I have an idea but I'm curious what you all will say. This is a video I did for another type site.
What type, do you reckon?
I have an idea but I'm curious what you all will say. This is a video I did for another type site.
You're not WA's mysterious SLI gym guy, now are you?
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Originally Posted by Gilly
No, I don't know anyone on here. I've done a little lurking lately, but mostly reading the articles.
SLI does seem probable for you, actually. Si/Ne introvert is my general impression.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Delta Irrational, I incline for IEE > SLI. Some reasons for this inclination: teaching people - you seem to be the person who likes to explain, traveling - doesn't bother you to change your physical environment but it is your relationships that are important, seemingly a social person - like to work or do things together with people, dislike the reticence towards collaborating without a justification.
Could you develop on rejecting when people tell you what you think, an example or something? I'm mostly interested in what makes you angry more precisely, for example it could be the idea of attempts to violate your inner person which is unique and unknowable externally, being misunderstood as a rule, or it can be the the justification and self-righteousness they take in asking you to do things. I don't really know what you mean by "moving in", it could be either, or something else.
What about living in your head when you were younger? How detached from reality you were and what kind of thoughts you had (about the future, the past, fantasy)?
Do you usually take an "attitude" when you interact with people? For instance, if you are going to snub someone, would you make that visible in advance, that you are upset?
I was reflecting on situations where people misinterpret mood and intentions in me. And then, after being told continue to believe it. I don't trust my own interpretation of others feelings. I can see it, sense it. But don't fully trust it, so I see it as a kind of arrogance.
Moving in was about people who use pressure in some way, some kind of emotional moving forward that throws me off balance. I think I was reflecting on space. Bit vague, sorry.
Not really fantasy. Reflecting on everyday life, philosophising. Thinking about stuff.What about living in your head when you were younger? How detached from reality you were and what kind of thoughts you had (about the future, the past, fantasy)?
Not really. I am pretty laid back.Do you usually take an "attitude" when you interact with people? For instance, if you are going to snub someone, would you make that visible in advance, that you are upset?
Welcome.
Last edited by 717495; 02-14-2012 at 02:56 AM.
Thanks.
I think SLI is right, or maybe SEI. Anyone got arguments for or against either of those?
I can definately see SLI.
I am still not decided but after the last update I'd say SLI > IEE.
How does Si/Ne work together? I mean, why specifically Ne out of the functions? Unrelated, but I read through IEE and I can relate to some of it. But SLI is a better fit overall.
Can some other people take a stab? Just for fun even.
There are certain sets of information elements which are always paired. That's because of the quadra structure, if you are sure that you value a certain IE, you also value it's counterpart ("valuing" means that you prefer either the introverted or the extroverted of an IE, Si over Se for example). If you value Si, you value Ne, too. Alpha and Delta are Si/Ne quadras.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Thanks, what is the clearest difference between Alpha and Delta? IE wise.
That's easy: Alpha and Delta share the Si/Ne, but Alpha values Ti/Fe over Te/Fi. Your quadra (whatever it migth be) shares two IEs with two other quadras, the other one is your opposing quadra, which values exactly the opposites of your IEs. That means, if you're SLI, you value Si/Ne and Te/Fi while any Beta type values Se/Ni and Ti/Fe.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Nice equipment you have there.
Thanks, Delta seems the best fit. I noticed I value a lot of the description of IEE which is my dual if I am SLI. Is that typical? Also, in the Socionics.us test half of my friends chose
A person with a unique view or vision who is good at helping others imagine and experience an unexpected side of things.
and half chose
A person with a high level of physical awareness who is good at helping others materialize their desires and wishes
Yeah, a local gym, old. So only people who love training go there.
No problem. Well, it's at least not atypical, since those features and traits should draw your interest in your dual. That means you're naturally inclined to see them as favourable. Before I typed myself SLI, I was mostly torn between LII and ILI. But whenever I typed myself ILI, I questioned it because I wouldn't value Ne then, which I was pretty sure I'd favour over Ni. LII didn't really fit for other reasons, mostly the Fe-valuing/seeking. I don't want to be hasty and close this case since I don't now you besides the few information here, but I think SLI migth be a good option for you.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
SLI, probably Te sub but could go either way
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
SLI. I don't see any doubt. Not very social, lives in the moment, doesn't want to run the show, but like team activities, spottend a bird bouncing off the window 20 feet away, likes to teach, not into labels or authority.
Would like to hear form the IEEs. They have a sense about such things.
ISTp
SLI
Enneagram 5 with a side of wings.
SLI
-
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
Which descriptions have you read?
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
A lot of different ones. Wikisocion for the most part. I've read a lot of stuff on Socionics.us as well. A few others scattered around but these were the best and most helpful.
Okay. The only other thing I would suggest is finding the original Information Elements descriptions by Jung, to see where the Socionics categorizations and descriptions have been derived from, and "trace" your type back to its roots -- if you want additional information and get to the core of things. Unfortunately I have lost the links to the relevant website(s).
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Thanks, I think I have the link to Jung's types somewhere. I've read through a few times. I've been into mbti a while and read up trying to decide on my type there. I think I am SLI with a reasonably well developed feeling side. Seems more easy to decide here than mbti, could never decide between istp and isfp. Probably similar to here, though I am aware how different the systems are.
The areas that cause me to rethink are that, I can play the clown and I do perform somewhat. I also tend to come up with random ideas in teams. To be the idea man so to speak. Also, I find it difficult to conceptualise how Si and Te play out together.
No problem.
That sounds like Ne valuing, mostly. You should consider ILE, maybe even LSE, if you're unsure about Fe PoLR and think you're more confident with Ne.
Practicality, efficiency, comfort & productivity.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
When you use valuing it means it is where in Model A?
Jung is not Socionics. He does not describe Information Elements because they do not exist in his theory, only functions and attitudes. Associating for exmple Fi with Introverted Feeling is an equivocation, misinformation spread among online Socionics entusiasts which earlier authors were not doing - since they were not using Socionics. Introverted Feeling type in Jung means introverted and Feeling, so on one hand Fi/Ne and Fi/Se, on the other Ni/Fe and Si/Fe - when feeling is secondary, it is introverted in Jung. I remember I read somewhere an anecdote how Aushra discovered Duality and Conflict, at first she thought that all Introverted Feelers would get along well with Extroverted Thinkers, but in many cases, they were ending up in conflict. Also, Jung theory does not have Quadra Values, it would be impossible to view the similarities between say Delta Irrationals, like it happened in this case (IEE and SLI).
Jung is the historical root of Socionics, but not it's core. No problem with reading about the background of this theory, but Parkster, stop misguiding new users.
1st, 2nd, 5th, or 6th position. Ego or Super-Id.
Ne-valuing types are also Judicious according to Reinin.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Shut up Effy. I didn't say Jung was Socionics. Wolfy is literal enough to not misinterpret what I said like you did.
You barely speak English, so you're not the one to talk about misguidance.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
I relate to it more as a suggestive function than base. It's like Fe, I do it and know I can do it. But I control it and don't go to far. In the eighth position I relate more to the Ti than the Fi description. I think I value Fi, so that'd point to SLI I think.
It's cool. I understand that it is a lot different than Jung. I related to Se in Jung.
LOL! I think you meant "literate".
Fine, so I misunderstood. No need to be an ass to say you didn't mean that.
Yes, it was a typo. Thanks for pointing that out.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
It isn't different, it's build upon it. The advantage of Socionics over MBTT is that Socionics takes a more direct-line approach in reference to Jung's work, and the IEs are built to be more consistent with the original function descriptions written by Jung. The Myers & Briggs typology utilizes a loose interpretation of Jung, and a lot of subjective additions and freely drawn generalizations, all put in a relatively unsubstantial construct, that has little practical merit compared to Socionics. Despite this, I think the MBTI is still more widely used by organizations and businesses, probably because it originated in the US.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
As soon as I started watching the vid I got a strongpolr vibe (very obvious you get little info. from this function), and just from a superficial observation, seeing as you work in a gym, I would say SLI.
EIE tritype 5w4, 4w5, 9w1
As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being.
Carl Jung, "Memories, Dreams, Reflections", 1962
I would say that information aspects (IAs) have good parity with Jungian functions, but IEs not as much. MBTI seems like a misrepresentation of Jung's ideas and should be rubbished not only for that reason but also because it makes a hash of rational/irrational base functions in introverts, with ordering of the remainder bungled as a consequence. Although socionics isn't exactly solidly reliable its basic model makes it superior to MBTI.
Wolfy, regarding your type I wouldn't be surprised by SLI, but that's not based on much information. If you want people to get a proper idea of where you're at within the socion then stick around and partake in general conversations. That'll provide more insight into your routine apperceptual modes, and also give a few intertype-related clues.
I probably mentioned training in general. But I am training for a powerlifting meet at the moment. I've done it in the past and am going to do another one soon.
That's a good bit of
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
Actually, thinking about it... maybe how I approach working as a trainer shows Si/Te. I tend to imagine how the other persons body feels when I am training people. More specifically, I kind of put my mind in the muscle... if that makes sense. Also, the aspect of working in the gym that interested me most initially and still does is program design.That's a good bit of
Yup, sounds right.
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
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
