Sol's examples of IEI females

[Sol]

Sati Kazanova

Taylor Kinney --> Delta ST, then?

Taylor Kinney is a man (some Se type). This thread is about women.

[Sol]

Deannie Yip
(she's 65 years there)

[Sol]

Emily Mortimer

[Sol]

Natacha Regnier

Sol & universe, just gtfo... pls. You both suck.

Suck are your typing skills So shut up... pls, study normal theory, forget Reinin's bs and look what IEI are indeed with my examples!
You notice IEI differ from you significantly, - that's your problem. Give normal typing materials to type you, get correct opinion about your type, understand this and then your problem will disappear.

Or just post your strange opinion about IEI, if you think it as better.

This thread should be renamed "Everything Sol doesn't like in a woman."

Generally, I have personal sympathy to IEI women. Problems may appear in close communication.

[Sol]

Kylie Jenner

Ti mobilizing is really obvious.

It's not good idea to type by such traits of model A, they are too hypothetical and not well expressed. It's more important to check: what functions are weak/strong, in ego (Fe/Fi etc), dichotomies, valued/nonvalued, intertype impressions. The closer you are to Jung's basics - the lesser mistakes you'll do.

summerprincess
Connect to our warm company in posting IEI-women examples. Your own typings, not which you saw previously.

[summerprincess]

Kylie Jenner



It's not good idea to type by such traits of model A, they are too hypothetical and not well expressed. It's more important to check: what functions are weak/strong, in ego (Fe/Fi etc), dichotomies, valued/nonvalued, intertype impressions. The closer you are to Jung's basics - the lesser mistakes you'll do.

summerprincess
Connect to our warm company in posting IEI-women examples. Your own typings, not which you saw previously.

Kylie Jenner is emphatically not an Intuitive type

[maniac]

Kylie Jenner

I told you she was fucking IEI

It's not good idea to type by such traits of model A, they are too hypothetical and not well expressed. It's more important to check: what functions are weak/strong, in ego (Fe/Fi etc), dichotomies, valued/nonvalued, intertype impressions. The closer you are to Jung's basics - the lesser mistakes you'll do.

So what you're saying is you reject socionics basic model A ideas hmm

[Sol]

Kylie Jenner is emphatically not an Intuitive type

It's useful to watch several clips. Maybe this will change your intuitive impressions.

[Sol]

I told you she was fucking IEI

I remember. Also we matched with her type independently, what rises the weight of the version.

So what you're saying is you reject socionics basic model A ideas hmm

I reject to think as equal parts of model A wich have different logical and subjective experimental basis. It's not religion and not "holy text" where you should not doubt in every letter of it. Model A is hypothetical still.
Some parts of descriptions of how different functions in model A are expressed in the behavior have low basis, compared to what functions are in ego and what relates to aspect, for example. There are better parts of model A to use in typing. And when you'll notice contradiction between, for example, traits of Fi or Se in ego and traits of "Ti mobilizing function" you should choose results of 1st.
The other thing - to notice traits like "Ti mobilizing function" is harder than traits of "Fi in ego" or "Se in ego", even if that hypothesis would be correct.

Tha'ts why on practice for typing I prefer to use only part of model A, which I said above. And same recommend to you. These parts are enough for sure typing. Using of anything else unreasonably will rise the risk to mistake. The example of what leaded you to post non-IEI as example of IEI. If you want the core of theory worked for you good, - it needs to minimize of using doubtful (and lesser clearly seen in behavior) parts of theory and maximum use parts close to Jung.

It's harder for F types to understand such details in theory, where one parts of it should to have more trust and practical use than others. Similarly as befor you had troubles to understand the difference between sure opinion and assumptions, and the difference between degrees of assumptions. It's common to simplify things in weak functions areas by generalization and equalization. Try to understand the levels of theory: where it starts, what are just consequences, where it's clear and where goes far in speculations. To read Jung would be also useful for you.

[maniac]

I remember. Also we matched with her type independently, what rises the weight of the version.



I reject to think as equal parts of model A wich have different logical and subjective experimental basis. It's not religion and not "holy text" where you should not doubt in every letter of it. Model A is hypothetical still.
Some parts of descriptions of how different functions in model A are expressed in the behavior have low basis, compared to what functions are in ego and what relates to aspect, for example. There are better parts of model A to use in typing. And when you'll notice contradiction between, for example, traits of Fi or Se in ego and traits of "Ti mobilizing function" you should choose results of 1st.
The other thing - to notice traits like "Ti mobilizing function" is harder than traits of "Fi in ego" or "Se in ego", even if that hypothesis would be correct.

Tha'ts why on practice for typing I prefer to use only part of model A, which I said above. And same recommend to you. These parts are enough for sure typing. Using of anything else unreasonably will rise the risk to mistake. The example of what leaded you to post non-IEI as example of IEI. If you want the core of theory worked for you good, - it needs to minimize of using doubtful (and lesser clearly seen in behavior) parts of theory and maximum use parts close to Jung.

It's harder for F types to understand such details in theory, where one parts of it should to have more trust and practical use than others. Similarly as befor you had troubles to understand the difference between sure opinion and assumptions, and the difference between degrees of assumptions. It's common to simplify things in weak functions areas by generalization and equalization. Try to understand the levels of theory: where it starts, what are just consequences, where it's clear and where goes far in speculations. To read Jung would be also useful for you.

It just what stood out to me, and she doesn't seem like she Se is something shes naturally good at, she uses it for her videos but fails and doesnt look like shes a natural. I think mobilizing is good for when you have trouble seeing the persons strong functions because he/she is trying hard to be someone else.

Here's an example of an ILI or SLI trying to be good at Fe or Se or something, and then when he looks back at it and learns hes not that at all ,and you can see his mobilizing Fi now as he comes off very compassionate and hes careful of being immoral or a bad person in his videos (Fi mobiliizing)

[Sol]

Geena Davis

Here's an example of an ILI or SLI

Philip DeFranco - ILI

and you can see his mobilizing Fi

I can feel in him: T, N, valued Fi and introversion. Generally impressions remind other ILI. That's it.
To use in typing much more doubtful part of the model, which uses traits which are harder to notice is senseless. Limit the usage of the theory to more core parts I've listed above and you'll type better.

[Sol]

Marguerite Moreau

He's Ne dominant, just so you know.

"Ne dominant" introvert. Now I know. Thanks.

[Sol]

Audrey Tautou

I think Sols latest way of typing people is by the shape of their eyes.

I'm using impressions from nonverbality, eye are important for this, but I don't care about their shapes. Most examples are from actors list, some of which are there for >5 years like Marguerite Moreau.

[Sol]

Olsens

Freelee - ESFJ(?)

would be good if others besides flood also posted IEI examples

[Sol]

Esther Nubiola

[Sol]

Alexandra Borisova, on left (socionica_club_spb)
wrongly typed by them as EII

[Sol]

Sofiko Shevarnadze

Dakota Fanning - ENFJ(?)

[Sol]

Lauren Parsekian


Marta Sobolevskaya


Shtukensia (VerussiaBeauty)

[Beautiful sky]

Shtukensia (VerussiaBeauty)

this is a better video of her

[Tigerfadder]

this is a better video of her

I activated subtext and translation to try to understand what it was about. It works... only ok.

[Beautiful sky]

I activated subtext and translation to try to understand what it was about. It works... only ok.

she talks too much for an introvert. thank you for the tip

[Tigerfadder]

she talks too much for an introvert. thank you for the tip

Some introverts do. The other day I watched a few interviews of warren buffett which is believed to be a Si lead, introvert. He said that when in public he was quiet but when alone with a trusted friend he could not shut up. That is usually how it can be for introverts at early ages.

[Beautiful sky]

Some introverts do. The other day I watched a few interviews of warren buffett which is believed to be a Si lead, introvert. He said that when in public he was quiet but when alone with a trusted friend he could not shut up. That is usually how it can be for introverts at early ages.

yes true

[Sol]

Wenche Myhre

she talks too much for an introvert

lesser than you

[Beautiful sky]

lesser than you

I'm not like this at all. Why do you keep getting the wrong images of me in your head. I'm quiet and restrained. @applejacks and a whole bunch of forum members met me in person and they wouldn't say that

In any case I think that I want to go with EIE final for her and it seems here that she's with LSI (the guy) and final

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj_pfQXTphY

[Sol]

Lavika

I'm not like this at all.

You have no Fi dominant type and don't notice this too. You prefer refuse the basic theory than to assume you are using it wrongly. Because you don't care about truth or use. You play a role, live with fantasies and make senseless chats - that's all you need here and anywhere else. That such behavior with ignoring of the reality may to create problems to other people - you don't care also.

[Beautiful sky]

You have no Fi dominant type and don't notice this too. You prefer refuse the basic theory than to assume you are using it wrongly. Because you don't care about truth or use. You play a role, live with fantasies and make senseless chats - that's all you need here and anywhere else. That such behavior with ignoring of the reality may to create problems to other people - you don't care also.

[Sol]

Polina Grents

sledgehammer is more effective

[Beautiful sky]

[video=youtube;bvjBwX7YzMI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
Polina Grents


sledgehammer is more effective

I know. They don't have one

[Sol]

Viktoriya Poltorak

[Sol]

Lily-Rose Depp

[Sol]

Anna Koshmal

[Sol]

Shannyn Sossamon

[Sol]

Olesya Rulin

Danielle's "boyfriend" is not SLE

[Sol]

Elizabeth Daily

[Sol]

Liza Aprelkova

[Sol]

Nazanin Boniadi

[Sol]

Diletta Leotta

[summerprincess]

Nazanin Boniadi

She has such a nice energy around her... or maybe it's because she is beautiful lol

[Aylen]

Nazanin Boniadi

Is this your list or is it a group compilation? Do you consult others on every video?

http://socion2.narod.ru/celsoclist2_en.htm