann, you need people to break things down to you; please find someone else to help you understand piece by piece; I can't I look at the whole thing and understand it at once. I don't have the energy required; you're like a vampire.
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
She observed interactions individuals have had with you...
AND she observed what others have said/complained about regarding you.
Neither of those are Fe.
Both require basic reading comprehension and memory abilities.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
You don,t have the energy in this case because you don't have enough support for your argument.
You don't have enough support in this case because you're wrong.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
FTR, she is very keen on one-on-one interaction with people. She usually secludes herself in parties with a single person whereas I try to put people in the same table and play games with the whole group.
Can you interpret emoticons or are they way too?
“I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
A break down of Fi parts to her full post:
Ver stated some of her Fi,Originally Posted by Ver
I sometimes feel I'm a bad person for criticizing her online and I sometimes feel that it's not right to attack her from all sides. It's also not right what I'm doing now there's a lot of evil in me.
Yeah I know what you're talking about, but fortunately a lot of good things can come out of it, too. : )
and Agarina expressed connection with that Fi. That she felt the same way. (Fi)
Then she went into possible good that could come out of people's dealings with you. (Ne)
Expresses her personal value and ethical considerations regarding you being used as a scapegoat. (Fi)Also, altough it's not necessarily very nice that someone is turned into a scapegoat,...
Here she,s talking about relations between people (individuals that would not otherwise liked/talked with each other) (Relational distance/closeness = Fi)People that wouldn't otherwise have interacted much or necessarily liked each other have talked & can have a way to feel they have something in common.
And their personal feelings of connectedness with a person they wouldn't normally feel connected to.(relational distance/closeness = Fi)
You can tell that she is using "people" to refer to individuals because in the same thought she said "each other". "each other" implies individuals dealing with other individuals.that kind of things make people feel closer to each other and trust each other more.
Again, here she is referring to individuals feeling closer to another individual(s) (relational distance/closeness = Fi)
And individuals trusting each other more. (relational distance/closeness = Fi)
Here she is approaching from a singular viewpoint, and describing how it personally feels to see someone making mistakes, (Fi)when you see how stupid someone else looks making that kind of mistakes it'll maybe become a little easier to admit you've been wrong or say it aloud that you're unsure about something.
And the psychological impact such witnessing might have on the individual viewer (Ne+Fi)
Such as feeling less pressure so can willingly admit making a mistake or not knowing something. (Fi)
Here she is empathizing with your confidence about yourself/abilities (Ne+Fi)it must be nice to feel so confident about oneself/one's abilities
Here she is projecting her empathy into a possible consequence of a person being so confident in themself/abilities. (Ne+Fi)Though it could also result in loneliness if you can't relate to people or think anyone understands you.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
on a rational level I KNOW that...
but I can't shut up that part of me that says.."Maybe??"
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
we should have a $1,000,000 award for anyone who can get through to maritsa.
the reason you wont is because it doesn't matter how right you are and it doesn't matter if you back her into a corner where she has to admit she's wrong. it doesn't matter. for her, the objective is not being actually right but in winning.
you could say the font in our posts is black and if she wanted she would say, "no, its purple. you're stupid." and she would defend that to the death. because its not about whats actually right. it doesn't matter. it doesn't matter.
her motivation here makes it impossible to get through to her. it is really painful to watch you try.
On a totally unrelated topic
The more you know: Maritsa is also the name of a river in Bulgaria.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
