What's my Gulenko cognitive style?

[The Exception]

I'm not sure how valid they are but they are an interesting concept to think about. For those unfamilar with the Gulenko cognitive styles, there's an article that explains them here:

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...e_Styles(wiki)

I'm just curious what style you see as predominant in me. Try not to think about my socionics types when you're determining my style.

[Sol]

Gulenko's bullshit is not socionics

[The Exception]

Gulenko's bullshit is not socionics

I'm still curious though. Bullshit or not.

[Velvet]

A lot of typing questions about yourself and you are here since .. wait 10 years? Crazy reality, maybe isolate yourself for a while to understand what you are.

[Simo]

Gulenko's bullshit is not socionics

Why do you have to be critical of anything you don't agree with?
To me you seem unhealthy Si type who isn't open to different opinions and your communication style is Te, so are you SLI or LSE by any chance?

[Simo]

I'm not sure how valid they are but they are an interesting concept to think about. For those unfamilar with the Gulenko cognitive styles, there's an article that explains them here:

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...e_Styles(wiki)

I'm just curious what style you see as predominant in me. Try not to think about my socionics types when you're determining my style.

I need to read the article and your 80q before I can suggest a style for you so you may need to wait for a long time

[Simo]

I know you probably didn't mean it but when you make statements like that, it really feels to me like you're insulting my intelligence, my ability to introspect and that hurts. So next time be more careful in how you phrase things please.

Sometimes people can type themselves wrong and you know what, it doesn't mean were stupid or not introspective. We are allowed to question, to doubt or maybe through time we see new realities about ourselves that we didn't see before because we are more open to them. At first when I learned socionics, I was *sure* I was a logical type, not an ethical type. But now I'm seeing that my ethical side is playing a major role in my life, probably was always there but now I'm more aware of it. More accepting of myself and my shortcomings and realizing that emotionally I'm quite easily vulnerable and sensitive and having to pay attention to the 'hard logic' all the time really isn't as natural for me as I thought it was.

Calm down no one said you're stupid maybe she was just teasing like me (good thing I didn't open my mouth )
Btw, being logical type doesn't mean you are emotionally not vulnerable or insensetive

[The Exception]

Calm down no one said you're stupid maybe she was just teasing like me (good thing I didn't open my mouth )
Btw, being logical type doesn't mean you are emotionally not vulnerable or insensetive

Yeah, I probably overreacted which I tend to do at times. I tend to take what people say literally, sometimes it's difficult for me to tell if someone is teasing or really being serious, especially online where things like body language and tone of voice are missing.
I'm no longer sure if I'm logical or ethical. Leaning slightly towards ethical ATM.

[Simo]

Yeah, I probably overreacted which I tend to do at times. I tend to take what people say literally, sometimes it's difficult for me to tell if someone is teasing or really being serious, especially online where things like body language and tone of voice are missing.
I'm no longer sure if I'm logical or ethical. Leaning slightly towards ethical ATM.

Then how do you describe Ti & Fi in your own words? and how do you relate to each?

[The Exception]

Then how do you describe Ti & Fi in your own words? and how do you relate to each?

I'm not always the best at describing functions without having a functional description sitting in front of me but I'll try.

Ti to me is about logical consistency, systemization, and classification. Clarifying defintitions so that it's logically accurate. Overall, I tend to value accuracy and consistency over efficiency which is more Te. I love to classify things, to see how the parts relate to each other and how they fit into a logical whole. It's important that the structure be internally consistent. I also see Ti as more of a subjective logic. What makes logical sense to me personally. My personal set of logical principles which may be different than those dictated by society.

Fi to me is about whether or not something is morally or ethically correct. I always try to do the ethical thing when possible and think alot about ethics and such. Fi is also about preserving good relationships between others and ensuring emotional harmony. The emotional harmony part I'm less sure would fit under Fi, but the valuing good relationships is Fi. I'm constantly thinking about the people I'm interacting with and whether or not we are on good terms with each other. Also, I tend to see the intrinsic value of every human being and care very deeply about peoples' dignity and preserving that.

[Simo]

I read the (T/F) blocks in your 80q thread, and I think you fit EII > LII since I don't sense the emotional detachment I associate with LII ( idk any LII irl so it's just my understanding of LIIs)

your answers may have some logic sense to them but they seem to be coming from a more emotionally personal perspective, more like Fi answers communicated through Ti
but since you type yourself as E9 I guess it makes sense especially if you have been around many Ti-valuing friends (see the quote below from:http://www.eclecticenergies.com/enneagram/type9.php)

Nines frequently mistype themselves as they have a rather diffuse sense of their own identities. This is exacerbated by the fact that Nines often merge with their loved ones and through a process of identification take on the characteristics of those closest to them.

[Myst]

Yeah, I probably overreacted which I tend to do at times. I tend to take what people say literally, sometimes it's difficult for me to tell if someone is teasing or really being serious, especially online where things like body language and tone of voice are missing.

You take things literally, Ti > Fi. Btw I have the same problem online unless things are made very obvious in terms of a Fe context.

I'm not always the best at describing functions without having a functional description sitting in front of me but I'll try.

Ti to me is about logical consistency, systemization, and classification. Clarifying defintitions so that it's logically accurate. Overall, I tend to value accuracy and consistency over efficiency which is more Te. I love to classify things, to see how the parts relate to each other and how they fit into a logical whole. It's important that the structure be internally consistent. I also see Ti as more of a subjective logic. What makes logical sense to me personally. My personal set of logical principles which may be different than those dictated by society.

Fi to me is about whether or not something is morally or ethically correct. I always try to do the ethical thing when possible and think alot about ethics and such. Fi is also about preserving good relationships between others and ensuring emotional harmony. The emotional harmony part I'm less sure would fit under Fi, but the valuing good relationships is Fi. I'm constantly thinking about the people I'm interacting with and whether or not we are on good terms with each other. Also, I tend to see the intrinsic value of every human being and care very deeply about peoples' dignity and preserving that.

Oh, you don't really deeply understand what Fi is as an information element. You do understand what Ti is, yep, you are clearly a lot into Ti overall. I recall how we discussed before on PerC some Ti things with enthusiasm

Valuing good relationships is not specific to Fi valuing types, that's a really ludicrous idea, sorry but yeah. Fe types care about that too, they just do it differently.

The intrinsic value thing, can you say more on that? The way you present it, it's Ne heavy for sure. Also, I noticed before that LIIs are often very focused on this idea of dignity for some reason. Not saying it must be an LII thing, just wonder what's behind it.

I read the (T/F) blocks in your 80q thread, and I think you fit EII > LII since I don't sense the emotional detachment I associate with LII (idk any LII irl so it's just my understanding of LIIs)

When she gets into Ti answers I do see such emotional detachment just fine. My own POV though, so chips would have to say more on this if she doesn't agree.

[The Exception]

Oh, you don't really deeply understand what Fi is as an information element. You do understand what Ti is, yep, you are clearly a lot into Ti overall. I recall how we discussed before on PerC some Ti things with enthusiasm

What am I not understanding about Fi? Maybe I shouldn't be asking you since it's your PoLR.

The intrinsic value thing, can you say more on that? The way you present it, it's Ne heavy for sure. Also, I noticed before that LIIs are often very focused on this idea of dignity for some reason. Not saying it must be an LII thing, just wonder what's behind it.

I am often into dignity in terms of every human being has inherent value just for being who they are. Inherently as our value as human beings, we are all equal and should be treated on an equal level.

Couldn't Fi have a strong sense of dignity though?

When she gets into Ti answers I do see such emotional detachment just fine. My own POV though, so chips would have to say more on this if she doesn't agree.

I agree with that assessment.

[Myst]

What am I not understanding about Fi? Maybe I shouldn't be asking you since it's your PoLR.

It's not my PoLR, I'm not typing as SLE anymore. I think you did not really differentiate between how Fi vs Fe valuers focus on ethics.

You can check out Golihov's descriptions on Fi vs Fe for a good example to see what the differences are.

I am often into dignity in terms of every human being has inherent value just for being who they are. Inherently as our value as human beings, we are all equal and should be treated on an equal level.

Couldn't Fi have a strong sense of dignity though?

As I said I didn't say this had to be LII specific. It's just something I noticed the LII's saying often. I don't know why, though. So it doesn't mean a whole lot on its own, sure.

What do you mean by "being who they are"?

[The Exception]

It's not my PoLR, I'm not typing as SLE anymore. I think you did not really differentiate between how Fi vs Fe valuers focus on ethics.

You can check out Golihov's descriptions on Fi vs Fe for a good example to see what the differences are.




As I said I didn't say this had to be LII specific. It's just something I noticed the LII's saying often. I don't know why, though. So it doesn't mean a whole lot on its own, sure.

What do you mean by "being who they are"?

Do you have a link to Golihov's descriptions?

By being 'who they are' I meant just that. I believe each human has equal intrinsic value. This is regardless of things like their socioeconomic status, gender, race, age, etc.

[Myst]

Do you have a link to Golihov's descriptions?

By being 'who they are' I meant just that. I believe each human has equal intrinsic value. This is regardless of things like their socioeconomic status, gender, race, age, etc.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Dmitry-Golihov