so it's bill and hillary huh? i would have to say the author's description does describe them. socionically, i still say it's a crap shoot. you can make a case for a lot of different types for each of them.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
What I find interesting is how the analysis of types from the description compares with their previously held types: Bill (ESE) and Hilary (LSI). After this analysis, Bill's creative function switched whereas Hilary's leading function switched. Just to offer a big what if, to what degree would the relationship description still make sense if Bill was ESE and Hilary was LSI as it previously generally believed?
i always thought bill was ESE and hillary was LII.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
.
Well personally I had already been thinking of EIE for him for a while, but I only shifted from LSI to ESI for her after seeing Bernstein's book. It's not just the bit by Morris; everything fits. As for the ESE-LSI relationship, I don't think it would work in the way described. I think ESE-LSI is one of those relationships where they find out they are better off as friends rather than as a couple, so they would have separated early on. This is of course just my opinion.
Yes. This may have been why she followed Bill to Arkansas in the first place, and I think she even said something like that at the time. She was asked by her friends if she was sure that was the best decision. She said something like, she wasn't sure, but she was determined to make it work.
I wasn't happy with the concept that she is ESI, either!
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
Sure, and I think that was one of Diana's points. His supervision is from the point of view of , that is, he sees her low as weakness and does not really understand that she may stick to him partly due to not seeing better options, rather than being dependent on him. To me that is consistent with supervision of IEE over ESI.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
I remember watching Morris's videos and feeling like he gave off the aura of an ENFp, but also feeling like the advice he gave was too Beta . But I guess that's the job of a political adviser.
I'm still trying to wrap my mind around this, and going back over my initial impressions of the passage. I just went through this thread again, and I'm having a difficult time seeing how the shift in opinion happened from Alpha to Beta NF.
I can see how the and from Hillary, and I pointed that out, but in the sense that he values it, I'm failing to visualize how this is happening.
I need to be able to visualize what - interaction looks like in order to understand this, which, I'm having a hard time seeing (in a very general sense) just what that looks like.
But again, looking at it from Bill's perspective from the passage, I'm trying to get a handle on what is going on here within the realm.
And what the contrast is between this and what I was seeing originally as .
Hope that makes sense, because I'm still stuck on Alpha for Bill, and I need someone to sort of spell it out for me why Bill as Beta NF is more apparent than Alpha (in the vs sense).
INFj
9w1 sp/sx
Wait, no. I actually know ESEs who are very well read and fairly concerned with demonstrating it. Also, they don't show signs of what I would consider "practical intelligence."
In fact, when I read the description about why the author considered Bill intelligent and not Hillary, I actually related to his analysis and saw of lot of my ESE friend in his description of Bill. My exact thoughts for Bill's description were "yes, i love people who have conversations in which they tie in lots of different information. the problem is that i can make the connections, but I can't ever remember the information." Okay, so, to be clear, I saw what Bill does as something that I can do only once the information is in front of me (because I have very short term memory for these things). I have Ne ego and I didn't see myself as similar to Bill, which might be why the description didn't really strike me as Ne, so much as Ne valuing. My interactions with ESEs often involve them throwing out lots of info and me drawing links.
I did originally think the description was ILE, but I was contemplating ESE because ESE's role is Te and their HA is Ne. I'm not saying that I think he is ESE, because I don't have an idea.
Actually, why not SLI for that description of Bill? They contemplate global issues, throw out info, have a weird Fe public persona, don't show emotions in private......
EII; E6(w5)
i am flakey
I've just finished watching a number of youtube clips of Morris, and it seems like he becomes irrational whenever he starts talking about Hillary. I don't think reading his description of her is a fair way to type her.
The point that some of you are missing is this -- it's not just Morris's description in isolation. As I pointed out, that was quoted in Carl Bernstein's book A Woman in Charge. Unlike his old Watergate buddy Bob Woodward, Bernstein now preferred to use named, and quoted, sources to write his book. There is nothing really in Morris's description that flatly contradicts what anyone else has said; it's not as if what Morris says is the total opposite of what all other sources have said and I picked precisely it. I chose that description simply because it's the longest one that Bernstein included, among those that are directly quoted and so can be attributed to a single individual.
Nor is Bernstein's book a sort of attack on the Clintons or her in particular; as far as I know no reviewer, of whatever political inclination, has accused him of that.
Of course in order to debate that, you'd have to read the book -- but in the meantime, I'm saying that to dismiss the description because of who the author is, and due to his obvious prejudices, is a mistake.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
I don't think anyone is proposing to do that. It is a point of view, of value because he knew them so closely, and to be weary of because of his biases and prejudices. The first aspect makes it a folly to dismiss him; the second should make you wary. Historians, when considering evidence from eyewitnesses, face this dilemma all the time. For instance, shall we dismiss Philo's eyewitness descripton of Caligula's behavior because of his obvious fear and loathing of Caligula? What is the "truth"? I don't know.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
...
Last edited by Suomea; 09-27-2008 at 11:00 PM.
Suomea
...
Last edited by Suomea; 09-27-2008 at 10:59 PM.
Suomea
"Unlike him she's a normal human being, with emotions. She is capable of love and affection and caring and compassion and warmth and empathy in a way that he is simply not. When he's with other people, he absorbs their emotion and their energy, and gives it back to them with a tremendous radiance that passes for emotion. It's nothing phony, it's heartfelt at the moment, but it's your feeling coming back to you. When he's alone, he's incapable really of feeling much of anything. He's an emotional albino."
6. The Activation Function: a person's activity on this function depends on the surrounding; when this function is "energized" by others – his/her activity may even sometimes exceed activity of other people, and when it is not – the activity disappears without leaving a trace.
To me, it all sounds as an ISFj writer charging against an ENTp and supporting another ISFj.
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
Hillary Clinton seems introvert
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Originally Posted by Gilly
bill - iee
hillary - lse
cheating Bill - ENTJ
stupid cocainist Hillary - N-F type
Hillary is LSE and Bill is IEE
link: https://www.idrlabs.com/articles/201...-is-esfp-enfp/
Why Bill Clinton is ESFP (and not ENFP)
We recently received an email suggesting that Bill Clinton is ENFP, rather than ESFP. Our correspondent submitted the following arguments to us:
- The ESFP was called “the Performer” by Myers, and ESFPs often play the clown.
- Clinton has a stellar academic record and is very intelligent.
- Clinton cares about the world, and such global consideration is the hallmark of NFs, not SPs.
Last edited by Distance; 11-22-2023 at 10:01 AM.
Black & white is a shallow divide ∕∕division is the color that multipliesx
Taking things at face value is good only for a spell⛧
Abstract builds a soul, a house can never become a home without it ♀
A little better makes better more>
♦♦
Bill Clinton SEI-Fe C>H
Hillary Clinton D-IEI-Fe or D-ILE-Ti