Delta Lounge

[tardigrade]

when you think you have a similar type to 2 of them, like EII, such a stance is rather unjustified before checking your type through intertype relations.


with new forum members/other people which you do not know personally or have communicated with for long, it is only reasonable to type through video. so, if you have lengthy and regular interactions with them, the chance that their type can be ascertained without a video is higher than from a questionnaire, but a video is still preferred to additionally have, as more reliable material for typing; it's harder to distort your image through your non-verbal behaviour than on text.

+ for Fe/- for EII is you posting an exclamation of disgust in response to some accusations by Northstar to delegitimise the video typing. he has some... eccentric ideas in his head about what happens on this forum. it's unlikely that EII would respond with such open disdain towards someone, especially a stranger.
1. as Fi and introverts they do not so quickly jump to behaviour which may inflame a conflict. similarly, a logical type, being insecure in emotional evaluations/expression, would likely say something less explicit, if they had to.
2. Ne types would not often react so simplistically to a situation which they do not know much of. when they do not have all the pertinent information, or suspect they may not have it, they are apt to perceive with nuance how the situation could be understood. to imagine alternative interpretations for situations is less important for Ni valuing types, less obvious for S.

so, since EII is at least not the most likely based on your current behavior, i recommend a video too, or at least to seriously try checking with intertypes irl. you may have the impulse to consider yourself EII, since you identify your partner as LSE. to potentially get closer to the truth about this would help with your decisions and understanding of that relationship.

You and Sol are jumping to a lot of conclusions. Intertype relations in my life is precisely what has given me confidence in not being certain types and what has suggested to me that the most likely typing of me and my partner is within the same quadra and likely duality.

You also assume this is my first tango with typology and socionics. I have gone through the IEI option and tried it out and it has not stood the test of time as much as some people I cinflict with and who conflict with IEIs would want that to be the case. Neither my life experience of living with this brain in this world nor the experience of those around me interacting with me has proven Fe ego for me (and I have asked them a lot). I have been in typology including socionics for 10 years now with breaks here and there. So yeah I am cinfident with certain things when it comes to my falling within these systems.

Also how am I supposed to react to such a simplistic analysis of 2 sentence interaction but with simplicity as well? I am not taking these assumptions seriously so I am not replying seriously (that includes my eww comment which was also said with a humorous tone while still implying my attitude towards what was described).

You can continue thinking I am more Fe than FI if I continue communicating on the forum and you care to pay attention to that, but it will not change my stance on my relationship with Fe because I have genuinely considered it plenty before and it has not survived.

[Minde]

The point of socionics is to be useful, not a religion. If your understanding of it is useful to you, people telling you you're "wrong" is... a bit silly. It's a model of reality, not reality itself.

Yes, yes, I understand that there is also value in the "purity" of the articulation of the system, making it easier to jointly learn and explore, etc. But on an individual level, if the system helps make some sense of various relationships and smooths some potentially prickly interactions, I call that a win and wouldn't want to diminish it.


I've had people think I'm all sorts of things. Sometimes it's bothered me, but especially as time goes on it doesn't as much. Something I've started practicing is being ok with people misunderstanding me. It sounds like you already have some skills there, @tardigrade.

[Sol]

The point of socionics is to be useful, not a religion.

The main sense of the term "religion" is for irrational ideas. Trusting to hypotheses without objective basis, only on subjective observations or even without (as novices do), - partly can be related to irrationality and hence to a religion. So Socionics in today state is close to religions.
This does not mean that hypotheses are incorrect, that religions can't be useful and some of its parts be related to a science later.

Until 2015 there was no objective proof for nonverbal "VI" as useful in types identification. It was used by me and by others, including Augustinavichiute according to some texts. People published books as Filatova, where nonverbal VI was described as significant data. This was alike a religion until my experiment with successful result. There were also who said a skepsis to this data for typing and about intuition as a way to decide, and some may say still despite the experiment.

When novices point on lack of rationality in Socionics practice to support own opinion, they miss the difference in degree of rationality with people which have positive experience of types usage. That while the chance of opposing novice to be correct exists, it is significantly lesser than for opinions of those who has a practice of positive theory application, even in subjective format.

Socionics keeps the possibility to get objective proof for IR theory. Until this we here remind a religion.