Socionics IQ Test

[implied]

I look forward to see what comes of the bumping of this thread.

probably nothing, but it does seem as though you've changed your tune a bit. no wonder you're so difficult for people to type. you valued Se, as this thread seems to point to, now you don't. it's impossible to work with, basically.

[UDP]

this was a seriously good thread, and worth a good bump.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...40&postcount=1

You might also want to look at what that thread lead to, which was a result of further questioning of my type. Now, the problem is, UDP III account got deleted, so all those post there are me, I believe, without a username.

ALso, I don't think anyone quoted my original post in that thread, which was quite lengthy, and revealed a lot about myself, so that is why I did not keep it up. I wonder if I saved it, I meant to.

[implied]

actually, it has nothing to do with that. but it's probably good that you pointed this out!

.... because i honestly think it's a pretty good sign that we're from conflicting quadras, but you two could be in the same! i don't bother arguing with you as much as sometimes i agree with your general idea (and i think we've agreed several times in the past. it's just odd as we tend to do some weirdly reverse, yet not incompatible typings. as in, i get what you're saying and coming from sometimes, but it's a bit odd. although like/dislike based typings is something i'm trying not to get too involved in, it certainly seems to count towards something.

[Ezra]

I find it interesting that a) Transigent only included LII and Beta NF as possibilities (ignoring "Other") and that b) about 25% went for "Other".

First, basically, why Beta NF? It would've made sense if Transigent had put "LII", "LSI" and "Other" as the options, but I see no logical explanation for the possibilities offered. I see Ti as a base function, as do many others. This fits well with what I can see as a clearly IJ temperament. I won't go into it here; I've done it twice - once on the wiki, once in another UDP typing forum.

Secondly, there is clearly a large base of people who don't think LII or Beta NF (and I'm not surprised that only three people collectively went for this, because I think it's pretty evident that UDP is not and ethical type). This means, I assume, that most of those ten think he is either an LSI or an LSE. I see a lack of Se, which is why I see these two options as implausible.

[UDP]

What on earth made you change your mind, Ezra? I don't get it. Now you see a "total lack of Se", heh, when before you were convinced I was LSI.

Why did you change your mind? What revelation has come to you?

[implied]

I find it interesting that a) Transigent only included LII and Beta NF as possibilities (ignoring "Other") and that b) about 25% went for "Other".

First, basically, why Beta NF? It would've made sense if Transigent had put "LII", "LSI" and "Other" as the options, but I see no logical explanation for the possibilities offered. I see Ti as a base function, as do many others. This fits well with what I can see as a clearly IJ temperament. I won't go into it here; I've done it twice - once on the wiki, once in another UDP typing forum.

Secondly, there is clearly a large base of people who don't think LII or Beta NF (and I'm not surprised that only three people collectively went for this, because I think it's pretty evident that UDP is not and ethical type). This means, I assume, that most of those ten think he is either an LSI or an LSE. I see a lack of Se, which is why I see these two options as implausible.

how is it evident that he's not ethical? i'll pull a joy (:wink and say that i think the possibility hasn't been explored enough.

udp, if you have the right to change your mind on your own type, i suggest that ezra has the right to change his mind. your own representation of yourself and your values has changed quite a bit, so i don't know why opinions on your type shouldn't change with that. i do have a tendency to maintain Se>Si for you.

You seek Fi in that you value close relationships highly, and you value the blunt truth over harmony. That's Te>Fe. It's not entirely imPOSSIBLE that you could be just a well-developed INTj, but the above makes me think ENTj.

i've been thinking that there are and types who are typically fond of harmonious relationships as well, so i wouldn't quite limit this to only , as isn't the "argument" function in all cases. a good example would be slackermom and her relationship with her husband. i think she's recalled before how ridiculous it seems to both of them when her ENXj parents fight constantly. (correct me if i'm wrong, mom.)

at any rate, i don't wish to contribute anymore on the topic of his type.

[UDP]

[b]udp, if you have the right to change your mind on your own type, i suggest that ezra has the right to change his mind.[/b/] your own representation of yourself and your values has changed quite a bit, so i don't know why opinions on your type shouldn't change with that. i do have a tendency to maintain Se>Si for you.

That is a good point, I meant to come back here and say that yesterday. We each change our 'statements' based on our understandings. It's not totally unreasonable.

That is why I dropped LII to go to LSE. And that is why I am still staying with that typing.

[implied]

That is a good point, I meant to come back here and say that yesterday. We each change our 'statements' based on our understandings. It's not totally unreasonable.

That is why I dropped LII to go to LSE. And that is why I am still staying with that typing.

i'd like to request a video.

[Ms. Kensington]

y'all are cute.

[implied]

y'all are cute.

not as cute as youuuu!

[UDP]

Aw, implied caught me being sloppy. Oh well : /

[implied]

is that you, dio?