Could Suzzy be a rational?

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Aiss]

Yeah, ok. I think we're talking about different things, there is the separation into four temperaments similar to Keyrsey's which is often found and I specifically used above:

- Rationalists: NT
- Idealists: NF
- Hedonists: SP
- Traditionalists: SJ

I thought it was only Keirsey's idea to put SP and SJ together. You said "NT club" so I assumed you meant club as in socionics. (I rather prefer clubs + temperaments to this separation, to be honest).

[Creepy-Cyclops]

of course its all true. i wouldnt have said it if otherwise. gee how little you must think of my types honesty . i still think logically suzzy is eii.

I wasn't talking about what you wrote, I was talking about why I wrote.

To clarify: I wasn't referring to honesty of anyone in my post, I was simply saying that what I said in relation to your type could in effect simply be what is known as confirmation bias. I see other people use this tactic here, although I suspect unwittingly, but I am aware of it and therefore try to steer clear of it, so in reality I don't think it is. IEE is glove fit for you imo, i've spoke somewhat about the reasons before.

In regards to your mums type, perhaps i'll find the time to elaborate more on why I type her as IEI, i'll see, but i'm spending less time here of late, so....

Edit: I suppose I could be lazy and ask you why you don't think your mum is INFp who tests as INTp due to some hardships. She sure does seem to alwas go back to this INXp setting after all, yes/no?

[Creepy-Cyclops]

No - I always go back to INFj setting.

Well, you sure did keep wondering if you were INXp on socionics.com, and I think - although I can't re-check, you've asked the same thing here, so based on the information, it seems you perhaps do both.

If you are happy with INFj, then perhaps you could stop making threads about your type.

I was just sharing my feelings as I am getting sick and tired of someone constantly saying that I am a type that it is so obvious that I am not. This person undermines me in threads that I am not even part of.

I was not trying to point the finger or anything Pinocchio to say that there is no one here who isn't good at Socionics. It's just all so complicated, all the functions, inter-type relations, that I wonder how can people ever come to a consensus especially here on a forum where many have conflicting views. And we try to type others mainly by just words and photos, not the whole picture.

I respect you and your skills in the area of Socionics. You have been a big help to me. I do not change my mind about that.

Can I ask if you still think that I am the using the type that you originally thought?

You won't learn much here because of the different views. Now here's me suggesting you read Jung's psychological types to see how the dominant function manifests in people. Then of course people will say Jung isn't socionics, but then of course Russian socionists often refer to him, and Ashura used what he said in her own observations of socionics, not to mention Jung was actually a qualified psychologist and his empirical observations of people probably surpasses Ashura and all of us in terms of volume so it would assume to have value with all of this considered, anyway.

Good luck in your frustrations, heh! :-)

Oh - this person keep saying you are type you are not, if this is dig at me, le sigh... I wasn't aware I was doing that, this is a thread about your type after all.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I am not referring to you Cyclops. I know that you think I am INFp/IEI and I respect your opinion. You have spent a fair amount of time trying to work my type out and obviously think you have good reason to go with the p over the j. Personally though I don't find myself relating terribly well to that particular types descriptions.

I thought it would be obvious that I was referring to Maritsa who continuously says in threads (even threads that I am not part of) that I am SEE/ ESFp.

Ah, i've not been following the threads as much.

Re socionics. So it's basically about inter-type relations. Perhaps considering this will help you, that's all i'll say on it rather than simply more opinions:

Relations between Psychological ("personality") Types

Socionics intertype relations describe relationship between Psychological Types of people and not between the actual people. This is the reason these relations are called "intertype" relations. The relations between actual people are complicated and depend on many different factors. The intertype relations, however, form the core of any relationship and describe various degrees of psychological compatibility between people according to their Types.

People with incompatible Types have more problems with their relationship than people with compatible Types. So if you are already in a relationship (especially the one you cannot get out easily, like family for example), knowing the intertype relations mechanism can help you to avoid many problems created by incompatible types. If you are single and looking, knowing intertype relations can help you to make the right choice.

I think it helps to re-read what this says, well, maybe an interpretation then - socionics isn't a miracle worker and should be kept in a perspective.

OK, think what it is useful for and how exactly you'd like it to help you, hmmm.

Well, .... i've sort of said something after all ;-)

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I am not referring to you Cyclops. I know that you think I am INFp/IEI and I respect your opinion. You have spent a fair amount of time trying to work my type out and obviously think you have good reason to go with the p over the j. Personally though I don't find myself relating terribly well to that particular types descriptions.

I thought it would be obvious that I was referring to Maritsa who continuously says in threads (even threads that I am not part of) that I am SEE/ ESFp.

Ah, i've not been following the threads as much.

Re socionics. So it's basically about inter-type relations. Perhaps considering this will help you, that's all i'll say on it rather than simply more opinions:

Relations between Psychological ("personality") Types

Socionics intertype relations describe relationship between Psychological Types of people and not between the actual people. This is the reason these relations are called "intertype" relations. The relations between actual people are complicated and depend on many different factors. The intertype relations, however, form the core of any relationship and describe various degrees of psychological compatibility between people according to their Types.

People with incompatible Types have more problems with their relationship than people with compatible Types. So if you are already in a relationship (especially the one you cannot get out easily, like family for example), knowing the intertype relations mechanism can help you to avoid many problems created by incompatible types. If you are single and looking, knowing intertype relations can help you to make the right choice.

I think it helps to re-read what this says, well, maybe an interpretation then - socionics isn't a miracle worker and should be kept in a perspective.

OK, i'll be so bold... to say, think what it is useful for and how exactly you'd like it to help you, hmmm, well, i've sort of said something after all ;-)

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Beautiful sky]

I do not want to argue or have someone constantly try and label me as something that I am not.

Is there anyone here who is truly gifted in Socionics?

Blaze.