Steve Jobs is my dual.

What is focus? Focus is saying no. I cannot say no. I get into everything. I say yes to everything. Scattered all over the place. No central focus.

There was this exercise where you take a word and try to name other words off the top of your head. Like somebody may say apple. You say red, tree, etc list of all the things that come to your head. I noticed the main word I said when I ran out of words was "open". Like clockwork. I need to be more closed


He is describing me right here. A bunch of different ideas, perhaps many of them good, but no focus. And he likes to a bullet through the head of people like me. Meaning he likes to kill unessential ideas.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8eP99neOVs


EIEs admire people whose thinking is clear-cut, unambiguous, and stalwart, who reduce the myriad of possibilities down to one single option. This is something they are almost completely unable to do on their own (they easily doubt their ability to choose right), but have a deep need for in other people.

Some people I know from this forum have typed him as EIE but he is the opposite of that. He is everything an EIE needs. I really relate to the top comment of the video too:

"Wow, I never thought about this before. I couldn't figure out why I keep learning more and more, but accomplish less and less. I thought it was lack of focus, but it's actually lack of ability to say 'no'. I want to apply all my knowledge to everything, and end up getting lost in the process."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tearsofaclown

Meaning he likes to kill unessential ideas.

---

That is because he is +I1. But ya, he is an LS- type.

LIE contact

This shouldn't be that hard lol

Idiot proof OS (or let's call it a shell). It is also pretty and by design philosophy quite restricted if used in default ways.

I can certainly see some EIE dual like attraction behind it.

I personally detest it.

He's officially typed as EIE by DarkAngelFireWolf69, and actually resembles plenty of EIEs I see in real life

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007

Idiot proof OS (or let's call it a shell). It is also pretty and by design philosophy quite restricted if used in default ways.

I can certainly see some EIE dual like attraction behind it.

I personally detest it.

---

Snapchat is so fucking unintuitive. My god. You have to watch a tutorial to use it. It is ridiculous. For me anyway. Facebook reminds me a little of Apple in that sense. They copied Snapchat with Instagram and did it so much better. My God. lol. Like night and day.

So the secret of Apple's success is making products for ethical types. He realized early on that ethical types would have trouble with such complexity and streamlined it for us.



:shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tearsofaclown

What is focus? Focus is saying no. I cannot say no. I get into everything. I say yes to everything. Scattered all over the place. No central focus.

There was this exercise where you take a word and try to name other words off the top of your head. Like somebody may say apple. You say red, tree, etc list of all the things that come to your head. I noticed the main word I said when I ran out of words was "open". Like clockwork. I need to be more closed


He is describing me right here. A bunch of different ideas, perhaps many of them good, but no focus. And he likes to a bullet through the head of people like me. Meaning he likes to kill unessential ideas.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8eP99neOVs


EIEs admire people whose thinking is clear-cut, unambiguous, and stalwart, who reduce the myriad of possibilities down to one single option. This is something they are almost completely unable to do on their own (they easily doubt their ability to choose right), but have a deep need for in other people.

Some people I know from this forum have typed him as EIE but he is the opposite of that. He is everything an EIE needs. I really relate to the top comment of the video too:

"Wow, I never thought about this before. I couldn't figure out why I keep learning more and more, but accomplish less and less. I thought it was lack of focus, but it's actually lack of ability to say 'no'. I want to apply all my knowledge to everything, and end up getting lost in the process."

---

Anecdotally only: My husband is LSI and he says yes to quite a bit of stuff, depending on what kind of stuff we’re talking about. I have super broad interests but I believe I can say no to more things and place firmer boundaries in some ways than he can.

That said, we may have come out more roughly even on this ability after seven years together. I think I have influenced him to say no more often in the emotional interpersonal domain. (When I’m not watching he says yes to social things he shouldn’t because he apparently doesn’t know the most effective ways to decline.) Also with phasing out relations he wanted out of or to change but was stuck in.

He has helped me to say no in areas where I had a hard time standing up for myself because I was unsure of what kinds of procedures were needed and how much leverage I had access to. He has also helped me reject ideas that aren’t viable (though he’s generally encouraging) and scenarios that cause me to underestimate myself, “sell myself short” in his words.

Again these are merely anecdotes but it’s possible that Jobs, as a very successful person, developed or got support with a key that he didn’t always have and values it enough to share it. I can’t type him LSI. I also find that dualization may not affect ppl super consciously like your “aha”-like reaction here implies, but more subconsciously and incrementally.

Yeah it can as well be an Intuitive topic. I've had professors in art academy say similar things, because what you display in art is always a choice, even if you make a photograph and aim at objectivity-- there's not such a thing-- focus means making choices. It's a kind of abstract reasoning on a practical obvious concept.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by golden

Anecdotally only: My husband is LSI and he says yes to quite a bit of stuff, depending on what kind of stuff we’re talking about. I have super broad interests but I believe I can say no to more things and place firmer boundaries in some ways than he can.

That said, we may have come out more roughly even on this ability after seven years together. I think I have influenced him to say no more often in the emotional interpersonal domain. (When I’m not watching he says yes to social things he shouldn’t because he apparently doesn’t know the most effective ways to do it.) Also with phasing out relations he wanted out of or to change but was stuck in.

He has helped me to say no in areas where I had a hard time standing up for myself because I was unsure of what kinds of procedures were needed and how much leverage I had access to. He has also helped me reject ideas that aren’t viable (though he’s generally encouraging) and scenarios that cause me to underestimate myself, “sell myself short” in his words.

Again these are merely anecdotes but it’s possible that Jobs, as a very successful person, developed or needs a key that he didn’t always have and values it enough to share it. I can’t type him LSI. I also find that dualization may not affect ppl super consciously like your “aha”-like reaction here implies, but more subconsciously and incrementally.

---

I say No to people a lot. It is ideas I have a problem saying no to.

Yeah, he could just be me actualized. Like the EIE final boss. He also grew up in a better environment. With risk taking and happening things in California during beginning of personal computers. Surrounded by world class and educated people. I am from a small town and there was nothing. No dreams are built here.

That is a good point about duality being more unconscious. This is something I understand. I am not good at it yet but I understand it.

If you have a crush on your own type what does that mean? That you are gay? A narcissist? lol.

lulz tis ok ~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tearsofaclown

If you have a crush on your own type what does that mean? That you are gay? A narcissist? lol.

---

It's only gay if they are the same sex as you and dress that way. :)

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...............................................

I actually think that lots of people are attracted to Identicals, but I also think those relationships get boring pretty fast.

I’ve also always thought Steve Jobs was LSI. DarkAngelFireWolf69 thinks Donald Trump is SEE and can suck on a penis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam Strange

It's only gay if they are the same sex as you and dress that way. :)

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...............................................

I actually think that lots of people are attracted to Identicals, but I also think those relationships get boring pretty fast.

---

Reminds me of an episode of Seinfeld. Jerry dates a girl who is like him in every way. Same interests. They finish each other's sentences. This is the best woman he ever found. Then he realized he hated himself and dumped her. lol. He doesn't want to date himself. I sure as hell wouldn't want to date myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ooo

Yeah it can as well be an Intuitive topic. I've had professors in art academy say similar things, because what you display in art is always a choice, even if you make a photograph and aim at objectivity-- there's not such a thing-- focus means making choices. It's a kind of abstract reasoning on a practical obvious concept.

---

Jobs was somewhat of an art student for a while and was into things like calligraphy. He said a computer should be a painting. So now I am thinking this is just something he learned from somewhere and not came up with himself. This is somewhat of a revolutionary concept to me as I have never had any formal art training.

I do remember one quote I always liked. Coco Channel said elegance is the art of refusal. I wouldn't be surprised if Jobs heard that quote and it sunk in either. He loved to quote things and sharing what he learned. It doesn't look like it at first glance but he is kind of teaching here. He is sharing what he learned. He seems like a sponge and I consider myself a sponge too. The more experiences you have and things you learn, the more creative you can be.

He also said the customer comes first. Or at least the human element. He worked with Bill Gates and they have known each other a long time. Gates was asked to describe how they do things differently. Gates said he views it as an engineering problem. Jobs sees it more from a personal perspective, how it affects people . That kind of thing. The human comes first and THEN the technology. You start with the human experience and work yourself back to the technology. You don't start with technology and then work yourself back to the human.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3d/3b...4d541f4d6e.jpg

I think there are also lots of Ti bases who like Apple products (to a point of religiosity) because it makes more sense to them. System that is quite fixed but also firm. Well, I can comfortably juggle for fun so I just use Linux and on phone I use terminal emulator when needed.

That said some EIE's might become quite tech savvy. I think one possible example of EIE driven projects could be some sort of Linux evangelism (by actual priest) which focuses on third world projects and schools. Not sure, though if that is the case.

and also long lost father

@Tearsofaclown

that's really cool! Jobs was a really great person, despite all the nerds saying otherwise because Linux and whatnot work better etc etc, I think it was Jobs to think of super intuitive ways to format a computer tho? Like the windows and basically there's your computer doing all the little things for you... anyway, it doesn't matter that he repeats smth he's heard, we all do that, and what he repeats in this case is a really enlightening thing, it becomes obvious if you are caught in the act of creating something, bcoz what will you put in there, everything? No, you can't put everything, you have to say no to smth and yes to something else, these are the choices that become apparent in the final work, without anyone realizing but the artist, and yeah it's a concept you can extend everywhere else.

Stay hungry stay foolish <3

So you must be ESI then

LIE's I have seen tend to be very from Jobs. They just tend to do little bit of this and little bit of that and finally they land somewhere. Some of them really try to work in sensing types jobs and do something practical stuff. After enough stray life they finally meet kindergarten teacher of their dreams, finalize their thesis in natural science and try to make some bucks. I have studied with over ten years older LIE's and we did some lab courses.

Yes, this is indication of their :Se: weakness.

Jobs as LIE? Ummm... He put huge emphasis on easy to use and aesthetics. Some LIE's might happily operate with computers stripped totally away from aesthetics using window managers like ratpoison or i3 etc:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ofq4gpG_lM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007

Jobs as LIE? Ummm... He put huge emphasis on easy to use and aesthetics.

---

-S4+L3 Demonstrative and Ignoring functions at work.

I was reminded how John Lennon met Yoko Ono. At an art display. He saw one of her pieces. It was like a blank page with with one small little word on in, that word was "yes". And it turned Lennon on right then. And he totally lost fuckin focus with Ono and she took over his life. Fuckin sucker. lol. Yoko Ono was a fucking player. Respect to her. You aint reelin me or Jobs in with that shit though.

But there was another piece that really decided me for-or-against the artist: a ladder which led to a painting which was hung on the ceiling. It looked like a black canvas with a chain with a spyglass hanging on the end of it. This was near the door when you went in. I climbed the ladder, you look through the spyglass and in tiny little letters it says 'yes'. So it was positive. I felt relieved. It's a great relief when you get up the ladder and you look through the spyglass and it doesn't say 'no' or 'fuck you' or something, it said 'yes'.

I was very impressed and John Dunbar introduced us – neither of us knew who the hell we were, she didn't know who I was, she'd only heard of Ringo, I think, it means apple in Japanese. And Dunbar had sort of been hustling her, saying, 'That's a good patron, you must go and talk to him or do something.' John Dunbar insisted she say hello to the millionaire. And she came up and handed me a card which said 'breathe' on it, one of her instructions, so I just went [pant]. This was our meeting.




-John Lennon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007

LIE's I have seen tend to be very from Jobs. They just tend to do little bit of this and little bit of that and finally they land somewhere. Some of them really try to work in sensing types jobs and do something practical stuff. After enough stray life they finally meet kindergarten teacher of their dreams, finalize their thesis in natural science and try to make some bucks. I have studied with over ten years older LIE's and we did some lab courses.

Yes, this is indication of their :Se: weakness.

Jobs as LIE? Ummm... He put huge emphasis on easy to use and aesthetics. Some LIE's might happily operate with computers stripped totally away from aesthetics using window managers like ratpoison or i3 etc:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ofq4gpG_lM

---

You just described one of my best friends. Fuckin sellout he is. lol. Marry this ridiculously feely woman (who is a teacher) but has no feeling himself. lol. Its funny trying to watch him console her when she gets emotional. Which is a lot. He kind of just stands next to her awkwardly. I do not want a feeler woman.

I also think Jobs could be a 7. Any opinion on his enneagram?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tearsofaclown

I also think Jobs could be a 7. Any opinion on his enneagram?

---

784 most likely

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

784 most likely

---

That's only because the Fauvres type him that way. They type him after Katherine's self-typing of 847, which is hard to believe for most who have seen her in action. Both Steve Jobs and Katherine Fauvre are 3w4's, the creative climber. 378 in Job's case, and I concur with many in this thread that he's EIE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007

I think there are also lots of Ti bases who like Apple products (to a point of religiosity) because it makes more sense to them. System that is quite fixed but also firm. Well, I can comfortably juggle for fun so I just use Linux and on phone I use terminal emulator when needed.

That said some EIE's might become quite tech savvy. I think one possible example of EIE driven projects could be some sort of Linux evangelism (by actual priest) which focuses on third world projects and schools. Not sure, though if that is the case.

---

I am not a tech guy at all and never cared about it or took sides. Still don't. What I love about Jobs is his philosophy and life, not his products. He wanted to put a dent in the world. He wanted the universe to know he was here. He wants to throw his weight around and break through walls. The genius of Jobs is not the products but the "ecosystem" he created as Warren Buffet put it. Buffett as a rule doesn't invest in things he doesn't understand. Tech is something he doesn't understand but he does understand a successful business model. He is brilliant at picking businesses. He actually owns 5% of Apple now and would love to own the whole thing. It's kinda funny cuz Bill Gates is his best friend and Gates sits on the Board of Buffett's company. And Apple isn't even really a tech company. It is bigger than that. Buffett recognizes that.

“I didn’t go into Apple because it was a tech stock in the least,” Buffett explained at the Berkshire meeting. “I went into Apple because I came to certain conclusions about both the intelligence with the capital they deploy, but more important the value of their ecosystem and how permanent that ecosystem could be.” -Buffett


But now that I understand the tech part of Apple more I think Apple products may be more suited for me. lol. I've ever owned any kind of apple/mac computer. Just an Iphone and Ipod. I have an android phone now. I am becoming more interested in tech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zklbZR9025Y

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Samson

That's only because the Fauvres type him that way. They type him after Katherine's self-typing of 847, which is hard to believe for most who have seen her in action. Both Steve Jobs and Katherine Fauvre are 3w4's, the creative climber. 378 in Job's case, and I concur with many in this thread that he's EIE.

---

You are 100% wrong.

I'm a 784. Jobs is obviously a 784 as well. I think 7 > 8 because he was okay with blowing stuff up. 3 is Hillary Clinton, achieving for the sake of achieving. SJ wanted to change the world, not work for a promotion.

He is LSI to the max as well with his attention to detail.

Enjoy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwf38MVMbc8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKE2U60tKY0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f60dheI4ARg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuNQgln6TL0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keCwRdbwNQY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp6_3UQLi2Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJWWtV1w5fw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oksetv3i90&t=1s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjjUOemW-_Q

https://bronnieware.com/blog/regrets-of-the-dying/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

You are 100% wrong.

I'm a 784. Jobs is obviously a 784 as well. I think 7 > 8 because he was okay with blowing stuff up. 3 is Hillary Clinton, achieving for the sake of achieving. SJ wanted to change the world, not work for a promotion.

He is LSI to the max as well with his attention to detail.

---

I have given this plenty of thought and have considered the 7 case very thoroughly, but it falls apart in the end. However, you are clearly not open to the case of 3w4 for Steve Jobs (or any other than your own really), so I won't bother you with it. Your self-typing is also irrelevant to me, in terms of typing Steve.

This sounds Ne not valued:

“People think focus means saying yes to the thing you've got to focus on. But that's not what it means at all. It means saying no to the hundred other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully. I'm actually as proud of the things we haven't done as the things I have done. Innovation is saying no to 1,000 things.”

― Steve Jobs

Very in the moment. Here and now. He is the same type as Bruce Lee, whatever that is. Lee said it is not the daily increase but the daily decrease. Hack away at the unessential. Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication as Da Vinci said.


http://www.quotehd.com/imagequotes/a...-devise-an.jpg

it seems to me absolutely everything that is superfluous is in some sense a product of nature, nature is literally responsible for all superfluous things... it seems to me they have it backwards and are just calling whatever they consider to be elegant natural. natural selection is about producing offshoots that are ultimately tested and rejected or accepted. you can say they are necessary and therefore not superfluous, but then so is everything. now we end up with there being nothing superfluous at all, which I think is sort of true. everything came into being and went out of being for some kind of reason and at the behest of nature on some level. the best way to conceptualize it is to say what exactly constitutes superfluous is itself a human construct, nature has almost nothing to do with it, and superfluity is itself a kind of illusion of the human mind when a human mind deems some things unnecessary because it can't see the world in its wholeness. true people have a right to select, but all action inevitably provokes some kind of reaction, what is rejected for being superfluous ultimately leads to something else, which means even in rejecting it its purpose was fulfilled, to say it would have been better to have never been is to break the chain that lead to the thing of supposedly higher value, and without which this thing would have nothing to compare itself favorably to

That quote makes me think that human beings can't possibly be and an invention of nature then.

its sort of like what is the one thing God (nature) lacks?

Ur m0m.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soupman

He's officially typed as EIE by DarkAngelFireWolf69, and actually resembles plenty of EIEs I see in real life

---

source? I have a hard time believing DarkAngelFireWolf69, the world's best socionist, would mistype Steve Jobs in such a way

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nefnaf

source? I have a hard time believing DarkAngelFireWolf69, the world's best socionist, would mistype Steve Jobs in such a way

---

XD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nefnaf

source? I have a hard time believing DarkAngelFireWolf69, the world's best socionist, would mistype Steve Jobs in such a way

---

ROFL.

DarkAngelFireWolf69 has done good work like banter style but he's done a lot of shit too like DCHN and quadra progression. Honestly, I think most of DarkAngelFireWolf69's work is not soo good. He is like a university researcher that cares more about getting published then doing quality research.

I actually think he’s mostly good but has made a few glaring mistakes, and so shouldn’t be treated as some kind of irrefutable authority on things.

He’s like a philosopher or storyteller. Not good for exacting sciences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by niffer

I actually think he’s mostly good but has made a few glaring mistakes, and so shouldn’t be treated as some kind of irrefutable authority on things.

He’s like a philosopher or storyteller. Not good for exacting sciences.

---

If you look at the overall system the good that DarkAngelFireWolf69 has done is Banter Styles, Quadra Values and maybe communication styles. That's about it. Technically he is on roughly the same level as Reinin. Below Augusta, and definitely below Jung or Aristotle.

what's this banter styles that you speak of, and how is it different than communication styles? I want some fresh DarkAngelFireWolf69 and this sounds like it may be it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

Quadra Values

---

Yeah that’s not even original either lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

what's this banter styles that you speak of, and how is it different than communication styles? I want some fresh DarkAngelFireWolf69 and this sounds like it may be it

---

banter = bully/tease, troublemaker/babysitter
communication style = passionate/sincere, pragmatic/analytical

nothing new here

do you have a link to this I've never heard of it before

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

do you have a link to this I've never heard of it before

---

http://www.socioniko.net/ru/articles/lifesc.html

oh Ive seen communication styles before, I was more wondering about the banter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

If you look at the overall system the good that DarkAngelFireWolf69 has done is Banter Styles, Quadra Values and maybe communication styles. That's about it. Technically he is on roughly the same level as Reinin. Below Augusta, and definitely below Jung or Aristotle.

---

Jung and Ausra are dead. Reinin has made great contributions but in recent years he has not done nearly as much as VG.

I actually think DarkAngelFireWolf69's best and most important work is his work on the rings of supervision, i.e. cognitive styles. All of the most common mistypes can be rooted out immediately by applying his concepts, it's quite remarkable.

I'll be honest, I couldn't make heads or tails of DCNH so I ignored it for about 5 years. Recently I have started to appreciate it a lot more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nefnaf

Jung and Ausra are dead. Reinin has made great contributions but in recent years he has not done nearly as much as VG.

I actually think DarkAngelFireWolf69's best and most important work is his work on the rings of supervision, i.e. cognitive styles. All of the most common mistypes can be rooted out immediately by applying his concepts, it's quite remarkable.

I'll be honest, I couldn't make heads or tails of DCNH so I ignored it for about 5 years. Recently I have started to appreciate it a lot more.

---

Link to research?

I don't find the supervisionary or beneficiary ITR important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

Link to research?

I don't find the supervisionary or beneficiary ITR important.

---

wikisocion article not a very good read unfortunately (machine-translated)

Basically, DarkAngelFireWolf69 discovered that supervision rings tend to have similar patterns of thought, which can then be observed in speech. These groups are formed by Evolution / Involution (Process / Result), Positivist / Negativist and Static / Dynamic traits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nefnaf

wikisocion article not a very good read unfortunately (machine-translated)

Basically, DarkAngelFireWolf69 discovered that supervision rings tend to have similar patterns of thought, which can then be observed in speech. These groups are formed by Evolution / Involution (Process / Result), Positivist / Negativist and Static / Dynamic traits.

---

Junk. Those dichotomies are not real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

Junk. Those dichotomies are not real.

---

are banter styles real?? im still curious where they come from

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

Junk. Those dichotomies are not real.

---

Static / Dynamic is not a real trait now? I think I've heard everything lol.

Yes, these are real traits. ILIs focus on the past :Ni:- while IEIs focus on the future :Ni:+.This is the sort research that actual socionists do - and DarkAngelFireWolf69 is the best at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

what's this banter styles that you speak of, and how is it different than communication styles? I want some fresh DarkAngelFireWolf69 and this sounds like it may be it

---

I believe "banter style" is referring to the romance styles, or erotic attitudes. Basically going by which irrational function is in the Model A ego block.

:Ne: - infantile
:Si: - caregiver
:Se: aggressor
:Ni: victim

basically, it describes which types are good in bed together.

oh I see, he just renamed them. thats funny I don't think of LII as being a troublemaker... let me just get my thesaurus out and devise a new better system than DarkAngelFireWolf69 which is actually just a complete rip off. its like, how can you discredit a man and plagiarize his work in the same breath, doesn't doing one kind of make the other pointless

I also feel like this Steve Jobs worship is likely benefit at work

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nefnaf

Static / Dynamic is not a real trait now? I think I've heard everything lol.

Yes, these are real traits. ILIs focus on the past :Ni:- while IEIs focus on the future :Ni:+.This is the sort research that actual socionists do - and DarkAngelFireWolf69 is the best at it.

---

Nope. It isn't derived from the Model A axioms. DarkAngelFireWolf69's +/- system is his inability to combine the mental abilities into intellects.

The Imaginative Logical Specialist (The Engineer) focuses on specialized imagination and generalized logic i.e. imaginative logical induction. The Imaginative Ethical Specialist (The Oracle) also focuses on specialized imagination but on generalized ethic, i.e. imaginative ethical induction. Both are sifting through visions or ideas but the IL- wants those ideas to generally work, e.g. make new widgets; Elon Musk. The IE- wants those visions to move people, e.g. communicate a message; ******.

P.S. the geometric shapes are the dumbest notation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

oh I see, he just renamed them. thats funny I don't think of LII as being a troublemaker... let me just get my thesaurus out and devise a new better system than DarkAngelFireWolf69 which is actually just a complete rip off. its like, how can you discredit a man and plagiarize his work in the same breath, doesn't doing one kind of make the other pointless

I also feel like this Steve Jobs worship is likely benefit at work

---

I didn't ripe anything off. I cited him. And I renamed them because it better illustrates the interaction. DarkAngelFireWolf69's naming is very poor. And yes Steve Jobs also did this too which is how he become so successful. Turns out communication is an important skill.

domr have you considered that you could be a SEE

you seem to have the Ti polr, low intuition, and mendaciousness down

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

domr have you considered that you could be a SEE

you seem to have the Ti polr, low intuition, and mendaciousness down

---

I'm not an OE+ (Entertainer).

Do you even know the difference between -E3+O4 and -E3+I4?

no because thats gibberish?

Look at who’s talking lol

Okay Fi 3D Se 4D vs Fi 3D Ne 4D

in your Creole language.

uh forget it, I realize where this conversation leads and its nowhere good.. I hope your scam ends up benefiting people

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nefnaf

source? I have a hard time believing DarkAngelFireWolf69, the world's best socionist, would mistype Steve Jobs in such a way

---

Go ask him yourself on Facebook, if you pay him, he'll be forth with you given how budgeted his time is. Steve was the mentor idealist - complete opposite to the rational managerial inspector that specialises in order. If you read Walter Isaacson's book you can see the EIE drama and gradually out of touch nature he had. Plus he was a dominant subtype - focused and geared towards results.

Once you know socionics it's not surprising as is Trump being the SEE archetype politician capable of ruling through chaos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soupman

Go ask him yourself on Facebook, if you pay him, he'll be forth with you given how budgeted his time is. He's the mentor idealist - complete opposite to the rational managerial inspector that specialises in order.

Once you know socionics it's not surprising as is Trump being the SEE archetype politician capable of ruling through chaos.

---

....

Are you for serious?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tearsofaclown

I say No to people a lot. It is ideas I have a problem saying no to.

Yeah, he could just be me actualized. Like the EIE final boss. He also grew up in a better environment. With risk taking and happening things in California during beginning of personal computers. Surrounded by world class and educated people. I am from a small town and there was nothing. No dreams are built here.

That is a good point about duality being more unconscious. This is something I understand. I am not good at it yet but I understand it.

---

That’s pretty unlikely. It would be like calling Oprah the final boss of LSI and a highly self-actualized LSI IMO. It’s more likely that Steve Jobs is just your dual.

I see the people on here typing him EIE as the same as Sol typing me IEI.

Btw: He was also adopted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

I'm not an OE+ (Entertainer).

Do you even know the difference between -E3+O4 and -E3+I4?

---

Have you tried not translating MBTI and seeing socionics for what it is first? Before you pick what you like and don't like.

SEE being the politician (Trump, Madona,...) really gets you a very different perspective when you see that socialites/interpersonal business club (SF) really see the world very differently.

ST are the Technocrat, Managers, Heirachy administration - the get things done.

NF are idealists, humanitarian, concerned with direction and philosophy

NTs are finally the Researchers, Experimenters picking apart how the world works and is

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by niffer

....

Are you for serious?

---

Yes absolutely, reading Walter Isaacson's book really paints the classic EIE, with Viktor's wife being EIE I'm not surprised he knows a lot about the type.

Much of what he's written applies to my EIE sister which proves that he truly understands the inner workings of the type.

I don't know why people would go with celebrity types - those guys are MBTI

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soupman

Once you know socionics it's not surprising as is Trump being the SEE archetype politician capable of ruling through chaos.

---

Of course Trump is SEE, that much should be obvious. Equally obvious is Steve Jobs being LIE

LIE can often be very emotionally affecting people. Many ministers, preachers, comedians are LIE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soupman

Have you tried not translating MBTI and seeing socionics for what it is first? Before you pick what you like and don't like.

SEE being the politician (Trump, Madona,...) really gets you a very different perspective when you see that socialites/interpersonal business club (SF) really see the world very differently.

ST are the Technocrat, Managers, Heirachy administration - the get things done.

NF are idealists, humanitarian, concerned with direction and philosophy

NTs are finally the Researchers, Experimenters picking apart how the world works and is

---

Okay so at least you think Trump and Madonna (which you spelt wrong) are the same type. You have a minuscule amount of rationality in you and not all is lost, just most of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by niffer

Okay so at least you think Trump and Madonna (which you spelt wrong) are the same type. You have a minuscule amount of rationality in you and not all is lost, just most of it.

---

Viktor DarkAngelFireWolf69 comes to the same conclusion - if you think the father of socionics is crazy, well that's on you. Even then socionics isn't compatible between different schools.

Stacy "Fergie" Ferguson is another kindred spirit but slightly different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soupman

Viktor DarkAngelFireWolf69 comes to the same conclusion - if you think the father of socionics is crazy, well that's on you. Even then socionics isn't compatible between different schools.

Stacy "Fergie" Ferguson is another kindred spirit but slightly different.

---

I don’t think he’s crazy. But I do think you’re a bit weird.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nefnaf

Of course Trump is SEE, that much should be obvious. Equally obvious is Steve Jobs being LIE

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nefnaf

LIE can often be very emotionally affecting people. Many ministers, preachers, comedians are LIE

---

I'm not sure what socionics schools you follow since I'd have to accept that as the perculiarities of your school archetypes.

Nevertheless whilst LIE can be complicated with the superego ESFx behaviour, that is rather the type of nerds, with poor social skills.

Viktor DarkAngelFireWolf69 adds to his LIE archetypes: Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg, see his Humanitarian Socionics Facebook page. He types Zucc's wife as LSI.

Jobs was a hippie that's very charismatic that archetypes is more characteristic of EIE. They are incredibly smart and contrary to MBTI complicated, dictatorial, and philosophers - though authoritarian given how they like to construct ideas without the debate and argumentation NTs have.

Zuckerberg as LIE makes sense. He has such a typical LIE mannerisms going on. The role that looks bit like constipated ESE.

I think Steve Jobs looked like if @Myst got an elaborate and well-done sex change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007

Zuckerberg as LIE makes sense. He has such a typical LIE mannerisms going on. The role that looks bit like constipated ESE.

---

Meh I think IEI is more likely for Zuck. He looks like he can’t chew anything properly with that jaw structure of his. Prob 1D Se Te. Also his wife looks like a man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

MBTI and Socionics are both interpretation of Jung's psychological work. I'm beyond both now and doing research into Aristotle's psychology.

Your labels are close but not correct; because you don't understand how the mental abilities or dom/aux pairs work.

Aristocrats
Imaginative Ethic = Theocrats, what you call idealists or philosophers
Observative Logic = Bureaucrats, what you call managers and administration. Hierarchy is an aristocratic trait.

Democrats
Imaginative Logic = Technocrats, what you call researchers and experimenters
Observative Ethic = Eudaicrats, what you call humanitarians and socialites

OE+ being a politician is a total joke. They are democratic, not aristocratic, and their job is maximize happiness, not build or manage intuitions.

Kersey was correct in wanting to put human labels on the types but the problem is he couldn't do it correctly because he lacked understanding of the intellects. DarkAngelFireWolf69 fails for the exact same reason. He can see the mental abilities, intellectual clubs even the intellectual cliques (quadras) but without an understanding of the 8 intellects it's not possible to correctly label the intellectual types. Hence he mislabels an entertainer as a politician. Fail.

P.S. Jobs was LO- not EI+.

---

You haven't read Walter Isaacson's book? Anyway in time you'll learn that there are more than 16 types of people and more than 16 ways to attach labels to them, along with the fact that qualitative descriptions of the theory are incompatible with the Jungian foundation - which makes everything abstract.

BTW you do know that "ethical types" are quite rational and logical but something is different about their thinking. When I got into typology, in my first weeks (over 6 years ago - oh man time flies) I thought my sister was logical because she could think, she is very intelligent, and reasonable - you'd type her as an LO in your system but the perculiarities of EIE much of the same reflected in Jobs would show up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soupman

You haven't read Walter Isaacson's book? Anyway in time you'll learn that there are more than 16 types of people and more than 16 ways to attach labels to them, along with the fact that qualitative descriptions of the theory are incompatible with the Jungian foundation - which makes everything abstract.

BTW you do know that "ethical types" are quite rational and logical but something is different about their thinking. When I got into typology, in my first weeks (over 6 years ago - oh man time flies) I thought my sister was logical because she could think, she is very intelligent, and reasonable - you'd type her as an LO in your system but the perculiarities of EIE much of the same reflected in Jobs would show up.

---

I've watched every SJ video on YT and watched the keynote address live. Jobs was LO- You could see that -O4 in his attention to detail and the -L4 in his building system and intuitions like Apple and Pixar.

Of course ethical types are rational. Ethic and Logic are the 2 reasoning (rational) functions.

And you didn't respond to anything I wrote. Like think about it, how can technocrats be OL when technology is imaginative/intuitive. My labels are well thought out.

This is just one model of the mind. In this model there are 16 types, 32 subtypes. Other systems can have different amount of types.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

I've watched every SJ video on YT and watched the keynote address live. Jobs was LO- You could see that -O4 in his attention to detail and the -L4 in his building system and intuitions like Apple and Pixar.

Of course ethical types are rational. Ethic and Logic are the 2 reasoning (rational) functions.

And you didn't respond to anything I wrote. Like think about it, how can technocrats be OL when technology is imaginative/intuitive. My labels are well thought out.

---

You haven't read the biography and you don't seem to know how much of a genius marketer he was by simply crafting the right image. He's a right contrast to the nerds like Zuckerberg and Elon musk LIEs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

I've watched every SJ video on YT and watched the keynote address live. Jobs was LO- You could see that -O4 in his attention to detail and the -L4 in his building system and intuitions like Apple and Pixar.

Of course ethical types are rational. Ethic and Logic are the 2 reasoning (rational) functions.

And you didn't respond to anything I wrote. Like think about it, how can technocrats be OL when technology is imaginative/intuitive. My labels are well thought out.

This is just one model of the mind. In this model there are 16 types, 32 subtypes. Other systems can have different amount of types.

---

BTW Jobs was a showman and an editor, Steve Wozniak exposed him and mentioned how he couldn't even write a line of code or design anything to any detail.

Steve Wozniak's father actually saw jobs as a fraud that he wanted him fired from the project. Jobs always talked about hiring fine talent and how he relied on it. He knew how to set direction mentoring people - inspiring them (all EIE expertise), he could be very emotional and abusive. Something quite a contrast to Tim Cook his dual whose more into rules and procedures.

@Soupman

IE vs OE. Every mind has 4 blocks; 2 logical and 2 ethical.

Zuck is an LI- and Musk is an IL- while Jobs was LO-. So when it comes to ethics, Zuck and Musk goto OE while Jobs to IE. That's the difference in their corporate cultures and their brand images.

As an OL instead of IL, Jobs was a duck out of water in silicon valley, that's why he was soo relient on IL talent. He could oversee them because they were all L types. Generally you find OL types in bureaucracy like Law or Finance or Govt. That is where SJ would intellectually be competent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by niffer

That’s pretty unlikely. It would be like calling Oprah the final boss of LSI and a highly self-actualized LSI IMO. It’s more likely that Steve Jobs is just your dual.

I see the people on here typing him EIE as the same as Sol typing me IEI.

Btw: He was also adopted.

---

I know he was adopted. He still grew up in that part of CA. Him and Bruce Lee were born in San Fran. I am open to the idea of him being LSI. I cant make decisions remember? lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by domr

@Soupman

IE vs OE. Every mind has 4 blocks; 2 logical and 2 ethical.

Zuck is an LI- and Musk is an IL- while Jobs was LO-. So when it comes to ethics, Zuck and Musk goto OE while Jobs to IE. That's the difference in their corporate cultures and their brand images.

As an OL instead of IL, Jobs was a duck out of water in silicon valley, that's why he was soo relient on IL talent. He could oversee them because they were all L types. Generally you find OL types in bureaucracy like Law or Finance or Govt. That is where SJ would intellectually be competent.

---

I don't know enough about Socionics to comment but I agree with your assessment of Jobs. Relied on great technical talent of others. Was a good scout of it and smart enough not to go against it. He would argue but would concede to others. He backed Woz on something their suppliers didnt on. He backed his guys. He also protected Woz in a sense from that business aspect. He knew Woz wasn't good there and had actually exploited it himself once but wouldnt let others.

In one part of the movie Woz asked Jobs why he doesn't respect him. And Jobs replied, "Maybe because you never respected me." Probably dramatized but fits into what I am talking about. He wasn't a technical ace and was disrespected because of that. I think Jobs appreciated Woz more than Woz did Jobs. Woz didn't see how what Jobs did was so valuable. Jobs valued Woz. Woz didnt return the favor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soupman

BTW Jobs was a showman and an editor, Steve Wozniak exposed him and mentioned how he couldn't even write a line of code or design anything to any detail.

Steve Wozniak's father actually saw jobs as a fraud that he wanted him fired from the project. Jobs always talked about hiring fine talent and how he relied on it. He knew how to set direction mentoring people - inspiring them (all EIE expertise), he could be very emotional and abusive. Something quite a contrast to Tim Cook his dual whose more into rules and procedures.

---

Ok, this is the kind of idiot I was talking about who has no respect for Jobs. And you wonder why he is an asshole. He couldnt code. You think so small.


Steve Wozniak: What do you do? You're not an engineer. You're not a designer. You can't put a hammer to a nail. I built the circuit board! The graphical interface was stolen! So how come ten times in a day I read Steve Jobs is a genius? What do you do?
Steve Jobs: Musicians play their instruments. I play the orchestra.


Where was Woz when the Ipod and Iphone came out? Apple would be in the dustbin of history without those products. Jobs brought that company back from the dead. Nobody is that fuckin lucky. He was actually great at something. I know you will probably respond that Jobs didnt design those products either but funny how he has a knack of finding that talent and creating an ecosystem that produced it. It is almost a talent in itself. It is a talent in itself. A talent I value more highly than Wozniak's.

lol reminds me of a funny quote on ENFJ: "oh you're a part of my group now? time to abuse you!".. part of the genius seems to be in finding people compliant enough to put up with it, kind of like a legal form of predation. but they can't complain too hard, I'm pretty sure everyone who worked in close proximity to jobs ended up rich. in the end jobs died of cancer anyway and they're probably all still living the good life. also he probably didn't even realize what a dick he was, because he didn't understand his own well being either. so it was more like ignorance of how to treat people in general including himself, rather than malice

tearsofaclown makes me think of Eliot Hulse, I always read his posts in Eliot's voice and manner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tearsofaclown

I don't know enough about Socionics to comment but I agree with your assessment of Jobs. Relied on great technical talent of others. Was a good scout of it and smart enough not to go against it. He would argue but would concede to others. He backed Woz on something their suppliers didnt on. He backed his guys. He also protected Woz in a sense from that business aspect. He knew Woz wasn't good there and had actually exploited it himself once but wouldnt let others.

In one part of the movie Woz asked Jobs why he doesn't respect him. And Jobs replied, "Maybe because you never respected me." Probably dramatized but fits into what I am talking about. He wasn't a technical ace and was disrespected because of that. I think Jobs appreciated Woz more than Woz did Jobs. Woz didn't see how what Jobs did was so valuable. Jobs valued Woz. Woz didnt return the favor.

---

Because Jobs was an aristocratic type (Beta) and Woz was a democratic type (Alpha). This is one of the big problems in socionics. They put too much emphasis on the Quadras and not enough on the families.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tearsofaclown

Ok, this is the kind of idiot I was talking about who has no respect for Jobs. And you wonder why he is an asshole. He couldnt code. You think so small.


Steve Wozniak: What do you do? You're not an engineer. You're not a designer. You can't put a hammer to a nail. I built the circuit board! The graphical interface was stolen! So how come ten times in a day I read Steve Jobs is a genius? What do you do?
Steve Jobs: Musicians play their instruments. I play the orchestra.


Where was Woz when the Ipod and Iphone came out? Apple would be in the dustbin of history without those products. Jobs brought that company back from the dead. Nobody is that fuckin lucky. He was actually great at something. I know you will probably respond that Jobs didnt design those products either but funny how he has a knack of finding that talent and creating an ecosystem that produced it. It is almost a talent in itself. It is a talent in itself. A talent I value more highly than Wozniak's.

---

Yes, EIE, and all of this: "I play the orchestra" his management of people, no technical skill, but being able to read the public very well. . . I do think that a person can admire their identical precisely because they possess the talents that you value in yourself, but they are exceptional at them. He was fantastic at creating a vision, a brand, a name and selling it, while finding the people to make that possible. I've always thought he was a good example of EIE, with the possible bad sides of that type just as easy to see as the parts that people admire him for. Fi ignoring and Si polr both are evident in his behavior along with his Fe and Ni strengths.

I don't remember now what I typed Woz as, since it's been a long time since I've thought about his type. . . might have to go take a look again.

I think Tim Cook is LSI Jobs's dual.

Something that is said about Jobs online: he was not a thinker, he was emotional. He learnt to think by practicing programming but his code was never that good. He had good enough grasp on technology (I think Te role). EIE is probably OK.

He refused cancer treatment. Cancer progressed. Went on treatment. Treatment failed because it was to late. Ideals>reality....? :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timber

He refused cancer treatment. Cancer progressed. Went on treatment. Treatment failed because it was to late. Ideals>reality....? :/

---

Si-PoLR, of course.

That stuff is real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam Strange

Si-PoLR, of course.

That stuff is real.

---

I actually type jobs as ILE or LIE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam Strange

Si-PoLR, of course.

That stuff is real.

---

lol sometimes Ni gets it wrong and this is what happens. this is why its hard to call Jobs a total asshole. He won big on one side of Ni and passed it on to a ton of people. and when he got it wrong, it was him who mainly suffered the consequences. RIP you unlikeable Jesus, you were a good egg