I'm no longer sure I'm really an LII

[The Exception]

Just throwing that out there.

For one thing I feel way too sensitive and vulnerable to be an LII. I'm hypersensitive to rejection. I'm not naturally a thick-skinned person.

There are some things about me that make be doubt as a base function. I'm not as regimented or as nitpicky about logical consistency as many base types. I find the writings of some of the LII posters on here rather convoluted and hard to understand like tcaud and labcoat.

Relationship wise, I'm not so convinced SEE is my conflictor. SEE's are very different from me, but conflictors? I'm not so sure. I have more problems with SLE and ESI, which are the conflictors of EII and ILE, respectively. These are two types I'm now considering for myself. I also relate to part of SLI except I'm pretty sure I'm an intuitive type.

There's more but I got to run to work now. When I get the time I'll post more info, update my bio, and maybe upload some videos.

[Rubicon]

.. maybe upload some videos.

Yay!

[redbaron]

yeah, videos would be cool! Regarding your comment on conflictors, I'm not sure it's necessarily true that people have "problems" with their conflictors unless they're forced to work closely with them or are trying to have a close relationship with them. My uncle is my conflictor and I rather like him in small doses! Anyway, I think oftentimes the problems with people are due more to non type-related issues that the individuals have, rather than type per se. Probably the person who annoys me the most right now is an LIE woman I know. But we're still friendly, I just know that I can't get too close to her or try to socialize too much or work on any projects together, etc.

[Jarno]

Just throwing that out there.

For one thing I feel way too sensitive and vulnerable to be an LII. I'm hypersensitive to rejection. I'm not naturally a thick-skinned person.

There are some things about me that make be doubt as a base function. I'm not as regimented or as nitpicky about logical consistency as many base types. I find the writings of some of the LII posters on here rather convoluted and hard to understand like tcaud and labcoat.

Relationship wise, I'm not so convinced SEE is my conflictor. SEE's are very different from me, but conflictors? I'm not so sure. I have more problems with SLE and ESI, which are the conflictors of EII and ILE, respectively. These are two types I'm now considering for myself. I also relate to part of SLI except I'm pretty sure I'm an intuitive type.

There's more but I got to run to work now. When I get the time I'll post more info, update my bio, and maybe upload some videos.

First of all xNTx types are most sensitive types according to keirsey. Just to let you know...

Next seeing Ti as logical inconsistency might seem logical from a socionics IM perspective, but in practice (which counts) you'll more often see a Te type talk about that kind of stuff.

Do you know what a conflict relationship is. Or did you just make up your own story of it based on the word 'conflict'. Those relationships are mutual attractive in the beginning. Just to let you know...

You are falling into a lot of traps. I'm not surprised you are in doubt. The only valid reasons I've read were that you cannot relate to Tcaud and Labcoat. But then again, I don't relate to Niffweed...

Just to add: I have no idea if your typing is right, just pointing out some weaknesses in your conclusions and assumptions.

[Creepy-male]

For one thing I feel way too sensitive and vulnerable to be an LII. I'm hypersensitive to rejection. I'm not naturally a thick-skinned person.

This does not rule out LII imo. I think IJs are rather fragile when they get hit where it hurts, which is often an emotional spot for the LII

There are some things about me that make be doubt as a base function. I'm not as regimented or as nitpicky about logical consistency as many base types. I find the writings of some of the LII posters on here rather convoluted and hard to understand like tcaud and labcoat.

What about Krig? tcaud is insane (I mean that lovingly, man), don't use him is an example. Labcoat is also highly theoretical, and it could be argued that he's an "experimental extreme" of the LII scheme. Don't forget about or underestimate gender differences--try comparing yourself to other female LIIs, or less extremely-something male LIIs (again, like Krig, who I see as being a fairly balanced individual).

Relationship wise, I'm not so convinced SEE is my conflictor. SEE's are very different from me, but conflictors? I'm not so sure. I have more problems with SLE and ESI, which are the conflictors of EII and ILE, respectively. These are two types I'm now considering for myself. I also relate to part of SLI except I'm pretty sure I'm an intuitive type.

I think Huginn has some posts around talking about her relationship with her SEE boyfriend. I don't have much reason to disbelieve her typing, so they might be a useful diagnostic. Superficial social interactions are not where Socionics works, so you should probably avoid using them as a gauge of intertypes. Look at close friends, romantic relationships (well, you have the chemical hodgepodge of love screwing this one up, so maybe not), family, etc.

There's more but I got to run to work now. When I get the time I'll post more info, update my bio, and maybe upload some videos.

Your last video(s?) had you being rather stiff, and perhaps a little shy? Bodily tension is characteristic of Rationals. I'll watch your next batch of videos and see how you compare on film to my esteemed colleague Huginn.

[Krig the Viking]

This does not rule out LII imo. I think IJs are rather fragile when they get hit where it hurts, which is often an emotional spot for the LII

I agree. LIIs have Role Fi, making it difficult for us to estimate the strength or weakness of relationships, and making us rather helpless to prevent things like rejection. The only reason we seem thicker-skinned than other types is that our 1-d Fe means that we rarely show our emotions in public. We can be devastated on the inside, but look as unemotional as ever on the outside.

Also, from what I understand, the irrational subtypes tend to be more sensitive than the rational ones.

What about Krig? tcaud is insane (I mean that lovingly, man), don't use him is an example. Labcoat is also highly theoretical, and it could be argued that he's an "experimental extreme" of the LII scheme. Don't forget about or underestimate gender differences--try comparing yourself to other female LIIs, or less extremely-something male LIIs (again, like Krig, who I see as being a fairly balanced individual).

YOU QUESTION KRIG'S MANLINESS??!?

I think Huginn has some posts around talking about her relationship with her SEE boyfriend. I don't have much reason to disbelieve her typing, so they might be a useful diagnostic. Superficial social interactions are not where Socionics works, so you should probably avoid using them as a gauge of intertypes. Look at close friends, romantic relationships (well, you have the chemical hodgepodge of love screwing this one up, so maybe not), family, etc.

Personally, I have not had too many difficulties with SEEs. I rarely cross paths with them, as they tend to exist in different social circles. They're like Duals in that way. They don't seem too bad from a distance, the problems begin when you start interacting with them, and they respond surprisingly negatively to your normal behaviour -- similar to Duals, who don't seem too bad from a distance, but then when you start interacting with them, they respond surprisingly positively to your normal behaviour.

That's not to say that it's impossible that you're ILE-Ti or something, warrior-librarian. Having problems with SLE would be more of an LII problem than an ILE problem though, I think. And of course ILEs and LIIs each have problems with both ESIs and SEEs. The difference between Conflict and Super-Ego, in my experience, is that one is annoying to interact with, while the other is maddening to interact with.

[electric sheep]

ILE works, I wouldn't be surprised if that was your type.

[krieger]

I wouldn't say I'm sensitive in a general sense. My reaction to rejections in particular is to get irritated and frustrated and to just reinforce the rejection from my side with compensatory force. It's not really a sense of feeling hurt so much as it is of saying "well forget the stupid thing then, I'm fine on my own".

You don't come across as an Extrovert in any of your postings. The only type I'd recommend taking a look at is INTp. My own estimation is that INTj is best fit type for you regardless of the concerns you express in your post. As a general recommendation, consider that there is a lot of room for variety within a single type.

Labcoat is also highly theoretical, and it could be argued that he's an "experimental extreme" of the LII scheme.

Are you saying I am some kind of genetic experiment? What are my superpowers? Do I get a cape?

On a serious note, what I think you mean is that I've turned socionics into an obsession, so what you see of me here is already a divergence from what I am otherwise like. On another forum I post on, 75% of my posts are one-liners. You'd get a completely different image of me if you analysed that sample instead of the one from this forum.

Another thing I should say is that I don't identify with tcaudilllg either. My main reason for being interested in his dual-types was that I wanted an explanation as to how he and I could be so irreconcileably different.

[redbaron]

I like you, labcoat!

[The Exception]

Yay!

I'll warn you, the videos won't be too exciting. It'll be like watching paint dry.

I've always been of the impression you were ILE-Ti. Mostly going by a video you posted some time back and you came off exactly like an ILE-Ti professor I know (I have no reason to think she is LII>ILE.) as well as a girl who I am pretty sure is ILE-Ti who was pretty good friends with LII. You really don't come off as LII, to me, and I am confident you are not Delta NF. But, omg, you remind me of so many people who are ILE-Ti.

My very good friend is ILE-Ti, a guy, and he is very sensitive and is as zany as you are.

I don't see myself as all that zany. I do have an offbeat sense of humor that I sometimes use to cover up my more sensitive and vulnerable side.

I'm definitely considering ILE-Ti as a possibility.

First of all xNTx types are most sensitive types according to keirsey. Just to let you know...

Next seeing Ti as logical inconsistency might seem logical from a socionics IM perspective, but in practice (which counts) you'll more often see a Te type talk about that kind of stuff.

Do you know what a conflict relationship is. Or did you just make up your own story of it based on the word 'conflict'. Those relationships are mutual attractive in the beginning. Just to let you know...

You are falling into a lot of traps. I'm not surprised you are in doubt. The only valid reasons I've read were that you cannot relate to Tcaud and Labcoat. But then again, I don't relate to Niffweed...

Just to add: I have no idea if your typing is right, just pointing out some weaknesses in your conclusions and assumptions.

I've read Kiersey and I don't recall him ever saying NTs were the most sensitive types. Where exactly did you find this?

Regarding conflict relationships, yes I know what they are. Yes, I've read up on this material. I haven't had a lot of close relationships in my life, so I'm willing to admit I may never have experienced a true conflict relationship.

Regarding Tcaud and Labcoat, its not that I don't relate to them as people, its just that I find their writing styles difficult to understand at time. I'm sure they raise a bunch of interesting points but I'd get more out of it if they could use more everyday examples. Oh, and alot of people seem to have trouble relating to Niffweed.

This does not rule out LII imo. I think IJs are rather fragile when they get hit where it hurts, which is often an emotional spot for the LII

What about Krig? tcaud is insane (I mean that lovingly, man), don't use him is an example. Labcoat is also highly theoretical, and it could be argued that he's an "experimental extreme" of the LII scheme. Don't forget about or underestimate gender differences--try comparing yourself to other female LIIs, or less extremely-something male LIIs (again, like Krig, who I see as being a fairly balanced individual).

I think Huginn has some posts around talking about her relationship with her SEE boyfriend. I don't have much reason to disbelieve her typing, so they might be a useful diagnostic. Superficial social interactions are not where Socionics works, so you should probably avoid using them as a gauge of intertypes. Look at close friends, romantic relationships (well, you have the chemical hodgepodge of love screwing this one up, so maybe not), family, etc.


Your last video(s?) had you being rather stiff, and perhaps a little shy? Bodily tension is characteristic of Rationals. I'll watch your next batch of videos and see how you compare on film to my esteemed colleague Huginn.

I find Krigs style very easy to understand and I don't doubt one bit that he is LII. But I also think Labcoat and TCaud are too. So maybe its the overly theoretical style that's a problem. I prefer more everyday examples listed.

Like I stated, I haven't had much relationship experience and certainly not much experience with SEEs. When I recall bad experiences that I have had with people, most frequently they have been SLE or ESI.

Yeah, I was kind of stiff in those videos. It's true I'm not as physically animated as many people are. (Which is why I told Rubicon that watching my videos is as exciting as watching paint dry). I was also nervous about doing it, it was my first time ever making a video. When Niffweed did a type assessment of my, he mentioned that my videos were very awkward. He never said why but I'm guessing it has to do with the stiffness aspect. I generally experience alot of body tension. When I get anxious about something, my muscles tense up. Heck, I'm tense as I'm writing this response.

[krieger]

Labcoat I understand, except when he's obfuscating things on purpose, on the other hand he's an LSI, neither the other LIIs are brighter than you when it comes to his posts it seems.

I'm sorry but you just abruptly fail in this regard. The idea that your kind's influence would spell supervision over me is laughable. I find you post comical in their stillborn misconception and harmless in their utter inability to influence anyone in a way other than to induce spells of catatonic disbeleif.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Brilliand]

You misunderstood, it's nothing about this, LIIs are not even your supervisors, but similar (Kindred, or whatever names are given to that).

However, with him as LSI, you would be his supervisor.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Uhh you seem to be confused. LIIs are usually extremely emotionally sensitive, in their own way, like a lot of types. SE is their polr, they really aren't a 'tough type.' At all.

Where did you get the idea that being an LII and being soft/vulnerable was incompatible? Actually it's the opposite. lol

I swear people lately have been twisting socionics around to mean something unrecognizable. That only leads to crazyville.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[The Exception]

It's not hard to talk with an LII in real-life, assuming at least two requirements are satisfied:
1. one purpose
2. four eyes.

You have to wear glasses to be an LII?

Edit: I'm not usually identifying with you, neither I think we have things in common, still, I think you're an ILE-Ne, at least this is a much more reasonable typing than LII.

I find your posts rather cryptic and convoluted too. Like Tcaud and Labcoat there's some interesting things in there, when understandable. You don't strike me as an ILE. Did you ever consider LSI?

I think if I'm ILE, Ti subtype is more likely than Ne. Actually, I favor the DCNH subtype system, and going by that, I'd be normalizing ILE, because I'm more IJ like than a typical ILE.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

lol. You're funny. You can't be that bad. Without fear there can be no courage. You know?

[The Exception]

I agree. LIIs have Role Fi, making it difficult for us to estimate the strength or weakness of relationships, and making us rather helpless to prevent things like rejection. The only reason we seem thicker-skinned than other types is that our 1-d Fe means that we rarely show our emotions in public. We can be devastated on the inside, but look as unemotional as ever on the outside.

Very well stated. This makes total sense.

Also, from what I understand, the irrational subtypes tend to be more sensitive than the rational ones.

Why would that be so? Is it because T subtypes are more likely to also have strengthened F so are able to cope with it better? Like the normalizing subtype would strengthen both Ti and Fi and the dominant subtype both Te and Fe?

YOU QUESTION KRIG'S MANLINESS??!?

No, umm, well, maybe.

Personally, I have not had too many difficulties with SEEs. I rarely cross paths with them, as they tend to exist in different social circles. They're like Duals in that way. They don't seem too bad from a distance, the problems begin when you start interacting with them, and they respond surprisingly negatively to your normal behaviour -- similar to Duals, who don't seem too bad from a distance, but then when you start interacting with them, they respond surprisingly positively to your normal behaviour.

That's not to say that it's impossible that you're ILE-Ti or something, warrior-librarian. Having problems with SLE would be more of an LII problem than an ILE problem though, I think. And of course ILEs and LIIs each have problems with both ESIs and SEEs. The difference between Conflict and Super-Ego, in my experience, is that one is annoying to interact with, while the other is maddening to interact with.

I need to find more SEEs so I can more closely track how well I relate to them. I was mainly going by SEEs on the forum which I've never even remotely had a problem with. Which is not a good assessment because I've never interacted with any of them in person. And in real life, the people who I have assessed as SEE may either:

1. Not actually be SEE
2. Are SEE but I have not experienced a close enough relationship with them for a true conflict relationship to emerge
3. Are SEE and I truly don't have a conflict relationship with them, which in that case its safe to assume I'm not LII.

You don't come across as an Extrovert in any of your postings. The only type I'd recommend taking a look at is INTp. My own estimation is that INTj is best fit type for you regardless of the concerns you express in your post. As a general recommendation, consider that there is a lot of room for variety within a single type.

Are you saying I am some kind of genetic experiment? What are my superpowers? Do I get a cape?

I've considered INTp as well. The main problem with me being INTp is that I don't relate much to gamma quadra values, particularly the Ni/Se valuing. I fit far better with alpha.

You can have a cape if you want:

On a serious note, what I think you mean is that I've turned socionics into an obsession, so what you see of me here is already a divergence from what I am otherwise like. On another forum I post on, 75% of my posts are one-liners. You'd get a completely different image of me if you analysed that sample instead of the one from this forum.

Another thing I should say is that I don't identify with tcaudilllg either. My main reason for being interested in his dual-types was that I wanted an explanation as to how he and I could be so irreconcileably different.

I vacillate between the one-liner and too wordy for words extremes.

I find alot of TCauds ideas interesting when I do understand them. I'm interested in his dual types theory.

75% of my posts are one-liners

Is this some requirement for being LII?

Uhh you seem to be confused. LIIs are usually extremely emotionally sensitive, in their own way, like a lot of types. SE is their polr, they really aren't a 'tough type.' At all.

Where did you get the idea that being an LII and being soft/vulnerable was incompatible? Actually it's the opposite. lol

I swear people lately have been twisting socionics around to mean something unrecognizable. That only leads to crazyville.

Okay, okay. I think I'm letting Myers-Briggs influence me too much. Because in the Myers-Briggs descriptions of T/F it mentions about T's taking things less personally and F's taking it more personally. I went and re-read the logical vs. ethical dichotomy descriptions and nowhere in the logical description does it mention about logical types not being emotionally sensitive.

Yeah, I'm a spineless wimp, or at least I feel that way at times. But I'm going to be the damn best spineless wimp there ever was!!! You take that, !!!!!

[Krig the Viking]

Why would that be so? Is it because T subtypes are more likely to also have strengthened F so are able to cope with it better? Like the normalizing subtype would strengthen both Ti and Fi and the dominant subtype both Te and Fe?

Not sure of the why, actually. I read it in a description (which I translated here), and it seems to correlate with my own observations. Beyond that, I can't think of a specific explanation --although since it seems to apply to both ethical and logical types, I don't think your hypothesis would explain it, as even an ethical type with an irrational subtype would still have stronger ethics than a rational-subtype logical type.

[Mattie]

Just throwing that out there.

For one thing I feel way too sensitive and vulnerable to be an LII. I'm hypersensitive to rejection. I'm not naturally a thick-skinned person.

There are some things about me that make be doubt as a base function. I'm not as regimented or as nitpicky about logical consistency as many base types. I find the writings of some of the LII posters on here rather convoluted and hard to understand like tcaud and labcoat.

Relationship wise, I'm not so convinced SEE is my conflictor. SEE's are very different from me, but conflictors? I'm not so sure. I have more problems with SLE and ESI, which are the conflictors of EII and ILE, respectively. These are two types I'm now considering for myself. I also relate to part of SLI except I'm pretty sure I'm an intuitive type.

There's more but I got to run to work now. When I get the time I'll post more info, update my bio, and maybe upload some videos.

Let's start out first by saying the areas of your personality, or where you are right now, are more universal as traits and not really type related. Take out the personality traits stereotypically assigned to your type... Yes, there are sensitive and easily bruised "logical" types. My best friend is NeTi and she cries and gets emotional way more than I do. Does that say anything about her thought processes so much? I would say apply the IEs in their function placements in how you view and use information. Getting caught up in "personality trait short-cuts" will just confuse you to ascertaining your's or anyone else's type.

When it comes to relations, again, there's more than personality traits to be bothered with. It is more how you view things overall... Like, if you could only see red and they could only see blue, and you both tried asking the other to see your own color, THAT'S the problem. Someone who can't view your red can still be a nice and interesting person that you get along with. It's the long term compatibility that will suffer more likely.

Try applying just the IEs without the shortcut personality traits attached to them and see if that clears anything up for you.