Same same but different

[Hays]

...

[pianosinger]

My guess is ILI>IEI

[Marie84]

I think she's LII.
Alot of what she's talking about sounds like + working; "reading into thing", creating something out of nothing, being filled with ideas and theories for the purpose of putting them in order to "make sense" of things.
She describes bits of here and there when referring to her stationary like reflective behavior and perhaps role with how she deals with people

[golden]

Where is the ? I don't see it, so can't vote IEI.

ILI and LII both seem closer.

[Crispy]

Definitely ILI > LII. LII's are known for being concise, and don't normally have difficulty with it. Also the being torn between thinking/feeling is a dead giveaway to being an irrational type.

[Jarno]

Yeah, ILI

[07490]

Definitely ILI > LII. LII's are known for being concise, and don't normally have difficulty with it. Also the being torn between thinking/feeling is a dead giveaway to being an irrational type.

yea, shes a dynamic type, so i agree ILI>LII.

[Jarno]

I think she's LII.
Alot of what she's talking about sounds like + working; "reading into thing", creating something out of nothing, being filled with ideas and theories for the purpose of putting them in order to "make sense" of things.
She describes bits of here and there when referring to her stationary like reflective behavior and perhaps role with how she deals with people

you should actually watch her instead of focussing on what she says

[07490]

you should actually watch her instead of focussing on what she says

I type people like that as well. I watch how they say it rather than what they say. Quick and easier, less confusing in my opinion, but I know if you are doing to do that, it's relating to your past socionics experiences with another person with similar types or a hintch. which if you gut feeling in the past is not wrong, should be enough.

[Jarno]

do you type people like that as well? I do. I watch how they say it rather than what they say. Quick and easier, less confusing in my opinion, but I know if you are doing to do that, it's relating to your past socionics experiences with another person with similar types or a hintch. which if you gut feeling in the past is not wrong, should be enough.

Exactly.

[Nexus]

Te-INTp / creative over-analysis, typical expert - 2:33 "I don't care if they don't understand it"

though she physically comes off as very Ni at 2:51, when she is explaining her philosophy - how she can be inspired without an "external stimulus" (probably because she has suggestive Se)

however the rest is about how she likes to think...anyway there is no way she is IEI, and jumbled thoughts are not at all typical for Ti-leading types

she really just overanalyzed this whole video and all of her own behaviors, perhaps it is just the woes of being simultaneously IP and NT 24/7...

[717495]

I relate to her way of living and processing in that I'm quite introverted, intuiting, thinking, perceiving, obviously the same type in MBTI. But I don't know if we're the same Socionics type, because it uses different dichotomy descriptions and terms.

My initial reaction for her type is IEI. Not completely sure though.

[Exodus]

LII ftw.

The speech pattern she mentions - halting between words - definitely a base thing.

[Exodus]

you should actually watch her instead of focussing on what she says

Both ways are valid. But the former method is a little more subjective, and to have any kind of reasonable discussion we have to use objective methods.

She talks at length about how she has a need to put things into a logical order or framework. This is basically the definition of . The lack of need for external stimulus I would interpret as introversion. The fact that she even perceives the need to convey things in a "logical and concise way" also suggests .

As for watching her, she uses very discrete hand gestures and facial expressions (logical + rational) and puts a very clear emphasis on certain words, which is something I do a lot too.

[Crispy]

lol @ a logical base type who is torn between logic/ethics. If she was LII she would be trying to choose between an ISTX and INTX and not be so sure about being intuitive.

[KeroZen]

No apparent so against IEI and LII.

I wouldn't distinguish NT types by their preference for or because they usually master both aspects.

I second other opinions about the polarization thing being a good indicator (harder to sort F vs T)

PS: I didn't really listen to the video sound, but she has same eye movements and facial expressions as my ILI ex...

[Exodus]

lol @ a logical base type who is torn between logic/ethics. If she was LII she would be trying to choose between an ISTX and INTX and not be so sure about being intuitive.

Are you serious? First of all, this is Myers-Briggs. Second of all, it's perfectly possible to be sure about the creative function and not the base function. This is an incredibly indirect argument for typing someone.

No apparent so against IEI and LII.

I wouldn't distinguish NT types by their preference for or because they usually master both aspects.

-_-

We need a sticky thread on typing methodology or something...

[Crispy]

Are you serious? First of all, this is Myers-Briggs. Second of all, it's perfectly possible to be sure about the creative function and not the base function. This is an incredibly indirect argument for typing someone.

The four dichotomies and the types they represent are identical in both MBTI and socionics. Anyone who has told you otherwise is focusing too much on MBTI's broken functions to see how well the descriptions match up in both theories, and should simply read more descriptions from different sources. The possibility you bring up is highly unlikely relative to the possibility of confusing creative > base; which happens all the time.

[KeroZen]

When I saw thehotelambush's insulting signature and quite high post count together, I thought either:

A) he/she is a filthy troll and doesn't mean what's written
B) he/she means what's written but managed to post over 4k comments, and is surely masochistic or insane (or both)

Then I saw a post in the forum pricing thread about him/her wanting to contribute, so I'm considering (A) more seriously...

Now for the topic, I fail to see how the system (MBTI or socionics) is relevant , both have a NiTe and a TiNe type, if they are the same or not is not the question here, but both systems say that the NiTe type has N>S and the TiNe type T>F.

Thus far, the "polarization sorter question" has worked for all persons I tested around me (test = involving the person, not type-guessing from a distance... like many people dare to call that typing) and for me included (as IEI, I have more difficulties saying if I more F than T but no difficulty saying I'm N>S)

I find it suspect to ear that people can have doubts about their leading function. It's afterall the one we master the most, and we're confident when using it...

We need a sticky thread on typing methodology or something...

There is no single proper method I'm afraid. Also this wasn't really typing but only sorting between a few choices (IEI/ILI/LII)

When I said T types master both aspects I was refering to this bit in the demonstrative function definition for instance:

"A person will often have just as sophisticated an understanding of this function as his or her leading function"

As an example from an external point of view it's hard to say if I'm more Ni or Ne as I use both extensively. Same for ILI, all the ones I met where really good at Ti and Te, I never saw any afraid of theories (Ti) even if they prefer clear logical facts (Te)

My examples could be better chosen, but what I mean is that it's often easier so see what the person doesn't manage/handle well rather than the functions he/she masters.

[ashlesha]

@kerozen: thehotelambush's signature isn't his words. they were said by someone on a different forum and he's quoting them for humor purposes (i assume). he isn't a troll or anything.

The four dichotomies and the types they represent are identical in both MBTI and socionics. Anyone who has told you otherwise is focusing too much on MBTI's broken functions to see how well the descriptions match up in both theories, and should simply read more descriptions from different sources. The possibility you bring up is highly unlikely relative to the possibility of confusing creative > base; which happens all the time.

? i relate more to INFP descriptions and would consider LII before ESI (i thought this was typical considering my subtype?)

[Exodus]

The four dichotomies and the types they represent are identical in both MBTI and socionics.

ok, so then MBTI should have an equally sophisticated theory of information metabolism and relationships. Oh wait...

This is kind of insulting considering the amount of time and effort that Augusta and others put into developing the theory. There are definitely similarities, but the theories are nowhere near the same, as you can see by looking at common descriptions of functions or whatever. This debate has been beaten to death IMO.

@kerozen: thehotelambush's signature isn't his words. they were said by someone on a different forum and he's quoting them for humor purposes (i assume). he isn't a troll or anything.

This.

When I saw thehotelambush's insulting signature and quite high post count together, I thought either:

A) he/she is a filthy troll and doesn't mean what's written

Yes, I am a filthy troll.

? i relate more to INFP descriptions and would consider LII before ESI (i thought this was typical considering my subtype?)

Yeah, it's not uncommon to consider mirror, business, activator, ...

Thus far, the "polarization sorter question" has worked for all persons I tested around me (test = involving the person, not type-guessing from a distance... like many people dare to call that typing) and for me included (as IEI, I have more difficulties saying if I more F than T but no difficulty saying I'm N>S)

I find it suspect to ear that people can have doubts about their leading function. It's afterall the one we master the most, and we're confident when using it...

You'd be surprised. Gilly, for example, typed himself as ILE for a really long time. Jessica typed herself as SLI. For a while most people on this forum thought they were ILE. Even if you're not a socionics noob, self-perception can be a really tricky thing.

[Exodus]

There is no single proper method I'm afraid.

Agreed, but using a person's self-perception that is phrased in terms of another system (or even socionics) is a little...indirect, to say the least.

[Crispy]

ok, so then MBTI should have an equally sophisticated theory of information metabolism and relationships. Oh wait...

The reason they don't is because they fucked up while developing the system of functions. If they did it the same way Aushra did they WOULD have a sophisticated theory of information metabolism and relationships. That does not change the fact that they are talking about the SAME 16 theoretical individuals when discussing their 16 types. The problem is their functional misrepresentation, NOT their identity.

[pianosinger]

When I saw thehotelambush's insulting signature and quite high post count together, I thought either:

A) he/she is a filthy troll and doesn't mean what's written
B) he/she means what's written but managed to post over 4k comments, and is surely masochistic or insane (or both)

Then I saw a post in the forum pricing thread about him/her wanting to contribute, so I'm considering (A) more seriously...

And you should consider the following:

a)thehotelambush has been a member of this forum since June of 2006. If you do the math, that averages to 74 posts per month. Youhave been a member since last month, and already have 344 posts.
b)I fail to see how offering to contribute towards the purchase of this forum equates to one being a "filthy troll" who "doesn't mean what's written." It's an utter non-sequitur.

[Jarno]

ok, so then MBTI should have an equally sophisticated theory of information metabolism and relationships.

not if they used an other formula to convert dichotomies to functions. Oh wait... they have an other formula.

[Exodus]

Interesting theory...in either case there isn't really any reason for me to research MBTI.

[KeroZen]

a)thehotelambush has been a member of this forum since June of 2006. If you do the math, that averages to 74 posts per month. Youhave been a member since last month, and already have 344 posts.

Argh I've been spotted! Does it mean I talk too much? :x

b)I fail to see how offering to contribute towards the purchase of this forum equates to one being a "filthy troll" who "doesn't mean what's written." It's an utter non-sequitur.

Bah, if thehotelambush cares enough to be willing to contribute to "save" this forum, it means he can't seriously think what's in his signature, hence it's humor, so I can make humor in return and say he's a filthy troll. And from his answer I got the impression he didn't take offence.

[Exodus]

Bah, if thehotelambush cares enough to be willing to contribute to "save" this forum, it means he can't seriously think what's in his signature, hence it's humor, so I can make humor in return and say he's a filthy troll. And from his answer I got the impression he didn't take offence.

Not at all.

[Jarno]

Interesting theory...in either case there isn't really any reason for me to research MBTI.

If you don't research it, then don't draw conclusions.