Krig the Viking & MegaDoomer, Te & Ti split from "Type changing"

[Jarno]

Yes, indeed, I think all three of us are the same time. I think you are INTj.

Unfortunately I know I'm ILI-Te for more than 6 years now, dated the whole socion and saw each relationship work out with the typical socionics features. I've no reason to doubt my type.

[Pa3s]

Nice. I've long suspected you were LII.

Cool. I know that others did as well, or at least Alpha NT. But I can also understand those who see me as ILI, I was pretty convinced myself.

Unfortunately I know I'm ILI-Te for more than 6 years now, dated the whole socion and saw each relationship work out with the typical socionics features. I've no reason to doubt my type.

If you made that experience, I congratulate you. As I said above, intertype relations are not that easy and clear for me. I suppose I had a crush on my conflictor some years ago which would explain why it didn't work well.

[1981slater]

FTR: MegaDoomer, Krig the Viking, Subterranean, etc are the same type, namely LII Ne

[Jarno]

FTR: MegaDoomer, Krig the Viking, Subterranean, etc are the same type, namely LII Ne

Since you all seem so certain, I withdraw my typing of megadoomer. You alpha's have a new member.

[krieger]

I think megadoom is INTp. He just seems more cautious than the average INTj and doesn't seem to have these typical ideosyncratic ideas that INTjs always hold fast to.

0.02c

[Pa3s]

I never "get" how this happens. Personally I feel almost acutely repelled from any conflictor that I meet.

Well, at least I think she is my conflictor, she might be some other type, too. However, it was mostly physical attraction imho. We were often misunderstanding each other and were prone to argue.

I think megadoom is INTp. He just seems more cautious than the average INTj and doesn't seem to have these typical ideosyncratic ideas that INTjs always hold fast to.

0.02c

In this regard, I have taken the Oldham types test and I scored as Conscientious (correlating wiht MBTI ISTJ) rather than Idiosyncratic (MBTI INTJ).

[The Ineffable]

0.02c

$0.02 you mean.

It's not what type you think you are but what type you really are.

You're my friend now

... Subt is EII.
...
Subt is too ethically-minded, i think his personal feelings and sentiments towards things and people come out very easily in his communication, even if he may not explicitly state them. it's something i see as Ethical, especially Fi.

This idea is still surprising to me. I see him as an ethical person, but not an ethical type. So am I, so is hkkmr, so is jxrtes, unfortunately these are ILE examples, but LIIs are not usually so vocal in telling their principles to everyone, unless they're involved into something.

As far as I can tell, unlike Subterranean, EIIs are much more empathetic, interested into people's problems and much less prone to try to impose their principles on others - an accusation that was brought to him. In fact I'm surprised how people suddenly jumped from the stereotypical Ti-Base (rules, strictness) to EII (soft, empathetic, often submissive). Maybe you people who had more contact with him (including himself) know something I don't know, but for the time being this typing sounds off to me.

also, i disagree that Ti is concerned with "precise definitions." it is Te that is concerned with objective data and information such as "precise definitions". Ti (esp. from Alpha NTs) will cut things down to the nitty-gritty, the absolute fundamentals, even to the point where it may be hard for someone who does not have enough background information to understand it, but Te will elaborate and clarify things to make sure the information being explained is "objectively" accurate and correct - which is what i see you do.

I very much agree.

In my opinion, both Te and Ti (like Se and Si) deal with external/explicit information, which is what most people call "objective facts". Both Te and Ti focus on "objective facts"

No. The definition (and manifestation) of Ti has nothing to do with facts.

: analysis, law, hierarchy, classification, understanding, order, (legal) right, system, structure, formal logic
: benefit, efficiency, action, knowledge, method, mechanism, act, work, motion, reason, technology, fact, expediency, economy

It is known that objectivity has nothing to do with empiricism, unless the consideration is factual accuracy, and IEs make no exception - the definitions/descriptions of Te and Ti are pretty clear. As you see, the attributes of Ti are totally independent of empirical evidence, Ti requires no objects but it works entirely with concepts.

[krieger]

The c stands for Canadian Dollars.

[Beautiful sky]

I think megadoom is INTp. He just seems more cautious than the average INTj and doesn't seem to have these typical ideosyncratic ideas that INTjs always hold fast to.

0.02c

Me too. I agree with you completely.

I wouldn't say that I expound upon facts so much as I seek to correctly categorize information logically. Ti looks at the world and tries to sort it into static categories. Te looks at the world and tries to keep track of the changing states of the objects in it. Consequently, Ti is more focused on correct reasoning and precise definitions, while Te is more focused on empirical data and efficient actions.

My posts tend to be purely theoretical and almost completely void of empirical data, which annoys actual Te types.

I can see the similarities between Expat and myself, but since I haven't really tried to type Expat for myself, I don't really know what to make of that. I've wondered if he might be some kind of Ti type in the past, but haven't looked into it.

As for my Fe-seeking -- I mostly post here when I'm in the mood for intellectual exercise. People here haven't really seen me in my sillier moods.

Fe is not being in silly moods; it's being in Fe atmosphere, very naturally, which I observed neither you nor megadoomer do. We don't have to see you in silly moods, all you have to do is talk silly and do silly...a lot of it as a natural indication.

er no, i don't, but thanks

i predicted that you might reply in this way - i figured that if you are a Te type you'd seek to correct my knowledge (which you did), and if you are a Ti type you'd try to further clarify your own viewpoint (which you didn't do.)

also compare yourself to MegaDoomer in this thread, he doesn't try to correct Maritsa's knowledge when defending his self-typing to her. he just explains why he believes he's LII "according to my own understanding, i must be LII". you take a different approach: "according to the objective data, i must be LII."

hah, this kind of thing makes me understand why Reinin calls Ti valuers Subjectivists, and Te valuers Objectivists...

Glam...do you see now why I also think that Dj is LSE type
And why I've been saying, feeling that he's my dual.
Megadoomer can demonstrate Ti.

Well, contrary to the wikisocion's statement about a LII's Te I'd say that I do keep track of my finances but otherwise, I think it also fits me pretty well. (Especially the sentences about 'aquiring skills based on interest instead of practicability) I don't know what I should reply to your claim you'd see more Te than Ti... it's your opinion.



As far as I know, LIIs aren't that expressive with emotion at all. And you might agree that emotional expression in a forum is not the same as irl. Your claim that I wouldn't ask enough questions or don't analyze enough looks a bit shallow to me. People of the same types may act differently, especially if one is older than the other. Anyway, this is not sufficient to rule out LII for me. At least in my opinion.



I don't understand why you put so much emphasis on this single statement. You should try to see the bigger picture there. I've 'settled' on INTj because I was switching pretty often which was caused by the lack of a 100% correlation of my personality and a socionics type. At some point, I realized there is no 100% correlations and that's why I settled on it because this seems to be the most reasonable explanation and the best fit.

Umm not according to this video...

[Pa3s]

Fe is not being in silly moods; it's being in Fe atmosphere, very naturally, which I observed neither you nor megadoomer do. We don't have to see you in silly moods, all you have to do is talk silly and do silly...a lot of it as a natural indication.

Again, you're focusing on one single thing and disregard the big picture. Maybe I just don't utter everything which comes to my mind on this forum? You also don't know how I act among friends. This forum can't transport everything. Besides that, when I was still self-typing as ILI, several people told me LII would be an option because of the reason you said above. Ask CiLi. I actually think my first self-typing has fixed your idea of my type and you won't change that no matter what I do. But let's see the other side: If I was ILI, how do I show my -seeking tendencies?

You'll probably say this is irrelevant, but as I said above, I got 'Conscientious' in that Oldham types test. I took it again and got the same result. I don't think this fits to ILIs pretty well.

And as I said before: dichotomy-wise I'm INTj. The base type is rational and the Ne subtype completes the type and adds my irrational traits.

[glam]

FTR: MegaDoomer, Krig the Viking, Subterranean, etc are the same type, namely LII Ne

imho Krig could be ILI and Subt is EII.

i could be wrong about Krig, i guess he could be LII, but to me he is very "literal" and dry, and he likes to expound upon facts and write descriptions, substantiating and clarifying various information. for example stuff like this thread, i see as Te. what Expat used to do for general socionics concepts, Krig does for DCNH. he doesn't seem to seek Fe either.

Subt is too ethically-minded, i think his personal feelings and sentiments towards things and people come out very easily in his communication, even if he may not explicitly state them. it's something i see as Ethical, especially Fi.

[Krig the Viking]

i could be wrong about Krig, i guess he could be LII, but to me he is very "literal" and dry, and he likes to expound upon facts and write descriptions, substantiating and clarifying various information. for example stuff like this thread, i see as Te. what Expat used to do for general socionics concepts, Krig does for DCNH. he doesn't seem to seek Fe either.

I wouldn't say that I expound upon facts so much as I seek to correctly categorize information logically. Ti looks at the world and tries to sort it into static categories. Te looks at the world and tries to keep track of the changing states of the objects in it. Consequently, Ti is more focused on correct reasoning and precise definitions, while Te is more focused on empirical data and efficient actions.

My posts tend to be purely theoretical and almost completely void of empirical data, which annoys actual Te types.

I can see the similarities between Expat and myself, but since I haven't really tried to type Expat for myself, I don't really know what to make of that. I've wondered if he might be some kind of Ti type in the past, but haven't looked into it.

As for my Fe-seeking -- I mostly post here when I'm in the mood for intellectual exercise. People here haven't really seen me in my sillier moods.

[golden]

As for my Fe-seeking -- I mostly post here when I'm in the mood for intellectual exercise. People here haven't really seen me in my sillier moods.

This reminds me that I've noticed on this forum how hard it is for me to see Alpha NTs' Fe-valuing online. IRL, it's easy for me to connect with them around some very silly Fe.

Krig may not be indulging in extensive antics here, but he seems lighthearted enough. The way he expresses himself in writing is not too different from an LII I know very well, who can be quite dry and serious in his writing and sometimes very playful in person.

[krieger]

I don't understand this "Live and let live" attitude toward's people's self-typings. It's not what type you think you are but what type you really are.

I wouldn't say self-typings are irrelevant, though. It's generally a good idea to take them in account as strong arguments in their own right. To sum up the reasons for this:
1. people tend to have a tremendous amount of information about themselves unlike anything you can gather about them from an outside perspective, let alone through the internet.
2. the most basic claims of socionics aren't generally very difficult to understand. What's more, when people begin to study socionics longer they typically start delving into the more experimental side of the theory, which has the potential of confusing them more than improving their understanding. Hence, the argument that people that have more experience with the theory type better than people who are new is not a very strong one.
3. people typically take what others say about them in account, so if you tell them casually what your impressions are, this information is included in their self-typing.
4. the person him/herself is the one that has thought about their typing problem longer than anyone else.

General recommendation: don't type people. Help people find their type.

[squark]

. . .

General recommendation: don't type people. Help people find their type.

Yes.

[Jarno]

My posts tend to be purely theoretical and almost completely void of empirical data, which annoys actual Te types.

you got that right, you freak!

'-)

[glam]

I wouldn't say that I expound upon facts so much as I seek to correctly categorize information logically. Ti looks at the world and tries to sort it into static categories. Te looks at the world and tries to keep track of the changing states of the objects in it. Consequently, Ti is more focused on correct reasoning and precise definitions, while Te is more focused on empirical data and efficient actions.

My posts tend to be purely theoretical and almost completely void of empirical data, which annoys actual Te types.

I can see the similarities between Expat and myself, but since I haven't really tried to type Expat for myself, I don't really know what to make of that. I've wondered if he might be some kind of Ti type in the past, but haven't looked into it.

As for my Fe-seeking -- I mostly post here when I'm in the mood for intellectual exercise. People here haven't really seen me in my sillier moods.

well your posts make me think that you are very concerned with empirical data. when you talk about socionics you do not actually focus on the theory, you elaborate on a given concept, give examples (including your real-life experiences) and are interested in hearing such information from others.

also, i disagree that Ti is concerned with "precise definitions." it is Te that is concerned with objective data and information such as "precise definitions". Ti (esp. from Alpha NTs) will cut things down to the nitty-gritty, the absolute fundamentals, even to the point where it may be hard for someone who does not have enough background information to understand it, but Te will elaborate and clarify things to make sure the information being explained is "objectively" accurate and correct - which is what i see you do.

i am not saying for sure you aren't LII, but based on your posts here i think there is good reason to think you might be a Te type instead.

[Krig the Viking]

well your posts make me think that you are very concerned with empirical data. when you talk about socionics you do not actually focus on the theory, you elaborate on a given concept, give examples (including your real-life experiences) and are interested in hearing such information from others.

also, i disagree that Ti is concerned with "precise definitions." it is Te that is concerned with objective data and information such as "precise definitions". Ti (esp. from Alpha NTs) will cut things down to the nitty-gritty, the absolute fundamentals, even to the point where it may be hard for someone who does not have enough background information to understand it, but Te will elaborate and clarify things to make sure the information being explained is "objectively" accurate and correct - which is what i see you do.

i am not saying for sure you aren't LII, but based on your posts here i think there is good reason to think you might be a Te type instead.

Ah, I see. I think you have a common misunderstanding of the nature of Te. While Te is concerned with objective data, that's not its primary focus. Te is a dynamic element: explicit dynamics of objects. It keeps track of the way objects in the world change and move over time, and understands how to cause and influence that change. The stock market is a good example. Your stereotypical LIE uses Te to keep track of how companies are changing over time, making and losing money, and uses Ni to extrapolate from the past to predict the direction that change will head in the future. While Te is concerned with getting accurate objective data on the current and past states of the companies, its goal in doing so is to figure out how that data changes and how to influence that change. Te is about profit, productivity, efficiency, practicality -- actions. It seeks the best method for doing things -- spending a lot of time trying to figure out exactly how to precisely define a thing would be a waste of time to a Te type; all they want to know is how to use the information they have, not how to define and categorize it.

On the other hand, Ti is a static element: explicit statics of fields. It seeks to understand the static, unchanging logical connections and categorizations of things. Data about constantly changing things (like the stock market) is uninteresting to a Ti type; they try to see through the constant changes in the world to the unchanging truths underneath. So a Ti type is more interested in things like philosophy, science -- something like socionics appeals to a Ti type, because the whole point is finding the unchanging commonalities underlying the seeming shifting chaos of the human mind. It's no coincidence it was developed by an ILE (Aushra). Ti is about categorization, precise definitions, logical frameworks, analysis -- sorting information into correct static logical systems. Understanding how to use information to accomplish some purpose is boring to a Ti type; they want to precisely and accurately sort information to arrive at a clearer understanding of the world.

Stereotypically speaking, Alpha NTs are pure scientists (seeking unchanging truth), while Gamma NTs are engineers (seeking the best method for making changes in the world). Clearly, I am the former: I seek to understand how the human mind is structured; I have no interest in figuring out the best method of using that information.

[ashlesha]

i could be wrong about Krig, i guess he could be LII, but to me he is very "literal" and dry, and he likes to expound upon facts and write descriptions, substantiating and clarifying various information. for example stuff like this thread, i see as Te. what Expat used to do for general socionics concepts, Krig does for DCNH. he doesn't seem to seek Fe either.

i've wondered if Krig might be a Te type for reasons like this and then dismissed my wonderings for reasons like the ones Krig gave...interesting, though.

[Pa3s]

@Maritsa:

The LII is a naturally cautious person, and never acts without considering the consequences in detail. This tendency sometimes prevents him from acting decisively—or at all. However, he tries not to be overly pessimistic about the consequences of others' actions, and only offers direct advice in this area if it is specifically requested. If something bad happens he is usually willing to forgive and move on without placing blame, re-establishing the course as subtly and smoothly as possible. While he tends to have very specific ideas about his general life principles and goals, he is basically indifferent as to their specific timeframe and implementation.

I think this fits my use of Ni pretty well.

[Beautiful sky]

@Maritsa:



I think this fits my use of Ni pretty well.

You would use Ti whether you decided on LII or ILI; difference being is that you wouldn't use Te if you were LII; so, I see you using more Te than Ti; where is your example of Te ignoring? and how about Fe valuing...I never see you around when BIG emotions are being pulled and where are you in pulling some yourself, or showing that you need your emotions pulled? Where do you ask questions and analyze?

Here you're pointing out empirical data to support your argument. You are relating to something but how do you apply it and where?

[1981slater]

Unfortunately I know I'm ILI-Te for more than 6 years now, dated the whole socion and saw each relationship work out with the typical socionics features. I've no reason to doubt my type.

You forgot to say that you scored on a first date with an IEE

[Jarno]

Oh, I know well your position on your type, and I recall your exchange with aixelsyd. My comment was just a fun poke, hence the lol smilie at the end of it.

ah okay :-)