Printable View
All these nutjobs that come on the typology forum but they are all "oh so complex" nothing anybody ever says about them hits the spot and they go on and on about themselves like they're the most amazing person that ever walked the earth. And they never ever settle on a type because they're just such a special snowflake and unlike others. How exhausting to deal with they have to be irl. I'd say half of people here have some serious personality disorders, i swear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Myst
The hypocrisy, butthurt and projection going on here is hilarious :lol:
@Myst
I take it that me describing in detail why me and @Chae are not alike at all past the similar temperament (which is something much more superficial than personality) means I'm "bothered". I'm not because as I said explicitly on my reply, while I don't agree with everything she says and does and I don't understand her a lot of the times I think she's really cool and I like interacting with her so far.
There was no "ad hominems" on my response, I didn't attack you at all and I made it very clear with each critic I've made precisely so a misunderstanding on what I was criticizing (your methods and analysis, not you as a person) wouldn't happen. I also never mentioned your PoLR (and even mentioned mine), so chill, put some aloe vera where you felt the burn, 'cuz I never meant to hurt.
Maybe you're used to people taking your word as gospel and praising what I'm sure you think it's "great :Ti: " that grants you authority, which is why it bothered you so much I challenged it not by emotionality, but by criticizing your thinking and pointing out exactly what was wrong with it, point by point.
Also, you might wanna check the dictionary:
This is the opposite of what I did. I don't know if it's against forum rules to post a PM on a public thread, but if it's not then why don't you post a screencap here so we can all decide on what objectively happen? Come on, expose my ass, I now you want it ;)Quote:
Ad hominem
adjective 1.appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2.
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.
@darya
It says a lot about you both as a person as a typer (as amateur as we all are) that you would call a person you have never interacted with except for brief responses on two posts a "nutjob", "special snowflake" and accusing them of having "serious personalities disorders"? That's enough projection and reach going on you could open up a worldwide movie theater on your own :popcorn:What got your panties in a bunch, why so much bitterness?
Again I repeat that for a :Ni: + :Fe: Ego you're incredibly adverse to anything that you don't understand when it comes to people. Maybe that's precisely why it hurts you Ego: because that's supposed to be your forte. I don't know, and frankly I don't care. And after your rant, I daresay you fit E4 much better than E3. That would explain why you're so bothered, only you can be a layered complex individual!
Also interesting how you say that even after I posted the subtypes page for my sociotype which refer to all the "contradictions" in my character verbatim. Again that says a lot about you, that pride comes before objectivity.
@Myst What's good is that we are in the same page about one thing: I also don't care about what a random stranger on an internet forum about an obscure unscientific personality typing theory thinks of me :high5:So I'll continue to post on the forum and be sure to leave you two alone.
Peace out xo
Everyone is a snowflake when it snows socionics.
You have zero interest in finding your type, you came here to stir shit and attack prople. Otherwise you wouldn't go on personal level after people were only trying to be helpful - after you know, you specifically ask for their help trying to type you. Especially chae was very friendly to you and only got mocking in return. If you weren't offended, you could nicely explain we got the wrong picture and that would be it. Also I wish I could get back 10 minutes of my time reading self-aggrandizing stories about your obnoxious personality.Quote:
Originally Posted by FANXY CHILD
I get that people are complex (duh) but if you wanna get typed you have to think through which of your personality traits are prevalent, otherwise it'll never lead anywhere.
But anyway, happy trolling (which I sincerely hope you're doing).
@darya
Attack people? Mockery?
I may get banned for this, but frankly, I don't give a damn:
http://i.imgur.com/WlN882d.png
http://i.imgur.com/wVHSkds.png
Happy projecting! :wave:
? You're putting personal digs at people in every sentence and mocking their supposed inability to get you after no provocation. Also retyping them totally unrelated to this thread, which is about typing you. So don't play dumb, you're trying to get a rise out of people.
You too enjoy forum experience, and cheers to our future ignoring of each other :mermaid:
:popcorn:
snowflake reporting in
believe it or not, people are complex. if they say x or y doesn't make sense, there's a reason for that (and it is a cop out to handwave it as unhealth without trying to first investigate other likely options). it may be they just don't understand the system, and the words mean to them something different than the outside person trying to type them. maybe in the end the other person is right, but it doesn't change the fact that the subject doesn't feel quite right about it. that's ok. why make that into a bad thing by attributing motive, as if they're doing it to cause trouble? I'm 99% sure if people got typed on the money and felt at ease about it they would leave it at that. disagreement in this regard is a chance to suss out something and make things better, it is not an evil in of itself. if the truth is in there somewhere then its simply a matter of working out the difficulties, it doesn't need to be "forced" on someone unwillingly
the opposite is the person who ignores all the contradictions and inconsistencies and difficultes of a type and just "names it and claims it" against all reason and evidence then gets smug about how they've never deviated, as if that's evidence to knowledge and character when its just as likely the opposite.
the idea that knowing your type so fast and so determinedly right off the bat is crazy given how complex people are and how complex the system is, either of which could take years to unravel and really understand. to me that points to ignorance of self and system, not mastery
even if someone was dancing around trying to explode the system, that would be the system's problem if they couldn't somehow account for it and its not enough to just handwave everything as "unhealthy" or whatever, which is why I don't like mixing enneagram with socionics. its like you can either explain someone in terms of personality or not. if you cannot without mixing the two it suggests that someone "does not have a pure type" except when combined with some enneagram, and that is wrong. socioncis can account for every type because its not a matter of behavior but a matter of cognitive functions. people who only look at behavior of course cannot nail someone down with socionics because they're not using the right method to do so. rather enneagram + TIM seems to be more a catalogue of behavioral stereotypes with little regard for the deeper message of both enneagram and a deep understanding of the technical aspect of socionics
fanxy just has a really bright personality so of course its going to be difficult to capture, much like any personality but the process of doing it is more pronounced because it is likewise a manifestation of personality. i wouldnt be surprised if it changed again, not because there's anything wrong with current type, but because that's life for the understanding to shift and evolve. it doesn't mean we're always wrong until we settle on one thing, the truth is something you're in not necessarily something you possess. which is worse: to have "been wrong" or to not be in the process of ongoing development?-- which necessarily implies the former. i think people who see socionics as a tool for personal development would find lack of development and concomitant error to be worse, whereas those who look at it as a static mode of behavioral categories find error itself to be the worst thing possible. but I guess it comes down to what you believe socionics exists to do
I have an idea! Maybe socionics isn't true, which could explain some of the contradictions and inconsistencies and the unsuccessful typings. Maybe it is as simple as not being accurate in theory or practice. Just a thought.
You missed the point - i get it's not usually done out of malice and many people on this forum are sane and confused about their type, but are not attention whoring about it constantly and being rude to people trying to help. Its the rudeness and aloofness that bothers me -choosing one type and being defensive of it, then choose another one and being nasty about it.... basically trolling the forum and wasting people's time -asking for imput but then arrogantly mock it. That's the difference between normal people just wondering about their type and trolly people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
Although I have to admit its difficult to understand how some people can go from SLI to EIE to ESI etc. in a month, that doesnt mean they're crazy in itself. I'm not explaining this well lol.
that is very ESE "how can people be so rude!"
trust me, there are good reasons, and rudeness is not the ultimate arbiter of good v bad, for most people
i understand that all other things being equal it would be nice if everyone conformed to your standards for social etiquette, but that's just never going to happen
Dont shatter my dreams :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Osifer
oh.......sorry :oops:Quote:
Originally Posted by darya
personality has not yet been reduced to grotesque obviousness, but to set that as the condition for it being true is an assumption not everyone shares, in that sense something that divides people on the basis of a certain ambiguity could easily be "the most true" thing, i.e. not peace but a sword; wheat from chaff etc. You pov is very much rooted in Ti Si valuesQuote:
Originally Posted by Phil Osifer
Sorry to harass you with my Si Bert, I will put it away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
ahahah, you can't just go around with your Si hanging out!
LOL @Myst be likeQuote:
Originally Posted by FANXY CHILD
https://i.imgflip.com/1tphmq.jpg
@Myst when will you learn that people know themselves better than you do and that at some point we don't want your input anymore? I mean, @FANXY CHILD closed her typing thread and you're still giving her your goddamn opinion on her type, which she just settled on. It's disrespectful and insulting to her intelligence that you think you know someone better over some forum posts than the person in question knows themselves, not to mention downright arrogant on your side.
Can't you see that? It's the same shit you've been pulling on me, and you're being a real idiot for not seeing how disrespectful you are being. I know you're just trying to make it seem like you're fucking helping or something, but all you do is listening to your own voice and ignoring every other counterargument, it's the most infuriating thing ever.
You're not helping anyone by insisting on what type people supposedly are, especially not when they've already decided and thoroughly disagree with you, okay? Not a lot of things piss me off, but people being willfully ignorant and delusional as fuck definitely is one of them, especially when they think they're right and are so obviously wrong.
:bashhead: <-- that's me trying to argue with you, doesn't work.
A SLE using an axe as an argument against an IEI. You can't argue against an axe. That's dualization :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 9 large
I like to think of polr as being one's both greatest strength and greatest weakness: that it is painful is just a fact of life, but causing pain just for the sheer pleasure of it is only sadism. however, sometimes people need pain to learn because its "real" in a way other things aren't, such that people stuck in their ways need such a shock to motivate them to break out of it... its a spoil the rod principle, pain here for less later in some sense. of course such an idea needs to be wielded responsibly, but in general the universe seems to be equilibrated in the sense that being pretentious or being sadistic ultimately carries with it its own costs over time, which sounds like a flat denial of evil, but its more a statement of faith and a call to action to do your best unashamedly, but in absolute good faith. in other words what separates sadism from real faith is the idea that your short term actions may pay off in time, with sincere reverence for such a thing (true people may be wrong, but what else can we ask that they try their best?), not the nihilistic surrender to simple enjoyment in the here and now whatever the expense may be... its an ocean, this topic could go on for a really long time, but I agree with what you're saying, except to say throwing someone's polr at someone is counterproductive in many, but not all, ways
What's hilarious is that you choose to be completely subjective and biased about the situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by FANXY CHILD
No, I was not talking about your describing Chae vs you when I said you were bothered. Your immediately choosing to respond on a personal level about my supposed attributes (and later my supposed motives in this thread) is what I meant. You can check that dictionary a bit more closely about what an ad hominem is: "in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself." Precisely what you were trying to do. You started right away with trying to list what shortcomings I must have instead of just saying that you don't agree and why or simply saying that you don't agree and don't want to discuss it further. You actually continued with the ad hominem in your response here lol, again trying to assume negative bs about my attitudes about just wanting praise etc. Nah, simply, as I said, I found your response unwarranted bs. You hardly pointed out what was wrong point by point btw lol. Only in your imagination... Btw also sorry to burst your bubble, but I don't need your offer of the aloe vera, again, I already said I don't give a shit about the way you tried to get at my stuff. Oh yeah and you posted the PMs afterwards so it's clear how you did describe things about me regarding my type so please don't play this bullshit here about how you did not mention anything related to Ne PoLR. :doh:
OK, I'm done with this. Agreed on leaving each other alone after this, bye.
It depends on how it's done. Wielding type like a weapon in order to insult someone and win an argument, doesn't help either one of you. If you bring something up to someone's attention, not out of spite, but to actually help, that's different. Problem is that it's a little too easy to justify that you're "trying to help" when you're really just calling down from your high horse on the supposed peons below.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
yeah its too easy to self justify in general, its probably the basis for most if not all human sin. I am now going to go on to self justify a bit
there's this idea, I think its in Jung, which is that society creates criminals in a certain sense; which is to say that things happen for reasons, so if someone is lashing out its probably because something happened to cause them to feel like it was necessary to do so. in other words there is a psychic economy that follows a dialectic principle of equilibration so while it is not always individual x's direct responsiblity for individual y's actions, it is the case that individual x may have benefitted from the same things that deprived y and so when y "acts out" in a seemingly destructive way, no one is completely innocent in the sense that we all partake in a sense of "stolen goods" because we are all sort of enmeshed in a common structure
the myth of the hero is someone who resolves to make things better not worse, which is the path to unification which is a way to stop one hand from punishing the other and back and forth ad infinitum but rather to realize a better harmony... the idea is the hero has to set out with a goal in mind that he really believes in and has to sincerely pursue it out of purity of heart and if they're doing that they can't in a sense lose no matter what
and its like society is made up of individuals and when a society is corrupt its because it generally flows as a process stemming from the corruption of if its individual members, which can be subtle its not like outright evil acts right at the onset but a slow burn that culminates in something like a Nazi regime. counterstroke after counterstroke where the issues are deepening and real harmony sort of slips through their fingers as they try to force it into being via authoritarianism
anyway its not a determinism its more like a dialectic that emerges only in retrospect because human perspective is just too limited to always catch things in the act, but you could say when you do believe you have caught something in the act you have to act on it otherwise you are complicit, so while it is easy to be complacent its complacency and insincerity itself that makes things worse, not the consequences of well meaning but ultimately mistaken people
anyway its those individuals who try their best I believe that stave off corruption and make it impossible to take hold at the highest levels, thus when something like the Nazis take over its because no one stopped it when it was budding, so its like yeah person x is never fullly and solely culpable for phenomenon y but they're rarely if ever entirely innocent. its not enough to buckle down and just stay out of the way, because opportunists are counting on people doing exactly that. that doesn;t mean everyone has to be a Se valuing Rambo or they're pure shit. it just means actively believing in taking a stand on what is right wherever you find yourself, it means Si types can be like "no Se is bad" and that makes it ok, because if they're right that gets thrown into the whirlpool of ideas to work itself out. in that sense it seems like confict is not the enemy per se, neither is pain, rather it is the failure to address things before they get worse that is the enemy, and it often takes the "clothes" of people saying conflict is the enemy or pain is the enemy, its like no, the enemy is the process of such things becoming worse and worse, not atomic acts aimed at stopping that process
anyway this is super complex and I don't think I have a perfect handle on it or anything but its just sort of what I think
Wow those pics, you are clearly reading emotional reactions into lines where I never displayed any.Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 9 large
I simply wanted to respond to her post to me before because she misinterpreted what I said so I wanted to flesh it out. I stated my intention upfront, if you are trying to read other bs into the lines, you are being very misguided.Quote:
@Myst when will you learn that people know themselves better than you do and that at some point we don't want your input anymore? I mean, @FANXY CHILD closed her typing thread and you're still giving her your goddamn opinion on her type, which she just settled on. It's disrespectful and insulting to her intelligence that you think you know someone better over some forum posts than the person in question knows themselves, not to mention downright arrogant on your side.
I don't assume I know people better than they themselves do. I analyze what they present based on the theory, that's a very different thing.
My PM'ing her with a polite neutral message with the purpose of clarification is hardly more disrespectful than her assuming things about me originally in the thread that I wanted to correct/clarify.Quote:
Can't you see that? It's the same shit you've been pulling on me, and you're being a real idiot for not seeing how disrespectful you are being. I know you're just trying to make it seem like you're fucking helping or something, but all you do is listening to your own voice and ignoring every other counterargument, it's the most infuriating thing ever.
And. That's just your assumption about my attitude without objective proof that I would ignore everything being said. It is quite funny with you accusing me of that while you skipped words (=ignore them) when quoting my reasonings to respond to.
More assumptions about my internals that are very off.Quote:
You're not helping anyone by insisting on what type people supposedly are, especially not when they've already decided and thoroughly disagree with you, okay? Not a lot of things piss me off, but people being willfully ignorant and delusional as fuck definitely is one of them, especially when they think they're right and are so obviously wrong.
:bashhead: <-- that's me trying to argue with you, doesn't work.
And, I was hardly insisting on her type in the PM. Reread it. I did give reasoning for it but I did not insist on her retyping. What I did insist on was giving a response after she assumed wrong originally and I addressed the whole post while at it. If it didn't help, okay, I did tell her it's up to her what she does with the info.
As for the wall emoticon... was never my intention to make you feel that way.
Oh your ridiculous bs at that link claiming that I "gum up the forum". Really? What weird distorted perception do you have to have to perceive me that way? I clearly don't post a crazy amount of posts, go count them. And nah, no one was leaving threads because of me, that is completely your paranoid imagination without any factual basis. Please don't make yourself sound any more ridiculous by keeping linking to this bs.Quote:
Originally Posted by squark
Again, if someone perceives something as pressure, they are always welcome to let me know if something bothers them. Just be specific. No need to overcomplicate things. End of story.
I kind of like Myst because they demonstrate a real pattern that rarely gets a lot of attention. I'm 99% sure its ESI in action, but either way its something that I don't think is bad faith. I think people really are like that and it would be good to understand it better
I'm 99% sure this is not type related but related to some huge personal flaw. Also that's a big insult to ESIs, no way they are all that dense, ignorant and self-righteous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
But I guess I'm just twisting Mysts well intentioned words again /sarcasm
we have a system for cataloguing huge personal flaws, i bet you'd be a fan of integrating that into your typology
Yeah, but do you see other people being this dense on here? @Pole for example is LSI and isn't this goddamn dense at all. In fact she is very receptive to what people have to say, and acts you know, like a normal human being. This has nothing to do with Ne polr.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
I heard my name... what?
I'm back from the gym, catching up has been fun :lol:
@Bertrand It's not nice to go waving logic around like that, be mindful of other people ;) I'm happy to notice you found your home in EIE, to be honest that's the strong impression you gave during our exchanges you have a lot of empathy. Now it's clear why I had to keep asking and asking for :Te:, but you freely gave me over and over. Just so you know, I really appreciate it.
@squark @Number 9 large I actually think is useful to have people like this being active as cautionary tales of what happens when one becomes a fiercely devoted to The Church of Socionics:church: Why can't faith, logic and rationality coexist? I don't know.
"Constantly"...lol, alternative facts indeed :crispy:
Also bringing in socionics as an excuse for shitty behaviour is probably the most counterproductive use of the system
well Ne polr manifests differently in ESI and LSI which is why I think Myst is ESI. at the same time I think your characterization of her behavior being bad on a level you don't want to "make the system responsible for and thus indirectly attribute to other people who likewise share the xSi designator" is probably rooted in good intentions but is ultimately a projection based on your own values: what if being "goddamn dense" as you put it, is not a bad thing? I mean how else would Adam Strange get laid? Also just because one ESI takes it to this level doesn't mean all do (for example Lungs wouldn't touch him with a 10 ft pole), which sure, means relative levels of development are definitely a thing, but on some level this behavior has to be consistent with some type, not entirely outside it, because it is a product of cognitive function
How is being ignorant a good thingQuote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
lmfao oh no you didn'tQuote:
I mean how else would Adam Strange get laid?
Also just because one ESI takes it to this level doesn't mean all do (for example Lungs wouldn't touch him with a 10 ft pole), which sure, means relative levels of development are definitely a thing, but on some level this behavior has to be consistent with some type, not entirely outside it, because it is a product of cognitive function[/QUOTE]
Sure this denseness might have to do with Ne polr, but what I'm trying to say is that you shouldn't be using ''Ne polr'' as an excuse for this ridiculously ignorant behaviour Myst is showing, and you definitely can't generalise this to all Ne polr people or all ESIs. I guess that wasn't your point but an insinuation I read into your lines. Just trying to warn you that using socionics should be a way to know your weaknesses so you can work on them, not bringing up excuses for your weaknesses, because that is counterproductive to your personal development, and, as we can all see, very annoying to deal with for other people aswel.
as far as ignorance potentially being a good thing, I think the deal with that is everyone is in a relative state of ignorance and this goes to TIM; which is to say theres a big ball of information out there and 16 different ways to perceive it, none of which see it comprehensively. thus ignorance is not so much "a good thing" in an absolute sense, but the idea is that each of the 16 types has a "brand" of "ignorance" that is useful
haha and I mock myst all the time, I don't think its an excuse. its just trying to understand how x might contribute to the development of y
the other thing to keep in mind is everyone is blind in 1/16 ways, and Myst can look upon that and just as quickly judge people as being dense in regards to whatever she sees clearly that they don't
Fair point, I guess you could say there are a number of blindspots regarding our perception of reality according to the theory, because of course we, in the end, see reality through the lens of our subjectivity, which means we ultimately don't witness reality an sich (in and of itself).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
I wouldn't go as far as to say that we cannot comprehend information at all, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
I still disagree that ignorance could ever be ''useful''Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
Yeah, fair enough, but you should be wary because humans tend to blame outside sources for the faults of their actions. It's called projection, and very easily slips in when you start thinking like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
Using the theory as an explanation for bad behaviour is almost the same as using it as an excuse to keep on acting out the behaviour, because the theory implies that you will never be good at it anyway, and that the flaw is part of your personality, therefore unchangeable. I don't believe in unchangeable characteristics of human beings. We are all malleable, at the end of the day.
By the way did you seriously change your type to EIE? I thought you were being sarcastic and mocking @Aylen when she called you out on probably changing your type to EIE in the future, but
this quote
made me think you are actually being serious about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by FANXY CHILD
im the mbti super user
as to how the types of ignorance can be useful, a lot of it is survival based. ESI is known to "preserve their indviduality despite all hostility"--now under some circumstances thats unnecessary and weird, but under others its actually a good thing, like if your society came to be dominated by a totalitarian regime and you were the last keeper of certain traditions and ideas, think orthodox Christians in the soviet union or something to that effect. the propriety of resistance to outside influence depends entirely on the nature of that outside influence. ESIs manifest that in the negative when they're resistant to good influence, etc etc. the idea is you need your dual to help bring you into balance with the world because they present information in a way that gently ushers you into a more comprehensive reality
Oh fun discussion. No, I don't know where the misunderstanding pops up with some people, it's definitely not with everyone, so I don't know what that depends on. Not everyone is gonna get along with everyone, sure. But I don't appreciate this kind of "discussion". It leads precisely nowhere, zero constructive direction.
@Number 9 large So you actually think I *must* have negative/malicious intentions while it's you who keeps pouring on the malice/hostility. Just because we disagreed on a socionics discussion. That, I'm sorry, is just ridiculous. Get over it.
@Bertrand I appreciate your trying to understand my side but your "joke" about me vs @Adam Strange was definitely over the line. Otoh, if you have any questions about trying to understand what I think like or what attitudes I have internally or whatever else that leads to whatever issue you are seeing from your pov, feel free to ask, I don't mind you trying to understand things.
sorry, sometimes I just can't resist. I didn't mean to imply you were going to touch him with a 10ft pole either
Yeah I know we can't change you. that doesn't mean we can't talk about it behind your back :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Myst
'kay. Btw I don't actually have a problem with @Adam Strange even though it's true he doesn't get certain people stuff well at all. Which he's well aware of I think? It doesn't bother me like it bothers some people for some reason. To me it's obvious that he doesn't have bad intentions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
Get over it, troll.Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 9 large