Elena, ENTj or ENFj? Let's settle it here

[Elena]

On another note, I noted that she doesn't use the emotional air of something the drive her to resolution. I should also say that I don't see evidence to suggest that she uses that same emotional vibe to induct a response from others. It might appear that she is being emotional to gage the reaction of others, but that is a manifestation, and not a motivation. It is the manifestation of, by her accounts, being frustrated of lack of progress and going in circles. In other words, I don't think she uses her frustration to try to incite things in others, but rather just venting... and the venting might in turn cause others to be incited, but I don't see that as her primary motivation.

Manifestation vs. motivation is an excellent way to put it.

[tereg]

I always thought Fi was much more subtle than Fe. They seem much more obvious about announcing their feelings and gesturing and trying to invoke a certain emotion response from a person.

For me personally, I verbally process things to others. I like having sounding boards -- people that can actively respond to me to things I invest time explaining or expressing. So, in my opinion, Fi is about an internal assessment of seeing and analyzing my place in an environment and assessing whether or not I "fit" there. In other words, how does what I sense around me or hear or whatever resonate within? And so, when I gesture and articulate things to other people, I'm not necessarily looking for an emotional response, but rather a response that will help me to put into perspective or clarify what I'm thinking or feeling (usually if I'm struggling to put something into words). Or maybe, a better way to say it would be, I'm looking for a response that will help me to clarify something that I'm struggling to express and also look at it from a different angle or light and determine if I resonate with it or not (which actually requires a bit of on my part to make the connection). So, that's what I personally do when I express things to people and try to get a response -- it's to try and help me to clarify things in my head.

Thanks again for this effort.

You're welcome.

[Minde]

For me personally, I verbally process things to others. I like having sounding boards -- people that can actively respond to me to things I invest time explaining or expressing. So, in my opinion, Fi is about an internal assessment of seeing and analyzing my place in an environment and assessing whether or not I "fit" there. In other words, how does what I sense around me or hear or whatever resonate within? And so, when I gesture and articulate things to other people, I'm not necessarily looking for an emotional response, but rather a response that will help me to put into perspective or clarify what I'm thinking or feeling (usually if I'm struggling to put something into words). Or maybe, a better way to say it would be, I'm looking for a response that will help me to clarify something that I'm struggling to express and also look at it from a different angle or light and determine if I resonate with it or not (which actually requires a bit of on my part to make the connection). So, that's what I personally do when I express things to people and try to get a response -- it's to try and help me to clarify things in my head.

Are you saying that what you just described is Fi? If so, could you explain a little what you mean by "environment"?

[Elena]

For me personally, I verbally process things to others.

I do too. If I appreciate somebody, I make sure to tell them. I feel they deserve to know that.

I like having sounding boards -- people that can actively respond to me to things I invest time explaining or expressing. So, in my opinion, Fi is about an internal assessment of seeing and analyzing my place in an environment and assessing whether or not I "fit" there. In other words, how does what I sense around me resonate within?

I like the word "resonate" a lot for Fi, it seems very fitting. That is what it feels like to me whenever I feel something. A force of attraction or repulsion that vibrates within me towards or against a person or situation or event etc. I think that is what is meant by internal field statics.

And so, when I gesture and articulate things to other people, I'm not necessarily looking for an emotional response, but rather a response that will help me to put into perspective or clarify what I'm thinking or feeling (usually if I'm struggling to put something into words). Or maybe, a better way to say it would be, I'm looking for a response that will help me to clarify something that I'm struggling to express and also look at it from a different angle or light and determine if I resonate with it or not (which actually requires a bit of on my part to make the connection). So, that's what I personally do when I express things to people and try to get a response -- it's to try and help me to clarify things in my head.

Yes, I don't look for emotional responses either to things I say or do, nor do I use them get certain reactions from others. If I do so feel something and I tell somebody, I just look for understanding from them. Also perspective because often I do not understand well why I feel something. So I want someone who I can trust to make sense of my emotional state for me. The persons I share any of my feeling with are very few though.

[Elena]

Internal Statics of Objects would be like... "I don't like you". Not "I'm feeling frustrated".

Well I have told people I don't like them too. I told you that before. Ftr, I still do not like you and I think you are dishonest, manipulative, and have a rotten character. So does your fiance.

Sure, any type can get frustrated. Responding the way you have though... calling names and directly insulting people due to feelings of frustration... is not how a typical LIE would handle the situation. An LIE would look at the external events of the situation/person/thing/whatever and think that saying something like that would sound ridiculous. It's totally irrelevant to what's going on, for starters. Their saying that a person is stupid will accomplish nothing except to make themselves less credible, put the the person on the defense, make it about who is right instead of what is right, encourage people to take "sides", incite that type of behavior in others, and cause the situation to become even more heated... all very negative, counterproductive things. Te (especially with Ni) will be more focused on those events than their own internal dynamics.

That sounds like you are stretching again and I think you using the words external and internal in ways they were not supposed to be used. I don't see the scenario you describe above written anywhere about ENTjs and I doubt it is dependent on type. If you have specific references somewhere to documentation on this matter I would be glad to read. Otherwise I can only assume this is something you are making up to fit your opinions.

Please read this post in this thread. It's an LSI description. I'm not asking you to say whether or not this relationship sounds attractive, just to note that Fe isn't only about fluffy happy feelings. LSI's in particular need a partner who will easily express their feelings of frustration.

That sounds exactly like what I don't want. It sounds more like how I act in relationships lol. I expect the emotional reassurance in a relationship but I am usually not one to give it very well. I'm not very aware of when someone might need it and I do not know how to very well.

Not totally unaware, but certainly far more unaware than most people are. This is one of the things ESI's provide LIE's with... insight into the LIE's own emotional states. (Of course, they don't encourage the LIE to express their internal dynamics. Instead they get to the root of the problem, determining how the states of beneath the surface connections have caused a problem.)

I am far more unaware than most people are. Mostly not very emotional at all. The question you asked me in the earlier post I had not even considered before. Does that sound like the mark of an emotionally aware person to you??

Get to the root of the problem and how to fix it. That sounds like exactly like what I would want.

This is the most interesting and telling part of this post. I specifically asked, "What do you hope to (or think you will) accomplish when you call people names or insult them?" I was primarily asking about the external dynamics of the situation (this question is pretty much always the first thing on an LIE's mind in most situations, even if they're extremely frustrated). I included every possibility I could think of, some more focused on Te and some more focused on Fe.

I might have misinterpreted since you asked a number of questions in the other post specific to emotion. Also I told you there was no intention to my expression of frustration so I thought I would try to give insight into why I do it. I was predicting you would twist it around in some extravagant case for me being Fe leading no matter what I said lol. But then I thought maybe there was a possibility you would be objective and I was mistaken.

Te motive:

• to make them question whether or not they are correct (this would be a Fe method of achieving a Te motive though)
• to make others question whether or not they are correct (this would be a Fe method of achieving a Te motive though)
• to communicate what you think of them to others (this could actually be Te or Fe plus Fe/Te or Ti or Fi, depending on what/how you think of them and what you intend to accomplish in communicating it)
• to bother them (this could be Te or Fe, depending on how/why you intend to bother them)

Fe motive:

• Is it to satisfy your desire to be hostile due to your irritation with them (this is a Te perspective on a Fe motive though)
• to communicate what you think of them to others (this could actually be Te or Fe plus Fe/Te or Ti or Fi, depending on what/how you think of them and what you intend to accomplish in communicating it)
• to demonstrate how strongly you feel that they are wrong (this would be a Te perspective on a Fe motive though)
• to bother them (this could be Te or Fe, depending on how/why you intend to bother them)
• to encourage them to say what they really think (this would be a Te perspective on a Fe motive though)
• to tell them how frustrated you are with them (this would be a Te perspective on a Fe motive though)

Fi motive:

• to communicate what you think of them to that person

You answered that you had never even thought about what you were externally accomplishing with your behavior. You also stated that what was happening internally was the reason you, without even giving it a second thought, acted that way.

There was no motive to expressing frustration other than my own venting. I told you that. I suppose that me not liking the person is part of that to. I don't experience frustration about people I like.

Anyway. Why you don't you focus on externals yourself and what I have said? How can you sit here and think you are so externally focused when all you do is talk about what are other peoples "internal dynamics" and what you think their motives and psychological makeup are? How hypocritical.

Yes. I didn't want to keep saying "of objects" because it would make the content of my post harder to read, but everything I said was related to the internal or external dynamics of a situation, person, things, etc. (objects).

I know what object and field are since I read them on Rick's site so I'd like you to be more specific in that way if you are going to be speaking of them. Since the difference between internal object dynamics and internal field dynamics is important.

internal dynamics of objects: What is happening beneath the surface of a person, things, situation, etc.
internal dynamics of fields: Beneath the surface connections between activities/events (cause and effect relationships that aren't readily observable or immediately apparent)

Okay. So all this awareness of "internal dynamics" you attribute about me, why is that not internal field dynamics?

I'm not sure why you think I'm the dramatic one since you go around here emoting and expressing personal feelings and social gestures with people more than anyone else.

It's not like Fe dominants go around creating scenes all day for no reason. When a situation arises, however, they're able to strongly express their internal dynamics with the best of them.

Still doesn't sound like something I do. I'm not a very expressive person unless something significant invokes a response in me. It takes a lot to do so.

And Te dominants don't like to use their Te if it's not accomplishing anything.

Neither do I. That's why I get frustrated.

Fe dominants see heated exchanges as something that can be a productive means of communication... "getting it all out there" and finding answers or reaching conclusions.

Most Fe dominants I have seen hate heated discussions and view them as damaging.

Te dominants (especially LIE's) see heated exchanges as a step in the wrong direction. They don't think they should have to reduce themselves to that in order to accomplish something. It's unpleasant and to be avoided whenever possible. When people colorfully express their internal dynamics, LIE's try to think of a way to bring the conversation away from that and back to (what they see as) the point so that it's even possible to be productive (from their perspective).

I already mentioned that I don't like it when people are really expressive. I just don't see the point and it's not interesting to me. If something needs expressed, someone should just express it and get it over with. So the discussion can move to something that isn't boring and unproductive.

LIE's see colorfully expressing their own internal dynamics as "wrong", and the only time they'll do it is when they have no idea what else to do.

Exactly! I have no idea what else to do since trying to engage in sensible rational discussion was getting nowhere. So I get frustrated.

They're looking for Fi to come resolve the situation so they can stop what they feel is a very unpleasant and extremely embarrassing behavior. (Perhaps I'm wrong, but you didn't seem to feel embarrassed by your behavior or to think that it was wrong.)

No I don't really care. Why should I feel it's wrong and why should I feel embarassed? I do not moderate myself according to the expections of others or some group. If they don't like it, so much for them. I have no patience for lack of individualism in others.

[Elena]

When EIE's colorfully express their own internal dynamics, they don't really give it a second thought. What they are (perhaps unconsciously) trying to get is a Ti reaction from others. They want someone to respond to the colorful/heated expression of their internal dynamics by making logical sense. When, in spite of their best efforts to understand what someone has begun to communicate, someone is still not making logical sense to them, they are likely to respond by expressing their internal dynamics.

If I wanted someone to respond logically, I would speak logically to them. If someone is not making sense to me, I will calmly ask questions to make sense of it. If I still can't (not likely) then I will end the conversation and go think about it in private.

If I express frustration, it means attempts to communicate logically with them have failed because they refusing or are incapable of understanding what I'm saying. I dismiss them as stupid and I'm annoyed that someone could be so irrational.

I know an EIE who gets into heated debates with others in his field, then when someone says he's getting emotional, he says that he's not. He says that they're the ones who are getting all offended and really upset by the exchange, and he doesn't understand why. He says to him it's not personal. I'm not sure I understand (because to me it looks like he's being emotional, though I do believe him when he says he doesn't think he is), but I do know that the people who he says are getting deeply offended and very upset aren't, generally speaking. They may decide they don't like him or stop taking him seriously (as many have), but that's not the same as being deeply upset.

I don't think anyone has accused me of getting emotional. A few people have lamented that this thread has upset them which came as a surprise to me. I didn't accuse of them being upset as your EIE friend does. They said it themselves.

I can't observe what's going on inside your head, so I can't argue. I've already stated what I see happening though.

No you can't observe it. But you sure make a lot of speculations about what you think goes on inside of my head, none of which is an external datum. I think you are a lot more focused on the internal object dynamics of people than you have lamely tried to accuse me of being. Which going by your standard makes you quite likely an Fe ego type.

[Joy]

As I've already stated, I'm not interested in carrying on a debate about your type. I did, however, think it only fair to at least give some explanation as to why I see Fe > Te in you, and I have. You're free to agree or disagree.

[Elena]

mcnew, please raise the maximum number of allowable characters in a post

2nding this.

You're talking mostly about people with conscious Ti, if I'm not mistaken. I posted some threads about how the 3rd and 7th functions work in duality that explain why Fi dominants act like this sometimes. As for the others, I'm not entirely sure who you're referring to. What I was referring to in terms of total logical completeness and accuracy was more along the lines of what I was contrasting Minde's Te dual seeking behavior to in this post. (I wasn't necessarily talking about Fe dominants, just the difference in what many Fe/Ti types expect/want/need and what Fi dominants expect/what/need.)

What are you contrasting logical completeness and accuracy to about Minde's Te dual seeking behavior?

I doubt sincerely that "logical completeness" is an operation of conscious Ti. Though it is the case that I see Ti ego types often have what I consider to be irrational ideas about what is "logically complete." Ideas that are not realistic or can be founded in the observable world.

We all use all of our functions. You definitely appear to value Ti > Fi though.

I doubt that. Ti annoys me. Fi is warm and nice <3.

[Logos]

I doubt that. Ti annoys me. Fi is warm and nice <3.

Why?

[Minde]

Fi is warm and nice <3.

Not always.

Don't you think I was being a bit mean to you in your other type thread?

[Joy]

Fi is warm and nice <3.

And you're certain that you have an ESI dual?

[Logos]

And you're certain that you have an ESI dual?

Would you prefer for her to say that her duals are assholes then?

[Elena]

Why?

It is difficult to follow their train of thought. Some are better than others. But I notice that trying to read their writings or listening to them speak feels like a big crash crash inside of my head because it all seems so blobbed together.

I mentioned they often seem to have their own ideas of logical completeness which are often not in very careful coordination with the real world. Often they seem to "force" data to fit their own frameworks they have built. Though I suppose Te ego types do this too in their own ways. I just seem to notice it more for some reason with alpha NTs and beta STs. I can't stand it when I see it. The more irritating ones even try to force their frameworks on you and insist you should think like them.

They often seem to want to constantly re-define the semantics of their argument whenever you are in a debate with them rather than admit it was a bad argument or that they are wrong. I notice this with all betas and alphas. Probably worst in ENTp, ESTp, ESFj, ENFj.

[FDG]

Well the dynamic of the thread seems to be going like this:

Joy writes some questions
Elena replies in a Te-Fi valuing way
Joy ignores all her responses and says that she values Ti and ISTjs are her duals

Not that Joy's way of handling socionics matter has been different for other instances, but really. It's painful to watch.

It's also funny how she is the one actually demonstrating stronger preference for Fe than Elena when she goes like this:

Their saying that a person is stupid will accomplish nothing except to make themselves less credible, put the the person on the defense, make it about who is right instead of what is right, encourage people to take "sides", incite that type of behavior in others, and cause the situation to become even more heated

Seems like the LIE you're talking about is very attentive to "internal dynamics", lol.

LIE's see colorfully expressing their own internal dynamics as "wrong", and the only time they'll do it is when they have no idea what else to do.

No, this is not correct. LIEs see expressing negative internal dynamics towards people they have a strong bond (Fi) with as wrong. However, they have no problem expressing positive internal dynamics towards people they have good relationships with, and they do not care about expressing either positive or negative among people they do not value a relationship with. Read Strats description of ENTj's Fe and Fi to have confirmation of this fact (also, notice how ENTjs are defined as being ostentatiously optimistic, something that strides with inability to express one's emotion).

They often seem to want to constantly re-define the semantics of their argument whenever you are in a debate with them rather than admit it was a bad argument or that they are wrong. I notice this with all betas and alphas. Probably worst in ENTp, ESTp, ESFj, ENFj.

This, my friends, corresponds exactly with the distinction between Subjectivist (Merry) and Objectivist (Serious), where Merrys see definitions' correctness as being only relative to a system, and serious see them as being relative to the language used.

[discojoe]

Well the dynamic of the thread seems to be going like this:

Joy writes some questions
Elena replies in a Te-Fi valuing way
Joy ignores all her responses and says that she values Ti and ISTjs are their duals

Not that Joy's way of handling socionics matter has been different for other instances, but really. It's painful to watch.

It's also funny how she is the one actually demonstrating stronger preference for Fe than Elena when she goes like this:



Seems like the LIE you're talking about is very attentive to "internal dynamics", lol.

lol

[Elena]

Not always.

Lol no, not always. But when it is nice I quite like it.

When somebody does Fe I either don't notice it or it just makes me feel stupid because I'm not sure how to respond. It is blank of emotion to me.

Don't you think I was being a bit mean to you in your other type thread?

Mean how? I'm not sure I recall thinking you mean.

[FDG]

lol

So, what do you think about my observation on how Joy picks up on the Fe parts of Elena's behavior better than Elena?

[Joy]

Seems like the LIE you're talking about is very attentive to "internal dynamics", lol.

That's external.

And you're right, I'm not interested in having a 20 page debate about her. No matter how many questions or responses I'd answer, the arguments would never stop. I'd have to quit at some point. And when I did, there would still be responses like the one you just posted. No thanks, not interested.

[Logos]

It is difficult to follow their train of thought. Some are better than others. But I notice that trying to read their writings or listening to them speak feels like a big crash crash inside of my head because it all seems so blobbed together.

I mentioned they often seem to have their own ideas of logical completeness which are often not in very careful coordination with the real world. Often they seem to "force" data to fit their own frameworks they have built. Though I suppose Te ego types do this too in their own ways. I just seem to notice it more for some reason with alpha NTs and beta STs. I can't stand it when I see it. The more irritating ones even try to force their frameworks on you and insist you should think like them.

They often seem to want to constantly re-define the semantics of their argument whenever you are in a debate with them rather than admit it was a bad argument or that they are wrong. I notice this with all betas and alphas. Probably worst in ENTp, ESTp, ESFj, ENFj.

This is another popular misconception regarding Ti, hence the self-depreciative signature on how Ti and Fe seem to be viewed on this forum at times.

But what annoys you more: someone forcing their frameworks on you or people who force their interpretation of the facts on you? Who has annoyed you more in this thread: the Alphas or the Gammas?

Why? What [Logos] said made sense to me.

What type do you think I am?

Now I am not saying that you are an ENFj or that you are not an ENTj (I think it is always possible that Joy and others are reading what they want to read into the situation and manipulate the interpretations.) nor am I confirming that you are an ENTj, because as I said earlier I don't really care either way, but what I would recommend is to just call yourself an ENxj or mark yourself as (?) until you have explored the options. I am sure those who insist that you are not an ENTj would at least back off your case were you to at least acknowledge what they are trying to say and keep the ENFj option open.

[FDG]

That's external.

No no no no. Emotions of other people and their reactions is internal, Fe, it's the behavior you've been attributing to Elena for all this thread! Damn.

[Minde]

Mean how? I'm not sure I recall thinking you mean.

Well, good, because as I've told you, I wasn't intending harm. But you didn't find it pleasant. That's what I meant. Of course, it wasn't necessarily Fi I was using at that point...

[discojoe]

So, what do you think about my observation on how Joy picks up on the Fe parts of Elena's behavior better than Elena?

I think it was rubbish. What she said was her observation of that kind of Fe-driven behavior, not a giveaway remark that showed off her alleged Fe preference. Not only that, she wrote it after I made that observation about Elena to her, so you're mistaken about both the meaning and the origin of the comment. What you said was just a waste.

[Elena]

And you're certain that you have an ESI dual?

It is the way it feels to me, not how the ISFj might appear to others. Also I wouldn't want someone I was in a relationship with being warm like that with other people. It feels wrong to be personal and share emotion with anyone but those close to you.

[Joy]

Their saying that a person is stupid will accomplish nothing except to make themselves less credible, put the the person on the defense, make it about who is right instead of what is right, encourage people to take "sides", incite that type of behavior in others, and cause the situation to become even more heated

This is a Te observation about Fe (though obviously not all Fe types behave this way, and the ones who do don't do it all the time, or even most of the time).

You can disagree if you'd like. It comes down to us staring at the same wall, you saying it's green and me saying it's blue.

(Goddamn, this situation is reminding me more and more everyday of the one that occurred a year ago. )

[FDG]

I think it was rubbish. What she said was her observation of that kind of Fe-driven behavior, not a giveaway remark that showed off her alleged Fe preference.

If she were to notice that on her own then it would have shown that she actually cared about that kind of information. If you say an argument is rubbish just because, it does not become rubbish, I'm afraid.

Not only that, she wrote it after I made that observation about Elena to her, so you're mistaken about both the meaning and the origin of the comment. What you said was just a waste.

What kind of observation about Elena? Those were Joy's questions and Elena replied she wasn't attempting to do what you two projected onto her. And yes, everything we say here is a waste of time, sure.

This is a Te observation about Fe (though obviously not all Fe types behave this way, and the ones who do don't do it all the time, or even most of the time).

It is not, you are wrong. Knowing what makes you more or less credible is an internal awareness because well, you cannot access the parameter "credibility" from an external point of view except via curriculum for example.

[Joy]

It is the way it feels to me, not how the ISFj might appear to others. Also I wouldn't want someone I was in a relationship with being warm like that with other people. It feels wrong to be personal and share emotion with anyone but those close to you.

This whole discussion about your type has done more harm than good.

[Minde]

They often seem to want to constantly re-define the semantics of their argument whenever you are in a debate with them rather than admit it was a bad argument or that they are wrong. I notice this with all betas and alphas. Probably worst in ENTp, ESTp, ESFj, ENFj.

I would like to generally point out that making sure people are on the same page in terms of how they define what they're talking about is important, imo. In my experience, differences or a lack of clarity in definitions often are the root of disagreements. Once people have the same understanding of something, they either discover that they really were in agreement all along or they can get down to the real differences of opinion.

Sure, semantics can be a good place to hide when the actual argument is a failure, but that does not negate the importance of a clear understanding of terms and their definitions.

For example, I think a lot of the disputes in this thread could be avoided if everyone involved had the same understanding of Fe.

[Logos]

This whole discussion about your type has done more harm than good.

Shall we hear you talk about your ESI duals?

[Joy]

Shall we hear you talk about your ESI duals?

My response had nothing to do with LIE/ESI duality or ESI's.

[FDG]

I would like to generally point out that making sure people are on the same page in terms of how they define what they're talking about is important, imo. In my experience, differences or a lack of clarity in definitions often are the root of disagreements.

I think that redefining the semantics makes reaching this objective much more difficult.

In any case, it is not possible to have the same understanding of something when both parties think the other is simply wrong, what do you think?

[discojoe]

If she were to notice that on her own then it would have shown that she actually cared about that kind of information.

Are you serious? Why can't someone learn how to recognize behaviors they don't identify with?

If you say an argument is rubbish just because, it does not become rubbish, I'm afraid.

What kind of observation about Elena?

The observation that she behaves in an Fe manner.

Those were Joy's questions and Elena replied she wasn't attempting to do what you two projected onto her. And yes, everything we say here is a waste of time, sure.

Nuh uh! You projected onto US you BIG STUPID!

[FDG]

This discussion is useless, just like talking with a brick wall that spouts insults.

[Minde]

I think that redefining the semantics makes reaching this objective much more difficult.

In any case, it is not possible to have the same understanding of something when both parties think the other is simply wrong, what do you think?

Yes, pigheadedness is definitely a stumbling block on the path to greater understanding.

[discojoe]

This discussion is useless, just like talking with a brick wall that spouts insults.

Yeah right, it's just you pRoJeCtInG onto URSELVES

[Joy]

Are you serious? Why can't someone learn how to recognize behaviors they don't identify with?

I've been wondering why some people have been saying things equivalent to "oh yeah? takes one to know one!" in this topic.

Why is it so hard to believe that someone who's studied the theory of Socionics can recognize Fe behavior without being a Fe type?

[discojoe]

I've been wondering why some people have been saying things equivalent to "oh yeah? takes one to know one!" in this topic.

Why is it so hard to believe that someone who's studied the theory of Socionics can recognize Fe behavior without being a Fe type?

Because they're worthless idiots who deserve to be burned to death in front of their families.

[Logos]

My response had nothing to do with LIE/ESI duality or ESI's.

And neither did mine, really.

[Joy]

Alright, at the risk of opening pandora's box...

It is the way it feels to me, not how the ISFj might appear to others. Also I wouldn't want someone I was in a relationship with being warm like that with other people. It feels wrong to be personal and share emotion with anyone but those close to you.

Elena, you're either an eager reader and a very fast learner, or you're being coached. A typical LIE who stumbled onto this forum and began reading about the theory would not post the "perfect" responses you repeatedly have within such a short period of time. These are the answers of someone who's either been part of the English speaking online Socionics community for a long time or has done a fuck of a lot of lurking.

[Elena]

This is another popular misconception regarding Ti, hence the self-depreciative signature on how Ti and Fe seem to be viewed on this forum at times.

Te has it faults too. It just seems I notice the negatives of Ti more and this is the way it comes off to me. I would not be surprised if Te came off in some similar ways to Ti egos.

But what annoys you more: someone forcing their frameworks on you or people who force their interpretation of the facts on you? Who has annoyed you more in this thread: the Alphas or the Gammas?

Bad interpretations of facts annoys me more. My negative reaction to it is higher when people refuse to acknowledge they are incorrectly interpreting facts.

Irrationality of any form annoys me though. It just depends on how severe it is and how closed the person's mind is. I have no problem with anyone who's mind is open and intelligent.

What type do you think I am?

INTj. I have to read your words a bit carefully but your posts do make sense. You're obviously someone well-informed.

Now I am not saying that you are an ENFj or that you are not an ENTj (I think it is always possible that Joy and others are reading what they want to read into the situation and manipulate the interpretations.) nor am I confirming that you are an ENTj, because as I said earlier I don't really care either way, but what I would recommend is to just call yourself an ENxj or mark yourself as (?) until you have explored the options. I am sure those who insist that you are not an ENTj would at least back off your case were you to at least acknowledge what they are trying to say and keep the ENFj option open.

I don't care if they back off my case or not. I do acknowledge what people say, I read it, I consider it, I respond. If I believe something, I will stand by it until there is reason to change my mind. I won't concede my stance to something I don't believe is true. Never. It would be a lack of integrity and violation of my personal principle to do that. Does that bother people just because I won't change my mind for them when I have no reason to do so? Or what.

[Logos]

Alright, at the risk of opening pandora's box...



Elena, you're either an eager reader and a very fast learner, or you're being coached. A typical LIE who stumbled onto this forum and began reading about the theory would not post the "perfect" responses you repeatedly have within such a short period of time. These are the answers of someone who's either been part of the English speaking online Socionics community for a long time or has done a fuck of a lot of lurking.

Normally, I hear that if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, then it is a duck. But now it sounds as if I am being told that it could not possibly be a duck but instead must be a goose, because it is all far too convenient for duck too show up walking, looking, and talking like a duck all at once?