Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by tide
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retsu77
I see this as a kind of game hes playing whether 4d/2d Fe/Ne or 4/2 Ne/Fe with some pretty constant Ti valuing (lots of if->then constructions as if they were meaningful)
I could see ESE pretending to be LII, but ILE makes more sense to me based on the condition of his room and the "edgy" nature of some of the statements
I see myself as sort of like an aggressor with victim-like tendencies. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007
Si in socionics is related to what I said in da video: Comfort, leisure, health, security, self-preservation shit. I'm SP last (despite incorrect typings) so this could be why I relate to having shit Si.
I never go to the doctor. I eat nothing but unhealthy garbage. I don't exercise. I don't care about chores, I can't cook lol, I hate daily routinized shit, I used to have fainting spells for no reason. I get muscle tensions in my neck and shoulder area and I tend to work even when sick. That's all bad Si shit, AFAIK. and in mbti, it's based on recollection of specific past events and being detail-minded... something no one would ever say about me that knows me. I tend to hate dwelling in the past and my work suffers due to making small mistakes and not going over the finer points.
lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
ESE or LII... this thread just keeps getting better and better. xD
You have some aggressive tendencies in the colloquial sense of the word, and you're opinionated, but, you're willing to play around with your opinions. But, you're not forceful enough to try to 'force' your opinions. This kind of playing around with your opinions, debating for fun is more Ti creative - the flexibility part. Both SLE and ILE like to debate for fun, but you have no clear goal as such, but to enjoy debating ideas (and you enjoy the attention -> Fe), so I say ILE over SLE, because too much emphasis on the playful part, and you're not threatened with wildly varying ideas about your type.
SLE? I see it as a strong possibilty, I think you're Se/Ni valuer, other than that I'm not so sure.
Bertrand is correct. This is an entirely predictable feedback loop ENTP's use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
He's just checking if we can accurately track his dynamic behavior or whether our categories are so unstable that he can manipulate what we're seeing.Quote:
The ENTP thus finds that playing with his principles— forming them perhaps into alternate realities—generates Exhorter excitement. He can in fact become very energized if he chooses for a short time to ‘believe’ something strange and different. He may actually choose at times to ‘play the devil’s advocate.’ This kind of argument for him is fun, as long as he can amuse himself with peripheral principles, pertaining perhaps to some new alternate world. If we won’t play his game, or aren’t as verbally quick as he is, then he may make slightly cynical comments—these imply that he has principles, and can work with them, and we don’t have that ability.
Interestingly, if we can ever get the ENTP to share the standards that truly rule his life—the assumptions in Introverted Thinking—then suddenly things turn a little awkward. That urbane sense of humor disappears—it’s as if suddenly he doesn’t know any more how to talk.
That's not at all uncommon in LSE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retsu77
The typical Si PoLR person is often tidy and healthy. They don't want to take any risks in this area. (Although they tend to work too much)
Ti types are terrible teachers and I am an excellent teacher. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by reverie
Anyhow, possibly not. I was simply answering 9's questions he posted and olimpia's. So maybe that is why many answers seemed more "Ti" than normal. I don't know? I do tend to talk a lot which is not an introverted characteristic.
I discussed dry, dull typological theory. No wonder why I get typed so strangely. Oh well. That's what you get when the material is dry.
Hmm, that's weird. My dad is LSE and is very health conscious and fastidious. We think alike on many issues but he seems much better at Si related shit than me. But people are going to type based on their pre-existing conceptions anyhow, so...Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
Odd how people went from LII to LSE...
Se PoLR to Se Demonstrative, uh...
I am omni-Se. Just the right amount when I need it. Making a boring typing video about socionics theory? Low Se. Some asshole threatens me IRL? High Se. It's all relative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
N type, T more possible
mostly thoughts for ILE
I am 8. If you are mistyping me as 9, you could be doing so do to my 9 wing. I have always typed as 8 or maybe 3w4. Nothing else is on the table, so you are wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by maniac
I would say 3w4 enneagram. You seem image focused with your degrees on the wall behind you and your Polo jacket that happens to match your decorations. The avatar of Clark Gable.
3w4 is second in my tritype as I explained in the video.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keranos
I never even noticed anything "matched" in the video. The degrees could indicate Te valuing, but the truth is, it simply worked out that way because my computer is in my bedroom. None of that was intentional.
Clark is a true example of a real alpha male (not the quadra).
Not really. I'm saying tests are better. An objective measurement beyond simply one's own opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
I am INTx how exactly? Miss ese?Quote:
Originally Posted by Olimpia
So you say your :Se: is just OK? No need to show off? Never backfires if you are careful?
Then it would be solid LSE.
How do you see EII's?
Person, who is a born humanist and is worried about state of the world has highly internally reactive emotions towards anything that breaks her values etc.
What a joke. It's a fucking video. I'm supposed to "stare down my cell phone camera"? smhQuote:
Originally Posted by Aramas
I'd say driving a flashy car and needing to dress well all the time show Se HA, but you seem to know better. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007
I don't really see childlike as an insult, I think of it as being open and guileless by nature, which is a good thing
i feel like if people lose that childlike part of themselves they really lose something important beyond words
Yeah 4hrs sleep when you don't feel like making a video will do that to you. Plus I was expecting mistypes so...Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramas
Well, I don't see it as FITTING. That's the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
Isn't type, supposed to - I don't know - "fit"? Not be completely inaccurate.
I answered questions based on alpha flirting style, which I clearly don't have. So where is the alpha childlike stuff coming from, again?
Don't get me wrong people - LII is not necessarily an insult. They are the smartest type (too bad they rarely do anything with their gift). It would be an honour to be the same type as Carl Jung. :D
It's interesting because the socionics descriptions of LII/INTj sound very similar to INTJs in Myers Briggs. Obviously this is due more to the 4 factor model than the functions themselves as Ti leads are rarely organized, structured and categorical, outwardly anyway. Their Ne/Se ego does not allow for that level of structure.
I wonder if it is possible to be INTj in socionics and INTJ in mbti (which is Ni + Te). Some do think I'm INTJ in Myers Briggs' system. And I tend to walk the line between introversion and extroversion, becoming a bit more introverted now than I was in my earlier years.
you're right, what fits is important, I just thought maybe you had misapprehended what childlike was about and thus felt it didn't fit based off that. its easy to, I think, get the message that childlike qualities are undesirable by their very nature and thus feel the need to distance oneself from them, but supposing you actually were a childlike type, it would only mean rejecting some critical aspect of yourself, not actually making you a different type. so its very important to know what precisely is meant by the term childlike, and I don't think its what society at large tends to impose upon the words, which often entail a pejorative tone
I just don't want to be a victim because they're pussies. lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
In MBTI/Jung I was down for being ENTJ, even with a softer "Ni subtype." I thought, "Hey this makes sense." But I didn't know about all the weak Se shit and how Ni victim types are such weaklings. As an 8, I'm not into that. I mean don't get me wrong, I'm not super-forceful as a rule in daily life, unless I'm angry or pushed. But victim males sound like complete... well, I can't say the word here without being banned so... lol You get the idea.
I'd relate to caretaker over childlike type, personally. I work with an ENFp chick - hot as hell, big tits and everything, but man... her Ne ego drives me nuts at times. Sigh. I have considered asking her out but long-term I don't know... I'm probably wasting my time. So we'll see...
LIIs are "Attracted to those that reach for them through pleasant food, comfort, sexual initiative, concern for their health and fulfillment of their requirements".
Not really. Maybe a little bit for the sex part but the rest is 100% no.
His type is ILI. He was mistaken thinking it as LII.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retsu77
There are videos with him on youtube and she wrote autobiography. My opinion is based on this, besides his obscurity style psychoanalysis with all those myths, synchronisms, etc. LII would never based own "method" on Ni stuff.
It's the only possibility :) As MBTI test uses same dichotomies as Socionics. All what is needed - to identify the type correctly by that MBTI and their theory of dichotomies. But this happends not always.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retsu77
:popcorn:
jungs type lets go ppl
He was Ni lead. I agree there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol
He is Ni lead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
I'm amazed I'm not being considered as one. Hell, I honestly expected to see SLI more, yet nope, not once. Odd.
And he thought himself as Ti lead. The Jung - the developer of the typology mistyped himself. It's funny truth. And makes lesser shame when we mistype someone too. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Retsu77
Well he stated type was not static but changed over one's life actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol
But yes, he did call himself a thinking type with bad relation to emotions and strong intuition.
Anyway, he's a man, not a god. Even Jung can be wrong about some things regarding his own type.
People keep telling you that LIEs aren't pussies and Fi isn't about social justice but you keep repeating these things. What would convince you?
1. I didn't say Fi is purely about social justice, but rather, that in my experience (and that's all I can do go by, is what I see with my own eyes), SJWs tend to often be Fi + Ne ego types. Maybe 75% of the time, rough estimate. Fi + Se types I find are rarely taken in by that stuff as their Se grounds them in reality, whereas Ne ego types get carried away with flights of Communist paradises and the like. (We see this also at times in male LIIs too.)Quote:
Originally Posted by lump
2. I haven't seen too much stating about what LIEs are either way in this thread. What I have noticed is how weak Se and most descriptions about victim types come across. This has also been mentioned in prior threads, including my own typing thread where I was initially typed as having strong Se based on my responses, which ruled out LIE. There seems to be little consistency in these threads when it comes to typing.
He said he saw when type changed at some people. But seems did not mentioned own type for this, so probably he thought own type as LII for most life, at least. What is known about him points to ILI from the moment he developed the typology to his late video interviews. I did not saw he said ILI as his type in that period, so think he mistyped himself there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retsu77
> Anyway, he's a man, not a god. Even Jung can be wrong about some things regarding his own type.
The situation with his selftyping is good lesson for today typers. Not taking into account real average match between them <30%. We should type carefully, we may mistake while people will try to use our opinions in own lifes.
An example. I recently mistyped EIE as EII. I could to make serious problems to her in case she'd try relations with LSE. Her behavior, her self descriptions, my sympathy to her - there was basis for such mistake and it took several monthes to she started to behave closer to other type and I could accept that was wrong, - before that I just thought "wrong EII due to non-types factors". It needs more time to be sure in someones types than it generally seems.
I don't see where you get Te ego for Jung based on his writings. They are convoluted as hell. He seems Ti valuing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol
That aside, everyone makes mistakes sometimes and no one is perfect. Your Ne HA is showing. No one can type everyone correctly 100% of the time. Don't sweat it.
I think you actually typed yourself correctly. ILE-Ti.
That's mostly a joke. lolQuote:
Originally Posted by lavos