Argh!@!

[hungry_mortal]

I have been interested in Socionics for about 4.5 years now and have recently becoming a lot more certain of my knowledge in the area. But I am having trouble understanding what my own type is.

I have cycled through EIE, ILI, LII, LSE, and ILE....but now I have narrowed it down a bit more because I am 100% positive I value [Si/Ne] > [Se/Ni] which places me in Alpha or Delta. I just don't know where I am within either of the two. The only other thing I DO now know is that I am an extraverted type (energy levels, etc.).

Since winter break is coming up and I will have tons of free time this seems an excellent point at which to resolve this. But I think that it is time to get outside opinions... So what do you lot need to know???

[Khamelion]

nononono run awayyyyy

[Joy]

nononono run awayyyyy

Not a bad suggestion... Don't think that once winter break is over you'll be able to stop posting.


(kidding, of course)

[Jarno]

finding your own leading function can be confusing. Since it's the function most ordinary for you and therefor least noticable.

better use dichotomies.

to be honest, if you are looking into socionics for 4,5 years and still don't know your own type, it's time to change tactics. right?

also, IMO the very best way to confirm/test your own type is looking at relationships you have with people. See if they are in accordonance with socionics relationship descriptions, when you think you know your own type.

[Joy]

Have you seen these? They came from Augusta herself.

http://socionics.us/works/socion2.shtml#1

[Jarno]

Have you seen these? They came from Augusta herself.

http://socionics.us/works/socion2.shtml#1

Yes and that's were things get confusing. Those IM elements are perfect to explain phenomena, but confusion for recognition.

If you told me (before I ever heard about Socionics) that time and forecasting etc was something I was good at, I wouldn't have understand what you were talking about.

Saying that I'm an introvert who looks at the big picture, would have made 100 times more sense.

People don't recognize themselves as object relaters, time forecasters etc blabla

[Joy]

Yes and that's were things get confusing. Those IM elements are perfect to explain phenomena, but confusion for recognition.

If you told me before I ever heard about Socionics that time and forecasting etc was something I was good at, I wouldn't have understand what you were talking about.

Saying that I'm an introvert who looks at the big picture would have made 100 times more sense.

People don't recognize themselves as object relaters, time forecasters etc blabla

To be honest, I relate more the the Ni description than to the Te description, though I do relate to the Te description. (I relate more to filvawhatever's ILI description than LIE description, too.)

However, EJ makes more sense for me than IP, and while I'm more "instantly attracted" to SEE's than any other type, I need the stability that ESI's can offer that SEE's just don't seem to be naturals at providing. Also, I'm definitely a Positivist > Negativist.

So anyways, I think the descriptions I linked to are better for ruling certain leading functions out, establishing quadra values, and narrowing down a few possibilities. I agree that it's much more easy to recognize these traits as they're described in others than in ourselves though.

[Joy]

Anyways, where you would suggest to focus on dichotomies (horrible idea, imo), I would suggest focusing on quadra values and then on temperaments and duality descriptions.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Anyways, where you would suggest to focus on dichotomies (horrible idea, imo), I would suggest focusing on quadra values and then on temperaments and duality descriptions.

I thought i'd point out that you identify with EJ temperament, which is really like an amalgamation of two dichotomies E and J.

[Joy]

too easy to fuck up (especially for ethical males and intelligent people, and especially for sensory intelligent people, depending on the stereotypes you're reading )

[Creepy-Cyclops]

huh? When it comes down to it i'm an introverted logical person who looks at the details and I can run a little late and can have irregular work patterns. That's really the dichotomies right there. I wouldn't say using them was terrible idea they are useful along with lots of other socionic tools to determine your type, or someone else.

It's down to personal choice of course what people use if they want to include them as part of their typing arsenal or not.

[Gilly]

Dichotomies are not part of Socionics (functional rings can be seen as dichotomic, in a way, but that's an oversimplification). They can be extrapolated from functions, but if you don't understand your type primarily as a result of your strong/weak and valued/unvalued functions, then you don't understand the theory, or your type.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Dichotomies are not part of Socionics (functional rings can be seen as dichotomic, in a way, but that's an oversimplification). They can be extrapolated from functions, but if you don't understand your type primarily as a result of your strong/weak and valued/unvalued functions, then you don't understand the theory, or your type.

I'm not sure who determines what's part of socionics or not, but I know they are used more often on Russian forums than on this one. I also know that Igor Weisband types using dichotomies and he is very much a part of socionics. Also if you read Lytov's information he talks about the similarities and differences with socionics dichotomies and MBTI dichotomies.

I think part of the problem is that people get upset if things are simplified. But I agree with you Gilly that people should read into things a lot more on the journey of their type.

My point is that dichotomies are useful and that I and other people involved in socionics use them. I use them along with other socionic devices to type people. They don't have to be exclusive, or excluded. That's pretty much it.

[Joy]

huh? When it comes down to it i'm an introverted logical person who looks at the details and I can run a little late and can have irregular work patterns.

And what exactly are social introversion, "logic" (whatever that means to you), detail orientation, habitual tardiness, and "irregular work patterns" supposed to be indicative of?

I'm socially introverted, have until recently always had a problem with habitual tardiness, and have "irregular work patterns" (depending on how you define that).

I can most certainly tell you that none of the above is indicative of irrationality.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

And what exactly are social introversion, "logic" (whatever that means to you), detail orientation, habitual tardiness, and "irregular work patterns" supposed to be indicative of?

I'm socially introverted, have until recently always had a problem with habitual tardiness, and have "irregular work patterns" (depending on how you define that).

I can most certainly tell you that none of the above is indicative of irrationality.

To be honest Joy I knew you would nit pick my words. What I said was basically one word one sentence for the dichotomies. What words would you have chosen instead?

Anyway it is like everything else. To become better at the dichotomies..just like the functions..just like romantic attitudes or cubic model or whatever.. people have to study them. Once you've learned more about something in socionics then you can see if it applies to you, or you can ask someone who knows more about it if they could pass on some of their knowledge and experience to help you, just like people to when they ask to be typed.

And on that, it's pretty much a shame that this guy (girls) thread has been de-railed so much. Maybe someone could offer typing advice or are we all too afraid of having Joy criticising things.

If you want to learn more about dichotomies fine, then do so. I'm not about to start jumping up and down like Phaedrus it makes no difference to me, but think about it, you attack what I say then ask me to explain it more just with the intention of attacking it again. Why would I want to do that? Like I say chill man, it's a free country

[Jarno]

Dichotomies are not part of Socionics (functional rings can be seen as dichotomic, in a way, but that's an oversimplification). They can be extrapolated from functions, but if you don't understand your type primarily as a result of your strong/weak and valued/unvalued functions, then you don't understand the theory, or your type.

uhhh functions are created out of dichotomy's.

ever read jungs book on which augusta based her creation?

secondly, dichotomies (and I'm never referring to mbti btw, just socionics) is the most common used typing method as far as I have seen, watching russian sites.

I often really wonder where you get your information from.

[hungry_mortal]

I'll just go through my reaction to each of The Socion Notes' function descriptions?

Well, none of the description describes me at all. I don't organize because things typically have a way of falling into place on their own, so there isn't much of a need to forcibly put things into their place. I don't like 'managing things' or reproducing things, though I am good at it I find myself bored when forced to do so. I have lots of will and energy but no desire to impose my will on others; I'd rather do my own thing when confident that my 'will' is correct.

is always a point of mild confusion for me. I mean, I know how to live comfortably and I often get compliments on how I make things look 'so cozy' and I'm a good cook, my outfits go together really well, blah blah blah, and I'm always mildly surprised (?) because I don't put effort into it. But I am often neglectful of my own health and go through periods where I just don't bother eating if the food is not right next to me, and I don't like sleeping because it is just a waste of much needed time.

I found the description to be the most incomprehensible of the lot, but I'm not quite sure why. It was actually the same with also; I was reading it and kind of thought to myself, "Well, yeah, but what good does that do?"

The one coincides with me at my...best? When I'm most energetic and happy with my life I get even more energetic and am generally just very explorative and talkative, but it always just dies due to me ending feeling stifled by everything and all the people around me (who refuse to react enthusiastically to anything, no matter how I push). So in the end I just end up stagnating until I run into something else which pushes me and I'm happy again. It's sort of the same cyclical thing as with .

I don't think I'm personally strong in since I never know how other people feel towards me and I need frequent reassurances from them (subtle ones are okay, unsubtle ones I feel the need to respond). I also really don't know how I feel towards other people. It's just basically either I like them if they are nice to me and interesting, but if not....meh. Someone could be an axe murderer and I wouldn't feel too terribly offended by them as long as they were interesting (and properly contained...).

and is, as usual, the point where I just don't know. Both sound appealing and annoying in different ways. I like doing things rationally and efficiently and believe in an objective reality that needs to be adhered to, but I also think it is important to develop my own solid understanding of the universe...

Information overload? Helpful? I think writing this all out has helped me organize my own thoughts, at least.

[Joy]

To be honest Joy I knew you would nit pick my words. What I said was basically one word one sentence for the dichotomies. What words would you have chosen instead?

Anyway it is like everything else. To become better at the dichotomies..just like the functions..just like romantic attitudes or cubic model or whatever.. people have to study them. Once you've learned more about something in socionics then you can see if it applies to you, or you can ask someone who knows more about it if they could pass on some of their knowledge and experience to help you, just like people to when they ask to be typed.

And on that, it's pretty much a shame that this guy (girls) thread has been de-railed so much. Maybe someone could offer typing advice or are we all too afraid of having Joy criticising things.

If you want to learn more about dichotomies fine, then do so. I'm not about to start jumping up and down like Phaedrus it makes no difference to me, but think about it, you attack what I say then ask me to explain it more just with the intention of attacking it again. Why would I want to do that? Like I say chill man, it's a free country

So in summary, while I myself am often accused of oversimplifying things, the concept of trying to type by E/I, T/F, S/N, and J/P is far, far too over simplified, even for me. And the concept of trying to reduce these dichotomies to just a few words makes it so over simplified that you'd have just as much luck finding your type as you would if you flipped a coin. The reason I jumped on your post is because I know you're a member of this school of typing.

The bottom line is that we fundamentally disagree about the best method of typing people/oneself. I'm content to leave it at that, as long as it's been made clear that this method of typing is not universally subscribed to.

And now I'll stop hijacking this thread and answer hungry_mortal's post.

[Joy]

I'll just go through my reaction to each of The Socion Notes' function descriptions?

Well, none of the description describes me at all. I don't organize because things typically have a way of falling into place on their own, so there isn't much of a need to forcibly put things into their place. I don't like 'managing things' or reproducing things, though I am good at it I find myself bored when forced to do so. I have lots of will and energy but no desire to impose my will on others; I'd rather do my own thing when confident that my 'will' is correct.

The way the term "organizing" is used in that description is more akin to "organizing a search party". It's not about being neat and tidy and managing your time.

is always a point of mild confusion for me. I mean, I know how to live comfortably and I often get compliments on how I make things look 'so cozy' and I'm a good cook, my outfits go together really well, blah blah blah, and I'm always mildly surprised (?) because I don't put effort into it. But I am often neglectful of my own health and go through periods where I just don't bother eating if the food is not right next to me, and I don't like sleeping because it is just a waste of much needed time.

Any type can do the part I underlined. The part in italics may be a good type clue though.

I found the description to be the most incomprehensible of the lot, but I'm not quite sure why. It was actually the same with also; I was reading it and kind of thought to myself, "Well, yeah, but what good does that do?"

You're clearly not Fe leading then. If the Ni description seems so obvious that you're like "well of course, that's just a given", then it could mean that you have strong Ni. If you felt similarly about it to the way you felt about the Fe description ("why would I care about that?"), then you do not value Ni/Se.

The one coincides with me at my...best? When I'm most energetic and happy with my life I get even more energetic and am generally just very explorative and talkative, but it always just dies due to me ending feeling stifled by everything and all the people around me (who refuse to react enthusiastically to anything, no matter how I push). So in the end I just end up stagnating until I run into something else which pushes me and I'm happy again. It's sort of the same cyclical thing as with .

If you're Ne at your best, you're probably a Ne ego type.

I don't think I'm personally strong in since I never know how other people feel towards me and I need frequent reassurances from them (subtle ones are okay, unsubtle ones I feel the need to respond). I also really don't know how I feel towards other people. It's just basically either I like them if they are nice to me and interesting, but if not....meh. Someone could be an axe murderer and I wouldn't feel too terribly offended by them as long as they were interesting (and properly contained...).

This sounds almost ILE? It could also be that you're a Delta extrovert.

and is, as usual, the point where I just don't know. Both sound appealing and annoying in different ways. I like doing things rationally and efficiently and believe in an objective reality that needs to be adhered to, but I also think it is important to develop my own solid understanding of the universe...

This could apply to a lot of different types.

Information overload? Helpful? I think writing this all out has helped me organize my own thoughts, at least.

Yes, helpful.

Would you mind going through it again and thinking about the people you've known well who each description reminds you of and then describing which people you get along with best and worst?

[1981slater]

I'd say this guy is my identical ENTp, perhaps he's subtype
If not, I'd say ENTj subtype

[Joy]

He appears to value Ne/Si above Ni/Se.

[1981slater]

He appears to value Ne/Si above Ni/Se.

Then we have a winner. ENTp
1...
2...

3!!!!!

ENTp

[Joy]

hungry_mortal, read this

[1981slater]

hungry_mortal, read this

Hey, Joy. You forgot to say: "do it, do it now or die!!!!!!!"

[Joy]

DO IT. NOW.

Seriously though, if you're interested in finding out your type, reading this description is a step in the right direction. I thought I was ILE at first, but whenever I read the duality description I was like "ugh, that does not sound appealing... why would I desire someone like that? sounds so pointless..." Turns out SEI is my conflictor.

[1981slater]

DO IT. NOW.

Seriously though, if you're interested in finding out your type, reading this description is a step in the right direction. I thought I was ILE at first, but whenever I read the duality description I was like "ugh, that does not sound appealing... why would I desire someone like that? sounds so pointless..." Turns out SEI is my conflictor.

I find it interesting that most people see themselves as ILE when they experience their first contact with Socionics, but only a few people are mad scientists after all

[Joy]

Yeah, I've noticed that as well. Another very popular choice is ILI, but the self-proclaimed ILI's seem to be more stubborn about reliqueshing the title. I think people read the ILE description and think "I'm intelligent and have ADD tendencies, this fits!" or read the ILI description and think "I'm intelligent and have NO social skills at all, this fits ". It's clear to see which excuse for their problems would be more difficult to give up.

[1981slater]

By knowing the weak traits of a person you can type him/her easily. Weak functions expose us

[Joy]

Sure. Bit unfortunately, "ADD-like tendencies" and social incompetence can occur in any type.

[hungry_mortal]

I'd say this guy is my identical ENTp, perhaps he's subtype
If not, I'd say ENTj subtype

I'm a girl, actually. ;D

I could see in the duality description how an SEI could be quite harmonious. Particularly in these parts:

The Mediator watches the flow of work and does not let The Seeker stop halfway by getting attracted to a new idea.

Big problem with me. Even with things that I am supposedly responsible for I often just stop doing, because I get bored of it. It leads to disasters every so often, and when I can't escape the situation I just get depressed.

The Seeker cannot regulate distance in communication; sometimes he is out of place, unceremonious, too credulous towards people, too kind to those who envy him.

Ha! Yes. This is kind of what I was trying to say in my description earlier...

Would you mind going through it again and thinking about the people you've known well who each description reminds you of and then describing which people you get along with best and worst?

-> My best friend is an EIE. She and I get alone really well when neither of us are stressed out but when we <i>are</i> stressed out we seem to have a lot of trouble communicating. I never feel relaxed with her, but the fact that we confuse one another is usually a source of entertainment for both of us.
-> Another friend is an IEE. It is very easy to communicate and enjoy myself, perhaps easier than anyone else I know. We are very respectful of each other naturally and can always understand the others POV even if not agree. But sometimes we really seem to just pass by each other on a deeper level, it is difficult to explain but rather like no matter what we do it has no lasting effect.
-> My younger sister (ILI?). We get along well but don't really have much in common. She seems, to me, very apathetic and way too relaxed. Whenever I talk to her I do progressively more bizzare things just to get her to 'react'.
-> Oldest friend...probable SLE. When we were younger we spent more time fighting than anything else. She was a big fan of pushing people as far as she could trying to get them to react the way she wanted; but I never found out exactly what she wanted from me since I just ended up being confused and withdrawing. Despite that it was usually a very easy friendship (as opposed to the other people, we had similar purposes). The disagreements were short and I just tended to push them from my mind as some freak malfunction of her personality.

Those are all the people I have solid type ideas for.

[Joy]

ILE seems most likely.

<i>are</i>

Wrong type of code. (: Try:

[i]are[/i] 

[Creepy-Cyclops]

So in summary, while I myself am often accused of oversimplifying things, the concept of trying to type by E/I, T/F, S/N, and J/P is far, far too over simplified, even for me. And the concept of trying to reduce these dichotomies to just a few words makes it so over simplified that you'd have just as much luck finding your type as you would if you flipped a coin. The reason I jumped on your post is because I know you're a member of this school of typing.

No I don't reduce the dichotomies to a few words. I only did so earlier as part of a conversation, which I thought I made clear. Dichotomies are useful along with many other typing methods.

However, to make this clear, for you to ignore them, even though it's your choice, puts you in a category of having esoteric and marginalised views of socionics: In effect you are a 'cult' in terms of what Jung defined, Ashura defined and just about every socionist uses.

The bottom line is that we fundamentally disagree about the best method of typing people/oneself. I'm content to leave it at that, as long as it's been made clear that this method of typing is not universally subscribed to.

Sure

And now I'll stop hijacking this thread and answer hungry_mortal's post.

Yeah not that it's a big deal to me, but it seemed your post needed more clarification, for yourself and whoever may be reading (including thread starter)

[Creepy-Cyclops]

It was actually the same with also; I was reading it and kind of thought to myself, "Well, yeah, but what good does that do?"

This is something I would double check to be on the safe side: It's unlikely an ENTp would find as something which has little point, seeing as they are normally aware of how much they value it. That is, they usually are aware they value it a lot.

The one coincides with me at my...best? When I'm most energetic and happy with my life I get even more energetic and am generally just very explorative and talkative, but it always just dies due to me ending feeling stifled by everything and all the people around me (who refuse to react enthusiastically to anything, no matter how I push).

Could you elborate on what sort of things are your interests?

[hungry_mortal]

Could you elborate on what sort of things are your interests?

What I enjoy doing with my free time: wallowing in the hot tub during winter and in the sun during summer (alternating b/w reading and staring off into space), playing piano, wandering around someplace outside of town, talking to people (not small talk though, ick), and pursuing whatever happens to be my more main interests at the time=. I also really love cooking and chemistry experiments where I get to play around with mixtures and create something. And I often get into moods where all I really can do is write, so that is an obligatory interest for me.

As to what I enjoy talking about with other people or thinking about in my spare time...psychology, the future (on a personal and more global or universal level), and ranting about whatever has been annoying me lately.

The only things that I am whole heartedly disinterested in: economics, petty gossip, politics/bureaucracy. Ick.

[Joy]

hungry_mortal, does this sound about right?

The individual longs for situations where people are having fun, laughing and joking, and feel emotionally free and spontaneous. However, he is generally unable to produce this atmosphere himself and uses other means to create situations where there is a good chance that others will take the emotional initiative and create a fun and emotionally stimulating atmosphere. Failure at such attempts are met with dismay, which the individual either hides or reacts to with frustration and annoyance.

[1981slater]

The icon on the title of this thread is similar to my avatar. It seems ILEs are drawn to this sort of pictures.
By the way: "aargh!" was also very useful to find her type, some kind of crazy seeking

[Joy]

Yeah, it crossed my mind that it was Fe valuing.

[1981slater]

Yeah, it crossed my mind that it was Fe valuing.

Socionics expert answer to "arrghhh" : dual seeking
99.99% of the world: (s)he's CRAZY omg!!!!

[hungry_mortal]

The individual longs for situations where people are having fun, laughing and joking, and feel emotionally free and spontaneous. However, he is generally unable to produce this atmosphere himself and uses other means to create situations where there is a good chance that others will take the emotional initiative and create a fun and emotionally stimulating atmosphere. Failure at such attempts are met with dismay, which the individual either hides or reacts to with frustration and annoyance.

I think so. Whenever with people I do my best to 'keep things light' by joking around and chatting about whatever I want them to hear about. But often times I go too far and they just drift off and I'm left feeling extremely annoyed.

Socionics expert answer to "arrghhh" : dual seeking
99.99% of the world: (s)he's CRAZY omg!!!!

LOLOL In that case, it is ILE fo sure!