Printable View
This thread is a dumpster of all kinds of tongue-in-cheek guidelines about Socionics, in the stereotypical style of Olimpia/Medusa/Cassandra/Sisofnight.
I will most likely also include Enneagram related "nuggets of wisdom". :P
Enjoy. ;)
P.S.: Don't take everything I'll say here too seriously... if you can.
Only listen to DarkAngelFireWolf69 when he's not using a model. His models are bs. The rest is fine.
Romance styles are real, but so are natural dynamics... Women cannot penetrate people with their vaginas, so... Take sex differences into account.
If you are proud of being an intuitive, your self esteem is either incredibly fragile and Low and that's the only way you feel good about yourself, or most likely you are just a try hard sensor.
If you don't suck at physical appearance stuff in some way, you are not an intuitive. However, the reverse doesn't apply.
If you are a "pussy", chances are you are either type 9 (core or at least wing) and/or IxFx.
No, extroverted 5s don't exist.
No, introverted 7s don't exist.
If you self type as ILE 5, you are likely LII-Ne 5.
If you self type as Ixxx 7, something's wrong with you. You are probably a try hard 9 or 5. Stop it.
When someone is a fairly intelligent and creative female ESI-Fi type 4, there's a 100% chance they'll self type as IEI.
This is most likely associated with Fe, not any Intuitive functionQuote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
If somebody reads up on Jung’s definition of the Introverted Intuitive type and doesn’t understand it, or relate to it, they are not an IxIQuote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
Filatova's facial profiles should never be the foundation of V.I. or serious typing.
Whenever someone pulls up those pics, saying "look, I look like this type" as a justification of their self typing, I'm internally facepalming myself.
Just because you get what you self type as as your test result, doesn't mean it's true.
Most tests only give clues about how you (ideally) see yourself or what IEs you may value or what functional strengths you may have. But it's rare that a test gives you signs of all three. It's usually one of the three.
Descriptions of information elements > general descriptions of types.
Type your Ego functions. That's it.
No, not all ESIs are stuck up traditional house wives type 6 style. You can safely ignore those descriptions. Unless you're looking for a Russian ESI 6 wife. Then by all means, indulge in them.
When a guy is aggressively pursuing you, it's safe to say he's not a Victim type. Unless he's LIE 8. Like Christian Grey. Yay.
Type 9s easily can come across as having weak Se and/or stronger Fe without necessarily being so.
On a similar token, types with weakened Se often seem core 9 without necessarily being so.
If you have to someone irrational friendly feelings and personal trust - he can be your dual. O not to be because of non-types factors. Yea, life can be difficult.
they do this with own "logic"Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
There's a huge misconception regarding Temperament and Conscientiousness.
No, not all j types are high in conscientiousness, and not all p types are low in it.
Or in other words, just because you're lazy and disorganized doesn't mean you are p.
There are lazy js (mostly Ij) and industrious ps (mostly Gamma) in the world.
"The love of your life" is not automatically your Dual.
On the same token, people who you find the most attractive are not automatically your Dual. (See Imago.)
Don't base your self typing on who you find attractive. It will most likely result in a mistyping.
Again. Type your Ego functions.
All females on this forum are ESI, unless there's evidence for the contrary.
Note: Evidence doesn't exist for Te PoLR.
:P
If this thread offends you, you are either Fi ego or not Se valuing. :P
If you are a male IxFx or INTx, there is a very high chance you won't end up with your Dual.
Sorry.
What? Isn't Christian Grey into bondage? And isn't bondage mostly Delta?Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
I will admit, I can't think of a single instance of which I'm personally aware where a Victim type actively chased an Aggressor*. Except me, and I actually am an LIE e8. But I'm not into bondage. :)
FWIW, if a woman actively chases me, as opposed to simply saying Yes (mostly) to my suggestions for closer relations, I tend to panic. That might be traceable to my being smothered for many years by my LSE mother. As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.
Hence, I want to do the chasing. Absolutely at first. But I also want the chasing to be accepted and reciprocated.
*I was going out with an IEI female who was the first one to hint that maybe we should consider each other in our future relationship plans, but that's pretty far from being an Aggressor.
The search for the perfect Dual is ultimately doomed.
No one is perfect. Not even your Dual.
This thread is pretty funny. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
You sound like you have temporarily fallen into black despair, and you need someone to bring you a beer and some flowers.
First of, Christian Grey is a female fantasy. That already skews things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Strange
Having said that, he's indeed LIE-Te in my estimation. He clearly values Se. His Se HA is off the charts. And he's very much a pseudo aggressor gone wild. He's as Aggressor as an LIE could ever be. Which is likely unrealistic.
Yeah it's mostly true that a lot of bondage enthusiasts are Delta, but not exclusively so...
Fun, I will follow this!
Maybe I should watch that movie sometime, but something about it doesn't appeal. IDK what.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
The mysterious 3-subtype doesn't exist in real life.
Christian Grey is a good example of an LIE-3Te. He's not real, ladies.
Wait, I know a guy who tested LIE-3Te. He's Iranian and single, very male but not attached, and he seems kind of gentle and ironic. He said he prefers heavier women because thin ones are, in his opinion, neurotic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
He does seem to have a hard time making long-term life decisions, though, which I attribute to very low Ni.
100% chance he's mistyped. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Adam Strange
@Number 9 large:
:lol:Quote:
dat feel when in socionics betas are alphas and alphas are betas
If you are Sx/So, there's a 100% chance you'll self type as Beta at some point, no matter your real type.
:indifferent2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
Haha don't act Fe Polr now, I know you love it :hug: :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Number 9 large
Yeah, Olimpia started :Ti: mobilization. :yup:
Or in german language: :Ti: macht mobil... :lol:
Take care of yourself, Fembot. Your tongue has to be rather dry because of the amount of time it stays outside of your mouth. :rolleyes:
P.S.: Don't take this seriously either.
:mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 9 large
Haha you're so cute when you get mad. ;)
Agree with this. It's definitely the approach I'd recommend. The descriptions are only meant imo to flesh out ways that the elements can show up, to use as examples. People can get imo too caught up in behavioral aspects and neglect to look at the actual thought processes. Focusing primarily on the IEs can help bring cognition itself back into focus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
Yeah @Number 9 large mobilizes me alright :PQuote:
Originally Posted by WinnieW
:cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
SX first types (esp the Sensors) often seem to be an image type (esp 3) without necessarily being so. It has something to do with the desire to be sexually attractive to the preferred sex. Image types' fixation with their outside appearance is more complex, or ironically more "superficial"; their image is like a mask they wear.
If you see the most attractive, bright and enigmatic woman - it's... your conflictor.
no. all stuff was taken by Beta, alreadyQuote:
Originally Posted by Adam Strange
> FWIW, if a woman actively chases me, as opposed to simply saying Yes (mostly) to my suggestions for closer relations, I tend to panic
Se types treat like "victims" anyone. it's better to relax and get pleasure
> Hence, I want to do the chasing. Absolutely at first. But I also want the chasing to be accepted and reciprocated.
LIE show how competent, smart and friendly they are. then be prepared for her jump
:cry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
you just... you just mistyped them!
The amount of butthurt is highly proportional to the amount of (valued) Fi someone possesses.
Actually, many gay guys are Fi ego...
Alpha NTs are easy to spot. They're the typical nerds.
Se and Te are the stereotypical "alpha male" IEs.
So naturally, many women find ESxp and ExTj men attractive, no matter their own type.
P.S.: That also explains why many INxx men are having a hard time attracting their Dual.
:popcorn:
Type 4s are easy to spot. They're the typical weirdos a la emo or gothic aesthetics.
4w5s often dye their hair darker when it's not naturally so; black is common. 7s with a 4 fix and some 3w4 often like to go rainbow. 4w3 is somewhere in between, like going for a deep burgundy red, or alternating between dark and bright. This can also apply to some 3w4s.
So yeah, that chick with blue hair has 4 in her tritype somewhere.
When someone is like "I (secretly) feel dumb", they're probably:
ESI-Fi (9) or ESE-Fe (2) or SEE-Fi (3) or SEI-Fe.
Self proclaimed "sapiosexuals" are either Ethicals looking for a Logical, or Logicals looking for an Ethical who's into Logic. For the most part. A few Logical sapiosexuals actually look for a fellow Logical.
Sx includes Sex.
But sex doesn't always include Sx.
Modern Feminism is led by female Delta NFs, who are also SP blindspot.
Many Sp/Sx guys mistype as Sx/Sp just because they are very horny and Sp first descriptions (which are mostly Sp/So-like) sound "boring" and not "edgy" enough.
A lot if not all transwomen are Ethicals, particularly Fi ego.
The stereotypical lesbian is LSI.
Having the same instinctual stacking as someone else can give you the feeling you're of the same Quadra.
Because you have the same instinctual values. Duh.
You keep doubting the validity of Socionics? Or your own type?
Type 6 confirmed.
(Core > wing > fix.)
6s doubt everything, man.
Best sexual chemistry = Physical attraction + matching Romance style
Nice to hear :)Quote:
Originally Posted by reverie
can someone explain how core wing fix works? I've seen "x fix" get thrown around a lot but have never seen an article on it
The vast majority of "sugar babies" and "golddiggers" is Gamma SF, SP instinct first or second.
And yeah, a lot of "sugar daddies" are Te ego, particularly LIE-Te. :p
Core = main typeQuote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
wing = wing type, the second strongest type (dependent on main type)
fix = type in the tritype
er yeah, I get that its a series of three numbers but what is the significance of being it in each slot versus the other or not at all? in other words how does the slot influence how the number is manifest
Adding into what oli said - Theoretically you have one type from each center - head (5,6,7), heart (2,3,4), and gut (8,9,1). So if you're primarily a gut type you might still fall back on the other centers. Theyre referred to as "3 fix" or "heart fix"Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
oh I see so its just there to break out a dynamic, like if I say I'm 1 with a 6 fix it just means I mainly act like a 1 but i fall back into 6 occasionally... "x fix" doesn't actually mean anything special except to say "when I'm being influenced by my least used center I go to this version of it"
Shit. I need some improvement of my disguise. :halo:Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
Do you think alpha NT types can have a 4 fix in their tritype? Not core type, of course. NT + 4 core type would be really strange.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
Cass's typing skills are based off stupid stereotypes & thinks she knows everything
That's the only Socionics For Dummies tip I got 4 y'all
Someone is butthurt? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake
In my experience, Alpha NTs can't have a 4 fix. LIEs can't, either. ILIs can.Quote:
Originally Posted by WinnieW
And yes, NT + 4 core is strange. Never met one before, and it makes little sense. It's almost as ridiculous as SEE 5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake
Fi user spotted
dare I say it--? ESI, anyone?
Aggresively pursuing a female all the time is not a good strategy.
It can be a good strategy if she likes you and is a Victim type.Quote:
Originally Posted by lavos
Otherwise, definitely not.
When someone claims to be "ambiverted" and/or they cannot decide between being E or I, they are most likely the Contact subtype.
Lmao not really. Just don't like when people think they are above everything. Does this - "The existence of a positive feeling can be inferred only indirectly, as it were. Its aim is not so much to accommodate to the objective fact as to stand above it, since its whole unconscious effort is to give reality to the underlying images" ring a bell?Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
Yeah, you take this thread too seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake
If you don't like it, you don't have to follow it. :shrug:
This is basically a version of "Olimpia's Brain", so.
yeah, I totally vibe with that.. more?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake
Sounds like Jung. It's terrible English. I'd rather read the German original, though even that can be overly complicated.
Jung is certainly not a Logical type. He's unclear af. Te PoLR. None of his theory is factual and evident.
He's IEI-Ni.
its obviously Jung but Im curious as to what type its describing, sounds like introverted feeling but perhaps not
Yeah, it's jungs introverted feeling.
Who said I was taking it seriously?Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
Nah he's LII, said it himself. Unless you think your the master of minds and can get in everyone's head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
If she disagrees with this she's a butthurt esi. Calling it now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake
Just because someone says they are a certain type, does not mean they are right.
And yes, even Jung might have been mistyping. Though in his defense, the types as they exist now, did not exist back then. So... I find it to be a mute point to some extent.
Anyhow, he was in a continual "Ni-Ti loop", which is quite common for Inert subtype people. (Being in a "loop" of their Lead and HA functions, that is.) So he "saw" Ni and Ti in himself, when he introspected. Which is not incorrect technically. It is not the whole story, however. And just look at his work, as a whole. It is IEI-Ni af. If you cannot recognize the Ni valuing of it, then... we have different takes on Ni.
:muaha:Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
SNATCHED BY NI!!!
what was Jung doing writing in such a convoluted way, he should have just posted a videoQuote:
Originally Posted by lungs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcuYZCv3cKM
what's Olimpia's recommendations for the dummies who come from MBTI?
Try to forget everything you've ever known about MBTI when you study Model A.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinoline
But then later, don't make the mistake and think that the types are totally different from one another.
I've written about that issue before here.
Ok, what about a wing? 3w4 or 5w4?Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
The main difference between you and Jung. You are only in a temporary Ni-Ti loop while posting here in this thread. :yup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
In that way you seem more NT like in your expression.:thinking:
HAHA :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 9 large
Unsure, actually. I am leaning towards no, but I cannot say for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by WinnieW
Jung was pretty much in his Ni-Ti loop when he wrote about the "psychological types", imo. He could pass as a fake NT. Otherwise the typings of him being LII wouldn't be so persistent.Quote:
Originally Posted by WinnieW
Every NT type does have a heart fix. What heart type can a NT type have?Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
2 as heart type for NT seems as strange as 4. 3 would be the only remaining option. 3 no wing, 3 both wings, 3w2, 3w4
For all Logical types, 3 is by far the most common Heart fix.Quote:
Originally Posted by WinnieW
ILIs can have a 4 fix.
I am open to the idea of ExTj possibly having a 2 fix.
That's mostly it.
Yeeeeeah you go girlQuote:
Originally Posted by lungs
Alright so would you disagree with Christians about God, but still consider yourself Christian? What about Muslim & Allah? Doesn't matter what it is, he created this and disagreeing with him would remove the whole point from the story. If you want to create your own typological system, go ahead, but don't consider it anywhere close to Jungian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
Does being emotional sensitve imply that :Fi: is one of my weaker or stronger functions?
Does make sense for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
suuuupQuote:
Originally Posted by reverie
This thread is Te PoLR.
What system of sorting people to match a system of abstract descriptions is :Te:-valuing at all?
Any theory that lacks falsifiability has evidently no connection to reality. Science is about theories that are testable.