Proof for Martisa

[Slacker]

That she typed me as ESFP. I'm putting it here so as to not clog up Minde's thread anymore.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post624127

She called me SEE a few times, but I have a baby I'm trying to keep up with and have no more time to find these threads.

[Beautiful sky]

That she typed me as ESFP. I'm putting it here so as to not clog up Minde's thread anymore.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post624127

She called me SEE a few times, but I have a baby I'm trying to keep up with and have no more time to find these threads.

I am reviewing the material....

[Beautiful sky]

Originally Posted by Mariella

Although, honestly, she seems a bit odd and that would certainly cloud her type. I can't say for sure she isn't EII. (There's that Ne. Can't close off possibilities.)

Me:
And your Ne is in your third spot therefore you can not make full use of it like Ti for me; so you are SEE in reality; do you see the connection?

When a person's Ne is in their third spot, the person produces enless ideas or possibilities without knowing which possibility to settle on as the one true idea...I noticed this from what you said about your mind..."There's that Ne. Can't close off possibilities."

So, yes I strongly considered SEE for you in the begining.

[Beautiful sky]

Here's an example for you:

My SEE friend wanted to help me paint my appartment and organize my furnature, not only did she produce endless ideas of paint colors to try, which really got to me after a while she did move my furnature around all day...drove me nuts.

LSE would have "done it right" the first time with one efficient use of color, which an LSE friend came to do, he also picked out one productive way of arranging furnature..

[silverchris9]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! This thread title is a contradiction in terms. lol (seriously).

[Park]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! This thread title is a contradiction in terms. lol (seriously).

That's what I thought!

[marooned]

I just have to interject.

Full use of is seeing tons of possibilities and potentials, allowing for a lot of idea generation. That's what in the first spot does. This is why needs , to generally calm it down from it's overactive mind of possibility seeing, idea generation etc.

in the third spot can only see some of these and has difficulty grasping the larger picture of all that is possible since it can't easily see all of this picture. It is subordinate to that is focused on actualities--what something actually is and looks like, not what it could be.

(I'm sure I explained this horribly.)

[Brilliand]

I think it's plausible that role will have more need to mention many possibilities, due to not being able to judge them itself. In contrast, base would see more possibilities, but would also be able to evaluate them and only mention the ones that have value. creative would be even more limited, mentioning only those that both have value and fit into the existing framework.

[marooned]

I think it's plausible that role will have more need to mention many possibilities, due to not being able to judge them itself. In contrast, base would see more possibilities, but would also be able to evaluate them and only mention the ones that have value. creative would be even more limited, mentioning only those that both have value and fit into the existing framework.

I think that role is less likely to mention many possibilities (but that super-id will mention a lot of them). I would probably agree that base and creative might not always feel the need to mention all of the possibilities (for one it would be very time-consuming) they see, instead mentioning the ones that are seen as more relevant... but the element evaluating that is not . I would see raw more as seeing all of it. Also, how much of what is seen is mentioned would depend on the individual person. I do for instance know an ILE whose speech is a constant stream of "aha moments" half the time.

[Beautiful sky]

I think that role is less likely to mention many possibilities (but that super-id will mention a lot of them). I would probably agree that base and creative might not always feel the need to mention all of the possibilities (for one it would be very time-consuming) they see, instead mentioning the ones that are seen as more relevant... but the element evaluating that is not . I would see raw more as seeing all of it. Also, how much of what is seen is mentioned would depend on the individual person. I do for instance know an ILE whose speech is a constant stream of "aha moments" half the time.

ILE speech is a constant stream sometimes...lol; but in my case

Ne: The second function of the INFj is Ne, by which the essence of ideas arrive and insights into their development arise. With this function, it is possible to collect multiple perspectives, concepts, ideas, and beliefs in order to register into a readily available databank their entirety and the various conscious considerations concerning them as they stand in the abstract theoretical world and in order to derive a global picture of them. However, Ne also maintains an active neutral stance on all of the whole of its inputs, even if the whole of the input of one core belief, concept, or idea, conflicts with any of the other core beliefs, concepts, or ideas it remains non-biased and registers them all as equals. Probably the most powerful aspect of Ne is an ability to see potential in the most obscure forms and to believe in them. Being an extroverted function, Ne cannot derive data from within and must amass information from outside of itself and in the here and now to survive as a function or at all.

Hence, constant research, feeling of hunger for knowledge, question and examination.

[marooned]

@ Maritsa, I'm not arguing your type. I said that because you seemed to think that Mariella's tendency to keep possibilities open points to role--when I think that leading would do the very opposite of this (close off possibilities so that it can act).

[Beautiful sky]

@ Maritsa, I'm not arguing your type. I said that because you seemed to think that Mariella's tendency to keep possibilities open points to role--when I think that leading would do the very opposite of this (close off possibilities so that it can act).

I know, but I have observed many SEE tell me that they just think about so very many options, I feel that Ne leading would know which is the idea to go with, but as far as closing off options, wouldn't Ne leading know which option is THE option...I know they would be able to produce many possibilities, but theres always that ONE possibility, that's not only very novel, but also very unique, because of incorporation of other things.

This is what Augustra did, incorporate many fields of study and theory into one, Socionics.

[Brilliand]

I think everyone will close off possibilities for various reasons... I know that opening possibilities can be very handy for shaking beliefs that you do not want others to hold any longer. Closing possibilities helps with more productive action, and opening possibilities can be a prelude to a later closing that results in a better alternative than we had previously (which combines both of the above reasons). So there is reason for a single person to do both.

[marooned]

I know, but I have observed many SEE tell me that they just think about so very many options, I feel that Ne leading would know which is the idea to go with, but as far as closing off options, wouldn't Ne leading know which option is THE option...I know they would be able to produce many possibilities, but theres always that ONE possibility, that's not only very novel, but also very unique, because of incorporation of other things.

This is what Augustra did, incorporate many fields of study and theory into one, Socionics.

My impression of leading is that uncertainty in the form of "maybe it's this, maybe it's that, we have to wait because there's always that other possibilty," etc. drives them nuts. just wants to go, go, go and does not want to be held up by all of these other considerations that bog it down keeping it from pursuing its objectives. leading very much wants the "one option" so it can just go with it.

Depending on the context of course, I think that sometimes leading would argue that there isn't a one, single, option... as it sees so many possible options. leading that goes with its "one way" can really irritate as is well aware of several alternatives that leading probably hasn't even considered. wants to be free to keep options open and go with other possibilities and does not want to be subjugated to "one way" of doing something, or "one path."

Synthesizing many fields of study into one is something is interested in, imo. But what Augusta did was craft a new theory from this synthesis, and that's a product of as well as of . Wanting to tie all of these theories floating around into something consistent, and into a sound theory seems more of a thing to me.

[Brilliand]

Synthesizing many fields of study into one is something is interested in, imo. But what Augusta did was craft a new theory from this synthesis, and that's a product of as well as of . Wanting to tie all of these theories floating around into something consistent, and into a sound theory seems more of a thing to me.

When describing such things as , we have to wonder what Rick (IEE) is doing.

[marooned]

When describing such things as , we have to wonder what Rick (IEE) is doing.

Studying it and finding supporting examples? (he didn't create it)

[Beautiful sky]

My impression of leading is that uncertainty in the form of "maybe it's this, maybe it's that, we have to wait because there's always that other possibilty," etc. drives them nuts. just wants to go, go, go and does not want to be held up by all of these other considerations that bog it down keeping it from pursuing its objectives. leading very much wants the "one option" so it can just go with it.

Depending on the context of course, I think that sometimes leading would argue that there isn't a one, single, option... as it sees so many possible options. leading that goes with its "one way" can really irritate as is well aware of several alternatives that leading probably hasn't even considered. wants to be free to keep options open and go with other possibilities and does not want to be subjugated to "one way" of doing something, or "one path."

Synthesizing many fields of study into one is something is interested in, imo. But what Augusta did was craft a new theory from this synthesis, and that's a product of as well as of . Wanting to tie all of these theories floating around into something consistent, and into a sound theory seems more of a thing to me.

So how can we tell if a person is SEE or IEE based on something they say about themselves?

For example, in Suzzy's case she writes here...

"I'm sorry but I don't really know how to be specific. My mind is constantly coming up with what it knows is the right thing and endless possibilities for other things. This all happens faster than what one can outwardly express. I have had to learn to verbalize and that has taken a long time. I started to verbalize things when I realized that other people didn't work like me to help them to understand what I was discerning, thinking and feeling."

That does not happen with me; I can come up with possibilities, but I know which possibility has integrated many interesting factors and I know the workability of such an interesting invention.

That expression is very characteristic of how Ne in the third spot act like on the person.

[Beautiful sky]

3. The Role Function: often a person tries to look this way (in order to not reveal his/her weak traits before the others), but is not that kind; in an emergency situation this function tends to excesses.

[marooned]

So how can we tell if a person is SEE or IEE based on something they say about themselves?

For example, in Suzzy's case she writes here...

I think mostly that I think hyperanalyzing statements like that don't really help anything. What Suzzy said sounds intuitive ish to me. But in the past on the forum there have been all sorts of these hyperanayses of people's thought processes, which I generally feel never really lead anywhere. As an example, I remember a long argument over thought processes between strrrng and unefille way back when, where he was arguing that how she described them and her use of metaphors was (I see both strrrng and unefille as Beta NF). It's a bottomless pit of analysis that just doesn't go anywhere, and why Socionics and insanity are like the same thing to me half the time.

3. The Role Function: often a person tries to look this way (in order to not reveal his/her weak traits before the others), but is not that kind; in an emergency situation this function tends to excesses.

Then it's a matter of if you think they're trying to "look that way." (I personally don't really think so, and I can't explain why, it's just how I see it.)

[Beautiful sky]

I think mostly that I think hyperanalyzing statements like that don't really help anything. What Suzzy said sounds intuitive ish to me. But in the past on the forum there have been all sorts of these hyperanayses of people's thought processes, which I generally feel never really lead anywhere. As an example, I remember a long argument over thought processes between strrrng and unefille way back when, where he was arguing that how she described them and her use of metaphors was (I see both strrrng and unefille as Beta NF). It's a bottomless pit of analysis that just doesn't go anywhere, and why Socionics and insanity are like the same thing to me half the time.

Then it's a matter of if you think they're trying to "look that way." (I personally don't really think so, and I can't explain why, it's just how I see it.)

Anyone can sound intuitive.

[marooned]

I think everyone will close off possibilities for various reasons... I know that opening possibilities can be very handy for shaking beliefs that you do not want others to hold any longer. Closing possibilities helps with more productive action, and opening possibilities can be a prelude to a later closing that results in a better alternative than we had previously (which combines both of the above reasons). So there is reason for a single person to do both.

Yeah, I agree, and it's all incredibly context-dependent. I somehow didn't see this post at first.

[Beautiful sky]

Yeah, I agree, and it's all incredibly context-dependent. I somehow didn't see this post at first.

You can't ask the person "Do you use force?" to determine Se; no one wants to look violent; but you have to wait for them to use volitional force to see that uncovered...So far, the three ENFp's have not used direct volitional force, but some ESFp's have. And, very well developed ESFp's know how to use what they have, when they feel is the best advantage, that I believe is a well cultivated sense of self.

[717495]

Maritsa types everyone as sensor, so obviously her database of types says you're an ESFp, and there isn't any legitimate reason. Are we done? Since you guys are conflicting two different theories with each other, and I'm puzzled at why you'd expect to win an argument.

[marooned]

Maritsa types everyone as sensor, so obviously her database of types says you're an ESFp, and there isn't any legitimate reason. Are we done? Since you guys are conflicting two different theories with each other, and I'm puzzled at why you'd expect to win an argument.

It's your fault:

Oh no, you changed your avatar.

[Beautiful sky]

Maritsa types everyone as sensor, so obviously her database of types says you're an ESFp, and there isn't any legitimate reason. Are we done? Since you guys are conflicting two different theories with each other, and I'm puzzled at why you'd expect to win an argument.

I do not and I just found another N type.

[sarahcoles]

Anyone can sound intuitive.

Yes Maritsa. You try to sound intuitive, but whatever lies you tell yourself and others you are not. That is the real truth, not your version. Anyone with a good eye at spotting inconsistencies will see the truth behind your words.

My suggestion, is leave this site voluntarily, because some people here dont want your version of your truth. You make the real INFj's leave the forum as they dont want to deal with you or the conflict you bring here, they are to nice and want to hope for the best in people. In some ways are a little naive.

Know when enough is enough. Leave it be.

[thePirate]

Originally Posted by Mariella

Although, honestly, she seems a bit odd and that would certainly cloud her type. I can't say for sure she isn't EII. (There's that Ne. Can't close off possibilities.)

Me:
And your Ne is in your third spot therefore you can not make full use of it like Ti for me; so you are SEE in reality; do you see the connection?

When a person's Ne is in their third spot, the person produces enless ideas or possibilities without knowing which possibility to settle on as the one true idea...I noticed this from what you said about your mind..."There's that Ne. Can't close off possibilities."

So, yes I strongly considered SEE for you in the begining.

ok well than your a fucking liar cuz you told minde:

"I have found N types on this site, with or without VI and I havn't challenged their typing...people like tiny_dancer, Mariella, and jewels, I saw ENFp right away and you may go back to their postings and see that I was very convinced of their types."

and you said INFj have exceptional memory, so by this it makes sense that this little factoid didnt escape your mind

you owe mariella and minde an apology you horrible excuse for a human

[Beautiful sky]

ok well than your a fucking liar cuz you told minde:

"I have found N types on this site, with or without VI and I havn't challenged their typing...people like tiny_dancer, Mariella, and jewels, I saw ENFp right away and you may go back to their postings and see that I was very convinced of their types."

and you said INFj have exceptional memory, so by this it makes sense that this little factoid didnt escape your mind

you owe mariella and minde an apology you horrible excuse for a human

I did say that and I will appologize to them for that...

[Beautiful sky]

Yes Maritsa. You try to sound intuitive, but whatever lies you tell yourself and others you are not. That is the real truth, not your version. Anyone with a good eye at spotting inconsistencies will see the truth behind your words.

My suggestion, is leave this site voluntarily, because some people here dont want your version of your truth. You make the real INFj's leave the forum as they dont want to deal with you or the conflict you bring here, they are to nice and want to hope for the best in people. In some ways are a little naive.

Know when enough is enough. Leave it be.

I don't lie, my dual will recognize me over time...there's the truth.

[Brilliand]

fucking horrible excuse for a human

Couldja be less nasty about it?

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I did say that and I will appologize to them for that...

It would help if you apologised for accusing me of saying something I never said also.

Basically, because apologising for mistakes creates the impression of a more reasonable person.