My reply to WorkaholicsAnon: tips for typing people

[meatburger]

WorkaholicsAnon wanted to know if i had any tips for typing people. I wrote out a long PM and thought i might as well post here to get discussion going. Hopefully it stimulates/helps someone. And no, im not returing to this forum lol

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hey there! Pleasure to meet you.

First off, im certinally no expert. I haven't actually given socionics a lot of thought for a year or so. I just use it passively when something jumps out at me, and im really enjoying that. I think Rick has mentioned that kind of does the same nowdays. At a wedding a few weeks ago, an ENTp friend asked me what type i thought his new girlfriend was. I told him i was unsure, but in truth i didn't want to know. Unfortunatly for me im almost sure she is an ESFj. The bride and groom were INTp and ENTj. Is an activity and a mirror relation a good thing? i just am not sure i should meddle in things like this. My telling him could cause something to happen that otherwise shouldn't have. Anyway, firstly, i think it would be important to figure out your type. I was lucky, my type seemed bleedingly obvious from the beginning. Ive had a quick skim of your posts, and i suspect you are indeed an IEE. Typing this way is definately not my strength though. And that point is very important. Perhaps all types should use their strengths to type people. For us it is and . For others, perhaps and Vi is very effective. Ive noticed that people like Expat can type historical figures very well, as he makes use of the Time function and his logic. Perhaps an INFj can use their often finely tuned ability to know how they feel about someone to type very accurately.

If you are not an IEE, then typing my way would not be ideal. Firstly, i dont think i can tell you any magic bullet for typing. For me, prototypes have came from following socionics for quite some time now. I do firmly belive in another 5 years, it will be possible to type almost everyone. IEE often has a flash of insight when looking at someone. Its instant, and ive always had this skill. Im not sure if its all ENFp's, or all subtypes. Its a subtle feeling, but there is a lot of information you can gain on a first glance. Its very much like what Malcom gladwell talks about in his book "Blink". This is our Ne. The longer any types follow socionics, the better they will typically become. I am certian this can be trained and that you will learn it in time.

For example, when you look at someone, you can look at their clothes. They tell a huge amount. Posture, body language, facial features and expressions/how expressive they are, where they are standing. I never really believed in Vi, but i have seen patterns of smiles, micro expressions on people's faces that i cannot deny. I think its highly likely that Fe dominant types could use this information to type very effectively. Take a look at the FACE and METT systems. They involve reading facial expressions and micro expressions, and i think this skill/information could be very very useful but it would require dedication. What is the person saying / doing. Voice tone/innotation. Are they kind, do they appear to have well developed logic? How reactive they are to others? Taking into account the context the person is in (airport, cafe, bar etc). Hair styles. All this information, and more is available straight away. Then you can also make use of based information. How do you feel about them, do you like their face or do they annoy you almost instantly? How do they react to you. Who are they friends with? This is often a huge hint for typing someone. For me, this is my solidifier. If they are a member of a group of others who I have typed, they are likely to be that quadra as well. You have to be careful, but in this way you can build a very wide network of people who's types you know, and with good confidence. The more people who's type you know, the more chances you will get to gather information when someone is interacting with them. People are both repelled and drawn to others like gravity, and if you know what to look for, this will be very helpful. For example an INTp might be sitting next to someone, but who are they giving most attention to? Who are they looking at the most. Bearing in mind that people have good and bad moments etc.

Now, as to the individual types, i find this harder to explain. I have identified countless numbers of each type, but i still find it hard to quantify what it is im noticing. I think my Ne is putting all the small peices ive described above into a coherant whole. ISTp's are often a brooding kind of type. If i see a girl with a almost sullen/serious type of facial expression, i become interested. Are they wearing sporting type of clothes, thats a great sign. Or ISTp women characteristicly wear floral type of dresses. I know it sounds crazy, but trust me on this one. A conversation with said person can reveal a huge amount of info, if you only just listen. What job are they doing? Mechanic, doctor, economics, engineer, night shift worker, nurse? Ive seen all these quite a few times before, store it away. Do you enjoy speaking to this person? ISTp guys often love talking about the destruction of human kind / conspiracy stuff like that. Some of them get very loud when intoxicated. The women i work with tend to enjoy when i have a laugh with them and dont take things seriously (i suppose all types do this haha). Ive came across a number with peircings, and two with those black circle dooflickies in their ears. ISTp girls often really are hard and wild, and boy is that sexy. Once you have typed a few people, it becomes far easier. Your aim is to view the types as having a soft malleable outer layer that has been influenced by their experiences and their upbringing, with a hard internal shell which processes information in set and specific ways (imho).

ISTj's... My dad is an LSI and i know a number of them. I type them in a more simplistic manner. They will have a serious look often, but its harsher in some way. It just repells me a little. Talking to them does not go as smoothly. Their lack of Fi means that they can say things in a confident tone that annoys you very quickly. The men really are manly men and it could be intimidating to some degree. The women might have short croppped type of hair. ISFj's can have a similar hair do, they can sometimes appear a little anxious. Just like wasserface from Twilight. But not always of course. When you read body language you take things in clusters, you are setting sail for fail if you look at any individual sign as being too important. Typing people for me is best done like this aswell, once you have enough characteristics that fit the type then you can wonder about the outlier behaviours that confuse you.

There is something else that i cannot quite quantify. All functions have a feeling about them but words will not suffice. If you look at Robert Downey Jr, he is a typical ENTp. The character he plays in Iron man is one aswell. Intelligent, unpredictable, fun loving and non serious, sometimes egotistical etc. When you look at him, perhaps the way he looks through his eyes there is a hawkish type of appearance. Ive seen ENFp's eyes actually appear to glow a light blue on occasion, including my own (blue eyes of course). Scarlett Johansen is a typical Si type. She is sensual, you could cut the Si in the air when she is around like butter. She is an ISFp. Thats why Iron man is attracted to her. ISTp's have a more toned down Si to me, tempered by logic rather than feeling. They appear serious, yet controlled. Even if i show signs of anxiety / uncomfortableness, it does not show up on their faces. They suck it in like a black hole, and that is highly theraputic. Strangely, often i dont have a lot to say to ISTp's. They love talking about relationships and getting advice, but they are often interested in very different things. They are sensors, they are into drinking, women, sport, parties, tv, good food etc. While im in to those things to some degree, i find other intuitives share my interests more. We follow quirkly lines of thinking and enjoy a different types of humour. Every now and then though i will connect to an ISTp and it truly is a great feeling, better than connecting with other types i can assure you of that. I do have reason to believe that i find it a little difficult to connect to ISTp's for more personal reasons, so this might not be a problem for other ENFp's.

Ok for the last part ive just rambled. Feel free to ask any questions and i will try to answer. Its quite funny as the feeling and understanding is in my brain but i need to spend a lot of time trying to break it down into its component peices. Ne does it all very quickly. A systematic approach needs to be taken to identifiy as many signs as possible but im an ENFp so the chances of that happening are zero

[thePirate]

robert downey jr is ILE?

[meatburger]

robert downey jr is ILE?

I thought that Iron man the fictional character definitely was. I am not so sure about the man himself now that you mention it. He could be something like an EIE perhaps. This method of typing for is not ideal, i find actors a bit hard to get a beat on.

[Suz]

oh wow Meatburger!! Thanks! I didn't see this thread before I replied to your PM!

In fact, I do tend to type people exactly the way you described. I'm not as experienced but for me it also is gathering tons of info from mannerisms, how they carry their bodies, general appearance, what they choose to talk about, how they convey what they talk about, etc etc, all in combination and sort of developing a gestalt. I always second guess myself though because i keep thinking that perhaps i've associated the wrong "gestalt" with the wrong type. but there are several types now that I think i'm pretty sure I can recognize. Others I just really have to analyze by functions and gather random clues until a type materializes. And yet others are just really hard to type based on what I know about them and what I know of socionics.

Along those lines, I find it pretty unreliable to type someone from a still photo (even a few still photos) without any behavioral context.

Thanks again, friend!

[Mattie]

I haven't actually given socionics a lot of thought for a year or so. I just use it passively when something jumps out at me, and im really enjoying that.

I noticed this as well when I was away. Instead of looking for Socionics in others, all of a sudden something will pop out and remind me of it, and cause me to explore what it has brought to light. I usually get a new perspective on a certain type or relation, and mostly I started to find what was actually consistent between people of the same type and what wasn't.

Otherwise, I don't really type the same way meatburger does. The more people I observe, the more I find that there are personality traits which don't necessarily come along with the type, especially some broader characteristics. Things like egos being aggressive, that's something I found not to be true, especially when you're sensitive as to what is aggressive. I found lots of types in careers and out of expected behavior that the profiles on wikisocion would describe.

Though, he does have a point in where there is something undeniable about quickly observable traits of a person. There is just something surface-wise that you can't quantify that just hints at their type. And I'm all about trying to get into their thought processes and using that as typing, but there is a correlative body language I can't quite describe. I also think it is interesting how he mentioned you can't really describe a type, and I'm leaning more towards that myself as well. I wonder if it is because I'm lessening type definitions on personality traits, because instinctively, I describe types with is associated with them (personality traits) rather than what it actually is, which is difficult since it is so abstract, and you want to give a practical on-the-spot definition to a person, which is really hard. I only start talking Socionics-wise when problem solving is needed interpersonally.

[Galen]

I thought that Iron man the fictional character definitely was. I am not so sure about the man himself now that you mention it. He could be something like an EIE perhaps. This method of typing for is not ideal, i find actors a bit hard to get a beat on.

Dude Tony Stark is the most sickeningly Se-ESTp E3 character ever. I found myself hating him almost immediately when Iron Man 2 started. Robert Downey Jr. himself seems pretty ESTp too, so I guess it was a good match

[Marie84]

This is an awesome post MB, you know your stuff

ISTj's... My dad is an LSI and i know a number of them. I type them in a more simplistic manner. They will have a serious look often, but its harsher in some way. It just repells me a little. Talking to them does not go as smoothly. Their lack of Fi means that they can say things in a confident tone that annoys you very quickly. The men really are manly men and it could be intimidating to some degree. The women might have short croppped type of hair. ISFj's can have a similar hair do, they can sometimes appear a little anxious. Just like wasserface from Twilight. But not always of course. When you read body language you take things in clusters, you are setting sail for fail if you look at any individual sign as being too important. Typing people for me is best done like this aswell, once you have enough characteristics that fit the type then you can wonder about the outlier behaviours that confuse you.

My dads an LSI too and that's how I generally interpret them as well. I find that LSI's and LSE's can both be quite serious on the surface but LSI's tend to project this harsh, angry, sternness to them that makes me think they're intimidating and mean

[meatburger]

Dude Tony Stark is the most sickeningly Se-ESTp E3 character ever. I found myself hating him almost immediately when Iron Man 2 started. Robert Downey Jr. himself seems pretty ESTp too, so I guess it was a good match

Hmm im regretting putting that paragraph in there . I was in mad rambling frenzy at the time. ESTp wasn't my impression so i don't know. When Iron man was kicking ass i didn't entirely buy it. I saw that more of the manifestation of the role function in an ENTp. When he was talking physics i actually bought it, i thought he could be a man who knows his stuff here. He appears intuitive at least to me. I actually thought i wouldn't mind hanging out with Downey Jr. He looks interesting and chilled out, and reminds me of ENTp's who i like a lot. I didn't see him as a sensor as it seems he has too much going on in his face. He talks a little too fast. I recall seeing these little flickers of doubt in his eyes that ENTp's sometimes show before they regain composure. I will admit i have typed Downey on the reactions of a number of SEI's i know that want to jump his bones. By my own admission, my typing of him is not very well thought out.

All that being said, i hate typing actors and fictional characters. I always have. The debate seems impossible to settle without actually talking to him, so it annoys me. I certainly have changed my opinions of a person many times before. Typing fictional characters is very difficult, sometimes impossible. For example, Iron man is a super genius / tough guy. These people really don't exist in real life. We never see actors in their natural habitat. The whole Fi connection is divorced under these circumstances. Its a person displayed as a 2d image, acting in an unrealistic situation.

This is an awesome post MB, you know your stuff

Aww fanks. Its become bleedingly obvious to me that actually describing the types is not my strong suit. It would be awesome to describe a whole heap of traits very indicative of each type but its quite hard. Its possible but quite hard. Perhaps other types are the ones for the job? . What i see in people is more their flavour. Every type has a distinctive flavour. ENTp's might be popcorn, and ESTp's, bacon, i just dunno :redface:

[Absurd]

The women might have short croppped type of hair.

Like in those porn films ?

[meatburger]

Like in those porn films ?

Exactly!

[Absurd]

Exactly!

You saw "The Shaved, The Hard, The Beautiful, didn't you ?

[meatburger]

You saw "The Shaved, The Hard, The Beautiful, didn't you ?

I played the leading role

[Absurd]

I played the leading role

Sorry, didn't know you're a woman. Nice V.I skills by the way.

[Galen]

Hmm im regretting putting that paragraph in there . I was in mad rambling frenzy at the time. ESTp wasn't my impression so i don't know. When Iron man was kicking ass i didn't entirely buy it. I saw that more of the manifestation of the role function in an ENTp. When he was talking physics i actually bought it, i thought he could be a man who knows his stuff here. He appears intuitive at least to me. I actually thought i wouldn't mind hanging out with Downey Jr. He looks interesting and chilled out, and reminds me of ENTp's who i like a lot. I didn't see him as a sensor as it seems he has too much going on in his face. He talks a little too fast. I recall seeing these little flickers of doubt in his eyes that ENTp's sometimes show before they regain composure. I will admit i have typed Downey on the reactions of a number of SEI's i know that want to jump his bones. By my own admission, my typing of him is not very well thought out.

Well if you look at Downey from a VI standpoint he comes across as very Se to me.

He seems very aware of his external environment, in a sort of "you are right exactly there I see you" way, something I've come to associate with Se ego.

As for the character he plays, I wouldn't let knowledge of physics be an immediate indicator of being an intuitor. To me that seems to implicate that sensors are inherently less intelligent or knowledgeable than intuitors.

All that being said, i hate typing actors and fictional characters. I always have. The debate seems impossible to settle without actually talking to him, so it annoys me. I certainly have changed my opinions of a person many times before. Typing fictional characters is very difficult, sometimes impossible. For example, Iron man is a super genius / tough guy. These people really don't exist in real life. We never see actors in their natural habitat. The whole Fi connection is divorced under these circumstances. Its a person displayed as a 2d image, acting in an unrealistic situation.

I think in the case of actors it's a general rule of thumb to not judge their type by the characters that they play. The best way to get a sense of who they "really are" in the sense I think you're trying to get at is through interviews, and youtube has plenty of those in stock.

As for fictional characters, it really comes down to what you consider to be type-related or not. If you see being a 'super genius' as intuitor-related and being a 'tough guy' as being sensor-related then it would seem that the Iron Man character is untypeable. Of course the odds of there existing a fictional character who's a perfect replica of any type is pretty rare, which I assume is what you're trying to get at. Also I kinda think it's just a matter of having fun, not taking yourself or the subject super seriously.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Meatburger, it's nice to see you, but maybe it is time that you left?

Oh, not saying I want rid of you, but from what you've said I take it you'd rather not get sucked back in to all of this again. And eh, does seem to be pretty much the same stuff going on as before, Robert Downey Jr is some other type or etc.

Anyway, peace w/e goes down.

[silverchris9]

Downey Jr. is probably SLE, but there's also a fairly strong chance he's an IEI-C. He reminds me very strongly of a friend of mine who is an IEI. I took him for an SLE at first, but there's something very subtle that made it clear that he's not SLE (my friend, not RDJ), just an IEI who has frequently experienced being in charge/in power. Something about his energy/how he carries himself. He's a very uninhibited IEI, but... not quite SLE. Too unbalanced to be SLE. SLEs, even when unhinged/unbalanced, have a certain degree of self-possession, or better yet, self-ownership, that IEIs lack. Also, what I've read of RDJs insane phase sounds more like the IEI "I can do anything therefore I choose to do nothing" thing than the SLE "I want to experience everything and I'm bad at focusing on the consequences of my decisions!" thing. I read one interview where he said it was like always having a loaded gun and knowing you can blow your brains out at any second or something related to that... like you can easily throw it all away in half a second. And it was the awareness, almost the very fact that he had the capacity to cause so much change by simply buying some coke or whatever, that was almost the tempting part of it. I can relate to that. I've often had to restrain myself from throwing my computer out of my 11th story window, because I know that if I do it I'll get kicked out of school housing and my life would be fucked, but just the idea of being able to change that much by doing so little... it's weird.

Also, I can make my eyes do that boring into your skull thing too. That's more of an actor thing than a type-related thing. Now, if he did that all the time and not just as an acting trick, I might buy that as type related.

[Exodus]

Yeah, Iron Man is totally leading - excessive, ostentatious, etc. I would say he's SEE rather than SLE, though.

[meatburger]

Well if you look at Downey from a VI standpoint he comes across as very Se to me.

He seems very aware of his external environment, in a sort of "you are right exactly there I see you" way, something I've come to associate with Se ego.

As for the character he plays, I wouldn't let knowledge of physics be an immediate indicator of being an intuitor. To me that seems to implicate that sensors are inherently less intelligent or knowledgeable than intuitors.

I think in the case of actors it's a general rule of thumb to not judge their type by the characters that they play. The best way to get a sense of who they "really are" in the sense I think you're trying to get at is through interviews, and youtube has plenty of those in stock.

As for fictional characters, it really comes down to what you consider to be type-related or not. If you see being a 'super genius' as intuitor-related and being a 'tough guy' as being sensor-related then it would seem that the Iron Man character is untypeable. Of course the odds of there existing a fictional character who's a perfect replica of any type is pretty rare, which I assume is what you're trying to get at. Also I kinda think it's just a matter of having fun, not taking yourself or the subject super seriously.

Yep fair enough. I have never subscribed to typing from a picture. To be honest i barely even know Robert Downey Jr, its just that i saw Iron man 2 the other day haha. You could well be right about Robert Downey. When it comes to the intuitives being more intelligent than sensors, to be honest i actually do subscribe to this idea to some degree. I really do see Sensors as being tied to the real world, intuitives to their minds. Of course you have to explain intelligent, and taking into account all different ways of thinking i think all types are equal. Perhaps an Se type could indeed be able to be 10 years ahead in creating technology from the mainstream. I know 1000's of intelligent sensors, dont get me wrong, far smarter than me. When it comes to theoretical work though, my experience has shown intuitive types dominate this area. Se types are typically better able to use their bodies, they are more coordinated. Its evolution i think.

Holy shitte i have to go to uni now. Yeah this conversation wasn't exactly what i had in mind, and i will be going soon dont worry Cyclops. Thats for the warm welcome though lol

I liked your point about not taking it seriously though, take it easy guys

[meatburger]

He reminds me very strongly of a friend of mine who is an IEI. I took him for an SLE at first, but there's something very subtle that made it clear that he's not SLE (my friend, not RDJ), just an IEI who has frequently experienced being in charge/in power. Something about his energy/how he carries himself. He's a very uninhibited IEI, but... not quite SLE. Too unbalanced to be SLE. SLEs, even when unhinged/unbalanced, have a certain degree of self-possession, or better yet, self-ownership, that IEIs lack.

Strangely i had this feeling aswell. He does look and remind me of an IEI i work with aswell. He just seems to extraverted in general think.

[meatburger]

@meat
have a good one pal, good *seeing* you though

Haha see ya mate! Perhaps i will ponder Model A and if i am still a strong advocate for it when im gone.

Take it easy all if anyone ever comes to the Northern Territory i would love to catch up

[meatburger]

Just before i go (lol). I just want to say that i have been hanging with a very intelligent ISTp lately who is changing my ideas about intelligence, and what constitutes intuition etc. He comes from a very scientific background, and is studying biology / natural sciences. He has so much Te information that i find interesting, that its really great to speak to him. I mentioned the recent article about how we all have part Neanderthal in us, and we talked about the blended theories / possibilities for quite some time. So im dualising with him very fast which is great. Anyway, my take home message is im always learning. Ive met a lot of ISTp's in my time, but not many intellectually minded ones :wink:

See ya