Why? Why does so many ILI 4w5, which is identical to Balzac's socionics and enneagram type (the archetype for ILI), mistype as IEI?
The main justificatory argument that I have seen for this is "oh but male IEI developsinstead of
".
All these ILI 4w5
Why? Why does so many ILI 4w5, which is identical to Balzac's socionics and enneagram type (the archetype for ILI), mistype as IEI?
The main justificatory argument that I have seen for this is "oh but male IEI develops
Do you have any examples of this?
In the history of this forum it has been the SLIs and Ni-IEIs getting typed into ILIs, but rarely the other way around.
Yes. Would naming a member be ok with the forum rules here?Originally Posted by silke
There is no rule saying that you cannot mention types for members that don't match their self-typing, but they may not feel comfortable with you creating a separate thread for this. Are there any other examples besides this one member that you can draw on?
It's more than one. It seems to be a reoccurring pattern. Another example that I could make is RogueWave over at PerC (dunno if he's on here). It's so obvious that he isn't Fe-creative yet the 4w5 typing seems to play its role.
I can see how 4w5 Ni bases could misattribute their creative function. The urge for uniqueness in the world overlaps in certain senses with Fe, and that silent watcher aspect of 5 overlaps with Te in a particular sense(both when combined with Ni of course).
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
i'd say ILI works for e5 only~
Again, Balzac was a 4.
why so?
Do you know who he was? Have you read anything from him? I don't think I need to argue for him being ILI. He was quite the character.
Like it can be seen in Father Goriot, it was written with all the gritty details, everyone in the book have their fair share of flaws and we get to see the struggle of these people. It is all very much 4w5-themed. You can read about his life to see for yourself, it is too much to bring everything up here, but for example to drop out of law school and ended up inflicting even more misery upon himself. He did this to himself and despite failing multiple times he held on to it, while it seems to me that he easily could go back to law school since his mother (presumably ESE) was even in Balzac's own reports concerned about not having a failure as a son and would therefore pay for him to get back into a more stable way of life.
Last edited by Inguz; 12-13-2013 at 03:50 PM. Reason: typo
LOL
Balzac was.. Balzac?
I said I can't see e4 for any ILI. I didn't say "He isn't ILI".
What is 'very much 4w5-themed' ?
I know people who were pushed by their parents for progress in educaction. Now they are being miserable about it. AND! they don't have magical number of either 5 or 4 over their heads.
lOL.jpg
It's kinda pointless to argue against circular logic.
Can't see one. And I'm open for reasonable arguments.
All ILIs are 5 --> Therefore Balzac was a 5 --> Because he was an ILI
That would be true, but the exchange didn't reach the point where i cover myself with it. You just attached it to me at this point. Circulus vitiosus can be sometimes too easily applied as there are many facts taken for granted in discussion. For now you know that I await reasons, why you consider him 4w5, also I asked for explanation for 4w5 theme. I do think that ILI's only sound with e5, but as I said if i will confront sensible reasons I will evaluate my thoughts. So far you're trying not to answer.
Uhm... Yes you did: "I said I can't see e4 for any ILI. I didn't say "He isn't ILI"."
I did presented a few reasons as to why, but somehow they mysteriously disappeared when you quoted me.You just attached it to me at this point. Circulus vitiosus can be sometimes too easily applied as there are many facts taken for granted in discussion. For now you know that I await reasons, why you consider him 4w5, also I asked for explanation for 4w5 theme.
And this is why it's a pointless exercise to argue against circular logic. You repeated your question and referred to ILI=5 again while simultaneously leaving any reasons that I brought up untouched.I do think that ILI's only sound with e5, but as I said if i will confront sensible reasons I will evaluate my thoughts. So far you're trying not to answer.
Poor argumentation at best.
It's very kind of you that you're offering to evaluate your thoughts when someone can explain to you why other e-types are possible for ILI than e5.
It's just that you're opinion is unpopular and normally it's accepted that sociotypes can be different e-types so it might be up to you to offer some insight why ILI can only be e5
P.s.: I am offering evaluation of my opinion after you explained (How kind of me)
Instead of reducing me to logical fallacy, you could finally try something different.
Right. I skipped them as they weren't anything really sensible or particular for e4.
Definitely. I am not a human being. I am ressurected fallacy that tries to forcefully destroy your opinion.
Quite funny it came from person, who tries to close me in one box. Remember to find other fallacies so other people who disagree with you get their own narrow boxes to live in. Oh and don't forget to give enneagram to each for its unique square/rectangle shape.Poor argumentation at best.
Hiding behind particular fallacy that is applied in wrong way is definitely a 'explanation'. I guess trying to achieve sensible exchange is too much for some people to handle.
Unpopular? You all were present on a secret event to sign a paper on the agreement? Damn. Both systems are categorizations of [Uncle Carl Language] libidos, which were formed in different cultures and caught by dudes and narrowed down. If you think that every ennea can be applied to every ego functions, then you are fundamentally contradicting basic assumptions of both systems.
P.s.: Sure, If there was only anything there to evaluate.
No, you never used any force. That's your problem.
You closed ILI in a box, remember?Quite funny it came from person, who tries to close me in one box.
It isn't.
Nope.
@davez #ignore
Where did you see this argumuent? I've never read something about developing an IE over another in socionics but I know it from MBTI. It's called loop, right?
The main justificatory argument that I have seen for this is "oh but male IEI develops
It was in relation to the user over at PerC that I mentioned. It's someone's personal account for why it doesn't fit. But relating back to this place I am not up to date what is used here, but I still see ILIs mistyped as IEI.
So am I ILI or IEI, I'm a 4w5 IEI afaik. Do tell.
I do not know about everyone. For you have I have no clue. Did you take it personally?
Inguz, I congratulate you on separating the usual associations of Enneagram and Socionics type. Not many people have managed that one, and typology has suffered a great deal of rigidity and stagnation because of it.
Jung describes in his chapter x (description of types) archetypes(extroverted thinker etc.) below his archetypes hi mentions that archetypes are rarely seen in the real world and that an individual normally develops a second function well who has to be a perception function if the individual has a main judging function and a judging function if the individual has a main perceiving function. What he doesn't say is if this second function has to be extraverted or introverted. So from a Jungian point of view it would be possible that a Ni-maintype has Ti as his second function. Because socionics is very strict and gives each IE a specific role such an individual could be typed IEI or ILI because it's not clear if the second function (after jung) has to be a valued one or not. IEI value Ti but its only 2D whereas ILI disvalue Ti but its strong 4d. Ergo such a individual doesn't fit into Socionics Model A.
I don't say there are no exceptions and that no ILI can be one (maybe they're painters or something and not entrepreneurs ) , but E 4 amplifies emotion . That would normally contradict Te's claims and need for objectivity .http://pstypes.blogspot.de/search/la...dentifications (see 4 / 5 section)
Enneagram 4 is described as Feeling, followed by Thinking and Action.
Last edited by Amber; 01-11-2014 at 06:58 PM.
who are you people? usually petty arguments on forum are fun to watch, but i'm just confused.
I don't know much about his life. Pere Goriot is a realistic book , deals with basic social phenomena in the 19th century, has relatively linear characters. I don't see anything that screams Enneagram 4 there. It's not Proust or Camus.
Last edited by Amber; 01-11-2014 at 06:26 PM.
is this your mating signal
are you making an offer?
This is no forum @FoxOnStilts. This is the16types. It might as well be Farscape.
This thread is idiotic.
"[Scapegrace,] I don't know how anyone can stand such a sinister and mean individual as you." - Maritsa Darmandzhyan
Brought to you by socionix.com
no
Why? Why does so many ILI 4w5, which is identical to Balzac's socionics and enneagram type (the archetype for ILI), mistype as IEI?
The main justificatory argument that I have seen for this is "oh but male IEI develops
Where???
Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.
In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.
When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.
So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.
InvisibruJim
send photo
*insert witty comeback*
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote