Well, if you keep thinking everything is a game, and cannot realize that making a statement about a claim is not the same as supporting its included assertion, then I agree this is a pointless endeavor.Originally Posted by Galen
Well, if you keep thinking everything is a game, and cannot realize that making a statement about a claim is not the same as supporting its included assertion, then I agree this is a pointless endeavor.
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
This thread is a clear example of why I don't like reading these kinds of threads. It's basically pointless. Instead of people discussing their perceptions and trying to share info and find common ground, or even at least TRYing to see the other's pov...which may include something a side is missing...it becomes a shitload of ad hominem attacks. For example, does Nicki Minaj,s type really rest on whether Galen talks with Ashton or korpsey about ANYthing?
Not just ad hominem attacks, but red herrings that snowball into a degrading thread of egos trying to prove their supposed superiority.
Ugh..and this is where 'logic' gets us on the internet. A tangled mess that leads to Absolutely Nowhere.
(and yes, gilly...feel free to read snideliness in this post.(though not directed right at you))
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Those lyrics aren't worthwhile as none of it can be confirmed to be written solely by Nicki. It's all collaborations. It doesn't point her type one way or another.
As far as those lyrics beingvaluing, I don't think so.
As far as any truth in my identification with the song, it doesn't affect the quality of the argument since it doesn't change what she's said. Anyways, there's no way to type conclusively, but you can just say that instead of making ad hominem attacks and noncommittal skepticism. I guess that's true about ILI's at least.
Nicki Minaj's type has nothing to do with who type who what, or what type what what, or what identification people have with her, just type these people by how they communicate, how they behave, how their personality is, just that, no ad hominems, no appeal to delusion because of bias. Make an argument, don't be scared, it's how you show your mettle. It's not up to me to prove she's not SEI, it's up to all the SEI typers to prove otherwise, which of course they can't and all they can do is call other people stupid or deluded.Frankly it's shitty bullshit behavior.
Even if she wrote them on her own it's hardly surprising she'd have an ambiguous presentation since she's either a beta-like alpha or an alpha-like beta.
Of course not when you've associated Si with gooey pies and being put to bed with a mouthful of Wonderbread.As far as those lyrics being
But it does play into perceptions of the song, and judgments are drawn from perceptions, so if the former is skewed then without proper safeguards then the latter may be as well. Simple logic, buddy, and part of the skeptical method of inquiry as well.
He says, with a suggestive insult stuck on the end. Too funny.
Identification plays a strong role in interpersonal relations, and while it can produce strong connections it can also lead people to assign false typings. And not just when identification is made but also because it is absent when it might be expected to be, such as anticipating an immediate connection with a supposed dual but but failing to experience one.
And that's exactly what was going on until post #39 when ESC leapt out of the woodwork to support Glam's mistaken assertion that "people are saying an SEI is acting like another type" when no one had said such a thing. Oddly enough though you've only seen fit to object when I've thrown stones, and you've also given your sign of approval when others did the same well before me.
You've made two yourself in this very post.
Strawman. Bias can affect perception and judgment but that doesn't automatically equal total distortion, and I neither mentioned nor alluded to delusion.
And there's your second ad hom.
Except "there's no way to type conclusively".
Oh, and by the way, fuck you.
I haven't said this and this is a false assessment. I said her song presents a strong sensory experience, you might not agree it does, but it really has nothing to do with gooey pies and being put to bed or wonderbread. It relates a concrete situation that anyone who's had to deal with a person undergoing cancer treatment can somewhat relate to.
It doesn't change the argument. My experience with a similar situation has nothing to do with whether or not this is an accurate or reasonable perception of the song which others can understand and agree with. Experience with a situation, such as dealing with someone who's undergoing cancer treatment doesn't make the perception less valid, experience sometimes make perceptions and judgements more valid.
When I posted in this thread, I made a general post, which you responded to, so I never picked on you, you picked on yourself.
The manner in which one receives and responds to lyrics is a subjective matter, so simply because someone proclaims "It's concrete!" doesn't mean it's regarded the same or even noticed by all listeners.
"Somewhat" revisionistic:
+
^tip for an IEI to appear more SEI-like. And for contrast with Minaj you referenced bread at least five times in the course of your arguments about "concrete and literal" experiences courtesy of an Si-slinging "real" SEI.Argh. I do a lot of seemingly stereotypical SEI things that may explain why so many ILE guys try to talk to me about these activities, and I actually have to hunt down SLEs. I've done both those things in the past two daysI should probably read philosophy books more or something.
Similar to what, being a figure in a modified bible myth? Spektor says quite clearly in the interviews that I posted that the lyrics are fiction, and she even goes so far as to laugh at people who think otherwise. And I've yet to see a strong link with cancer anywhere in the lyrics except within the realm of subjective interpretation and "wut du u tink deez r songz abut" websites.
See above.
Yet you've argued the opposite before in an attempt to discredit (seems you and I have a little history, hahahahahaha):
Continually redefining your terms is an amusing hokey-pokey. I see your mirror ESC just pulled this same gibberish with Galen in pretending that he didn't mean what said or even say what he said when he said it.
But that general post wasn't made until after you'd personally approved some of the general ad homs and general grab-assery. You didn't speak out against it until I'd lit into your flunkies for being stuck on behaviorism, and you haven't warned anyone else for the same behavior since. So I'm not being picked on (nice frame-job, buddy) with your decision to play ping-pong just with me to the exclusion of everything else, but you're doing a good job of showing how your vaunted rules are very selectively enforced.
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...l=1#post848734
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...l=1#post850628
Your points seem a little biased to me, and I don't see this going anywhere worthwhile - I'm okay with agreeing to disagree and ending it here.
The gist of my argument is that Galen rushed into a discussion he didn't comprehend in coming to ashton's defense, ignored/miscomprehended fallacies that are elementary in nature by virtue of fitting the definition of those fallacies straightforwardly. Considering his history with 2 other certain individuals, the way he went about it displays cronyism and yes-manning (to me).
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" isand not
I was asking him a question. There was no malicious tone in that post, and if ESC had given his answer at that point this whole thing would have probably gone over that much faster. It doesn't matter how obvious you felt the answers to be, a question is a question nonetheless. What happened though is he got needlessly defensive, insisting that I have to somehow "prove myself" to him as if I were a court jester auditioning for the king's fair. By then I was well onto the presence of his not-so-hidden intentions of making idle snark against his perceived enemies, and thus the snowballing began.
Galen had already posted in this thread before the link you gave.
Galen had also already written to glam prior to the link you gave. (#35)
If you took to the time to see who wrote what and when, it would be obvious that in this thread, there was no "rushing into a discussion he didn't comprehend in order to come to ashton,s defense". Galen was already part of the discusion with glam BEFORE ashton wrote.
In fact, Galen had posted to this thread about 22 hours before Ashton had posted his first comment in this thread.
Glam, at least in part, referenced Galen's typing of SEI in her post (#33).
To which Galen responded in his post (#35).
20 min later, Ashton wrote his short stereotyponics post (#36).
ESC, who had not posted ANYthing on this thread until (#39), both quoted glam and ashton, and accused ashton of logical fallaciousness. So if ANYone was trying to protect their 'cronies', it was ESC jumping in to protect glam.
To which Galen asked ESC how what Ashton had written was any more absurd than what glam had written (#42).
At which point, ESC (#40) posts disparagingly to Galen, wanting Galen to prove that he was worth ESC,s time. (ironically enough, Galen was willing to spend the next couple of pages putting Galen down and inserting red herrings, drawing Galen away from Galen's conver with Glam.)
So, I'd have to say...when taking in what was actually written, by whom, and when...
It looks like ESC was the one pulling the supposed "cronyism" thing.
With thePirate following "cronyism" suite to aide ESC.
But ESC and thePirate's "cronyism" doesn't stop there!
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Way to twist things out of context, she could have related any experience in a sensory fashion and it has really nothing to do with bread or being in bed or having one's hair fall out. That's just parts I listed because it was literal.
Another song, another lyric.
Note I never heard this song before and have no idea what it means, but that doesn't really matter as far as the information conveyed in the lyrics. There might be a deeper meaning but it's still presented in what I would say is a
I think it's pretty clear she's writing about things she's observing in the real world. This is in contrast to Nicki Minaj who is creating a separate identity to escape the conflict in her world.
I make mistakes, since what I said was an ad-hominem, I will revise it. I take my fallacies seriously, what I would say now is whatever I said didn't make your viewpoint suspect, but it does not make the viewpoint better either. So although your perspective doesn't make your view on Hydrangea's type suspect, it doesn't make it better. I don't think my argument is better because I have had personal experience in this situation, but the argument is still valid. Since you have been on both side of this situation too, what's good for me is good for you too.So if your biases don't detract from your argument, my bias also doesn't detract from mine. And this is how we get the ad hominem out of the way.
So yea this:
As far as my arguments thus far, I don't think anything you've said has made it invalid.
I think Regina Spektor writes in a
This is in contrast to Nicki Minaj who created imaginary identities in order to escape her childhood situation.
I haven't warned anyone at all, it hasn't gotten very abusive, ad hominems are just fallacies and often times aren't abusive, everyone can make mistakes and make a ad hominem, it's hard to figure out what exactly constitutes one a lot of the time, however it shouldn't be the main means of argument. I sometimes tell people to be constructive without it being a warning, it's not like anything has been spoiler-ed or warned by me in this thread.
I liked those posts when the threads started, I think it was Starfall and Glam(which I don't think contained any attacks), and then I didn't look at this thread for a few days. Then I come back to all sort of hijinks a week later.
The stupidity on this forum never ceases to mind-boggle me, come on Ann. I thought you were smarter then that.
Galen being in the thread prior to him commenting on that specific post is irrelevant, as well as the other observations you followed up with. I wasn't attacking Ashton or defending ESC, I dont care about the exchanges that followed on between them. You completely misrepresented the intention of my actions, hence your point is moot.
@Galen - The answer to your question wasn't obvious? If you were indeed intellectually deficit enough to not understand the fallacies outlined, did you bother looking them up? I find it very difficult to believe any sort of thought was placed into your reply, but much easier to believe you jumped at the chance to reply to ESC because he pounced on your boner-inducing compadre.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
Just because you choose to ignore the proof because it does not suit your purposes, doesn't mean that the proof isn,t there.
YOU completely misrepresented the actions and intents of others,
Thankfully, the proof In this thread is what makes your ego-saving selective bias attempts moot.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Of course I looked them up. I was seeking clarification. I had made a roughly equal claim to Ashton's in my previous post, so I felt ESC's post to be equally as attributable to my comment about stereotypes in socionics as to Ashton's. Pardon me for not having your apparently superior brain, ass.
Seriously dude, what's your problem with me? To the best of my knowledge I have done nothing to you, yet you insist on going after me time and time again.
What I think of this thread.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
The context is things you've advanced as being Si.
Oh, so they're both making observations of externalities and then creating narratives and characters in reaction to them.
I can live with that.I make mistakes, since what I said was an ad-hominem, I will revise it. I take my fallacies seriously, what I would say now is whatever I said didn't make your viewpoint suspect, but it does not make the viewpoint better either. So although your perspective doesn't make your view on Hydrangea's type suspect, it doesn't make it better. I don't think my argument is better because I have had personal experience in this situation, but the argument is still valid. Since you have been on both side of this situation too, what's good for me is good for you too.
Compromise is a better term than invalidate. I'm not necessarily trying to sink your whole ship, just see how well it floats with a few holes poked in it (though I certainly wouldn't mind if it went straight to the bottom). Things aren't always cut and dried, especially with a contradictory and self-concealing thing like a human being. This is why I dislike simplistic, non-cognitive type analyses that rest entirely on comparing apparent behaviors with stereotyped profiles written by...someone or another. Especially with someone like Minaj who presents what I see as conflicting type indicators.
Fine, but I still think the underlying mechanism is similar. Hence my advocacy for a broad hermeneutic approach that gathers various sorts of evidence to make reasonable deductions about the nature of a given analysand's mental life, so we aren't simply reduced to pointing at behavioral charts and claiming that mere appearances do or don't fit.*I think Regina Spektor writes in a
This is in contrast to Nicki Minaj who created imaginary identities in order to escape her childhood situation.
Fair enough, I can't prove otherwise so we'll let that be the official story.
Best thread ever!
Last edited by Korpsy Knievel; 02-26-2012 at 11:21 AM. Reason: * l'esprit d'escalier
this thread smells like sex.
It's not about mimicking this one typing. Stop playing ignorant. I don't really think we need to have this discussion again.Why? Galen typed her 1st as SEI, and I'm inclined to agree that's probably right. So obviously I'm just mimicking him!
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
I think Nicki Minaj is a Beta Extravert (Se-ESTp or EIE). There's no way she's Mariah Carey's identical. Then again in a world where Lady Gaga, Dido, Amy Winehouse, Annie Lennox, Marilyn Monroe, Britney Spears, Thom Yorke [lead singer of Radiohead], Amy Lee [of Evanescence], Nicki Minaj, Mariah Carey, Sharon Osbourne, etc. are all SEI (ISFp), anything's possible.
Last edited by HERO; 05-10-2013 at 02:06 PM.
Some sort of EP type, haven't looked any further than that.
Robert Christgau reviews (Nicki Minaj):
http://www.robertchristgau.com/get_a...me=Nicki+Minaj
Pink Friday [Young Money/Cash Money, 2010]
Not only are those not her breasts, at least not the ones her biologicals gave her, but her hair isn't really pink or, wink wink, straight. Not only is the quick-lipped hoyden of the year all "Young Money, Cash Money, yeah I'm Universal" with every upper-case except the "I" discretionary, but she's consorting with Natasha Bedingfield and reminding will.i.am how he did it. Half rapping and half singing, half bragging and half kowtowing, brazening a "punt" rhyme here and proclaiming commonality with "girls that never thought they could win" there, she's proud to be shameless, with the hooks to back it up. She knows well the presumably stolen words of her male collaborator-counterpart Drake: "Everybody dies but not everybody lives." And damn right she calls this living. A
Beam Me Up Scotty [Trapaholics download, 2009]
This 2009 mixtape, not the more recent Barbie World, is why if not where hards decided a biracial female was street enough. Without undue popping of coochie, she quickly establishes herself as a highly unsisterly, rabidly materialistic "shopaholic" set on becoming "the black Hannah Montana." That way of putting it should have alerted hoodrats unworthy of her hiney implants to the scope of her ambitions; on the other hand, so should "behind every bad bitch there's a really sweet girly-girl." Even her materialism is relative: "Tell Michelle I got my eye on Barack Obama/Tryin' to get that Madonna/You know Hannah Montana [a theme?]/Could find me sittin' Indian-style with the Dalai Lama/I'm meditatin' I'm in cahoots with a higher power." One does wonder, though--once you rhyme "Dalai Lama" and "higher power," do you need Hannah Montana anymore? A-
Roman Reloaded: Deluxe Edition [Cash Money/Universal Republic, 2012]
Since the positive and negative reviews say pretty much the same thing, we can agree that this is an overstuffed, musically manipulative, thematically directionless bid to put the pink-haired alien on the singles charts until Katy Perry absconds to rehab. She isn't "the female Weezy" or some ill-defined male alter ego. She's an aspiring and most likely inevitable pop queen who raps exceptionally well, sings quite well, rhymes inconsistently but sometimes superbly, and will do anything to be rich and famous. This obviously doesn't make her a heroine. But if you enjoy contemporary pop whose market-tested blare offends both rockist philistines and IDM aesthetes, her second album is a worthwhile investment. It begins strong and, counting the three bonus tracks, ends strong. In between it tends mawkish and loud, neither of which precludes fun, especially with the right cameos. There is, however, a Chris Brown track. (Hey--I said anything.) A-
- agape: Does anyone here watch Americon Idol? I think Angie might be Fe-ENFj; Kree seems Ti-ESTp to me; and Candice might be Fe-dominant...
Actually months before I ever saw this thread, and was watching American Idol, to me Nicki Minaj seemed SLE-Se (Dominant subtype) [SLE-EIE].
What she said about the double standard of assertive woman = bitch and assertive man = boss was something I agree on, but we sadly as a society often forget about the reverse scenario as well. The compassionate woman = aww how nice and the compassionate man = what a pussy double standard is equally, if not more so, annoying. By always talking about the former and never the latter, we hurt feminism and prove the detractors right.
Oh yeah, how did GOLDEN go from considering Ni-INFp for her type to ESTj. This has got to be the work of the Socionics Dogma. From INFp to ENFj to potential ESTj... It's a good substitute for therapy, I guess. Plus it's free, right...
Nicki Minaj should get together with Lana Del Rey, scissoring/genital rubbing/tribbing/tribadism style.
"Been trying hard not to get into trouble / But I -- I've got a war in my mind"
http://www.psychohistory.com/htm/eln05_psychogenic.html
"Business cycles, as William K. Joseph has shown, are driven by the manic and depressive cycles of group-fantasy,* as manic defenses against growth panic are followed by depressive collapses into emotional despair and inaction. Indeed, most death rates, car crashes, homicides, cancer, pneumonia, heart and liver diseases rise during prosperous, manic times and are lower during depressions and recessions. [Business Week, July 1, 1996, p. 22.] Only suicide (internal sacrifice) rises during economic declines, reacting to the prevailing group-fantasy need for internal sacrifice."
* William K. Joseph, "Prediction, Psychology and Economics." The Journal of Psychohistory 15(1987): 101-112; William K. Joseph, "Will Peace Panic the Market?" The Journal of Psychohistory 16(1989): 405-409. See also Lloyd deMause, Reagan's America.
There once lived a beautiful a gracious princess; mysterious and beautiful which originated from the lush and fertile shores of the Nile. Her name was Cleopatra.
Sadly this is not Nicki Minaj, she originates from the lush and fertile shores of New Jersey. Specifically from Queens.
Uh yea, I don't know what else to say lmao.
I think they're both Beta. Betas fight each other a lot, as do the other quadras to a lesser degree. What I think is happening is a temperament conflict, I.e Ej vs Ip temperament.
The two of them are very similar tho, DIVA... DIVA... DIVA... DIVA.
Also while Nicki's been public trying to do stuff, Mariah's been quietly trying to get the producers to dump Nicki, in the end everyone got fired/quit/and taken out.
A bajillion pages to figure out that she's some type of gamma.
Yes presence of conflict is not indisputable evidence someone is a conflictor. That's a shallow interpretation imo.
i think she's IEI.
sensing type
When she was on American Idol she struck me as SEE. I could see SLE too though.
SLE - Se
Cannot see her as anything but Fe-ESE in this. Definitely not Beta.
I was sad thinking that I don't know Nicki Minaj after years of celebrity.
Then after some thought I was very happy.
SLE. Obvious Beta.
SEI
SEI or ESE
she looks very much like Mariah Carey: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...3-Mariah-Carey
Last edited by yeves; 10-14-2014 at 01:35 AM.
As judges on American Idol (ashamed to admit i've watched later seasons of that show) they hated each other and fought all of the time. Nicki was more direct while Mariah was more passive aggressive. Not saying it wasn't just for TV, because it might've been, but, even so, they seemed pretty different.
Nicki has admitted on Ellen that they fought because they were way too similar to each other.
SEI sx/so, possibly 3w2 or 2w3
she makes an impression on me of being deeply unhappy for some reason
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
