Easiest types to spot?

I was wondering what types people found easiest to notice in everyday life. Why do you think those types are simple for you to figure out? What aspects of that type, in your opinion, stand out to help you with your evaluation? I'd rather get responses in general terms but Socionic lingo isn't unwelcome. ILI, SLI, and EIE(and sometimes ESE) are probably the easiest for me, followed by LII and IEE. I think those types, with the exception of EIE, stand out to me more than others because I was around them the most growing up. SEIs and IEIs can be easier for me to decide on as well, so this leads me to think that Fe plays a pivotal role in my 'easy types'. I'll elaborate later(typing is tedious on my phone) but I at least wanted to get this thread started.

Merry>Serious
Extroverts>Introverts

Identicals are easiest for me

Conflictors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Talking Celery and Co

Conflictors.

---

These, and ESFjs for some reason

ESE, ILE, IEI, EIE, SEE, IEE, EII

Identicals

If a type is "easy" to spot, you're biased.

ENFP

For me, LSI. I think supervisee is easy to spot in general.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cat King Cole

If a type is "easy" to spot, you're biased.

---

Not necessarily in the negative way though.

You know what to look for, the signs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cat King Cole

If a type is "easy" to spot, you're biased.

---

After posting I was curious whether anybody would interpret my question this way. I definitely see what you're saying by this, but I was referring to "easy" in the sense that EyeSeeCold mentioned. In my opinion figuring out somebody's type is a skill and, just as with any other skill a person practices, the more we practice the skill the better we become(leading to relative ease of typing). Of course, since we're all human, caution must be taken so we don't end up blurting, "so-and-so is this type" within the first five minutes of meeting them. Even after I spot my "easy" types, I put the first guess aside until further observation/interaction confirms and reaffirms it.

IEI, SLE, EIE, LII are the easiest, then LSE, ESE, LIE, EII, ILI

SLEs thanks to mY estp bestfriends all mY life plus an estp father and cousin, etc.

I think having close experience with certain types makes it the easiest.

For me it's ILE, ESE, SLE, SLI, IEI, EIE

I've always had big trouble spotting gammas, especially ENTjs. Riddy put it best that gammas sort of "hide in plain sight:" they're always there, but their presence doesn't jump out at me.

In socionics: NFs.

In Enneagram: 5s and 7s. They stick out like neon lights to me because they are so polarized in contrast to the surrounding people.

Extraverted ST types will tend to pick up on things/qualities about others they can see, which they use to compare and contrast to other; while introverted ST types develop a more subjective framework, their own structure of what they see that might not correspond with objective reality.

My type looks quiet, expressionless, plain. The extraverted ENFj looks and dresses very elegantly but never out of time; because they are very well in touch with time, not their own sensation from clothes, they can pick out articles of clothing that they can wear for a very long time.

LSE look tense, stressed, always need to get some where. Directive in motion. Try taking up their time, or wonder off course when you're in a relationship with them and watch them say, "we have to walk to the movies, it starts at 11." Always on plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galen

I've always had big trouble spotting gammas, especially ENTjs. Riddy put it best that gammas sort of "hide in plain sight:" they're always there, but their presence doesn't jump out at me.

---

That depends a bit on the setting but in general...yeah, I can see what you mean.

Some users said which TYPES or DICHOTOMIES are easier to spot

Some users said which INTERTYPE are easier to spot

Type related?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1981slater

Some users said which TYPES or DICHOTOMIES are easier to spot

Some users said which INTERTYPE are easier to spot

Type related?

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTQ0w...eature=related

I find it easiest to spot couples of types with the intertype relation. Then I have even more information to go with. I sometimes spot best friends or couples on the bus and their types are often very obvious. For example I saw these LSE-IEE activator-friends talking to each other on the bus the other day. Don't know them, didn't talk to them. The other day on the bus stop there was this woman, she gave a sensual impression, she was looking at the time table, and touching it sensually with her fingers. Could be IEI, there was also the general impression of her that was IEI, then I saw her husband, sitting beside her waiting, very much LSI. Case closed!

Deltas.

LSE have this very defiant and adversarial stance or gesture they make a lot which is they cross their arms and they are likely to do this just about any time.

It seems, for the most part, that identicals and conflictors are among the easiest types to identify. Conflictors can be easy for me to notice when they 'get in my face', so to speak. However, since I have a tendency to be immersed in my thoughts and ignore my environment, their contrasting nature isn't always noticed immediately.

@1981slater, I was personally wondering whether people's answers and typing methods had any correlation with the system of typology they used most heavily(Socionics, Enneagram, etc). Mere speculation on my end, though.

Thanks to everyone for contributing to the discussion.

i usually tell people who are undecided on their type to look for Supervisors, Duals or Conflictors since it is these types that one tends to have a strong, visceral reaction towards.

identical is generally too numb and uneventful a relation to be really telling. semi-dual is too ambiguous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by labocat

i usually tell people who are undecided on their type to look for Supervisors, Duals or Conflictors since it is these types that one tends to have a strong, visceral reaction towards.

identical is generally too numb and uneventful a relation to be really telling. semi-dual is too ambiguous.

---

What about Quasis?

The only type I can sometimes spot immediately is SLE. The more interaction with people the easier it becomes to see the nuances of that types behaviour in others.

Betas, because they talk shit and I have to laugh at it.

LSE's because they struggle to laugh at things that aren't funny due to their :Fe: role.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold

What about Quasis?

---

no, NOT quasis, ffs.

Yeah....probably ILE. I mean at least once they start talking, its pretty obvious.

This is how I look on a typical day, nothing fancy or made up. No makeup usually either. OH AND I LOVE MY COFFEE. :P

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1304535562.jpg

http://www-hollybaby-com.vimg.net/wp...0621144515.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa33

This is how I look on a typical day.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1304535562.jpg

---

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tar1495_54.gif

Striking resemblance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aquagraph

LSE's because they struggle to laugh at things that aren't funny due to their :Fe: role.

---

Interesting, my dad says things that aren't funny all the time and I don't laugh at them either. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I think I am good at spotting sexually agressive women (SLE, LSI, SEE and ESI) This is because I want to be their victim! ESI's are so shimmeringly awesome, LSI's deserve endless devotion. SLE's need my xxx .

What do you mean?

How do you, as a fellow victim, approach the aggressor? I would suppose with stoic dignity at first, and with reciprocation, the advance would continue. However, she will need to strongly clarify her interest. She must be demanding of attention, or else the reserved charm of a male "victim" will likely recede. The male "victim" needs an element of uncertainty, but prefers the uncertainty to be playful and illusionary - she will need to hammer down and define her interest. I am correct on this? Right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saberstorm

I think I am good at spotting sexually agressive women (SLE, LSI, SEE and ESI) This is because I want to be their victim! ESI's are so shimmeringly awesome, LSI's deserve endless devotion. SLE's need my xxx .

---

Either English is not your first language or you are just weird. Which one is it?

Something wrong with LSIs?

SEE, SLE, IEE, ESE, LII. SEE is like the most obvious ever, god love em.

Fe and Si users in real life.
EII, ILI, ESI, LII, SLE, IEI online (say, in new members on the forum)

EPs can be a bit ambiguous due to lots of public-anchoring and chameleonic tendencies.... I_Ts can look very similar to each other for the opposite reason.
Fi can sometimes appear like Ti if you don't know ppl well, especially in a formal context (say, colleagues, public institutions and events etc.).

I think identicals. Beta NFs because they can tend to stick to the same subculture/wardrobes. Alpha NTs and Delta STs for similar reasons. Duals and Semiduals are somewhat easy, but that may actually be due more to them being IJ. I agree that it depends on what you're exposed to but it seems that, even after you've been exposed to all types, some are easier to spot than others.

I would think it depends on who youve been exposed to, in addition to other variables.

I can spot IEI SLE ILI ESI & SLI pretty good.

I tend to have the easiest time spotting my identicals. ILE, SLE, and IEI seem easier for me to spot for some reason.

Quasi-ID can be tricky at times. I have mistaken them for my identicals before. Same with SEE/ESE, superficially they look alike. Same club, same dimensionality of functions but when you look a little closer, they're nothing alike at all.

Mostly extroverts, obviously. In my area, there are mostly alphas and betas:

A TON of ESEs and SLEs, I frequently see ILEs around, but they aren't, like, everywhere— SEEs are pretty common according to people I know, but I haven't come across more than one.

the types with wich you've had most experience and typed them
I also notice conflictors in quantity, probably because they get my attention as the most different from me

EIEs ESEs and LIEs for me

I tend to observe introverts more than extroverts, the types I easily spot are usually ESI, SLI and IEI. Oh and SEE! Because my childhood friend, my father, my first crush and my brother are this type.

Not Si leads, because they are too unnoticeable

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morgana

Not Si leads, because they are too unnoticeable

---

That just means you have to look for the most unnoticeable and inconspicuous person in the room and you found them.
Szah-mat.

It tends to depend on how clearly the type expresses itself in a person not really type specific.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cat King Cole

If a type is "easy" to spot, you're biased.

---

Or you just know that type well

Can you find all the 13 ENTps?


https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gF002HgwW...Spot+Wally.jpg