You can view the page at http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-DarkAngelFireWolf69
Printable View
You can view the page at http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-DarkAngelFireWolf69
Summary of cog-styles:
DA: Process, Negativist, Dynamic, dual to CD
CD: Process, Positivist, Static, dual to DA
-Give rise to dual pairs: α-ILE-SEI, β-LSI-EIE, γ-ILI-SEE, δ-LSE-EII
VS: Result, Positivist, Dynamic, dual to HP
HP: Result, Negativist, Static, dual to VS
-Give rise to dual pairs: α-LII-ESE, β-SLE-IEI, γ-LIE-ESI, δ-SLI-IEE
Simplified descriptions of cognitive styles from: http://course.socionics.kiev.ua/tag/...-deyatelnosti/
C-D cognitive style: ILE, LSI, SEE, EII
This is a precise, single-course style of thinking, that is also called formal logic, deductive-axiomatic logic, or bureaucratic thinking. It is based on the four laws of formal logic. Most of the academic books are written according to the rules of this thinking style. This type of logic predominates in society.
D-A cognitive style: SEI, EIE, ILI, LSE
This is precise style of thinking that branches out and runs along multiple parallel courses (multi-course style of thinking). It works according to principle "thesis-antithesis-synthesis." Types using this type of logic make for the best programmers.
H-P cognitive style: LII, SLE, ESI, IEE
This is imprecise, multi-perspective thinking. It is mosaic-like. It works according to the principle of a hologram - the creation of three-dimensional representation of the object through the imposition of several of its sections. It is suitable for solving complex multifactor problems that have no clear-cut algorithms.
V-S cognitive style: ESE, IEI, LIE, SLI
This is imprecise, but holistic, single-course style of thinking. It works according to principles of natural selection - method of trial and error. This style of thinking is the most natural one. It can successfully solve the problems of self-organization. It is stimulated by competition. The society it is often rejected due to its random, chaotic nature.
Note: Types in Benefit and Extinguishment relations have dual cognitive styles to each other. This lowers the communication barrier and creates a certain level of attraction between them. For example IEIs often become friends with IEEs, ESIs, and LIIs, all of which have dual thinking style to that of IEI (HP:VS). Famous ILI-ILE extinguishment friendship: Einstein-Bohr. (discussion)
Note: This deserves further emphasis: "I emphasize that in this article I will investigate the structural forms of cognition, not their content. My attention will not be directed on what a person thinks, but how they think. In other words, the subject of my discussion will be on the instrumental and technical aspects of thinking." -- that is cognitive styles elucidate structural features of cognition of different socionics types - they don't determine what a person thinks, what beliefs and values they hold, but how they think.
Quotations taken from real people demonstrating differences in cog-styles:
Dialectical-Algorithmic Cognition (D-A): EIE, ILI, SEI, LSE
- Tao Te Ching by Lao-tzu exemplifies D-A thinking style. Notice the juxtaposition of the opposites and numerous negativist, dynamic constructions. The verses have a distinct back-and-forth rocking style.
- "But I do think in complications and contingencies, and balance a lot of conflicting possibilities in my mind all at once." - EIE
- "... my thinking style mostly consists of balancing opposites, finding middle grounds and relative truths based on the relative strength of opposing internal dispositions; when I'm under stress it kind of feels like I'm walking a tight rope, trying to balance what's going on in my head. To me it feels like a constant balancing act of my own internal tendencies for the things that I consider good and evil, the things I consciously do to improve myself and the world and my ability to promote my own vision of how I think things should be vs. the evils I am compelled to do either by my own impulses that I struggle to control or by circumstance. Everything I do is weighed on these scales, every word that comes out of my mouth, every emotional signal I send, every action I take, and the final outcome, what comes out of me and goes into the world, is dependent on how the scales are balancing inside me." - EIE
- "I have a horrible talent for entertaining and enhancing oppositions in my mind. If two things don't go together, I put them together in my perceptions. And I get paralyzed or something. I'm basically nuts. It's that I really see how a thing and its opposite fit together, locked up. And that can bring me a huge amount of pleasure, to see that. The downside seems to be that I can't ... um, function. These are gestalts. And so a good friend will come in with a nice hammer and start breaking it into pieces." - EIE
- "The best I can represent it as would be something like a scale that has weight being constantly poured onto it, and the ENFJ's role is to dictate where the weight falls in order to maintain proper balance. I think it makes a lot of sense for Aristocratic EJs: rational aristocracy is all about maintaining a social structure, so its fitting that the EJs have a style of thinking that supports their role, one focused on "keeping things together." The mental assumption of EJ temperament is that everything is in motion, and that it should be organized, and that energy needs to be exerted in order to maintain organization; the Democrat EJs (ENTJs) being the transition point to aristocratic quadras, take a more generative role with Vortex thinking, finding the right opportunity to promote cathectic action; once the shift is made into an extant collective, the Aristocratic EJs (ENFJs) take on the role of holding everything together once the opportunity to organize has been capitalized upon." - EIE
- "All that we identify with in reality was all brought about by the psychic current of introversion. Extraversion is like a contra-density, a force of expansion and inflation that prevents the complete nullification of all ideas and concepts, and the collapse of all psychic energy in the universe into recursive introversion. It is the mirror image of introversion in every respect, and has to be in order to function as a perfect eternal balance giving rise to infinite truths in infinite forms." - ILI
- "I tend to view myself in terms of certain attributes. Like for example, I'm intelligent, foolish, amiable, distant, novelty-loving, rut-oriented, independent, afraid of losing people, savor the moment, and am pretty indolent. I have my moments, both ways. Sometimes at the same time!" - SEI (notice the juxtaposition of the opposites)
- "I wanted to set up a situation where there are hundreds of sentences all of which are plausibly true to someone, but then in effect pose the question "what do you do, how, for example, would you govern given all these conflicting opinions?" - LSE, aristocratic EJ D-A
- Negativist D-A "push-and-pull" - LSE
Causal-Determinist Cognition (C-D): LSI, SEE, ILE, EII
- "If one asks how one's mind works, he notices areas where it is (perhaps incorrectly) understood, that is, where one recognizes rules. One sees other areas where he lacks rules. One could fill this in by postulating chance or random activity. But this too, by another route, exposes the self to the same indignity of remote control. We resolve this unpleasant form of M** by postulating a third part, embodying a will or spirit or conscious agent. But there is no structure in this part; one can say nothing meaningful about it, because whenever a regularity is observed, its representation is transferred to the deterministic rule region. The will model is thus not formed from a legitimate need for a place to store definite information about one's self; it has the singular character of being forced into the model, willy-nilly, by formal but essentially content-free ideas of what the model must contain." - Marvin Minsky
- "I see flashes of instantaneous understanding of the cause and effect of every possible action I could take at that very moment, and I choose extremely quickly which one is the best choice." - ISTj, 16T member
- "There is like a flowchart in my mind. Every single possible if-then statement is recorded and stored in my brain and I have an amazing memory for it. My plans for the future can be written in C++ format if I wanted. (if I get this job, I will stay for 6 months. Else I will find a new job & work on my real estate liscence simultaneously). When I was younger, interacting with women was a huge flowchart because I had no emotional intelligence (its debatable if I still do). I would make a complete flowchart in my mind so I could control the interaction and know exactly how she was going to react so I wouldn't get my feelings hurt. For example, I would plan an entire interaction in my mind, "I'm going to say "hi, how are you?" her possible responses will be: nothing, something non-commital, and something engaging. If she says nothing, I will try again and stop pursuing if she doesn't. If she says somethig non-committal I'll leave. If she says something engaging, I will start these topics of conversation with her: X, Y, Z." - ISTj, 16T member
- "I think here lies the problem with the system. There has been no consistent principle put forth in the past five years, of how the system actually works. Frankly I thought Socionics was a good theory until baseless arguments begin on how the system works." - ISTj poster
- "This is why socionics is so confusing. for some people it means one thing, for another something else. there needs to be a set description with no chance for uncertainty" - ISTj poster
[From my observations, people with C-D style of thinking seem to experience the most issues and troubles with getting into Socionics, perhaps because some of basic axioms of socionics have never been clearly formulated. The high levels of ambiguity embedded into Socionics present a challenge to C-D thinkers. DarkAngelFireWolf69 has also commented that Socionics is easier to grasp for Result types (V-S and H-P types).]
Vortical-Synergetic Cognition (V-S): IEI, LIE, ESE, SLI
- "We are drowning in information, while starving for wisdom. The world henceforth will be run by synthesizers - people able to put together the right information at the right time, think critically about it, and make important choices wisely." - SLI (E. O. Wilson)
- http://tinyurl.com/5vegfyn - Tim Harford's (SLI) TED talk that demonstrates trial-and-error intrinsic to V-S cognitive style
- "My thinking is alike mucking about in puddles - randomized, but following some sort of direction. Playing some music, my head clicks together properly and thoughts come into focused torrents. I live in a world of organized chaos, headwise." - IEI, forum poster
- "Sometimes the connections and perceptions in my mind are so abstract there are no words to explain. A lot of times I just know something and can’t explain it—a premonition that’s hard to articulate. If it’s strong I usually say something or explore where it’s coming from, but I will keep it to myself if people don’t seem to understand. Informed decisions require lots of information and looking at a situation from as many different points of view as possible. I find it amusing, the absurdity in everyday situations." - IEI, forum poster
- "I love to deconstruct complex concepts, organize ideas, form conclusions or arguments by looking at it through several different lenses. I love that "Aha!" moment when everything clicks together for me." - IEI, forum poster
- "To be blunt, I arrived at this typing out of gestalt. Since I know myself better than anybody else, and since I am the common denominator in all of my inter-type relations, my self typing becomes the focal point around my understanding of socionics coalesces. Imagining myself to be different types is akin to playing around with the focus on a pair of binoculars. Everything comes out blurry at all focal settings other than this one. At this point, everything snaps into focus and I am taken aback by how well socionics premises appear to jive with my own experiences. Every other focal setting produces a jumbled mess of incoherence from which nothing of value can be gleaned." - IEI, forum poster
- "Vortex thinking believes the system is not perfectly counter balanced, and the connections of all the data imply the value of an unknown variable (all the information points toward its value). The value of the variable is what brings the system back into balance. That's why vortex thinking is opportunistic. Vortex thinking is searching for something." - IEI, forum poster
- "You imply that nature intends something. That's just you projecting your own human notions unto something that's utterly inhuman in every way. There is no natural equilibrium, no balanced system that we're parts of. There is no thought behind it. Nature is purposeless, mindless, violent, self consuming chaos, only it's so slow we barely notice it. It does not "hint" and it does not "intend" us to reproduce. We're completely meaningless results of a 4 billion long, automatic and completely mindless process of small random changes and sifting by natural selection. Whatever purpose you see here is made up by you." - LIE, forum poster
- "Sometimes the time gap in between Point A and Point B is so far in between that it allows me to think of all the things I could have improved upon to have a better point B (interestingly enough while this is happening my mind is also hovering over Point C). It's this point that I begin spiraling as the immensity of all the ways I could have made it better weighs on my shoulders. Somewhere in that chaos, the thought of "OMG I'm running out of time" crosses, until of course one settles. An epiphany hits and BAM you realize, "You're way ahead in time and all things are falling into place (not perfect as envisioned) but they are aligning as you've imagined." At this point, I think Point B is just about to meet you face-to-face at the exact moment you've predicted and Point C is already peaking over in the horizon." - LIE, forum poster
- An mmo game likely incepted by someone with V-S cog-style: link to trailer
- http://tinyurl.com/ycgy4uc
Holographical-Panoramic Cognition (H-P): SLE, ESI, LII, IEE
- "Art is the elimination of the unnecessary" - SLE, Pablo Picasso
- "I never over analyze the things that people say or do - I feel like people's intentions are always very clear to me." - ESI, 16T member
- "There are two aspects to any person: essence and behavior. Typology based on behavior improves with complexity: the more dichotomies you come up with, the more accurate it is. On the other side, typology based on essence strives for simplicity: it's about reducing personality to its minimal expression. There is no limit about how far you can go about complexity and this is why there are so many behavioral typological systems. But simplicity has a limit and that limit is probably Socionics." - IEE
- "Why the hell would I need to think about reasons? if I got them, I do stuff; if I don't, I might do stuff just the same; oftentimes the conclusion would be the same either way, but I get there faster if I just chop out a large bulk, if not all, of the deliberation" - IEE, 16T member
- "...when shit hits the fan, I stop all thinking and just do a bunch of shit and then everything goes awesome seems I'm most comfortable when all hell's breaking loose" - IEE
- "I don't really focus on what they're doing or why. It's just not important to me. I'll meet someone for the first time and pay hardly any attention to what they're doing, tbh. Usually people say the wrong things or look awkward at first because they're nervous, shy, or just not open to me yet—I'm not going to analyze the things they say. It just isn't of much significance to me. However, I do tend to gather impressions of people when I first meet them, but it's by observing something else. I suppose you could call it a person's undertone? Like if you meet some girl who acts extroverted and bubbly, it's not hard for me to look past that and see one general face to her—a more solid, internal, static thing that serves as a core despite her outward expressions. I guess it's like spotting depression in someone even if they act like they're on top of the world. And yeah, if I do meet someone that looks like they're acting against who they are, it feels obvious to me. That sort of impression tends to last too, and I'll wonder if they'll ever start showing who [I think] they are. And even though I'm not going to really judge them for it, I still can't get over the sense of internal friction they give off, and I feel like I can't get close to people like that. I do trust my impressions, though. How I feel about them can and probably will change over time, but who I think they are pretty much stays the same." - ESI, 16T member
- "Lets say you're in a room that has no walls, no floor, and no roof. This room is completely free of conventional rules except for those of your own choosing (rules such as gravity for example). Now in this room, the focus of your attention is an object that you are dissecting or even expanding upon. You don't have to come into direct contact with the object in order to move it in anyway. However you choose to view the object will allow you to view in this way. You could choose to inverse the object in anyway shape or form to accurately/properly analyze it from your desired perspective." - LII, , forum poster
- "My frame of perception is constantly shifting, or I'm layering one on top of the other." - LII, , forum poster
- "Ti delves into possible realities. First, a schema appears before the mind's eye, then the facts are filled in depending on the context, but the facts are never given value. there is no seeking of facts for their own sake." - LII, 16T member
- "I just started writing it and kept writing, and it evolved and evolved. It’s like filling in a crossword puzzle. You know that word has got to be abracadabra, right? Because there’s no other word it can be until you get halfway through and you see that the word down the middle has a P in the middle of abracadabra and there is no P. So therefore, one of them has to be wrong. They can’t both be right. And the same thing is true about structuring a drama. You go along and say, “I know this has got to happen at the end of the second act,” until you realize you’ve spent two years, and it doesn’t work. So something’s wrong. Either the first and third acts are wrong or the second act is wrong. How am I going to fix it? The structure is the whole thing — getting the movie to eat up 15 lines on a sheet of paper so you can write it." - SLE, David Mamet (notice how similar Mamet's description is to what LII poster said above - he sees the puzzles as a whole, then he simply proceeds to fill the blanks in)
- "Well, you can’t help but make a distinct movie. If you give yourself up to the form, it’s going to be distinctively your own because the form’s going to tell you what’s needed. That’s one of the great things I find about working in drama is you’re always learning from the form. You’re always getting humbled by it. It’s exactly like analyzing a dream. You’re trying to analyze your dreams. You say, “I know what that means; I know exactly what that means; why am I still unsettled?” You say, “Let me look a little harder at this little thing over here. But that’s not important; that’s not important; that’s not important. The part where I kill the monster — that’s the important part, and I know that means my father this and da da da da da. But what about this little part over here about the bunny rabbit? Why is the bunny rabbit hopping across the thing? Oh, that’s not important; that’s not important.” Making up a drama is almost exactly analogous to analyzing your dreams" - SLE, David Mamet (From main article: According to Aristotle, Holographic cognition corresponds to explanation by structural or formative causes. Aristotle called it the structure of form. Returning to the sculptor example, the cause of the sculpture is its latent form, which the sculptor merely sets free by cutting away excess marble.)
- http://imgur.com/SUM1e
- http://tinyurl.com/zw8le
-------------------------
There have been a few instances of people temporarily 'flipping' to the cognitive style that is dual to their own. This may indicate that the duality of cognitive styles is an on-going process where the balance is shifted in favor of one (in other words each person is capable of applying two cognitive styles, that of one's native type and that which is dual to it: VS:HP or DA:CD). These shifts do not involve cog-styles that are non-dual to one's own i.e. DA may on occasion switch to CD but never to HP or VS.
This balance seems to be affected by both temperament and subtype:
V-S and H-P types listed in order of proportion of reliance on V-S/H-P cog-styles:
(max V-S) Je-ESE/LIE > Pi-ESE/LIE > Je-SLI/IEI > Pi-SLI/IEI {V-S flips to H-P} Pe-SLE/IEE < Ji-SLE/IEE < Pe-LII/ESI < Ji-LII/ESI (max H-P)
meaning that Fe-ESE and Te-LIE would be two types are the most heavily moved towards vortical-synergetic cognition, while Fi-ESI and Ti-LII are the most predisposed to holographic-panoramic thinking. Types closest to the center divide - Si-SLIs, Ni-IEIs, Se-SLEs, and Ne-IEEs - would experience the V-S↔H-P 'flips' more frequently than others.
For D-A and C-D types the order is as follows:
(max D-A) Je-EIE/LSE > Pi-EIE/LSE > Je-ILI/SEI > Pi-ILI/SEI {D-A flips to C-D} Pe-SEE/ILE < Ji-SEE/ILE < Pe-LSI/EII < Ji-LSI/EII (max C-D)
What this could possibly mean is that some Reinin dichotomies are alternating i.e. people can periodically exhibit traits attributed to the dichotomies of their dual type but at lower frequency.
Fixed dichotomies (same between dual cog-styles):
- Judicious/Decisive
- Objectivist/Subjectivist
- Process/Result
- Yielding/Obstinate
- Democratic/Aristocratic
Alternating dichotomies (differ between dual cog-styles):
- Negativist/Positivist
- Constructivist/Emotivist
- Tactical/Strategic
- Asking/Declaring
The 'alternating' dichotomies would be less reliable to use in typings than the 'fixed' dichotomies.
Static-Process-Positive: Causal-Deterministic Thinking (Imposition):
Dynamic-Process-Negative: Dialectical-Algorithmic Thinking (Parallelism):
Static-Result-Negative: Holographic-Panoramic Thinking (Reconstruction):
Dynamic-Result-Positive: Vortical-Synergetic Thinking (Opportunism):
Still not sure if I understand. I think DirecTV's newest line of commercials are examples of Causal-Determinism.
DIRECTV - "Don't Wake Up in a Roadside Ditch" 2012 Commercial
DIRECTV - "Stop Taking in Stray Animals" 2012 Commercial
DIRECTV - "Don't Have a Grandson with a Dog Collar" 2012 Commercial
This might be an example of Holographic-Panoramic:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
That's pretty good. How about these H-P examples:Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
^ In a thread called "I'm Curious", interestingly enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
The writing in this article is poetic and awesome. I loved it.
Quote:
SLI 'lies in a drift' as it were awaiting favorable wind.
How would someone perceive their own type's cognitive style? Would they believe it's better than other types? And similarly, how would someone perceive their dual's cognitive style? It mentioned something earlier about the types sometimes transitioning into their dual's form of cognition... Then would they also believe their dual's way of thinking would be better than other types?
Forms of cognition are kind of a advanced topic that requires a bit of philosophical background. The terms used to describe the forms are quite descriptive, I recommend familiarizing oneself with the philosophical concepts first and then see how it applies to individual thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by Limitless
The way I see Forms of cognition between duals is that they're complementary and offers a clear protocol of interaction, this works for benefit and extinguishment relations too.
For example take causal deterministic cognition, it's main purpose is to achieve a singular answer to a problem. Yet how is this problem constructed? The dialectical-algorithm cognition provides a dialectical problem which suits the causal deterministic solution, yet it also presents new problems which will occur after one problem is resolved. In this manner the complementary forms of cognition forms a feedback loop between interlocutors.
I hope I answered a little of what you asked.
Just fyi, I translated that article.
smn interpret dis in context of socionics, esp cog styles: http://archive.is/js9yC kthxby
HP cog is contextual in nature
Everything depends on the context.Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
It's just an observation that had occurred to me. I don't have experience with very many IEEs but the other HP cog types are talented at sorting through bullshit to their advantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by chips and underwear
Why would that be correlated to HP?Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
They have x-ray, holographic panoramic cognition, and what becomes apparent is that they employ contextual information in order to facilitate their cognition style.Quote:
Originally Posted by chips and underwear
^
It's a combination of their diminished historical Ni and mythological Si along with introverted judging functions that lead to their static, inductive negativism.
HP cogs are sociopathic while CD cogs are social
^
Let me clarify
HP cogs are going to create objective holograms, which fundamentally is sociopathic and due to diminished historical, esoteric Ni or mythological Si subjectivity. Therefore, VS cogs are highly subjective with their pronounced Ni or Si and will employ the use of demands. The most obvious example is the obstinate SLI whose opinions rarely change, if ever. IEIs will also become rigid and impervious if their inner values are threatened.
*Note: I do not and have never believed that each type is saddled with 8 functions; we only have 4 original functions. Period.
CD cogs are social because DA cogs are susceptible to imprinting, and without the placement of social chains from the CD cog, the DA cog will succumb to the relentlessness of imprinting.
I was able to synthesize and derive this conclusion whilst completely removing myself from the influence of HP cogs and simultaneously interacting through oscillations with different types of DA cogs and ignoring the demands of VS cogs; thus, I found myself seeking shelter in CD cogs.
HP cogs are sociopathic, VS cogs are demanding, CD cogs are social and DA cogs are occultists
One last thing, don't forget that perceiving functions (sensing and intuition) are ego functions and each type's area of confidence.
We are all just cogs in a wheel, I suppose. :love: But how did humanity ever get this thing off the ground?!
WTF???Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
They're accurate and a good means to type, if you have the proper baseline for the self (your type is correct). It's apparent in speech and text as well. If you can determine the cognition style, and know if they are extroverted or introverted, you just have to pick between their real type and their mask.
:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by chips and underwear
If you really want to sober up and get off the kool aid, the survival games that each class of personality type plays combined with forms of cognition works better than expected.
Sj = complain
Sp = masquerade
NT = robot
NF = blackmail
Therefore:
ISFj = complaining sociopath
ESTp = masquerading sociopath
INTj = robotic sociopath
ENFp = blackmailing sociopath
(sociopath meaning failure to latch - probably due to boredom associated with extroverted ego function Se or Ne)
ESFj = demanding complainer
ISTp = demanding masquerader
ENTj = demanding robot
INFp = demanding blackmailer
...
etc.
It works better to just link them to actual disorders, especially since those usually have treatment plans
^
Did you hear about the EXXp liberators, EXXj avengers, ISXx builders and INXx masterminds?
(I actually appreciate a good string of DA cog cache.)
I sometimes think in those terms too. I always place Dynamic Feeler males as secretly wanting to get buttfucked.
coolQuote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
I'll go back up and insert the links for reference ... on second thought ... nevermind ... fuck it ... if people can't extend the application and extrapolate what I said from typology then screw it. :shrug:
Hmmm nah only SEI and IEI are Dynamic Feelers, and SEIs are known to rage while IEIs will throw you the bird.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
EXFps are flamboyant and unstable as hell subsequently seeking domination, albeit secretly; NeFi and SeFi must be like a roller coaster.
I could give you some video examples but then I look like a fruity weirdo. :coffee:
IEI guys are the gayest ones I know of lol. Them and ILI's, but ILI's are blatantly gay. The IEI's are just all whiney until they get the D to put them in their place, same as IEI females lol
You'd be surprised, and Erotic Attitudes (which is subdivided by dominate perceiving ego fuctions: Se = aggressor, Ni = victim, Ne = childlike and Si = caretaker) suggests otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
*thanks silke for merging my posts
Aggressor =pitcher, Victim = catcher
sort ofQuote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
Is that like "sort of gay"?
No, it's that aggressor/victim works better if the aggressor pulls the victim to safety and then the aggressor gets a big kiss. But aggressors will get too aggressive and carried away at times and then victims tend to forgive aggressors rather than alienate them as childlikes would.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
Sounds sort of gay to me *shrug*
Eh, I'd tell the aggressor how sexy it was that they just went for it without asking and how they should feel free to just claim me whenever they're in the mood. But hey, I'm weird, I can see how someone might go along with it in the moment and yet feel somewhat violated afterward (i.e. an infantile/childlike). Such is the ways of sex, it's really one huge gray area, nobody really knows what they want until they've, well, experienced something. Gaining "fully informed" consent is next to impossible. Consent is easy, but nobody really knows if both sides will enjoy what's about to happen until after the fact. Add in the fact that our society is pretty much puritan on this front and, yeah, lots of awkward moments and mixed negative feelings. Then the legal issues come in...Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
I swear to god, they're trying to make sex illegal. Well, straight sex anyway, sorry to be Politically Incorrect but the way things are right now it's as if they don't want people to reproduce. They've aligned the incentive structures firmly against it. For what purpose I'm not sure but I still wanna off some .01 percenters for this. I'm poor but I want a family down the line, how dare they set it all up so that I look like a financial fool for having this desire!
I think you're an Si caretaker as you have a rigid understanding of gender and its relationship to sexuality, and you are welcome to get fucked up and wrecked by an Se aggressor if you'd like to see for yourself but it really should be left up to the professionals - the Ni victims. Whenever aggressors are being too rough, victims will point it out to them without the victim needing to panic. Being a victim, akin to masochism if you will, is not gay, and in fact, it is the masochist who has CONTROL and will tell the sadist to stop. (I use the terms masochism, masochist and sadist loosely without any specific connotation to any forms of sexual deviance.) Victims will save aggressors from themselves, essentially, which highlights the aggressor's WEAKNESS of having a lack of self-control, and it's the strength of the victim you seem to be underestimating. Ni victims grin while we bear it and Si caretakers fight back against Se aggressors but to no avail.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
^
I could get into my current relationship with this Se-SLE but I really think it's TMI.
Safety from what? Are they hanging from a cliff? Tied to railroad tracks? :shifty:Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
http://www.papermag.com/uploaded_ima...rcmpo1_500.jpg
http://artfucksme.com/wp-content/upl...l-covers-2.jpg
As always you inspire interesting imagery in a cliché, romance novel, sort of way when I picture you in one of your "victim" scenarios. Nice to see you back. :love:
Interesting scenarios, but still kinda missing the point. Current society has a bias towards :Si: and :Ne: couples. The :Se: and :Ni: couples are seen as "kinky" at the moment. Also, :Si:/:Ne: types hold the unsexy "realistic" model of how it all "ought" to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellyan
I won't fight it. The people of Wal-Mart need love too... Just not by those of us who actually got a good number in the genetic lotto :shifty:.
Aggressors sort of kill off victims from the inside out offering us an internal death. They have life figured out in terms of extroverted sensing - power, money, possessions and possessiveness. I really struggle with disappearing into the woodwork without an aggressor around.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellyan
Se as kinky? Maybe in more minority situations, but half of the victim/aggressor dual relationships have 1D Si in the mix, and they are just terribad in bed.
Rectal Destructiiiioooonnnnn!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
Flawless Victory!
Introverted sensing and extroverted intuition is rather stifling and traditional but I can't fault them.Quote:
Originally Posted by End
You are confusing sodomy with rectal prolapse, Silly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
Y'all are confusing stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
ILE and IEE will have 2D Se, and only be interested in normal dominance/submission roles for the male and female.
LII and EII will have 2D Si, and only be interested in stuff that feels normal sexually to them, as in "hey! don't do that! feels weird!"
The Ne 2Ds like imagination and novelty, but not too far out there
The Ni 2Ds like it to play out like a regular story, with same thing happening every time
I don't know what you're talking about. There are only 4 functions per type. Shit is that straight.
IEI has Se- suggestive, so they like being penetrated constantly.
I'm ready to sound the obstinate SLI alarm on you Jeremy! Welcome...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
Wouldn't it be the troll alarm? Lol
Awww cute >.< Trolls aren't usually so Te :Te: knowledgeable but now it seems as though we're getting into your type's Fi :Fi: inverted, codependent narcissism. :love: SLI = :Si::Te::Fi::Ne: ... your athletic pitcher/catcher reference caught my attention.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
EII. Close, though, lol.
Agreed, the problem is the social expectations. You may want to be a certain way but everyone pressures you to be something you're not. Even those who secretly agree with you will pressure you just to avoid alienating themselves. Nietzsche was right, we're all wearing masks. I just wish we could take them off more often without a high social cost. Everyone says "just be yourself" as if that's an easy and simple prospect. It ain't, that makes you exceedingly vulnerable, and nobody likes to be vulnerable.Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
Yet you need to make yourself vulnerable to experience true love. It's all rather frustrating and confusing, I wish things were just presented up front instead of being occulted behind layers of subtly, puritanism, and bullshit. People should just say what they want up front, but if ya did that most romantic prospects would just up and run away. Rejection stings harshly so people keep the current status quo which isn't really making anyone happy according to the data. Girls most especially, which is quite sad. Turns out not every girl is a caregiver or childlike deep down, yet she's trained to only go for caregiver or infantile men for "serious" relationships (or if we're a really hardcore traditionalist area, only caregiver males are "worth her time" so to speak). No wonder she ain't happy.
I hope this is meant to be poetic. If it isn't then maybe rethinking your relationship is not a bad idea, if it is feeling like an "internal death". Love can feel like that sometimes when you are in a relationship that involves a lot of struggle and things do not fall into place effortlessly. If you meant something else then say it. I know you are capable of speaking plain language that anyone can understand. I have seen you do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
Most aggressors enliven me and make life fun. When it all feels good colors are brighter and the thought of jumping off a (metaphorical) cliff less scary, but you use cryptic language so it is hard to tell with you sometimes if you are being pessimistic or trying to be poetic. I have had relationships that made me feel like I was dying inside with more than just aggressor types.
You! Up against the wall and shush!Quote:
Originally Posted by End
http://meelelahutus.org/wp-content/u...15/01/paar.jpg
Have you guys met actual human beings or is this what it looks like "on paper" to you? :doh:
*Relationship experience may vary based on many influencing factors both external and internal.
@End I was not missing the point she was trying to make... I was being sarcastic because my relationships do not play out like some ridiculous romance novel where I am being saved then rewarding the guy with a "big kiss". I like what I like and prefer when people do not make general statements based on theory when they have very little real world experience. You two should compare notes. Her longest relationship was with an ILI according to her past posts so maybe she has some tips and tricks.
I do think you are ILI End but not all male ILI have the same rape fantasies and pessimistic view of relationships you do. Yes some do and I have met those types of ILI which I have mentioned before. ILI can be a bit aggressive sexually and take charge even. :shock: Don't be so quick to project your fantasies and cynical views of relationship on everyone. I know from my own experience with ILI that cynicism can run deep though so I forgive you. :p
I woke up in bitch mode today You can ignore the above or not. :halo:
/tangent
Oh I know that, I just get carried away sometimes and lapse into hyperbole, generalization, and exaggeration. I think everyone does that sometimes, gets carried away with themselves. I have no idea how I ended up like I did, I think deep down most people don't. They're just like that and there's no real way to pin down the deciding factor or factors. Besides,even I know you never tell them about twisted sexual fantasies in real life (and certainly never on the first date). Well, not unless they ask first. Just gotta be patient and wait for them to ask. The wait sucks but if they don't run away after you tell em' the truth then you might have yourself a keeper :).Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellyan
Nope, that's the type du jour.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
I did some musing today. I think victims are like martyrs who are simply whiners who discount the troubles of other people, and in doing so, martyrs specify which cause or belief is most important to them, and they want everyone to know they're doing that. It's really selfish when you stop to think about it.
You would have to understand the type to know, and seeing as how you don't understand your own type well enough to know that you're a closet homosexual, it doesn't make me inclined to give any validity to your knowledge or apparent lack of ability to form a coherent logic chain lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by IBTL
Logic is extroverted thinking :Te: ... which in a 4 functional model I wouldn't even have ... so go fuck off!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
EII is the most elusive, for sure, but it's not the kind of elusive most people would be comfortable with. The manifestation of their ego, extroverted intuition :Ne: , lends to strange behavior which is explicit in Erotic Attitudes.
Awwwwww *pats on head* it's okay little guy! Don't fret! When people are mean to you about your sexual "preferences," they just aren't seeing that you're just "special."
For what it's worth, I identify with Dialectical-Algorithmic. I even have degrees in philosophy and CS. (Look at my blog, if you want examples... Or even my avatar. Or my signature!)
EDIT: I'll give you more. Most of what I think is not certain or definite. Most ideas that I have are carefully weighed against other ideas, but I find that since I can hold multiple possibilities in my mind at once, the ideas are all just 'teetering' there without a clear 'winner' - most of the winners, just barely cross the finish line ahead of the others...
Therefore, I find my real strength is not coming to conclusions, but considering multiple possibilities at the same time and thinking in terms of paradox. Even looking at my avatar, there is nothing to process... The picture clearly just keeps repeating itself... The 'real' question is whether physically that image comes to a clear end (which is a paradox - like the article says is supposed to be dialectical-algorithmic). This then is very useful in philosophy (look at some of the examples in the article. I even have a theory that most - if not all - philosophical problems are paradoxes.)
Even consider my self-typing of LII-IEI. It considers all of the functions at once and synthesizes them into an algorithm. The algorithm is then checked against my types in other systems for correctness. It is complicated to explain, but I try to 'smell-out' what types I like, what types I supervise, and what types I clash with, etc. and then fit all of this information together into the relations. For instance, many who type themselves as 'ESE' and 'IEE', I find myself supervising all the time. Conflictor as well I try to 'flesh out.' (People like Milton Friedman and Gordon Ramsay stand out as conflicting/supervising types) Then there's 'dual' (Matthew Matthew Mcconaughey and Katy Perry, I guess, amongst others.) Like I said, I then synthesize all of this into an algorithm, and come up with Ti-Ni (i.e., LII-IEI). Then I test this against other systems - fits 5w4 in the Enneagram and 'Investigative-Artistic' in Holland's Code. ("Okay, sounds right!")
I find that both of these skills are useful in two areas I have really found success at: programming and philosophy.. Perhaps because I trained my mind as both a programmer and a philosopher, I can use this mode of thought so easily...
EDIT: Thumbs up to panoramic-holographic thinking as well! And note: my old avatar was selected specifically because it was a fractal (in the shape of an eye...), consistent with this kind of thinking...
ST males are indeed shitheadsQuote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
Aren't you the one that told people they had personality disorders? Lol
Just their tendencies, I suppose. IEIs get their fair share of finger pointing too. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy8419
OMFG - CD cogs understand the mental architecture of others, which is what makes them "social".