Theres no political leaning.Originally Posted by Suz
ILE (ENTp)
SEI (ISFp)
ESE (ESFj)
LII (INTj)
SLE (ESTp)
IEI (INFp)
EIE (ENFj)
LSI (ISTj)
SEE (ESFp)
ILI (INTp)
LIE (ENTj)
ESI (ISFj)
IEE (ENFp)
SLI (ISTp)
LSE (ESTj)
EII (INFj)
Theres no political leaning.
Estp, like him but makes me think Estp have no chance at being socialites..whatever he does everyone dislikes. Love him hate him must not be just a stereotype for estps
People that no me here might say the same but I've changed and see more now but not enough
Scratch that mark Wahlberg is cool
Last edited by Leader; 05-30-2017 at 10:21 PM.
"Trump can't have any Fi, he's too offensive". Then you have an SEE on this forum who is named "handjob" with a title "H A T E F U C K", who is generally offensive.
It has nothing to do with being offensive. He's just blind to the concept of personal loyalty. See the fact that he fired three campaign managers in a year; dropping them as soon as anything got turbulent. And he's on his second or third staff member for several key positions barely 100 days into his administration.
Plus he routinely cycles between cursing someone out on Twitter and then a week later shaking their hand weeks later and calling them 'a great friend'. There's a long list of people he ripped apart on twitter during the campaign and then hired after getting elected.
He just doesn't have an Fi bone in him.
also that's a really simplistic notion of "offensive" since handjob is basically subtly picking up on when its ok to be that way vs when its not; i.e.: he has a very nuanced and entertaining/essentially uplifting concept of "offense" that is actually very inoffensive (lol no offense, maybe a better word would be healthy or developed) in a deep way, whereas Trump is just blind to the entire dynamic and tries to be "inoffensive" in the most offensive way and vice versa
I think singularity's Te polr is just programmed to not be able to see it since if he could he'd probably be more disgusted by SLE in general and that would be bad for the dyad
sure there isn't...
it's dripping with it.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
That's common stuff with Fi creative. The fact that he can befriend someone that easily shows his people skills.
He doesn't seem to befriend people easily though. It's all so superficial. It just doesn't seem like he has a close relationship with anyone.
Read some Fi-creative descriptions, especially strat's. She paints SEEs in a terrible light, describing them exactly as you've described Trump here.
Here's a short example in quotes, but read the whole description as there's tons more and it reads as though she's just writing down a description of himIt is not surprising that with such ethics of behavior the SEE manages to gain numerous enemies (independent of the scale of his activity). Moreover, relations of the type friend-enemy are also built with much contrast and inconsistency: yesterday's enemy is graciously received as a friend today, because "this is how it should be", while today's friend, who has given more attention to another subject, is no longer a friend but a "traitor".
naw you're just looking at personal loyalty through Ti. SEEs heavily value loyalty and understand it, but via Fi, which looks different. Its more like "if so and so cheats with me they were never loyal to original spouse" therefore I'm doing spouse a favor by bringing this to everyones attention sooner rather than later, because the only thing worse than being cheated on is being in a relationship with someone who is a cheater, but you don't know it, and are therefore stuck with them and not allowed to seek out something better (not to mention maybe the cheater deserves better, based on how he got roped into things to begin with, etc). from the point of view of Fi what the SEE is doing is consistent and good for all [1]. Jung talks about it in Aion where the idea is there is an evolutionary advantage to "destroyers"--Shiva, et al. From their individual point of view what they are doing is justified in a Fi sense. Trump doesn't get any of this. Trump is not SEE.
SEE makes enemies because 1) people don't get Fi and 2) SEE doesn't always make informed choices. (the above example is an "idealized" case; SEE needs to destroy "bad" not "good" things--marriage is not by definition one or the other. there is an analytic component that is required that they can fall down on). SEE doesn't recognize the inherent force, i.e.: goodness of an established order for its own sake--it reserves for itself the right to make its own judgement and act accordingly. This creates enemies who see this as chaos--inherently evil--truth is its neither inherently good nor evil.
Trump makes enemies because even when he has the information he doesn't process it in a way that tracks people's internal states according to Fi modes. In other words, he lacks empathy. SEEs problem is they overdo it or otherwise miss the mark, but are playing the right game. Trump's problem is he lacks the willingness or capacity to empathize and relies entirely on Ti constructs which can, when dealing with humans, be paradoxically inverted, which is why he can be offensive while trying to be inoffensive and vice vera (its not even the same sport). its knowledge of these idiosyncratic norms (Fi) that constitute respect for the human condition (Dostoevsky--the real one--has a lot to say about this[2]) and the basis of empathy which he lacks. as far as he's concerned saying "great show" or whatever at the holocaust museum is a compliment etc etc
As far as Trump is concerned he's in the unique position to pass judgement on the established order "as the king"--as the "rightful" head of the hierarchy. But SEE retains this right regardless of position. Their willingness to stand by their own judgements, they have in common, but its coming from democracy (Fi) in SEE and aristocracy (Ti) in SLE; hence there is some apparent overlap but that is where the similarities end (in other words, they both dispense commands/retain the initiative, that someone or other finds offensive, but that's about it).
[1]SEE doesn't look at themselves as causing the cheating but actually working towards ending it (because they're trying to get at what was always there and underlying it--they pull the mask off "evil"--and are willing to get their hands dirty in order to do it)
[2] man would go insane just to prove he's not an automaton. he would destroy perfection if he ever achieved it
Last edited by Bertrand; 05-31-2017 at 02:06 AM.
this may actually be a function of intelligence rather than socionics, imo.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
i intuitively processed this as "singularity's lack of intelligence is to blame for assessing "offensive" in such obtuse terms" and chuckled to myself
but I think its a bit of both, to be honest, along with experience
Handjob is a teenager of course he gets cut more slack. If he acts the same at age 70 fewer people are going to find it amusing.
Being disgusted by Trump has nothing to do with strength of Te. If it does I have some of the strongest Te on this forum. 10D.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
my point is he handles Fi better than Trump, even as a teenager, thus no extra slack is given nor requiredHandjob is a teenager of course he gets cut more slack. If he acts the same at age 70 fewer people are going to find it amusing.
Being disgusted by Trump has nothing to do with strength of Te. If it does I have some of the strongest Te on this forum. 10D.
if people feel Handjob and Trump are on the same level but Handjob is getting a pass because he's a teenager they're not looking at it from the point of view of Fi. True the situations are contextualized but lets make it clearer: when Trump was a teenager he was still a low Fi asshole and acted differently than Handjob--there's a qualitatively different assessment being made that goes deeper than a Ti comparison of what amounts to volitional acts asserted against resistance (this is what they objectively have in common). People get mired in displays of Se and are lacking a criterion to effectively tease them apart so they lose the distinction between SEE and SLE, especially the point of view of beta [1] which, being on the lower rung of social development, has a harder time understanding Fi than Fi users have understanding Ti (alpha does a little better with Ne). The point is, despite how its understood by Ti, not all overt volitional acts are the same because someone somewhere disagrees with them (this is how Fe views "transgressions"--formulates its "economy"), rather there is a deeper Fi dynamic at work that differentiates them that Ti is unconscious of. Its precisely the difference between SLE and SEE and on the larger stage beta and gamma.
I do think we may be entering territory that is very difficult for a lot of people to understand because it goes to some of the deepest assumptions people have about the world
beta turning on Trump is precisely because they view every transgression to the field of Fe as being fundamentally equal and Trump is starting to disrupt the field to a greater degree than he's improving it and this is how Fe objectively assesses the effects a person is having on the world in lieu of Te; and once Trump loses that base he's got damn near no one left supporting him which means he's pretty much done (because he's certainly not improving the world in a Te sense except for a very limited company: big oil/insurance, russia, china, putin, etc)
[1] I feel this is exactly why beta has "spread out" on this forum and there's probably more beta-"gammas" than real gammas. Its like Hamlet has inspired his acting troupe to impersonate the entire socion for want of more variety after they set up shop and drove all the real ones out. that "inspiration" only works on people who cannot innately sense the difference, because the most convincing performance (i.e.: the best) is the one where you don't know you're acting. "its not a lie if you believe it"-- Fe/Ni in a nutshell
Last edited by Bertrand; 05-31-2017 at 04:21 AM.
My point is, Bert, if Handjob acts the same at 70 fewer people will think it cute. A lot of people find bled cute and his age has a lot to do with it so yes people cut him slack and to deny that shows a lack of awareness on your part. This description does not exclude Trump. In fact it fits him pretty well.
Fi as creative function in SEE (ESFp; Napoleon) and IEE (ENFp; Huxley)
He is frequently conveying to others his attitude towards them. Uses his own attitude towards someone to manipulate them. Aims to give his evaluation to everything that surrounds him, judges what is 'good' and what is 'bad'. Sometimes he can change his sympathies and antipathies several times a day, very amorous and inconstant in this respect. Looks for a place where others would be interested in his views on any issue. Thus he may find his vocation as artistic director, since in this sphere his judgement is often accepted and valued. As a manager or leader his approach remains the same, however, acceptance of his judgement here will be lower. He himself refers to his evaluations as "work in progress", something mundane, commonplace to him: first he praises someone, then scolds them, then praises them again. Not being in a position to do this, it looks inadequate, so often this serves as incentive for him to achieve such a position, and thus quietly "sell" his products for which there is small demand in society. Usually none at all, because those who are critical of everyone often no one likes. He is frequently perceived as someone who has arrived with "his own charter in a foreign land". He immediately begins to look and evaluate everything: "this is good, but that is poor" "I like this, but not that". He is interested in conflict situations, and can even provoke them since then he will have a job: to assess. These people often win the sympathies of others by participating in their problems: they are aware and interested in them, they can adjust to another person to better get in touch. Therefore, they often make for good politicians. Their advantage is the ability to play on requests of the voters, to know what they want. Their relations are rarely reliable - "today I like you, tomorrow you're not in favor, and day after I like you again". Even their hate can easily one day turn into love. For them feelings is alike an interesting game. They know price to everything, so can make for good evaluators and tasters. Seldom they leave a member of opposite sex without their assessment. Their assessments can sometimes sound like moralizing, but there is no consistency to their judgements. Sometimes the situation requires that they adapt their valuation to "opinions of others." In such cases they may put it into more acceptable formulation, for example "it is said that ...". If you try to specify who is saying that, it turns out that he has merely used the phrase about public opinion to cunningly hide his own opinion.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Wow Bertrand, don't mention me or speculate about my type. That's offensive.
Even outside of Socionics, Gulenko's analysis of Trump is pretty much correct:
1. He creates conflicts just to start negotiating right after. And when everything is done, he makes sure that everyone ends up feeling good.
2. He promises to fulfill things that people in general demand - whether he actually has the ability to do so or not. Even in that Letterman's interview, he says that "Giving 1 million dollars to each audiences is an intriguing idea...". He knows exactly what to do to make him "popular". Kind of like how Elvis was incredibly generous with his "giving" - he gave stuff away all the time. That's what made Trump so successful in the media, because he was incredibly skillful in that area, he knew what would make him popular. It can't be said that it was just a fluke that he won.
3. He creates more chaos than order.
the chances of Handjob acting the same at 70 is zero though
comparing trump at 70 to Handjob at 20 is just admitting the point that his Fi sucks. my Fe may be that of a 5 year old Fe dom's, that doesn't mean we're the same type. in fact it demonstrates the opposite
I don't think he could get any more SLE. There was never anything that made me think Fi before this debate sprang up. Having arguments and then making up with people is a weak argument looking only on the surface.
This is my favorite comment that I've read on a typology site, hahaha.
･ﾟ*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:･ﾟ
I.e., offense coincides withstronger than
and some unhealthy 8 stuff going on, which Trump really polarizes.
The last oneeeeee!! If that's not thePoLR loose cannon (can confirm from personal experience
). My SLI dad has commented on that recently, saying that you'd never know what to expect from Trump, no coherency available. He IS more of a celebrity and people player, businessman? Where.
Here's from an ESI, one that you've expressed how much you've liked in the past, regarding SEE.
Really I think that if more people just read this: http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...Stratiyevskaya Especially the Se and Fi sections, the arguments against SEE for Trump would all vanish.
Well, I think that's a little biased. I'm not sure there's an ESI out there who doesn't find SEE's use of Fi compared to their's utterly chaotic. Absolutely everything about Trump seems ST type to me, specifically SLE.
･ﾟ*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:･ﾟ
Just one of Bertrand's weird and bizarre worldviews.
Leave
- him alone if he doesn't want it
- the diva meme-ing to me that's my talent I'm butthurt and envious!!!!!!!!!!Grrrrr
I agree with @darya about Trump's Fi being below zero.
Here is a quote on Trump's loyalty:
"too many people finally understand what Trump is really like:There is this storyline about Donald Trump, one longtime Trump watcher says, that he's a loyal guy. That he sticks with his old friends and defends them and supports them. "You have it all wrong," he says. "Trump is not loyal, except to his family. He can be solicitous and ingratiating. But if there's a moment you are not useful, forget it, you're done. No matter what you have done for him." Consider: Rudy Giuliani, Paul Manafort, Chris Christie."
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dru...iring-new-ones
also, for the record: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dru...ol-30-may-2017
All of her descriptions are biased. However, Trump fits her description of SEE better than any description of SLE comes close. I don't really like to type by descriptions, but this one is funnily accurate when applied to him, as though he was her model for the description.
Without reading it though, functionally, SEE still fits better than any other type.
Yeah, that's just Fi creative with Se-leading for you.
Sorry, I should clarify: That's how Trump demonstrates that he is Fi creative with Se leading. Not all SEEs are disloyal scumbags.
Last edited by squark; 05-31-2017 at 12:40 PM. Reason: clarification
If anything that is some weird weakissue with the usefulness, high
He lacks any softness or loving goofiness that I'd expect from 4D Fe ExFp types. Even the harshest SEEs have it. But his Fe instead feels artificial and cheesy and seems like something he wants but can't naturally produce. I think the SLE Fe HA of wanting to be loved fits him perfectly - he desperately imposes offensive things on people in an attempt for them to agree or to at least notice him. SEE's are often centers of attention but they have a more delicately crafted way of going about it.
His attempts at any sort of ethics makes him look like a total idiot in my eyes and looks like that from a logical type.
SEE's and SLE's both will make and break many relationships and move on relatively fast, they are Ep and sensors. The difference is that SEE isn't as fast and will try to mend it if they can because they are loyal to the people they like, even if it doesn't last forever. We will be upset if there's lasting bad blood and if a friendship has to end in the first place. With Trump he just has no moral core whatsoever, and does not care to hurt or make up with anyone.
His wives have been ethical types because he needs someone to help him soften up.
To any true SEE it is obvious he is not one.
･ﾟ*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:･ﾟ
Still debating Trump's type? Can't we all just accept that Gulenko gets things wrong and move on?
+1000. It's just obvious he's not an ethical type, and not because he's a douche or a narcissist.
I forgot to mention that he is irrationally obsessed with his reputation in a way I haven't seen from any president before. Any time he is bad mouthed he will throw a fit on Twitter in such an immature way that an SEE wouldn't. SEE's care about what people think of them but they would never respond so childishly.
･ﾟ*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:･ﾟ
Are you saying Trump's ideal mate should be Fe Polr ILI? That makes zero sense when you observe how he communicates with people. He needs a soft wife, like handjob said. The one who warmly blows on his ego and explains to him how he can improve on ethical ground etc.
I wholly agree.
My feeling is that people who support Trump fall into a few categories:
1) trolls who just enjoy seeing life trolled to the max.
2) anarchists who just hope to see the US government implode on itself.
3) xenophobists/racists who want the return of a white European America and heard this in Trump's campaign messaging
4) people who feel threatened by immigrants taking their jobs and out-excelling them & their kids in school.
5) people who always vote Republican, no matter what. Party loyalists at any cost.
6) one-issue voters who vote for whoever supports the pro-life message (or pro-israel, or school choice, or what have you), ignoring anything else.
7) gullible simple people who thought a successful businessman would help them get their jobs back
8) people who act similarly as Donald Trump and feel a sense of validation for their crass behavior by electing him to Presidency.
9) personal friends of DT and those who stand to gain personally from him - these people are often on TV going all out with smoke & mirrors to try to mainstream his shady stuff.
Last edited by Suz; 05-31-2017 at 01:32 PM.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
If I had to give an elevator speech on what I think are the differences between SLE and SEE, it would be that SEE's seem extremely extroverted, open, and friendly toward people, as if they are masters at getting you to like them, or at least involved with them. In fact, it seems like their main interest is in being the motivator of the party. They seem to want to generate excitement around them.
SLE's, on the other hand, can be aggressive in approaching people (or not), and it is clear that they can be attracted to excitement, but there is a strong undercurrent of mistrust of others in their dealings with people.
In other words, SEE's expect you to like them. SLE's expect that you will not like them.
Of these two types, which one would be more likely to tell you whatever you wanted to hear upon first meeting only to later utterly forget about any promises made, and would trust only a few family members?
And would an SEE with 4D Fe say this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpOZVN4_Ihc
Honestly, Trump (Fi-1D, Fe-2D) saying something that inappropriate is closer to what I (Fi-1D, Fe 2D) might have done in Jr. High.
When I first joined the forum and started to learn about ESI's, I agreed to meet one in a coffee shop to discuss buying her art. She showed up in cutoffs, flip-flops, a thin knit pastel top with string straps, long blonde hair and looking like a basketball player, and I instantly panicked. She was so different from me, so utterly strange, that I fully expected to be talking to her about some innocuous subject when she would suddenly take offense out of the blue at something I said and would throw the coffee in my face and call the cops. That is how (Fi-1D, Fe-2D) feels. And yet, I have learned to work a crowd.
I'm pretty sure Trump is SLE. I first thought he might be a very unhealthy LIE, but he seems to have no foresight (he said he thought being President would be easy. My god, what will he try next for lack of insight?), and his business decisions, outside of promoting himself, are terrible.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 05-31-2017 at 01:30 PM.
Politically agreeing or disagreeing with him should have nothing to do with people's typing of him. I personally disagree with his politics, but actually find him entertaining as a person and would have zero problems being friends with him - him being a president of US is a whole different problem though. Him being "unethical" in a non-socionics sense is also not connected to my typing : there are definitely plenty of SEE'S who are corrupt, disloyal etc. That's not the reason why he's clearly not ethical in socionics sense imo.
Wouldn't Trump need
a) facts
b) less polemics
c) a systematic while future-focused approach?
IEI would only inflate his ego more, ethics? Trump accepts none of that. Except by Ivanka which is his activity partner - not supervisor... come on she's his absolute favorite in the clan, no SLE truly adores an ESI like this.
Trump's ethical wives didn't improve anything about his character, didn't moderate or instill advice that would make him more tolerable. He's ethical himself, that's why he can push people's buttons through twisted "right/wrong/hate/love" thinking. Ethical types are no saints, in fact, the douchity you pointed out applies to many of us since we get away with it. Trump does exactly that.
WHAT
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
