Most likely to mistype themselves.
Least likely to correct themselves.
Discuss.
Most likely to mistype themselves.
Least likely to correct themselves.
Discuss.
Last edited by mu4; 01-22-2008 at 10:27 PM. Reason: Exaggeration effect to stimulate discussion.
hkmrr, what are your reasons for saying this? i'd like to examine your logic.
IEI - the nasty kind...
edit
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
good point. are you something else? (;Originally Posted by ScarlettLux
@hkk - i don't know about what you've said, but i can say from my own experiences that it seems like alphas are least likely to mistype themselves.
6w5 sx
model Φ: -+0
sloan - rcuei
Which do you mean, that a non-alpha usually won't mistype him or herself as an alpha? Or an alpha usually won't mistype him/herself as a non-alpha?Originally Posted by implied
Originally Posted by Logos
Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.
I pity your souls
I think that's what she meant.Originally Posted by Elro
INTp
sx/sp
I will not name names. I will not name names. I will not name names. I will not evoke the name that would derail this thread...Originally Posted by hkkmr
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
Reject "all" evidence is of course exaggerated, but I think that, theoretically, you have a point.Originally Posted by hkkmr
You can add:to make said conclusion fit a logical structure, thereby seemingly reinforcing it.
![]()
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
I'm thinking more like:Originally Posted by hkkmr
is certainty and simplicity.( cracker, bionic and me)
is uncertainty and complexity.(XoX and Johnathan)
So when these types are looking for their type I thinkwould try to make things as uncertain as possible and maybe even try and confuse themselves to find some sort of complexity.
Andwould try to make things as certain as possible and maybe even try and block out information that would cause any unnessary complexity.
Ehh, I dunno if I agree with this. I'm not even sure if XoX isOriginally Posted by electric
but if they are ...
I don't really like to make things too complex in regards to my own type. I think a person should know who they are and to spend so much time over-analyzing after the initial confusion seems a bit overboard. If this is
simplicity, pfft, I'll be
then. It seems to me that some people like to make themselves out to be this mysterious typeless thing when I do believe that deep down, they know what they value, they just enjoy making a mess out of it.
Actuallyis more proper for the "vigorously defend the typing" aspect.
is more related to attributing differences in opinion to emotional rather than factual concerns.
and
are subdued. They are simply given less importance than
and
.
![]()
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
It's the same thing actually.Originally Posted by hkkmr
That sounds correct.Originally Posted by hkkmr
![]()
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
Recent convo:
INFp: I'm going into the city for a couple of nights blah blah blah - can you feed the cats?
ISTp: Sure. When?
INFp: I'm going right now!
ISTp: *suicide attempt* No, when do you want me to feed the cats?
SLI/ISTp -- Te subtype
Originally Posted by force my hand
Why does this sound familiar? (I don't have any cats....)
IEI-Fe 4w3