difference between ILI and IEI is simple.
Ask them if they are proud of their logical approach, or their humanistic approach.
ILI will say: Yeah I'm logical and I'm proud of it.
IEI will answer: Of course I'm not logical, it's harsh and wrong to not include people. I hate being logical.
Looks like I'll have to be happy being a hippo. Because Type has lost me in that inverted time portal inbetween ILI and IEI.Originally Posted by Jarno
Concepts, Fantasy, Strategy, and Power.
INTp
There is a general tendency on this forum to confuse creativewith either accepting
or creative
. We who have creative
It clearly has something to do with the fact that most people here are much too focused on the quadras, which leads to severe mistypings in many cases. The only way to solve that problem is to try to educate people, I think, but sadly enought they are often almost totally uninterested in learning the types correctly. They generally prefer to stick to their prejudices and misconceptions.
In general, I tend not to go against self typing. There is something here however that i've been noticing. If Java is ILI or IEI, then he is either going to be Fi seeking or Fe demonstrative, what I have been wondering, and partly been looking to observe, is which he is showing more..Fi seeking or Fe valueing. I'm getting an impression of Fi seeking, but then keeping an open perspective there's been some beta Fe demonstrative also. It could even be some sort of Fe alpha seeking, because there seems to be some sort of mix.
I'm not seeing this as any conclusive method of approach, at this early stage. However I think the seeking/demonstrative approach can have its uses IRL definitely, and I guess I can see it being useful to a certain extent online also, it's something i'm interested in, so i'll give it some observation for further posts.
I guess i'm wanting to put down some of my general thoughts just now..they're kind of not fully formed, I would have prefered to have held off, but dunno..somehow I think putting down some general thoughts/impressions just now *might* have it's uses..for anyone else who's reading (read this far) and Java.
Anyway, i'm possibly rambling now, besides.. in the meantime i'll be shortly getting dragged out to a social event, so I need to go get ready n put on my nice new denims and that kind of ok t-shirt I bought last week. Analysing Java type would be much more interesting.
That is almost impossible to reliably observe with any accuracy over the Internet. A proof of that impossibiltiy is all the mistypings in that respect which Expat and others are guilty of.
You should not even try to determine those aspects, because whatever conclusion you may draw from your observations is necessarily less reliable than Java's own self-typing.
It's simply a very bad method of approach at every stage.
I agree in principle with what your saying..that it is *difficult* to observe with accuracy over the internet, but I wouldn't say impossible..or any near a definition of impossible. I think in that respect of how good it is would be dependant on how deep the interaction (conversation) were to go with an individual.
Sure.
i don't know so much. For instance, supposing you were close to someone, and you wanted their advice..and they were an ethical type..what advice would you be more receptive to..an Fi creative or an Fe creative? If you were unsure of their type then you would probably be more sure after that conversation.
What I'm saying is that it isn't a bad method at every stage. Of course you may say a person would have determined if the other were Fi or Fe creative before such a thing, but if you did say that, that isn't always the case, the way I see it is that every method has it's uses, I think imo the distinction you should be making, is perhaps one has to know when to use them.
Of course I did say that I wasn't making any conclusions of Javatype this way, I simply was passing some observations at this stage which may or may not be useful here..but it could be useful 'there' (even to someone reading for their personal reasons) But you are saying it is never useful (or at least always very bad etc etc), which is incorrect, because aside from the reason(s) i've given here (which shows it can be of use and will sometimes be good) .. how can you possibly be aware of *every* situation in such a context?
Neither -- unless they could back up their advice with T arguments.
No, certainly not. If I can't type them independently of such aspects, then I would certainly not try to type them using such an unreliable method. I would simply suspend any opinion of mine on their possible types until I had enough reliable data on which to make a correct typing.
There are always much better typing methods available than trying to determine such nuances as whether someone is Fi or Fe creative. So why not use those other, more reliable methods instead?
Some people I know have gave me definite Fi advice. It's one of my seeking functions and one of yours. Why would you need to T to back up their advice? That doesn't fit in with model A intertype relations.
Some people are more difficult to type, sometimes one method not reliable on own but when tied together with others pretty much make the case a given.No, certainly not. If I can't type them independently of such aspects, then I would certainly not try to type them using such an unreliable method. I would simply suspend any opinion of mine on their possible types until I had enough reliable data on which to make a correct typing.
Interesting.. It occurs to me that my approach is Cre Te Dynamic. I feel personally it serves me well.
You missed my point..I don't believe that you or anyone can be sure that they are aware of every situation so I do not understand how you can be sure that there are always better typing methods available in certain circumstances. Can you not accept/admit that maybe sometimes, what I said could have it's use(s)?There are always much better typing methods available than trying to determine such nuances as whether someone is Fi or Fe creative. So why not use those other, more reliable methods instead?
Last edited by Cyclops; 05-03-2008 at 04:17 PM. Reason: typo.
IEIs see themselves as illogical, and proud of it?
Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.
I pity your souls
To a certain extent, yes. At least in comparison to ILIs. IEIs don't prioritize logic in the same way.
That question was intended for the IEIs on the board.
Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.
I pity your souls
lol that's exactly what I thought when I saw that
fwiw, in my experience Fe/Ti types are much more likely to use the word "logic" a lot than Te/Fi types are. They're more likely to use the word "logical" when admiring someone who they think is smart, more likely to use the word "illogical" when criticizing someone who they think is stupid/foolish, etc.
Basically what I'm saying is that if someone goes on and on about who/what is logical and who/what is not, odds are they're Fe/Ti.
No. That is just a myth. It is not true.
see myself as irrational more so than illogical. Like I can be logical if I try hard and form logic better than logical types dumber than me but it seems unnatural for me to use it too much so I return to using my strong functions.
IEIs wouldn't be proud of being illogical, but probably proud of being who they are, and who they are seems like an illogical person lol
Also, we like to think that we are very logical, it depends on the IEI your talking to. Me personally, having understood with the help of professionals my type, I find IEIs to be friendly system builders. I think people confuse Ethical, with having good intentions in mind for other people, or having an ethical thought structure. This is not the case, we actually see that our environment is more workable if people are 'happy'. It's a lot of work to keep people happy, we don't see any problem with giving them what they want, even if it's just a big lie that we are perpetuating in order to keep the working environment stable. For having witnessed the horrors that unleash when confronting people with their problems, we now understand the usefulness of perpetuating ignorance.
"There is a dark side to every smile." - Lord Java the 3rd
Concepts, Fantasy, Strategy, and Power.
INTp
Rubbish.
Of course it's rubbish. I'm not sure if anyone apart from Jarno seriously considered that statement to be valid.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
I'm relieved (seriously).
I think the only type that might say something like that - and on occasions, out of exasperation, perhaps - would be the IEE.
Joy = clearly fucking retarded
Was it niffweed or you who thought that Jarno may be an LII? I cannot honestly remember. But I must say that Gamma quadra has my sympathies for the "Nouveau Gamma" influx.
@crazedat: While I agree that sometimes Joy has a habit of sidestepping the issues that you present that seem out of context and non-issues by turning it into a "proof" regarding your type, I would hardly say that Joy is "clearly fucking retarded." She can be frustrating, as I am many times as well, but not clearly fucking retarded.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
I never made that suggestion as far as I remember. Not sure about niffweed.
Why, thanks.
Do you mean new gamma members, or people who incorrectly think they are gamma? If you're referring to me, I'm going to note that in a negative light. I'm not happy. Btw, I can totally tell that you're EIE, what now?! Oh noes, your world is corrupting because other peoples minds control your type. Defend it? Nah, you have enough status in this forum to lean on.
Pick on someone else with your title. If anything, Gamma needs some more threads to keep them from dying. Sympathy. Really.
Why don't you do something 'constructive'.
Concepts, Fantasy, Strategy, and Power.
INTp
No comment.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
hmm since my statement about how an IEI might react was rubbish,
I guess I can't be an IEI myself afterall...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote