Digging Deeper to Verify Self-Typings

[jason_m]

A way of processing certain types of information regarding the environment and whatnot, a way of interacting with it. Se is divergent, discrete, and takes things in in their raw form. The focus is solely on the magnitude of the impulse for a given object - nothing more. This tends to manifest in a focus on the immediate sensory qualities of things, and a general understanding of the physical variables and how to manipulate them. In all of Justin's videos, he does not convey any of the body language that I associate with Se, nor does he appear to be processing things in that way. It seems more like he is using Si to ossify his connection with the environment and create a physical continuum. This is evidenced in his smoother bodily movements and an overall demeanor which suggests a more balanced way of dealing with the environment. Look at how he reacted around sean; super ego was clear. Sean's discrete, sharper movements and demeanor (and speech patterns - interruption) would seem to catch Justin off guard, perturb the continuum that he was focusing on - Si. I don't see him as my identical, even if he was an Fe subtype (which would only enhance his focus on Se, which doesn't work), for multiple reasons, the above-mentioned being one of them. And where's the Ni?? What, is he good with predictions or some dumb shit like that? His facial movements and energy seem to suggest an Ne focus - on the correlations and semblances between things in the external world; not the internal connections that are processed in subjective-imagery form - he's not that internally focused or ignoring of his surroundings. He doesn't appear to focus on the Se bare form, but rather the inherent form/possibilities, which he seems to want to explore and expand upon. And his energy levels work better with the EP temperament. I don't see why people are making such retarded suggestions based on some ostensible behavior that supposedly means Fe and the fact that he's had beta friends (or so he says). I don't see him using beta functions. Period.

I think that what you said here is fine, but I wouldn't place too much emphasis on things such as facial movements. I think it's more about the way one processes information, which can be seen in a person's expressed thought patterns, and the type of information that one is receptive to, usually illustrated by his/her relationships with others.

Jason

[JuJu]

Hey Jason,

I'm trying to figure this out... I recognize that the tea-leaves are pointing away from the type I've long considered to be mine (ENFp.) They seem to be pointing toward EIE or IEI...

I'm wondering if there's a way that you define Ni..?

Only write if you have time--and don't worry about other ppl telling you that the particulars are wrong... What you write usually makes a lot of sense to me.

Thanks, -Justin

[jason_m]

Hey Jason,

I'm trying to figure this out... I recognize that the tea-leaves are pointing away from the type I've long considered to be mine (ENFp.) They seem to be pointing toward EIE or IEI...

I'm wondering if there's a way that you define Ni..?

Only write if you have time--and don't worry about other ppl telling you that the particulars are wrong... What you write usually makes a lot of sense to me.

Thanks, -Justin

Justin,

No problem. I think that the key is to look at the sorts of things that are associated with Ni, and see if there is anything common to these characteristics. Consider the following common Ni traits:

1. Being able to predict things.
2. Living in the future or the past.
3. Daydreaming about fanciful things.
4. Mysticism.

What is central to all of these things is that they involve living in your imagination. Predicting things usually involves imagining them, living in the future or past usually involves imagining yourself in either time period, daydreaming about fanciful things clearly involves using your imagination, and with mysticism, you involve your imagination by thinking about things that aren't connected with the tangible world.

Ne also involves imagination, but it is much more connected with reality and involves static thoughts. For instance, with Ni, when you are connected with tangible reality, you might be predicting things, and this involves imagining a sequence of events unfolding; you imagine a set of changing events, looking to see the end result. If Ne were to predict something, it might, for example, be that you suddenly having the notion that your plane is not going to arrive on time. Notice that the thought process doesn't evolve; it only includes one static thought. Also, Ne is often more focused on the real world. For example, Ne might suddenly consider that it would be useful to open up a type of business that no one has thought of before. The fact that this is a practical opportunity makes it more connected to reality than, for example, imagining yourself on a picture-perfect cruise that you'll never take.

I hope this has been helpful. If you need anything clarified, please ask.

Jason

[strrrng]

I think that what you said here is fine, but I wouldn't place too much emphasis on things such as facial movements. I think it's more about the way one processes information, which can be seen in a person's expressed thought patterns, and the type of information that one is receptive to, usually illustrated by his/her relationships with others.

Cognitive patterns are reflected in subtle physical ways.

1. Being able to predict things.
2. Living in the future or the past.
3. Daydreaming about fanciful things.
4. Mysticism.

These aren't themes; they're stereotypes - and erroneous ones, at that.

What is central to all of these things is that they involve living in your imagination. Predicting things usually involves imagining them, living in the future or past usually involves imagining yourself in either time period, daydreaming about fanciful things clearly involves using your imagination, and with mysticism, you involve your imagination by thinking about things that aren't connected with the tangible world.

What a shit deduction.

Ne also involves imagination, but it is much more connected with reality and involves static thoughts. For instance, with Ni, when you are connected with tangible reality, you might be predicting things, and this involves imagining a sequence of events unfolding; you imagine a set of changing events, looking to see the end result. If Ne were to predict something, it might, for example, be that you suddenly having the notion that your plane is not going to arrive on time. Notice that the thought process doesn't evolve; it only includes one static thought. Also, Ne is often more focused on the real world. For example, Ne might suddenly consider that it would be useful to open up a type of business that no one has thought of before. The fact that this is a practical opportunity makes it more connected to reality than, for example, imagining yourself on a picture-perfect cruise that you'll never take.

Sub-par and far from worthwhile.

Justin, don't ask for public opinions on Ni; you'll just get a bunch of convoluted mess about something people don't really experience/understand. Better to use your general theoretical background knowledge and decide for yourself through experience.

[jason_m]

These aren't themes; they're stereotypes - and erroneous ones, at that.

Really? I got them from reading a variety of actual profiles. I can cite the specific profiles if you want. Now, tell me, where are you getting your definitions from?

What a shit deduction.

What you said here is meaningless. Your subjective opinion of my interpretation is not important. It does not prove anything, because I could come back with a reply that is just as good: your conclusion about my deduction is shit. What have I demonstrated? My arrogance? A computer program - a "random insult generator" - could have created that argument. It would make a lot more sense for you to tell me why my deduction is wrong, and perhaps, what would make for a better interpretation of Ni. Then you would have actual arguments.

Sub-par and far from worthwhile.

See my comments above.

Jason

[strrrng]

I've already pmed Justin about this matter, and arguing with you is pointless to me. Why would I waste time illustrating your stupidity, lol? It's silly.

Oh yeah, have fun citing your sources. I rely on first-hand experience and only use theoretical information so far as it coincides with my experience.

[jason_m]

I've already pmed Justin about this matter, and arguing with you is pointless to me. Why would I waste time illustrating your stupidity, lol? It's silly.

I've already addressed this issue, and believe me, it's not just my point of view. Anyone who knows a lot about informal logic would agree that what you've constructed in bold is not a good argument. Once again, a random insult generator could have constructed it.

Oh yeah, have fun citing your sources. I rely on first-hand experience and only use theoretical information so far as it coincides with my experience.

First-hand experience is useful, but when it's combined with authoritative information it's more useful. It's similar to bodybuilding. A personal trainer who only goes by first-hand experience alone might be good, but probably not as good as someone who has first-hand experience and a wide base of knowledge and implements purely theoretical programs when his/her experience might not be applicable.

Jason

[Expat]

I rely on first-hand experience and only use theoretical information so far as it coincides with my experience.

As a general remark - not aimed at the present discussion in particular - doesn't that have the danger of limiting your understanding of Ni (or any other function)?

I mean, even two different individuals of the same type may experience Ni in different ways - or, perhaps more to the point, express what they experience differently. Especially in such an internal function as Ni, two individuals may well experience it very similarly, describe it differently - and so never realize how close their experiences really are (of course, a total understanding of how anyone else experiences anything is possible only through telepathy).

I suggest that it is a bit rash to dismiss any description of Ni (or anything else) as rubbish or invalid, because your interpretation of the description does not fit how you'd describe your experiences. Maybe there are different ways of describing Ni, or even of experiencing it. To assume that only the way you experience and describe it is correct sounds, again, rash.

After all, those "classical" descriptions of Ni by Russian socionists etc did not come from nowhere. They were arrived at through intensive discussion of their experiences, over decades.

My point is not that you should accept blindly those "theoretical" descriptions - I don't, either. But to reject any description as being wrong because it's not how you experience or describe it is mainly prevening you from broadening your understanding.

After all, isn't it just too easy to say, "those people who wrote those descriptions knew nothing of Ni lol"?

(and sorry, this is my "haughty teacher" mode but it's not intentional)

[hellothere]

You are also very 'self'-conscious and that implies .

I don't know if this has got anything to do with Ni, or if it just points to strong Ni, because I am very "'self'-conscious" as well and I doubt I'm beta NF

[Nexus]

I don't know if this has got anything to do with Ni, or if it just points to strong Ni, because I am very "'self'-conscious" as well and I doubt I'm beta NF

I mean in an way.

[hellothere]

I mean in an way.

what do you mean? that being 'self conscious' is a sign of ("implies") ? or that juju is self conscious in a way? if the latter, then what is the way that 's are self conscious?

[Nexus]

what do you mean? that being 'self conscious' is a sign of ("implies") ? or that juju is self conscious in a way? if the latter, then what is the way that 's are self conscious?

I don't mean self-conscious in the traditional use of the expression, I mean self-conscious in terms of being dynamically conscious of the self image itself and how everything will ultimately affect it.

[hellothere]

I don't mean self-conscious in the traditional use of the expression, I mean self-conscious in terms of being conscious of the self itself and how everything might affect it.

yeah I gathered that, but how does it imply Ni?

[Nexus]

yeah I gathered that, but how does it imply Ni?

what else could be introverted intuition other than intuition of the self?

[strrrng]

As a general remark - not aimed at the present discussion in particular - doesn't that have the danger of limiting your understanding of Ni (or any other function)?

No, it doesn't. All we can know is our own experience, so it's better to place more confidence in it than anything else. I'm not saying to be phaedrus lol; just establishing priorities.

I mean, even two different individuals of the same type may experience Ni in different ways - or, perhaps more to the point, express what they experience differently. Especially in such an internal function as Ni, two individuals may well experience it very similarly, describe it differently - and so never realize how close their experiences really are (of course, a total understanding of how anyone else experiences anything is possible only through telepathy).

They may experience it slightly differently, but the function itself remains the same. Thus, through discussion they can see the patterns inherent to the function and how it manifests with people who possibly have it in another position in their psyche.

I suggest that it is a bit rash to dismiss any description of Ni (or anything else) as rubbish or invalid, because your interpretation of the description does not fit how you'd describe your experiences. Maybe there are different ways of describing Ni, or even of experiencing it. To assume that only the way you experience and describe it is correct sounds, again, rash.

Why is that rash? It's not like I don't want the descriptions to make sense. I actually make a point of getting as wide of a theoretical understanding as possible, so that I have all the information at my disposal to winnow through experience. I also think that discussing the function with people who experience it similarly is important. The problem is when people start with the theory and - subconsciously or not - force-fit their experience to it, or cherry-pick things they think are associated with it. I am arguing to focus on the ontology, and assume that theoretical descriptions are erroneous, because by doing so, the accurate ones will shine through. But too many people assume the descriptions are correct - more or less - and thus blind themselves, to some degree. And I wasn't suggesting that my experience is better or more accurate than anyone else's, objectively speaking; it is just what is accurate for me. I compare it with theoretical descriptions, and try to console discrepancies; I am well aware that I could be incorrect or paying attention to the wrong things.

After all, those "classical" descriptions of Ni by Russian socionists etc did not come from nowhere. They were arrived at through intensive discussion of their experiences, over decades.

And? That makes them no more inherently "true" than if a crackpot came up with them during a high. Those people could be wrong. It's unlikely, but I'm not simply going to assume that because they have a lot of experience, that they are correct. And you realize that most of the time the same ideas get recycled through generations, so a lot of these people could have been blind to other options anyway, since they already had some theoretical preconception in their head. Experience != accuracy. Period. It makes it more likely, but I'm not just gonna believe something because someone is an "expert" or more experienced than me. Again, it's just about personal verification; I neither dismiss nor accept the descriptions without extensive research.

My point is not that you should accept blindly those "theoretical" descriptions - I don't, either. But to reject any description as being wrong because it's not how you experience or describe it is mainly prevening you from broadening your understanding.

Depends. I don't just say something is wrong; I try to figure out why it doesn't match my experience. If I discuss it with others, make more observations, etc. and I find a pattern that corroborates my experience, then I'm right. And vice-versa.

After all, isn't it just too easy to say, "those people who wrote those descriptions knew nothing of Ni lol"?

Yes, it is. And based on most of my experience and studies of them, they didn't lol.

(and sorry, this is my "haughty teacher" mode but it's not intentional)

No problem.

[JuJu]

All we can know is our own experience, so it's better to place more confidence in it than anything else.

The problem in this case is: for a long time, 2/3years, I've attributed certain experiences to Fi and Ne... B/c I believed I was NeFi ego. Now I'm suspicious that my entire Socionics conception of those experiences: Ne, Ni, Fe, Fi--has been totally off... It's disorienting.

@Nick: I'd typed myself by the methods you espouse as incorrect--cherry-picking info from profiles and nodding, "yes." Now I agree with you 100%--that was not the right way to go about it... That's why I will take my time this time--reflect on all of the info--and not rush to any conclusions.

I've had several good conversations with Implied that have helped me realize that some behaviors I was attributing to 'ENFp'--yeah, essentially, I was 'cherry-picking.' For example, when I've laughed at someone's ridiculous facial expression during sex, it didn't mean I was fo sho 'infantile.'

Throughout these years of self-typing, my major problem has been: I've wanted to be ENFp badly... I know that sounds gay, but I've wanted the pieces to fit... I've ignored large swaths of evidence to the contrary.

In the back of my mind, doubts have always lingered... Niffweed and Implied brought them to light during the Sean situation... At that time, I got defensive and stubborn... (See Expat's: The pathetic hidden agenda.)

Now I just want to get to the bottom of it... I've dedicated a long time to attempting to understand Socionics... I don't want it to end in a bizarre blur of misunderstanding... I want to understand why I'm a certain type.

Indications are I'm an Fe ego type...

Please tell me more, anyone... Please.

[jessica129]

I have a strong urge to put lotion on that cat and slap his stomach.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Hey JuJu..reasons for Fi.. We've really only chatted somewhat briefly JuJu, but when we have done, I feel i've tried to understand were you are coming from, what your intentions are, the reasons for what you say or have acted..if you will to find what really makes you tick. I've kinda felt that you've just skimmed along the surface of such things, even when i've suggested to go "deeper" which to me this is something which looks to satisfy my Fi valueing. It's been more Fe..I don't think you value, nor supplied that sort of Fi communication I enjoy. I've also thought that your attitude of using your F is to keep things with a "cool" and chill external atmosphere..I get the impression that the external displayed emotions is something important to you, but as an Fi valuer external emotions aren't as important to me, and as an Si dominant I already am chilled out as my natural inclination.

Of course we haven't had massive conversations. It's just the impression i've had, so it could be I haven't been "around" you for long enough, but I think some of this is relevant.

This is for me how I think you could be Fe ego and also perhaps not receptive to ISTp's Si. (maybe you'd be receptive to ISFp's Si more)

[JuJu]

Hey JuJu..reasons for Fi.. We've really only chatted somewhat briefly JuJu, but when we have done, I feel i've tried to understand were you are coming from, what your intentions are, the reasons for what you say or have acted..if you will to find what really makes you tick. I've kinda felt that you've just skimmed along the surface of such things, even when i've suggested to go "deeper" which to me this is something which looks to satisfy my Fi valueing. It's been more Fe..I don't think you value, nor supplied that sort of Fi communication I enjoy. I've also thought that your attitude of using your F is to keep things with a "cool" and chill external atmosphere..I get the impression that the external displayed emotions is something important to you, but as an Fi valuer external emotions aren't as important to me, and as an Si dominant I already am chilled out as my natural inclination.

Of course we haven't had massive conversations. It's just the impression i've had, so it could be I haven't been "around" you for long enough, but I think some of this is relevant.

This is for me how I think you could be Fe ego and also perhaps not receptive to ISTp's Si. (maybe you'd be receptive to ISFp's Si more)

Thanks for this... I really like you, respect you, and thus I've really enjoyed talking with you when I have... I believe you're right... I probably mis-typed myself as ENFp.

You do not feel like my conflictor though, Cyclops... At all...

I'm leaning toward EIE/IEI... I'm wondering if you have an opinion on that/a way to distinguish between the two types?

Again, thank you... I hope me being a different type doesn't lead to a changing of the friendship, b/c i really do like you.

[JuJu]

I have a strong urge to put lotion on that cat and slap his stomach.

LOL!!!! Yeah, he needs lotions badly... I bet he's ashamed of himself.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Thanks for this... I really like you, respect you, and thus I've really enjoyed talking with you when I have... I believe you're right... I probably mis-typed myself as ENFp.

You do not feel like my conflictor though, Cyclops... At all...

I'm leaning toward EIE/IEI... I'm wondering if you have an opinion on that/a way to distinguish between the two types?

Again, thank you... I hope me being a different type doesn't lead to a changing of the friendship, b/c i really do like you.

Distinguishing between mirrors... one way to look at it is essentially what the judging and perceiving functions do in the ego block.

For instance, the perceiving functions N and S basically "view" the information, and the judging functions T and F pretty much do something with the information.

What this means, is that say for instance a P type.. NiFe, essentially they will be looking to make sense out of something vague (Ni information going into Fe judging) whereas an FeNi is essentially trying to make something vague out of something defined (Fe judging going into Ni information perceiving)

So I think basically, an INFp's approach is to make sense out of something vague, and an ENFj's approach is to try to make something more undefined out of something defined.

I think this can also be picked up on by the person in question who is trying to decide.

Also.. I think it comes across in writing styles... for instance I think my posts here usually show me having something vague and making sense out of it..a little more meandering to something defined (as a "P" type). Take for example Niffweed and Expat.. who are mirrors. Expat displays "jugdements" primarily in what he writes, then moving to other possibilities ("vagueness").. Where as Niffweed seems to start with more general information...moving to his point. The difference I think is that Expats seems primarily like a "T" type..his judging main function..where as Niffweed seems primarily like a "N" type.his perceiving main function.

Contrast it also with say, Kristiina, and some INFp's here, how the differences come accross in writing/thought organisation.

I think this one of the things that can help point towards the differences when viewing or deciding on which of a mirror someone is.

And no I can't see us as conflictors. I think you are a perceiving type not a judging type.

[Slacker]

Your descriptions in this thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...highlight=juju sounded pretty ENFp to me. So, I don't know what's going on. Were you deliberately trying to make yourself sound more ENFp than you are?

[JuJu]

@Cyclops: Thank you I agree with what you wrote about your own posting style--and now that I've reviewed a few examples, (rational and irrational--Expat and Niffweed, specifically,) I can discern the difference in their posting styles... I agree with your analysis, i.e. vagueness to specifics and vice versa.

Applying this to myself, it might seem to suggest I'm INFp>ENFj.... Is this your opinion as well..? Thank you for your help in this, Cyclops You are a class-act.

Your descriptions in this thread:
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...highlight=juju sounded pretty ENFp to me. So, I don't know what's going on. Were you deliberately trying to make yourself sound more ENFp than you are?

I'd feel genuinely badly if you believed this, Slacker Mom...

Since I began 'studying' Socionics, I'd hoped I was ENFp, and built my understanding around the idea I was... The 'cherry-picking' of info that led me to consider myself ENFp--for years--laid the groundwork for this bizarre situation--which is embarrassing, honestly. That said, it's not the result of 'lying' or purposely embellishing--it's b/c I attributed behaviors to Ne and Fi incorrectly.

Sorta similar to unefille and idolatrie--I misunderstood.

[JuJu]

Unefille gave me the green-light to post this here... I don't believe that there's anything overly personal in it... Hopefully, it will generate some feedback..? I've found it VERY HELPFUL.

Ok, I've been thinking (haha, it's like a puzzle I want to crack!) and I definitely think you're IEI. Feel free to quote these reasons in your thread if you think they're at all relevant.

I think you're much more conscious of Fe then you are of Ni in a way that suggests Fe is your creative function which you selectively deploy. In myself for example: I'm much more aware of Ni then I am of Fe, to the extent that the idea I'm Fe-base took a really long time to make sense. Ni for me is like glasses you put on - every time you 'use' it, you're aware of 'wearing it' (even if I don't have to make a deliberate choice to use it). Fe on the other hand is integrated into your vision. It's like um...being short or long sighted. Until other people and kind doctors point it out, you have no idea that the way you see is particular, so how can you identify how you're different and what causes that? Ok, badly explained. Long day writing papers, is my excuse.

Even the way my last message described Ni - it was all about how I use it; what purpose it serves. It does things for me that I'm aware of. In contrast, I'm not sure what Fe does for me because I don't use or produce Fe; I am Fe. I read people without being aware that reading them and I react immediately. It's only through socionics that I realise that I'm doing it at all, reading, reacting, reflecting, constantly taking in non-verbal cues and emitting them. That I produce the effect I desire to produce doesn't require any awareness on my behalf at all.

I think the way you use and deploy Fe indicates you're Fe-creative. So, my vote is definitely for IEI-Fe.

Sometimes questions:

1. Do you normally approach people or do people normally approach you (because you seem warm, friendly, inviting etc)?
2. Would you say people find you judgemental - if not in your character, at least in the way you deploy humour?
3. Do you find yourself affecting/setting the mood of most endeavours you're involved in, or are you less intrusive with your moods?
4. In a group, do you established the 'mode of communication'?
5. In a social environment, do you fit in quite seamlessly with the social environment, or do you find yourself chosing between either remaining outside of it, or intruding and thus disrupting the flow and redirecting it?

1. Sometimes I'll approach someone--often to seek information... Like last night, I saw this dude at the gym whom I've noticed has been getting in good shape--I'd been tracking his progress, b/c we're always there at the same time--so I went to him and asked him about his routine... I do this rarely--only when I'm very interested in starting a conversation/friendship... Much more often, ppl will approach me--esp in romantic situations... This may sound shitty, but I'm being honest so as to get the typing right... I get tons of txt msgs from a lot of different ppl everyday... Ppl do seem attracted, and want to communicate... But ppl who've known me a long time call me "reclusive." lol

2. Yes! lol... My humor is satirical, 'cutting' I guess would be a good word. Ppl have called it "mean-spirited" and I can understand why--but it's just the way I view things... One of my friends described it as, "you'll make what you're saying sound like a joke--but it's obvious it's what you believe... So it hurts." I've always been like this... Using irony to make points about ppl/things.

3. I'll set the mood of an endeavor if the pre-existing mood is IMO lame, you know? haha... At work, for example, I've never liked it when ppl have been overly formal... So when I'd come in, I'd usually try to shift the mood (successfully) by making jokes/appearing relaxed/smiling/talking about non-work-related stuff... Or, to use another example: if one of my friends looks gloomy or something, I may attempt to set a new mood, (or else I'll just listen and be empathetic.) I wouldn't say I'm 'intrusive' with my moods (like my ESE Mom is, lol--I love her to death, but she is very intrusive with her moods...) I will only attempt to steer the general mood if I feel it really needs steering.

4. Sometimes... (It's conscious, if I do...) The other day, me and a friend picked up someone we didn't know so well... My friend was being disrespectful to this new person, (I felt--and I could tell this person, prob ILI, was getting pissed,) so I attempted to change the mode of communication to a more neutral discussion of interests, (as opposed to personal attacks...) I feel that this is different from what my ENFj friend can do--he can orchestrate the emotional tone of a large gathering... For me, only a few ppl.

5. I fit in seamlessly... I feel lucky, b/c I've noticed that a lot of ppl cannot... I'd feel at home at a debutante's ball or in a ghetto... (I know that might sound weird, but I feel like I can communicate with anyone... and be accepted by anyone--in the short-term, that is.)

[kensi]

@Huitzlipotchli... That's interesting... What you notice about impulsiveness is one of the things that caused me to re-examine my type (vs. e.g. tereg.)

...

How do you see someone like Tereg...or myself for that matter of fact and how do you differ from that if you don't mind me asking ?

[kensi]

what else could be introverted intuition other than intuition of the self?

intuition of time and substance

[kensi]

I have a strong urge to put lotion on that cat and slap his stomach.

have fun with that

[kensi]

Hey JuJu..reasons for Fi.. We've really only chatted somewhat briefly JuJu, but when we have done, I feel i've tried to understand were you are coming from, what your intentions are, the reasons for what you say or have acted..if you will to find what really makes you tick. I've kinda felt that you've just skimmed along the surface of such things, even when i've suggested to go "deeper" which to me this is something which looks to satisfy my Fi valueing. It's been more Fe..I don't think you value, nor supplied that sort of Fi communication I enjoy. I've also thought that your attitude of using your F is to keep things with a "cool" and chill external atmosphere..I get the impression that the external displayed emotions is something important to you, but as an Fi valuer external emotions aren't as important to me, and as an Si dominant I already am chilled out as my natural inclination.

Of course we haven't had massive conversations. It's just the impression i've had, so it could be I haven't been "around" you for long enough, but I think some of this is relevant.

This is for me how I think you could be Fe ego and also perhaps not receptive to ISTp's Si. (maybe you'd be receptive to ISFp's Si more)

Do you suppose he can be FeSe (Fe Ego and Se hidden agenda)....i'm starting to think that......even in the videos he makes...who in their right mind would get their friend involved in videos to launch over the internet on the topic of Socionics. ENFj would probably be a better candidate than ENFp because of the FeSe thing.Peace

[kensi]

I'm leaning toward EIE/IEI... I'm wondering if you have an opinion on that/a way to distinguish between the two types?

I think EIE is more probable given the choice

[strrrng]

ugh

[JuJu]

who in their right mind would get their friend involved in videos to launch over the internet on the topic of Socionics. ENFj would probably be a better candidate than ENFp because of the FeSe thing.Peace

kensi, what the hell is wrong with you? Sean came up here b/c he wanted to talk about Socionics and make a video... In the above post, you made a dumb (offensive) assumption about that, and drew an idiotic conclusion from it.

regardless, to your original question: in your videos--you come across as much less expressive than me--not as forceful... You remind me of Jeff Daniels... I do not believe we're the same type.

Tereg? He seems very nice... He has a much less biting sense of humor then me... More tolerant then me (I'm not sure if that's the wright word.) He's creative in a totally different way... I would very surprised, having seen his videos, if we're the same type.

[kensi]

ugh

kensi, what the hell is wrong with you? Sean came up here b/c he wanted to talk about Socionics and make a video... In the above post, you made a dumb (offensive) assumption about that, and drew an idiotic conclusion from it.
.

Sorry, it was meant to be a small comment ultimately for your own regard and not something personal. I am certainly not aware of your entire dealings with him and probably nobody else here is as well...i must admit you've got me a little confused with how ur acting but whatever.

[JuJu]

it's ok... i thought you might've known about b/c it was all anyone talked about here during the entire month of august.

P.S. Thank you for the info, everyone--who wrote here and sent PMs... I've learned more about Socionics from this thread und ihre Kinder than almost any other... Danke

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Hey JuJu... re your question on the thread the other day.. didn't get a chance to log on.. yeah INFp sounds OK

[Sirena]

Hi Juju! I've been following the thread closely, looking for similarities/differences myself since IEI was my original self-typing and one that I wasn't too sure of leaving at first, although it becomes increasingly clear that it wasn't the correct one for me. Now that I think about it, it makes sense that when I first came on the forum and was undecided between IEI and EII, I was finding it hard to relate to the IEI description and although it was apparent I was irrational, I kept getting drawn to the EII description because of he Quadra values/functions. I never bothered to read IEE! Anyway, I know this is isn't directly related to this thread, but I guess I'm just saying that I can relate to the cherry picking info to make things fit and the feeling of knowing you're NF, just not sure which one!

I'm glad you're getting closer to figuring things out! Have you decided on IEI fo' sho'? I see it's on your signature. Aww, I'll miss you in Delta.

[Nexus]

it's ok... i thought you might've known about b/c it was all anyone talked about here during the entire month of august.

P.S. Thank you for the info, everyone--who wrote here and sent PMs... I've learned more about Socionics from this thread und ihre Kinder than almost any other... Danke

I am glad that you could settle on a type. IMHO IEI suits you.

[JuJu]

Hi Juju! I've been following the thread closely, looking for similarities/differences myself since IEI was my original self-typing and one that I wasn't too sure of leaving at first, although it becomes increasingly clear that it wasn't the correct one for me. Now that I think about it, it makes sense that when I first came on the forum and was undecided between IEI and EII, I was finding it hard to relate to the IEI description and although it was apparent I was irrational, I kept getting drawn to the EII description because of he Quadra values/functions. I never bothered to read IEE! Anyway, I know this is isn't directly related to this thread, but I guess I'm just saying that I can relate to the cherry picking info to make things fit and the feeling of knowing you're NF, just not sure which one!

I'm glad you're getting closer to figuring things out! Have you decided on IEI fo' sho'? I see it's on your signature. Aww, I'll miss you in Delta.

I am glad that you could settle on a type. IMHO IEI suits you.

I hope to respond to these at greater length in the next couple of days--right now I'm deluged in schoolwork (I've procrastinated disgracefully.)For right now though, I just want to say thank you.

[Sirena]

I hope to respond to these at greater length in the next couple of days--right now I'm deluged in schoolwork (I've procrastinated disgracefully.)For right now though, I just want to say thank you.

Oh wait...I think the asterik next to in your signature might mean you're still unsure.

[JuJu]

Here is a short video... In it, I talk about Ni--differences in Ni-valuers understandings/expressions of it... IP temperament... And a shout out to Phaedrus. (hell yeah)

P.S. Sirena, as much as I would like to be ENFp>INFp--I think it'd be wishful thinking to say I am... INFp--for me, the inter-type relations make sense (finally.) The typing explains my propensity for solitude, and my desire for Se.

[Gilly]

Hah, you look kind of like Ashton