I'm between alpha and gamma for him.
IMO, he doesn't have a fraction of the range of Russell Peters, who beams EIE all over the place:
Aziz Ansari
I'm between alpha and gamma for him.
IMO, he doesn't have a fraction of the range of Russell Peters, who beams EIE all over the place:
if he's between Alpha or Gamma, he's beta or delta... ^_^ I think he's IEI. He's a clear introvert imo, he also happens to look exactly like my IEI friend.
SEE
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I don't believe that he's SEE. IMO, he projects Fe rather than Fi. (In performers, I've found that it can be difficult to tell the difference.)
I agree with hkkmr's typing -- IEI seems the most likely to me… IEI-Fe.
Huh?? I don't see that at all. That video is of Russell Peters, I hope you weren't going off of that..
I agree he is I, but he's not an F and not a beta. The range of his jokes falls into gamma, imo. I thought alpha bc he has that NT nerdy thing going on too.
I'm going with ILI:
I like him better doing interviews:
He's so funny
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Thanks for the videos!! I'll check them out, and get back to you with (hopefully) a better educated opinion… The interview, especially, will help.Originally Posted by sssonyyy
Huh?? I don't see that at all. That video is of Russell Peters, I hope you weren't going off of that..
I agree he is I, but he's not an F and not a beta. The range of his jokes falls into gamma, imo. I thought alpha bc he has that NT nerdy thing going on too.
I'm going with ILI:
FWIW, I've seen "Parks and Rec" many times -- I love it -- and I believe that it can be classified, primarily, as Gamma, (with nods to both beta and delta -- reminiscent of classic U.S. sitcoms like "Cheers," in that way.) For example, Adam Scott (who plays Ben Wyatt on the show) is, to me anyway, a prototypical ENTj comic actor.
The actor who plays Ron Swanson intrigues me re: Socionics type -- introverted gamma or delta? Regardless, he's hilarious -- just looking at the guy cracks me up! Perfectly cast character.
I've never watched parks and rec. I can't seem to get into these shows everyone keeps telling me to watch.. Breaking Bad, Parks and rec, house of cards.. I need my comedies to be way too silly, AND I'm very picky with my definition of silly. Its always sunny in philadelphia, portlandia, futurama are favorites, and on the other end, Mad Men. Do you watch any of those, bc I have strong socionics opinions on them too, lol.
Most of my friends have a much bigger list of shows that they follow regularly, but idk I just lose interest if it's based too heavily on one type of social group perception, which most mainstream shows are.
@JuJu
Aziz is made more difficult to type, IMO, by not conforming to the ol' temperament stereotypes, (which, personally, I've found progressively less helpful over the years.)
sssonyyy, I agree with you, esp. after watching the interview, that he values Te and Fi, (evident in statements like - paraphrasing - "I wanted to know what this guy typed to get him to an image that he clicked, which then turned into the woman he wanted to spend the rest of his life with...") His comedic style reminds me, vaguely, of Chris Rock's. (Chris Rock, IMO, is ENTj.)
So, scrapping my first-thought typing (which was IEI,) I've been trying to discern whether he values Ne or Ni… Has anyone seen anything that would indicate a preference?
This typing interests me a lot.
I love "It's Always Sunny…" and will almost always watch "Futurama" or "Mad Men" when they're on… Recently, I got into old episodes of "Strangers with Candy," which are so absurd -- demented, and silly - but somehow, well-done… I've been wanting to check out Portlandia for a LOOONG time now.I've never watched parks and rec
Most of my friends have a much bigger list of shows that they follow regularly, but idk I just lose interest if it's based too heavily on one type of social group perception, which most mainstream shows are.
@JuJu
I'm interested in what you think, Socionics-wise, for the shows you mentioned.
Strangers with candy looks promising, will check that out.. I need new shows to watch, my bf and I finished all the seasons of portlandia and always sunny too quickly. As an aside, my bf is ISTj and it's difficult to keep his attention on tv shows for more than 20 mins (he mostly just watches south park and UFC lol), so I was pretty surprised myself that he liked portlandia so much. He's not one to find that Ne-ish hipster self-absorption funny, which no doubt draws a lot of people to Portlandia; we just laugh at the two people doing stupid stuff.
Oof I'll get back to this shortly.I'm interested in what you think, Socionics-wise, for the shows you mentioned.
EIE - To me, the Fe is so incredibly apparent. A Te valuer wouldn't do a skit like Randy, nonetheless end the show with it. I also found it funny how Aziz touched on the fact that James Franco(SEI) does not like him, and how he's the only person on stage(during the roast) who isn't his friend.
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
The first video is not Aziz.
I saw one of his standups on Netflix. Gut reaction: ILE/ ENTp
james franco is not isfj?
You shouldn't compare EIE's to IEI's these can be two very different types. Mirror types can be dramatically different in many things. I also don't think he's gamma, his whole livelihood is surround by Alpha types but he doesn't really fit in 100% with them either and is more independent.Huh?? I don't see that at all. That video is of Russell Peters, I hope you weren't going off of that..
I agree he is I, but he's not an F and not a beta. The range of his jokes falls into gamma, imo. I thought alpha bc he has that NT nerdy thing going on too.
I'm going with ILI:
I like him better doing interviews:
As far as his 2nd video you linked, that's basically him asking teachers to be more like SLE's. There are many situations where imo he acts like a IEI in his standup, such as when he talks about him meeting M.I.A.
He is imo for sure a introvert, his standup is entirely personal and focused on his life.
"I like talking about things that are going on in my life, because that's always going to be different and original," he says. "No one else is gonna be talking about my personal experiences."
This is different than someone like Dylan Moran, who's comedy isn't very personal, but observational.
He could be SEI as well imo, IEI/SEI are look alike types.
By that rationale both Ron White and Kevin Hart are also IEIs due to their use of personal anecdotes. Long-form story telling is simply what mainstream stand-up is currently. It's not a comment on a celebrity's type, it's just how you make money doing stand-up today.
Easy Day
Introvert not IEI, there is a huge difference.
Also his stand-up is entirely personal. There is a huge difference between the use of personal anecdotes and being personal. You can tell a story that happened to you in an entirely impersonal manner as well. You can do observational comedy based on your own experience as well. A persons own experiences is always present in things, but some individuals choose to depersonalize those things and others will accentuate them.
I don't know Ron White, but I think Kevin Hart is a introvert as well, but not IEI.
Link two seperate comedians who's stylistic differences will elucidate the contrast between using personal anecdotes and being personable.
Easy Day
I want a pocket comedian.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
It's simple.
Take Aziz Ansari's gay right sketch, he talks about meeting a gay rights activist who asks him to sign a petition, and Aziz say's he's busy, except there is just something trival that he is going towards.
He personalizes the joke by then saying he's going to kill this person who is where he's going to(because this person is against gays), he personalizes it more by asking the activists what is he doing to help gay rights. In the end this is a personal interaction/confrontation between him and the activist and soon to be personal interaction between him and the person he's going to kill.
He orients this simple interaction into a deeper subjective experience.
Now let's look at a comedian that steers towards externalizing this sort of personal experience.
He's talking about a similar personal anecdotes where he's having a interpersonal interaction with a driver. Instead he externalizes the situation comedically, by inferring from this person's 4 marriages is proof positive of American optimism. It's all very matter of fact, there is no subjective orientation in what he's communicating.Ellis: You married at a fairly young age. Do Europeans marry earlier than Americans on the East or West Coast?
Moran: I don't know, Americans are funny. I was talking to a man who was driving me from the airport yesterday, nice guy, who had been married four times. If that isn't proof positive of the eternal American optimism... I don't know what is!
Jungian introversion and extroversion is very much about this and how some individuals deals with their experience, everyone's experiences is personal, but not everyone dwells in that personal experience, some try to move away from it, while others take even impersonal experiences and make them more personal.
These are 2 examples, I could easily find 100 examples for these two individuals, or 1000, because this isn't something that happens once or twice in an individuals life, but constantly in almost everything they do.
It's not that introverts or extroverts don't all have personal experiences, every single individuals life is a collection of personal experiences, but introverts and extroverts take very different roads when expressing what they've gathered from these experiences.
If you're going to analyze behavior with Jungian dichotomies then you should reach a conclusion in Jungian terms.
Easy Day
Jungian dichotomies are socionics dichotomies, that's why those dichotomies are called Jungian dichotomies in socionics. It's not like introversion or extroversion changes from Jung to Socionics. Socionics doesn't redefine Jungian dichotomies like some other studies, they only acquire new commentary. Socionics remains backwards compatible.
But if you really need to use socionics dichotomies, I will.
http://www.socionics.us/theory/ext_int.shtml
See here. The same applies.
Using socionics terms that Rick has posted, the introvert in my example, creates interrelationships between objects in the situation he presents, while the extrovert comments on the quality and characteristic of Americans.
Yeah most people think Ron White is ESFj and Kevin Heart is ESFp
Yeah that's why I excluded him from my quadra too lol.
I think most of his comedy is making himself annoying, esp in shows like Parks and Recreation.
OK, sorry for taking so long, I wanted reply to this when I had enough time.
I'll start with the easiest, It's Always Sunny...
Dennis - LIE.
Mac - EIE
Dee - SEE
Charlie - IEE
Frank - ILE
Not sure about the Waitress, or the other random chicks that float in.. like Artemis, or Frank's wife.
With Futurama, I would say that the actual personality of the characters is rather one dimensional, done on purpose bc there's so much other cool shit going on, where the focus is the group's interaction with the outside world, rather than their interpersonal relations. There is also no real conflict or catharsis arising from the personality of the characters - the relationship conflicts are much more general. I think it's a pretty Alpha show.
Mad Men is so BIG that it eludes socionics theory, though I've tried to type the characters many times. Mad Men also reveals different aspects of the characters each time you re-watch it, so that whatever initial judgement you had made of the character seems like it needs to be totally revised.
The few characters whose type I am entirely certain about are not even main characters. Sally is definitely Beta, probably SLE. Faye is LSE. The moment it became apparent is after Don tells her the truth of his identity. She tells him to turn himself in, come clean with the authorities, and she'll help him through the whole thing. Interestingly, when I've watched that episode with a beta or a gamma, their reaction was WTF, NO! (which was my reaction). Alphas and deltas think Faye has made a good suggestion, and there are a lot of people on forums who think Don should have stuck with Faye because that was his "healthiest relationship." These people do not know what they are talking about at all.
I guess that would mean that I think the show falls between beta and gamma? Roger is SEE, maybe IEE. Joan is a sensor, Peggy is an intuitive, but both are introverts. Lane was all Ti, no Se; LII. Peter is LIE or ILE. Betty is ESI or IEI. Megan is definitely Fe-creative.
But what about Don??!! I really don't know.
I listened to his latest special during the weekend, he might be SEI instead of IEI.
EIE
Will they hook up?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
