All INFps think they're not INFp, at least at first.Originally Posted by Allie
All INFps think they're not INFp, at least at first.
"Only the true Messiah denies his divinity" - Life of Brian .
So, if you think you're not INFp, it's evidence for your INFp-ness.
Absolutely brilliant.
Wait -- that means it's evidence that I am INFp, too?
Last edited by Expat; 09-29-2008 at 04:22 PM. Reason: typo
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Yes, you're INFp as well."Only the true Messiah denies his divinity" - Life of Brian .
So, if you say think you're not INFp, it's evidence for your INFp-ness.
Absolutely brilliant.
Wait -- that means it's evidence that I am INFp, too?
I'm also INFp (though I don't think I am, which means I am).
you're only INFp if you disagree with Te types.
6w5 sx
model Φ: -+0
sloan - rcuei
You're also INFp if you don't think you're INFp, as stated earlier.
Great. INFps are like the E6s of the socion. And I'm so counterphobic I think I'm.
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
Huh?Great. INFps are like the E6s of the socion. And I'm so counterphobic I think I'm
because many people who are typed E6 don't think they are E6?Great. INFps are like the E6s of the socion. And I'm so counterphobic I think I'm
6w5 sx
model Φ: -+0
sloan - rcuei
INFp is a trash bin type in the same way that E6 is. Almost anyone can be INFp. Anyone can be E6.
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
If I DID think I was INFp at first, this means that I'm actually not? Does it work both ways?
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
Nope. You're INFp too.
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
But if you take that too far, people who actually are those types will think otherwise.
not true. I always knew I was INFp.
(maybe I'm not INFp now!
IEI-Fe 4w3
I see. People like me, then?
Nope. You're INFp.not true. I always knew I was INFp.
(maybe I'm not INFp now!
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
Yes.
That only makes any sense if you see a type as some sort of mark of social status here that depends on people's recognition to be valid.
It was a joke.
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
It is mostly "us against them" way of thinking with lots of generalizations.
lol @ this
4w3-5w6-8w7
Allie is not IEI! She absolutely does not have Ni as her first function! It seriously bothers me that people refuse to see this!
EII 4w5
so/sx (?)
Are you usually seriously bothered by people who refuse to see what is obvious to you?
I revel in your misery.
I am not bothered by the "people", I never said that. I'm bothered that people are basing her type on (probably incorrect) stereotypes of beta behavior instead of looking at how she uses the functions.
EII 4w5
so/sx (?)
Well, I'm glad you have found something to revel in.
EII 4w5
so/sx (?)
lol
??? please explain
EII 4w5
so/sx (?)
Ever considered that you might be basing her type on an incorrect understanding of how she uses the functions?
I have observed her and interacted with her in several different types of situations, not just her posts here, but also on aim and extensively on stickam. Others who know her quite well agree that she does not use Ni as her primary function. If someone who believes that she is iei could please lead me to some information about how she has written posts here indicates Ni base function then I would consider this possibility. ("getting along with ashton" does not count as valid information for typing. I am saying kind-of as a joke, but also because this has been an argument from several people, and I think it is silly.)
EII 4w5
so/sx (?)
I have no precise idea of her type, and I voiced my tentative opinion only at her request.
I just think that "show me how her posts indicate Ni as a base function" is the same circular reasoning that is going on here:
- I know that someone writes as someone with Ni as base function because they write like those I know have Ni as base function.
It's like "he is Ni-dominant because he writes like the Ni dominants I know" and "if he does not write like the Ni dominants I know, then he is not a Ni dominant".
Which is circular thinking at its best.
Last edited by Expat; 09-30-2008 at 05:34 PM.
You called them "the functions".
*snicker*
http://forums.socionics.ws/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=66
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ead.php?t=2008
i hesitate a bit about harping on these threads especially as evidence, but i think that this case is extremely well documented in these threads which clearly you have no familiarity with.
yes, it does."getting along with ashton" does not count as valid information for typing.
oh yeah?
3952836759823y94t 43jgo9y429ingp934gt9134jf93ghf91y43fd9nu13t7g1943j 0913g48r
?
Exactly.
i want to blow off both of your heads and eat your brains.
You are not in the least bit intimidating. It's cute watching your infantile escapades and desperate attempts to assert otherwise.
i want to rub your blood on my chest and arms, and take a shower
Well, someone is kinky.
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
Now you're just trying to be cute, but I'm afraid it's still all rather embarrassing.
Reply With Quote
