Prove your understanding of socionics

[griggerplease]

Hi!

What is your type? Can you descripe how your functions feel in a concrete reality based way? If you can please do so.

Shoot!

[ashlesha]

how would that prove anything? couldn't anybody make something up?

[Saberstorm]

Content removed due to lack of interest...

[squirreltual]

 

[Galen]

Hi!

What is your type? Can you descripe how your functions feel in a concrete reality based way? If you can please do so.

Shoot!

sure hold on just let me sketch an outline for this 300 page thesis on the nature of human cognition

[griggerplease]

how would that prove anything? couldn't anybody make something up?

Well if they made it up then they are not certain of their true type.

Content removed due to lack of interest...

What did you write? I am very interested

sure hold on just let me sketch an outline for this 300 page thesis on the nature of human cognition

Yeah you really must be crazy.. I specifically asked you to keep it short

[ashlesha]

Well if they made it up then they are not certain of their true type.

its not at all unusual for two people who are sure about their type to give contradicting reports of what its like to experience it.

making something up doesn't mean not believing it.

[Galen]

Yeah you really must be crazy.. I specifically asked you to keep it short

You didn't, but that's beside the point.

There's no real way to talk about the IEs in a concrete and tangible way unless you just want snippits that exemplify only a small part of it at a time. Even then it would take an extensive amount of time and effort to distill everything down to even a few paragraphs in order to explain the phenomena in their entireties. There are a bunch of posts lying around where people talk about the IEs as they experience them, but I don't have the patience to dig through page after page of threads to look for one or two specific posts.

Plus to demand "proof" of one's knowledge is a terribly conceited way to phrase the question. Who are we supposed to prove it to? You? Why do we need any one specific person's or group's approval of it? Etc.

[JWC3]

Absolutely, which function do you wan't first? I'm feeling kinda lazy at the moment so you just pick one and we'll start there.

[Pookie]

I feel as though the Title of this thread might detract from the responses. After all, who accepts a challenge when success is determined by an outside party who already seems as though he doesnt believe you know anything. To the person who feels like they understand socionics, the risk/reward isnt worth it on something as simple as this.

I'm just going to look past the "Prove" part and instead attempt to address your question. I will start with my base and work down.

Ni: I feel like using this function is similar to spotting that damn fly buzzing around your house. You have to stop looking for the fly, and still your mind so that you can see everything in your line of vision. When you see the fly, you see it's movement. And then you catch the fly and keep it in your sight. Ni to me is like a passive stillness of thought, where you accept information in from multiple stimuli and the mind sparks a thought deriving of tangenting from one or a combination of those. As a VS Cog style i can see how my tangent spark is often times derived from prior information that i have stored in my mind. (Example: someone mentions the Boston Redsox, and i think of a Racist Puerto Rican joke about how their women wear one sock when its that time of the month.) Alot of times this can seem out of nowhere or off the wall to outside observers, but to me it's a simple internal connection of the two ideas. As my base, i'm comfortable doing this. When i see other people do Ni related randomness, i often react "Hey! I see what you did there". As a Fields/Dynamic guy, i tend to excel in areas of interest which force you to examine what the full spectrum of variables to assess are, and how they interact when juxtaposed against each other. For instance, im pretty good at predicting fighting sports because the phrase "styles make match-ups" is really about examining what tools a fighter brings to the table, and how that meshes with his opponents tools. The winner is more often determined by the style clash than anything if their observable skill level is similar.

Fe: I honestly believed i developed this function out of insecurity in my younger years. Fe to me, is about reading emotion. I notice how people react. If im in an environment where i don't know the people im interacting with, i'm very slow to open up verbally. I'll need some sort of visible signal of interest before i can really get into my groove. But if i can get comfortable, i have little to no trouble opening up honestly. I can express myself truthfully and honestly with little effort. All stress in this regard goes to making sure i don't say something that visibly upsets them. But even then, sometimes you have to. I'm often very aware of when someone is interested. I can spot when someone likes someone else in their interactions based on what emotion/body language they show. When blocked with Ni in this order, i think Fe reads emotion and derives intention from relaying that observed emotion into one's self. What reasons would i do that, in this context(Irrational, Dynamic)? Often times because of this i feel confidence in reading other people and figuring out what motivated them to do what they just did. Im not sure exactly which function comes into this, but I'm insanely honest with myself about my "weaker" impulses and my inherent character flaws. I can see why a person tells a lie often times because putting myself in their shoes, i can see what effect their trying to stir and what mannerisms they show, that i show, when i'm making something up.

Si: Honestly, i think this is my absolute weakest function. Maybe this is attributable to Ni-subtype, im not sure. I can use this as a social mask, but its rigid and i havent developed it very well. With this function in role, i can see my weaknesses show up in sort of neurotic ways. I eat erratically, and often times i don't know when im full or hungry. Im prone to eat candy and shitty foods for energy. I dont need to operate on much sleep, and am probably going to go to sleep way later than i should. I can go on knuckle cracking binges if i get momentum going. I rarely know how my actions/words will affect someone, on a base level i can derive what i did was good/bad, but beforehand i dont have much confidence in causing the affect that i want. Honestly, because of that insecurity, i pretty much learned not to be fake with people or to attempt to manipulate. Not saying im above it, because im not. It just stresses the shit out of me to act in that manner since i suck at it.

Te: I have confidence here, if i'm in my realm of knowledge. But otherwise, i generally hold Te with little weight. People can argue with me about statistics or data, and its not likely to change my mind though they might shut down my argument. I tend to see Te related things as too black and white, with so little gray area that i feel its often times not applicable to a real life situation, where most things are gray. I prefer to base my beliefs/understandings on my own internal framework. As im skeptical of the validity of outside sources and the routes one can take to skew information/data. However I can get on very long unproductive streaks, and if someone calls me out on it... they're probably right and i just have to take that hit on the chin. I, in general, hold Te in little esteem but the downsides to this are just as apparent to me as the benefits from it as well.

The unconscious functions ill write about some other time.

[JWC3]

its not at all unusual for two people who are sure about their type to give contradicting reports of what its like to experience it.

making something up doesn't mean not believing it.

Well therein lies the rub, believing it, and even being able to articulate that belief doesn't make it so. I would wager that people who are the same type, instead of simply thinking they are, would have similar themes present in their writing. Minute differences, sure, but those are always there. That being said there are a few examples of this on the forum, there are also examples of individuals being very similar, and behaving similarly, and both thinking they are the same type, but that type is not the correct one. All in all I tend to think it's more worthwhile to look at the similarities than the labels is what I'm getting at.

[griggerplease]

You didn't, but that's beside the point.

There's no real way to talk about the IEs in a concrete and tangible way unless you just want snippits that exemplify only a small part of it at a time. Even then it would take an extensive amount of time and effort to distill everything down to even a few paragraphs in order to explain the phenomena in their entireties. There are a bunch of posts lying around where people talk about the IEs as they experience them, but I don't have the patience to dig through page after page of threads to look for one or two specific posts.

Plus to demand "proof" of one's knowledge is a terribly conceited way to phrase the question. Who are we supposed to prove it to? You? Why do we need any one specific person's or group's approval of it? Etc.

The meaning is intended in the opening post. And as a strong thinker myself I believe that it is possible. It is about being used or accustomed to thinking in words amongst things. Some people are better with words then others. And interestingly enough it could be related to type. But let's not get into that now.

its not at all unusual for two people who are sure about their type to give contradicting reports of what its like to experience it.

making something up doesn't mean not believing it.

It is in fact very unusual for two people to contradict each other while describing a function assuming they both know what they are talking about. And someone who believes something that is made up is for obvious reasons mistyped as a result or consequence if you will.

[JWC3]

The meaning is intended in the opening post. And as a strong thinker myself I believe that it is possible. It is about being used or accustomed to thinking in words amongst things. Some people are better with words then others. And interestingly enough it could be related to type. But let's not get into that now.

Well it depends on what you define as better really. Size of usable vocabulary is more probably associated with intelligence, type would play a larger part in what that vocabulary consisted of I would suppose anyway. Actually I think that is perhaps even a stretch.

[griggerplease]

I feel as though the Title of this thread might detract from the responses. After all, who accepts a challenge when success is determined by an outside party who already seems as though he doesnt believe you know anything. To the person who feels like they understand socionics, the risk/reward isnt worth it on something as simple as this.

I'm just going to look past the "Prove" part and instead attempt to address your question. I will start with my base and work down.

Ni: I feel like using this function is similar to spotting that damn fly buzzing around your house. You have to stop looking for the fly, and still your mind so that you can see everything in your line of vision. When you see the fly, you see it's movement. And then you catch the fly and keep it in your sight. Ni to me is like a passive stillness of thought, where you accept information in from multiple stimuli and the mind sparks a thought deriving of tangenting from one or a combination of those. As a VS Cog style i can see how my tangent spark is often times derived from prior information that i have stored in my mind. (Example: someone mentions the Boston Redsox, and i think of a Racist Puerto Rican joke about how their women wear one sock when its that time of the month.) Alot of times this can seem out of nowhere or off the wall to outside observers, but to me it's a simple internal connection of the two ideas. As my base, i'm comfortable doing this. When i see other people do Ni related randomness, i often react "Hey! I see what you did there". As a Fields/Dynamic guy, i tend to excel in areas of interest which force you to examine what the full spectrum of variables to assess are, and how they interact when juxtaposed against each other. For instance, im pretty good at predicting fighting sports because the phrase "styles make match-ups" is really about examining what tools a fighter brings to the table, and how that meshes with his opponents tools. The winner is more often determined by the style clash than anything if their observable skill level is similar.

Fe: I honestly believed i developed this function out of insecurity in my younger years. Fe to me, is about reading emotion. I notice how people react. If im in an environment where i don't know the people im interacting with, i'm very slow to open up verbally. I'll need some sort of visible signal of interest before i can really get into my groove. But if i can get comfortable, i have little to no trouble opening up honestly. I can express myself truthfully and honestly with little effort. All stress in this regard goes to making sure i don't say something that visibly upsets them. But even then, sometimes you have to. I'm often very aware of when someone is interested. I can spot when someone likes someone else in their interactions based on what emotion/body language they show. When blocked with Ni in this order, i think Fe reads emotion and derives intention from relaying that observed emotion into one's self. What reasons would i do that, in this context(Irrational, Dynamic)? Often times because of this i feel confidence in reading other people and figuring out what motivated them to do what they just did. Im not sure exactly which function comes into this, but I'm insanely honest with myself about my "weaker" impulses and my inherent character flaws. I can see why a person tells a lie often times because putting myself in their shoes, i can see what effect their trying to stir and what mannerisms they show, that i show, when i'm making something up.

Si: Honestly, i think this is my absolute weakest function. Maybe this is attributable to Ni-subtype, im not sure. I can use this as a social mask, but its rigid and i havent developed it very well. With this function in role, i can see my weaknesses show up in sort of neurotic ways. I eat erratically, and often times i don't know when im full or hungry. Im prone to eat candy and shitty foods for energy. I dont need to operate on much sleep, and am probably going to go to sleep way later than i should. I can go on knuckle cracking binges if i get momentum going. I rarely know how my actions/words will affect someone, on a base level i can derive what i did was good/bad, but beforehand i dont have much confidence in causing the affect that i want. Honestly, because of that insecurity, i pretty much learned not to be fake with people or to attempt to manipulate. Not saying im above it, because im not. It just stresses the shit out of me to act in that manner since i suck at it.

Te: I have confidence here, if i'm in my realm of knowledge. But otherwise, i generally hold Te with little weight. People can argue with me about statistics or data, and its not likely to change my mind though they might shut down my argument. I tend to see Te related things as too black and white, with so little gray area that i feel its often times not applicable to a real life situation, where most things are gray. I prefer to base my beliefs/understandings on my own internal framework. As im skeptical of the validity of outside sources and the routes one can take to skew information/data. However I can get on very long unproductive streaks, and if someone calls me out on it... they're probably right and i just have to take that hit on the chin. I, in general, hold Te in little esteem but the downsides to this are just as apparent to me as the benefits from it as well.

The unconscious functions ill write about some other time.

Kudos on the effort. Fe, Si and Te descriptions were descriptions of a interplay of functions though. But the portrait that I got from you is still MBTI INFJ/ENFJ which correlates to IEI pretty good.

Well it depends on what you define as better really. Size of usable vocabulary is more probably associated with intelligence, type would play a larger part in what that vocabulary consisted of I would suppose anyway. Actually I think that is perhaps even a stretch.

I've read that dominant Ne users are good with words

[Saberstorm]

Nergeey- what are you trying to prove? On what basis do you believe you can judge what we say? You are no expert. What is up with you?

[Saberstorm]

Your name is Dutch for "nowhere." Explain that to me.

[griggerplease]

Nergeey- what are you trying to prove? On what basis do you believe you can judge what we say? You are no expert. What is up with you?

I liked his/hers post alot. But since you are choosing to interpret my reply that way let's put it up to discussion. How is what I wrote wrong?

[JWC3]

I've read that dominant Ne users are good with words

Do you self type as an "Ne user"?

[Korpsy Knievel]

Drop your knickers so we can see this hoop you're asking us all to jump through.

[griggerplease]

Do you self type as an "Ne user"?

No

[JWC3]

Drop your knickers so we can see this hoop you're asking us all to jump through.

*shrugs* I'd fuck 'em.

@negern Perhaps a better question would be who is someone you think is both an Ne user, and is also good with words. How does their use of language manifest as different than individuals who you do not think possess Ne. I would prefer examples but if you can explain your train of thought conceptually that would be fine.

[JWC3]

Also I really am open to describing some function and how I feel about that function if you care to pick which one. It strikes me as a harmless task.

[Beautiful sky]

Hi!

What is your type? Can you descripe how your functions feel in a concrete reality based way? If you can please do so.

Shoot!

What am I shooting for?

[griggerplease]

Also I really am open to describing some function and how I feel about that function if you care to pick which one. It strikes me as a harmless task.

Ni for example or your first or second function perhaps - please stay on intended track mentioned in the opening post

What am I shooting for?

She said while shooting blindfolded..

[Cuddly McFluffles]

You're asking that someone describe in a concrete, reality-based way? This strikes me as ironic.

Edit: Re-read the OP. OK, I see what you're saying. I might pop by later and give a write-up. However, I'm a horrible procrastinator, so...

[griggerplease]

Just have to give credz to @Pookie. There actually is a chance that he has typed himself correctly. There is so much mistyping going on right now though.

[somavision]

Hi!

What is your type? Can you descripe how your functions feel in a concrete reality based way? If you can please do so.

Shoot!

With regards to my type, I'm an IEE, with regards to yours, I believe that we are conflictors. Right now my functions feel nice. I offer a concrete reality based breakdown, I trust that it is acceptable and meets your cirteria for correctness .

Ne - It feels like being at a set of traffic lights at the point where they turn from red to gree.
Fi - It feels like the familiar smile of a friend I have not seen in years
Se - Feels like a show that I cannot maintain, I need to leave the room and wash off the dirt.
Ti - Feels like something important I struggle to define, like a large sound system with many inputs, outputs, feedbacks and auxillaries; I may have an understanding of how it works and could troubleshoot any faults, but lack confidence in explaining it concisely and my ability to learn quickly. So to sum up I feel uncertain.
Si - I am not sure, an outside agent could probably sum this up better than me.
Te - I don't know what subjective knowledge I can express in relation to this function, if I were to re-write your question, phrased to myself and specific to this function, perhaps it would help. Describe how Te feels in a concrete reality based way? I am aware of a desire to accumulate much knowledge, I often have difficulty selecting the most specific knowledge to use in any given situation. I have learned a mantra used by Carl Rogers (taught to him by an agriculture proffesor) "Don't be a damned ammunition wagon; be a rifle!"
Ni - One path amoungst many perhaps, no noticalbe perception.
Fe - I react quickly and confidently to emotional states both internally and externally, this shifting is like a wave that can be surfed, my awareness hightens when these states change, I am aware in changes of blood pressure and the clarity of my vision, my focus is drawn to the emotional dynamics, I have an instinct to mediate.

[Pa3s]

What is your type?

ISTp

Can you descripe how your functions feel in a concrete reality based way?

This is how my functions feel in a concrete, reality based way:

- blissful
- firm
- wavering
- steamy
- wondrous
- rightful
- spiky
- linear

[JWC3]

Ni for example or your first or second function perhaps - please stay on intended track mentioned in the opening post

Ni makes me feel confident. It sort of is commonly described in relation to direction, or rather the concept of direction, but I don't feel that way in interacting with Ni leads. Rather instead of instilling some purpose in me, Ni to me feels like reassurance that I am acting or taking action correctly. At times I think it can manifest in a pleasant reminder of impending difficulties which is nice because then I can prepare to handle those difficulties.

[Beautiful sky]

She said while shooting blindfolded..

I like your humor. There's Fi. My subjective emotional reactions to people, what they say etc, based on my disposition, moral values. Producing a feeling of kinship, closeness, forming relations.

[strangeling]

It's easy. In order to prove a pseudo-science, all you have to do is believe it yourself - rationalize everything within the scope of socionics. If you find yourself making a contradiction, find a better rationalization; if someone else contradicts you, then they are an idiot.

I've solved socionics.

[Beautiful sky]

It's easy. In order to prove a pseudo-science, all you have to do is believe it yourself - rationalize everything within the scope of socionics. If you find yourself making a contradiction, find a better rationalization; if someone else contradicts you, then they are an idiot.

I've solved socionics.

I find what you said to be hilarious
*I hope it's not directed at me*

[griggerplease]

SLE

- Self aware state
- The state of looking at the scale numbers after weighing something polyamorous
- Aware state
- The state of knowing what is important to oneself and how important that thing/person is
- State of interpreting the big picture
- The state of knowing what is important to the majority and how important that thing/person is
- State of tuning in to desired previously experienced "sensation"
- Stressed state

This is my latest typing. What do you think of the descriptions?

[Beautiful sky]

-external awareness of things, criticism of external objects

[Absurd]

[ClownsandEntropy]

I always confuse parallelograms and trapeziums. CLASSIC SE-POLR.

[JWC3]

I always confuse parallelograms and trapeziums. CLASSIC SE-POLR.

Pfft, Noob. Trapeziums are so entirely distinct from parallelograms.

[ClownsandEntropy]

Pfft, Noob. Trapeziums are so entirely distinct from parallelograms.

Maybe for a decisive type. But I'm more interested in how the shape is changing over time.

[JWC3]

Maybe for a decisive type. But I'm more interested in how the shape is changing over time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topology

[Kogoro Akechi]

I have a question, is it possible the description of male also match with the female? I'm a female btw..I haven finish read other socionic description yet, but so far I got matched with ILE Ne, LSI, SLI.