So, I'm with you now

[Marie84]

After reading through the thread it sounds more like you're relating to the Si aspects of SLI's more so than the Fe PoLR.
I'd also like to point out that some of the things you relate to are common human qualities and not at all exclusive to SLI's, like not wanting to be pushed and coerced. I think every person has their boundaries and no one wants to be forced into submitting themselves to something they don't want

fwiw, I like you VDF and think a few people here have been acting quite douchey to you for no good reason.

@OP on the issue of betas.
Betas often have major conflicts when dealing with other betas.

This times infinity

[crazedrat]

I'm a dick all the time but I've never had Krig speak up to me. He's pussy whipped - that doesn't mean he isn't partially right. Problem with being pussy whipped is it gets you nowhere. He should take my advice.

[nanashi]

Are you a jew?

Nope.

[Krig the Viking]

It's is fine for those who are deserving (read: prideful) but VDF is simply misguided. She's honestly not doing this just to annoy you guys

This is probably what's bothering me most about this particular instance. It's bad enough when both parties are arrogant and hostile; it's another thing entirely when one person is politely expressing an honest opinion, and gets attacked for it.

crazedrat: heh, you don't remember our first interaction on these forums? Pretty much the exact same scenario -- you were being cruel and insulting to an ESE who did nothing to deserve it, which pissed me off.

Feel free to assign me whatever motives you want, if it helps you pretend to yourself that you're not acting like an unpleasant bully.

[thePirate]

This is probably what's bothering me most about this particular instance. It's bad enough when both parties are arrogant and hostile; it's another thing entirely when one person is politely expressing an honest opinion, and gets attacked for it.

polite my ass

she started out polite till she started responding about what an SLI will or will not do as if she has some semblance of knowledge; then she goes on to say that people cant possibly type her correctly because they don't know her, etc etc..

this is stupidity at its finest.

I get you wanting to defend her because shes your dual but I mean really?

jumping from an Fe base typing to an Fe PoLR typing like that?

now she thinks she 'gets' theory? this is ridiculous.

she reeks of Fe and is still insistent on SLI, so now shes going to go around and spread her experiences as an 'SLI'(she already has in another thread). this is fucked up man, people are going to get the wrong idea of what an SLI is; its certainly not her.

fact is, shes being a stubborn little bitch

[crazedrat]

Dude, I agree that she's probably ESE. I'm just sick of people substituting mockery for reason around here. It's lazy and creates an unproductive hostile environment.

Not substituting. More like.. I'm mixing mockery and reason. It's what I do best.

[Absurd]

Maritsa I suggest you abandon all your interest in socionics and get a job with the church, or in childcare.

I'm open for business.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[crazedrat]

It's not all in my mind. She is SLI. Now stop crying about the other day, you're like a wounded girl.

[sarinana]

i always thought she was LSE....

[strrrng]

Not substituting. More like.. I'm mixing mockery and reason. It's what I do best.

lol... I think people who complain about this simply can't see how the two work in concert without any intrusion.


and ftr -- to those of you whining about "hostility" and such -- taking text as an indicator of some emotional state/intention is incredibly presumptuous, and only betrays the fact that you are looking for a way to write off what the person says because, due to your projections, it doesn't sit right. just take it at face value and move on, instead of dwelling on the chemical reactions that words on a screen induce in you.

[crazedrat]

Yeah I see the emotional instigation as a necessary part of alienating ignorance / changing minds. Usually the ones who advocate undying harmony are the ones who spread mindless banter. Others just dont care. Unless they're pussy whipped, or something.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[crazedrat]

Yeah your innovation is so rogue.
No, I used logic to make my conclusions. I didn't ~explain~ my reasons. That's the difference. It's a big difference.
My opinion is not based on group consensus, it has nothing to do with being a "joiner".. (how cliche).
Really, I explained some of my reasons.. I didn't explain all of them. Exhausting myself like that really doesn't pay off. What's in it for me to explain myself to someone barely willing to listen?
If you agree with my typing I don't see where the hangup is. What basis could you possibly have to assume I didn't arrive at the conclusion she's ESE of my own accord?
I'll tell you what's really going on here. You're moping because of the incident a few days ago where I called you a crackpot. Okay, stop being such a damn baby please. I don't want you following me around crying anymore.

[Beautiful sky]

Nothing says SLI like golden evenings in the breezy, dwindling sunlight.

Good point

Not that I really feel like getting flack from her detractors for agreeing with what Maritsa said about anything, but: IF I'm wrong, correct me.

I have an idea that Maritsa's response to empiricism seems to be a result of her personality, and your accepting it, of yours.
Empiricism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Empiricism. Belief that experience is the source of knowledge. Opposite of rationalism.
[F. Bacon, Locke, Hume.]
• Rationalism. Belief that knowledge is attained through pure reason or innate ideas.
Opposite of empiricism. [Plato, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz.]

http://preposterousuniverse.com/teac...nts04/isms.pdf

Ni and Se are connected. Ni dominants take physical happenings and digest them.
"p. 222: '...draws our attention to immediate sensory phenomena. ... It prompts an interest in perception itself--the process of recognizing and interpreting what we take in.' "

Introverted Intuition



the INFj with lower valuing of is less comfortable with the empiricist's mantra and would be more accepting of the Rational's? She propounds that one would have to empirically prove that empiricism works to maintain it's fidelity. We look at it and say it has worked ENOUGH. We can pick up on the trend, and we Ni or Se dominants see that as all we CAN go by because we don't have other perception. We have faith in our perceptive functions.

The Si dominant (in Maritsa's quadra) looks at reality as every changing and untrustworthy because that is not where their perceiving is located.

"'From an Introverted Sensate viewpoint, immediate conditions have no stable meaning. They're just an influx of data impinging on the senses. And our response to these impressions depends on our mood, our state of mind, our desires, our feelings. It's our commitments and priorities, the facts we hold inalienable, that give our circumstances enduring significance.'

As a dominant attitude:

p. 174: 'ISJs...don't believe for a minute that the universe is inherently rational. For these types, the outer world is a jumble of ever-changing perceptual experiences, dictating ever-changing behavioral responses. What ISJs maintain, and maintain unconditionally, is their priorities, which stabilize perceptual reality and give it consistent meaning.' "
Introverted Sensation

The two views have since merged in philosophical circles.


That was said awkwardly.

Excellent argument on the weak Se and basing information on rational/logic.

[Beautiful sky]

Fe puts out moods of "ups and downs" in order to get ESTp's to react this external action does not work with ESTj's because they require an even temperament with emphasis on discussion rather then these spikes in external emotions. Fe gathers information about the emotional atmosphere around them while Fi decides how they feel about the emotional atmosphere around; Fe projects emotions and manipulates the emotional atmosphere, while Fi decides how they feel about the emotions that are circling in the other person; Fe gathers external emotional information to find out how everyone else feels, while Fi infer relationship between himself and everyone else; I will try to find examples to compare; one such example is that Fi will sympathize/empathize in moods according to the atmosphere, for instance, if the general atmosphere is depressing/sad then Fi goes along with that mood and sees it silly when Fe types try to change that atmosphere in the opposite direction (most of the time, not always); because, this is how Fe gets their feelings for who is what kind of a person, merry kind will laugh and not be too serious while depressed/pessimistic/melancholic may be another, but Fe kinds, need so see or read these external reactions in order to get that feel, while Fi do not want to cause any significant riffles in the external emotions of others, striving to suppress them or release others of negative emotions; a typical thing that an Fi will to when they see a sad person, is not to joke around, is to first reflect the persons emotions hence giving a sad look for every sad look > > then to ask questions about what internal process is bothering the person, to bring these processes out, hopefully through logical explanations rather then huge emotional displays (in fact, huge external emotional displays of the candidate being chosen to empathize with with the Fi person will cause the Fi to further draw in within themselves, refraining from approaching that person letting time and a slight distance cool the infuriated person out); ESTp's look for an are attracted to the person who can draw infuriated feelings out of them, Fi doesn't do this to them instead concentrating on their internal emotions, but internally, ESTp's are even keel and fine, they don't need empathy with their emotions on the outside because they prefer that you draw huge emotional reactions out. ESTj's get frustrated when they sense that someone is trying to draw their emotions out, they get angry and enraged to try to stop the Fe person and get them to no longer make dramatic displays, an Fi person would stop, but the Fe person would continue as if that's what needs to be done in order to wield the situation to a correct/positive understanding.

Fe will say in a loud prominent voice, “What you're doing is pissing me off”
Fi will probably go up to the same person and say, in a quiet and soft voice “honey, I have been thinking about a lot of things in our relationship is not working and I feel sad about them”

ESTp will welcome the “power”/ “challenge” of Fe type, and will see this as honest
ESTp will think what is the Fi type talking about, he must not be honest and must be trying to play some games with my head

ESTj does the opposite of ESTp and you can imagine how that goes.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

omg 11 pages stop this madnes

[Beautiful sky]

Yeah I see the emotional instigation as a necessary part of alienating ignorance / changing minds. Usually the ones who advocate undying harmony are the ones who spread mindless banter. Others just dont care. Unless they're pussy whipped, or something.

She views your Fe as being silly, that's passing it up for Fi.

Now let's stop; I didn't have time yesterday to offer the Fi and let you take over pages of Fe.

[crazedrat]

According to this definition, made by you, crazedrat, I use Te:

"In a strictly practical sense? Fe helps you to sum up whether information is relevant. It's useful if you're filtering through data and trying to get the gist of something. Ever notice Te types will criticize with specific facts / evidence which is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things? It happens all the time. That's their weak Fe. The typical response by the Fe type - 'but that does not matter'. Or 'that's irrelevant'. I have to use this phrase daily just to get through discussions.." -- One Crazed Rat

Yeah I actually noticed that to be honest. But I thought about it a little and I realized what you do is different. What you do is blatantly ignore evidence.
This leads you to say things irrelevant sometimes, but not chronically. That tendency stems from a difference of values not a lack of ability to distinguish relevance. I think that's the important part.

That's called bluff. You again use a fallacious reasoning implying that we should believe you without evidence - because *maybe* you have reasons. You can't pass an exam with a blank paper, can you? You may be a genius with the same probability that you may be a retard. In your case, your history suggests that the second possibility is more likely.

If I say I see a bird and there's a bird flying in front of my face, am I bluffing dumbass? No.

The hangup is in your suggestion that the fact that Malia is SLI

I suggested she was ESE, not SLI.

and others agree, this is a proof for them that you had a reasoning.

Stop reading into my motives when you have not a scrap of fucking evidence for it.

It isn't, this is actually how posers and joiners are, they pretend to be have the same convictions and reach the same conclusions as the group, but they just imitate others, it's all a fake.

You're a fake [B]crazed[, if I'm the first to tell you this, I'm sorry. I know I sound like an SLE, but I want you to take me seriously - in the end, I'm an ILE - I, [B]Pinocchio], wholeheartedly believe this, that you, [B]crazedratXII] are a poser .

You pathetic, passive aggressive butt fuck of a man.

[Beautiful sky]

If I say I see a bird and there's a bird flying in front of my face, am I bluffing dumbass? No.



I suggested she was ESE, not SLI.



Stop reading into my motives when you have not a scrap of fucking evidence for it.


You pathetic, passive aggressive butt fuck of a man.

Fi valuing...will you get over this now?

[Aiss]

According to this definition, made by you, crazedrat, I use Te:

"In a strictly practical sense? Fe helps you to sum up whether information is relevant. It's useful if you're filtering through data and trying to get the gist of something. Ever notice Te types will criticize with specific facts / evidence which is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things? It happens all the time. That's their weak Fe. The typical response by the Fe type - 'but that does not matter'. Or 'that's irrelevant'. I have to use this phrase daily just to get through discussions.." -- One Crazed Rat

I'd rather say you're the perfect argument against Fe-ultimate-relevance theory, though one rat dismissed in a typical fashion of clinging to Ti-HA opinion to a disregard of all evidence along with ESE as a type.

ETA: funny, crazed, that you edited your post to bring up ignoring evidence, which you're quite good at yourself.

[crazedrat]

What it argues for is Fi as an alternate form of relevance, and suggests I should pick a different word other than relevant to describe the shortcomings of Te types.
I don't think this is a good use of the word relevant. I'd prefer 'valuable', but it's common enough of a use for me to have to acknowledge and change the word.

[strrrng]

pinnochio, pointing out that someone disagrees with what they see as a consensus, isn't grounds for assuming that is their justification for having reasons.

actually, there's an implicit relationship between the fact that you were so quick to label crazed as a "joiner" on this premise, and your emphatic attitude of ideological rebelliousness.

[crazedrat]

yeah it's like an emotional need to be spectacular which drives him to defy the obvious.

How can you say I blatantly ignore evidence? I use real-life evidence which is 99.99% of what is important or relevant! You use my writing style. I agree that writing style *can* be suggestive, but it doesn't have to be. There are many reasons for things besides one.

Go look back in this thread at the many times people point out your use of Fe. Then notice you not once respond with a question about Fe or a call for elaboration.

I think you know nothing about what goes on in my head. Sometimes I think I know exactly what I'm saying and other times I am confused at what in the list of many, many things I could say, would be relevant. That is not something I like to admit, either, but I am doing so for the sake of this argument.

Well, I feel like a broken record at this point.
I think you're right that the word relevant should be changed. Apparently it is pretty common to see relevance as related to personal values, for the average person. I am talking about objective, universal relevance when I use the word in my quote, for the record. IMO this is the correct use of the word, but like I said the word is gona be changed. That way I can insult Te types without risking a backlash.
I also think strrrng mentioned something about what I'm attempting to describe being specifically related to Ni&Fe. I may have to consider that a little further

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[crazedrat]

No, I mean passive aggressive.
-Spreading lies, lacking evidence
-Holding a grudge days later and 'getting payback'
-Ignoring me when I speak to you directly about it
-using gay little insinuations

It's just all very weak and girly. It's passive aggressive. Alphas are always gay like this. Little fairy elves..

When there's no bird it is a bluff. There's no evidence that it's otherwise, don't expect people to believe you without proof.

There is a bird. All you have to do is look at her writing and you can see she's ESE. Like the bird, her being ESE is self apparent. That is the point.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[strrrng]

And that's related to what? I don't understand allusions so well.

basically that, it was flawed for you to suggest that crazed's apparent relation to a social context was the grounds for his reasoning (whether it be "these people agree, therefore I have reasons," or, "I disagree with the consensus, therefore I have reasons" -- the wording of your statement was a bit odd).

I agree, but like I said, not the concordance of conclusions can tell the similarities between people, but the reasoning behind them. At an exam, two people who wrote the same thing may have a totally different intellectual level: one has solved the exercises, the other might have copied.

And guys, this has an explanation, it's not really-really necessary to debate: you are Se valuers, you put labels on people. Consider someone who solved 99.99% of the issues, but fails at one. If I come and tell you "hey, he was wrong there" you'll say no, he's not, he's a solver. The difference between Si/Ne and Se/Ni is that the first perceives the person in cause as "someone who solved 99.99%" and the other perceives it as "a solver".

I think the general tendency you're pointing to is valid. but it's not so much that Se-valuers simply 'label' people; rather, when a sense of the basic pattern of a person emerges, a boundary is drawn around them. so, if someone is a "solver" it is more of a reference to their inherent methods of behavior, not just "they did this, therefore they are that." it ignores more details in context than Si/Ne, because it sees them as irrelevant to that pattern; Si/Ne seems more varied, in this regard.

Therefore, you perceive me as a "rebel" while I'm not, sorry to disappoint people who admire me for it, especially Betas. I just end up in being a rebel, but this is no motivation for me by itself. I don't blame crazed for it, because being a goat is much better than being a sheep, what I blame him, and other several people is that they in the end put priority on this ideal, ignoring what has brought them here, to this ideal - the objective conclusion that the mob is dumb, on a case-by-case basis - so they become an impulsive mob themselves.

well, it's more that you maintain this insular rejection of other opinions; and even if they accord with yours, it's taken as a coincidence and sign of that person's being right, rather than indicative of a broader pattern that can be understood by many people.

[thePirate]

Or maybe you cannot possibly type me correctly because you don't know me.

I am far more verbose in writing than I am in real life because it's hard for me to be eloquent or so expressive in real life, easy for some reason in writing.



I actually never said that. You just said I didn't.



Or maybe you don't know any female SLI's in real life (or very few) and you haven't conversed with those females online. I often consciously appear more spirited and friendly because I have learned that is what society accepts in a woman. If you notice, many of my posts are NOT underlined with emotions at all (most) but you only notice the ones that are.
SLI's can and do talk about things that are going on in their lives when they feel safe, but maybe you don't know one well enough to know that.



The day when you get slapped straight to hell will be a good day (for the record, I don't buy there's a hell, but there should be a special one made just for you).




Thank you.

you IDIOT, I know plenty of SLIs, they are nothing like you

you don't understand what Fe PoLR is, you literally just said 'many of my posts are not underlined with emotions at all' Fe are NOT emotions, even maritsas stupid ass knows this.

Im not even going to go to the trouble of explaining it to you, its really not worth it. Dont make the mistake of thinking you know anything, there is no way in fuck you are SLI, and YES I can confidently make that assertion over the internet regardless of what your shit for brains thinks.
so please stop giving lessons about what an SLI is, its NOT what an SLI is, you have no ideas NO ONE here believes you other than maritsa who is the forum joke

and the people here who DONT believe you know theory and can type VASTLY better than you. your just an arrogant airhead who IS(whether or not you believe yhou are) suggesting that you know BETTER theory than us.

dont say you know yourself better, dont say we cant type you, because if you know theory you CAN do these things - YOU CANT - WE CAN.

get some humility, fuck

people like you should be banned

[strrrng]

Or maybe you cannot possibly type me correctly because you don't know me.

yes, the beauty of socionics. you don't have to "know someone" personally (which, in most cases, translates as: I don't like your assessment of me -- *reframe sense of self*), in order to type them. patterns are patterns.

I am far more verbose in writing than I am in real life because it's hard for me to be eloquent or so expressive in real life, easy for some reason in writing.

what would this have to do with type?

[strrrng]

that is insulting

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[strrrng]

well, you delivered a rotten apple.

[Wynch]

omg 11 pages stop this madnes

2nded.

[strrrng]

you should have made a friendly offer

[strrrng]

to determine whether anyone wanted it

[Rubicon]

[strrrng]

should I care what others want?

when it concerns a rotten apple, yes. where is your humanity?

[Rubicon]

I think it's odd for an alleged Fe-leading person to not be aware of how she's coming across in terms of emotionality and expressiveness. She keeps stressing that the content of her posts is the most important thing, and expressing frustration that people are reading between the lines. Why is this not being treated as relevant information? Expressiveness minus awareness is probably not Fe.