Attachment 7214
No but really. Being positivist means youre open to harassment from random strangers on the internet? Hm. Maybe Im not eii....
Attachment 7214
No but really. Being positivist means youre open to harassment from random strangers on the internet? Hm. Maybe Im not eii....
-
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
Gal, with average matches at ~15% all 16 types an be picked for one person. And there is always some chance that your type is any of 16.
Subjectively on this moment I've excluded 3 types (INFJ, ISTJ, ESTP) with confidence, while ESFJ stays among possible ones in my perception.
It's not hard to check wich of any 2 types is more possible for you by my bloggers list: ISFJ vs ESFJ, ENFJ vs ESFJ, etc.
I was just surprised he added the disclaimer, "in my perception." .
It triggers me less. I give him credit for that but no way you are ESE if my sister is and she agrees with that typing even though she is hardly interested in personality theories. She only goes along when my other sister and I trap her at a computer and make her read it. My sisters and I used socionics for bonding time when they visited. I think she was just grateful that we were talking with her and not off doing our own thing while she sat alone in the living room watching episodes of some decorating show, or movies on Lifetime, (Tv for women) wishing she was out doing something.
She is a good sport though but I think it passes in one ear and out the other hahah She is truly an extroverted type and surprisingly (because I still see her as a kid) gives very good practical and even insightful advice. I would be surprised if she stays home two nights in a row. Her social calendar is literally filled out a year in advance. She takes mini vacations up to 5 times a year and it is usually with a group. Blows my mind.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Does someone agrees with version about his type or not means not much as people type badly generally, in other case they'd have high typing matches at least. Especially it's such when that opinion is from the one who knows about typology alsmost nothing like your sister.
As for Persephone, one of problems is she did not give normal video for typing, - no good light, half of her face on WSS video is under shadow so it's hard to type her by nonverbal behavior.
My sister is not an idiot even if she considers herself the least intelligent in our family. She can look at what is written and discern what describes her best. We were taught critical thinking skills from my ILI stepdad and he had an iron fist when it came to education.
We spent a couple of days reading aloud the descriptions and discussing them. They both took the tests after and guess what? Both got the type they had agreed to just by description. She was rather impressed with the ESE description just as my other sister was impressed by the EII description for herself. I didn't even tell them my type first and they both said IEI for me. I give my sisters credit for being able to read and understand plain English. Socionics is not rocket science.
I have seen other videos of Persephone and talked to her on voice chat. She is not an ESE.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
If people read Beskova descriptions they would be better at typing
-
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
-
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
She's just incompetent in the typology.
Days of reading types descriptions compared to years of reading different sources of full theory and practice. And then those people get only 15% average match. While with her sister the situation is much worse.We spent a couple of days reading aloud the descriptions and discussing them.
Tests are far from being highly precise source. Especially if that was primitive test, people had opinion about their types and read types descriptions befor testing.They both took the tests after and guess what? Both got the type they had agreed to just by description.
You may throw a coin 4 times and it will say you IEI with the probability of 1/16. Also they could notice (partly unconsciously) how you react on descriptions of different types and such to guess and repeat your opinion.I didn't even tell them my type first and they both said IEI for me.
It's worse. Rockets drop in much fewer cases than 85% of mismatch in Socionics.Socionics is not rocket science.
If you'd had high match with me then your opinion could to have high weight for me.She is not an ESE.
The only reasonable things wich may happen to change my opinion about Persephone is the video wich fits to conditions wich were said to her and/or her impressions from my examples of types. Other factors are random. As for you - there is nothing interesting you can add to the situation, so the theme with you may be finished.
-
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
Sol just wants to be the authority and final word on how he concludes your type. He'll type you as he likes it.
May I add completely disregarding the person's own natural tendencies.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 03-01-2016 at 04:28 PM.
-
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
-
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
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
-
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
There's a reason why so many forums have rules in place to stop users from openly scrutinizing the types of others.
With that being said, this thread is actually more tame than I thought it would be lol.
The method to getting the cooperation and support of others isn't to insult them and put them down. It is to encourage them and ask for information in such a way as to help you understand things about them a little better. You can say it this way "percephone, would it be possible for you to make another video in a better light setting and talk about these things and what they mean to you?"
-
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
Have you any idea how insulting and arrogant this comes off? I was giving you the benefit of the doubt when I attributed it to your poor English. She is a highly intelligent woman regardless of her type. English is not her first language either.
If you do realize you come off that way then carry on...
Last edited by Aylen; 03-01-2016 at 05:09 PM.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Who said I don't like relationships? Still waiting for you to drop all that knowledge on me, since you claim you've been building your case for a while and have plenty of examples on hand. Right now, it kind of seems like you read an article, had what you thought was an incisive, original thought, and decided to announce it by stamping me SLI.
someday the grapes will be wine
and someday you will be mine
EII-Ne 2w3 - 9w1 - 7w8 so/sx
@Sol
You can't refer to "correct typing percentages" without also stating what the baseline is that the percentages are compared to. Also, you normally just type via MBTI, which you do well at, but it has no bearing on Socionics.
@Maritsa
Well, I match Beskova 100%, so that disproves your SLI for myself. You don't understand the difference between Fe and Fi.
-
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
All of it. That's almost verbatim my life.
See? This is specifically what I was talking about. Your idea of EII is literally normative Fe. What service do I do to you or those around you, if I sit back and watch you run around saying retarded things? If I sit back and watch you, not only be mistyped for years on end, but also mistype others for years on end due to such? You don't even seem to realize that this thread is extremely asinine. EII is Fi in the rejection of Se. Does my appearance to others matter to me enough to forsake Fi for it? No. You need to wakeup to reality and realize how idiosyncratic your views of Fi are.
-
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
You need to go back and actually learn Socionics, prior to attempting to type people, and learn the background for the Beskova articles. Someone else typed you as EII, and you assumed it was correct and aligned your thoughts and views on yourself to match. "Being nice" and "friendly" is using Fe, not Fi, and EII doesn't have normative Fe, nor Vital Fi. Your views are so far off, it's slightly unreal.
-
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
What was about objective typing accuracy. If all typers have low match <50%, then there is no even 2 typers who type good. It's evident. There is hypothetic possible only 1 good typer, but it's doubtful anyway.
While recently I said mainly about average typing match ~15% - this is what you may expect from random typer. To trust someone with such % of match is stupid. The max match I saw is 30% and this is very low too.
So I find as best to trust only to myself in typing as my experience is good, - theory works with my typings not badly, and I understand that this is subjectively. If there was someone with objectively proven good typing accuracy or good typing match with me, then I'd have basis trust to him too.
I type with theories of Socionics (model A, 8 functions, IR, dichotomies) and Jung like they are described in its books and other sources. Outside of USSR MBT is known much better, that's why I prefer this notation on English forums. MBT notations are appropriate as preferences in both variants are compatible and that notation means only preferences.you normally just type via MBTI
Jeremy8419, I have impression you don't orient in what is happening here.
Are you speaking about this?
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...y-of-Functions
If so then what about it
-
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
@Sol, it shows arrogance to assume that everyone should understand what you are saying, especially when your grammar is poor and your word choice is imprecise. It wouldn't kill you to admit that you're not infallible.
@Persephone is not ESE. As a defining characteristic, ESEs express their emotions freely with the intention of changing the emotional environment around them, given that Fe is their leading function. I do not know her personally but I do know that she does not fit within this definition of ESE.
@Emmym why do you have so much makeup?
-
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
-
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
Clothing and makeup fall under Si, which is Vital (personal, no common shared stereotype) for EII.