Contra

omg you like cool ass music ily

Sure, here you have the link. It's the same thread, where I compare myself with a friend (it seems you could have thought the type-me is a different one). I was specifically referring to the picture which is at the bottom of the OP. Your eyes in the selfie are similar to mine in that image, but V.I. wise, as I said, you're quite close to Narc (althugh your gaze is a bit different, he has a more typical Ni-creative eyes). I think some [many] people thought I V.I. as delta just because I'm not thin enough as the intuitive stereotype says, which is ludicrous. Also my focused gaze in some pictures could be easily explained as a reaction to a source of discomfort (camera) in a typical PA (NPA model) fashion, but once I'm caught in a more relaxed & natural way, I think the "I'm in my mental world" style becomes quite visible.

The ILI users here are not quite "pure" or achetypal imo. Some of them are probably not ILIs. I agree Korpsey is an excellent example, he even has the same facial expression (and attitude) as Wolfgang Pauli, universally acknowledged as one.

I'm also unsure about the ILI guy in the video. He seems quite ip-ish and his speech lacks the typical "trying to promote interest/enthusiasm" that its usually easily recognizable in Fe-valuers. The girl is much more typical ILI, she literally sucks and throws away your energy as she's speaking . LSE is a plausible option for the last girl, although I do not see anything that specifically points to that instead LIE. She has a lot of energy, maybe Te-LIE was a better subtype.

You don't have to worry about the P.M. I just assumed you didn't have more comments to add about what it was already said. You are welcome if you want to add more info, of course. I just was particularly curious about if you expected such "idealist side" in me, because in the forum I project a more realistic (~Te-ish) persona. I just don't like to make visible these aspects if I'm not confident enough, as I'm a bit sensistive about that part of myself which is a potential food for predators.

I'm not sure where your vision about alpha idealism as "superficial" comes from. Could you elaborate? I could agree in the ILE case, not because I think they are shallow, sometimes they just don't care too much about any particular subject (Ep temperament). But in the case of LIIs, their idealism goes to the very essence of human nature, the root of all things, so to speak, thus affecting to all aspects of human existence...

Hi man. I've seen your selfie. Interestingly, your gaze in such picture is quite simular to my own in the last picture of my type-me thread . Generally speaking, I would say you V.I. quite a lot like Narc, althouth a bit more "in your own thoughts".

If you're still struggling with your type, you can find here some gamma NTs (or potential gamma NTs, at least) whose ways of speaking are being compared with alphas of the same club in upper posts.

I bet I convinced you about my alphaness (particularly in contrast with neighboring quadras alternatives) as soon as I exposed my idealist side in the last PM...

Hello. I have sent you a PM. It has a spoiler that you are not supposed to read too soon, but the tag was wrong so it's visible. Please ignore it until the appropiate moment.

Oh my goodness! I just realized I never responded to you! A lot has happened in my life and my internet access is limited at best.

No Country for Old Men was good.

I agree that There Will be Blood is more about the loneliness of apotheosis. I also find that it hits a nerve with the perceived human condition.


I hope youre well. Anything worth mentioning happening in your life presently?

Merry Christmas Contra! I will reply properly at a later time, but did not want you to think I was ignoring you.
I am just needing a bit of a breather.

Have a great day! (:

Hello Contra. Your past has been quite interesting, but I have to disagree with this affirmation "those who have the least problem self-typing are those with the fewest self delusions". I think it could work in the opposite way, at least in no few occasions.

Assuming everybody has certain degree of self-delusions (as you pointed, and I agree), those who are the most confident about their types are those who have the most strongly settled opinion about themselves. And this, precisely, could be the case of the most self-delusionals. Because the more you are sunk in a certain idealization of yourself, the more you will refuse to acknowledge when this image does not fit reality. This will make the individual less receptive to presented data which could suggest that the person belongs to another type and, consequently. that he/she is not who he/she is claiming to be. Regardless this data comes from lived experienced or observations from other people.

By the other hand, those who are quite receptive to data which contradicts previous formed opinions about themselves, are potentially less sunk in such self-idealizations.

Not to mention that a strongly settled type requires a strongly settled opinion about how functions works, and sure both of us are aware about how problematic this really is. Until some objective, falsifiable and reliable method of typind is stablished, one should accept that the opinion manifiested today about function, types, etc, could and should be quite malleable.

I do think it's more likely than not that I'm a Se/Ni valuer. As I mentioned to you in my previous VM, recent experiences about my interaction with people are making me reconsider my type. Those behaviors I've mentioned I see them as un-alpha, but actually I have now a potential different interpretation than Fi-HA (which is still not discarded).

I would like to share some aspects of this recent and other personal experiences, and my evaluation of them. But this would require an extremely long post and as they're a bit personal, I prefer using P.M. Regardless you agree with my observations or not, I think you can find it illustrative and useful, maybe even for your own self-evaluation purposes.

So, would you like to engage in such discussion?

If the opportunity arises you should definitely check out the darker roles he has played that you havent yet seen. He is a truly talented gentleman. Your avatar now definitely fits in with that theme (;

We seem to have similar taste in movies. Or maybe you just like DDL, but as you mention Plainview and not DDL I am assuming you liked the movie and not just the actor (; . Personally, There Will be Blood is my favourite movie of all time. It just speaks to me.

Creepy and weird roles are my favourite for Jake Gyllenhaal to play. He was born to play them as far as I am concerned. Great avatar choice.

Hello. Sorry for answering so late. I usually disconnect from online foums when I'm outside vacation period, as they're too time (and in this case also mental) consuming.

I think you're probably right and I was a bit too quick affirming that LSIs are against SciFi. I could have misunderstood some delta LSEs for LSIs, and another factors like enneagram or simply general taste could also contribute a lot. Ni HA may still be a strong SciFi promoter, particularly when compared with ESEs (Ni PoLR) who usually don't like or simply don't care about this genre (and about this I'm quite certain).

About my type it's really complex. This aspect points to X, this to Y... etc. It's probably easier being objective when you're evaluating others instead yourself. Because in the first place as you're looking outside the box, the background noise cancels itself and you can focus in the most obvious and reptetitive patterns of behavior. But in the second case as you're inside the box which you're ananlyzing, you see all the aspects in their full magnitude, which makes impossible (very difficult) to see all of them at once and observe how they neutralice each other and which one survives if you put them together.

Still, I would say that I'm closer to ILI than anything, maybe a particularly social ILI as contradictiory as it could sound. In my experience LIIs, maybe becuase they're rational and tehrefore more consistent, are more easily identified, whereas ILIs one day could seen to be ILI, another day LIE, another day ILE, another LII...

Also I'm considering that maybe looking at different aspects instead how I think (as all NTs have more or less the same strengths) could be helpful. A recent personal experience has made me consider the way I interact with people, and I think some aspects could fit quite well in Fi-HA and are a bit un-LII (or un-alpha in general). I dislike (or if you want hate) most people although I try to be nice to everyone but still I feel the strong need or forming how to say... bonds, quility ones with people for trusting an valuing. Which sometimes have caused me very bad experiences with people who have proved not worthy and I though the opposite. LIIs in my experience even the more social ones do not look for such highly intense & differentiated bonds, they just look for people nice to them, and when their interactions with people fails they move on (or do it more quickly), not wasiting too much time & mental resources. I can became quite resentful & hateful, both in general (that is friends) and with former couples if I consider that I have been treated dishonestly.