Is it possible, discuss....
Possibility of the XXXx
Is it possible, discuss....
what do you mean?
A type who has no function preferred above the other for their leading function... they are equal with respect to all functions.... they valued Se as much as Ne, Ni, Ti, Te, Si, Fe, and Fi
Not within Socionics, no, since the model does not work on gradients, axes, or spectra, but discrete elements.
I've wondered this too. There doesn't seem to be anything preventing it from being the case, does there? My excuse (and I'm aware that this is a solution to a problem within a model rather than a claim that has a lot of evidence support from real life) is that people specialize in certain functions over the course of early childhood, and that one could not possibly survive childhood without some degree of specialization. Like, it's too difficult to hold these mutually contradictory models in tension and grow in all of them equally. But you have to grow in a few of them in order to be skilled enough at much of anything to accomplish your goals or at least your communication goals when you get older.
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
It's probably not within the range of the human genome.
For a while I thought that crisis-oriented, confident, deeply determined people might be such, but they actually do have a type that becomes apparent in the character of the organizations which they lead. The thing about that group though, is that they tend to have a lot of humility and are willing to listen to many, many points of view. They don't really have a sense of where things are headed, but they can distill such an understanding from the opinions of many people. Presidents often collect "brain trusts" around themselves for this purpose: they don't buy into any one expert's point of view, but try to distill the real situation by gauging the relative probabilities of each proposition, until an image become apparent of the most probable scenario. But they aren't demonstrating function proficiency by such evaluation, just being very humble and acknowledging that they can't figure everything out by themselves.
I have heard that AI researchers are trying to create such an intelligence however using computer technology. It's kinda scary actually, because the intention is apparently to create a kind of artificial god to watch over and advise mankind.
A person could come out that way on a test but either the person has extremely poor self-awareness or the test really sucks or both.
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
Only people without any possible means of information input or output.
never met one.Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
Actually there is a possibility that DID sufferers are XXXxs, because the type change would entail with it both a transformation of identity and an inability to make sense of information that is obvious to another type. Type acts as a decoder, hence one type cannot "read" information produced by another type.
By the way, the reason type exists, is due to repression. Each of the alternative types is associated with something negative that one must suppress to avoid having negative thoughts. However the negativity itself is due to the functions having the attributes and qualities of their native positions. Type is simultaneously a dynamic and static condition.
I think what happens in the case of a DID person, is that a weaker function attains the mastery, but still has the attributes of its respective position.
No, not if it's genetic, and no, unless you don't exist.
-
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
Removed at User Request
Here's an idea; god, triviality.....arghhh
If you have someone born of a morphologic type to one type; like an ESFj who looks like an ESFj, but is somehow mentally impared, then you could have a morphologic ESFj that doesn't prefer any functions, because functions are the process of the brain, the absense/damage to a part of a primary processor/locator in the brain could cause the brain to circuit information, but that would result in the person being mentally handicaped.
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
lol listen to yourself... you sound like a fanatic. YOU MUST COMPLY TO THEORY... there is no reasoning required. YOU ARE EITHER WITH THE MODEL OR AGAINST IT!!!! AHH!!!!! CRETINE!!!!!
Asking questions IST VERBODEN!!!!!!!! AHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU MUST ACCEPT OR DENY THE ALLEGATIONS PUT BEFORE YOU ABSOLUTELY WITHOUT QUESTION!!!!!!!!!
lol get real. By the way I don't suffer from cretinism (cretinism - definition of cretinism by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.)... I'm actually 6'4'' and have a very healthy thyroid, thank you very much. How about you just give your opinion on the topic and go jack off a donkey. I'm just taking a poll of ideas/opinions here, and I don't need to be personally attacked because a question makes you insecure. Fucking weak piece of shit.
Thank you for your opinion.... come again. This would suffice next time.
LOL!!
Removed at User Request
Removed at User Request
Lol, and how did I insinuate anything... I only asked if you think its possible. Insinuating would be me suggesting that XXXx can exist, which frankly I'm not... I'd like to keep my thoughts on this issue private, but I'm curious about what other people think. How is this so horrible? It's like I'm getting viciously attacked and my intelligence is being verbally assualted just by merely asking a question.... and by the way.....
That's where I see the fanaticism. Fanatics hold viewpoints so rigid that merely questioning these viewpoint is seen in a negative light. I don't understand the need for retaliation here on your part, since when did asking a question ever hurt anyone? You ask a question, you get an answer back... it's usually the answer that is the part to pay attention to. I'm keeping my answer private, solely for the purpose of preserving harmony between me and other people.
lol you had too....
If your were talking astrodynamics... a part of astronomy... you'd be incorrect in assuming the earth was perfectly round. Of course a round earth model is useful, but sometimes a more accurate model is required if you wish to say accurately track the trajectories of objects in the earth's gravitational field.
Now would you like to continue to talk astronomy? I actually find this topic fascinating.
Oh and who is the dumb ass now?
Umm once again I just asked a question.... I didn't acknowledge or unacknowledge anything so far.
don't know what you're talking about honestly, maybe you could be more specific?
Wow, way to be vicious... this is exactly WHY I don't have a problem being bothering to you... you're just feeding this energy into me. If you'd stop the unnecessary personal attacks such as "dumb ass, implying everyone finds me bothering, I have some problem/am disfunctional/broken, I make dumb contributions, I make worthless contributions".... well then I'd be very kind to sit down and listen to your ideas civilly whether I agree or disagree with them.
Removed at User Request
I've had these exact same thoughts. This would especially be the case for someone similar enough to Sybil. But I would say it is definitely not a healthy state. I would even be bold to say that those who don't feel they fit into a type cleanly have some DID symptoms that can be on a scale say from ~mild to ~moderate to ~severe.
Behold, Xerxes! Behold what you have wrought!!
Actually, I think Piper is a troll.
@Divided: ah I think the people who think they don't have a type do so as a factor of tendency to assume that unlimited self-willed personal change is possible, that the mind's function is completely plastic, etc.
Basically, people who assume too much.
DID people believe they have a type... in fact, they would prefer that they acted like their "preferred" type more often.
It's currently obvious who's the dumb-assfrom....
*walks away calmly*
Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not an expert on DID, but wouldn't it be hard for a person with DID to separate themselves into a particular type that feels true to their inherent selves without the help of someone knowledgeable on the theory as well as DID to help them sort things out?
It's disappointing the thread is reduced to this, really. I was thinking about my response at work during the day and had plans to post something when I returned from work.
Pied Piper, you should calm down. You're going way overboard here.
You may be correct to say that this thread would be better off in the Alternative Socionics Theories section on the grounds that with Model A, there is an assumption that each individual is stronger at some functions than others, but it is a bit of a grey area to say this thread topic definitely cannot address some aspect of Model A theory.
Why would that stop you? Just because they are having an argument doesn't mean other people won't come in and give you a constructive discussion on what you are thinking. Just do it!
Don't make Buttercup unhappy
Why? Cause I'm mad, really mad Buttercup. It's the same 'ole shit, day after day.
*Bubbleshugs*
Removed at User Request
There are two issues here - the issue regarding you is that you have been acting disproportionately in this thread. If you had an issue with HaveLucidDreamz, your approach was not an ideal way of attempting to resolve the situation.
Do I smell a real live flame war about to erupt to christen our new forum dedicated specifically to "flamming"?
Stan is not my real name.
I currently favor viewing psychological type as something developed in the brain, which would support the view that everyone starts out XXXx and develops a type. However, remaining XXXx would involve working all eight functions equally, which is... rather hard. XXXx is, under this interpretation, an unstable equilibrium - a negative state that it is very easy to get out of.
Didn't Augusta also consider psychological type a necessary adaptation rather than something technically impossible to avoid? IIRC, she even allowed for less-developed (but still functional) people not yet having a type.
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
You know the pita kind of reminds me of the tortilla, except the pita is usually associated with greek food, while the tortilla is usually associated with mexican food. I also tend to like corn tortillas more than flour, and of course I enjoy pita bread from time to time.
/waits for backlash from community
pita bread is tasty. gyros are definately one of God's foods.
how about pita chips
Hmmm Pita Chips look good, I'd be willing to try them... but to be honest part of the attraction of pita bread for me has always been its puffy texture... its like a pillowy soft disk of warm bread.
I tried these wasabi crackers one time, and they were pretty good... but I was playing this game and on the mic I was like "mmm wasabi crackers" and someone was like "ewwwwww" lol... I still liked the crackers though.
Wasabi is crazy though... I don't even know what's in that stuff but it makes your nostrils stimulated as fuck.
No, because they blackout when their personality changes.
Cite please.
Oh I should say for the record Pinnochio, you're not really a quote "fucking weak piece of shit"... that was rather harsh, I think that was a bit like a dagger in the back. Just for the record.
hehe stacy's simply naked
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
