-

[Joy]

My perspective at this point is that if dee doesn't have a Te PoLR, it doesn't exist.

[Ezra]

You're a 6w5.

explain.

He took a test, and came out as 4w5, followed by 6w5. He said 6w5 was more like him. He may be wrong, but I trust his judgment in the Enneagram, if not in socionics.

From my point of view, I can see him as a 6 by the way he constantly sifts through every type, and can settle on nothing. It's not as if he's limited himself to a few types that he could possibly be; he's basically just said "out of all the 16 types, I dunno which one I am!" and he's attempted to employ a variety of futile methods in order to find his type, which he hasn't found yet. This is textbook 6 behaviour. He's also very averse to upsetting anyone in any way i.e. if he passes a comment he perceives as insulting to another, he'll automatically retract it after having gotten a negative response from someone. Take, for example, my thread:

Right, there's a huge divide here. All LIEs are against the idea of my being an LIE, including discojoe, who is simply sucking up to Joy for obvious reasons.

What the fuck is this? Some stupid bogus argument to undermine his credibility just because he disagrees with you? Grow up.

will you quit being so fucking impolite!

Then, after:

oh yeah, i get it now, i just didn't know what sucking up means (even though i looked it up it gave me different meanings). i think discojoe doesn't really suck up to anyone, it may be though that he got the type wrong. i'd personally like to see his reasons.

Ok, fair enough. Do you see why I reacted the way I did?

Comes:

yes. sorry.

He doesn't like ordering people about, in comparison with me, to whom it comes naturally.

This is what makes me think of Alpha > Beta (the Fe is evident, so he must be in one of these quadras).

I haven't decided on his wing yet. The way his Fe comes through points more towards 6w7, but he appears to enjoy studying socionics from many different angles, and isn't overtly dependent, which is why 6w5 is definitely a possibility.

[Mea]

My perspective at this point is that if dee doesn't have a Te PoLR, it doesn't exist.

What doesn't exist?

Anyway, I agree that dee has a Te PoLR, over any other xx PoLR.
SEI makes most sense so far, IMO. Fe creative makes more sense than Fe dominant, from the descriptions on wikisocion.

[Joy]

My perspective at this point is that if dee doesn't have a Te PoLR, it doesn't exist.

What doesn't exist?

Te PoLR

Anyway, I agree that dee has a Te PoLR, over any other xx PoLR. SEI makes most sense so far, IMO.

Yeah, (s)he doesn't seem IEI to me.

[Ezra]

i can think of a handful of people who still ROFL at your ESTp self-typing but actually that only stands to strengthen your point here.

I would actually like you to name them all so I can cut them down with my arguments. Seriously, I have argued to hell and back with various arguments concerning my type, and I would like to see who disagrees with me. There are a bunch of dickheads on this forum who seem to laugh at any fucking type I prescribe to myself; it's like they don't want me to type as whatever they are (they see me as competition, insulting or offensive, unpleasant or dislikeable. You know, can I not just settle on a type that everyone agrees with? Blatantly not. You've always got a senseless fuckwit who can't see the facts right in front of their goddamn eyes.

I trust Expat, Joy and Thunder when they say I am not like them, and so am probably not LIE. I trust everyone when they say I value Se; it is so fucking obvious. I trust people when they say Fe > Fi, because I have seen direct, concrete, worldly evidence for it. When people say I use Ti > Te, I trust them, because that too is obvious. Any prick who's still contemplating EIE is so psychologically fucked up that they should probably not even bother learning about socionics; they clearly haven't the capacity to do so.

So come on then, let's hear it. Let's hear an argument to thrash my own. Oh wait... THERE ISN'T ONE.

[Ezra]

Actually, dee, you mentioned that there was a possibility that you were IEI didn't you?

4w5 would be perfectly compatible with IEI. I'd have a harder time seeing someone who was an SEI 4w5, and an even harder time seeing someone as an xEI 6w5.

[Joy]

I trust Expat, Joy and Thunder when they say I am not like them, and so am probably not LIE. I trust everyone when they say I value Se; it is so fucking obvious. I trust people when they say Fe > Fi, because I have seen direct, concrete, worldly evidence for it. When people say I use Ti > Te, I trust them, because that too is obvious. Any prick who's still contemplating EIE is so psychologically fucked up that they should probably not even bother learning about socionics; they clearly haven't the capacity to do so.

Just thought I'd point out that not being LIE, valuing Se, valuing Fe, and valuing Ti doesn't exclude EIE. (However, I'm not saying you are one. I think you're SLE, mostly because I think you're static.)

[Ezra]

What's the difference between static and dynamic? I looked at some stuff on various socionics sites, but it doesn't help me.

I don't have Fe-leading. No chance.

[Ezra]

Because of quadra values. Yes, it's understandable. But not from my perspective. Basically, I don't see it as my valuing all my quadra values above all others. As I've said many times before, if I had a choice between Se/Si, Te/Ti, Fe/Fi and Ne/Ni, I'd value Se, Te, Fi and Ni. Simple as that. Maybe I don't use them. But I certainly value them.

How important is independence and freedom to an SLE by the way?

[Blaze]

but i've never really cared to bother trying to "thrash" your arguments, because the reward at stake is so small compared to the potential risk of getting ensnared in one of your multipage tirades.

this is one of the best things ever said here. lol

[Ezra]

I really don't understand why you think you value .

Did I say I did? Fe > Fi, I agree with you.

Understanding bonds (Fi) is less important to me than manipulation/expression of emotions (Fe).

[Ezra]

but i've never really cared to bother trying to "thrash" your arguments, because the reward at stake is so small compared to the potential risk of getting ensnared in one of your multipage tirades.

this is one of the best things ever said here. lol

It was a pitiful response.

What he's essentially done is start with a comment, and backed down when he got my answer.

[Ezra]

Because of quadra values. Yes, it's understandable. But not from my perspective. Basically, I don't see it as my valuing all my quadra values above all others. As I've said many times before, if I had a choice between Se/Si, Te/Ti, Fe/Fi and Ne/Ni, I'd value Se, Te, Fi and Ni. Simple as that. Maybe I don't use them. But I certainly value them.

You said it there, were you mixed up?

I totally misinterpreted Fi. I thought it would be more useful. But that whole thing about the McCanns as a stereotypical manifestation of Fi, I just thought 'no chance' and knew Fe > Fi was obvious.

[marooned]

SEI

[astralsilky]

dee, I usually get an IEE vibe from you.

(Where's the tag that makes text jiggle back and forth??)

[astralsilky]

Ezra is trying to use facts to come to his type. ok this is certain, this or that, so it must be this

Is there another way to go about it?

[Ezra]

I think the main distinction Expat, Joy and Thunder (I use them as examples because they all claim to have Te dominance) make concerning Te and me, is that while Te is about avoiding as much as possible spreading that which may be slightly untrue, I am confident in saying things that are rarely backed up by hard evidence. They perceive that I'm more focused on logic and things fitting in with my perspective than on delivering the facts as they stand. Also, the ulterior motive thing from me that has been mentioned on many occasions points more towards Se than Te leading. It's making an assumption as opposed to an informed observation.

They see much more Fe in me than they do Fi, but that I think is because Fi is so hard to see. Despite the fact that those around me and people on this forum might perceive me as having poor emotional intelligence, I actually have very good emotional intelligence; I simply often don't practice/use it enough. I'm also beginning to see the importance of it in everyday life. It's crucial to friendships, relationships and the like. I'm a very enthusiastic person for the most part in life, so naturally one would see Fe > Fi.

In short, people see in me Se, Fe and Ti. Whether or not this is the case, I can't say, but that is what many people on this forum say they see in me.

[marooned]

I'm sorry, I just have to say this... I think everyone uses facts to come to a conclusion... but there are different ways in which to do that... it's how one processes the incoming information that is the question, yes?

[Ezra]

i wonder if using facts to come to a conclusion is Te, cos to me that's what you've just been doing, Ezra.

To the best of my knowledge, that is what Te types do.

But as I say, my problem is that I'm not sufficient enough in socionics to come to an almost definitive conclusion about my type (despite my signature).

See, to some extent I feel right with SLE, but in many ways I feel it is far out. There are issues that not even Slacker Mom can write off as being normal to an SLE. As imfd95 said, people laugh at my being an SLE. I don't appreciate the split, because on the one hand you have those who claim I am Beta, I value Fe and Se etc. and on the other hand you have those who doubt whatever type I suggest.

I think the problem is that there has been not enough looking at the facts; as someone mentioned, it has been one big Ti-fest; going round in circles.

[Ezra]

I'm sorry, I just have to say this... I think everyone uses facts to come to a conclusion... but there are different ways in which to do that... it's how one processes the incoming information that is the question, yes?

True.

[marooned]

Dee, I know someone asked before, but how old are you? Just in general... Are you under 20 or over 20?

[Ezra]

Ezra --

Many of the things you say -- you will remember your comment about discojoe "sucking up" to Joy -- are totally repulsive to an Gamma. That you so seem to so easily assume that people might have some motivation for outright dishonesty is completely alien and offensive to / -- do you not see it?

Yes, I do.

Your devaluing of has been painfully obvious from the start -- is not difficult to see,

No, it isn't.

and the lack of it is even more obvious.

Yes, it is.

Your initial statements about relationships show that you barely even consider it.

No, I don't.

I don't even know where to go for this because you're so bullheaded

Yes, I am.

and there is no fucking point,

No, there isn't.

if you think you are a Fi-valuing type then you simply don't have a clue about Socionics.

No, I don't.

[Ezra]

ifmd95, I don't claim to assert anything. Merely people perceive certain aspects of me, and then come to conclusions. When I act in a different way, it is perceived as a contradiction on my part.

There are problems I see with SLE. It's not something I think I definitely am. To be honest, I would not like to be SLE. There are too many flaws. Is this a sign that I'm coming to accept who I am; a flawed character, as everyone is? Or is it because I am genuinely not an SLE? I don't know.

[marooned]

I think it may be important. I've read that on average the brain doesn't finish developing/maturing until around 25. Also I remember reading somewhere on Rick's Socionics site that people are easiest to type between like the ages of 25 and 30 something (I don't remember the exact #s, but it was somewhere close to that range).

In my own experience, taking MBTI-like tests... when I was around 17 I always got INTJ... then a couple years later, it was usually INTP... then some years later it was pretty much always INFP. I answered questions honestly. I think my personality was still sort of in flux... especially when I was a teenager.

In short, I think age is relevant.

[Dee]

...

[Dee]

...

[Logos]

What is Thunder doing wrong?

[Mea]

You don't present facts, you present your interpretation of them -- which I don't trust.

prove it using examples.

in my life, i had wonderful experiences with ILIs. just as with SEEs, just as with ENTjs, actually, not as pleasant with ENTjs, ISFjs and ILIs, but good enough.

Can this be used as an example? You're taking examples out of real life. And you might have mistyped them even.

Anyway, like your interpretation of certain reinin dichotomies, your interpretation of the IM elements seem... not entirely correct.

And the way you express yourself seems very Fe valuing. You're making Fe valuing sound like a bad thing. Why?

@Ezra: I think Fe dominants tend to score the best on EQ tests.

[Expat]

ok, in socionics, there already is such thing as code of ethics of a typer. and in it, there is no such thing as forcful typing, in fact it's a very, very, VERY bad thing. rmcnew and Expat are aware of it and they WILL prevent you from HARASSING me if you continue to do so.

I do not intend to do any such thing.

This is an open discussion forum. If you start a thread, you have no right to demand that specific individuals do not participate, or that they only say things that please you.

Thunder is debating your type with you using socionics arguments. If you don't like it, you can ignore her, either by not replying or by actually putting her on ignore.

For her to join a discussion you started, using arguments, can't be called "harrassing" by any definition of the term, unless you call questioning your arguments "harrassing". Which, if accepted, would mean the end of this forum (and of most others, I'd say).

[Dee]

...

[Ezra]

Ezra the point was you make assertions about your type (or typing..maybe not type itself but in either case), such as having been dubbed ESTp "99%-definitely", when less controversial approaches to the same end (establishing that dee is less likely ESTp than you are) seem possible.

Okay. I'll consider that.

i put you on ignore as you are just too much for me, Thunder, sorry.

This is the kind of statement that would lean towards Ethical for you, dee.

If you are SEI, perhaps it would explain why you conflict with Thunder. She has also mentioned that you claim to assert that she is ESE. Were your reasons for this linked in with your thinking your are ILI, by any chance?

I stand by my assumption that people on this forum type using their relationships with the typee, and how the typer works with them.

[Angel von Himmel]

The ignore button works wonders for things like this.

[Mea]

thanks very much, reuben. it really does

notice how neither Expat nor mcnew did anything quite like you said they would. and yet you're on a first name basis with them now?

I think this might point towards merry(reinin dichotomy).

2. Cheerful does not perceive "getting to know somebody" as a special kind of activity (in contrast to the serious, for which it is a form of ritual). They know/realize very well why they are getting acquainted (the purpose of this acquaintance ? interest, business and so on). In contrast to the serious they do not divide the process of acquainting into consecutive stages. They can immediately establish/determine emotional distance in contact and adapt/regulate it. They overcome boundaries between them and strangers by emotional incandescence (It can either bring them together or move them apart). The "name" behind the person is of secondary relevance, interest is on the person, relations are paramount and so on ? therefore they do not count formality as a necessary part of acquaintance.

2. For the serious acquainting with new people is represented by a special ritual necessary for rapprochement with them (If this ritual was not carried out them the serious does not consider themselves acquainted, for example: "We did not introduce ourselves"). In situations of acquaintance for the serious it is easier if the affinity of contact (Emotional distance) is set externally i.e. the degree of emotional distance will be set by some sort of "mediator" (Whether this be a person, situation or something other) which allows to skip the first stage of establishing emotional distance and begin closer dialogue/contact. For overcoming boundaries between them and other people serious create (or they use already existing) "rules" or "rituals" for the step by step rapprochement. They are aware of all the stages of the process of acquainting (When the status changes from "strangers" to acquaintances). For the rapprochement for the serious it is important to know the name, title, any other thing that describes this new person ? therefore formal representation is a very important stage of acquainting.

Note: There's a possibility I might be wrong. But I think Serious types are less likely to call someone by their first name if they've never had any real 1 to 1 interaction, being formally introduced, etc. And would more likely call this person an acquaintance rather than a close friend.
And dee is relatively new, and he seems to have done what the merry dichotomy described.
Of course, correct me if I'm wrong (someone who's familiar with the reinin dichotomies).

[Mea]

i am and this is not a sufficient basis for it. i would advise to look more into what functions are valued in these dichotomies. Te/Ti , Fe/Fi. though with the level of understanding of these most people have (especially the first two), it's tough call.

Merry types basically value Fe, and Serious, Fi.

[krieger]

The guy in this video is a good example of a male ENFp. The speech is in dutch but you should get a fairly good impression of what he is like from body language and intonation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EShMI...at%20gamekings

Any identification?