Yeah, again, confidence inOriginally Posted by ifmd95
.
Which - if Fabio is SEE - makes again sense. A LIE is put off by such use of Fe; a SEE, having it as 8th function, tends to see it as, hmm, "cute" or something.
EP
EJ
Se
Ni
Fi/Te
Ti/Fe
Ethical
Logical
Other
Yeah, again, confidence in
Which - if Fabio is SEE - makes again sense. A LIE is put off by such use of Fe; a SEE, having it as 8th function, tends to see it as, hmm, "cute" or something.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Not sure how a type can be so easily deduced from such a limited quantity of posts. (Elena, not me)
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
It depends. If you're talking about the ESFj kind of Fe, I agree - the kind of "ooooh, sweeeeetie, it's so gooooood to see you!" Fe doesn't bother ENTjs as much as it does INTps.
Yes, that's what I meant. Not the Fe as in "let's all have fun now!" which is what Bionicgoat and cracka also use; so long as it's not actively expected or demanded from them, LIEs are okay with it and even like it (assuming they don't dislike the person).
But Fe as in making an "argument" in a discussion, especially if the aim is to "win" by questioning the other person's motivations or credentials -- this is offputting to Te base (with Se HA, I suspect ESTjs would not care as much). ESFps understand Se goals (as in, the important thing is to "win"), are not threatened by clumsy use of Te, and find the use of Fe towards a Se goal amusing.
*shrug* I can reach at least a tentative typing, can't I? The more information I have about her, the better I can confirm - or revise - that tentative typing.
I like "typing by minimalist information". More often than not, when I get scattered minimal information about a person - whether first-hand or second-hand - if they all point in the same direction, they tend to be later confirmed.
But, again, with more information I can change that typing. So far, though, everything I see points very consistently towards EIE. I'm not claiming to be infallible.
Ah yeah for sure, I do them all the time. My thinking was more on the line, that everything can become too speculative if we don't possess enough empirical data. But I see how you can reach EIE as a type by the motivations you've given.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
@Fabio. Ah cool.
It does vary with the person. Some people have a "neutral" way of writing when posting - Rick, for instance. It's not easy - or even possible - to deduce his type just from his posts (which is what made him very skeptical that anyone could be typed online, but later he changed his mind).
Other people are easier. For instance, reyn_til_runa's posts were Ni-loaded from the start, so it would have been surprising if she wasn't Ni dominant. Cracka's posts are full of Alpha Fe. tcaudilllg's, of Ti. And so on and so forth. Elena's, so far, have been full of Fe, Fe of the EIE variety.
"but interestingly enough, that area does seem to "work for you" (if what you've said about your relationships is any indication.) but that may not be your interpretation of the theory working, as much as it is your own Se + Fi."
I think we've also got to make a distinction between using the theory in a strictly personal fashion, and writing a formal paper and-or trying to get the information across. In the former case, I don't need to provide any proof as long as the results are good for me. My head is fallible for sure, but as long as I'm the only one that is impacted by eventual errors, it doesn't matter.
In the latter, I definitely need to proved both empirical and logical grounding to everything I say. A similar situation would be the one of an investor that picks up trends intuitively with rules-of-thumb. Suppose he's very successful. Yet, he won't be necessarily able to write an academic article on his strategies because they work in his mind and not always formalization is possible (or among the capabilities of the indvidual). But a common language is needed, otherwise it's impossible to: - find errors; - use effectively the strategy (interestingly, the problem of "finding a common language" is generally related to serious preference by many socionics authors).
Your point...I disagree with it. You can think that Se+Fi is what makes my relationship work, ok (they worked even before socionics though), but why would I need renin dichotomies? I don't think I've ever said they add anything to my relationships but rather that they are a good source to see the difference between individuals and clarify their types. Getting along with people is a whole different matter: as I said, regardless of our typing, the relationship will always remain the same (supposing we remain of the same type).
Last edited by FDG; 01-02-2008 at 12:05 PM.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Not sure. I think you resent people using "unfair" means (that is, of your super-ego) to achieve the same goals as your HA, so LIEs would dislike someone using Fe to achieve Se, but not Fe to achieve Si (they might find it pointless, but not actively dislike it, unless it's expected of them).
Yes it seems we're talking essentially of the same thing.
No, the "Se HA" referred to the "Te" outside the parenthesis, confusing I know. You got it right.
I am curious why you are such the prima donna and vainly believe you are in any position to say otherwise?You do not seem very important.
Yes, you hit the nail on the head.That's a different discussion, and of course there's too little information (and we must be aware of individual and cultural differences, etc etc etc) -- but I agree that, so far, Elena's tone and style of argumentation is very similar to Kristiina's. What she's doing above is trying to re-order the supposed social roles of the interaction, essentially putting Joy down in a "who do you think you are" way., not
Which is not the kind of argumentation I've ever seen Fabio use, by the way.
And the mutual appreciation with Jadae, etc (again, it's too little).
So, from the little information seen so far, I agree that Elena seems more ENFj than ENTj.
LIE's argue with information about the subject at hand, not by re-ordering the supposed social roles of the interaction. She was challenging my social status. A very clear distinction between EIE's and LIE's is that LIE's see social status or group approval as being totally irrelevant to what is correct and what is incorrect (not that all EIE's don't). That's why I didn't respond to her "oh yeah, well you're not even all that cool or important, so why should anyone listen to you?" attitude, as if my being in an unfavorable social standing in the interaction would make a difference as to whether what I'd said was accurate or inaccurate (I seriously cannot even begin to understand this type of reasoning).
I remember wondering if she was challenging me as such because FDG had mentioned me to her, because I'm the one who started the thread, because I have a high post count (if ever there was a time in which would be appropriate to use the rolling eyes emoticon, this would be it), or because of what I had said. I do not believe that it could possibly be just because of what I had said, so one or more of the other possibilities seemed to be a factor. If she had seen me as just some random poster she would not have responded that way. She responded as if I (or someone?) thought I was in a position of social dominance, and that I (or someone?) thought that the things I said about Socionics must be correct just because of my position as one of the top posters or being socially established here or whatever. It was like it didn't even cross her mind that I may just be in a position to speak more knowledgeably than her (or FDG) because I actually do have more knowledge about Socionics, something that has absolutely NOTHING to do with my post count or my "importance".
The only response I could possibly offer to that was to subtly point out that the irony in her telling me that I'm not in a position to speak knowledgeably about Socionics.
Then I tried to set aside the pettiness and discuss Socionics, and FDG came in and said that he doesn't want me to talk to her about his type (even though I was only directing her to information from sources that he himself had said were reliable). He even said that she should consider information offered from anyone but me.
But that's beside the point. The point is that I see no reasonably possibility that Elena is LIE.
Joy I don't see how you can claim that social status will NEVER affect an LIE's view of what's right or wrong. Not all of you are holy knights for the truth, lol.
And I don't think she ever implied you were right or wrong because of your "status," but merely whether or not what you say was reliable.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
I obviously warned her against you Joy, but I didn't mention anybody else.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
What do you mean by that? That Expat is making extensive and too-close-for-comfort-for-an-LIE use of Ti?Yeah, but
No. There's a vibe I sense which is one of loyalty; a kind of 'banding together' with other LIEs on the forum.Because I'm not good at verbally expressing frustration?
I've noticed it comes through in Joy too, though slightly more subtly. She does it more with Expat than you. It's like a mentor-pupil relationship. You're Joy's and Joy is Expat's. If you are looking at this in disgust (anyone, not just Salawa), I don't want to here anything from you. Why? Because if you agree with me, you understand exactly where I'm coming from for whatever reason, but if you don't, then you never will; you'll only harbour stubborn feelings towards me.
Introduction thread!? Please link me, Joy.
Fabio's a member. If you'd like to view it and are not already a member, perhaps you can join.And how would we go about that if (from what I understand) it can only be viewed by members?
I don't understand this at all.I would argue that it's more Se + Ti/Fi and Ni + Fe/Ti.
At this point SEE seems like the most likely option (followed by SLE). Welcome back to Gamma!Sometimes I think Expat is actually a God. Or at least a Prophet, of the mighty Socionus. The Second Coming, haha (after Augusta).
That's wrong. I certainly don't do that, and I'm an Irrational. There's a big misconception about EPs not following a clear line of thought, which is essentially an MBTT-derived myth.hm.. I don't think that fabio shies away from logical argument or feels uncomfortable arguing in this style (which is what is written about a Ti polr). What I see SEE doing is mimicking what they would get from an ILI.. factual accuracy. Like, argue about things being factual or not factual, then mocking someone about it. I don't see fabio doing that as much as using logical arguments and then mocking them
This is a very good point. Gilly, can you honestly say that you talk a fair bit about Fi, and Fi-related issues? I can't. It's my Achilles' heal.
Can I just say that when I first joined, the little information you had lead you in the direction of EIE.That's a different discussion, and of course there's too little information (and we must be aware of individual and cultural differences, etc etc etc) -- but I agree that, so far, Elena's tone and style of argumentation is very similar to Kristiina's. What she's doing above is trying to re-order the supposed social roles of the interaction, essentially putting Joy down in a "who do you think you are" way.
Which is not the kind of argumentation I've ever seen Fabio use, by the way.
And the mutual appreciation with Jadae, etc (again, it's too little).
So, from the little information seen so far, I agree that Elena seems more ENFj than ENTj.
I think that what Joy is trying to get at is that her views appear to be coming from an Aristocratic point of view. And LIEs are not Aristocratic.
Take this into account, Joy.And I don't think she ever implied you were right or wrong because of your "status," but merely whether or not what you say was reliable.
No, ezra, he means that he think I use a lot of
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Based on what? Again...
"I am curious why you are such the prima donna and vainly believe you are in any position to say otherwise?
What does being important have to do with what is correct or incorrect? What does my view of myself or whether or not I'm a "prime donna" (which is apparently Italian for "first lady", such as a lead singer or actor) have to do with what is correct or incorrect?
I'm not saying that social status is never taken into account by any LIE ever... just that an LIE will care more about what's correct or incorrect than social status. (Social status may be one of the things taken into consideration to help gauge whether or not one is a reliable source of information. Information from a doctor who is not respected by any of his peers will obviously be evaluated for accuracy much more carefully than information from a doctor who is at the top of his field.)
I'm the only one you feel threatened by? Thanks FDG, I feel honored.
I don't feel threatened, there's nothing at stake, nothing I can lose. Never cared about my reputation here.
I feel like you give the wrong information, and I feel like it's all really misguided, and that your understanding of socionics is completely wrong (as much as you feel mine is wrong, I feel yours is wrong), from the basics to the most complex things.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
introduction thread
Yes, that's a large part of it. Te > Fe (external > internal) + Democracy.
But how would she know, having only been here a day or two?Take this into account, Joy.
What do you think?No, ezra, he means that he think I use a lot of
It's more like Alpha male, but female.
IMO, she's showing a far better demonstration of Te or at least Te valuing, by stating that she actually knows Fabio, and contrary to what you and others might say, she knows what he's like. The vehicle she's using to explain herself may seem Aristocratic, but her evidence is certainly more reliable than yours, by default.
Oh I agree it's baseless, but I don't think you can use it to say that EIEs see truth as relative to authority. They don't care so much about truth, probably because they see it as "hard to come by;" they're more interested in what is actionable and what can be used, and with what reliability, which is what she was getting at, I'm fairly sure.Based on what? Again...
"I am curious why you are such the prima donna and vainly believe you are in any position to say otherwise?
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
I think it's fairly obvious that I don't have a thinking PoLR, and the only thing that might show this are the fact that I've changed my mind about my type. I accept varios different theoretical frameworks and use their terminology and take whatever has empirical value for me. Surely, I don't really care about forming a cogent system out of them because it seems like a daunting and time-expensive task, and I don't even feel like I have a natural inclination towards it. Yet if questioned on the empirical validity of these construct I don't have much problems replying (see my recent exchange with imfd for an example).What do you think?
There's probably only one person whose (argumented) opinion could make me change my mind immediately, and it's Smilingeyes, who I think has always had the best ideas and has always been extremely objective in every evalutation of his except for his last intervention.
Fact: the posters here have changed their minds about their types just as much as me, but none of them is thought about as having a
Primadonna means somebody that always tries to be the center of attention, it's generally a derogatory form.
Last edited by FDG; 01-02-2008 at 06:59 PM.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
1) I type primarily by quadra values; so to have typed you as a Beta extravert, when you are a Beta extravert, doesn't sound so bad at all.
2) Even then, I never said that there was no way you were SLE. I did say that you are "certainly" a Beta extravert, and more likely EIE than SLE. I'm not denying that I put EIE above SLE, not at all.
And, as I have stated already, my "typings by minimalist information" are tentative (as, indeed, all my typings are). For the umpteenth time -- so far she has consistently seemed EIE. If she starts showing Te more than Fe from now on, I will change my mind accordingly. Simple as that.
So - I'd like to be clear on this - if I disagree with you in this matter, then I hate you?
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
I agree with it.And yes, LIE's are uncomfortable when there's just sitting there doing nothing.
The line you quoted was, I believe, talking about both the unsettled feeling LIE's have when they're not accomplishing something (unless their dual seeking function is actively being fulfilled in that moment) and the difficulty they have making themselves physically comfortable. Even if they're healthy, they can sit with poor posture for a while without realizing it, for example. Also, if they do try to make themselves and their surroundings comfortable, they're not good at it and never quite sure if they've succeeded.
Perhaps I am exaggerating though... perhaps Expat or ishy can offer input?
how in the hell is that Te???
Well, she has hard evidence about his personality from real life interaction, whereas we can only infer from what he posts on the forum.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Yes, but -- that's the kind of argument that, say, a SEI would be equally likely to use, as in "my personal experience pwns your theoretical knowledge". And, in fact, people of all types have used this kind of argument.
We can say it's Te, or Si, or Se (in terms of "winning" a discussion"); but to say "I know him in person, so I am in a better position to talk about him than you are" seems like a sort of "universal argument", whatever function you can also connect it to.
Sure she knows Fabio better than we do. But that's not enough to know better about his type. That's the same discussion we have with those who say, "how can you claim to know my type better than myself", which is easily answered with "because I know socionics better than you".
i utterly fail to see what that has to do with Te.
I'm not saying it means she's a Te type, or that she knows his type better than we do, but I don't think it can be denied that she's appealing to Te. That's all I'm saying.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Because she has actual real knowledge of what he's like, and doesn't have to infer anything.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Well, still, it depends.
If she's looking at Fabio through criteria, and impressions, she can easily discuss with others - she's looking at him "externally" and as an "object".
But she can look both at Fabio's dynamics and static aspects.
So - external dynamics and statics of objects -
But she's as likely using her own personal impressions, so also the internal ones:
Internal dynamics and statics of objects -.
i don't agree at all. Te basically says that we should consider the facts in question. knowing him does not amount to any real evidence if she has no understanding of socionics.
fine. that's not Te. that's experience.
i still don't understand your point at all.
Eh...maybe. She can definitely provide facts about how he behaves, and is surely privy to them, so she has a Te edge over us, whether she is using it or not. But obviously it doesn't amount to shit about her knowing his type, because she probably knows squat about socionics.Well, still, it depends.
If she's looking at Fabio through criteria, and impressions, she can easily discuss with others - she's looking at him "externally" and as an "object".
But she can look both at Fabio's dynamics and static aspects.
So - external dynamics and statics of objects -
But she's as likely using her own personal impressions, so also the internal ones:
Internal dynamics and statics of objects -
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
If we're questioning her understanding of Socionics, then that's insufficient Ti. She has facts we don't have, that is, facts about Fabie's behavior IRL. So it's at least part Te; you can't say that it doesn't include Te.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
You're being a twat. She has knowledge about how he behaves in real life, in real time. That is Te.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Well, sure. As long as she says things like, "I know that Fabio bikes 5000Km every day, and immediately afterwards eats nails for breakfast, at the same time as writing his essays with both hands simultaneously -- he does that every day, precisely from 6am to 6:35am, that is a fact", then she's providing us with Te information.
Right. I don't think she has done that, but she does "have more Te" on Fabio than we do, so to speak. That's really all I was trying to say.
I do, however, think Ezra is wrong in assuming that her flaunting of this fact is a show of strong OR valued Te.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
yeah, exactly.
her knowing him in and of itself has nothing whatsoever to do with Te, no matter how many times you say it.
Good thing I never said it.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
it is duly noted with painstaking attention to cadmium yellow that the tinge of hunter green (color 3992-10) which appears on patches 615B and 616B is incorrect; it should rather be replaced with rainforest green (color 3987-04). therefore the werewithal to approach such vector coordinates as those appearing in patches 322D and thereabouts might be more appropriately diagnosed as bernice's syndrome (+20.009 to anyone who gets that reference), and herein there shall always be maple trees in the great salt lake, and on the seventh day petals fell in petaluma; lewis, be dead already.
Reply With Quote
