Why is it so Difficult to Find your Type?

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I think it's as simple as this: When somebody is posting, how do we know how well they're *really* thinking things through before they hit 'submit?' Maybe after careful consideration whatever they're saying is false; and the reverse is actually true. Am I being paranoid or just reasonably careful? I don't know who to trust really.

Too many nerdy alpha anime fanboys for me, but I think that's lessening. =p

However, surprisingly enough, I don't see how I can be anything other than IEI nowadays because of how intertype relationships are playing out. For example, I really enjoyed Sean's posts (SLE in my book).

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Why do you ask questions? So that you can answer them yourself?

If everyone listened to themselves as much as you do then there would be no such thing as communication.

[Ezra]

To which you yourself have contributed a lot. The worst forms of shit people are spreading is the delusion that you can dismiss the four dichotomies and your own test results and believe that you can be one type in MBTT and another in Socionics.

Phaedrus, everyone thinks you're an idiot. Your opinion is worthless not just because of this, but because you fuck up on everything. I think it would be best for all of us if you just blew your brains out.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Phaedrus]

The theoretical analysis provides a consistent and reliable foundation for typing.

No, definitely not. The only reliable foundation for typing is empirical observations and comparisons.

Most people cannot understand the repertoire of tools that someone experienced uses to type, and there are a lot of conflicting opinions that cannot be disambiguated. The point is to allow a relevant frame of reference to take precedence and act as a common ground for speculation. I know that can be hard to accept as a -creative type, but ultimately I think that it will prove useful, especially for educating newcomers.

You are clearly wrong here. Too much focus on is one of the main reasons why people misunderstand the types and Socionics. It should be avoided in the beginning -- almost at all cost.

[Phaedrus]

Phaedrus, everyone thinks you're an idiot.

People's opinions are irrelevant. Only objective truth counts. And I am in possession of it, whereas those who think that I am an idiot are obviously idiots themselves. So why do you keep repeating this totally non-interesting stuff?

Your opinion is worthless not just because of this, but because you fuck up on everything.

I am right and you are wrong. The only model you understand fairly well is the Enneagram. In Socionics you are a duck, who has messed up things pretty badly. You are still nothing but a deluded beginner in Socionics.

I think it would be best for all of us if you just blew your brains out.

Of course it would. But that is also totally irrelevant to the truth of what I am saying.

[crazedrat]

ezra, i want to cut off your fingers and make you scream

[Nexus]

No, definitely not. The only reliable foundation for typing is empirical observations and comparisons.

You are clearly wrong here. Too much focus on is one of the main reasons why people misunderstand the types and Socionics. It should be avoided in the beginning -- almost at all cost.

Socionics is a theory. You yourself claim that Jung was LII. While empirical facts are very important in typing, the facts themselves must be static () trends and not dynamic () circumstances in order to indicate a consistent disposition in the subject. Even then, the most reliable facts still require a theoretical frame of reference to have any comparative relevance or individual significance.

[Phaedrus]

Socionics is a theory.

Yes, so what? That's one of its main weaknesses. Socionics must change its focus from speculations and creations to observations and tests in order to become a real science. The types are real. They exist independently of any model, and they can be observed and measured. Socionics should try as much as possible to collaborate with neuro-biologists and neuro-psychiatrists. That's where the real scientific progress will be made that will improve our understanding of the types and make our theories more accurate. is a dead end here.

You yourself claim that Jung was LII.

Yes. We don't need a theory to see that Jung was an LII. It's an empirical observation that he was an LII. If you know the types, you see very clearly that that is the case.

While empirical facts are very important in typing, the facts themselves must be static () trends and not dynamic () circumstances in order to indicate a consistent disposition in the subject.

Bullshit mumbo jumbo.

Even then, the most reliable facts still require a theoretical frame of reference to have any comparative relevance or individual significance.

No.

[Nexus]

Yes, so what? That's one of its main weaknesses. Socionics must change its focus from speculations and creations to observations and tests in order to become a real science. The types are real. They exist independently of any model, and they can be observed and measured. Socionics should try as much as possible to collaborate with neuro-biologists and neuro-psychiatrists. That's where the real scientific progress will be made that will improve our understanding of the types and make our theories more accurate. is a dead end here.


Yes. We don't need a theory to see that Jung was an LII. It's an empirical observation that he was an LII. If you know the types, you see very clearly that that is the case.


Bullshit mumbo jumbo.


No.

Empirically, I can say that I am dark-haired. Unfortunately, without a theory that correlates socionic type and hair color, this fact is useless to me. Without a falsifiable (theoretical) hypothesis, real science cannot progress. As an advocate of Popper you are well aware of this.

[Phaedrus]

Empirically, I can say that I am dark-haired. Unfortunately, without a theory that correlates socionic type and hair color, this fact is useless to me. Without a falsifiable (theoretical) hypothesis, real science cannot progress. As an advocate of Popper you are well aware of this.

What is your point? Don't you understand what I am saying? If you are, you cannot disagree.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Yes, so what? That's one of its main weaknesses. Socionics must change its focus from speculations and creations to observations and tests in order to become a real science.

Stop being up s ass so much. isn't just speculation or creations, it's connections and complexity. will just give the whole thing better form and structure to be taught.

But if you want to make things interesting and fun, you still have to include some of the more abstract concepts. People will be looking for how socionics compares with everything in the world, which is where will really start limiting itself.

I agree with you though, just your choice of words is a bit off.

[kensi]

The functions and the four dichotomies never ever contradict each other. .

There are 6 dichotomies.

[Phaedrus]

Stop being up s ass so much.

No, I won't. is the only way to uphold real science.

isn't just speculation or creations, it's connections and complexity.

And that's not what I have said either. Why do people always make logical errors in their reasonings and make false assumptions? I have never tried demarcate the exact borders of , and yet you assume that that is my intention. Ridiculous. I said that we should have less of and more of in Socionics, and that is exactly what we MUST have if we want Socionics to be a real science. That truth is not open for debate. You just have to accept it.

will just give the whole thing better form and structure to be taught.

No. (I am so tired of seeing people misunderstand the functions.)

But if you want to make things interesting and fun, you still have to include some of the more abstract concepts. People will be looking for how socionics compares with everything in the world, which is where will really start limiting itself.

What you say here is almost totally false. I have no time for such bullshit. You don't know what you are talking about. Read some poetry instead. (And now don't assume that I want to imply that poetry is worse than science.)

I agree with you though, just your choice of words is a bit off.

If you agree with me, you have managed to hide it in a heap of word crap.

[Nexus]

+, huh

that spells LO

b/c Deltas are low

@the Swedish Looney: creates more by supposing hypotheses to be falsified. You are really limiting yourself.

[kensi]

They are not more similar in behaviour and life rhythm. In that respect they are opposites.
.

Mirrors are not opposites...if anything, extinguisment points to an opposing nature.....today in class my ESFj friend was talking to me when the ISFj instructor was talking at the same time.....and there was a lot of tension there (related to extinguishment)...if it was an ISFp instructor, i dont think it woulda mattered.

[kensi]

+, huh

that spells LO

b/c Deltas are low

@the Swedish Looney: creates more by supposing hypotheses to be falsified. You are really limiting yourself.

Why are Deltas low?
Deltas are the best...they smack some sense into people...their F is inward focused on the ideal and not distracted by random E happenings. While lacking Se/Ni initiative, their Si incorporates strong anchorage to fullfill their Ne initiatives. Clearly Ne is better than Ni in the long range of things....but do deltas have the endurance to take their game there.

While i have noticed some members of delta to be low, i dont think they are....and certainly not if i'm in it

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Phaedrus you need a reality check. And stop screaming and carrying on like a damn girl.

[Phaedrus]

Mirrors are not opposites...

Mirror types are always TOTAL oppistes in TEMPERAMENT (= life rhythm, working habits, energy rhythms, etc). It's incredible how you stupid you are when it comes to understanding the basics of the types. It is not even trying to explain these to you (I have tried too many times already), because you mess up everything anyway.

[Slacker]

This reminds me of another reason people have trouble finding their type. There are people here who are confused about Socionics and therefore their own type, and they type other people around their confused ideas. Sometimes they sound very authoritative, which makes people think maybe they should listen. So they mistype themselves to go along with what the confused authoritative-sounding person says. And then maybe that person gets set up as an archetype around here. "You can't be XXXx, because you aren't anything like SoandSo."

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Mirror types are always TOTAL oppistes in TEMPERAMENT (= life rhythm, working habits, energy rhythms, etc).

So what? They're not opposite where it really matters, that is life ideals and psychological harmony. It also explains why mirrors get along and are in the same quadra. It's refreshing to agree with somebody internally even if your temperaments are different. So what if somebody is opposite of me in external factors. The inside is what matters. =p

You need to take a midol, babe.

Just calm down. God.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Mirrors also have the same taste in music usually, despite having vastly different lifestyles. So they pleasantly surprise each other. Deep down at their core of their core, they are kindred spirits and do not wish to fight/get rid of each other.

So again Phaedrus, you continue to point out stuff that although is technically true, doesn't really mean anything and does nothing to improve your relationships with anybody in the forum. Do you scream THE STOP SIGN IS RED OMG IT IS RED! for 5 hours when you drive or something?

[Nexus]

Mirror temperaments are similar in information metabolism, but different in lifestyle.

From this argument directly follows another SSS which describes the relation of the temperament to the static/dynamic Reinin trait. While dynamic types notice significant changes as focused concrete information with general applicability, static types notice stationary trends as complicated abstract structures pertaining to specific qualities. The temperament asymmetry is often considered among the most confusing in socionics. Because judging is what permits decision, types with introverted judging will be most confident in manipulating themselves while types with extroverted judging will be most confident in manipulating others. Extroverted perceiving accommodates introverted judging by seeking large, abstract, organizational propensities externally that are relevant to the internal structure that has been generated by introverted judging. Introverted perceiving accommodates extroverted judging by seeking small, concrete, communicable indicators internally that may signify in the self what is isolated for immediate notice by extroverted judging. Because indicators (measurements) document changing and propensities (dimensions) document unchanging, EJ/IP is dynamic while IJ/EP is static. Immediately, since one trait over time is best exploited or supplemented by the other, duality is incorporated - each dual judges different things so there is no common ground for conflict.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Yeah. Case closed.

OH and don't let it go to your head:

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=sePYsG...eature=related

[Nexus]

Why are Deltas low?
Deltas are the best...they smack some sense into people...their F is inward focused on the ideal and not distracted by random E happenings. While lacking Se/Ni initiative, their Si incorporates strong anchorage to fullfill their Ne initiatives. Clearly Ne is better than Ni in the long range of things....but do deltas have the endurance to take their game there.

While i have noticed some members of delta to be low, i dont think they are....and certainly not if i'm in it

[Park]

LOL

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I AM EXTRAORDINARY IF YOU'D EVER GET TO KNOW ME.

[Phaedrus]

So what? They're not opposite where it really matters, that is life ideals and psychological harmony.

Your temperament has a lot to do with your life ideals and what kind of behaviour and attitudes make you feel psychological harmony. The temperament is what really matters, more so in many situations than functions.

It also explains why mirrors get along and are in the same quadra.

Mirrors get along well when it comes to understanding each other's arguments and way of reasoning and some other things. But they do not get along in temperaments. When will you begin to understand that you are only focusing on one aspect of this, an aspect that is totally irrelevant to what I am saying, and that you totally ignore the other aspects that are just as important as the only one you can see?

[Phaedrus]

Mirrors also have the same taste in music usually, despite having vastly different lifestyles.

No, definitely not. They are much too different for that. One of them always has a much less developed esthetic sense than the other, and the difference in E/I makes them value different things in all kinds of art. And, perhaps more importantly, the difference in J/P also make them value different aspects and not be equally receptive to what really counts. Usually, the judging (rational) type in this constellation is the one with the least developed sense of quality.

So they pleasantly surprise each other. Deep down at their core of their core, they are kindred spirits and do not wish to fight/get rid of each other.

Kindred spirits in one sense of that word, yes. But with totally different working styles, totally different life attitudes in many things that relate to themselves and how they cope with life. There is a huge difference between EJ and IP, EP and IJ, and you are totally blind to that extremely important difference.

So again Phaedrus, you continue to point out stuff that although is technically true, doesn't really mean anything and does nothing to improve your relationships with anybody in the forum.

Since when do my relationships with people here have anything to do with anything? You admit that I am right and yet you continue to act like an idiot.

Do you scream THE STOP SIGN IS RED OMG IT IS RED! for 5 hours when you drive or something?

Do you close your eyes every time you are going to read a text to get a better feeling for it, and then keep them closed during the whole reading?

[Jarno]

My question is, why is it so difficult?

Because there is a trend on this forum to rely on information elements as a criteria to find your type.

I see this tendency much less on russian sites.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

No, definitely not. They are much too different for that.

No. They are same deep down in the creative/romantic sense, ENFjs always provide me with music that I really enjoy. You're speaking as a person that's never found true love. You're like this blunt naggy grandpa that's flicking his boogers on me. Go away and find some inner happiness before you think you can be a teacher to others.

But with totally different working styles, totally different life attitudes in many things that relate to themselves and how they cope with life.

So what. It explains how you can still really enjoy somebody even if they have a vastly different lifestyle than yours. And besides, that lifestyle isn't so different than you think. Many IEIs write about shit that EIEs have lived out.

Since when do my relationships with people here have anything to do with anything? You admit that I am right and yet you continue to act like an idiot.

They have to do with *everything.* Life is all about relationships. Work on yours or die a bitter old man. I at least hope there is somebody out there that appreciates/cares for you. Like Expat you also don't understand that sometimes it's not about how right you are. A calculator is always right. But it doesn't mean I want to stick one up my ass.

Do you close your eyes every time you are going to read a text to get a better feeling for it, and then keep them closed during the whole reading?

lol Actually, I probably could put a little more effort into things. But in turn, you need to chill the fuck out and stop screaming. Nobody cares.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[kensi]

Mirror types are always TOTAL oppistes in TEMPERAMENT (= life rhythm, working habits, energy rhythms, etc). It's incredible how you stupid you are when it comes to understanding the basics of the types. It is not even trying to explain these to you (I have tried too many times already), because you mess up everything anyway.

i know where you are coming from, dont worry about that, i just dont believe your convictions to be true and especially not with a one dimensional focus. Your anger is the most obvious thing to me and that is a detriment to your ability to explain yourself fmp...and thus i dont see what you mean..this only applies to our one on one dealings...i dont need anybody else stepping in here on this topic.

[kensi]

Haha,.....u never asked, you assumed.

[kensi]

LOL

you think so, i've always wondered why you're on this site...that last instant message probably summed it up.

[kensi]

I AM EXTRAORDINARY IF YOU'D EVER GET TO KNOW ME.

you're profile is too basic from what i can see

[Nexus]

Haha,.....u never asked, you assumed.

Why are Deltas slow?
Betas are the best...they smack some sense into people...their F is outward focused on what's real and not distracted by delusional I happenings. While lacking Si/Ne initiative, their Ni incorporates strong anchorage to fullfill their Se initiatives. Clearly Ni is better than Ne in the long range of things....but do Betas have the adaptability to take their game there.

While i have noticed some members of delta to be slow, i dont think they all are....and certainly not if you're in it

[kensi]

Why are Deltas slow?
Betas are the best...they smack some sense into people...their F is outward focused on what's real and not distracted by delusional I happenings. While lacking Si/Ne initiative, their Ni incorporates strong anchorage to fullfill their Se initiatives. Clearly Ni is better than Ne in the long range of things....but do Betas have the adaptability to take their game there.

While i have noticed some members of delta to be slow, i dont think they all are....and certainly not if you're in it

wow. That is a very unusual talent you have for an ISTj

[Nexus]

wow. That is a very unusual talent you have for an ISTj

Thanks. BTW, have you considered EII for yourself? The propensity to 'act' like other types that you mentioned on JuJu's typing thread is more typical of EII than IEE, which is better known for being a 'reporter', and it would fit with your Si HA. Also you seem more Fi-leading and you have very developed and well-considered opinions, which is something I generally have not noticed in IEEs. Perhaps your temperament is incorrect? If not then I would consider Fi-subtype.

[Phaedrus]

i know where you are coming from, dont worry about that, i just dont believe your convictions to be true and especially not with a one dimensional focus.

Why do you stubbornly refuse to check for yourself? My "convictions" are not beliefs but facts, all of them are to be found in the socionic literature and can be observed rather easily in the behaviours and attitudes of real life people, whose type you have determined by other means. Are you an idiot who can't read? Obviously, you have never compared your beliefs on the types with reality.

Your anger is the most obvious thing to me and that is a detriment to your ability to explain yourself fmp...and thus i dont see what you mean..this only applies to our one on one dealings...i dont need anybody else stepping in here on this topic.

The most obvious thing to me is your lack of intelligence and ability to connect the dots correctly. You refuse to learn anything by reading socinic literature, and you hold on to provingly false beliefs about the types that no serious socionist has ever held.