http://photos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-...09424_6642.jpg
Normally I don't like posting one pic, but I think this one is pretty good.
Printable View
http://photos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-...09424_6642.jpg
Normally I don't like posting one pic, but I think this one is pretty good.
ESE-Si
he's got that sheepish, "this is somewhat awkward" SEI smile imo
He looks a lot like an SEI I know, and I agree about the little smile, so that's my guess.
.
The type Ritella wants to fuck? (I hope that's not her brother)
if i ever hear brenden frasier has had a terrible stalking experience with some math professor ill know who it was
He radiates the gentleness I associate with SEIs.
should i tell his type now or wait for more guesses?
should you ask that?
http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/8452/hanksug1.jpg
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/9501/050505td2.jpg (3 years ago)
Just saying...
okay.
Dun
Dun
Dun....
His type is...
IEE!!
a lot of people either got it or were close.
Hell no. He's some delta NF.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterpark
Same expression, headshot, different functions.
I'm pretty sure Tom Hanks is Fe INFp, and Tereg you look really Delta in that picture. You look more Fi in that picture than in most of your other pictures I've seen. Hanks in his picture looks Se seeking, like he's waiting in his self contained zone for something to happen, whereas you're seemingly reaching out looking to establish some consistent context.
Also he looks dynamic, you look static. The way your head and shoulders are situated look like they're just plopped there with each part standing still in this frozen position, whereas Tom Hanks looks like the pic captured him as a frame of a moving picture.
As far as the person in VId in this thread, I don't have a read yet, my first instinct was ethical.
intuitive, obviously. would guess delta nf.
he's cute, Ritella.
um, Tom Hanks, IEI? blech.
hmm...I do think tereg looks more self-contained than hanks, like he's not looking to incite some reaction or anything...not sure about the Se thing. And by context, do you mean an Si context?
Maybe. Lots of factors could go into this though. All pictures are static.Quote:
Also he looks dynamic, you look static. The way your head and shoulders are situated look like they're just plopped there with each part standing still in this frozen position, whereas Tom Hanks looks like the pic captured him as a frame of a moving picture.
Si and Fi. He's both looking for that continuous external context and also that kind of stable Fi-context, whereas Hanks by contrast is much more "directly reactive" to these areas and doesn't look for the same kind of continuity/stability.
What I meant was, try imagining Tereg moving vs how Tom Hanks moves - imagine the way the shoulders move relative to the head and stuff. Static types, particularly ENXps tend to move like their body consists of a pile of things and they all kind of pick up the pieces and move. Whereas IPs tend to move more as self-contained units, like atoms (movement within themselves with electrons moving about etc). It's a similarity I noticed you even have with Hanks. Whereas compare the way Tereg may move with the way I generally move.Quote:
Originally Posted by strrrng