For Those Of You Who Are Tired Of The Game

By the way, Expat, I read those descriptions you posted. I've discovered that I am not :Fe:. This bit in the :Ne: description I related to especially, and it made me laugh inside:

"Ne types perceive reality as if they were working on a PC and were constantly opening new windows on subjects that they find interesting."

It's not so much that that is a metaphor for the way I perceive things, but because I actually literally do that. :lol: I can partially relate to the :Se: description, but I'm not sure I am :Se:. Perhaps.

A lot of credit to you for writing that stuff. I found it very interesting and enlightening.

I've realised things about myself i.e. that I need to not jump in so quickly. I never thought I was arrogant because I was just faking it, but I actually am. I need to not be arrogant.

Sorry to bring up another metaphor, but I feel like Musashi. At first, he's like a wild, untamed beast. Then he embarks on the path of self-development. It's incredible.

And they all lived happily ever after?

Well, technically Expat and others are unsatisfied with my conclusion that I am ENTj. I've realised that it is not important that I convince them that I am I realise; they can think for themselves. I myself am identifying with the descriptions more and more, and can see how that is my natural state.

Who knows, perhaps over time, things will change, but for me - I just feel like I've been given a welcome and a half into a new community. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slacker Mom

Did you ever read this? Two Important Steps to Make

---

Yes. Did you read my comment?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Yes, Expat directed me to this a week ago or so.

It's an interesting article. Pretty much clarifies the fundamental principle that any enthusiast of any personality system (be it Socionics, Enneagram, MBTI, Big 5 or any other one) should observe: we all use every function; there is simply an imbalance in our use of the functions, and the result is our type or personality.

I understand where you're coming from. In some ways it stands up more in the face of logic than my own argument does.

---

If you're wondering why I talk about dichotomies, it's because Phaedrus wanted me to clarify ENTj in terms of dichotomies as well as functions, which, as you'll see, I've talked about above that post. Essentially you should ask Phaedrus to read the article if you have a problem with thinking in terms of dichotomies.

---

Yes, Phaedrus has issues with that, because it's the only way he can find even the slightest amount of evidence that he's INTp. Which is a pretty good example of why it is a bad idea to type that way.

:lol:

.

And yet, and yet! I find myself wanting to convince people of my type. Not so much so that they can perceive me as a certain type - no, that would be boring and it would end all the fun - but because I enjoy arguing a point, even endlessly, often, because I realise that everything is in flux, and everything changes, thus, there is always something new and interesting to argue about. Even if it's old, if it's enjoyable to argue about, I'll argue about it.