Differences between ISFj-ESI and ISFp-SEI

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashton

Or yellow82 has typed people wrong. Or she's typing unhealthy people with neurotic attributes. Or it's just how ESIs subjectively come across in her perspective. Or some combination thereof.

---

I disagree, I think Yellow painted a fairly accurate observation of SEI vs ESI with a few generalizations (such as ESI's only wanting to be with people their own age, which isn't really applicable to type).
I for one did not find her remarks about either types as painting unhealthy or unlikeable people, but I can understand why neither you or FDG would particularity like the characteristics of an Fi base rational introvert in the same way that I often cringe at Se dominant descriptions...because I don't value it, not because Se base observations portray a negative individual

i don't see why it would be strange that an ESE's description of an ESI wouldn't sound great to an LIE. they would have different impressions and notice different things about the same person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yellow82

In my experience: In a nutshell: SEI's can be rather random and tend to always be thinking of others comfort and are less judgmental [at least out loud]. On the other hand, ESI's are stricter and much more likely to be judgmental and may not let something go if they were hurt "too much" by you.

Some other differences I have noticed are: an SEI will go shopping with you and randomly go "oh X would really like that." While ESI's if they're shopping for someone else will have a tendency of already thinking about it before they go shopping. SEI's also may try to pay for dinner if they sense that you're having a bad week/day, while ESI's tend to think that you should just learn to deal with the pain, however on occasion they may take you out to "celebrate" something, but I've never had one pay for a meal when I was feeling down. SEI's will be much more open to hearing how your day went [even if it was a negative day.] While ESI's will generally cut you off as soon as you start getting negative, some are much more tactful at this then others. SEI's tend to not be very scheduled, although they may stick to a to-do list every now and then. ESI's tend to be very organized and scheduled, and often expect others to be just as much as they are and they will get stressed out if you aren't. When an SEI goes to an event they will tend to seek out other people to talk to, while an ESI will often be very awkward and hope and pray that someone will approach them, and if someone does they will in a very polite manner talk to them. [This is a weird one, and I'm not sure if it's true, but:] SEI's tend to get along with all ages, especially those young at heart, while ESI's generally like only those their age or over, they tend to go for more "mature" people. One that I knew only had my brother, I and another friend that were her age at the wedding, and everyone else seemed to be fourty and above. It was really odd. . .

Hopefully this helps.

Also, the difference between duality and conflict is with conflicters you tend to always be stressed out and in the end you're wondering how you can change yourself to make yourself more agreeable to them. While with duals you tend to just go with the flow and be yourself.

---

:doh:

I think you missed the entire meaning of :Fi: and replaced it with strict hermit. Here's a good sign of someone mistyping people.

Honestly, I didn't mean to be negative. Two of my best friends and my grandmother are ESI.

They're all like that. Strict. That's why they're so good for ENTj's. :P

My grandmother and grandfather are ISFj-ENTj, and they're a lovely couple. They're very strict though and when I'm there I have to have a schedule and stay on it or it is extremely stressful for them. My mother [INTp] is the same way except to a slightly less degree.

I don't see being strict, judgmental or scheduled as particularly bad traits, in fact, they can be very good traits as my grandparents are very responsible and are millionaires probably greatly due to the way that they live; extremely organized, well thought out and scheduled.

And what I meant by the way the ISFj's tend to avoid negative topics is that if we get into a conversation that is slightly bearing towards negative, the ISFj will tend to sit down and have the mentality that I need to organize my negative thoughts and address them in a civilized manner or not address it at all. They also tend to plan their "sit-downs". It's kind of like, "oh, you want to tell me something about how you're feeling? Ok. How does seven work for you?"

Again, being organized and scheduled is not a negative trait. It's a trait that I actually greatly admire and yet do not have. :P

And also, I said that the whole age thing might not actually be a characteristic of the ISFj, I was just throwing that out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kassie

i don't see why it would be strange that an ESE's description of an ESI wouldn't sound great to an LIE. they would have different impressions and notice different things about the same person.

---

Her descriptions are not really that subjective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kassie

i don't see why it would be strange that an ESE's description of an ESI wouldn't sound great to an LIE. they would have different impressions and notice different things about the same person.

---

I don't think Yellows type has anything to do with her observation, even if she has a preference for FeSi, her understanding of FiSe was still fairly consistent. But than again, I didn't find anything negative about her understanding of ESI's and can see how her observations of their directness and lack of spontaneity is something that an LIE would in fact find positive, whereas an SLE (which I strongly believe Ashton is) would find such an individual unappealing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold

Her descriptions are not really that subjective.

---

this is partly true, my attention went more to things like "scheduled" and "polite" and i automatically threw out things like "may also pay for dinner" and "to-do lists" as i was reading because they are ridiculously specific.

i don't think this disproves my point though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

I don't think Yellows type has anything to do with her observation, even if she has a preference for FeSi, her understanding of FiSe was still fairly consistent. But than again, I didn't find anything negative about her understanding of ESI's and can see how her observations of their directness and lack of spontaneity is something that an LIE would in fact find positive, whereas an SLE (which I strongly believe Ashton is) would find such an individual unappealing

---

fairly consistent with what?

Quote:

---

this is partly true, my attention went more to things like "scheduled" and "polite" and i automatically threw out things like "may also pay for dinner" and "to-do lists" as i was reading because they are ridiculously specific.

i don't think this disproves my point though.

---

I was merely giving my life experience with the types, non-specific and specific details. If the OP had wanted the basic description of each type it is easy to find on the internet and he wouldn't have come here. . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yellow82

I was merely giving my life experience with the types, non-specific and specific details. If the OP had wanted the basic description of each type it is easy to find on the internet and he wouldn't have come here. . .

---

i don't see anything wrong with sharing your experiences of actual people that you've typed. i find it preferable to talking about people as abstractions for sure. i don't personally find descriptions of behaviors that painstakingly specific very helpful but i wasn't intending to target you, sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

of course they would

---

Too bad I've been in a relationship with an ESI for 5 years...as usual, you have "strong belief" about concepts and occurrences which conflict with reality.

the only observation which I found true is:

Quote:

---

When an SEI goes to an event they will tend to seek out other people to talk to, while an ESI will often be very awkward and hope and pray that someone will approach them, and if someone does they will in a very polite manner talk to them.

---

which is a kind of obvious difference between IJ-negativist-result-serious and IP-negativist-process-merry. It's much more pronounced for male ESIs (they tend to be more reserved than female ESIs).

Quote:

---

Honestly, I didn't mean to be negative. Two of my best friends and my grandmother are ESI.

They're all like that. Strict. That's why they're so good for ENTj's.

My grandmother and grandfather are ISFj-ENTj, and they're a lovely couple. They're very strict though and when I'm there I have to have a schedule and stay on it or it is extremely stressful for them. My mother [INTp] is the same way except to a slightly less degree.

I don't see being strict, judgmental or scheduled as particularly bad traits, in fact, they can be very good traits as my grandparents are very responsible and are millionaires probably greatly due to the way that they live; extremely organized, well thought out and scheduled.

And what I meant by the way the ISFj's tend to avoid negative topics is that if we get into a conversation that is slightly bearing towards negative, the ISFj will tend to sit down and have the mentality that I need to organize my negative thoughts and address them in a civilized manner or not address it at all. They also tend to plan their "sit-downs". It's kind of like, "oh, you want to tell me something about how you're feeling? Ok. How does seven work for you?"

Again, being organized and scheduled is not a negative trait. It's a trait that I actually greatly admire and yet do not have.

And also, I said that the whole age thing might not actually be a characteristic of the ISFj, I was just throwing that out there.

---

Do you really believe that the way of living of your grandparents can be extended to ESIs (or LIEs) who are in their 20s, 30s or even 40s? Old people tend to be scheduled, strict and boring compared to youngsters, ceteris paribus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

I disagree, I think Yellow painted a fairly accurate observation of SEI vs ESI with a few generalizations (such as ESI's only wanting to be with people their own age, which isn't really applicable to type).
I for one did not find her remarks about either types as painting unhealthy or unlikeable people, but I can understand why neither you or FDG would particularity like the characteristics of an Fi base rational introvert in the same way that I often cringe at Se dominant descriptions...because I don't value it, not because Se base observations portray a negative individual

---

You're like a bose-einstein condensate of stupidity, bigotry and preconception.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ESI Female portrait, Beskova

DREISERKAs are demanding of themselves, they possess strong wills and they can force themselves to take to heart the fact that making children usually is not desirable (this was the only interpretation that I could make of this). But they also manifest an exactingness of others. Such that, not all of those desiring can become girl friends and friends of this girl. DREISERKA is very, very exacting of others. And no one gets away with any irresponsibility. Homework she does in accordance with a plan same as, however, many other things. She loves the measured-out life from childhood itself and she can get upset, if her plans are destroyed. In such cases, unexpectedly, even a scene with tears can occur. Thus, there must be no unexpected trips to the zoo or the aquarium (the original Russian word described a place for just dolphins and other marine mammals, not that it has any relevance to the text). It is better to plan matters beforehand.

---

I think generally most people have met a ESI like this, not to say all of them are like this, but just it's kinda of memorable.

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=ESI_male_and_female

http://www.hulu.com/watch/314500/cel...dcarnie-wilson

This is a example of imo a RL ESI, Tracey Gold.

I'm sure there's plenty of unmemorable ESI's who do whatever but it's not unusual to meet someone like this and typically people remember such a person due to these novel and consistent characteristics which they display that others might not. This particular episode if wife swap has a dual rational couple swap with a non-dual irrational couple. A good example of contrasting lifestyles, although at the extremes.

Well doing homework according to a plan and starting to cry if such a plan isn't carried out doesn't really seem that exacting, more like a bit cute. Exacting has to do with forcing other people to do stuff, usually...

I have to say I think ESI's are considered exacting by many, there is this XSXp girl that I work with that would cry every day because of her ESI supervisor, they get along now but when she first began she had so many demands from the ESI that she would crumble in tears.

Also for example, on the show Top Chef, this season there is imo a ESI chef who is very exacting.

http://www.bravotv.com/top-chef/season-9/bio/lindsay-autry

On one of the challenges, she was very detailed in how she wanted her fish cooked and because of her unwavering need to have it cooked in a certain way, she was unable to work with the person who cooked her dish. This is someone that for sure could have cooked that fish to perfection, but was basically micro-managed. Also due to the stress of the challenge she blew up but she probably is generally a very polite person.

I believe this is a fairly cold version of the ESI type and she could also be LSI, but I think generally when people think of ESI, her and Tracey Gold are decent representative.

I don't really view exacting and scheduled as bad traits, I view myself am as an exacting person. But certainly there are differences in how I express this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Well doing homework according to a plan and starting to cry if such a plan isn't carried out doesn't really seem that exacting, more like a bit cute. Exacting has to do with forcing other people to do stuff, usually...

---

Oh God, my h-homework!! :lol:

I don't care about organizing other peoples lives but I have to know what is going to happen in mine and that affects the people I'm close to. one of the issues between me and my ex was he would do this thing of "I got a plan, its covered, don't worry," but he wouldn't explain anything. sometimes I would ignore it and do my own thing to take care of the situation because I couldn't stand just stepping back and not knowing what was going to happen. and then our different courses of action would conflict and fuck everything up. either that or I would be completely stressed out not knowing. he took it as a sign that I didn't trust him. but I can't stand looking forward and just seeing a tangle and not untangling it as soon as possible. so I wouldn't say exacting in terms of being bossy but exacting over my own situation and I need other people to be on board with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yellow82

In my experience: In a nutshell: SEI's can be rather random and tend to always be thinking of others comfort and are less judgmental [at least out loud]. On the other hand, ESI's are stricter and much more likely to be judgmental and may not let something go if they were hurt "too much" by you.

Some other differences I have noticed are: an SEI will go shopping with you and randomly go "oh X would really like that." While ESI's if they're shopping for someone else will have a tendency of already thinking about it before they go shopping. SEI's also may try to pay for dinner if they sense that you're having a bad week/day, while ESI's tend to think that you should just learn to deal with the pain, however on occasion they may take you out to "celebrate" something, but I've never had one pay for a meal when I was feeling down. SEI's will be much more open to hearing how your day went [even if it was a negative day.] While ESI's will generally cut you off as soon as you start getting negative, some are much more tactful at this then others. SEI's tend to not be very scheduled, although they may stick to a to-do list every now and then. ESI's tend to be very organized and scheduled, and often expect others to be just as much as they are and they will get stressed out if you aren't. When an SEI goes to an event they will tend to seek out other people to talk to, while an ESI will often be very awkward and hope and pray that someone will approach them, and if someone does they will in a very polite manner talk to them. [This is a weird one, and I'm not sure if it's true, but:] SEI's tend to get along with all ages, especially those young at heart, while ESI's generally like only those their age or over, they tend to go for more "mature" people. One that I knew only had my brother, I and another friend that were her age at the wedding, and everyone else seemed to be fourty and above. It was really odd. . .

Hopefully this helps.

Also, the difference between duality and conflict is with conflicters you tend to always be stressed out and in the end you're wondering how you can change yourself to make yourself more agreeable to them. While with duals you tend to just go with the flow and be yourself.

---

At large these are good observations, but I don't agree that SEIs tend to be always thinking about other people's comfort. They are not, they are much more focused on their own comfort, but they'll allow others to hop on the bandwagon and they can even be pleased if someone expresses appreciation for this comfort. Thinking about other people's comfort is more of an ESE thing. (also, when other people benefit from their Si, SEIs will feel appreciated for who they are, ESEs will feel appreciated for what they do)

The thing about ESIs making themselves very hard to approach is very true. It can be even worse: when they are approached, they might react in such a way that it results into rejection of the attempt. My gut feeling is that ESIs apply high standards (even those that have nothing to offer themselves), and you really need to persist in the effort to get anywhere.

well, for a starter; a random SEI is more likely to be overweight than its ESI counterpart.
So, next time you see a random overweight, not yet typed, person, do remember that it's likelier that the person is SEI>ESI.

Also, in comparison to SEIs, ESIs have their muscles tense.


Also, in comparison to ESIs, SEIs don't really like taking sides. Remember: SEI the Mediator. ESI the Guardian.
---

One could even go and construct a stereotype, like this:
SEI => Overweight, relaxed person that never takes sides.
ESI => Underweight, tense person that always takes sides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trevor

well, for a starter; a random SEI is more likely to be overweight than its ESI counterpart.
So, next time you see a random overweight, not yet typed, person, do remember that it's likelier that the person is SEI>ESI.

Also, in comparison to SEIs, ESIs have their muscles tense.


Also, in comparison to ESIs, SEIs don't really like taking sides. Remember: SEI the Mediator. ESI the Guardian.
---

One could even go and construct a stereotype, like this:
SEI => Overweight, relaxed person that never takes sides.
ESI => Underweight, tense person that always takes sides.

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0_SaJT-80Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_Glcf_D5J4

Okay, I accept everyone's objection, but then let's accept that we're narrowing our focus to extreme :Se: subtypes, neurotic and bossy ISFjs. That might very well be 30-35% of the whole population.

Quote:

---

The thing about ESIs making themselves very hard to approach is very true. It can be even worse: when they are approached, they might react in such a way that it results into rejection of the attempt. My gut feeling is that ESIs apply high standards (even those that have nothing to offer themselves), and you really need to persist in the effort to get anywhere.

---

Chances are they're just shy and don't know what to talk about and are afraid to make a bad first impression.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Chances are they're just shy and don't know what to talk about and are afraid to make a bad first impression.

---

This. ↑

Most ESIs aren't nearly as rigid, stuck-up, and callous as some of you (consentingadult, yellow82, Marie84, etc.) are portraying.

Though I suppose it's a bit ironic that the people I perceive as being the most judgmental/narrow-minded on here, are coincidentally among the most vocal in making these claims…

Lessons in Socionics perspectivism.

The ESI can be very sweet, responsible, enthusiastic, but they are always a little bit more realistic than their INFj kindred. They are also not always women...


I think this girl is an ESI - she is 17, from Norway, and is a devout Christian of a Mennonite like church - she became a Christian on her own even though she is from one of the most secular nations in on the earth. (I think that she is an E4 ESI... she is very individualistic in a very "MORAL" way.) She is very sweet, is she not? She does some Si Fe type stuff, but she seems to be mostly about virtue. I could be wrong, maybe she is an SEI traditionalist.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMYUqGd65Mk




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpsWPoNpgqI&feature=channel_video_title

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saberstorm

I think this girl is an ESI - she is 17, from Norway, and is a devout Christian of a Mennonite like church - she became a Christian on her own even though she is from one of the most secular nations in on the earth. (I think that she is an E4 ESI... she is very individualistic in a very "MORAL" way.) She is very sweet, is she not? She does some Si Fe type stuff, but she seems to be mostly about virtue. I could be wrong, maybe she is an SEI traditionalist.

---

That chick seems EII to me. Spazzy Ne bullshit going on in her eyes. Sounds infantile, too—she reminds me of how Maritsa talks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashton

Most ESIs aren't nearly as rigid, stuck-up, and callous as some of you (consentingadult, yellow82, Marie84, etc.) are portraying.

---

Wrong: from an irrational perspective, most of them are, just a few of them aren't.

Lessons in Socionics perspectivism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Chances are they're just shy and don't know what to talk about and are afraid to make a bad first impression.

---

Not so much type related. Younger ESIs might indeed come off as more shy, but older don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by consentingadult

Wrong: from an irrational perspective, most of them are, just a few of them aren't.

---

XXXp vs. XXXj doesn't make much difference in that respect IME.

Quote:

---

Lessons in Socionics perspectivism.

---

Herp derp! Though you don't seem to be grasping how relative it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saberstorm

The ESI can be very sweet, responsible, enthusiastic, but they are always a little bit more realistic than their INFj kindred. They are also not always women...


I think this girl is an ESI - she is 17, from Norway, and is a devout Christian of a Mennonite like church - she became a Christian on her own even though she is from one of the most secular nations in on the earth. (I think that she is an E4 ESI... she is very individualistic in a very "MORAL" way.) She is very sweet, is she not? She does some Si Fe type stuff, but she seems to be mostly about virtue. I could be wrong, maybe she is an SEI traditionalist.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMYUqGd65Mk

---

This girl above seems very much EII, but I have difficulty seeing how the female in the video posted below by Felafel in this thread http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...l=1#post846400 could also be an EII. Doesn't she seem more ESI?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felafel

here is psychopathic istj going insane over trivialties on infj. can't say infj helped own case much (if you've watched earlier and later bits of the show). still, istj are exactly like this when power-tripping.

@ about 8:44
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCz6tbgOzj8&feature=related

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kassie

I don't care about organizing other peoples lives but I have to know what is going to happen in mine and that affects the people I'm close to. one of the issues between me and my ex was he would do this thing of "I got a plan, its covered, don't worry," but he wouldn't explain anything. sometimes I would ignore it and do my own thing to take care of the situation because I couldn't stand just stepping back and not knowing what was going to happen. and then our different courses of action would conflict and fuck everything up. either that or I would be completely stressed out not knowing. he took it as a sign that I didn't trust him. but I can't stand looking forward and just seeing a tangle and not untangling it as soon as possible. so I wouldn't say exacting in terms of being bossy but exacting over my own situation and I need other people to be on board with that.

---

Hmm maybe this is in part to do with :Se: vs :Si: valuing. ie Betas and Gammas may frequently want to know 'what's up' as if all the world should know and that their physical boundaries are expanding, due to the nature of objectivism, where as Si valuers tend to have more habitual ability for writing it off as showing deference for the individual's thing, showing a greater sense of privateness, each more or less when they come to empirical qualia like activities, plans, awareness etc. This is not in definition of Se/Si, but you can see how those of each type, esp. Se valuers, would find these attitudes useful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shayley

This girl above seems very much EII, but I have difficulty seeing how the female in the video posted below by Felafel in this thread http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...l=1#post846400 could also be an EII. Doesn't she seem more ESI?

---

I do not see how that LSI is an LSI - She is all about Te ... Now Natasha from Rocky and Bulwinkle is a LSI, she is all about structure + action!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0okytU6LpEc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kassie

fairly consistent with what?

---

Take your pick http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ry/53-ESI-ISFj

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashton

This. ↑

Most ESIs aren't nearly as rigid, stuck-up, and callous as some of you (consentingadult, yellow82, Marie84, etc.) are portraying.

---

I'm convinced you have no concept of what any Socionics type is, so I'm not going to take your comments about "what ESI's are really like" with much confidence (same goes for FDG). The evidence so far seems to point to you having an idealized version of an IEI and calling it ESI, while insulting the qualities of actual ESI's by calling them neurotic. There's simply nothing unhealthy with ESI's dependable characteristics, they're just not your cup of tea.

Quote:

---

Though I suppose it's a bit ironic that the people I perceive as being the most judgmental/narrow-minded on here, are coincidentally among the most vocal in making these claims…

---

Says he who created an entire site to preach his warped typology under the banner of legitimate typology, who types people based on their faces like an aura reader and thinks he knows better than the sociologists and psychologists who've researched the theory and published peer-reviewed papers on the subject

So far, you've openly admitted to thinking Socionics is basically BS while simultaneously acting like some sort of guru on the subject. I have no idea why you continue to troll this site other than to peacock amongst your band of followers

Maybe we need to start with the hypothetical ESI stripper (mentioned in the Russian type profile) and then work backwards from there, as to how to get a classic stay at home mom...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

Take your pick http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ry/53-ESI-ISFj

---

so her interpretation is consistent with your interpretation of other peoples' interpretation of what aushra said. this doesn't mean anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

Says he who created an entire site to preach his warped typology under the banner of legitimate typology, who types people based on their faces like an aura reader and thinks he knows better than the sociologists and psychologists who've researched the theory and published peer-reviewed papers on the subject

So far, you've openly admitted to thinking Socionics is basically BS while simultaneously acting like some sort of guru on the subject. I have no idea why you continue to troll this site other than to peacock amongst your band of followers

---

:( where are you getting words like "preach" and "guru" and "followers" from? this is a serious question. its just like the cool thing to say for people who don't like ashton or something. but they are just buzzwords that don't actually reflect anything true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kassie

so her interpretation is consistent with your interpretation of other peoples' interpretation of what aushra said. this doesn't mean anything.

---

Whose her? There are three different Socionists that provided descriptions, and there are even more on Socionics.org if you use a translator

Quote:

---

:( where are you getting words like "preach" and "guru" and "followers" from? this is a serious question. its just like the cool thing to say for people who don't like ashton or something. but they are just buzzwords that don't actually reflect anything true.

---

Seriously? He created an entire site just for his alternative theory (which is fine) but simultaneously calls it Socionics (which isn't), chaotically and carelessly spreading misinformation while also using this site to troll, harass and school impressionable people who are actually trying to learn.
In terms of followers, I basically see a group of users and yes men who have rejected dozens of peer-reviewed papers published by actual professionals in favor of a charismatic internet dweller

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

Whose her? There are three different Socionists that provided descriptions, and there are even more on Socionics.org if you use a translator

---

her is yellow.

yes, there are dozens of descriptions. who decided that they were all consistent with each other and accurate? at some point along the line of practicing socionics you have to start using your own observations and thinking for yourself. if i found something i thought was inconsistent between two of those descriptions, what should i do? go straight to aushra? that seems pretty "follow-ish" to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

Seriously? He created an entire site just for his alternative theory (which is fine) but simultaneously calls it Socionics (which isn't), chaotically and carelessly spreading misinformation while also using this site to troll, harass and school impressionable people who are actually trying to learn.
In terms of followers, I basically see a group of users and yes men who have rejected dozens of peer-reviewed papers published by actual professionals in favor of a charismatic internet dweller

---

oh, god. the poor, impressionable people. you really have created an interesting narrative. no wonder this is so important to you, you're battling the anti-christ lol.

How about we just do this. . . read these and see which one best suits your girl.

ESI = http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/ESI-ISFj/
SEI = http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/SEI-ISFp/

Quote:

---

This. ↑

Most ESIs aren't nearly as rigid, stuck-up, and callous as some of you (consentingadult, yellow82, Marie84, etc.) are portraying.

Though I suppose it's a bit ironic that the people I perceive as being the most judgmental/narrow-minded on here, are coincidentally among the most vocal in making these claims…

Lessons in Socionics perspectivism.

---

How am I being judgmental? :thinking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kassie

her is yellow.

---

okay, thanks for the clarification

Quote:

---

yes, there are dozens of descriptions. who decided that they were all consistent with each other and accurate? at some point along the line of practicing socionics you have to start using your own observations and thinking for yourself. if i found something i thought was inconsistent between two of those descriptions, what should i do? go straight to aushra? that seems pretty "follow-ish" to me.

---

I don't have anything against you, or anyone else, being skeptical of Socionics. If you don't feel that it's practical and truthful than I certainly won't argue against it, but it's something that I've personally found to be authentic.
And yes, I will fully admit I'm a follower to an extent; as long as I see something as reliable I have no issues aligning myself with it

Quote:

---

oh, god. the poor, impressionable people. you really have created an interesting narrative. no wonder this is so important to you, you're battling the anti-christ lol.

---

Whatever, I have my opinions of him and you have yours

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

I'm convinced you have no concept of what any Socionics type is, so I'm not going to take your comments about "what ESI's are really like" with much confidence (same goes for FDG). The evidence so far seems to point to you having an idealized version of an IEI and calling it ESI, while insulting the qualities of actual ESI's by calling them neurotic. There's simply nothing unhealthy with ESI's dependable characteristics, they're just not your cup of tea.

---

Or you're over-literalizing the descriptions and inducing confirmation bias—like a Forer Effect, except applied to other people.

And like I said, I think at least some of this is a perspectival issue too, where each type perceives other types differently. That is, you could take the same ESI and different types would form different impressions about that person, because they're seeing and experiencing different things about the person relative to their own sociotype's reference frame.

Quote:

---

Says he who created an entire site to preach his warped typology under the banner of legitimate typology,

---

What? Get your history straight. That site was created at the time because a lot of people hated Reuben McNew. It had nothing to do with advocating any particular brand of typology.

Quote:

---

who types people based on their faces like an aura reader

---

Aushra used VI too.

Quote:

---

and thinks he knows better than the sociologists and psychologists who've researched the theory and published peer-reviewed papers on the subject

---

Woah there… actual sociologists, psychologists, and PEER-REVIEWED papers… in Socionics?! Are you kidding me?

Quote:

---

So far, you've openly admitted to thinking Socionics is basically BS

---

There are useful aspects to it; I wouldn't be here if I didn't think there was. But there's nothing objectionable about utilizing a theory while simultaneously maintaining skepticism towards it. This is constructive to how humans eventually become more knowledgable about the universe.

Quote:

---

while simultaneously acting like some sort of guru on the subject.

---

Nonsense. I've never anointed myself as any kind of "guru". If you see it that way, then I suppose that's your problem.

Quote:

---

I have no idea why you continue to troll this site

---

Again, criticism ≠ trolling.

Quote:

---

other than to peacock amongst your band of followers

---

Yeah, my mythical, imaginary cadre of followers. They're everywhere!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

Seriously? He created an entire site just for his alternative theory (which is fine) but simultaneously calls it Socionics (which isn't), chaotically and carelessly spreading misinformation while also using this site to troll, harass and school impressionable people who are actually trying to learn.
In terms of followers, I basically see a group of users and yes men who have rejected dozens of peer-reviewed papers published by actual professionals in favor of a charismatic internet dweller

---

Indeed it is annoying to be required to address any crap written of random internet users in the name of free-speech, especially rhetorical harassment and misguiding information. The quality of the information on the forum is a responsibility of the administration, IMO. Since I can't remember I told the leadership that taking an *active stance* is a necessity, whatever that is. Active stance means getting one's hands dirty, they should judge the content, trying to prevent and penalize misinformation, to a reasonable extent. Reasonable but still limiting at their discretion.

And I'm not suggesting that Ashtonian Socionics should be banned, on the contrary, if he were an admin, his Socio-Jungio-whatever mix would be the official view, anyone who disagrees could leave. I would support that as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Ineffable

And I'm not suggesting that Ashtonian Socionics should be banned, on the contrary, if he were an admin, his Socio-Jungio-whatever mix would be the official view, anyone who disagrees could leave. I would support that as well.

---

you say it is annoying to address "misguiding" information and then you say this? is it the truth you're concerned with, or do you just like censorship for its own sake? lol