d'oh - I lost that one
I don't think that's an inherent facet of Si base. It seem more 9-related, i.e. the connections between you and everything are what make you feel alive, and thus if reality "suffuses" you it only enhances this feeling. I think it's a little more than cognitive information processing.
4w3-5w6-8w7
socio: INFp - IEI
ennea: 4w5 sp/sx
**********
Originally Posted by Mark Twain
Not necessarily ... Incidentally, here's a thread in which this issue was discussed ... or brutalised, w/e. Uh ... skimming through it, there's a lot of SEI fluff at the beginning - ok the majority of it is SEI nonsense. And those were the days when I apparently considered arguing with Phaedrus a worthy undertaking. Ah, the memories. http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=18584
Yes, a clear example of an INTp, subtype if you want to be more precise.
Then you learned something new. But the question I think you should be asking yourself is this: Why not? What were you lacking in your understanding of Socionics that made you think that I was not a ego type?Originally Posted by Christy B
Lol. You knew her too Cycops.
Also you seem so confident....do you know what the bare minimum requirement to be an enneagram 4 is? If you don't have a clear picture of that in your head you can't judge whether or not a socionics type can or can't be that type.
Many of you are saying an ISFp can't be an enneagram 4 for x or y reason when x or y reason isn't a requirement to be a 4...just something that either might or will probably be true...not something that HAS to be true.
Cyclops already demonstrated his vast ignorance - which I exposed - on the nature of 4's.
4w3-5w6-8w7
the enneagram is worthless, and you are wasting your time.
That was a common mistake among members of this forum some years ago. It probably occurs so often because the socionics descriptions of are misleading and very easily misinterpreted.
I didn't want to suggest that I am clear example of the subtype, but I am definitely a clear example of INTp.In any case I'm sure stating that you are a "clear" example of INTp Ni sub is probably inaccurate.
there is no use fighting against stupidity. by fighting stupidity, all you do is strenghten it.
We will see a lot of human suffering the coming decades, more than most people can imagine. That will be a huge problem for many people, but far less for you and me than it will be a problem for others. I am so cynical that I have already resigned to the role of the observer. I will observe the end of the world if I live that long, but I will do very little to save it, since it's futile anyway. What theoretically can be done to solve the problems, will in fact not be done. Of course you can say that that's a difference in perspective, but it's hardly my problem if I fail to see the world as the rest of mankind see it. Time will tell that I'm right.
you are very much like me in this regard phaedrus
there may be hope for the enlightenment of select individuals in brainwashing the culture with art, if you could become a master artist. that is the only thing i can see worth working toward
For example all of those who include MBTI and Keirsey tests at their socionic sites as well as links to the corresponding MBTT and Keirsey types side by side with their socionic type profiles. And even you must agree that the introverted sensory/sensing types are identical in behaviours and attitudes in MBTT and Socionics.
Do you take back your statement that I am probably an LSI and accept that I am an ILI?
I've heard many mentions of Myers-Briggs Typology and Keirseyan typology at socionics conferences in Kiev, and the overwhelming sentiment has been to view those as separate, non-identical typologies from socionics. There was a period in the early or mid 90s when socionists were enthusiastic about incorporating MBTT into socionics, but since then they have become deeply disenchanted with this. I can list those who have expressed this opinion: Bukalov, Karpenko, Chikirisova, Churyumov, Gulenko, Lytov, Yermak, Prokofieva, and others. Each of these people at some point made an investigation of Myers-Briggs type theory and tried to correlate it with socionics, but ultimately found the two too incongruous to merge. To demonstrate this point once and for all, Lytov made an interesting study where he gave socionists descriptions of Myers-Briggs types (without the type name at top) and asked them to say which socionic types they described. The result (I can dig it up if you want) showed that many of the Myers-Briggs descriptions were not recognizably similar to their supposed socionics counterparts. I believe Lytov (who is a careful researcher) chose the most well-known MBTI descriptions and disseminated them among the most prominent socionists.
It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.
I can quite easily change who I am. I'm an actor who loves to make people laugh. So take that you horse-girl who wears the blinders on the side so you can only see straight ahead of yourself.Originally Posted by Jem
D-SEI 9w1
This is me and my dual being scientific together
I know the study, and I have seen the result, which only proves that those socionists participating in it were incompetent at comparing type descriptions from different typologies. And the names you mention have obviously not studied the correlations enough. The types are the same, and you are an idiot. Since you still haven't admitted your mistake regarding my type, you little piece of worm shit, I hope you will live the rest of your life in misery.
That there can be so many idiots among well-known socionists is a mystery. The four dimensions (dichotomies) are identical in MBTT and Socionics, and since they necessarily correlate with the types and the functions in such a way that it is correct to say the each type is defined by the four dimensions, it is not possible that the types are not identical in MBTT, Keirsey, and Socionics.
If I remember correctly Lytov only used a punche line or some words as a description of the mbti types. Which is an unfair test. (Ofcourse it could be that I'm wrong, but that's what I remember, if we're talking about the same test).
Not that I'm saying that mbti descriptions could be incorporated in socionics...the view angles are to different.
It might be nice to take this test on this forum, I could copy some descriptions out of a good MBTI book and see what people here guess.
No, that's not true. He gave people entire descriptions in Russian from a translation of David Keirsey's "Please Understand Me." The first time was at a conference in Moscow, the second was at the most popular socionics forum.
for reference: http://www.socioniko.net/ru/gazeta/2...alog-mbti.html
(in Russian)
That would be an interesting demonstration here, but since most people came to socionics through MBTT, rather than being unaware of it, I doubt the results would be as telling.
It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.