Type Me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Number 9 large

like and dislike is Si (i mean liking and disliking stuff in general), relating to people and relations is Fi (yes they also have good liking and disliking of people, but it is of people only, with Si it is of mental/physical states as a whole)

Si people often ask themselves would I enjoy doing this, Te people ask themselves is it worth it, Ni people ask themselves does this have meaning, Ti people ask themselves does this make sense, Ne asks what are the possibilities?

Now go forth and choose wisely, my friend. :justwait:

---

No, it's Fi, but ok. You might want to ask olimpia about that because I don't think she would agree with you.

I ask all the time, if someone or something makes sense.

I need to create a poll or do a video eventually or something about this. Because it's clear no matter who you ask, you will get a different answer for my type. You say SLI, she claims LIE. This forum... fuck who knows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

No, it's Fi, but ok. You might want to ask olimpia about that because I don't think she would agree with you.

I ask all the time, if someone or something makes sense.

I need to create a poll or do a video eventually or something about this. Because it's clear no matter who you ask, you will get a different answer for my type. You say SLI, she claims LIE. This forum... fuck who knows.

---

;) if youre so smart why dont u selftype nigga

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Number 9 large

;) if youre so smart why dont u selftype nigga

---

Because my opinion is meaningless. I think it's retarded when some idiot self-types themselves as whatever they want to be, then get butthurt 24/7 when everyone and their brother disagrees with them. It looks lame.

The ILE-Ti self-typing is obvious trolling.

It's obvious you value Se and Te, based on your questionnaire and concerns with power etc etc.

Si is about physical like/dislike in a sense (I suppose), Fi is about personal ethical feelings about things.

With Si it is all ultimately tied to how your body (or others' bodies) react, with Fi it is more about a personal value judgment that could be about anything; it could even be about physical things, but more often than not it is about people, yes, but it could also be about moral concepts, or just a strong liking/disdain for certain individuals, situations, actions etc that impact the way you judge and relate and act towards that specific something.

Si is much more "visceral" and "gut feeling" related, whereas Fi tends to be more of a (judg)mental activity.

I've never read a socionics description which equates an introverted perceiving functions linked with an introverted judging or evaluating function. Si simply perceives, it does not make judgments about the content of said material. In some circles, they equate that with thinking about the past, being detail minded, traditional. In socionics, it's mostly about comfort, security, being mindful of one's bodily state, health or what physical feels good/pleasant physically (in Jung, that part is largely Se). None of that seems to refer to whether you "like" or "dislike" something per se. Because the act of making the statement is a judgment, not merely a perception.

LSE makes far more sense IMO than SLI. I'd be more likely to go with that, tbh.

I don't know why we've got to reinvent the wheel every time this comes up, Si is comfort/discomfort perception internally and in others, whereas Fi is good/bad judgement. You can say people who make others uncomfortable are bad. thats a Si/Fi crossover. comfort/discomfort are irrational states, good/bad are rational judgements. people tend to "like" comfort, but the "like" is more an ethical attitude than an irrational perception. in the same way people tend to "like" Ni clarity, but to attach an ethical judgement is a step removed. Ni ignoring doesnt make such a leap for example, at least not automatically in the way a Ni dom probably would

you can actually have diametrically opposed Ni states quite easily, so a clear Ni perception is value free in of itself, just like a pure Se perception of arrayed forces is likewise value free until you pick a side

confused Ni states are like a messy room. not precisely bad in of itself

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

I've never read a socionics description which equates an introverted perceiving functions linked with an introverted judging or evaluating function. Si simply perceives, it does not make judgments about the content of said material. In some circles, they equate that with thinking about the past, being detail minded, traditional. In socionics, it's mostly about comfort, security, being mindful of one's bodily state, health or what physical feels good/pleasant physically (in Jung, that part is largely Se). None of that seems to refer to whether you "like" or "dislike" something per se. Because the act of making the statement is a judgment, not merely a perception.

---

Dat :Te:

He knows the source information yo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

LSE makes far more sense IMO than SLI. I'd be more likely to go with that, tbh.

---

I get the impression you take all of this way too seriously.

Gamma problems? :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

Because my opinion is meaningless. I think it's retarded when some idiot self-types themselves as whatever they want to be, then get butthurt 24/7 when everyone and their brother disagrees with them. It looks lame.

---

hahhahaha Te>Ti bro, a ti ego wouldnt give a f about what others say, cuz its subjective logic and if theyre convinced of something they wont change their mind unless u come up with very strong arguments that make more sense than what they already have in their head.

anyway u can self type pretty easily, all u need to do is choose 2 information elements that you relate to the most, then put one before the other and there u go mate. and dont confuse ur HA with ur leading function. often you dont notice ur own leading function because it is so obvious to yourself. only others will notice that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olimpia

Dat :Te:

He knows the source information yo

---

Mmm, not necessarily. I'm just describing what Jung (and a couple other theories) said about Si.

Does that make Jung a Te type? He mostly just wrote what he saw in his patients.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olimpia

I get the impression you take all of this way too seriously.

Gamma problems? :P

---

Not really. If I were being serious, I wouldn't be bebopping all over the type wheel. :p

If anything, you are the one who takes my type too seriously. Would it really matter if I was a different type?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

Not really. If I were being serious, I wouldn't be bebopping all over the type wheel. :p

If anything, you are the one who takes my type too seriously. Would it really matter if I was a different type?

---

Your trolling comes from an oddly serious place, to make the point that you can argue for every sociotype if you know your stuff.

It is not just to "have fun"...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olimpia

Your trolling comes from an oddly serious place, to make the point that you can argue for every sociotype if you know your stuff.

It is not just to "have fun"...

---

Nah, I don't care enough about that.

It's mostly just the fact that my type is really elusive and no one seems to be able to pin it down, which tbh, puzzles me even a bit. If this system is supposed to be so airtight, how do people like myself slip through the cracks? It bugs me a bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

Nah, I don't care enough about that.

It's mostly just the fact that my type is really elusive and no one seems to be able to pin it down, which tbh, puzzles me even a bit. If this system is supposed to be so airtight, how do people like myself slip through the cracks? It bugs me a bit.

---

"No one seems to be able to pin it down", eh, I did. :shrug:

But this is not about others, this is about yourself. You have a poor grasp of your self (concept). Something bugs you about yourself. No one can help you with that, but you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olimpia

"No one seems to be able to pin it down", eh, I did. :shrug:

But this is not about others, this is about yourself. You have a poor grasp of your self (concept). Something bugs you about yourself. No one can help you with that, but you.

---

Well you typed me based on what you think I am/was, yes. That does not mean it is necessarily correct as you are only a human with a limited perspective, of course.

But we would expect more people to agree if that was actually my type. And we would also expect that the descriptions would, I don't know, fit? Being typed as someone with bad Se vs someone with good Se for example, is a question of a type with good Se vs LIE, basically. With other typing systems, this was much simpler as they don't delve as deeply into the functions. But I never realized how deep socionics was until more recently. I never realized ENTJs for example had terrible Se. It almost makes no sense, yet thread after thread have confirmed it. Others have stated LIEs are bad with Se and at achieving their goals, for example. They are not combative and back down easily. I just don't know if I can agree with that when my personal experience shows the opposite. It's so strange.

Additionally, the descriptions I have read for lie duality sound incredibly unappealing to me personally. So again, that is pause to stop and question that typing too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

I don't know why we've got to reinvent the wheel every time this comes up, Si is comfort/discomfort perception internally and in others, whereas Fi is good/bad judgement. You can say people who make others uncomfortable are bad. thats a Si/Fi crossover. comfort/discomfort are irrational states, good/bad are rational judgements. people tend to "like" comfort, but the "like" is more an ethical attitude than an irrational perception. in the same way people tend to "like" Ni clarity, but to attach an ethical judgement is a step removed. Ni ignoring doesnt make such a leap for example, at least not automatically in the way a Ni dom probably would

you can actually have diametrically opposed Ni states quite easily, think conflicting idealogical backdrops like conservative/liberal, one is disliked (to put it mildly) in the eyes of the other, so it is not value laden to begin with, which is precisely how you can fully entertain opposing ideas without subscribing to them (at least in the case of 3d+). the like/dislike comes after

---

yeah i meant liking or disliking through feelings of comfort or joy (which is what you'd usually say about liking and disliking, at least for me...), i suppose for fi valuing types its more on the lines of ''ethical and unethical''
but yea, thats what si entails @Retsu77

lets say it this way, if youre LSE, your Te judgment of ''is it worth it?'' would be supported by the connotation of the question ''would i enjoy this?'', you would disregard meaning, pleasure and productivity/information intake is all you need. Higher meaning would be disregarded when making consicous decisions. (Ni polr)
From your dual you would ask someone who is good at brainstorming and coming up with ideas to fulfill your ''is it worth doing this and does it satisfy me'' kind of lifestyle, aswel as providing you with good ethical judgements of people.

If you're LIE, your Te judgment of ''is it worth it?'' would be supported by the question ''does it have meaning?'', meaning it would only be worth it in the end if it had meaning to you, personally. Pleasure and personal comfort/well-being would be completely disregarded in your making of decisions (Si polr)

In a dual you look for someone to match your toughness, who can set you to action by force/kicking your ass. The person is also good at providing you with information of how people would relate to you, because as both LIE and LSE you suck at evaluating how people truly feel about you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

Well you typed me based on what you think I am/was, yes. That does not mean it is necessarily correct as you are only a human with a limited perspective, of course.

But we would expect more people to agree if that was actually my type. And we would also expect that the descriptions would, I don't know, fit? Being typed as someone with bad Se vs someone with good Se for example, is a question of a type with good Se vs LIE, basically. With other typing systems, this was much simpler as they don't delve as deeply into the functions. But I never realized how deep socionics was until more recently. I never realized ENTJs for example had terrible Se. It almost makes no sense, yet thread after thread have confirmed it. Others have stated LIEs are bad with Se and at achieving their goals, for example. They are not combative and back down easily. I just don't know if I can agree with that when my personal experience shows the opposite. It's so strange.

Additionally, the descriptions I have read for lie duality sound incredibly unappealing to me personally. So again, that is pause to stop and question that typing too.

---

The thing is LIE-Te subtype has 2,5 Dimensional Se, SLI has 3 Dimensional Se, besides, even though LSEs have 4D Se, they often wont use it, favouring Si over Se (Se would disregard internal state to retrieve an object of desire, while Si would disregard object of desire for internal state, so its hard to see 4D Se in LSEs sometimes)

Besides that, Se or Si is kinda hard to measure on a forum like this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Number 9 large

yeah i meant liking or disliking through feelings of comfort or joy (which is what you'd usually say about liking and disliking, at least for me...), i suppose for fi valuing types its more on the lines of ''ethical and unethical''
but yea, thats what si entails @Retsu77

lets say it this way, if youre LSE, your Te judgment of ''is it worth it?'' would be supported by the connotation of the question ''would i enjoy this?'', you would disregard meaning, pleasure and productivity/information intake is all you need. Higher meaning would be disregarded when making consicous decisions. (Ni polr)
From your dual you would ask someone who is good at brainstorming and coming up with ideas to fulfill your ''is it worth doing this and does it satisfy me'' kind of lifestyle, aswel as providing you with good ethical judgements of people.

If you're LIE, your Te judgment of ''is it worth it?'' would be supported by the question ''does it have meaning?'', meaning it would only be worth it in the end if it had meaning to you, personally. Pleasure and personal comfort/well-being would be completely disregarded in your making of decisions (Si polr)

In a dual you look for someone to match your toughness, who can set you to action by force/kicking your ass. The person is also good at providing you with information of how people would relate to you, because as both LIE and LSE you suck at evaluating how people truly feel about you

---

Yes, I have read all of that before, about duality. Thanks for the more thoughtful post, btw.

But oddly enough, that is exactly why I doubt I'm Te lead in socionics. I don't find it appealing to have someone tell me what others think. I can usually tell without being punched upside the head. From what I've read, SEI actually sounds more appealing to me. They're non-confrontational, calm, relaxed and good at expressing their feelings and doing chores around the house (shit I hate doing). I don't generally need someone to tell me to do anything. I just do it myself. When we factor in duality, it becomes increasingly more difficult to type myself, I'll be honest.

Most people on this forum are in love with their concept of their dual (whether or not it is practical). I find it unappealing at best.

if you think a messy room can be a good thing because the time you saved not cleaning is almost always better spent elsewhere: Ni > Si (and slightly Te > Fe)
if you think pain = gain: Se > Si
if you think solutions should be tailored to the situation over developing universal rules and maxims: Te > Ti
if you think predicting the future is more important than being able to always find an escape hatch: Ni > Ne


if you look at these and think of ways in which the if->then fails to capture something: Ni
if you look at these and think of clever ways to demonstrate you're outside the context they suggest: Ne
if you look for the logical possibilities left open and naturally find those gaps attractive regardless of how it furthers the discussion: Ti Ne

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Number 9 large

The thing is LIE-Te subtype has 2,5 Dimensional Se, SLI has 3 Dimensional Se, besides, even though LSEs have 4D Se, they often wont use it, favouring Si over Se (Se would disregard internal state to retrieve an object of desire, while Si would disregard object of desire for internal state, so its hard to see 4D Se in LSEs sometimes)

Besides that, Se or Si is kinda hard to measure on a forum like this.

---

Yep, it's tough. I usually just go by tests and those are kind of shitty. So what's left? Video typing? That may happen sooner than we think...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

if you think a messy room can be a good thing because the time you saved not cleaning is almost always better spent elsewhere: Ni > Si (and slightly Te > Fe)

Ehh, depends. I generally don't like huge messes, but I'm not going to flip out over slight mess every now and then.

if you think pain = gain: Se > Si

Definitely Se. No pain, no gain.

if you think solutions should be tailored to the situation over developing universal rules and maxims: Te > Ti

Hmm, it depends... Rules should exist, but they should also be broken from time to time too.

if you think predicting the future is more important than being able to pleasantly surprise people: Ni > Ne

Definitely Ni.


if you look at these and think of ways in which the if->then fails to capture something: Ni
if you look at these and think of clever ways to demonstrate you're outside the context they suggest: Ne
if you look for the logical possibilities left open and naturally find those gaps attractive regardless of how it furthers the discussion: Ti Ne

---

Hmm...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

Yep, it's tough. I usually just go by tests and those are kind of shitty. So what's left? Video typing? That may happen sooner than we think...

---

yeah video typing is a good indicator. its easy to see how dimensional someones Fe is. from that u can go further. Also stuff like Se is easily noticable imo, and Ne to a certain extent aswel.
@Olimpia says she can easily identify Te types. I personally dont see how, but eh, together we can type u :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

Yes, I have read all of that before, about duality. Thanks for the more thoughtful post, btw.

But oddly enough, that is exactly why I doubt I'm Te lead in socionics. I don't find it appealing to have someone tell me what others think. I can usually tell without being punched upside the head. From what I've read, SEI actually sounds more appealing to me. They're non-confrontational, calm, relaxed and good at expressing their feelings and doing chores around the house (shit I hate doing). I don't generally need someone to tell me to do anything. I just do it myself. When we factor in duality, it becomes increasingly more difficult to type myself, I'll be honest.

Most people on this forum are in love with their concept of their dual (whether or not it is practical). I find it unappealing at best.

---

I have a friend Im 99% sure is LSE but he identifies more with Ti for some reason. Wasp also conspicuously dislikes duality descriptions. She seems like SEI to me (does "shuttle diplomacy") but identifies as EII. I could see you two being duals whether its LSE or ILE because you do have similarities I associate with duality. i.e.: two sides of the same coin, fundamentally unified in values, but emphasizing different sides

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Number 9 large

yeah video typing is a good indicator. its easy to see how dimensional someones Fe is. from that u can go further. Also stuff like Se is easily noticable imo, and Ne to a certain extent aswel.
@Olimpia says she can easily identify Te types. I personally dont see how, but eh, together we can type u :P

---

Well, I could fake it if I wanted to. But it depends on my mood. Not only that, but talking to a boring camera will not cause me to emote much. So I'd likely end up getting ILI or SLI (in your case). But my answers betray that. So we run into a problem...

She's seen me speak before. I will flat out say that I can see Ne when I speak. I hate it but it is there. So Ne ego is not off the table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

Hmm...

---

this is actually Ne cause you're reframing the questions subtly but unintentionally, although you say you value Ni. that is where the contradiction is (and Ti ignoring). I'm fairly certain you're LSE based on this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

I have a friend Im 99% sure is LSE but he identifies more with Ti for some reason. Wasp also conspicuously dislikes duality descriptions. She seems like SEI to me (does "shuttle diplomacy") but identifies as EII. I could see you two being duals whether its LSE or ILE because you do have similarities I associate with duality. i.e.: two sides of the same coin, fundamentally unified in values, but emphasizing different sides

---

I think duality is overhyped by lonely people. I have had the best relationships with potentially my super ego types. How is this possible? I have never dated an Fi + Se type, as far as I know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

this is actually Ne cause you're reframing the questions subtly but unintentionally, although you say you value Ni. that is where the contradiction is. I'm fairly certain you're LSE based on this

---

I do value predicting the future over surprising people though. So it's not as cut and dry.

If I value Ne, I will honestly just say ILE-Ti tbh. LSE doesn't make very much sense based on my understanding of Jung, the cognitive functions or the like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

Well, I could fake it if I wanted to. But it depends on my mood. Not only that, but talking to a boring camera will not cause me to emote much. So I'd likely end up getting ILI or SLI (in your case). But my answers betray that. So we run into a problem...

She's seen me speak before. I will flat out say that I can see Ne when I speak. I hate it but it is there. So Ne ego is not off the table.

---

true that, i also think i came across as way more introverted and lower dimensional fe than i actually am in real life when i interact with real people instead of doing a boring quesionaire talking about myself the whole time haha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Number 9 large

true that, i also think i came across as way more introverted and lower dimensional fe than i actually am in real life when i interact with real people instead of doing a boring quesionaire talking about myself the whole time haha

---

Right so maybe you're SLE/ESTp.

In most typology circles, people typed me as INTJ. So who knows what the socionics equivalent of that might be (assuming these people were even right in the first place)?

Quote:

---

I do value predicting the future over surprising people though

---

I believe you, but I'm confident thats a function of polr

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

I believe you, but I'm confident thats a function of polr

---

Ehh, I trust your typing of me less than anyone else here, so...

its okay, this is more for the record than for your benefit. testing my Nostradamus skills

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

Right so maybe you're SLE/ESTp.

In most typology circles, people typed me as INTJ. So who knows what the socionics equivalent of that might be (assuming these people were even right in the first place)?

---

socionics equivalent would be ILI, to lesser extent LII, LSI even

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

its okay, this is more for the record than for your benefit. testing my Nostradamus skills

---

It's hilarious they type you as ESI. I don't see it at all. They must be on crack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Number 9 large

socionics equivalent would be ILI, to lesser extent LII, LSI even

---

ILI doesn't fit at all. I've read the descriptions. Too much Se.

LSI... ehh, it's possible. That'd make me you. lol

LII... maybe...? I don't know. Alpha NT is starting to make more sense tbh than gamma. Gamma in socionics, esp. NTs, sound exceedingly boring. Alphas might be children but at least they have fun and enjoy their lives. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retsu77

It's hilarious they type you as ESI. I don't see it at all. They must be on crack.

---

the beauty of life is we all get to place our bets and see how things turn out

fwiw my LSE friend thinks hes INTP in MBTI

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

the beauty of life is we all get to place our bets and see how things turn out

---

Sure. At least everyone agrees on Fi lead. Even we both do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

the beauty of life is we all get to place our bets and see how things turn out

fwiw my LSE friend thinks hes INTP in MBTI

---

I am an ENTJ in mbti. Formerly tested as ENFJ for years too.

I'm just sayin' if you land on LII eventually it wouldn't surprise me

(but I still think you're LSE)