:oops:Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Ok, then, retry - What do you think of it?
Sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Printable View
:oops:Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Ok, then, retry - What do you think of it?
Sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Be nice, people. I get all the dates, these are the facts. All the rest's up to discussion.
So that's what a Delta flame-war looks like.
lol... I don't see the point of dating random girls, it has no meaning.Quote:
Originally Posted by Minde
It's ok.Quote:
Originally Posted by Minde
Well, Lokivanguard and force_my_hand are free, so I'm going to be nice and just let you have them. You guys have fun!Quote:
Originally Posted by FDG
... That doesn't really help me.Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Ok, starting from the top - You said, "TBH I don't think ENFp guys do well with women in terms of dating."
I said, "I suppose it depends on what you mean by doing well with women and dating."
So, what is your concept of doing well with women in terms of dating?
I supposed that depends on your definition of "free"Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Well, it doesn't matter because Minde's still got aut in her grip. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by LokiVanguard
Ugh, I thought that this was over... I meant that in terms of what it stereotypically means, pretty much someone that sleeps with lots of girls. I don't think ENFp guys are like that, but I could be wrong. I'm not saying that ENFp guys don't get girls or get along with them, I think it's the opposite from what I've seen. Just that they don't seem to be serial daters. Damnit, you're making me answer questions I wasn't thinking of.Quote:
Originally Posted by Minde
and force_my_hand you suck! Why aren't you helping a fellow Delta in need? :(
Aren't both you and minde deltas?
Because I'm an asshole who finds your discomfort an excellent and healthy source of amusement.Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Yeah, except I'm the only one in the crappy situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by LokiVanguard
She's coming after you two next. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by force my hand
Okay so to sum up...all types are great at dating. All types are great. We love them all :)
I don't think whether a guy wants a relationship or a fling is type-related. I mean, one of the ENFP guys I knew was completely relationship-focused (wanting to find one person). Another thought he was relationship-focused, but was really a relatonship-hopper. And still others were players who had slept with many, many women. A lot of it comes down to their individual goals, values and charisma.
It's hard to make generalizations, because no one has met enough of any type to know for sure and there are exceptions to everything. This seems to happen a lot, where someone says "I met an xxxx one time and they were bad a bowling, so xxxx types are't coordinated." It's hard to generalize like that, because it can be a sterotype.
But generalizations are also fun. I like to make them now and again. And really, none of us would bother with socionics in the first place if we didn't like them -- we'd just be like "no everyone is different. people can't be put in boxes."
Why couldn't you have said that before I got sucked into this? :(Quote:
Originally Posted by jewels
Sorry, I'll stop now. I wasn't trying to make this more complicated than it already was or to frustrate you, but I guess it happened anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
I'm sorry for derailing your thread, jewels. I'm afraid I can't answer your original question.
Eh, it's ok (as long I don't have to keep answering these questions.) :D
Nah, you're not alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Minde
I hope you realize that me not asking questions will severely limit our conversations.Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by UDP
Well, you can ask me questions but this was overkill. You kept pressing me to answer questions on people of all things (from 7 billion different angles at that), stick to non-people questions and I'll be fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Minde
:lol: And you expect :Fi: + :Ne: to be different... how?Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Well, you were expecting me to be good with :Fi: + :Ne: which is what got me annoyed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Minde
Hm, really? :? Actually, if anything, I think I was just expecting you to read my mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
But I guess I forgot to put on my tin hat. Or was it take it off? I can never keep those things straight...
Anyway, now that I'm nicely confused I think I'll go have dinner.
And, honestly, I wasn't trying to argue with or annoy you.
Mhm. That is what it is like when I've been invited to the girls' sleepover parties.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christy B
Oh god, it's nice to know that it's not only my IEE friend that's trying to act all tough and that's it's normal for male IEE-s. Yeah, one of these days he's gonna get his ass kicked. But he also compensates in other ways. He dates a lot of girls simultaneously and says certain groups of people should be exterminated.
Now something else I wanted to comment.
Minde, I don't think you are not delta. I've had a suspicion before but though it was just my lack of proper understanding of EII-s. In this thread, and in some other places, you appear to be... some sort of an automaton. An automaton that is stuck up on the exactness of phrase construction, the consequences of the exactness of phrase construction, bent of perfect clarification of what is being tried to be conveyed, on following a linear path of discussion and resist attempts of making the discussion flow freely. I think this is what annoyed aut0, you placed emphasis on :Ti: and tried to suppress :Ne:.
What I see has happened here. Aut0 came in and gave some observations, possibly expecting some :Ne: to come his way in people offering various unrelated ideas on why such a thing is so, or whether it is or is not so. Minde, however, did no such thing but proceeded straight to giving facts about "how things really are" and entering in a discussion on "how things really are". Or in other words delved straight into :Se:. This annoyed aut0 who was not looking for a discussion on the exactness of reality, or :Se:, as Minde was doing. The discussion then progressed into a discussion of correctness of expression, everything I listed about Minde acting like an automaton on Minde's part and trying to find his footing/orientation on aut0's side.
Here Minde strikes me as a possible Ti subtype of LSI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snegledmaca
I don't know if I would go so far to say Minde is not EII, but sometimes she seems a little ISFJ to me. She actually remindes me of an isfj I know very well, though, I had attributed this to her being a strong Fi subtype.
I think here Minde behaved like a declarer who was trying to understand things better. She made CLARIFICATIONS, but she didn't really ask anything. She did expect aut0 to reply to those clarifications, but none of those sounded like a question. ISFj is a negativist asker. She didn't sound like that at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christy B
I am not sure how a negativist asks questions, because I do not know much about negativist/positivist. . .Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristiina
Can you explain?
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by jewels
SLE and EIE are attracted to me. I do not get this. Recently tried telling an EIE it was a bad idea for us to get together but he just refused to hear it. He was always getting mad at me for how I was acting, ie, not in SLE fashion, but still thought we should be together. (Although, of course, this meant me changing to be more SLEish.) I cannot talk to him anymore because of this, and we had been good friends!
Keep in mind that Minde is also E1.
Minde seems to value :Te: quite a bit, too, and does not stike me as being in beta, or valuing :Fe:
look at Meged's EII Fi subtype description...
Quote:
PSYCHOLOGIST
Ethical subtype is polite and tactful, restrained and impassive. Usually it soblyudayet a certain distance in the contact, it now and then seems strict, cold, bezemotsional'nym. Gradually this impression is scattered, since in the process of contact sincere sympathy is manifested and desire soak by the matter. It is usually serious, calm and benevolent. It is very penetrating, but it is reserved. Rarely it shares its observations. It is punctilious and very tactful. It does not know how to joke, it fears to say excess. It departs silently from the disputes, without resorting to diplomacy. It is very industrious, tedious, patient and assiduous. It does not transfer injustice and violence. It is sequential and solid in its principles. It knows how to create comfort, to decorate house with distributions. Much it knows how to make with its hands. View is alerted, rarely it smiles. It follows the figure, it is always accurate, pulled. It is modest, but it is dressed with the taste, if means are allowed - izyskanno is elegant. Motions are smooth, although are stopped up stop up. Gait is sufficiently rapid, is light, frequently semenyashchaya, a little forged forge. It sits directly, rarely it gesticulates.
Sorry! :( I got here as fast as I could! lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Minde, no worries. De-railing makes threads more fun. :)
Interesting analyses...
From a model A standpoint, if I was using Ti and Se during that discussion, my role and PoLR, that might explain why I didn't do too well. ("Failed miserably" is probably the better term. It was a very uncomfortable conversation for me.)
@ UDP - From the little research I have done on the Enneagram, I tend toward thinking I'm a 9w1. However, I also see the whole theory as being fundamentally flawed and incomplete, so I do not put much stock in it.
@ sneg - Yeah, I do tend to get caught up in phrasings. Not something I particularly like about myself. And... "automaton"? :(
@ Kristiina - So, from your viewpoint I was being postitivist declarer? Did I sound like your dual would?
@ jewels - :) Well, I'm glad somebody doesn't mind too much.
Tell me more. That is, explain it. I said I think it's :Ti:, I want to see whether you will confirm this observation. If you have the will and time to that is. I don't want to drop obligations on you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Minde
In approach to the matter. You seemed very, how should I put it," :Ti: dominant".Quote:
And... "automaton"? :(
Hah! For future reference, when I post something stupid just remember I'm looking for something like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by jewels
:pQuote:
Originally Posted by jewels
Sneg, is there some kind of sane IEI subtype?
Hey! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by snegledmaca
I just saw this thread and it was enough to make me come out of my hybernation. I can relate to ENFp's acting tough very much. In fact it happens to me and i have to try to stop it. I think its to do with having Se as a role function. For someone like me its incredibly confusing. Both my parents have creative Se. Im actually built pretty buff aswell. Its not helping now that ive been going to the gym with my friend. Im also a black belt at martial arts and was asked to represent my dojo for the state lol. Ive always known that being tough is not me though. I just dont have the Se for it. We really cant be our true goofy selves in public much though. Your right we would be bending over and asking for trouble. Acting a little tough can be a defense mechanism and can also help to ingratiate you with tough people. One of my ISTp friends is on the rougher side of things.
When it comes to ENFp's and girls, im sure theres plenty of differences but i have talked to quite a few and they do have problems in this area. I used to think i would be good at it but it turned out not true. I seem to be able to flirt and be smooth quite easily and then it just stops. Ive had an ENFp girl and an INFj say to me that cant understand why i never have a girlfriend. Its another complicated matter. ENFp's can do without things, including sex because of low Si i suppose? (Ive proved it over the years lol). Not only that i think about it far too much. I know that 99.95% of the girls i meet aren't what i want. Maybe im too picky but i personaly think waiting is a valid game plan. >50% of marriages end in divorce. People date other people and i can see it as a house of cards ready to fall. Ive dated some nutters including stalkers and cheaters lol. I would rather be free that be in a shitty relationship and loose all my money in a divorce.
ENFp's need to fly free. We resist being tied down very much ;)
@Jewels. You're just good at what you do. I think its a testament to you that you can attract people from the opposite quadra. I find ENFj's quite hot and they tend to like me so im not that suprised there. When i was younger i had heaps of people i didn't like wanting to be my friend. It sucked lol.
That ENFp that went to craft shops etc... sure he wasn't gay?
I really want things to make sense, and when they don't I often feel like I have to do it myself. The problems is my priorities are all wrong and I usually don't really know what I'm doing. Or I tend to feel I don't know what I'm doing, that I'm out of my depth. Then I flail. That's one reason that unless I feel pretty grounded in something I'm not likely to get into an extended argument about it - the idea being that if I know I'm right then the arguments will (hopefully) take care of themselves. However if I'm not sure of what I think, because I do want to have something be right, I'll try to find it in whatever's around me - sentence structure included. :? So, basically, I lose sight of the bigger picture and get tangled in the little details. In some situations it can be hard for me to tell the difference between what's important to concentrate on and what's not.Quote:
Originally Posted by snegledmaca
Or, another thing that happens is like here, where I had an idea in my mind that I'm both sure of and still exploring. So far the base principle looks like it works fine, but there's still more to know about the situation so I wait for it to become more apparent. As I wait I'll sometimes say something relating to the main principle while at the same time throwing out something that might encourage further feedback. The problem comes when I get distracted from the main idea to focus on some side issue that someone else finds both important and wrong. I get concerned (because I'd like to be right, even if I have to change my original position) and start focusing on that, to the detriment of not only the main idea but communication in general.
I think it comes down to wanting to be right and clear - wanting things to make sense - and having an often poor ability to discern what's important to focus on and what's not.
Hm, ok...Quote:
Originally Posted by snegledmaca
Welcome fucking back buddy.
looking at the thread question i'd have to say no, i do not end up in relationships or attract people to me from the opposite quadra.
conflict is a relation that clearly has problems that i can see and feel almost immediately. quasi identical: mostly i feel initimidated by them which puts me in weird space to have interactions with them. with contraries, i do feel kind of a connection but it's not clean, and they prove me right when they disassemble my point of view. with superegos, there's an attraction but a lack of trust, so it's superficial.
then there's the familiar feeling of supervision and benefit and comparative that i get from delta that i can easily recognize since it is the same as the family i grew up in. so it's familiar but uncomfortable.
having said this, people can wear social masks and not act like themselves. there's a high level of social deception and manipulation that can be turned on by any number of childhood, mental health, substance abuse, contextual factors. typing people isn't always a clean process. it can be very difficult to know what type somebody is when they are hiding who they are for whatever reason.
which leaves me with a foot in alpha and a foot in beta. my relations have been with beneficiary, illusionary, lookalike, activity (very brief) depending on what type i am.
Yeah, my friend had, what I would call a typical, delta perspective. He said that in the beginning he was repulsed by the current western ideal that was propagated of treating people basically though :Se: (He did not actually say :Se:, he basically described it without knowing it) and went and approached it with a very :Ne: + :Fi: manner of tying to get to know the person, talk to them, spend time together and so on, and then after three or more years, I'm not sure how much he mentioned, of abstinence because such an approach never lead to sex he "wised up" and embraced the :Se: approach of treating women as objects, pieces of meat, something to own and so on and not only does he have no problems it's working like a charm. He's currently dating several women for a short while with nothing serious in mind like before and is rotating them, getting a new one, every so often. I think he realized that women are as inserted in sex as he is and if he wants it he has to go-and-get-it. This newly found attitude, I think, made him more "confident" in :Se: I'd say. He's still the flaming :Ne: + :Fi: type and screams it really through his actions, words, behavior, everything really, but he's more interested in being "tough", in projecting some sort of authority or something. Much more uncompromising. I'm disliking this as I don't want to see him get into trouble and I don't think idealizing something is a good idea (Although, unconnected, ironically idealization of reality is practically the definition of myself so I should be the last person to criticize him for that). This especially comes out when he is drunk. Starts imagining people are doing things purposefully to him, loudly voices, I'd say, fascist viewpoints, basically starts looking for trouble.Quote:
Originally Posted by meatburger
Not sure in what context (I'm seeing several possible interpretations of this), could you clarify.Quote:
Originally Posted by aut0
Not sure what to make of this. It partially confirms what I say but I'm not certain whether I am reading into this things that are not really there, whether my interpretation of what has been said is not that of a possibility but of reality. Or if I am only seeing what I want to see. However, here it goes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Minde
Again, I'm seeing Se in some way. The first segment, you are basically describing how you desire to have at least something make sense/be right. Basically, when uncertain you look for stable reference points in your environment. To be honest, what you are describing with that sounds to me like what Ne dominants describe as being annoying in Se creatives. Looking in their immediate surroundings for things, "grasping to some detail" when they want them to delve into the realm of uncertainty and possibility. In essence the Ne dominant wants for the other person to let go, unhinge themselves of their immediate environment, to transfer from Se to Ne, while you, with everything you described there, seem to do the opposite. You talk about trying to find more connections, essentially become more rooted, more connected to the immediate environment, like you say, you lose sight of the bigger picture and get tangled in the little details. I'd say a knee jerk reaction to an attempt to be "uprooted" by Ne.
However it could be a need brought about by Ti, the need to have clearly defined structure in ones environment. The notion of using this detail, argument, proclamation or something as a reference point, to have it be mutually accepted and understood, like you state " if I know I'm right then the arguments will (hopefully) take care of themselves".
I am of course assuming you are not defining things to be objectively-within-the-context right for no reason, that is, if somebody proclaimed something that contradicted this determined truth you would attempt to prove them wrong, that you would not jump on the bandwagon of what if it was wrong. I'm assuming this because you mention things being fixed, making sense, as being of importance to you. You mention an inclination to have things be "right" as a part of yourself. Basically in my opinion you are expressing a natural inclination towards Ti.
Also, to elaborate on this and show how this is not some other element at work here, the reason why it's not for example Fi, even though it can also be said to be a system because of the natural assumption that "everyone will see things straight", my version of your statement " if I know I'm right then the arguments will (hopefully) take care of themselves", your approach is starkly against the subjective nature of Fi which could never make such a proclamation. Not even remotely. And the reason why it's not any of the other internal elements, Fe, Ni and Ne.
The reason why it's not Te or Si is because what you are describing is static. And extremely so. In essence I can't see it as being anything otehr then Se or Ti with seeing both of them in there.
But I'm also nudged by kristina's statement of your behavior being explained through being a positive declarer. There is a possibility that I could really be seeing your extremely static nature and am interpreting it as Se and Ti. (Note: EII are positivist declarers as well)
Essentially what I described above, a need for a clear static field (Here I would not say Ti). I don't see much more. Sign of an external static function with the waiting to get concrete data. However there could be a sign of Se. The waiting for things to concertize, for them to become more readily apparent, observable. A Ne type would have a tendency of not viewing the situations in that manner, but would tend to jump the gun, "fill in the blanks". For example, I think an intuitive would start that off not through saying "so I was there waiting to get a refill on data" but with "so there I was with the enough information to form a picture of things". However I feel this is somewhat of a sketchy argument as it's mostly an assumption. I don't know the motivations behind this action. You could really just be waiting for information because there is a shortage of information and not because this is a natural thing for you to do, to first get the sensory input and then form the intuitive picture. In fact, I'd even say that the former is more likely. However I don't want to discount the possibility that the latter is correct.Quote:
Or, another thing that happens is like here, where I had an idea in my mind that I'm both sure of and still exploring. So far the base principle looks like it works fine, but there's still more to know about the situation so I wait for it to become more apparent. As I wait I'll sometimes say something relating to the main principle while at the same time throwing out something that might encourage further feedback. The problem comes when I get distracted from the main idea to focus on some side issue that someone else finds both important and wrong. I get concerned (because I'd like to be right, even if I have to change my original position) and start focusing on that, to the detriment of not only the main idea but communication in general.
Also the idea of a "main idea" and being aware of diverting from it, is very centralizing and might I add not very Ne. And the fact that you have major issues when diverting from it also makes me think Ne is a poor side of you. I can't see how a type with Ne in their ego would have any problems with getting sidetracked.
Well, I'd say that your need to have things make sense is a normal thing, everyone need things to make sense, however, defining things to make sense if they are "right and clear" within a given context of discusion, or external and static in a field, is a sign of Ti in my opinion.Quote:
I think it comes down to wanting to be right and clear - wanting things to make sense - and having an often poor ability to discern what's important to focus on and what's not.
The part about trouble focusing, that would be unusable with a proper context, but in the context you presented above, that the problems with focusing are on aspects in a discussion, the mere idea of trying to discern what's important to focus on and what's not in a discussion is very anti Ne. As I have addressed above, being sidetracked is no problem for a Ne type, quite the contrary.
So in conclusion I'd say that you are LSI. However I am so uncertain in my analysis that I seriously think that somewhere, somehow I've made some terrible, huge mistake and everything I said is rendered invalid because of it, so you shouldn't take anything I say with any conviction or certainty, that is, don't let yourself be convinced by my argument, and perhaps it would been be better if you just dismissed or ignored them, as a preemptive thing, that is, you're EII and I'm just spewing rubbish, over analyzing, reading things that aren't there, seeing only what I want to see, finding facts to support only those argument I desire to be true and dismissing the rest and so on. Gah, why are you listening to me in the first place.
LOL as basing relationships on Socionics type.:
Wasn't the type in your sig ESTj like 5 minutes ago??