Why? Why does so many ILI 4w5, which is identical to Balzac's socionics and enneagram type (the archetype for ILI), mistype as IEI?
The main justificatory argument that I have seen for this is "oh but male IEI develops :Ti: instead of :Fe:".
Printable View
Why? Why does so many ILI 4w5, which is identical to Balzac's socionics and enneagram type (the archetype for ILI), mistype as IEI?
The main justificatory argument that I have seen for this is "oh but male IEI develops :Ti: instead of :Fe:".
Do you have any examples of this?
In the history of this forum it has been the SLIs and Ni-IEIs getting typed into ILIs, but rarely the other way around.
I can see how 4w5 Ni bases could misattribute their creative function. The urge for uniqueness in the world overlaps in certain senses with Fe, and that silent watcher aspect of 5 overlaps with Te in a particular sense(both when combined with Ni of course).
i'd say ILI works for e5 only~
Do you know who he was? Have you read anything from him? I don't think I need to argue for him being ILI. He was quite the character.
Like it can be seen in Father Goriot, it was written with all the gritty details, everyone in the book have their fair share of flaws and we get to see the struggle of these people. It is all very much 4w5-themed. You can read about his life to see for yourself, it is too much to bring everything up here, but for example to drop out of law school and ended up inflicting even more misery upon himself. He did this to himself and despite failing multiple times he held on to it, while it seems to me that he easily could go back to law school since his mother (presumably ESE) was even in Balzac's own reports concerned about not having a failure as a son and would therefore pay for him to get back into a more stable way of life.
Balzac was.. Balzac?
I said I can't see e4 for any ILI. I didn't say "He isn't ILI".
What is 'very much 4w5-themed' ?
I know people who were pushed by their parents for progress in educaction. Now they are being miserable about it. AND! they don't have magical number of either 5 or 4 over their heads.
Attachment 2799
It's kinda pointless to argue against circular logic.
That would be true, but the exchange didn't reach the point where i cover myself with it. You just attached it to me at this point. Circulus vitiosus can be sometimes too easily applied as there are many facts taken for granted in discussion. For now you know that I await reasons, why you consider him 4w5, also I asked for explanation for 4w5 theme. I do think that ILI's only sound with e5, but as I said if i will confront sensible reasons I will evaluate my thoughts. So far you're trying not to answer.
Uhm... Yes you did: "I said I can't see e4 for any ILI. I didn't say "He isn't ILI"."
I did presented a few reasons as to why, but somehow they mysteriously disappeared when you quoted me.Quote:
You just attached it to me at this point. Circulus vitiosus can be sometimes too easily applied as there are many facts taken for granted in discussion. For now you know that I await reasons, why you consider him 4w5, also I asked for explanation for 4w5 theme.
And this is why it's a pointless exercise to argue against circular logic. You repeated your question and referred to ILI=5 again while simultaneously leaving any reasons that I brought up untouched.Quote:
I do think that ILI's only sound with e5, but as I said if i will confront sensible reasons I will evaluate my thoughts. So far you're trying not to answer.
Poor argumentation at best. ;)
It's very kind of you that you're offering to evaluate your thoughts when someone can explain to you why other e-types are possible for ILI than e5.
It's just that you're opinion is unpopular and normally it's accepted that sociotypes can be different e-types so it might be up to you to offer some insight why ILI can only be e5
P.s.: I am offering evaluation of my opinion after you explained (How kind of me)
Instead of reducing me to logical fallacy, you could finally try something different.
Right. I skipped them as they weren't anything really sensible or particular for e4.
Definitely. I am not a human being. I am ressurected fallacy that tries to forcefully destroy your opinion.
Quite funny it came from person, who tries to close me in one box. Remember to find other fallacies so other people who disagree with you get their own narrow boxes to live in. Oh and don't forget to give enneagram to each for its unique square/rectangle shape.
Hiding behind particular fallacy that is applied in wrong way is definitely a 'explanation'. I guess trying to achieve sensible exchange is too much for some people to handle.
Unpopular? You all were present on a secret event to sign a paper on the agreement? Damn. Both systems are categorizations of [Uncle Carl Language] libidos, which were formed in different cultures and caught by dudes and narrowed down. If you think that every ennea can be applied to every ego functions, then you are fundamentally contradicting basic assumptions of both systems.
P.s.: Sure, If there was only anything there to evaluate.
@davez #ignore
So am I ILI or IEI, I'm a 4w5 IEI afaik. Do tell.
Inguz, I congratulate you on separating the usual associations of Enneagram and Socionics type. Not many people have managed that one, and typology has suffered a great deal of rigidity and stagnation because of it.
Jung describes in his chapter x (description of types) archetypes(extroverted thinker etc.) below his archetypes hi mentions that archetypes are rarely seen in the real world and that an individual normally develops a second function well who has to be a perception function if the individual has a main judging function and a judging function if the individual has a main perceiving function. What he doesn't say is if this second function has to be extraverted or introverted. So from a Jungian point of view it would be possible that a Ni-maintype has Ti as his second function. Because socionics is very strict and gives each IE a specific role such an individual could be typed IEI or ILI because it's not clear if the second function (after jung) has to be a valued one or not. IEI value Ti but its only 2D whereas ILI disvalue Ti but its strong 4d. Ergo such a individual doesn't fit into Socionics Model A.
I don't say there are no exceptions and that no ILI can be one (maybe they're painters or something and not entrepreneurs ) , but E 4 amplifies emotion . That would normally contradict Te's claims and need for objectivity .http://pstypes.blogspot.de/search/la...dentifications (see 4 / 5 section)
Enneagram 4 is described as Feeling, followed by Thinking and Action.
who are you people? usually petty arguments on forum are fun to watch, but i'm just confused.
This is no forum @FoxOnStilts. This is the16types. It might as well be Farscape.
This thread is idiotic.