Donald Trump

[Aylen]

I'm just going to say what I think and whether anyone cares to read this or finds it wrong, okay.

Trump is often very brutal and blunt before all else. He has a history of getting rid of people and/or pushing them away when they are no longer useful to him or when they threaten him in some way. He seems to lack empathy for individuals or see them as such (although he's very good at appealing to ideas of group or categorical morality on some abstract level -> Fe/Ti) and needs constant assurance that people are loyal to him because of it; and when they stop being useful to him in some way or they threaten him, he dumps and denounces them without much care. He seems to naturally lack the kind of sensitivity of higher order Fi, a function that is both abstract and implied, neither of which he seems to understand very much when he demands constant assurance of loyalties and thinks it's okay to be a douche to people if they are of no value to him. His Te is essentially utilitarian and he doesn't seem to care much for the individual that's impacted by his decisions; and he's only loyal to someone if they serve his purpose, yet he demands unwavering loyalty from others.

I think he uses Se, Te, and Fe a lot and seems to have no problem compartmentalizing everyone into categories and dealing with them that way -> Ti. But he doesn't seem to value separating people from their categories and thinking about them as individuals. It's not really his proclivity, although I'm sure there are instances of him trying to make a good pre-conceived effort to do so (which is arguably a super-ego thing to do), but when he's threatened or under pressure, he has no problem putting people into political categories and fueling the political charge. I guess what I'm saying is, I could probably make a case for him as SEE by cherry-picking parts of the theory that fit, finding reasons why he can't be SLE, and pulling things he's done or said out of context to paint his behavior a certain way, but in the end is that truly compelling? I mean he may not fit a caricature of a self-composed SLE that thinks everything through in calculated logical detail, but both SEE and SLE have neurotic Se and would be impulsive and not think things through all that much by the nature of their implied neurosis. So it kind of seems an irrelevant thing to constantly point out and argue.

I think if you look further back in this thread you will see some well thought out arguments made for SEE, even by those who originally voted SLE. Once you vote you can't take it back. Their's are much better than mine.

Speaking of cherry picking. There are a couple cherries here that most people that type him SLE are picking. The main ones being SLE are the brutal and blunt type and that anyone with Fi in the ego couldn't possibly behave in such a way because of Fi. You are guilty of the same subjectivity that we all are. The whole point of the forum is to discuss theory so it is to be expected. You can go to any other thread and find the same kind of cherry picking based on personal understanding of the theory. It's not a bad thing. FTR, I gave SLE a lot of consideration before deciding SEE is a better fit even though SEE was my first impression. I don't even hate Trump although it could be taken that way. I just think he is in over his head. This has happened to him in business as well which is why he was constantly being sued.

[Number 9 large]

I think if you look further back in this thread you will see some well thought out arguments made for SEE, even by those who originally voted SLE. Once you vote you can't take it back. Their's are much better than mine.

Speaking of cherry picking. There are a couple cherries here that most people that type him SLE are picking. The main ones being SLE are the brutal and blunt type and that anyone with Fi in the ego couldn't possibly behave in such a way because of Fi. You are guilty of the same subjectivity that we all are. The whole point of the forum is to discuss theory so it is to be expected. You can go to any other thread and find the same kind of cherry picking based on personal understanding of the theory. It's not a bad thing. FTR, I gave SLE a lot of consideration before deciding SEE is a better fit even though SEE was my first impression. I don't even hate Trump although it could be taken that way. I just think he is in over his head. This has happened to him in business as well which is why he was constantly being sued.

Yup, ppl dont seem to realize that the bluntness n shit comes from Se, and that the Fi is only in the creative spot

[Protozoa]

I think if you look further back in this thread you will see some well thought out arguments made for SEE, even by those who originally voted SLE. Once you vote you can't take it back. Their's are much better than mine.

Speaking of cherry picking. There are a couple cherries here that most people that type him SLE are picking. The main ones being SLE are the brutal and blunt type and that anyone with Fi in the ego couldn't possibly behave in such a way because of Fi. You are guilty of the same subjectivity that we all are. The whole point of the forum is to discuss theory so it is to be expected. You can go to any other thread and find the same kind of cherry picking based on personal understanding of the theory. It's not a bad thing. FTR, I gave SLE a lot of consideration before deciding SEE is a better fit even though SEE was my first impression. I don't even hate Trump although it could be taken that way. I just think he is in over his head. This has happened to him in business as well which is why he was constantly being sued.

Well okay. And I know I'm being subjective to a degree. This kind of thing is unavoidable, probably, and I didn't mean to imply that I'm not. So sorry for that, but there's something off about an SEE typing that kind of frustrates me too that people don't see. But about the brutal and blunt thing, fair enough.

I guess my main issue really with this whole thing isn't the argument for SEE or SLE, but how masterfully Trump categorizes people into certain groups and then he deals with them that way. It has been the center-piece of his campaign strategy to create these divisions and put people into camps in order to deal with them and it's not something I've gotten from SEEs. Its an aristocratic thinking that I've recognized from SLEs and that's mainly what feels so off about an SEE typing, not to say that you won't find an SLE typing off for other reasons. SLEs are supposedly aristocratic according to reinin and it's something I've found true as well.

http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=Aristocratic
Aristocratic Types (bolding for emphasis on what I think stands out most about him) *Note: the forum formatting sucks, so this is going to be hard to read, despite my efforts

• Inclined to perceive and define themselves, and others, through groups they belong to; however, such groups are perceived and defined by the Aristocrats themselves, not necessarily accepting those groupings as defined by others or by social conventions.

Ergo, him seeing illegal Mexicans as mostly rapist and criminals when statistically that isn't the case.
Ergo,

(https://www.scmp.com/news/world/unit...ld-trump-tells) US President Donald Trump was accused of being racist and divisive by many Democrats after suggesting that four female Democratic lawmakers, led by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, should return to the “broken and crime infested places from which they came”.

Three of the four women Trump was apparently referencing were born in the US; none is white.

Like really Trump?

Or blasting all the news media outlets he doesn't like as fake news. Trumps loves putting people into categories he defines on his own whim, if it suits him. How is that not a kind of at least creative subjective thinking?

• Their initial attitude to another person is influenced by their attitude to the group they see the person as belonging to.

Yes, initial. He has no problem backtracking later and trying to cover his track after people get riled up by it.

• Tend to attribute common qualities to members of their circles of contacts, and define such circles by those same qualities.

Probably why he praises other world leaders so much. He said this about Xi Jinping (https://www.scmp.com/news/china/dipl...nd-xi-liked-it)

“President Xi, who is a strong man, I call him ‘king’,” Trump said in a wide-ranging speech at Tuesday’s dinner. “He said, ‘But I am not king, I am president.’ I said, ‘No, you are president for life, and therefore you are king.’ He said, ‘Huh … huh.’ He liked that. I call him ‘king’. I get along with him great.”

He seems to like Xi Jinping's status as a strong man and a President for life, but nothing about who he is as a person.

Or take one of Trump's meetings with Kim Jong Un (https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/40...-and-appalling)

Trump praised Kim at a campaign rally on Saturday, saying that he and the North Korean leader "fell in love."

"I was really being tough and so was he," Trump said. "And we would go back and forth. And then we fell in love. No really. He wrote me beautiful letters."

"They were great letters. And then we fell in love," he continued.

It could sound like Fi, but Trump never really says anything about him as a person, just that they got along. I think he just likes strong leaders because that's what he thinks he is or something.

• Inclined to use expressions that generalize group features.

When doesn't he do this?

vs

Democratic Types (bolding for emphasis on what doesn't stand out about him)

• Perceive and define themselves, and others, primarily through individual/personal qualities: interesting, pleasant, unpleasant, good-looking, etc, not in connection to any group they may belong to.

He says personal things sometimes about people, but it's usually stuff like this

"So now they are after the legendary “crime buster” and greatest Mayor in the history of NYC, Rudy Giuliani. He may seem a little rough around the edges sometimes, but he is also a great guy and wonderful lawyer. Such a one sided Witch Hunt going on in USA. Deep State. Shameful!"

First makes notion of his lawyer title "crime buster", then that he's a mayor, all aristocratic stuff. Then finally that he's rough around the edges sometimes, but a great guy. But it never has any bearing on Trump's definition of himself or his identity.

• Form their relationships/attitudes toward other persons based on the latter's own individual characteristics, not with base on their relationships to groups of any kind, nor on their relationships to representatives of such groups.

As noted above in the aristocratic part, Trump usually praises people's status in talking about and relating with them.

• Not inclined to perceive their acquaintances as representatives of a certain "circle of contacts" that supposedly possesses qualities inherent to people of that circle

Not really sure about this one, since we don't get much news about acquaintances I guess.

• Not inclined to use expressions that generalize group features.

Well he has no problem doing that.

Isn't this a pretty big discrepancy? He's not even really in between on this one. He's far aristocratic. And SEE is democratic.