Differences between LII-INTj and ILI-INTp

[Soupman]

No, Mens, Korpsey and Aestrivex are clear ILIs. They can't be IEEs. IEE is out of the question.

I used to think like that until I actually experienced what @Bertrand is talking about. @Olduvai looked like an ILI initially because he was into ideas, held his ground (was no pushover and could be hostile like a man). I no longer think of IEEs as soft at all, and here the subtype theory helps me understand differences; Normalisers and Harmonisers are far less confrontational.

However after closely talking to him, the half extinguishment dissonance emerged, my ideas seemed wrong to him - couldn't trust my analysis, he said I was speculating/forcing things together which may not necessarily do so. And well I'd here and there say, his ideas weren't internally consistent - you are not thinking about how everything is suppose to fit in together. Ni vs Ne cognitively is like Ti vs Te.

The ILI: Ti-Te vs IEE: Fe Fi, was also weird - I had no counter to his Fe-Fi reasoning, especially when he emphasized the "Fe" reason - which is actually a logic form but conceptual, implicit, in its factoids (over pedantic logic (logic) - focusing on explicit details). Similarly I realized that when I also emphasized my "Ti", logically and systemically explaining my rationale - logic, explicit and fact based, he didn't quite process what I said.

[Kill4Me]

Somewhat yeah - ILI Creative subtype, I have alpha values but my temperament is pretty much IP/Receptive Adaptive with distortions from my subtype - I (novelty) & E (excitement) seeking.

I figured you would identify with the creative subtype...ILIs favor identification with this subtype over the other subtype ime.

I pretty sure you see it differently because you have a case-state, a precise scenario you've observed were people you classify as ILIs were "precise", offering information you perceive to be relevant/value; whilst comparably LIIs you typed seemed to offer irrelevant conjectures.

You are not so much a fan of the "wall of text" eh?

I see your take on "precise" as a more idiosyncratic view on the word. Eccentric or creative might be another way to put it. What you're saying about it may be true at a deeper level, but just for the sake of distinguishing between the types, I don't need to deconstruct it that far. And fwiw I think that conditional facts can still be described with precision in spite of the fact's conditional nature. It may not be precise in describing deeper reality but again, I don't need to go that deep with it to practically distinguish between the types. I'm not a big fan of text walls. I mean, windbags are usually full of shit. I generally mind it less from ILI than LII and am more prone to brush over "walls of text" from those I type LIIs than those I type ILIs.

Bertrand is a case in point. A lot of what he says is just pure bullshit, even though he probably doesn't know he's full of shit. Nobody can have that many universal statements in wall-of-text form to make about types from one post to another unless they have either studied socionics for a hundred years or were perpetually full of shit.

[Myst]

Okay, well first of all, go fuck yourself.

And second of all, it's not bullshit. You still aren't seeing yourself clearly.

Lol. Trust me I see myself more clearly from x years of existence in this world, than you from a few forum posts

[Kill4Me]

I used to think like that until I actually experienced what @Bertrand is talking about. @Olduvai looked like an ILI initially because he was into ideas, held his ground (was no pushover and could be hostile like a man). I no longer think of IEEs as soft at all, and here the subtype theory helps me understand differences; Normalisers and Harmonisers are far less confrontational.

However after closely talking to him, the half extinguishment dissonance emerged, my ideas seemed wrong to him - couldn't trust my analysis, he said I was speculating/forcing things together which may not necessarily do so. And well I'd here and there say, his ideas weren't internally consistent - you are not thinking about how everything is suppose to fit in together. Ni vs Ne cognitively is like Ti vs Te.

The ILI: Ti-Te vs IEE: Fe Fi, was also weird - I had no counter to his Fe-Fi reasoning, especially when he emphasized the "Fe" reason - which is actually a logic form but conceptual, implicit, in its factoids (over pedantic logic (logic) - focusing on explicit details). Similarly I realized that when I also emphasized my "Ti", logically and systemically explaining my rationale - logic, explicit and fact based, he didn't quite process what I said.

I don't know who Olduvai is...I probably wouldn't have typed him an ILI if he isn't one. He's not on my list. However, Bertrand's remark veers into wild skepticism. So yes, there's going to be your Olduvais and then there will be your Aestrivex's. With you, I sized up your Ni/Te cognition very quickly, having never known your socionics type. My only recommendation is that you look closer at the Te subtype.

[Soupman]

I figured you would identify with the creative subtype...ILIs favor identification with this subtype over the other subtype ime.

Not Roan "Aestrivex" LaPlante, assuming he's your archetype for the sociotype. He hates the theory, hasn't bothered trying to learn/understand it - he infamously said "Viktor Gulenko is completely stupid" as is everything he says. His subtype is dominant BTW.

[Kill4Me]

Not Roan "Aestrivex" LaPlante, assuming he's your archetype for the sociotype. He hates the theory, hasn't bothered trying to learn/understand it - he infamously said "Viktor Gulenko is completely stupid" as is everything he says. His subtype is dominant BTW.

He used to post here as Aestrivex/Niffweed. He had a separate forum for a period. I type him as the Te subtype.

[Muddy]

My brain just imploded from trying to decipher the comments in the later parts of this thread.

[Bertrand]

Bertrand is a case in point. A lot of what he says is just pure bullshit, even though he probably doesn't know he's full of shit. Nobody can have that many universal statements in wall-of-text form to make about types from one post to another unless they have either studied socionics for a hundred years or were perpetually full of shit.

i've actually posted about this kind of wilful blindness in the past, about how SLE generates Ti schemes to cover for what they can't understand in the guise of labeling it "not real." (I actually think this is the reason post-modern betas are so sensitive to sophistry and exclusion as will to power via ideology, because that is precisely what they're subconsciously oriented toward--the flipside of the cynicism of their dual is their expectation of cynicism in every Ti scheme) in the end its just a silly power play without any meaning. I look forward to you meditating on this issue when you're like 70

[Soupman]

He used to post here as Aestrivex/Niffweed. He had a separate forum for a period. I type him as the Te subtype.

I've known Roan since 2012 and we clash heavily, it got to a point where he called me an IEI. DCNH is a superior subtype system because I have found it explains why I unconsciously annoy him. I bring chaos when he wants order.

[Kill4Me]

I've known Roan since 2012 and we clash heavily, it got to a point where he called me an IEI. DCNH is a superior subtype system because I have found it explains why I unconsciously annoy him. I bring chaos when he wants order.

Typing wasn't Aestrivex's strength, but he still got Ni-dom right on you, though, so I can't say it's totally out of the ballpark. I just can't see how he ended up with Fe-creative. That's really bizarre.

[Kill4Me]

i've actually posted about this kind of wilful blindness in the past, about how SLE generates Ti schemes to cover for what they can't understand in the guise of labeling it "not real." (I actually think this is the reason post-modern betas are so sensitive to sophistry and exclusion as will to power via ideology, because that is precisely what they're subconsciously oriented toward--the flipside of the cynicism of their dual is their expectation of cynicism in every Ti scheme) in the end its just a silly power play without any meaning. I look forward to you meditating on this issue when you're like 70

Are you on drugs?

[Bertrand]

the irony is you're responsible for militant SJWism, enantiodromia in action

[Soupman]

Typing wasn't Aestrivex's strength, but he still got Ni-dom right on you, though, so I can't say it's totally out of the ballpark. I just can't see how he ended up with Fe-creative. That's really bizarre.

Roan types by "quadra values" not cognition or any other theory, he has created 4 groups he personally likes to put people in. Beta is his ubiquitous group for people who have the energy to challenge him, Alpha is his annoyingly "friendly" I want nothing to deal with you, Delta is reasonable but without a backbone, and of course Gamma being him serious, hostile/aggressive but "reasonable" and caring about only specific people.

[Bertrand]

lol that sounds about right, its not super sophisticated but it captures the essence of how quadra come across in broad strokes

I actually feel like the two are compatible (cognition and "quadra values")--in fact they're linked and inseparable, but people just focus on small parts of the big picture, but if you're accurate a typing works across every level of analysis. everyone has to start somewhere, but ultimately it should all coalesce into the same picture. at the end of the day its perception that has to be accounted for for the system to work for everyone and not just a subset of likeminded individuals.. this is in essence the measurement problem restated in other terms. otherwise all people can really do is argue over their preferred territorial approach or warp their approach to suit their locality. that kind of parochial mindset is still interesting because it fleshes out unique holographs, but is fundamentally limited in usefulness to anyone who doesn't already see the same stuff. this is how it lacks ability as therapy and instead becomes just self affirmation of limitations. I can think of 3 people who approach socionics this way k4m sol and olga. each have interesting insights, but they flesh out territory in the Se over Ne sense, it lacks inclusivity or the ability to reach beyond, which is really the essence of socionics, otherwise its just a game of pokemon

[Kill4Me]

Roan types by "quadra values" not cognition or any other theory, he has created 4 groups he personally likes to put people in. Beta is his ubiquitous group for people who have the energy to challenge him, Alpha is his annoyingly "friendly" I want nothing to deal with you, Delta is reasonable but without a backbone, and of course Gamma being him serious, hostile/aggressive but "reasonable" and caring about only specific people.

Oh, the old quadra values mythology approach to typing is the absolute worst approach to typing there is.

[Kill4Me]

the irony is you're responsible for militant SJWism, enantiodromia in action

Put down the crackpipe and back away slowly, Bertrand. The drugs are only intensifying your Ne-creative platitudes.

[Bertrand]

[Kill4Me]

lol that sounds about right, its not super sophisticated but it captures the essence of how quadra come across in broad strokes

I actually feel like the two are compatible (cognition and "quadra values")--in fact they're linked and inseparable, but people just focus on small parts of the big picture, but if you're accurate a typing works across every level of analysis. everyone has to start somewhere, but ultimately it should all coalesce into the same picture. at the end of the day its perception that has to be accounted for for the system to work for everyone and not just a subset of likeminded individuals.. this is in essence the measurement problem restated in other terms. otherwise all people can really do is argue over their preferred territorial approach or warp their approach to suit their locality. that kind of parochial mindset is still interesting because it fleshes out unique holographs, but is fundamentally limited in usefulness to anyone who doesn't already see the same stuff. this is how it lacks ability as therapy and instead becomes just self affirmation of limitations. I can think of 3 people who approach socionics this way k4m sol and olga. each have interesting insights, but they flesh out territory in the Se over Ne sense, it lacks inclusivity or the ability to reach beyond, which is really the essence of socionics, otherwise its just a game of pokemon

You're full of shit. I type socionics ten times better than you. I've been speaking out against typing by quadra values before you ever knew it was an issue. Reaching beyond...I'm the one that pushed the open borders approach to typing. You don't even have a VI template for each socionics type.

[strangeling]

You're full of shit. I type socionics ten times better than you. I've been speaking out against typing by quadra values before you ever knew it was an issue. Reaching beyond...I'm the one that pushed the open borders approach to typing. You don't even have a VI template for each socionics type.

[powerrainbowcrystal]

One responds well to Fe gayness the other is very 'meh' about it- this is the most obvious way to tell the difference. Or just look at how n0ki and k0rpsey both responded to my presence on the forums lol.

I don't mean to say that IEI-LII is always favorable to IEI-ILI or anything, but generally that seems to be the case. IEI-ILI will have surprising moments of good-will and compatibility and IEI-LII surprising moments of mutual agitation and not getting along.

My dad was LII and he would out of blue suddenly say something mean and hateful when normally 98% of the time I found him sweet and innocent. He would have a lot of genuine empathy and compassion for me... but due to his Se polr if he was ever pissed at me, he didn't always show it in the most tactful of ways. And a ILI will either like me or dislike me; but either way it feels a lot more consistent or something, like there is a lot less turbulence in the air.

I don't mean to sound condescending but Fi valuing/Fe valuing is pretty easy to spot in this case, right?

[Olimpia]

Actually this is true for both types but both types can only be energized by their temperament dual. EJs - for LIIs, and EPs - for ILIs. Flexible-Maneuvers are adaptive and respond to the situation when it makes sense to do so - something ILIs can unconsciously sense; however LIIs are annoyed by how this seems to come from nowhere. Linear-Assertives are orderly and stable, over being stimuli-adaptive sensitive - something LIIs unconsciously feel comfortable with, but ILIs feel is unnecessary thus frustrating.

The temperament issue gets a bit more complicated. Given that both types can also reject volitional force - especially subject to subtype or when their preferred mode of working is challenged. LII prefer to work in an IJ rhythm and ILI, an IP... there's more to it.



Yeah - neither is this entirely reliable. I have seen both LIIs and ILIs who loathe people, and care about "group-politics" who likes me, who doesn't... but only seem to do so to the degree they think it affects their interests.

I'm an ILI with Alpha values, I have realized that I do genuinely like a vivid, pleasant and emotionally relaxed atmosphere. It suits my stereotypical Enneagram 5 nature were I'm divorced from my emotions and don't/can't bring them out without a receptive atmosphere. My dual is an SEE with alpha values, not either ESE or SEI, temperament incompatibilities and dissonance information exchange reveal themselves.



Both types cannot provide such an atmosphere on command if demanded by the situation. Although subtypes do affect this - creatives are the most sociable, and most likely to functionally accentuate E and I, attuned to the emotional atmosphere and desiring to entertain others with novel ideas or antiques.

The more "serious" ILIs and LIIs do what you described as pertaining to "ILIs only".




I'm not sure if its just me, but much of this looks like common sense life-values for someone who intends to live a long and healthy life. If those personal values align with you, then it's only logical to care about the quality of your life - materially and health wise.

Socionics is broken when it comes to this manner of defining terms, and critiquing them against observations of real people.




I read about this 5 years ago and couldn't understand this blanket statement and generalization - initially I agreed with it because I'm a skeptic myself, I care about the ultimate truth but philosophically see that as unattainable especially when I got introduced to "epistemology" - how, what, why we construct knowledge and how much faith can we place in what we believe.

Years later I no longer believe that "universal truth" is a delineate between the types since I know that if I subscribed to the philosophy that there's knowledge that can be deemed universal - I'd see myself accepting that viewpoint.

However in trying to precisely explore the difference with my quasi-identicals and getting to understand how and why Gulenko thinks as he does (when he espoused this universal truths mistake). I realized he came up with that generalization after he found the ILIs he's friends with doubting his overarching conjectures without understanding the reason why. But I understand it, ILIs don't like generalizations that aren't backed up by independent evidence; ILIs feel (towards sloppy Ti logic): "just because you've observed a circumstance were what you've concluded is true, doesn't mean you have good or any evidence to generalize your observation onto everything; just because every swan you've seen is white doesn't mean 'every swan is white' is a universal truth".

What is also true is that LIIs feel similarly about "Ni" ideas (which in reality is more like "Ne" but systematized to illustrate a point) were they say ILIs come up with speculations after observing a few facts "Te" and then running away with a conclusion. The long explanation ILIs give won't be respected if it's not based on observations (ILIs feel the same way about useless "Ti" information).

There's always information confusion when the two types aren't taught explicitly why they understand the world differently, something no socionics school has tackled properly as to-date.




What you've written here can be true for both types actually - especially subject to subtypes. The reliability of their "control function" (mistakenly caused the ignoring function in model-a) determines whether you'll easily see a difference with regards to "Ne" or "Te" in a pure information way (not energy wise):

*When ILIs aren't in a fully healthy state - they don't bother making observations - exploring a lot of ideas, thus "Speculate" from limited observations to the annoyance of LIIs. Whereas when healthy, they understand the "Ne" perspective and make sure their ideas are backed up by observations.
*LIIs in an unreliable state, unfortunately don't bother to look for evidence for their grandiose - generalized claims, running away with a few observations to mass generalizations. In science they get laughed at in peer reviews when critics ask for objective impartial evidence of claims. Whereas when healthy "Te" is reliable - their logic is empirical, they don't make run away claims everyone laughs at.

The control function is always active and never ignored, regardless of whether they are making good use of it or not. BTW I find POLR makes sense as the "ignoring function" intellectually, since that information just doesn't get processed.

In energy functions the two types are identical actually - both prefer LT (Structural Logic & Temporal Intuition) the most and PI (Pragmatic Logic & Intuition of Opportunities) less. Both types are low in energy - they are not driven to be overly pragmatic or to chase new opportunities; preferring instead to move at their own pace and timely T (Temporal Intuition) and following rules, systemically and orderly inline with their focus L (Structural Logic).

FE are what their dual both possess and I like that Gulenko has admitted that ESEs are very pushy and demanding, especially the Dominant subtype which amplifies P(Desire for results), E(Emotional dominance), & F(volitional force).

LII confirmed?

Especially this: "I'm an ILI with Alpha values, I have realized that I do genuinely like a vivid, pleasant and emotionally relaxed atmosphere (Fe-Si af). It suits my stereotypical Enneagram 5 nature were I'm divorced from my emotions and don't/can't bring them out without a receptive atmosphere. (Fe seeking/1D Fe and Si valuing)"

So what exactly makes you ILI-like?
(Apart from having strong Ni and Ti, which both ILIs and LIIs share.)

You've also made several excuses about how ILIs use Ne more often than they actually do, even making the claim that "The control function is always active and never ignored". You deliberately chose the word "control", because "Ignoring" implies the obvious. Another claim of yours is how "unhealthy" ILIs will explore a lot of ideas. Why would an unhealthy ILI focus on their Ignoring function? You contradict yourself in the next paragraph when you explain how LIIs will ignore Te too much when they are unhealthy. So ILIs use their (Ignoring) Ne more when they are unhealthy, and LIIs use their Te (Ignoring) less when they are unhealthy? Pick one.

So yeah, I get the impression you are for some reason rationalizing your self-typing as ILI from the view point of someone who is actually more likely LII, and that imbues your explanation with false function definitions.

I am wondering what drives you away from the LII self typing, despite even admitting you have Alpha values. I suppose it is your lower conscientiousness, making you think you cannot possibly be Ij? And also, I suppose Type 5 fits better with ILI stereotypes, as you pointed out yourself.

[para]

You guys are just marvelous.

[ApeironStella]

My ILI friend tends to like assertive people, people who doesn't fear to show their desires/sexuality/wants and chases after them as he tends to have problems with showing how he feels especially when it is something intense.

I would nope away from such a person and am drawn to people who give an air of "fairness" and emotional warmth. I just get really easily influenced by anyone showing genuine warmth and interest to me and while I have problems with verbalizing emotions too, when it is intense, I have a need to somehow emote it out so making weird noises, grinning ear to ear with sparkling eyes with flailing hands or dying whale noises tend to be my go to expressions at such times.

He also tends to have an eye out for how to profit from things, ie he is rather into video games and knows how to make charas to sell in games, a Te focus to it, while I am a lot more into needless details/trivias/whatever the game maker could be thinking.

Also he tends to love speculative lores where nothing is as certain, things like Dark Souls lore while I feel a need for certainity so I tend to like things like Portal series where it is a lot more humorous. He doesn't really like antichamber as well, for entire purpose of that game is understanding how logic of that game works and there isn't much replayability value there as once you figure it out, things can be rather easily linear after that. While for me it is a precious game for the maker of the game, who is likely to be an LII or Alpha NT at least, made the game to observe and play with how people thought while they play a video game. It was his way of understanding human nature/psychology which he finds boring.

Funnily enough, he is actually the type to say "Science is not just facts, it is also imagination." with his Ni poking in, marveling at possibilities of the universe while I am a lot less into that and would rather focus on things I can systematize to a certain extent and then placing some wiggling room.for exceptions.

There is also being a 5 vs 9 involved there too probably, as he is 5w4 sp/so but those are the things I have observed.

He is a lot undecisive inside while he comes off as more certain outside, while I am a lot more certain/have a categorizing outlook to things inside but come off as more open minded and softer/less certain outside due to making my intuitive associations outside, using things and people's reactions as a sounding board.

[Shining]

One responds well to Fe gayness the other is very 'meh' about it- this is the most obvious way to tell the difference. Or just look at how n0ki and k0rpsey both responded to my presence on the forums lol.

I don't mean to say that IEI-LII is always favorable to IEI-ILI or anything, but generally that seems to be the case. IEI-ILI will have surprising moments of good-will and compatibility and IEI-LII surprising moments of mutual agitation and not getting along.

My dad was LII and he would out of blue suddenly say something mean and hateful when normally 98% of the time I found him sweet and innocent. He would have a lot of genuine empathy and compassion for me... but due to his Se polr if he was ever pissed at me, he didn't always show it in the most tactful of ways. And a ILI will either like me or dislike me; but either way it feels a lot more consistent or something, like there is a lot less turbulence in the air.

I don't mean to sound condescending but Fi valuing/Fe valuing is pretty easy to spot in this case, right?

You can spot easily because you have good awareness of Ethical things.
To me, it's not evident at all either i value Fi or Fe, i think i tend to mix Fi and Ti. Most of my values and principles are the result of Ti i think and not Fi, but in the end, it looks like Fi.
What do you mean by respond well to Fe ?
I am very often emotionnally irresponsive in response to emotional expression (Fe). Emotional is more linked to my interest/sympathy into the person.
So not knowing well i tend to be aloof.
I appreciate Fe expression in my closed ones or people i am interested by, otherwise i don't really care i think, but could be a lack of awareness on Ethical stuff.
I like positive Ethical stuff towards me, but who doesn't like it ? And it could be Fi as Fe i guess.

[Skepsis]

You're full of shit. I type socionics ten times better than you. I've been speaking out against typing by quadra values before you ever knew it was an issue. Reaching beyond...I'm the one that pushed the open borders approach to typing. You don't even have a VI template for each socionics type.

The quadra value sortement is Hogwarts Hazing. It is infantile, imo. While some types fit the expected quadrant values, these values aren't necessarily correlated with their respective cognitive stacks. As I am skeptical of how and by whom cognitive functions are validated, I am that much more skeptical of typing by quadra values.

[Kill4Me]

The quadra value sortement is Hogwarts Hazing. It is infantile, imo. While some types fit the expected quadrant values, these values aren't necessarily correlated with their respective cognitive stacks. As I am skeptical of how and by whom cognitive functions are validated, I am that much more skeptical of typing by quadra values.

Typing by quadra values is stupid....it's fake socionics. Typically, if you look at the groupings in the enneagram, you can see where typing by quadras goes astray. The 468 reactive triad gets conflated into "beta values," the 125 competency triad gets conflated into "gamma values," the 279 positive reframer triad gets conflated into "Alpha values," and the 126 compliant triad gets conflated into "Delta values." So if you have an LII in the enneagram's 468-reactive triad, that person's use of Ti will be more reactively calibrated and the person would probably be mistyped LSI using the Quadra Values Technique.

[Aylen]

If your imaginary hit list is longer than your friends list then you might be ILI.

[lavos]

Example of ILI(Ni) = Hitta
Example of LII(Ti)= thehotelambush

Now all you need to do is notice how they are different.

[Kill4Me]

TheHotelAmbush is EII-Fi. I don't know Hitta's type but it's not ILI.

[Crispy]

Dammit guys what the fuck is my type?

[Soupman]

Typing by quadra values is stupid....it's fake socionics. Typically, if you look at the groupings in the enneagram, you can see where typing by quadras goes astray. The 468 reactive triad gets conflated into "beta values," the 125 competency triad gets conflated into "gamma values," the 279 positive reframer triad gets conflated into "Alpha values," and the 126 compliant triad gets conflated into "Delta values." So if you have an LII in the enneagram's 468-reactive triad, that person's use of Ti will be more reactively calibrated and the person would probably be mistyped LSI using the Quadra Values Technique.

I know an LII from Ukraine who was into VI-phrenology, he was obviously "Dominant" subtype with accentuated F and P. Under the Quadra viewpoint he'd be seen as LSI, given the IJ temperament and pronounced volitional force qualities.

He got me to doubt the delineation by Viktor that unanimously, everyone that is Alpha and Delta cognitively is some kind of pushover.

[Bertrand]

right, to connect the dots, perhaps the only way to discern the difference sometimes between LSI and LII with varying accents is quadral values. people use enneagram to make similar distinctions. I have a feeling quadral values preference is linked to Ne and enneagram Ni. two people can be outwardly indistinguishable in those kind of situations, if you look only to their immediate characteristics, but the context that situates them (Ne) is quadral values. it literally is the big picture difference that places them in the broader world, when individual differences aren't enough. like, as an island, the guy in soupman's example would be taken as LSI more often or not but its only when seeing where he slots in with others and nested within a broader scheme of values which makes sense of why he's a part of this group not that--that is where quadral values is useful. you can start from quadral values and work backwards, but for the camp that cannot see the productive use of such a technique even in principle, its like starting off on the wrong foot and therefore fatally flawed and useless

[Soupman]

LII confirmed?

Especially this: "I'm an ILI with Alpha values, I have realized that I do genuinely like a vivid, pleasant and emotionally relaxed atmosphere (Fe-Si af). It suits my stereotypical Enneagram 5 nature were I'm divorced from my emotions and don't/can't bring them out without a receptive atmosphere. (Fe seeking/1D Fe and Si valuing)"

So what exactly makes you ILI-like?
(Apart from having strong Ni and Ti, which both ILIs and LIIs share.)

You've also made several excuses about how ILIs use Ne more often than they actually do, even making the claim that "The control function is always active and never ignored". You deliberately chose the word "control", because "Ignoring" implies the obvious. Another claim of yours is how "unhealthy" ILIs will explore a lot of ideas. Why would an unhealthy ILI focus on their Ignoring function? You contradict yourself in the next paragraph when you explain how LIIs will ignore Te too much when they are unhealthy. So ILIs use their (Ignoring) Ne more when they are unhealthy, and LIIs use their Te (Ignoring) less when they are unhealthy? Pick one.

So yeah, I get the impression you are for some reason rationalizing your self-typing as ILI from the view point of someone who is actually more likely LII, and that imbues your explanation with false function definitions.

I am wondering what drives you away from the LII self typing, despite even admitting you have Alpha values. I suppose it is your lower conscientiousness, making you think you cannot possibly be Ij? And also, I suppose Type 5 fits better with ILI stereotypes, as you pointed out yourself.

I prefer this definition by Gulenko's energymodel, compared to model-a which I've been done with for quite sometime. I have information dissonance with SEIs and ESEs, the intertype relations I hate with them (from a pure information viewpoint).

Defining functions as "values" is another important but separate (inconsistent) part of socionics.

7	Controlling	Leading, stable, internality	Control via the restriction

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...er-examination

V.V. Gulenko "Criteria of reciprocity"

Hospitable monotony


Initially, communication is interesting, but too monotonous and tiresome. It takes a lot of effort to introduce an element of novelty and originality. In this way, partners can reach a fairly substantial degree of reciprocity for some time. Over time each begins to demand more attention than the other person is willing to grant him. Complains and criticisms begin to surface and flourish on this ground. Partners start to think of each other as selfish. Constant minor disagreements and squabbles are an inevitable component of these relations at close distance.


Binary attributes intertype relationships


Superego relations are characterized by the ability to sensitively capture the state and motivations of the partner at large communicative distances. Therefore, superego partners need a lot of space for interpersonal and diplomatic maneuvers. Their ability to get along greatly diminishes at close distances and when partners are deprived of change and new impressions.


Relations of superego consist of constant maneuvering and empty promises. In person partners can say one thing to each other while in private keeping to completely different decisions. Their activity is highly dependent on the general state of the pair. Each violently resists any attempts to make him dependent. Such pair is very dynamic and requires frequent change in activities.


At a close distance, these relations become full of arguments and quarrels. Partners try to find some kind of stable position, but such a position is very shaky and constantly escapes them. Relations of superego are based on restoration of balance that is periodically destroyed. Thus all rapid changes in this pair are perceived from negative point of view rather than positive one. Each partner blames the other if the distance is mismatched. Partners come to see each other as egoistical. Relations can be very passionate but at the same time they are characterized by irrational behavior towards one another.


These relations are also pragmatic. Superego partners come together having very concrete, tangible, materialistic interests. This pair is capable of accumulating experiences by method of trial and error. Partners also monitor the status of each other and very painfully react if one of them obtains some privileges or benefits over the other.


The development of this type of relations leads to a gradual, but turbulent equalizing of forces and emotional contributions of the partners. Each of the participants is quick to react to any imbalance. The amplitude of these oscillations gradually increases, reaches a climax, and then begins to decline, as the partners learn to more fully consider the interests of each other. Opposition of positions gradually declines.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...rego-relations

V.V. Gulenko "Criteria of reciprocity"

Disorienting hospitality


Conflict partner immediately draws your attention via some unusual effect he has on you. If your areas of activity are separate, then communication is overall polite and amiable. Especially of interest are the methods which conflict partner uses to solve his problems. When trying to work more closely, his behavior starts to seem confusing. As a result of this, irritation builds up, which can lead to conflict if partners don't distance in time.


Binary signs of intertype relations


Disagreements a fueled even further with intervention of third parties. The root causes of conflict – complete opposition of the basic properties of the personality – are not removed when partners communicate one-on-one (this is impossible in principle), but can be curbed, disregarded for a time being, interiorized. Conflict relations grow more accommodating with maximum isolation from external influences.


Conflict partners can keep together only if they adhere to a system of discussing their tastes, habits, and intentions beforehand. In conflict relations, to avoid escalation into open conflict, partners need to have an outlet to discharge their internal emotional tensions. Conflict partners do not tolerate uncertainty and subtle hints. These relationships stabilize when they are founded on a solid, invariable rhythm of life.


Conflict partners usually are willing to demonstrate reasonableness and manage to stay together in spite of an apparent dissimilarity of character, but this is only possible with continuous suppression of internal negative emotions. Advice of conflicting partner seems deliberately misleading and illogical. There is a need to constantly restrain oneself to not retaliate and try to discredit him.


Conflicting relations inhibit any bold, original initiatives and quickly extinguish any "flights of imagination". They orient people at conservative, routine values. Partners beneficially work together only on already established and previously successful projects. These relations require a stable, strictly static environment. Conflict partners have a tendency to conserve exiting balance and very much disapprove of unexpected turns of events. Switching to new mode of existence is extremely difficult; it is seen almost as a natural disaster. Thus partners resist change at all costs, clinging to the old ways. Only after being sure that all connections have been broken do they look to a new course.


Associations are usually only short-term, during which the partners can significantly move forward. In other cases differences are reinforced. Internal tensions immediately makes itself felt when conflictors get closer, into which they are sometimes pressured by external circumstances. At best, the tension is relieved by mutual jokes and banter, at worst – a quarrel and forceful collision.


Advice on getting along


These relations cause the ever-present inner tensions. People brought together by these relations over time become anxious and irritable. In collaboration with your conflict partner, strictly divide duties among yourselves and carry them out according to a firm schedule/plan. Rationalization will help you keep internal nervousness and negative emotions at bay and channel accumulated energy into useful things of homemaking or leisurely nature.


It is recommended to use humor and jokes to uplift each other's moods. However, joke carefully and avoid sarcasm. Once you feel that the tension has reached a critical point, it is best that you leave the vicinity of your conflict partner (for example, go to a different room).


Do not allow any mediators into your relations. Household duties do together, but don't take up the same duty together. Avoid surprises, fancies, novelties, as your partner is likely to react negatively to them.


Keep fidelity out of a sense of duty, consciously suppress resentment and antipathy. Make it a tradition to celebrate the most pleasant moments of your relationship. Help each other in the most difficult moments. This way you will see responsiveness and effectiveness of these relations in the pursuit of mutual interests against outside pressure and adversity.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...lict-Relations

[Kill4Me]

I know an LII from Ukraine who was into VI-phrenology, he was obviously "Dominant" subtype with accentuated F and P. Under the Quadra viewpoint he'd be seen as LSI, given the IJ temperament and pronounced volitional force qualities.

He got me to doubt the delineation by Viktor that unanimously, everyone that is Alpha and Delta cognitively is some kind of pushover.

Gulenko surprises me. I would expect him to favor an Open Borders Approach because of how he seems to grasp at possibilities such as "Multiple Types". The Quadra Values technique amplifies mistypings because it only binds the typer into a straightjacket (and there is no rational basis for it).

I'm a big proponent of VI. I think any author pontificating on Socionic Types needs to show their VI templates for each Socionics Type. Is the author just building air castles upon air castles or are his ideas grounded in physical reality? If they can present a VI template, then the next thing to look at is the quality of the groupings and whether the groupings work in so far as cognition goes....it's been my assertion that the VI layout that comes out the best is the one which implicitly contains the truest information about socionics.

I don't even organize my Socionics New Wave list in order of quadra for specifically this point. I don't see any need for that since quadra values typing is a mythology and dissolving that mythology has been a core platform of Socionics New Wave since its inception. Advanced duality is only a more recent addition from Socionics New Wave onto subtype theory.

Quadra Values typing is becoming a thing of the past.

[Bertrand]

what's the difference between your VI system Sols or Olgas, how do you resolve differences between them

what exactly underlying them is being described? nothing? are you just better at seeing things like a person who has 20/20 vision vs someone who has 20/15, or are there underlying qualitative differences not just mistakes of visual accuity. if there aren't quadral values ultimately what does it mean to be in beta quadra, why are quadras organized into quadra at all if differences in functional preference are indistinguishable except on the grounds of appearance

why don't we just make a socion out of big noses and small heads or other patterns in physical characteristic if there's no meaningful difference between patterns at the level of relationships between those groups

[Kill4Me]

Dumb question. If you were to group along the features of big noses and small heads, the groupings come out incredibly incoherent as far as like-cognition goes. You end up grouping people together who have indisputably different cognition.

[Bertrand]

yeah but what is like-cognition if it doesn't produce any results, its just a cloud of words

[Kill4Me]

One result is accurately typing the individual in question within a much shorter time.

[Bertrand]

yeah but if there is no result at stake, I can accurately type everyone by just randomly assigning them and its indistinguishable from any other typing system. in that sense you can say its not real or any more real than chaos which is that which is unknown, if knowledge is indistinguishable from ignorance then it can't be knowledge, because there's no implication for action (except that typology is a waste of time)--this is precisely "the problem" with typology

[Kill4Me]

Some people may just want to know a person's type to know it, not for any practical reason but because they find typing a fun exercise/hobby and prefer to be accurate.

And yet others prefer real world applications...i.e. in the real world people may not have time to pull out an eighty question sheet and others may not be inclined to show much about their cognition. VI provides a nice shortcut in that sense. Quickly tagging the person's socionics type can provide accurate information about the person's cognition - strengths, weaknesses, blindspots, competencies, incompetencies - that may otherwise take a longer time to figure out.

What somebody does with the result is up to them.