I want to talk about Ni

I also think the LSE Ni polr section is interesting. I don't agree w some parts--like others have said, the explosive anger is probably more like an LSE 8 thing--but I think the idea of Ni polr as the inability to see the inner state as changeable by one's own will is interesting/possibly the right way to think of it/a conceptualization I hadn't seen before. I don't see a lot of the things that people usually claim are Ni polr in my LSE 3 friend, like being really nervous about time and wanting to overplan things or whatever.

But I do think he is very inflexible in regards to his inner state. We are both at an anxiety-ridden stage of our graduate program. I quickly came to the conclusion that our anxieties are not productive & that we should simply try to manage them/find peace and keep plugging along in our work. So things like meditation would be useful, or at least realizing that it's not the end of the world if we don't end up w our first choice jobs. After realizing this, I calmed down a lot and began having a much better time. He took a while longer to realize this, and I don't know if he realized it on his own or through the many conversations we had about his sources of stress, how they're not productive to wallow in, and what to do instead, but he did eventually realize this, and I think he's doing better. Now when his stress sources pop up, he does things to distract himself from them. <___>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Economist

I also think the LSE Ni polr section is interesting. I don't agree w some parts--like others have said, the explosive anger is probably more like an LSE 8 thing--but I think the idea of Ni polr as the inability to see the inner state as changeable by one's own will is interesting/possibly the right way to think of it/a conceptualization I hadn't seen before. I don't see a lot of the things that people usually claim are Ni polr in my LSE 3 friend, like being really nervous about time and wanting to overplan things or whatever.

---

Explosiveness of LSE. I think EIIs might even take pride to control it. I tried to put myself in a sate of anger and EII was like do not show that over there. I laughed a bit inside and dropped the mask – of course I wouldn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paranoid

maybe, or maybe ESI descriptions are just poorly written.

i relate to both EII and ESI profiles, even their respective quadral complexes, but i feel like my affinity for strati's "complex of tied hands" puts me out of the running for EII.

---

In my opinion strat isn't the best for understanding some things. It seems like she relates everything to herself, as an ESI. So, she turns beta rationals into social-instinct gammas of a sort, and delta rationals into another sort of warped impression, as well as lets her own opinions influence every description way too much. Some of the other authors are a lot better at being able to step out of their own viewpoints and give less biased impressions. Her descriptions in my opinion are a good way of seeing how an ESI might see other types, but aren't a good way of understanding other types as they actually are. Purely, entirely, in my own opinion.

Edit: I think she does better with those less closely related to her own type. She paints SEEs in a really bad light (imo) but is far more fair to LIIs for example.

I think it comes down to Fi v Ti, because I get the distinct feeling she's more fair to gamma than any other quadra and gives alpha the driest descriptions. Its like she retreated into a bunch of "objective" cliches, but we have a zillion other authors for those. To me, that's not what Strats for and her unique approach is what makes her so valuable

from my point of view objectivity is kind of an illusion (in typology at this time) and really what we have are "psychological perspectives" that have the domain from which they work and people tend to gravitate towards nearby zones but the great thing about strat is she brings a unique perspective that adds to the overall depth of the picture, which gets us closer to real objectivity, even though it ostensibly leads us away in some sense, but that sense is just one aspect of a bigger picture (Ti). people on one hand often complain about socionics being fundamentally useless when you get right down to it, but I think until we penetrate to that deeper layer its applications will be limited so I feel like strat is an extremely valuable contributor. I actually think the idea that socionics being limited and then "intentionally" ignoring strat is itself a manifestation of low intuition because they fail to see how they contribute to their conclusion, when its possible it could be otherwise. Its a Ne statement and Ni way of being that I do not think captures the "real" picture, but in failing to do so contributes towards limiting the picture and the real potential of the theory. But it does so in a way I would characterize as "out of control" or "unaware to itself." The high intuition version of this would be to know that is the case and do it anyway for whatever nefarious reason, but I don't believe anyone does that because if they know enough to know that they likely also know how counter productive such a thing is, and the only reason I think they might say things to that end is if they thought it might make someone feel better and wouldn't ultimately harm any prospects anyway. That's how I picture some of that "there there, socionics doesnt mean anything anyway" talk

I mean I do think people have more or less psychological space in their head and that sometimes just adopting one coherent perspective is all they need rather than to account somehow for the myriad of all possible perspectives, but I do think on some level the people more able to do that need to make that their mission and someone like strat is really helping with that

my point is right now socioncis exists mainly in the realm of Ti and many people have limited it to its existing instantiations, thinking that as it branches out "that's not what it is" yes but that is not "all it could be"

in a sense until it starts getting validated in application (Te), it will be limited, which is ironic because I feel like the same people that on hand critique it for being limited often go on to do everything they can to keep it that way, in how they go on thinking about it (and teaching it). I feel like until we can somehow tie together what strat is hitting on and all the authors are hitting on, reinin especially, we will be constrained to lower level "interpretations" of the socionics idea, but the ultimate goal is the find the ways in which they are unified by universal principles, and socionics has laid the groundwork to do that, and when we can do that it will transcend these "objectively useless" "personal models" of socioncs and become truly useful in a more "objective sense." This doesn't necessarily have to be Te, it could be Fe, if the "germ" of socionics gets "out there" and becomes more a part of the lexicon. Imagine how much conflict could be avoided if we could bring a real understanding of projections to the world... in any case a myriad of perspectives needs to be embraced because of how they contribute to the depth of the pool upon which we draw, and not "clamped down on" as I see so often

there's an ethical saying "walk a mile in someone's shoes before condemning them" in the same way I believe you "can't critique what you don't understand" is the thinking version of the first, because it shows how we often rush to judgement and in doing so short shrift ourselves from the possible good more productive outcomes that exist... I feel like people should focus on seeing the world from strats perspective first rather than from eliminating it from the realm of consideration in principle. I know that is perhaps my mission not someone else's, so I don't mean to put this on anyone but I feel like that is the way forward so I don't like it when people dismiss her or rush to judgement as I see it, without having seen what's really there and how it is incredibly insightful and valuable

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Economist

Does an IEI ever purely express a real desire (that they will not eventually achieve) for the sake of expressing it (as opposed to for the sake of some other greater desire that they will achieve through expressing this unachievable desire)?

---

If I want something difficult, I'll probably try to achieve it in some reduced form. If I want something impossible, I'll try to drum up the accompanying mental state and imagine what that'd be like. You know all of the various gimmicky applications for virtual reality that are coming out? Ni paradise. Create a fascimile of what something feels like so you can satisfy your curiosity for what it is like. A simulation.

Quote:

---

I also really liked the part about Ni being like the brain watching itself. I don't remember the exact words you used, and I can't find the part again, but one of my ILI friends experiences this a lot. He often gets the sensation of being completely detached from himself and just watching himself. Or, his brain watches his brain form patterns. The interesting thing is, he assumed everyone has these sensations. I think that's another characteristic of your lead function--it's like breathing to you, so you assume all human beings also have the cognition associated with your lead function--at least, until you learn socionics. :p

---

Accurate. It really throws me for a loop that that isn't "normal". I feel like there's my thoughts, which just are, then there's a narrator in my head, who generally thinks in first person plural, and makes note of what those thoughts are about and what they're for and which ones we want to hold onto and which ones we should let go. The narrator gives me topics to think about and I use my imagination, my logic, etc. to fulfill those mental tasks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unsuccessfull Alphamale

Explosiveness of LSE. I think EIIs might even take pride to control it. I tried to put myself in a sate of anger and EII was like do not show that over there. I laughed a bit inside and dropped the mask – of course I wouldn't.

---

it seems to me EIIs, moreso than most, know how to deal with more than just their dual. I feel like their reach spans the entire socion in some way. Its like if IEI is the "mirage of all the socion", EII is like "the benefactor" or some other relation wherein they seem to be able to find psychological leverage over almost anyone

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stellafera

If I want something impossible, I'll try to drum up the accompanying mental state and imagine what that'd be like.

---

and in some sense really achieve the thing, because the mental state is usually what I feel people want anyway by going about their goals, or at least a large part of it

this is how eckart tolle can achieve bliss on a park bench or how IEI can achieve in the corner, at a party, far more than what anyone else will actually accomplish that night, etc etc


and this is why I would say if you're not living this in some way you're probably not x type. which I want to point out was my point in my OP about the merit of phenomenological description in sorting things out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

.

---

I didn't suggest eliminating it - only seeing it in context. In other words, see it as the perspective it is. This doesn't mean ignoring her viewpoint nor her descriptions, only recognizing their strengths AND limitations. You tend to get a bit overzealous regarding the strengths and then become guilty of ignoring the shortfalls.

what can I say, love makes fools of us all

I feel like what LSI sometimes unwittingly does is request or even demand a "finished product" by submitting it to their characteristic Ti critique, wherein they inspect the piece for any weaknesses that might prove limiting in the creative application of the thing (Se). But what they fail to realize the immense complexity sometimes that goes into the development of the thing (especially its transformations over time), so by rejecting it for failure to meet "final standards" they sometimes unknowingly make implications about the prospects of the thing and in doing so can impede a things development, by sort of cutting it off at the knees.

They're not of course trying to do that, they're looking at it from the point of view of "ready to test it out" not how to contribute to "abstract R & D" but other people look upon this judgement as "objective" (because Ti can be very persuasive and authoritative) and can be mislead as to the value of other assessments (including their own) coming from other psychological programs and in doing so "give up" in participating in what they think is viewed as a "flawed project" so I want to prevent that from happening because I think we need everyone at the right time, not people bowing out because they misunderstood LSI as prognosticating when LSI was really requesting more not advocating less information contribution

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

this is how eckart tolle can achieve bliss on a park bench or how IEI can achieve in the corner, at a party, far more than what anyone else will actually accomplish that night, etc etc

---

Yeah, although IxIs really need to jolt themselves into having actual experiences sometimes. Otherwise you can end up with an imagined theory of reality based off of near-nothing.

Reminds me of my middle-school journals full of condescending "writing advice" that I gleaned from other people's writing advice. I taught myself all about how you're supposed to write a good, genuine narrative, but spent no time writing anything sincere. Years later, I found my little writing manifestos in a moving box. All of them were terrible pretentious garbage. My elementary school stories were better. They were goofy, but they made me actually laugh, because I wasn't in my own head the whole time and actually wrote some damn narratives. IxIs need Se once in a while or else they basically become middle school kids.

yeah absolutely ILI gets super weird and in his own world sometimes and I feel like if Im saying that it must be bad, cause im not exactly innocent either

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

what can I say, love makes fools of us all

I feel like what LSI sometimes unwittingly does is request or even demand a "finished product" by submitting it to their characteristic Ti critique, wherein they inspect the piece for any weaknesses that might prove limiting in the creative application of the thing (Se). But what they fail to realize the immense complexity sometimes that goes into the development of the thing (especially its transformations over time), so by rejecting it for failure to meet "final standards" they sometimes unknowingly make implications about the prospects of the thing and in doing so can impede a things development, by sort of cutting it off at the knees.

They're not of course trying to do that, they're looking at it from the point of view of "ready to test it out" not how to contribute to "abstract R & D" but other people look upon this judgement as "objective" (because Ti can be very persuasive and authoritative) and can be mislead as to the value of other assessments (including their own) coming from other psychological programs and in doing so "give up" in participating in what they think is viewed as a "flawed project" so I want to prevent that from happening because I think we need everyone at the right time, not people bowing out because they misunderstood LSI as prognosticating when LSI was really requesting more not advocating less information contribution

---

You and your edits. . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paranoid

i think i'd prefer anything over a noose tied around my neck which is pretty much what a relationship with an LIE amounts to, really

---

LIE's aren't really controlling... but I don't know what you were referring to here really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paranoid

for me it was just uncomfortable to witness you (or anyone, really) treat an interpersonal arrangement as an opportunity to capitalize on another person's weakness(es) for your own means, which is your prerogative, but still. irrespective of socionics, i don't think it's anyone's responsibility except your own to take the heat for your words and actions, it's pretty inconsiderate to use another person as a protective shield (or, as you say, "a weapon") which hints at cowardliness. for the time being i've settled on LIE-ESI duality being shit. if there's any validity to the system then i'll gladly take the ESIs so they don't have to settle for opportunistic money-bags with no balls or a backbone. [insert joke to lighten the tension here]

---

Based on my experiences with LIEs, they don't see a close relationship as "an opportunity to capitalize on another person's weakness(es) for own means". They do have a hidden vulnerable side :) If that was your problem...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squark

You and your edits. . .

---

I actually feel like this is the basis for IEE LSI conflict which is IEE is offering provisional insight and LSI critiques from the point of view of a finished product and they each have their point but they get into a death spiral in trying to make themselves understood without really seeing the broader dynamic

yes it would be a mistake to build a bolshevik regime on strats ideas, but its not really the point, even though I may sometimes come off as potentially advocating such a thing :)

I think she presents an extremely important step in the ladder upward

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

I actually feel like this is the basis for IEE LSI conflict which is IEE is offering provisional insight and LSI critiques from the point of view of a finished product and they each have their point but they get into a death spiral in trying to make themselves understood without really seeing the broader dynamic

yes it would be a mistake to build a bolshevik regime on strats ideas, but its not really the point, even though I may sometimes come off as potentially advocating such a thing :)

I think she presents an extremely important step in the ladder upward

---

I thought you were just taking Wyrd's advice (in the other thread) and editing in something someone wouldn't agree with, after they liked it. :hide:

no its more like the thought had to occurred to me seconds after I posted the initial comment and i didn't want to doublepost so i edited it in before I saw anyone had liked it

i feel weird having to state this, but I don't mess with people just to do it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

no its more like the thought had to occurred to me seconds after I posted the initial comment and i didn't want to doublepost so i edited it in before I saw anyone had liked it

i feel weird having to state this, but I don't mess with people just to do it

---

I was just teasing you. :halo:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylen

I was just teasing you. :halo:

---

you've again managed to perfectly recreate the feeling I get around most ESE, congrats

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

what can I say, love makes fools of us all

I feel like what LSI sometimes unwittingly does is request or even demand a "finished product" by submitting it to their characteristic Ti critique, wherein they inspect the piece for any weaknesses that might prove limiting in the creative application of the thing (Se). But what they fail to realize the immense complexity sometimes that goes into the development of the thing (especially its transformations over time), so by rejecting it for failure to meet "final standards" they sometimes unknowingly make implications about the prospects of the thing and in doing so can impede a things development, by sort of cutting it off at the knees.

They're not of course trying to do that, they're looking at it from the point of view of "ready to test it out" not how to contribute to "abstract R & D" but other people look upon this judgement as "objective" (because Ti can be very persuasive and authoritative) and can be mislead as to the value of other assessments (including their own) coming from other psychological programs and in doing so "give up" in participating in what they think is viewed as a "flawed project" so I want to prevent that from happening because I think we need everyone at the right time, not people bowing out because they misunderstood LSI as prognosticating when LSI was really requesting more not advocating less information contribution

---

The "finished thingy" as you describe at length with everything else is probably just Ne PoLR.

Not sure how I'm to interpret the last part, requesting more information while others don't realize this? Actually yes that fits me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

you've again managed to perfectly recreate the feeling I get around most ESE, congrats

---

You have a distorted of view of ESE then. ESE are usually nicer than I am. :p In fact most of the values you state you have, they have too. Anyone can see that I am not ESE, of all types, except you. I think you need to learn the types before you mistype yet another person which is something I see you do frequently. Remember when I told you that SEE you felt so sorry for was not an SEE but most likely an Fe lead? Yeah, it is true. You expressing so much in one thread has allowed me to see how it fits your perception of types.

Now think on this, ESE's are actually your dual. How do you feel about that now that you see it all falling into place? It is not falling into place yet? Give it some time, it will. You know that nagging feeling you get when someone talks about SEEs...

I don't think you have made the connection here that you are continuously using Ti which is a pity. You do not sound like an LIE. This rambly stuff that basically says nothing is not Ni and certainly not Te. You are confusing it for Ni. You probably have preconceived ideas of how alpha types are due to your family or whatever. Just accept you are alpha and you can drop those judgments.

What is it with guys typing me their conflictor on this site? They are typing me their dual by doing that and don't even know it. You are not the only one. I wasn't going to say anything but when I see your posts now I see certain shades of pink. I looked for an image to show someone what I was talking about seeing when you post...this was perfect. It is the energy signature you are giving off to me and with each new posts it gets stronger.

http://i.imgur.com/5X1q0Bl.jpg


Just admit it is possible to dislike people other than a conflictor? I realize you were self typing ILI when you first typed me ESE.

Edit: I gave you an opportunity to explain how I am ESE in the typing of forum members thread but you didn't. That is because you can't. I guess you needed to get it out of your system by bringing it up now.

@Bertrand
yeah, my bad. i forgot that you take on that tone (somewhat critical whilst acknowledging any potential background bias) wrt all your observations, but a tiny part of me hoped that you'd do the cliche "knight devoted to his princess" thing, yet instead of gamma bertrand swooping in to save his pseudo-scientific gamma love, it was the opposite. i think i was just caught off guard at the time, but my jokes were too harsh. (but c'mon, it was funny banter)

tl;dr i just wanted the princess-knight analogy to be reality ok

@Myst haha i don't have a problem with bertrand. i just took issue with the way that he phrased a few things in his post(s) which he re-clarified later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squark

In my opinion strat isn't the best for understanding some things. It seems like she relates everything to herself, as an ESI. So, she turns beta rationals into social-instinct gammas of a sort, and delta rationals into another sort of warped impression, as well as lets her own opinions influence every description way too much. Some of the other authors are a lot better at being able to step out of their own viewpoints and give less biased impressions. Her descriptions in my opinion are a good way of seeing how an ESI might see other types, but aren't a good way of understanding other types as they actually are. Purely, entirely, in my own opinion.

Edit: I think she does better with those less closely related to her own type. She paints SEEs in a really bad light (imo) but is far more fair to LIIs for example.

---

agreed. i enjoyed her quadral complexes articles because i could see past the satirical exaggerations and unearth the "gold" buried within, which was quite insightful imo, but the rest didn't fly with me. i just didn't understand why she'd paint such an unflattering portrait of her own type. i can understand being hard on other types since she may lack the necessary insight into their hidden motives and thought processes to make qualitative observations, but, in this particular case, the opposite seemed to be true. overall strat's work is insightful but it requires a little bit of wading before i finally unearth the "gold".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylen

Edit: I gave you an opportunity to explain how I am ESE in the typing of forum members thread but you didn't. That is because you can't. I guess you needed to get it out of your system by bringing it up now.

---

I'm just telling you how you make me feel. The rest seems like Ti seeking to me. Sorry you got Fi when you want Ti, but maybe one of our LIIs or ILEs can explain it all better

@Aylen boys are mean to girls they like.

it is true, I do a lot of things sometimes perceived as mean because I really do care

you only care about meeting your daily quota wrt the swear jar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paranoid

@Myst haha i don't have a problem with bertrand. i just took issue with the way that he phrased a few things in his post(s) which he re-clarified later.

---

I wasn't talking about Bertrand, just about LIEs :) (No offense but I don't think Bertrand is LIE.)

Quote:

---

agreed. i enjoyed her quadral complexes articles because i could see past the satirical exaggerations and unearth the "gold" buried within, which was quite insightful imo, but the rest didn't fly with me. i just didn't understand why she'd paint such an unflattering portrait of her own type. i can understand being hard on other types since she may lack the necessary insight into their hidden motives and thought processes to make qualitative observations, but, in this particular case, the opposite seemed to be true. overall strat's work is insightful but it requires a little bit of wading before i finally unearth the "gold".

---

Unflattering seems subjective? I didn't see it that bad (ESI description). Or the other types either. More like realistic, showing good and bad sides too. Maybe a bit heavy in presentation of the bad but I don't mind that. True tho' that it requires wading lol, those long articles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paranoid

the swear jar bux

---

you could say im linear in that sense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

Unflattering seems subjective? I didn't see it that bad (ESI description). Or the other types either. More like realistic, showing good and bad sides too. Maybe a bit heavy in presentation of the bad but I don't mind that. True tho' that it requires wading lol, those long articles.

---

yeah, i think i just have an unusually low tolerance for negativity in general. in "the complex of tied hands" article, strat goes into detail about the gambling habits of LIE and it felt a lot like i was peeking into another woman's diary. "wait... huh?" but i still think the quadral complexes articles bare solid insights. i just prefer DarkAngelFireWolf69's work, especially forms of cognition, but it may have just been his writing style. it could be hot air for all i know.

"IEI as if in a kaleidoscope sees whimsical iridescent imagery, dissolving then receding in flux."
"LII grasps the problem from opposite sides, mentally rotating the situation in three dimensions around its semantic axes."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

I'm just telling you how you make me feel. The rest seems like Ti seeking to me. Sorry you got Fi when you want Ti, but maybe one of our LIIs or ILEs can explain it all better

---

My Fi is more than you can handle. You should really trust me on that because I don't think you want to see it. It is 4D and demonstrative. You don't have to worry about my Se though. It is rather weak, not 4D as the type you project on me. I am not going to do the caregiving type thing you are looking for to make you feel good about yourself and prop up your ego.

All jokes aside, I am serious about you using Ti though. Your Fi also appears to be your role function. It is pretty obvious that you ignore Te in favor of Ti. It didn't take much for me to explain to others you use Ti after I showed them the Jung excerpt on Ti and Te. I just think you are more neurotic than some LII so maybe that is enneagram related. Jung's description fits you so well. It seems like it was written about you. I don't know if you read it but I posted it a couple pages back.

About your Fi role, I think this sums things up from your behavior on the forum.

Quote:

---

Fi as Role Function

The individual recognizes the existence and importance of personal relationships, so he is usually cautious at first about offending others if he does not know them well. To minimize this risk he adheres somewhat simplistically to the relevant social conventions (e.g. political correctness). However, if taken too far this produces stress, as it inhibits his natural introverted logic (Ti) inclination to voice exactly what his thoughts are on a given issue or situation, with the expectation that others will appreciate his straightforwardness, rather than accusing him of being insensitive. This caution gradually disappears as he gets to know people better. He prefers to develop relationships indirectly with others based on open conversation and common activities, and only reveals his innermost personal feelings to those he has known for a long time. He may become confused and suspicious if they are directly solicited by others.

---

I suppose you thought I would appreciate your straightforwardness by retyping me? I kind of do. It is better than hearing about it through the grapevine.

I believe your words betray you, even while self typing LIE or ILI. I notice things I store away for future use. I saw Adam had liked some of your posts but I wonder what exactly he was liking in them? It seems anyone who writes walls of rambly stuff get typed Ni ego regardless of the content but the difference between you and Adam is that he uses Te frequently.

I am actually trying to help you here because I think you have created your own narrative of types, in your head, that don't match up to reality. You don't even vibe gamma. You are too light and pink. You don't understand the duality of gammas and you are almost as bad as Adam when it comes to describing ESI. I don't know where that comes from...

My Ti is just fine I don't need you to help me with anything but if I need some help I will go to someone I trust knows what they are talking about. ;)

FTR, I don't like to be the one pointing out the emperor has no clothes, since it tends to be children and fools who can see it clearly, but when you responded to me I decided the timing was perfect and I was waiting for the perfect time to get this all out. If there are ESI here that can't relate to your perception of them, it is for good reason. You are not their dual. I don't want to hurt your feelings here but this has gone on long enough behind the scenes.


Edit: Almost everything he expresses is just a sham but if you pay attention you will notice what he is pretty consistent with. Here is how it has been so far, he hates Fe, and particularly beta, when he self typed delta. Hates Fe, in and particularly alpha SFs, as a gamma. Now he is self typing beta and is starting to hate on Fi and delta. This is not how Ni operates. He is seriously confused and has trouble connecting dots. You may disregard any typing I give him since I am just returning the favor when he wants to battle type. The more he posts the more I can insert pieces in their proper place, eventually I will see something emerge from my observations. The issue with typing Bert is separating his core traits, values, function from those he desires, then allowing that to come together. It does take time so as always every typing I make is tentative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

I'm just telling you how you make me feel. The rest seems like Ti seeking to me. Sorry you got Fi when you want Ti, but maybe one of our LIIs or ILEs can explain it all better

---

One other thing you should know, I am not making you feel anything since I have hardly had any interaction with you outside of a few threads, even then it was brief. Maybe that is your Fi role in play? Your Fi would be 2D so you might have as much trouble sorting it out as I do dealing with Si.

So keep in mind if you interact with me, in the future, I am nothing like your projection of me. Your feelings about me do not even intersect with the reality of me. What you are feeling is mostly related to your past associations with certain types of expression. The reality is that you probably do not know what you are really feeling (weak Fi and Fe).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paranoid

yeah, i think i just have an unusually low tolerance for negativity in general. in "the complex of tied hands" article, strat goes into detail about the gambling habits of LIE and it felt a lot like i was peeking into another woman's diary. "wait... huh?" but i still think the quadral complexes articles bare solid insights. i just prefer DarkAngelFireWolf69's work, especially forms of cognition, but it may have just been his writing style. it could be hot air for all i know.

"IEI as if in a kaleidoscope sees whimsical iridescent imagery, dissolving then receding in flux."
"LII grasps the problem from opposite sides, mentally rotating the situation in three dimensions around its semantic axes."

---

I know another Jack, as far as I can tell, who is a compulsive gambler. he works like super hard to maximize the amount of money he makes in his hourly shift, just to blow it at the casino. it sounds ridiculous but I think he really thinks hes going to "outsmart" the casino somehow so the money spent is like an investment. I really do think that's how Jack looks at a lot of his other ventures that likewise look crazy from the outside. failure is not failure its feedback taken to an extreme can turn into absurdities but you have to consider from a weak Fi point of view it may be his best hope in some messed up way. I think calculations of that kind are desperate on a level only once removed from criminality but people do behave in that way. When strat talks frankly about the dark side I believe it lends authenticity to it and is done out of care. I don't believe she just points out "flaws" gratuitously, and I sympathize with her because I think people view a lot of my "contributions" in the same negative light. But I believe there's an element of sincere care trying to understand and explain those negative phenomenon; to get one's hands dirty so to speak. I see deep sacrifice in that, because people won't understand, but I feel being willing to go there is the only possible path forward sometimes

I will add that I enjoy Bertrand's posts a lot. And I am assuredly Ti ego. Take that for what you will.

thinking types are bros is what that is as far as I can tell. its a mutual love for presenting shit logically. I often find myself enjoying ILE and LII in particular, because I get to choose up front that I'm interestedin what they have to say. Living with logicals can be tedious when they're on about stuff you don't want to fuss over, but when you can go on youtube and look up hubert dreyfuss lectures on heidegger and get a Ti mega dose of existentialism its frikkin cool. I feel like Te works the same way toward Ti, when Te isn't going on about business but is adding a Te perspective on topics interesting to the interlocutor like socionics, of course they appreciate one another. its socionics + logic that brings types together! :hyper:

i also think Te can be intellectually dishonest sometimes when its expedient for them to do so, in that sense they're more prone to "abuse their power"--I think if Te types can get over that and learn to think in terms of the value of accurate and not simply "expediently useful" knowledge and claims, it allows the types to get along much better

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylen

One other thing you should know, I am not making you feel anything since I have hardly had any interaction with you outside of a few threads, even then it was brief. Maybe that is your Fi role in play? Your Fi would be 2D so you might have as much trouble sorting it out as I do dealing with Si.

So keep in mind if you interact with me, in the future, I am nothing like your projection of me. Your feelings about me do not even intersect with the reality of me. What you are feeling is mostly related to your past associations with certain types of expression. The reality is that you probably do not know what you are really feeling (weak Fi and Fe).

---

Tbh I don't think @Bertrand is a Ti valuer but he's definitely no Te lead since it's painfully clear that he's introverted in his orientation. All his way of thinking (I don't necessarily mean thinking as in Logic) as presented is subjectively oriented in the sense of it being introverted.

You could be right about the 2D Fi however, I used to consider SLI for him, I guess I don't know him well enough to say if ESI or SLI.

PS: I should've put this in the forum members type thread, if anyone replies to this here, I'll go over there and respond there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

Tbh I don't think @Bertrand is a Ti valuer but he's definitely no Te lead since it's painfully clear that he's introverted in his orientation. All his way of thinking (I don't necessarily mean thinking as in Logic) as presented is subjectively oriented in the sense of it being introverted.

You could be right about the 2D Fi however, I used to consider SLI for him, I guess I don't know him well enough to say if ESI or SLI.

---

Actually SLI was my first impression of him when he joined but the overwhelming match up to Jung's description of Ti (especially a certain type of Ti) is hard for me to ignore. I guess I could see where he is treating it somewhat as a joke and making fun of it which is in alignment with SLI having 4D Ti. I might consider it again. I just don't think he is a gamma. The Te egos I know leave no room for me to doubt their use of Te yet Bertrand does not seem particularly strong with it and doesn't even seem to value it with me. I am aware there may be other issues here that are influencing so maybe I should not be so hard on him.

Edit: Almost everything he expresses is just a sham but if you pay attention you will notice what he is pretty consistent with. Here is how it has been so far, he hates Fe, and particularly beta, when he self typed delta. Hates Fe, in and particularly alpha SFs, as a gamma. Now he is self typing beta and is starting to hate on Fi and delta. This is not how Ni operates. He is seriously confused and has trouble connecting dots. You may disregard any typing I give him since I am just returning the favor when he wants to battle type. The more he posts the more I can insert pieces in their proper place, eventually I will see something emerge from my observations. The issue with typing Bert is separating his core traits, values, function from those he desires, then allowing that to come together. It does take time so as always every typing I make is tentative.

Bert's Ti and Te could be weak considering recent behavior. Alpha or Gamma SFs are not off the table. Perhaps even that evil SEI he talks about :p

Really no idea but probably not base Ni or ego. If Ti probably this type:

"Ti: Introverted Thinking

• Detaching completely from the outside world to pursue an obsessive, internal search for "truth"
• Becoming stuck on a single aspect of something that "does not compute" with the whole"

i'm sure you guys can work out a meaningful consensus if you put your heads together

I replied in the members type thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1207143

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stellafera

Yeah, although IxIs really need to jolt themselves into having actual experiences sometimes. Otherwise you can end up with an imagined theory of reality based off of near-nothing.

Reminds me of my middle-school journals full of condescending "writing advice" that I gleaned from other people's writing advice. I taught myself all about how you're supposed to write a good, genuine narrative, but spent no time writing anything sincere. Years later, I found my little writing manifestos in a moving box. All of them were terrible pretentious garbage. My elementary school stories were better. They were goofy, but they made me actually laugh, because I wasn't in my own head the whole time and actually wrote some damn narratives. IxIs need Se once in a while or else they basically become middle school kids.

---

@Medusa

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

i'm sure you guys can work out a meaningful consensus if you put your heads together

---

What, you think this is some kind of democratic consensus process? I appoint myself judge and jury in your case. You now stand accused of being pink and fluffy, like a SEI's throw pillow. :p In my court of law you are guilty until proven sane.

I see what you are doing here. I can reach a conclusion on my own. I promise you that I have no intention of consulting with @Myst on your type, let alone come to a consensus. At the end of the day socionics will not help people like you with their intertype relationships. I see it having no positive influence on you at all since it only seems to reinforce your own prejudices. I am still laughing at your claim that SEI are evil and how you backtracked when called out for it. After all this time on the forum you have learned nothing about real people. When socionics replaces critical thinking it is time for a reality check.

Having said that, most of what you say points to you being nothing more than a troll so what I said above is more for others who might be into socionics and lost their own sense of perspective on human relations. I just don't understand why a troll would spend hours writing out his manifesto on intertype relationships unless he is unemployed and/or bored with life?

Anyway, you switched types, as I knew you would, even while you were so dramatically defending the honor of your, then, "SEE" dual... hint: she is ESE.

Interesting how you are now roleplaying what you think a Lie would look like. You wouldn't happen to be a furry too? I heard that is an alpha thing. I won't judge you... I imagine you are priming us for the day you proclaim yourself Hamlet, start a cult of feeble minded worshippers, play the part perfectly... That is until they all realize you are a false prophet, turn on you, offer you up as a sacrificial lamb to Dolos . Your final act of self typing will be when you yell out "plot twist I am ESE!" as you explode in a thunderous crescendo of extroverted feeling. Dolos claims your lifeless body to feed on and your soul to do his bidding, for eternity.

The oracle has spoken. Your fate is sealed.

https://media.wired.com/photos/59372...-DevilCard.gif

ALL HAIL DISCORDIA!

~~Fin ~~

alright, well, thanks

So many leaky ideas everywhere in socionics. You can try to patch one at a time, but not all. Even if you manage, it is all likely to erupt at any time.