Introduction to Psyche-Yoga

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

10-17-2016, 12:44 AM
chrys

I AM FVEL, CHEKHOV! :D (below is a picture of Chekhov ^^)

http://66.media.tumblr.com/0a87f98a7...c7w3o1_500.jpg

OKAY I've finally figured it out! This was surprisingly easy, which is amazing because it has 24 types not 16 types, so one would think it'd be a bit harder to identify which type to be. But alot of people don't feel complete with their Socionics type which implies there's not enough type to go around, so maybe the increase in number of types actually makes it easier since you don't have to apply a typing so reluctantly.

>MY FINAL TYPING, FINAL<

1st Function: Physics is most likely, next would be Logic, then finally Emotion.
2nd Function: Only Willpower is possible.
3rd Function: Emotion is most likely in this place, next Logic, and finally Physics.
4th Function: Logic is most likely in this place, next Willpower, and finally Physics.

According to all of this, I would be conveniently placed in FVEL, the first type on Avalonia's tumblr for Psyche Yoga, also known as Chekhov :3

?Here's why?

Emotion or Logic (this spoiler here is for the following reasons: this forum's text formatting is retarded =w=

appears to bring about an intellectual or emotional type, and I am neither. See how simple that was? ^^ I am an easygoing person who just wants to have a pleasant time and help others when asked, I don't really do recreational emotional or intellectual activities... I never have passion or expressiveness, I only have good intentions. There's a difference, so please don't mistake my friendliness for being a strong emotional type, because Psyche Yoga does not really have an "Fi", it only has a very potent definition of Fe which I don't have at all.
I'm not logic first either because I don't theorize... I'm not a very mentally active person at all. I just, like I said, want to enjoy myself.
And so naturally they would be placed...
>Logic goes into 4th position, only wanting a result rather than to delve into anything deep. I may be quick to come up with logical conclusions which tend to be more or less satisfactory, but they're lazily done for a reason: I dont fucking care I just want to get something done, who cares about how it works?
>Emotion goes into 3rd position, only wanting to be removed from actual emotion in favor of playing with it as a sort of personal game, as well as just to be pleasing to others rather than actively project my own emotions. Emotion is not 4th because I don't just submit to everyone else as if I don't fucking care about my own feelings ;~; no I have them, I definitely do.

Willpower could be last, but it's not because Logic goes there. Willpower seems to be defined quite differently based on its placement, and so while you may think that having it as my second function would imply I'm very Se dominant and doped up on cocaine, It actually means I just feel the need to have everyone's opinions and ideas all considered. Second Willpower is very much an Ne and Se influenced function, it just wants to get the best result possible by being inclusive, open-minded, and considering everything. It also claims to be an indecisive, energy inefficient function because it takes up so much time and effort to get all possibilities down, which is something I easily sympathize with xP It says it, like the fourth function, doesn't have very strong desires, and so adapts to the will of others. So this would either be Second or Fourth for me.

Physics works quite well compared to the others as a first function, as the only prerequisite seems to be having a sense of your own needs and what makes you personally feel good and satisfied. I like to think of this as a Self-Preservation instinct (Enneagram) because it enjoys hoarding space, it just needs things to be feel comfortable, and if there's excess then all their worries are suddenly washed away and you feel on top of the world because nothing can bring you down when you have all your needs taken care of and guaranteed for a long period of time. Maybe I'm wrong... but I still think that no other fits in 1st except Physics.
10-17-2016, 06:14 AM
Pallas

I can't find a test or links, but VELF sounds right based on the individual descriptions. Is that pronounced as velf to rhyme with elf?

Anyways, I think this is a silly system. I don't see Mega and I as having the same type literally anywhere else. This is not quite ambiguous enough to be Forer effect but not specific enough to really be useful IMO either.

Edit: I mean, I thought I'd be E first since arts and "the intuitive side of life" are my favorite thing (although "ORDNUNG" would still be in my personal Favorite Things song), but then I read the descriptions and was like "nope" because I like to control my emotional effect on others. But V first could be an :Fe: type, or an :Se: type, or even LSI in Socionics. Do people actually get all of the Psyche-yoga types? I don't think people get all of the Enneagram wings or tritypes either to be honest...
10-17-2016, 06:37 AM
Pallas

Yeah. And it's also just supposed to be a personal tool without use in the outside world. If there were more info on it, I'd look at it, but I like theories for the applications, so I wouldn't stick with it. Socionics was developed to help economists and sociologists and it's quite good for predicting people's and groups' actions and torturing them DarkAngelFireWolf69-style. Enneagram is the opposite and seems to be mostly good for contemplation if anything. This seems to be a hair away from the Enneagram side in aims.

Also, I think it's funny all the xFxjs socionics are not going to be E dominants in this by definition since they all control their emotional expression heavily rather than just changing with the phases of the moon or whatever. I literally compose poems and songs in the shoutbox but that's impossible since I'm not E first... Never mime my weird spiritual beliefs that I don't think anyone would ever want to hear unless I go off and be a cult leader with my charisma score of 18.

Also, onto a breakdown of things:

Good types: V first, E not last.
OK types: L first, V last
Bad: Anything else
Horrible: FLVE (basically just antisocial personality disorder described euphemistically. I thought there would be more than one horrible one but once I tallied the worst places to have these 3 of 4 were defined so L second just slipped in even though that's otherwise fine).

Anyone want to calculate the numbers of the first three? I want to see just how biased this is but I'm not so good at math now :P

Edit: Also how is Goethe FVLE? Maybe this is a different Goethe, because the one I know is a poet first and foremost... E last for a poet, really? (He's also consistently typed EIE in Socionics along with Shakespeare and a giant number of other poets and playwrights. I doubt EIEs care about their physical comfort that much. Goethe was just an aristocratic party dude. You don't have to be introverted and ascetic to be a poet...)

Anyways, I want to be an artistic type, but all the artistic types here are introverted and weepy. They don't know Tolkien well either. Ugh. I also don't like sexta 5 at all so I quit VELF. *checks out the other sextas*

I like sexta 1 but not any of the individual types therein. Are these sextas actually based on the types at all? I'll pick ELFV so I can be a dark mystical poet because I am a dark mystical poet, just not an Ip one.
10-19-2016, 08:58 AM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

I AM FVEL, CHEKHOV! :D (below is a picture of Chekhov ^^)

http://66.media.tumblr.com/0a87f98a7...c7w3o1_500.jpg

OKAY I've finally figured it out! This was surprisingly easy, which is amazing because it has 24 types not 16 types, so one would think it'd be a bit harder to identify which type to be. But alot of people don't feel complete with their Socionics type which implies there's not enough type to go around, so maybe the increase in number of types actually makes it easier since you don't have to apply a typing so reluctantly.

>MY FINAL TYPING, FINAL<

1st Function: Physics is most likely, next would be Logic, then finally Emotion.
2nd Function: Only Willpower is possible.
3rd Function: Emotion is most likely in this place, next Logic, and finally Physics.
4th Function: Logic is most likely in this place, next Willpower, and finally Physics.

According to all of this, I would be conveniently placed in FVEL, the first type on Avalonia's tumblr for Psyche Yoga, also known as Chekhov :3

?Here's why?

Emotion or Logic (this spoiler here is for the following reasons: this forum's text formatting is retarded =w=

appears to bring about an intellectual or emotional type, and I am neither. See how simple that was? ^^ I am an easygoing person who just wants to have a pleasant time and help others when asked, I don't really do recreational emotional or intellectual activities... I never have passion or expressiveness, I only have good intentions. There's a difference, so please don't mistake my friendliness for being a strong emotional type, because Psyche Yoga does not really have an "Fi", it only has a very potent definition of Fe which I don't have at all.
I'm not logic first either because I don't theorize... I'm not a very mentally active person at all. I just, like I said, want to enjoy myself.
And so naturally they would be placed...
>Logic goes into 4th position, only wanting a result rather than to delve into anything deep. I may be quick to come up with logical conclusions which tend to be more or less satisfactory, but they're lazily done for a reason: I dont fucking care I just want to get something done, who cares about how it works?
>Emotion goes into 3rd position, only wanting to be removed from actual emotion in favor of playing with it as a sort of personal game, as well as just to be pleasing to others rather than actively project my own emotions. Emotion is not 4th because I don't just submit to everyone else as if I don't fucking care about my own feelings ;~; no I have them, I definitely do.

Willpower could be last, but it's not because Logic goes there. Willpower seems to be defined quite differently based on its placement, and so while you may think that having it as my second function would imply I'm very Se dominant and doped up on cocaine, It actually means I just feel the need to have everyone's opinions and ideas all considered. Second Willpower is very much an Ne and Se influenced function, it just wants to get the best result possible by being inclusive, open-minded, and considering everything. It also claims to be an indecisive, energy inefficient function because it takes up so much time and effort to get all possibilities down, which is something I easily sympathize with xP It says it, like the fourth function, doesn't have very strong desires, and so adapts to the will of others. So this would either be Second or Fourth for me.

Physics works quite well compared to the others as a first function, as the only prerequisite seems to be having a sense of your own needs and what makes you personally feel good and satisfied. I like to think of this as a Self-Preservation instinct (Enneagram) because it enjoys hoarding space, it just needs things to be feel comfortable, and if there's excess then all their worries are suddenly washed away and you feel on top of the world because nothing can bring you down when you have all your needs taken care of and guaranteed for a long period of time. Maybe I'm wrong... but I still think that no other fits in 1st except Physics.

Glad you finally figured it out. I'm still confused with mine and I've been studying this system quite extensively for over a year now.

I think my problem is this. Different methods will give me different types and because most everything is in Russian some stuff is lost in translation. There just isn't extensive information like socionics either.

If I take the approach where I force fit one function into every position I also get FVEL or alternatively LVEF. 2V and 3E were easy enough to determine. It's trickier with L and F. I don't exactly fit 1L or 4L. Actually I think 2L or 3L fits me more. But you can't be both 2V and 2L or 3E and 3L. And with F, none of them strongly resonated with me.

With 1F for instance:
First Physics: Has a strong idea of their material wants/needs and the state of their physical selves. Combined with a natural sense of ownership and knowing just what they need to enjoy life. Hyper aware of how something makes them feel (physically) and actively take steps to pursue the positive states while avoiding the negative. Overly materialistic and superficial in their approach. Focused on their own pleasure and material needs, which can make them rather greedy and egoistic, and disinclined to share anything. Can also appear lazy and spoiled, by being unwilling to change or make any compromises in their lifestyle.

Well I definitely know just what I need to enjoy life and my materials wants/needs. I place a high priority on my own physical comfort and pursuing the positive states and avoiding the negative. I can be a bit lazy. I prefer to not have to change or compromise my lifestyle but I can if I must. I don't relate to materialism or superficial in my approach. My material needs are quite simple and minimal really. And most of what I want to enjoy life are non material sorts of things. I don't relate to the greed or being spoiled aspects. Although I'm not excessively generous either- I don't give more than I can afford to lose.

Now contrast with 4F:
Fourth Physics: Able to figuratively live anywhere under any kind of physical conditions without any complaints. No need for or strong attachments to material pleasures and no strong attachment to their material possessions and they do not require much diversity in sensory pleasure. Easily satisfied, yet only hindered by an inability to take care of themselves. No patience for physical endeavours. No idea about preferences in the physical/material world. Only has habits to go from when making evaluations about material linking, thus being quite conservative or unknowing in their tastes.

I relate to not being very materialistic or attached to my possessions. I also don't need much diversity in sensory pleasure. I can be rather impatient with physical endeavors. I'm easily satisfied and do alot of things by habit. However, I am highly sensitive to physical discomfort and I can't just 'thrive' in any condition. I do have material preferences, it's not like I'm unaware or indifferent to them. And I don't lack an ability to take of myself either. That's just stupid.

So the confusion here might be due to a couple things:
I'm 1F and an intuitive type so that's going to make me less materially focused than other 1Fs.
or
I'm 4F and the Si mobilizing function and/or self-preservation instinct in the enneagram focuses on things like comfort or physical needs making it look more 1F.

Also if I take an alternative approach and just go straight to the individual type descriptions, then LVEF is a much better fit. Or LEVF. Sexta 6, for the win! FVEL description doesn't fit me very well. I'm too intellectually oriented to relate to the 4L and I'm not really a 'live for the moment' sort of person. Well I am but I always think about how it fits into the whole scheme of things.

But really, I can see myself fitting into any of the 1L descriptions or EVLF or FLEV and maybe a couple of others.

Then the third approach is to fill out a questionnaire as I did here.

Now here, it seems like L is process oriented, not result oriented and probably in the 3rd position. So sexta 6 is out and the types in that sexta. EVLF maybe, although it's hard to say about emotion- not many questions on that.

And you can always take tests although they aren't exactly accurate. Also they will need to be translated from Russian to English.

Under the heading psihosofiya...

40 question test:
L 26/30
V 18/30
E 16/30
F 9/30
So LVEF with LEVF coming close

200 question test
I didn't record all the numbers but I did score EVLF overall.
Test was rather annoying though. Forced yes/no responses when so many of the questions are "it depends."
10-19-2016, 09:34 AM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verbrannte

I can't find a test or links, but VELF sounds right based on the individual descriptions. Is that pronounced as velf to rhyme with elf?

Anyways, I think this is a silly system. I don't see Mega and I as having the same type literally anywhere else. This is not quite ambiguous enough to be Forer effect but not specific enough to really be useful IMO either.

Edit: I mean, I thought I'd be E first since arts and "the intuitive side of life" are my favorite thing (although "ORDNUNG" would still be in my personal Favorite Things song), but then I read the descriptions and was like "nope" because I like to control my emotional effect on others. But V first could be an :Fe: type, or an :Se: type, or even LSI in Socionics. Do people actually get all of the Psyche-yoga types? I don't think people get all of the Enneagram wings or tritypes either to be honest...

It's like I know the system is silly in a way. I mean can you really only have one function in each position and it always stays in that position? Like a 1V can never act like a 2V a 2E can never act like a 1E, etc, etc.
But once I read about a personality system, I'm still obsessed with trying to figure it out regardless of how much validity it holds in real life. :o

Quote:

Originally Posted by troubadour

i was thinking the same—the sexta 4 types seem coincidentally reminiscent of socionics' Delta quadra. also, there's just not enough published information on PY for me to really dig my heels into.

Delta or gamma I'd say. 6th sexta sounds quite alpha like. 1st beta maybe. 3- gamma. 2 and 5 not sure, have to read again?

With the exception of that tumblr blog, it's all in Russian.

There is a small English speaking Facebook group about it here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verbrannte

Yeah. And it's also just supposed to be a personal tool without use in the outside world. If there were more info on it, I'd look at it, but I like theories for the applications, so I wouldn't stick with it. Socionics was developed to help economists and sociologists and it's quite good for predicting people's and groups' actions and torturing them DarkAngelFireWolf69-style. Enneagram is the opposite and seems to be mostly good for contemplation if anything. This seems to be a hair away from the Enneagram side in aims.

There are theories on PY relationships. 1 and 4 are most compatible. 2 and 3 are most compatible. The worst kind of relation is between 1 and 3. That's probably more than you want to know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verbrannte

Also, I think it's funny all the xFxjs socionics are not going to be E dominants in this by definition since they all control their emotional expression heavily rather than just changing with the phase
s of the moon or whatever. I literally compose poems and songs in the shoutbox but that's impossible since I'm not E first... Never mime my weird spiritual beliefs that I don't think anyone would ever want to hear unless I go off and be a cult leader with my charisma score of 18.

I don't think it's necessarily that cut and dried. Socionic type probably modifies expression of PY type and vice versa. PY could be useful in that it might help someone explain why they have difficulty determining socionics type. For example a logical type with strong emotion might think they are ethical in socionics. Or a 1L in PY might think they are logical type in socionics when really there are ethical.[/quote]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verbrannte

Also, onto a breakdown of things:

Good types: V first, E not last.
OK types: L first, V last
Bad: Anything else
Horrible: FLVE (basically just antisocial personality disorder described euphemistically. I thought there would be more than one horrible one but once I tallied the worst places to have these 3 of 4 were defined so L second just slipped in even though that's otherwise fine).

Hmmm, why? I mean I understand the FLVE description is poorly written but why are most of the types bad?

Also the 1V description kind of sounds like a selfish asshole although they do get alot of stuff done. 2V on the other hand generally sounds really good.

But how we perceive the PY descriptions probably relates to our own PY type.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verbrannte

Anyone want to calculate the numbers of the first three? I want to see just how biased this is but I'm not so good at math now :P

Edit: Also how is Goethe FVLE? Maybe this is a different Goethe, because the one I know is a poet first and foremost... E last for a poet, really? (He's also consistently typed EIE in Socionics along with Shakespeare and a giant number of other poets and playwrights. I doubt EIEs care about their physical comfort that much. Goethe was just an aristocratic party dude. You don't have to be introverted and ascetic to be a poet...)

There's alot of variation among people with the same type. No reason why FVLE can't be a poet. Or any other type. Also I think the 4E description is not entirely accurate. 4E as described by the Russian sites is more of an 'onlooker.' They observe peoples' emotions and tend to adapt to them. They may not necessarily show alot of outward expression but they can still feel strong emotions. The 4E on the Tumblr site makes it sound like they don't have feelings of their own and don't care at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verbrannte

Anyways, I want to be an artistic type, but all the artistic types here are introverted and weepy. They don't know Tolkien well either. Ugh. I also don't like sexta 5 at all so I quit VELF. *checks out the other sextas*

I like sexta 1 but not any of the individual types therein. Are these sextas actually based on the types at all?

The sextas are based on what functions are process oriented and which are result oriented. Positions 2 and 3 are process oriented. Positions 1 and 4 are result oriented. By theory, you supposedly get along best with those in your sexta. But I don't know how accurate the sexta descriptions themselves are.

I do like EVLF in sexta 1, but then I found out their most compatible type is the 'antisocial' 'psychotic' FLVE. :o

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verbrannte

I'll pick ELFV so I can be a dark mystical poet because I am a dark mystical poet, just not an Ip one.

Okay, suit yourself. ;)
10-19-2016, 01:54 PM
Pallas

@chips and underwear

Aww, let me have fun. I don't take this seriously at all because it doesn't really make any sense. To be honest, I thought Psyche-Yoga was going to be some system to try to develop psionic abilities with the aid of Eastern philosophy.
10-19-2016, 03:47 PM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verbrannte

@chips and underwear

Aww, let me have fun. I don't take this seriously at all because it doesn't really make any sense. To be honest, I thought Psyche-Yoga was going to be some system to try to develop psionic abilities with the aid of Eastern philosophy.

I did let you have fun. And now I will take over the world.

Why do they call it Psyche-Yoga? The name doesn't much sense, I agree.
10-19-2016, 03:56 PM
Pallas

@chips and underwear Been there, done that. You'll have to take it from me. :hello:
10-20-2016, 12:08 AM
chrys

I really think it'd be beneficial to have the first ever (I think) Psihisofiya translation sorta project on this forum, with a whole subforum dedicated to understanding what it all means, or at least clearing up the definitions in a way that makes sense to us even if it's not exactly what they had intended.

For example, we need to know what dichotomies go into a function based on placement.

Function Dichotomies:
1: Result, Dominant(forceful), Individualist (Always), Strategic
2: Process, Submissive(flexible), (Individualist/Collectivist depends), Tactical
3:Process, Dominant(forceful), (Individualist/Collectivist depends), Tactical
4:Result, Submissive(flexible), (Individualist/Collectivist depends), Strategic

Notes:
+I dunno if I'm reading these wrong... but the Individualist and Collectivist traits are completely unbound by any sort of rule except that the first function for every "element" is Individualist.

+I think that the 1st/4th and 2nd/3rd function are meant to dualize, given that one is Dominant and the other Submissive. One willingly adapts to the other's initiative. If we see this through Socionics then it's kinda like how a LII willingly gives in to the ESE's initiative to bring about emotional excitement, the ILI also finds comfort in letting the SEE lead in any physical endeavors (Leading dominates the Suggestive). And the other relationship (2nd and 3rd) would be like how the ESE gives in to the LII's own physical needs as if they were a sort of caretaker to their sensitive Hidden Agenda, and the SEE wants only to listen to and help the ILI with their own emotional troubles and are willing to understand their feelings because they are more competent in these areas.

It seems like the 1st function is more self-satisfying and just kinda does what it feels it needs and lets the 4th follow, since the 4th really doesn't have a vocal opinion of its own and just desires the end result of whatever the function does. The 2nd function appears to be the most communicative and able to reach out to others and exchange information freely with the which kinda fits with the 3rd function's own sensitivities and complaints and needs, as the 3rd is the most perceptive function in the Psyche Yoga system and needs someone to follow through on giving them the necessary care. The 2nd is more "artistic" and thus can be creative in how it helps the very specific needs of the 3rd which the 1st might overlook.

Idk how all of this would change how you feel about your type, or if what I'm saying even holds true. xP
10-20-2016, 01:59 AM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

I really think it'd be beneficial to have the first ever (I think) Psihisofiya translation sorta project on this forum, with a whole subforum dedicated to understanding what it all means, or at least clearing up the definitions in a way that makes sense to us even if it's not exactly what they had intended.

Yes, I would definitely be interested in such an endeavor. It's too bad more people aren't interested in this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

For example, we need to know what dichotomies go into a function based on placement.

Function Dichotomies:
1: Result, Dominant(forceful), Individualist (Always), Strategic
2: Process, Submissive(flexible), (Individualist/Collectivist depends), Tactical
3:Process, Dominant(forceful), (Individualist/Collectivist depends), Tactical
4:Result, Submissive(flexible), (Individualist/Collectivist depends), Strategic

Hmmm. Let's see.

Emotion (E): Very process/tactical oriented, quite individualistic and idiosyncratic but always careful not to go out of bounds and scare or offend people with it. Can be quite forceful but often suppressing that. Although if pushed enough, it can explode. So basically a combination of 1, 2, and 3. I know it's not the 4th.

Logic (L): Result oriented in the sense that I want to get the answer and the knowledge! But I often feel like I'm engaged in a lengthy process to figure it all out. Strategic/tactical- what does that mean in terms of logic? Very individualistic in the sense that I have my own crazy ideas and things I'm always thinking about alone. But I can't say it's *always* individualistic because I do care about other peoples' thoughts and opinions to see if my conclusions have any sort of validity. Probably more dominant than submissive. It's really hard for me to keep quiet if I see some logical inconsistency or some reasoning that doesn't seem to make much sense. So probably 1st or 3rd, leaning slightly towards 1st.

Physics (F): Very result oriented- just make me comfortable get my needs met, process is not very fun, mostly submissive but occasionally can be forceful and dominant but try to suppress it unless necessary, both individualist and collective. Individualist- I know better than others what makes me comfortable. Collectivist- let's more evenly distribute resources so everyone has enough. Looks most like 4th, but some aspects similar to 1st, probably due to Si mobilizing or SP instinct.

Will: Result oriented/strategic in the sense that I want to achieve my goals and accomplish things. But I don't believe the ends justify the means. It's not good to achieve if you're gonna hurt people on the way. So there is value in the process/tactics. So both. Individualist and collectivist. Do things individually and think about how others would be affected by those actions. Mostly adaptable/submissive but occasionally I'll be really tempted to dominate but usually suppress that. I'm Se PoLR- it's hard for me to just force people to do things and I hate having people force me. So will is probably 2nd but often looks like 4th because I will often give in to avoid conflicts escalating. So it looks like LVEF/EVLF which is what I was leaning towards anyway.
10-21-2016, 01:31 AM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

Notes:
+I dunno if I'm reading these wrong... but the Individualist and Collectivist traits are completely unbound by any sort of rule except that the first function for every "element" is Individualist.

Okay maybe I'm taking what you've said above overly literally but how is a function *completely* individualistic? I'm sure some are more individualistic than others but I doubt anything is completely individualistic. Functions don't exist in a vacuum, there is always going to be external influence to some degree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

+I think that the 1st/4th and 2nd/3rd function are meant to dualize, given that one is Dominant and the other Submissive. One willingly adapts to the other's initiative. If we see this through Socionics then it's kinda like how a LII willingly gives in to the ESE's initiative to bring about emotional excitement, the ILI also finds comfort in letting the SEE lead in any physical endeavors (Leading dominates the Suggestive). And the other relationship (2nd and 3rd) would be like how the ESE gives in to the LII's own physical needs as if they were a sort of caretaker to their sensitive Hidden Agenda, and the SEE wants only to listen to and help the ILI with their own emotional troubles and are willing to understand their feelings because they are more competent in these areas.

Makes sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

It seems like the 1st function is more self-satisfying and just kinda does what it feels it needs and lets the 4th follow, since the 4th really doesn't have a vocal opinion of its own and just desires the end result of whatever the function does. The 2nd function appears to be the most communicative and able to reach out to others and exchange information freely with the which kinda fits with the 3rd function's own sensitivities and complaints and needs, as the 3rd is the most perceptive function in the Psyche Yoga system and needs someone to follow through on giving them the necessary care. The 2nd is more "artistic" and thus can be creative in how it helps the very specific needs of the 3rd which the 1st might overlook.

I'm not sure how any of my functions are 'artistic' or creative. If my second function is V, I'm not seeing how I'm using it creatively. Basically it's just making sure everyone's desires are met and everyone feels like they have a say. There's not a whole lot 'creative' about it. It's possible I've got my second function wrong because I'm not sure how good I actually am at doing that. It's more like a value system I have than something I actively communicate. I'm probably more likely to use L in way you describe or even E when more comfortable.

Well all of my functions are self-satisfying to some degree but never to the point where I'm ignorant of others. Well maybe I'm more prone to be self-satisfying with L or E but then I don't really relate to the know-it-all, dogmatic attitude of 1L or the 1E being so emotionally self-absorbed that they don't really notice or care about other peoples' feelings.

Regarding the 4th function- once again, all of the functions have their own opinion to some degree. WIth F- I tend to just want to get the result quickly, but I still have my own opinions and preferences about some things. But oftentimes I do trust someone's opinion over my own. Like you probably know more about cooking or doing some physical task than I do. I could be 4V since if V is not 2nd, it's probably 4th. Oftentimes, I will just let others make decisions if it's not really important to me or I just don't want to invest the time or effort. Or I might have a decision in mind but don't want to disrupt harmony. Even with L, I can be rather lazy and just want a quick answer rather than having to read through a bunch of gobedely****. Just give me a simple, concise explanation. So, I guess, 4th could be anything but E.

And the 3rd function, being the most perceptive. Maybe it is E. I sure feel hypersensitive in this area. I am highly sensitive to things like voice tone and facial expressions. The person looks angry. What did I do to make this person mad? Or is it just my imagination and overreacting? I never quite feel sure. But I could have have a 3rd function other than E. I can perceive the even the slight logical ambiguities and inconsistencies (L), my senses are very sensitive and I have a low pain threshold (F), or I'm highly perceptive of inequality in the power structure or the sensation that someone is trying to press me a bit too much (V).

Hmmm, now I'm considering FLEV as a possibility. F does seem result oriented, 1 or 4. I'm not sure I would get along very well with 1V though.
10-21-2016, 04:53 AM
chrys

Quote:

Originally Posted by chips and underwear

Okay maybe I'm taking what you've said above overly literally but how is a function *completely* individualistic? I'm sure some are more individualistic than others but I doubt anything is completely individualistic. Functions don't exist in a vacuum, there is always going to be external influence to some degree.

Honestly I don't think many of the definitions of the functions show much humanity in them, and I'm not saying you're wrong, but according to the definitions I'm reading, the 1st function really doesn't seem to show much sense of "collectivism" at all..... especially 1E. Emotion in the first position is just god awful, I can't imagine how it could be useful at all compared to 2E. I don't understand how your first function could be a weakness of all things... yet that's how it seems to be here. 1E: "Naturally fluctuates between emotional states and spices up everyday life for themselves and others. Done through an active meeting with their world with a real enthusiasm or passion in their own personal endeavors thereby always acting authentic to their own feelings. They will often act unfiltered on their own emotions, not taking into account the positions or emotional effect their behavior has on others. Can have a tendency to overdramatise a situation and not dealing with things in a level-headed way, thereby blowing them out of proportion and escalating conflicts."
Basically a drama whore with no contributions to humanity?!?! wtf is up with this... at least the type descriptions are more positive and healthy for Emotional dominants.

Anyways, 24types.ru claims that all the 1st functions are Individualistic so I just took it literally and thought it was like the Socionics equivalent of an Inert Type, where it doesn't really let itself become altered by external forces.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chips and underwear

I'm not sure how any of my functions are 'artistic' or creative. If my second function is V, I'm not seeing how I'm using it creatively. Basically it's just making sure everyone's desires are met and everyone feels like they have a say. There's not a whole lot 'creative' about it. It's possible I've got my second function wrong because I'm not sure how good I actually am at doing that. It's more like a value system I have than something I actively communicate. I'm probably more likely to use L in way you describe or even E when more comfortable.

Hm... maybe creative was not the best term to use. Though I'd still say it fits the definition of: very receptive to new information, agile and flexible to the situation at hand. Which could be exactly how you use your willpower given that you can always find a way to incorporate everyone's ideas and needs into one that fits the majority and are sure to not let anyone feel left out or rejected. Maybe 2V is the function for feeling responsible for bringing out the potential in others just so you have the maximum amount of possibilities to choose from, and from that you could see which fits best to produce the most satisfactory end result, even if it isn't time or cost effective. It could maybe function like Ne in trying to make great use of seemingly nothing [Ne-], or having the ability to find and distinguish the best ideas and people [Ne+] (idk if im using these -/+ symbols correctly lol)

Quote:

Originally Posted by chips and underwear

Well all of my functions are self-satisfying to some degree but never to the point where I'm ignorant of others. Well maybe I'm more prone to be self-satisfying with L or E but then I don't really relate to the know-it-all, dogmatic attitude of 1L or the 1E being so emotionally self-absorbed that they don't really notice or care about other peoples' feelings.

As an introvert I think all of my functions are meant to be mostly self-satisfying. I never really have much need to incorporate other people's ideas unless necessary for some collaborative work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chips and underwear

Regarding the 4th function- once again, all of the functions have their own opinion to some degree. WIth F- I tend to just want to get the result quickly, but I still have my own opinions and preferences about some things. But oftentimes I do trust someone's opinion over my own. Like you probably know more about cooking or doing some physical task than I do. I could be 4V since if V is not 2nd, it's probably 4th. Oftentimes, I will just let others make decisions if it's not really important to me or I just don't want to invest the time or effort. Or I might have a decision in mind but don't want to disrupt harmony. Even with L, I can be rather lazy and just want a quick answer rather than having to read through a bunch of gobedely****. Just give me a simple, concise explanation. So, I guess, 4th could be anything but E.

Yeah... I also relate to 4L in that way, as well as 4V. I'm willing to put in the time and effort for most things that will be beneficial according to my Physics function, but as you said I get really lazy when it comes to making decisions, whether serious or not, and I really don't care about getting into unnecessarily complex explanations of.. well anything lol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chips and underwear

And the 3rd function, being the most perceptive. Maybe it is E. I sure feel hypersensitive in this area. I am highly sensitive to things like voice tone and facial expressions. The person looks angry. What did I do to make this person mad? Or is it just my imagination and overreacting? I never quite feel sure. But I could have have a 3rd function other than E. I can perceive the even the slight logical ambiguities and inconsistencies (L), my senses are very sensitive and I have a low pain threshold (F), or I'm highly perceptive of inequality in the power structure or the sensation that someone is trying to press me a bit too much (V).

[/FONT]
Hehe, you have quite alot of "sensitivities". : P ehhh I kinda do too... I think Emotion and Physics both are very easily overwhelming for me. Sensations and Emotions both go together I think for me... Physical discomfort triggers emotional discomfort and vice versa. I can't say the same for Logics and Willpower..
10-21-2016, 08:04 AM
Pallas

@Chryssie Since you understand this and I don't, could you give me a type please?
10-21-2016, 05:32 PM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

Honestly I don't think many of the definitions of the functions show much humanity in them, and I'm not saying you're wrong, but according to the definitions I'm reading, the 1st function really doesn't seem to show much sense of "collectivism" at all..... especially 1E. Emotion in the first position is just god awful, I can't imagine how it could be useful at all compared to 2E. I don't understand how your first function could be a weakness of all things... yet that's how it seems to be here. 1E: "Naturally fluctuates between emotional states and spices up everyday life for themselves and others. Done through an active meeting with their world with a real enthusiasm or passion in their own personal endeavors thereby always acting authentic to their own feelings. They will often act unfiltered on their own emotions, not taking into account the positions or emotional effect their behavior has on others. Can have a tendency to overdramatise a situation and not dealing with things in a level-headed way, thereby blowing them out of proportion and escalating conflicts."
Basically a drama whore with no contributions to humanity?!?! wtf is up with this... at least the type descriptions are more positive and healthy for Emotional dominants.

Anyways, 24types.ru claims that all the 1st functions are Individualistic so I just took it literally and thought it was like the Socionics equivalent of an Inert Type, where it doesn't really let itself become altered by external forces.

Yes, I agree, the 1E sounds like a bit much. But maybe that's just the 3E reaction to the 1E. But anyway, I try to avoid reacting emotionally to that excess. I'm not what you call dramatic. Occasionally I might overreact but it's when I've been under too much stress, so it explodes and then I regret reacting that way.

2E on the other hand is mostly appropriate in their emotional reactions. Not too excessive nor too dry. The way it should be. :D

Also the descriptions are a bit stereotypical because it's like that person is exclusively that way 100% of the time. Which no one is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

Hm... maybe creative was not the best term to use. Though I'd still say it fits the definition of: very receptive to new information, agile and flexible to the situation at hand. Which could be exactly how you use your willpower given that you can always find a way to incorporate everyone's ideas and needs into one that fits the majority and are sure to not let anyone feel left out or rejected. Maybe 2V is the function for feeling responsible for bringing out the potential in others just so you have the maximum amount of possibilities to choose from, and from that you could see which fits best to produce the most satisfactory end result, even if it isn't time or cost effective. It could maybe function like Ne in trying to make great use of seemingly nothing [Ne-], or having the ability to find and distinguish the best ideas and people [Ne+] (idk if im using these -/+ symbols correctly lol)

Let's just say, I try to incorporate everyone's ideas and needs but I don't know how good I am at it. And sometimes if someone is being a bit unreasonable and a bit of an asshole, I don't care to incorporate that person's wants and needs. I just want that person out of my face. Sometimes its not possible to incorporate everyone's needs when the needs directly oppose one another. Or maybe you can meet them both but not at the same time.

I work a customer service oriented job in the library and I run into this problem all the time. For example- someone wants a place where they can go where they can carry a quiet conservation because there is a study group that meets. Then someone else wants *absolute quiet* no talking or background noise at all. Well we do have study rooms but even with the door shut, the sound can carry. Or when someone wants to be able to extend the checkout period or number of renewals on their items because they want more time. Then someone else complains that the wait lists are too long and the library doesn't own enough copies when the library cannot afford to purchase any more.

Ideally everyone would be satisfied but sometimes it's just not possible and for me its stressful when you try to meet the needs of people with conflicting agendas and try to smooth out conflicts. It's why I feel like I'm not very good at doing this.

Regarding potential in others. I see peoples' potential but I don't know how good I am at bringing that out. I see it more as their responsibility I guess- whether or not they want to utilize their potential. I guess it's kind of sad when people have alot of potential and choose not to use it. But I don't really see myself as a developer of others or even quite sure how to go about doing that. But if someone asks for my assistance with a specific question, I'll try best to help.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

As an introvert I think all of my functions are meant to be mostly self-satisfying. I never really have much need to incorporate other people's ideas unless necessary for some collaborative work.

Well I am very introverted. I guess in a way I use the functions mostly for myself. My needs are first and foremost but I'm always aware that other people have needs too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

Yeah... I also relate to 4L in that way, as well as 4V. I'm willing to put in the time and effort for most things that will be beneficial according to my Physics function, but as you said I get really lazy when it comes to making decisions, whether serious or not, and I really don't care about getting into unnecessarily complex explanations of.. well anything lol.

I will put in the time/effort for physical things to some extent but I don't enjoy the process usually and if I can find a way to make it more efficient, all the better. I know I have to eat but I hardly ever cook and when I do it's something I just pop in the microwave. Or if someone else doesn't mind doing the physical work, I'll let them do it. Like assembling something or cooking.

Anyway, regarding 4V description:
[4V] Fourth Willpower: Very compliant and reliable.
---Yes! Often complimented and praised by others for that.

Puts harmony over their own desires which makes them easy to get along with,
----Very often do this. It depends on how badly I want to achieve my desires. If I want something bad enough, I might be willing to fight for it risking harmony but for most everyday things, I will either give in to someone elses desires or find a way to attain it that wouldn’t compromise harmony. Generally I’m very easy to get along with.

as they generally will adjust to the wishes of others, creating a positive relation to them while avoiding conflict.
---Yes, I hate conflict and highly value positive relations with others.

Good at giving new experiences and endeavours a chance.
---Usually.

Very dependent on others and are often indecisive, making them unable to make their own choices.
---This is where I start to not relate to the description. I’m highly independent and prefer to do things on my own when I can. I can sometimes be indecisive but its not because I’m unable to make their own choices. I prefer to make my own choices. I just want to make sure I’m making a good decision over the long term and make sure that what decision is made will not cause upset or harm to anyone.

Somewhat irresponsible and will actively avoid positions of responsibility at all times if possible.
---No! I’m very responsible. If I’m accountable for something, I will admit to it and not just shift it to someone else. I often find myself taking on various positions of responsibility but usually not more than I could reasonably handle.

And now for 4^th Logic description:
[4L] Fourth Logic: Open to different points of view and explanations, and using the logic of others to understand their own life without necessarily being personally committed to a point of view or model of explanation.
---Yes, usually.

Likewise able to cut short a conversation or discussion if clear answers are not being driven from it.
---Yes, it’s annoying when people can’t quickly get to the point or give me a bunch of extraneous irrelevant information. I try to be polite though when I’m in such conversations and hide my annoyance but I will gently try to bring it back to the main point.

Intellectually dependent and can need the guidance of others to figure things out.
---Yes and no. I hate the phrase ‘intellectually dependent.’ Of course I’m capable to figure things out on my own if I really want to. I’m not stupid. It’s more a matter of, is it really worth the time and effort to do so? If someone is regarded as an expert in an area I’m not and it’s an area of not much personal interest for me, it’s going to be faster and more efficient to just consult that expert. Sometimes I enjoy the challenge of trying to figure it out on my own because I get great personal satisfaction from being able to solve it on my own. It all depends on the situation.

May present claims without the necessary reason or rationalizations behind them, as they deem these of lesser importance.
---Maybe occasionally I end up doing that out of laziness. Normally, I think it’s important to make claims that actually have sound backing and logical rationale behind them. I am interested in the reasons or rationale behind any claims. I am skeptical when there isn’t a good reason or rationale.

May base their knowledge on trusted authorities rather than who has the better arguments.
---It depends. If it’s an area where I lack knowledge, I may not know enough about the area to even know what would be considered a ‘good’ vs. a ‘bad’ argument, so I end up just trusting the authorities. But for any other other area where I at least have a passing level of knowledge, I start to question the authorities, to weigh their arguments against mine and those of other people. Just because someone is a labeled an ‘authority’ does not necessarily make that person more right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

Hehe, you have quite alot of "sensitivities". : P ehhh I kinda do too... I think Emotion and Physics both are very easily overwhelming for me. Sensations and Emotions both go together I think for me... Physical discomfort triggers emotional discomfort and vice versa. I can't say the same for Logics and Willpower..

Yeah I do, don't I? :oops: My greatest sensitivity is probably emotional sensitivity though. I often find my body and my feelings working together. If I'm physically uncomfortable it can strongly affect my emotional mood. If I'm emotionally upset or at unease, I can start to feel it physically in my body. Strong emotional conflicts can actually make me ill, physically.

With logic, I think maybe it's just more of an annoyance when things are a bit ambiguous or not consistent.

With willpower it's a bit more complicated, Se is my PoLR, so I am hypersensitive to feeling pressured or having my will imposed upon or worried that maybe I'm too imposing myself. Although I haven't entirely ruled out 3V as a possibility for myself.
10-21-2016, 05:48 PM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verbrannte

@Chryssie Since you understand this and I don't, could you give me a type please?

Me first though. I responded first. :P

Oh, here's my responses to my questionnaire if that gives you a better idea.
10-22-2016, 03:55 AM
chrys

Quote:

Originally Posted by chips and underwear

Yes, I agree, the 1E sounds like a bit much. But maybe that's just the 3E reaction to the 1E. But anyway, I try to avoid reacting emotionally to that excess. I'm not what you call dramatic. Occasionally I might overreact but it's when I've been under too much stress, so it explodes and then I regret reacting that way.

2E on the other hand is mostly appropriate in their emotional reactions. Not too excessive nor too dry. The way it should be. :D

Also the descriptions are a bit stereotypical because it's like that person is exclusively that way 100% of the time. Which no one is.

Let's just say, I try to incorporate everyone's ideas and needs but I don't know how good I am at it. And sometimes if someone is being a bit unreasonable and a bit of an asshole, I don't care to incorporate that person's wants and needs. I just want that person out of my face. Sometimes its not possible to incorporate everyone's needs when the needs directly oppose one another. Or maybe you can meet them both but not at the same time.

I work a customer service oriented job in the library and I run into this problem all the time. For example- someone wants a place where they can go where they can carry a quiet conservation because there is a study group that meets. Then someone else wants *absolute quiet* no talking or background noise at all. Well we do have study rooms but even with the door shut, the sound can carry. Or when someone wants to be able to extend the checkout period or number of renewals on their items because they want more time. Then someone else complains that the wait lists are too long and the library doesn't own enough copies when the library cannot afford to purchase any more.

Ideally everyone would be satisfied but sometimes it's just not possible and for me its stressful when you try to meet the needs of people with conflicting agendas and try to smooth out conflicts. It's why I feel like I'm not very good at doing this.

Regarding potential in others. I see peoples' potential but I don't know how good I am at bringing that out. I see it more as their responsibility I guess- whether or not they want to utilize their potential. I guess it's kind of sad when people have alot of potential and choose not to use it. But I don't really see myself as a developer of others or even quite sure how to go about doing that. But if someone asks for my assistance with a specific question, I'll try best to help.

Well I am very introverted. I guess in a way I use the functions mostly for myself. My needs are first and foremost but I'm always aware that other people have needs too.

I will put in the time/effort for physical things to some extent but I don't enjoy the process usually and if I can find a way to make it more efficient, all the better. I know I have to eat but I hardly ever cook and when I do it's something I just pop in the microwave. Or if someone else doesn't mind doing the physical work, I'll let them do it. Like assembling something or cooking.

Anyway, regarding 4V description:
[4V] Fourth Willpower: Very compliant and reliable.
---Yes! Often complimented and praised by others for that.

Puts harmony over their own desires which makes them easy to get along with,
----Very often do this. It depends on how badly I want to achieve my desires. If I want something bad enough, I might be willing to fight for it risking harmony but for most everyday things, I will either give in to someone elses desires or find a way to attain it that wouldn’t compromise harmony. Generally I’m very easy to get along with.

as they generally will adjust to the wishes of others, creating a positive relation to them while avoiding conflict.
---Yes, I hate conflict and highly value positive relations with others.

Good at giving new experiences and endeavours a chance.
---Usually.

Very dependent on others and are often indecisive, making them unable to make their own choices.
---This is where I start to not relate to the description. I’m highly independent and prefer to do things on my own when I can. I can sometimes be indecisive but its not because I’m unable to make their own choices. I prefer to make my own choices. I just want to make sure I’m making a good decision over the long term and make sure that what decision is made will not cause upset or harm to anyone.

Somewhat irresponsible and will actively avoid positions of responsibility at all times if possible.
---No! I’m very responsible. If I’m accountable for something, I will admit to it and not just shift it to someone else. I often find myself taking on various positions of responsibility but usually not more than I could reasonably handle.

And now for 4^th Logic description:
[4L] Fourth Logic: Open to different points of view and explanations, and using the logic of others to understand their own life without necessarily being personally committed to a point of view or model of explanation.
---Yes, usually.

Likewise able to cut short a conversation or discussion if clear answers are not being driven from it.
---Yes, it’s annoying when people can’t quickly get to the point or give me a bunch of extraneous irrelevant information. I try to be polite though when I’m in such conversations and hide my annoyance but I will gently try to bring it back to the main point.

Intellectually dependent and can need the guidance of others to figure things out.
---Yes and no. I hate the phrase ‘intellectually dependent.’ Of course I’m capable to figure things out on my own if I really want to. I’m not stupid. It’s more a matter of, is it really worth the time and effort to do so? If someone is regarded as an expert in an area I’m not and it’s an area of not much personal interest for me, it’s going to be faster and more efficient to just consult that expert. Sometimes I enjoy the challenge of trying to figure it out on my own because I get great personal satisfaction from being able to solve it on my own. It all depends on the situation.

May present claims without the necessary reason or rationalizations behind them, as they deem these of lesser importance.
---Maybe occasionally I end up doing that out of laziness. Normally, I think it’s important to make claims that actually have sound backing and logical rationale behind them. I am interested in the reasons or rationale behind any claims. I am skeptical when there isn’t a good reason or rationale.

May base their knowledge on trusted authorities rather than who has the better arguments.
---It depends. If it’s an area where I lack knowledge, I may not know enough about the area to even know what would be considered a ‘good’ vs. a ‘bad’ argument, so I end up just trusting the authorities. But for any other other area where I at least have a passing level of knowledge, I start to question the authorities, to weigh their arguments against mine and those of other people. Just because someone is a labeled an ‘authority’ does not necessarily make that person more right.

Yeah I do, don't I? :oops: My greatest sensitivity is probably emotional sensitivity though. I often find my body and my feelings working together. If I'm physically uncomfortable it can strongly affect my emotional mood. If I'm emotionally upset or at unease, I can start to feel it physically in my body. Strong emotional conflicts can actually make me ill, physically.

With logic, I think maybe it's just more of an annoyance when things are a bit ambiguous or not consistent.

With willpower it's a bit more complicated, Se is my PoLR, so I am hypersensitive to feeling pressured or having my will imposed upon or worried that maybe I'm too imposing myself. Although I haven't entirely ruled out 3V as a possibility for myself.

Hehe, honestly I really think FLEV, LVEF, or FVEL are the best fits for you ( i know im lame for only getting three out of all this but I'm not exactly a pro here : P) I mean your Emotions as you say are most likely in 3rd, which I agree with(or at least not first or last I suppose, a very controlled and sensitive awareness of the emotional atmosphere could be either 2 or 3...). Willpower could be fourth or second, maybe both have a sense of responsibility for different reasons? The fourth probably is more likely to feel guilty for disrupting the harmony and thus feel inclined to put the desires of others over themselves, which would make them more responsible and aware of their effect on others rather than completely deny the role they take in the group. They're at least more responsible than V3, which apparently are passively wallowing in their own pity and life circumstances and refusing the social role they have on others. xD Given your... not "laziness" but unwillingness to deal with complications of the physical world, I think that it's a comfortable guess that you're not 2F, the most active of the Physics functions, and not 3F either since you much prefer to get the benefits of the physical world rather than get caught up in petty details and feel restricted by some unachievable physical lifestyle... I think 1F and 4F are very much the "simple comforts of the home" kinda people. This leaves you with LVEF, FVEL, and FLEV!

Now I'm not sure really where to go from here with the information you have. Maybe I'll read over your questionnaire as well and see what that changes. Your contempt for inconsistency and lack of clarity could easily fit into any category, especially 4L which really dislikes putting in more effort than necessary into extracting the necessary truth from a poorly put together conclusion. 3L actually in its definition claims to be put off by minor details or errors in logic, so who knows maybe you're an xELx type given this trait is more prominent than your emotional sensitivity. 2L I think would be able to look past these inconsistencies and be able to construct something out of chaos, as it is willing to take the steps to understand what an argument is saying for the purpose of learning. I don't know how 1L would react... they might just not listen or take them seriously xP
Hm... reading your questionnaire makes me feel you're less reliant on an optimal amount of Physics than I thought... you could also be 2E the way you're willing to give attention and emotional assurance to those who need it even when you're not exactly in that state of mind. Also the way you approach debates and new information doesn't feel as ... text-book reliant as say a 4L. You seem to have a decent understanding on many topics and a willingness to see how others view things (with an impatience for those who just 'know' things which is understandable, which is also a good sign you probably aren't 1L since they would feel comfortable with these kinda of people, the confident ones.)
So with that I've arrived at... LVEF and FLEV o-o ehhh I'll leave it up to your own instincts to decide cx

edit: in your questionnaire you say you define more goals than you actually accomplish, which actually is quite helpful because in Result Willpower quadras, there's a huge focus on the accomplishment of realistic goals, possibly overdoing themselves, and not exactly conserving their energy in the process. So this might allude to you being an LVEF! :0 I'd take into the account your answers about not wanting to rush through decisions and opinions on things, but this could go for most people, especially introverts who need more time to process information in general. Maybe this at least rules out 3V, the most indecisive function, since you have no trouble with getting to the answer within reasonable time. Or maybe even 4V... which might only be indecisive when left to itself, but not within a group setting.
10-25-2016, 04:54 AM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

Hehe, honestly I really think FLEV, LVEF, or FVEL are the best fits for you ( i know im lame for only getting three out of all this but I'm not exactly a pro here : P) I mean your Emotions as you say are most likely in 3rd, which I agree with(or at least not first or last I suppose, a very controlled and sensitive awareness of the emotional atmosphere could be either 2 or 3...).

3 is most likely I think, but if not 3, than 2 would be next most likely. Process oriented for sure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

Willpower could be fourth or second, maybe both have a sense of responsibility for different reasons? The fourth probably is more likely to feel guilty for disrupting the harmony and thus feel inclined to put the desires of others over themselves, which would make them more responsible and aware of their effect on others rather than completely deny the role they take in the group.

I suppose there are various reasons why I'm responsible.

1. I absolutely hate to let people down by breaking promises. So if I make a promise, I will follow through on it if at all possible. And would expect the same done for me. Sometimes people are relying on you and don't come through, then you just leave them hanging and then what? For example, you have a friend who is struggling in a class and you offer to help her out before the exam. Let's assume that friend doesn't have anyone else as suitable of a tutor as you. So you don't follow through and your friend fails the exam. Well of course I would feel like I was largely to blame and I would feel very guilty.

2. To avoid conflict. I may not want to follow through on a task but if I do, I run the risk of having people being upset at me, thinking poorly of me, etc. I have to deal with all of the negative emotional effects that would result from that (which my 3E hates!). I also don't want to risk losing relationships out of some broken promise.

3. Sometimes it's just purely for selfish reasons. I am not really invested in the task and don't really even care much about it but I have to follow through if I want to keep my job or something like that.

4. This happens less frequently but sometimes I can take responsibility for the task if I trust myself more than others to do it right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

They're at least more responsible than V3, which apparently are passively wallowing in their own pity and life circumstances and refusing the social role they have on others.

I often do find myself wallowing in my own pity and life circumstances though. :frustrated: I do try to do better my situation though. Although if I get enough 'beatings' from life, then I suppose I could have quite a resigned attitude. Kind of like why bother anymore. I feel that way to some extent in my job. I am patching together several part-time gigs because I have yet to find a full-time job in my field. It's not for lack of trying either. It's just that when you get rejected enough and people don't tell you the real reason why and don't give you useful feedback you get to a point where you wonder if its pointless to even try anymore. So now I'm getting by on my part-time work and taking a 'hiatus' from job searching.

I don't relate to the unpredictibility in the 3V description though. I wouldn't lose sight of my social role. I am well aware of the effect my actions have on others and hate to let other people down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

xD Given your... not "laziness" but unwillingness to deal with complications of the physical world, I think that it's a comfortable guess that you're not 2F, the most active of the Physics functions, and not 3F either since you much prefer to get the benefits of the physical world rather than get caught up in petty details and feel restricted by some unachievable physical lifestyle... I think 1F and 4F are very much the "simple comforts of the home" kinda people. This leaves you with LVEF, FVEL, and FLEV!

I think it's safe to say physics is result-oriented for me. Process E, result F, which means only types in sextas 5 and 6 are possible!

I'm more of a homebody than a dynamic, active person but I have moments where I can be quite active physically. Sometimes once I get active, I can be hard to stop. I'm not really a physical caregiver type either. I can be if I must but it's not all that natural for me and I'd prefer to be physically taken care *of*. So 2F unlikely.

I don't think I get caught up in too many petty physical details but I can be quite picky about cleanliness- but I think there are good reasons for that. Health and sanitary reasons. Sometimes I just like the look of a shiny shelf that's dusted off. :biggrin: I almost never feel restricted by some unachievable physical lifestyle. I'm more interested in maintaining my current lifestyle and not losing the things I value about life. Physical appearance- can be quite minimalist here. So 3F also unlikely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

I Now I'm not sure really where to go from here with the information you have. Maybe I'll read over your questionnaire as well and see what that changes. Your contempt for inconsistency and lack of clarity could easily fit into any category, especially 4L which really dislikes putting in more effort than necessary into extracting the necessary truth from a poorly put together conclusion. 3L actually in its definition claims to be put off by minor details or errors in logic, so who knows maybe you're an xELx type given this trait is more prominent than your emotional sensitivity. 2L I think would be able to look past these inconsistencies and be able to construct something out of chaos, as it is willing to take the steps to understand what an argument is saying for the purpose of learning. I don't know how 1L would react... they might just not listen or take them seriously xP

It could also be socionics related too. I previously typed myself as LII- the type very particular about logical consistency and clarity. I'm kind of between EII and LII for what its worth, leaning slightly towards EII.
I do know that when someone throws a bunch of information at me, I can easily get overwhelmed. I need quiet and concentration to sort it out, to make some sense of it. This is moreso true with things I need to learn such as for my job that I wouldn't be interested in otherwise.
With topics I'm very interested in, I'll just naturally sort through it all, although I still want to know which sources are more reliable vs. not reliable so I can get the most accurate information. (Te suggestive perhaps?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

Hm... reading your questionnaire makes me feel you're less reliant on an optimal amount of Physics than I thought...

Hmmm, can you please clarify what you mean by that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

you could also be 2E the way you're willing to give attention and emotional assurance to those who need it even when you're not exactly in that state of mind.

Also I can appreciate many different styles of aesthetics, even though I may personally prefer certain styles, I see the value in all of them. That sounds kind of 2E.

The description of 2E:
[2E] Second Emotion: Able to act as the setting requires, and empathically takes into account the feelings of everyone while providing space for others to express themselves and live out their own emotions.
--I try hard to do this and usually succeed

Has a very good understanding of the mood
--Yes

and can actively adjust their own feelings to match it or manipulate it to fit others without ever losing control or being emotionally inappropriate.
---I try hard to adjust my own feelings so they are expressed appropriately but sometimes there are doubts about how much to adjust and how. What if they can tell I'm faking happiness or some other emotion? So there is some anxiety here. I also cannot say that I don't ever lose control or I'm not emotionally inappropriate. It's rare, but it happens and then I feel really guilty afterwards for losing control.

Their love for emotional games and prodding in the emotions of others can lead to hostile reactions, due to overstepping emotional boundaries.
---Emotional games???? That just sounds manipulative. Unless they mean like gentle teasing or something which I'm prone to do. I try hard not to prod into the emotions of others and overstep boundaries. The exception would be if they are expressing emotions way out of line- like if they are really angry or rude and they're hurting someone, I might try to stop it. It's weird. I hate being personally involved in emotional drama but sometimes I like watching it from a distance when it doesn't affect me personally. Sometimes the drama on this forum can be a bit interesting............

[3E] Third Emotion: Questions emotional displays as well as their appropriateness in given situations. Encourages grounded, level-headed decision making and actively avoids emotional extremes or dramatic escalations.
--A strong yes to all of this.

Remaining sceptical pathos and emotional manipulation.
--Yes. I hate feeling like I'm manipulated emotionally and yet I easily am. I can be 'undone' by sometimes hard-luck story or tantrum. So sometimes I'll just give in to their demand to make them stop because it makes me uncomfortable.

Often actively hides or suppresses their emotional states and are worried about others reactions to them.
---Yes. I don't think I can truly suppress my feelings. Like if I'm sad, I can't just make myself happy at will. I can restrain the expression of sadness though.

Because of this emotional suppression, they are prone to being trapped in negative emotional states, without actively knowing how to process them.
---Yes, this happens all too frequently.

They are afraid of strong emotional expression as they associate that with a loss of control, and can demand such to be kept to a minimum in their environment.
---Yes, but mostly in regards to negative emotions like anger. I cannot deal effectively with people openly expressing anger. It makes me very uncomfortable and when someone is anger you have no idea what they could do or say next. They could aggressively act out violently or say really nasty insulting things to your face. Of course my fear of anger might also be related to Se PoLR.

The high emotional self-control also causes problems in personal relationships, as they will have trouble “letting go”.
---I have trouble letting go of past hurts, that is very true. I never totally let go. I may forgive, but I never forget! I do think I am 'emotionally' expressive enough in personal relationships though. If I trust someone, I tend to let it all out emotionally.

Overall, the description of 3E definitely seems closer than 2E. But I think sometimes I can pass for 2E, when I'm in a good mood or want to cheer someone up or make them laugh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

Also the way you approach debates and new information doesn't feel as ... text-book reliant as say a 4L. You seem to have a decent understanding on many topics and a willingness to see how others view things (with an impatience for those who just 'know' things which is understandable, which is also a good sign you probably aren't 1L since they would feel comfortable with these kinda of people, the confident ones.)
So with that I've arrived at... LVEF and FLEV o-o ehhh I'll leave it up to your own instincts to decide cx

I think it's the logic I'm most struggling with in this model. By elimination I could arrive at 1L but then I don't relate all that much to 1L

[1L] First Logic: A know-it-all.
--No. I'm always ready to admit I don't know everything. Occasionally, I might be perceived as such by others in areas where I know a lot, but inwardly, I'm always aware of where I need to improve my knowledge.

Readily and confidently provides clear and unambiguous answers and opinions.
--No. I qualify practically every statement I make. I never want to tell people wrong or potentially mislead them. Very few things are truly unambiguous.

They are steady, reliable sources of information and excel at giving closure to otherwise uncertain ideas and thoughts from a solid and strong framework.
--If I'm confident in my knowledge in a subject, I can be an excellent source of information for people, assisting others in understanding something better. I enjoy taking on this kind of role in subjects I know alot about.

Dogmatic and inflexible in their opinions.
--Rarely. Only with things I feel very strongly about.

Consider that their own ideas are right by default and those of others are inferior.
--Rarely. Occasionally I might be like this with an opinion on an issue I personally feel very strongly about it, but otherwise I'm not like this.

Has a very hard time admitting to mistakes and can pull up an arrogant and unapproachable facade.
--I usually openly admit my mistakes with no problem. I might have some worry about looking stupid though. Occasionally people might perceive me as arrogant or unapproachable but that could be due to other factors. Introversion? 3E?

Will often dismiss ideas not fitting their own thoughts instantly without giving them the consideration they require.
--This sometimes happens when the ideas are completely inconsistent with what I perceive to be true. I think eventually, I do take them into consideration, may even change my viewpoint with the new evidence but it takes some time to fully grasp it, integrate these new ideas, analyze how reasonable they are, etc.

And now for 2L:
[2L] Second Logic: Open minded in the traditional sense of the word and able to freely discuss everything while listening and accepting the opinions and ideas of others, giving them the reflection and thought required.
--Usually open-minded and accepting of others' ideas. I like to reflect on them, compare them with mine. The exception, might be for the few issues I feel very strongly about, it can be difficult for me to fully 'accept' others' ideas. I will still think about it, wonder why they have that opinion but may still consider it 'stupid.'

Completely able to tactfully convince the other party of their ideas, while also openly admitting to their own mistakes, thereby enlightening the world.
--Yes, this is all very true.

They may endlessly discuss ideas without reaching any kind of constructive conclusion and naturally over complexify an otherwise simple subject.
--Yes, I am prone to doing this. I often find myself over-complexifying because those details enhance understanding and without that information I may feel that understanding is incomplete.

Overall 2L fits much better than 1L.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

edit: in your questionnaire you say you define more goals than you actually accomplish, which actually is quite helpful because in Result Willpower quadras, there's a huge focus on the accomplishment of realistic goals, possibly overdoing themselves, and not exactly conserving their energy in the process.

I think 1V hugely focuses on accomplishment AND has the drive to get there. I'm not sure 4V is focused so much on that. Seems like 4V is rather unambitious, not caring that much about accomplishment, just doing what's necessary, what's required. At least from other sources I've read.

I want to accomplish goals though. I desire to be an accomplished individual, often find myself envying those whom I perceive as more accomplished than myself. (I've read this is more common for 3V, so confused again).

If the goals are required for work or for class then, yes, I will meet them all to the deadline and to the specifications. I'm very compliant that way. But if they are personal goals that aren't required in the first place, then it ends up being more like a personal development 'wishlist' than anything serious that must be done. For example, one of my personal goals is to become fluent in Spanish. It's difficult for me to set aside a specific timetable or plan that I would end up sticking to over any long term. I value my freedom too much, I don't like to be tied down. Although I do try to put in 30-60 minutes a day on average. But really it probably averages more like 15-20 minutes. Some days I will be really intense about it and once I get going, I can focus for several hours at a time, even overdoing. Then, I might go several days in a row without studying it at all.

I guess you could say I envy people that are really focused go-getters. Who have some 'niche' in their life, who have some real purpose, some accomplishment that makes them stand out and the discipline to make it happen. Who knew that all their life they wanted such and such a career. I never had that. I just want a job that I'm good at and makes me happy and pays the bills. But then again, I wouldn't like being tied down to having to practice and focus and work all the time. I like my free time to do what I please when I please. (Perhaps this might relate to reasonable/decisive dichotomy more than V position?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chryssie

So this might allude to you being an LVEF! :0 I'd take into the account your answers about not wanting to rush through decisions and opinions on things, but this could go for most people, especially introverts who need more time to process information in general. Maybe this at least rules out 3V, the most indecisive function, since you have no trouble with getting to the answer within reasonable time. Or maybe even 4V... which might only be indecisive when left to itself, but not within a group setting.

Looking over the LVEF description again more closely- I would say on the whole it fits me very well. Even the cute nerd character sketch. J The only thing that doesn’t quite fit is not hestitating to be misunderstood. Being misunderstood is very painful for me and I may not put ideas forward that have a high likelihood of being misunderstood. Also I don’t feel quite as innovative in my thinking, but I undoubtedly value it highly.

Looking at FLEV again- most of this also fits me quite well. What doesn’t quite fit- the character sketch (too ILI-like, too gloomy.) The indifference to beauty and emotion- very affected by these. The depressing view of the world. I am depressed sometimes but my view of the world is a mix of good and bad.

Hard to say which one fits me more.
Sexta 6 description does fit me more than sexta 5 (which would be my 2nd choice) So that would favor LVEF. But of course I have doubts, particularly with being 1L.

Also I wanted to add some thoughts about the 4th function. The 4th function does not imply inability! And yet the 4th function descriptions seem to be written as such. What the 4th function is- result-oriented, tends to trust other peoples' opinions more than their own, subjectively this area is of less importance to them. When you combine these qualities together, you get a sense of 'laziness' a sense of wanting 'something for nothing' to put in the minimal time needed. So for 4F- they can look like they can't physically take care of themselves. They can, they would prefer to have someone else do it if possible or just put in the very minimum. 4V can make decisions but mostly prefers others do it for them since other things tend to be more important for them. 4L can be just as intelligent as other positions of logic, but why think through something unnecessarily complicated if it has no practical use for me? 4E- can feel emotions and understand others' emotions but may not think its useful to talk or think about them endlessly.
11-24-2016, 07:21 AM
Fay

Based on reading this I think I am either ELVF or ELFV ... where can I find a test?
11-28-2016, 07:25 AM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackburry

I'm "Third emotion."
Only one that I resonated with. :-p. So.

That one was the easiest for me to determine. Although I have some characteristics of the second.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fay

Based on reading this I think I am either ELVF or ELFV ... where can I find a test?

40 question test

200 question test

Both of these tests are in Russian so you will need to translate them. I haven't been able to find any in English. Sorry.

But like Socionics, PY tests aren't always very accurate. Best to study the theory, read the descriptions, and come to your own conclusion on your type. Or ask someone who has studied it for awhile.

Not really a test, but I find this graphic particularly useful for quickly determining type.

https://c4.staticflickr.com/6/5515/3...0a3f2f2f_b.jpg
11-29-2016, 12:38 AM
Avalonia

It's wonderful to see an increase of activity in this thread, I'm glad to see people interested and engaged in this theory! I think it would be appropriate to expand on my descriptions a bit and return to this topic today with a better understanding.

To begin, I would like to eliminate the common problem that often comes with determining personality type in a newer system, especially something that you haven't been exposed to very much - finding out your type through various means. It is not a stretch to say that Psyche-Yoga is a much simpler system than socionics and what I know for certain is causing the most confusion with most people who try to find their type, they can't seem to find at least two descriptions that make sense to them AND describe the personality type effectively.

Sharing what mental picture I've created in my mind about the six different sextas, will ultimately lead to a more refined understanding of how to determine your psyche-yoga, without having to rely on a second opinion or test. What I have written is open to questions, commentary or critique.
11-29-2016, 03:29 AM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avalonia

It's wonderful to see an increase of activity in this thread, I'm glad to see people interested and engaged in this theory! I think it would be appropriate to expand on my descriptions a bit and return to this topic today with a better understanding.

Yes, it's too bad more people aren't interested but people are just hearing about this outside of Russia. Give it more time and maybe there will be more interest.
I would be interested in seeing your expanded descriptions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avalonia

To begin, I would like to eliminate the common problem that often comes with determining personality type in a newer system, especially something that you haven't been exposed to very much - finding out your type through various means. It is not a stretch to say that Psyche-Yoga is a much simpler system than socionics and what I know for certain is causing the most confusion with most people who try to find their type, they can't seem to find at least two descriptions that make sense to them AND describe the personality type effectively.

It's definitely a challenge that virtually everything besides your tumblr page is in Russian. I think that's probably the biggest barrier right there. I know for me, my challenge has been that for some of the function descriptions, none of them quite describe me. This was especially the case for me with F. Or the descriptions seem a bit too exaggerated and extreme for people to relate to. Initially I didn't choose 1L or 4F even though I'm about 95% certain now my type is LVEF in this system, obtained through reading deeper into the theory and other peoples' feedback. 1L just seemed a bit too extreme for me- too much of a know it all, too arrogant with their knowledge. Also I am open to taking other peoples ideas into consideration. But its clear that logic is my most powerful function. It wants the result and if I am going to overpower someone it will be probably be with logic. Additionally, 4F seemed too indifferent, too helpless about physical matters. With F, it's just something I don't want to have to spend alot of time on aside from what it necessary. It's not an inability so much as something that's a lower priority for you. It doesn't mean I'm totally indifferent to F. I still have foods and clothes I like and dislike. Also, wanting to quickly get the result and minimize time on the process.

When you say "can't seem to find at least two descriptions that make sense to them AND describe the personality type effectively." are you talking about the function position descriptions or the full type descriptions?

I found that when I went through just the function descriptions, I did not arrive at the right type but when I read the full type descriptions, it all made much more sense which one I most likely fit into.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avalonia

Sharing what mental picture I've created in my mind about the six different sextas, will ultimately lead to a more refined understanding of how to determine your psyche-yoga, without having to rely on a second opinion or test. What I have written is open to questions, commentary or critique.

I found the part about the sextas really interesting. They seem to be the backbone of relationships because you will tend to relate best to people in your sexta and worst to people in your opposite one. It all has to do with what functions are process oriented or result oriented. I also found sextas helpful in determining my type. It was clear to me that sexta 6 fit me the most so that helped me eliminate some other types I had been considering that did not belong to that sexta. I read the other type descriptions in my sexta and I feel like I would have really good chemistry with them, especially Dumas.

Your site is great and very understandable for someone new to the theory. I just have a couple of suggestions to improve on it. Perhaps use a platform other than Tumblr? Because the way Tumblr is designed there aren't places where you can just quickly link to other parts of the site. If you want to find something specific you might have scroll down alot. The most basic information is at the very bottom and the recent stuff- the type specific descriptions is at the top. It would make more sense to reverse the order its displayed and have quick links to various things.

Also maybe adding some stuff on the dichotomies: high/low, result/process, dominant/flexible (similar to the diagram I have in my other post above).
Or more in depth stuff about relationships between different positions of the function.
11-30-2016, 09:49 AM
Yuma

Oo~ This is so cool!
11-30-2016, 05:35 PM
The Exception

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yuma

Oo~ This is so cool!

Hi! Here's to hoping we can be duals in both socionics and psyche-yoga.
12-01-2016, 06:43 PM
Shazaam

Well obviously for me the crying hysterical girl is my dominant function (lol) and the logical asshole person is my weakest function... *and shiver/k0rpsey is vice versa so we rape each other* @lungs smirks in agreement.

But I am confused about the placement of the other two really. Still thinking about it.
12-02-2016, 12:16 AM
Shazaam

k gonna go with EVLF for me.
12-03-2016, 01:36 AM
Avalonia

If you're interested in determining your type from the specific values from the 200 question test, there's an easier way to "rank" the likelihood of what Psyche-Yoga type you are inputting the numerical values from the questionnaire on this website: http://which24type.appspot.com/index.html

Here are my results, for example: http://which24type.appspot.com/index...6;0;0;0.5;0.64

EDIT: I'm also planning on editing the machine translations, to the point where they sound more coherent and provide a sense uniqueness to each type description to better differentiate between them. (I'll also switch out some of the artwork, it might help reduce some confusion for the more visual learners currently understanding the theory.)
12-03-2016, 07:52 PM
The Exception

4 Attachment(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avalonia

If you're interested in determining your type from the specific values from the 200 question test, there's an easier way to "rank" the likelihood of what Psyche-Yoga type you are inputting the numerical values from the questionnaire on this website: http://which24type.appspot.com/index.html

The 200 question test switched me E and L around. I've done it a few times now and always seem to get EVLF even though I'm probably an LVEF. My actual type was ranked 3rd out of 24, so not too far off.

Many of the questions I wanted to answer with 'sometimes', 'occasionally' or agree with one part and not the other. It was hard to give a clear yes or no answer to many of the questions. Maybe that affects the accuracy I'm not sure. Also a few questions were awkwardly phrased- again what happens when you Russian to English.

Attachment 9150

Attachment 9151

The 40 question test on the other hand nailed me as LVEF.

Attachment 9153

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avalonia

EDIT: I'm also planning on editing the machine translations, to the point where they sound more coherent and provide a sense uniqueness to each type description to better differentiate between them. (I'll also switch out some of the artwork, it might help reduce some confusion for the more visual learners currently understanding the theory.)

I like the artwork on there already, although I will admit a few of the character sketches are rather questionable. Not your fault, I know they originally came from a Russian site.

Like Pushkin EFVL for example. Attachment 9152

It looks like she self mutilated her arms with a sharp knife. Who wants to be associated with that?
11-01-2017, 10:40 PM
chrys

I may be biased but I think that.............. if second function supposedly is both well understanding and able to understand others, wouldn't everyone strive to be 2nd in everything? This seems like a pretty faulty rule to go by, that chart that implies 1 goes by the self, 2nd by both self and others, 3rd trusts no one, 4th trusts everyone except himself.

I think I am way more centered around 2 and 3, I am doubtful and receptive. 964 tritype haha. I know nothing but also can't trust that others know more than I do.

Though that probably would make me a 2 or 3 in logic only. Still trying to figure out how the I+You thing works on other elements.

LOL if 1, 2, 3, and 4 were types in general I would be such a 3.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Myself

LOL if 1, 2, 3, and 4 were types in general I would be such a 3.

WHAT THE FUCK DID I FUCKING SAY OMG I KNEW IT I KNEW I WAS A DEGENERATE, I KNEW THAT MY PLACE OF LEAST RESISTANCE IS ACTUALLY MY ENTIRE MIND, BODY, SOUL, and ANYTHING ELSE THAT I POSSESS!

https://i.imgur.com/aNcVNSO.png

A type Probability,%

LEVF (Pascal) 5.953

ELVF (Andersen) 5.586

WELF (Akhmatova) 5.436

VLEF (Socrates) 5.080

LVEF (Einstein) 4.922

EWLF (Ghazali) 4.911

VBLHEP (Plato) 4.502

FLVE (Aristippus) 4.312

VLFE (Lenin) 4.172

LEFV (Augustine) 4.064

FEVL (Dumas) 4.062

LVFE (Lao Tzu) 4.013

VFLE (Napoleon) 3.985

VEFL (Tolstoy) 3.922

EPVL (Pushkin) 3.885

FELV (Borgia) 3.688

ELFV (Rousseau) 3.697

FVLE (Goethe) 3.637

LFEV (Berthier) 3.522

EFLV (Bukharin) 3.511

EVFL (Pasternak) 3.397

VFEL (Tvardovsky) 3.380

FLEV (Epicurus) 3.332

FVEL (Chekhov) 3.031

02-21-2018, 06:53 PM
chrys

ok I started this questionnaire 6 months ago...

F questions:

1.) Let’s say someone in your home or work space changes the thermostat. You usually keep it set at 68, and they change it to 75. How do you respond? Rate your stress level at this situation on a scale of 1 to 5, five being most stressed.
I adapt to temperature pretty well, usually there’s worse issues on my mind (not that they are always on my mind). Usually if I say “I’m gonna be okay” then nothing affects me, if I want to enjoy being cold then I will enjoy it. I will take the consequences with pride if there even are consequences. :p Stress level: 1

2.) What do you think about people who seek to acquire wealth and/or own extravagant things? Are you like this?
They are necessary because that’s what I grew up around. People always need to have a reference, if there’s no wealthy people then people will get depressed and lose hope, so shut up about that. It’s good to have outliers. I’m not at all like that really.

3.) Your significant other goes through a period of unemployment during which they are unable to help with household expenses. In this situation, your income in enough to just barely cover expenses, but a lot of sacrifices have to be made, bills aren’t always paid on time, and you’re not always sure if you’ll have enough to get by. How do you respond? Rate your stress level at this situation on a scale of 1 to 5, five being most stressed.
I don’t get stressed when I’m with other people, but at the same time I’ve never had my own household so I wouldn’t know that feeling. Let’s call it a 2.5

4.) Imagine the same scenario as above except you’re the one who’s unemployed while your SO covers expenses. Rate your stress level at this situation on a scale of 1 to 5, five being most stressed. Gimme a 5 pls, dependency sucks. I’d rather suffer not having things than depend on others. That’s like the worst feeling, something I’d try to avoid.

5.) Let’s say you’re having some people over for a meal, and there is a guest who is a fussy eaters and doesn’t like the food that you’re serving.
If this situation is realistic that means that anyone who is over at my house has been cool with me for at least a good 5 months, which means that I would have their interests already taken care of and I wouldn’t be feeding them something they don’t want. Please don’t accuse me of feeding people bad food!

6.) Alright, now let’s say that you’re a guest at a gathering and don’t like the food that’s being served. How do you respond? How stressful/irritating is it on a scale of 1 to 5? Are you a fussy eater just in general?
I’d be more uncomfortable that I don’t understand what anyone is saying since I don’t speak the language. Why don’t they speak the same language? Anyone who speaks english well wouldn’t be eating food I don’t like. Wait I take that back Americans with bad Si eat shitty fake food like cheese crusted chocolate anuses and purple-bruised pancakes, gross artifical stuff. Ok but seriously I think It would be not very stressful. I’m not sure, this question is pretty boring since I don’t know what I’m eating. I’d respond differently if i were eating child testes than say fermented shark fin. But if I don’t like the food I usually just swallow my own vomit with great disgust,... maybe a 3.

7.) Pick which of the following best represents your sexual behavior/approach:
A. I don’t really care a lot if I get off as long as my partner is satisfied. I’m content just knowing they had a good time.
B. I’m confident that I can both enjoy myself and pleasure my partner. We can try different things until we find things that satisfy each of us.
C. I want to enjoy myself, but I worry more about my partner’s pleasure. This is an area of anxiety, so I appreciate a partner that communicates their own satisfaction and also focuses on mine.
D. I’m much more focused on my own enjoyment than my partner’s. As long as they’re satisfied enough to want to do it again next time I’m in the mood, that’s enough.

E questions:

1.) Let’s say you’re having a bad day and just are in a pretty bad mood. How would you feel/respond if one of your friends contacted you because they were having an emotional breakdown and needed to vent or needed emotional support?
It would make me feel better myself, so I’d want them to tell me everything they want.

2.) Alternatively, let’s say you’re having a bad day and are in a really bad mood and a friend contacts you excited by some good news they just got and going on and on about how happy they are. How would you feel/respond?
Whurtever. I probably wouldn’t feel much.

3.) Okay, now let’s say you’re having a bad day and are in a bad mood and a friend tries to talk to you about how you’re feeling and cheer you up. How would you feel/respond?
I’d hate it, I just want it to myself. I can cheer myself up well enough if I want to. But I’d respond neutrally, it wouldn’t make me say anything different.

4.) How would you rate your taste in movies, music, literature, art, etc. compared to that of others? Are your tastes objectively better? How strongly do you feel about this? What if someone criticizes your taste in these things?
I don’t even. Objectively better >W> <W< >W> <W< are you fucking with me. The thing is… “better” can’t even be measured?! Like objective and better make sense in a scientific context where you can say a banana can kill a human better than a lemon thrown at the same speed, but what the fuck is the point to say “this song is 40dB louder than yours” or “this song lasts for 10 hours longer than your song” or “this song has higher frequencies”... do you even know what you are saying?! If someone criticizes my tastes then they do. Sorry I answered this pretty terribly. Ofc btw I think my music is way better than others’. Why wouldn’t I? It’s what provides the best emotions the best thoughts the best memories, it can’t be worse than others’ that provide the worst motions the worst thoughts and the worst memories.

L questions:

1.) How do you feel about logical debates? Is it something you put much time/energy into? Rate your stress level during intense logical debates on a scale of 1 to 5, five being most stressed.
NO! 5!

2.) If you make a statement and someone else says, “No, you’re wrong. This is how it is,” and gives you their opinion as if it’s a fact, how you do you respond? How stressful/irritating is it on a scale of 1 to 5?
I am bad at arguing with confident people who just know everything. The way some people can identify things as true or false or whatever so fast is honestly scary…. It might be a Beta ST thing. Like in video games it’s the same people who say “X person is trolling” “X person is hacking” or is the first person to say that “X person doesn’t know what he’s doing”... and here I’m like, wait where did you see this? Where I don’t see proof or evidence other people see it strongly and with confidence. I just back down because I don’t understand or care that much, let them think what they want. Especially groupthinkers, they are actually some of the worst people in my mind, I can’t stand them and want to go sleep when I see them. If someone is capable of independent thought no matter what type they are superior to every other type who can’t.

3.) Is there such a thing as overthinking? Do you do it? On a scale of 1 to 5, five being most stressed, how stressed out are you when you’re thinking intently about a situation for an extended period of time?
Yes, and yes I do overthink. I don’t usually get stressed overthinking unless it involves my relationship with people. Maybe a 5 in that case. Overthinking however could be overfeeling and overintuiting? I don’t know. Anxiety is irrational, and rarely ever involves thinking logically but rather having multiple images of where something is heading, it’s definitely doesn’t require much thinking. So I dunno. If that counts it’s a 5, if not it’s a.. Still probably a 4.

4.) Which of the following most closely matches your approach?
A.) I’m drawn to people with strong opinions about things. I don’t care to spend tons of time thinking about my own views, so if they tell me something that makes sense to me, I’m inclined to go along with them.
B.) I don’t think anyone can ever really KNOW anything for sure, and I find myself being torn between wanting to tell others that they’re wrong vs. not even being entirely sure I’m right. I know I can be difficult about this, and I appreciate it when someone patiently considers my views and offers their own in a give and take, low pressure exchange. It’s very stressful to me when someone acts like they know everything and doesn’t even consider my points. [Basically what I already said about myself]
C. I enjoy discussing my views about things at great length and considering what others have to say. This is an area of comfort and confidence for me. I’m open to changing my mind if someone makes a good case.
D.) I prefer to consider information and come to my conclusions on my own, and I’m quite confident that I’m able to reach correct conclusions. I don’t mind explaining my opinions to others if they’re interested, but I have little patience for having them picked apart by those who wish to challenge my views. I’m willing to change my mind for myself if new information is discovered, but I this doesn’t happen particularly often.

V questions:

1.) If you’re in a group of people where there’s no clear leader and decisions aren’t being made so nothing is happening, how do you respond? What do you think/feel about the way you responded?
I try to ask questions to clarify what we are doing. If no one knows then I’ll suggest something. It’s not hard at all to control a group when people are attentive to you… getting the attention is the hardest part. Alot of the times I’ll get everyone’s attention, say what needs to be done, but then let myself casually slip back into the role of just another groupie and hope someone else takes control. If not I guess I’ll just be the one appointing roles based on what i feel about their wants and capabilities.

2.) How do you react when someone tells you what to do? Assume it’s someone that you like and trust, and the specific thing that they’re telling you to do doesn’t violate any of your values. How stressful/irritating is it on a scale of 1 to 5?
I usually just say okay and do it. I couldn’t see it being stressful unless I was in a very dark room at 12AM, alone, and my friend came up behind me and whispered in my ear: “Hiii. Please assist me with a task. The Bathroom must be cleaned by 1AM or you will perish.” I’d say this is a 1.

3.) If you’re planning to do something and someone tells you not to, how do you respond? How stressful/irritating is it on a scale of 1 to 5?
I find this very irritating as I find it rude to affect someone’s will before knowing anything about what they want out of something. If they asked what I was thinking before or really just asked ANYTHING, then I would listen wholeheartedly, but I don’t listen to commands that are aggressive rather than curious/worried. So I’d say it’s a 4.

4.) If you say that you’re going to do something, how likely are you to do it on a scale of 1 to 5, five being the most likely? How likely are you to make such commitments?
1…. I never do things I say. I take years to make sense of what I want or need so if I say “I’ll do this” it’s probably out of fear.

5.) If you’re asked to take a leadership position, how do you respond both internally and externally? How stressful is it on a scale of 1 to 5?
I don’t really care initially, well depending on the task. It’s not like I’m the most knowledgeable or quick witted person on the Earth… I can be paralyzed by confusion very easily if I go into something with little information. But if I know what there is to know then… actually I still might be too indecisive. I don’t think I’m a good leader, I’m way too focused on whether things make sense internally (basically the Ji functions of Socionics) rather than executing a goal… I am slow to adapt. So a 4.

6.) How likely are you to make goals? How likely are you to accomplish those goals? How do you feel about others having goals for you?
I don’t like making goals, and when I do they are just placeholders to make everyone comfortable while internally I’m like… maybe there’s something better. When others make goals for me then it feels more justified and I’ll carry it through. Which brings me to this thought: If I don’t understand the why behind a decision then somehow it makes me feel more secure, because when I’m told why most of the time the reasoning others have is very .. poorly thought out and gives me doubts. But trusting people on faith and intuition comes way easier… as well as doubting people on faith and intuition.

General questions:

1.) In which two of the following two areas do you wish people would just stop rushing and take some time to deliberate/appreciate?
A. Coming to conclusions about their opinions on things. [While important, I don’t care usually since it’s not going to affect anyone immediately as much as choice B]
B. Making decisions about what to do. [Gives me anxiety when not done, gives me excitement when done]
C. Getting physical details right. [Wtf. Not really]
D. Experiencing and expressing feelings. [Sure but no… I want people to be people, this is too much to ask for really]

2.) In which of the two above areas do you wish people would just stop belaboring the issue and just git er done already?
A. Coming to conclusions about their opinions on things. [At some point yes, please shut up you’re making my ears tired and I’m starting to get uncomfortable]
B. Making decisions about what to do. [But this is fun…]
C. Getting physical details right. [The thing is, as a comfort oriented individual, I am able to produce comfort through harmony rather than fussing… which is why Socionics Si is pretty weird since people say it’s comfort oriented yet most Si people are fussy and detail oriented whereas that’s what creates DISCOMFORT in me, like I don’t need to know or see everything, gtfo with that shit or it’ll make me anxious. I have low ass standards, and I can make them lower if necessary.]
D. Experiencing and expressing feelings.
02-22-2018, 03:00 AM
whodat

So where do you break down the gross and subtle organic body and separate your mind for your flesh and see through the veil of the soul into the soulless void of what you are?

ooops sorry I'm i the wrong place.
03-07-2018, 11:14 PM
NdFeB08

FLEV seems to fit me; if not then FLVE as second option
03-08-2018, 05:04 PM
Myst

I understand now what V means and the different positions - looks like I'm either LFVE or FLVE or a mix of these two really, high F/L and low V/E are for sure, and 4E seems pretty set too.
03-08-2018, 08:40 PM
Dauphin

By my reckoning I am a Tolstoy (VEFL).
03-08-2018, 09:26 PM
WinnieW

I'm LEVF, most likely.
01-19-2019, 08:53 AM
Sanguine Miasma

Leaning towards LEFV. :thinking: The last two sounded quite well fitting.
04-02-2019, 09:11 PM
Subteigh

bump

Psyche-Yoga Questionnaire

[Psyche-Yoga] Sexta 1
[Psyche-Yoga] Sexta 2
[Psyche-Yoga] Sexta 3
[Psyche-Yoga] Sexta 4
[Psyche-Yoga] Sexta 5
[Psyche-Yoga] Sexta 6

Psychotic Yoga humor and memes

Perhaps it would be good to have an index thread or article somewhere of useful links (including tests).
04-02-2019, 10:14 PM
Aylen

More descriptions of the Psyche Yoga types:

http://osocionike.ru/psychosophy/

http://osocionike.ru/psychosophy/page/2/
04-03-2019, 04:37 AM
Dauphin

My last estimation was off the mark. I'm more of a VELF, at least for now.
04-03-2019, 05:16 AM
Cybernetic

I scored as LFVE on a 200 question test, but I think I relate to LFEV more. Definitely one of those two, though.

A type	Probability,%
LEVF (Pascal)	5.953
ELVF (Andersen)	5.586
WELF (Akhmatova)	5.436
VLEF (Socrates)	5.080
LVEF (Einstein)	4.922
EWLF (Ghazali)	4.911
VBLHEP (Plato)	4.502
FLVE (Aristippus)	4.312
VLFE (Lenin)	4.172
LEFV (Augustine)	4.064
FEVL (Dumas)	4.062
LVFE (Lao Tzu)	4.013
VFLE (Napoleon)	3.985
VEFL (Tolstoy)	3.922
EPVL (Pushkin)	3.885
FELV (Borgia)	3.688
ELFV (Rousseau)	3.697
FVLE (Goethe)	3.637
LFEV (Berthier)	3.522
EFLV (Bukharin)	3.511
EVFL (Pasternak)	3.397
VFEL (Tvardovsky)	3.380
FLEV (Epicurus)	3.332
FVEL (Chekhov)	3.031

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page