Your typing of forum members (archived '11-'14)

[Eliza Thomason]

The best thing to do is to disengage..

[Zola]

That peacock cupcake is impressive.

[Kim]

I was going to respond, but I give you marmosets instead. It was between marmosets and gay gladiators. I am a nice person.

Two%u0025252520orphaned%252520pygmy%252520marmosets%252520Cebuella%252520pygmea.jpg

[SyrupDeGem]

Well its no secret I think SEE is a real possibility for you but you are WRONG, I was implying nothing of the sort. What you just said above that I bolded, is ALL NEWS TO ME. I never knew that. Thanks you for the interesting info. I did not know it was a SEE thing more than IEE.. I also react in the moment, though, when I think bout it now, I in fact is I am less likely than SEE to tell my feeling reactions in the moment. Even though I do sometimes.

In the situation you mentioned, I was just commenting on what you did/said, and figuring it was an "F"thing and not putting anything on it but F (which should be clear in my post, as I clarified it just for those who seem to need me to completely clarify everything I say), which you seemed to have no quibble with so I was trying to avoid quibbling.


So your wrong guess at what I meant lead you to a wrong conclusion about my motive.

Please know that there are many times you jump to wrong conclusions about what I meant or why I said it. So your ideas about what I am ignorant or innocent about are often off the mark.

The intelligent thing is weird to me too. I never "rate intelligence" except about subject matters, i.e., my son is more intelligent about math concepts than I ever was. I am intelligent enough for me and realize we are all just using a tiny part of our brains and we are all smarter than we seem and everyone is full of surprises as far as intelligence is concerned.

I would really just like to get along. But maybe you are like my mother, a type who "likes a good argument", for arguments sake. I do not know what other types than my mother's enjoy arguing, but it whatever types you are, it seems that you and Ann and Kim have this in common with each other and not me. That it becomes such a negative conversation seems to cause you no desire to back out of it.

I just don't get it. Maybe @Johannes Bloem explain it to me since he is your identical and should look at all your posts thinking, "Ohmigosh, I can see myself writing the exact same posts!" Right, Johannes?

(and if you think that was a not-so-subtle question at your IEE self-type, you'd be right this time!).

This is VERY interesting. You said:

I don't see Socionics as "Identifying" with a type. I see you ARE a type, or, you are not. "Identifying" with a type is a subjective view. I see this as an entirely objective matter, so I would not use the term "identify with". Because either you are or you are not a type. So to me, "self-type" is a more accurate word. I "Self-type" as an IEE and I have strong reasons to believe I am that type, reasons good enough for me. I am not personally offended by people who think I am ESE, or SEI or LIE or what have you. I have no "offended!" feeling reaction, just a curiosity to the motive. Are they trying to be mean? Silly and shallow, and then I ignore the little fit. Or do they honestly think that. If they honestly do, its a curious thing of interest for me to explore. If someone were to persist in truly believing I was ILI when I know I am not, I would just get bored of the conversation once I understood where that person came from. I would not feel offended that they truly continue to type me not what I self-type as. And since that is how I would react to being mistyped, I just don't relate to it bothering you or you considering it a kind of personal attack that I persist in a different idea about yours or your friends's types. I believe in freedom of thought, you know. Its okay for people to think different from me.

Also Kim and Ann's idea of "pure and only IEE" is very strange to me. How could I possibly be the only IEE? And what in the world is a "pure IEE"? Either one a type or one is not. One is not "mostly" or "pretty much" a type. If there can be a "pure IEE", than what is an impure one? A crude immoral one?? A crossbreed IEE/ILE or other IEE Combo Type?? What is a "not pure" IEE??

...It just makes no sense.

Probably all this effort to explain myself is useless though because you don't get me because you can't get it or because you don't want to. Lets see, are all these words a waste, because you won't find ONE point of understanding, you will just find some small point to pick at in what I wrote, and more accusations? Lets see.

What type is your mother?

And do you dislike everyone in your family?

[Eliza Thomason]

What type is your mother?

And do you dislike everyone in your family?

Okay, so it was a useless effort to explain all that.

I don't dislike ANYONE in my family. I like EVERYONE. We all have good relations. Some require no effort at all for that, some require a little.

My Mom has Alzheimer's, pretty advanced now, and its an ongoing adjustments to make her life better. We're doing pretty good right now.

[SyrupDeGem]

Okay, so it was a useless effort to explain all that.

I don't dislike ANYONE in my family. I like EVERYONE. We all have good relations. Some require no effort at all for that, some require a little.

My Mom has Alzheimer's, pretty advanced now, and its an ongoing adjustments to make her life better. We're doing pretty good right now.

I'm sorry to hear that, my grandmother had Alzheimer's i attempted to look after her alone at age 18, it was tough going, it's often a long and heartbreaking road and one which i have traveled so I do empathize.

What type is your mother?

Edit: Your post wasn't useless, it helped me understand a few things but it was rather a jumbled mess and to detangle it will take some time and i wanted to ask you those two quick questions.

[Eliza Thomason]

...Edit: Your post wasn't useless, it helped me understand a few things but it was rather a jumbled mess and to detangle it will take some time and i wanted to ask you those two quick questions.

Oh good, I am glad to hear that. And no you don't have to attempt to respond.

...I'm sorry to hear that, my grandmother had Alzheimer's i attempted to look after her alone at age 18, it was tough going, it's often a long and heartbreaking road and one which i have traveled so I do empathize.

I definitely don't think I could have done this at 18. Even when i was stay-at-home when my son was young, and my grandmother (whom I adored and was the validating adult in my childhood, and whom I think may have been IEE), had some dementia (nothing like what my Mom has ) and depression (my mom never was) and she HATED living with my parents (where they moved her when she could be on her own no longer) because she and Mom never got along; they were invalidating of each other) - even then I could not handle care-taking.

Grams used to stay with me every other weekend and she loved being with me and always asked if she could live with me. But I just didn't think I could manage with my husband, and trying to keep up the house and his demands, and also being the Mom I wanted to be. I always regret when she was put in a home at the end, and was so unhappy. This now is my last chance to do the what I think I should do with a parent (my Dad died) or grandparent, so I am glad I can. And my SLI is very willing and committed to help me.

What type is your mother?

She is ESI. Growing up she ruled our orderly roost, and my parents (Dad SLI) were a untied front and we did what we were told. She took excellent care of us and put her family first. She did not "get" me and I thought she liked boys better, as seemed to much prefer my 3 brothers. That was not so wounding as it might be, I just accepted the reality.(But a bad recurring childhood memory is just after we kids went to bed -always on time!- Mom and Dad downstairs immediately would begin talign about their day to each other, and Mom's whispering "She... she... and then she... in her litany of complaints about me)... And my paternal grandmother, above, was the one from my childhood who accepted and understood me the best, though she lived out of state till I was a young adult and moved up here. She wrote once a week and visited 2x a year..

Maybe she was IEE and her Supervisor role was tyrannical because she felt strongly entitled to be honored as No.1 in my Dads life, and my Dad, a good son, had his priorities straight putting his wife first. Grams had issues with her own Dad and others issues I came to understand very well, that made her actions make sense to me, and understand what was behind her wrong attitude actions toward my Mom, which Mom understandably took umbrage to. Every time Grams would visit, it would be peaceful til the last day, and a completely puzzling (to us kids) shocking passionate angry argument would suddenly break out between Mom and Grams (and we never had those kinds of fights in our house). And my Mom had good reasons for very much needing an understanding, or at least, normally-respectful mother-in-law, and she didn't get that in my dear Grams...

So I have this desire to be a good mother-in-law to my son's wife someday. I pray for him to have an IEI wife someday; I really want that for him, and I read on how to get along with my "Contrary", LOL. At any rate, I know I will hold my tongue if I disagree with any of her decisions or preferences...

I got along fine with Mom till I started to individuate in later high school. I had a very "Introvert" upbringing and my Mom wasn't ready to let me be my own person, and I was subject to stricter curfews than my brothers. NO goignouton school nights, and if I want out on Friday night with friends I was not allowed out on Saturday night, that was that, because it was "too much"... so frustrating for me then. And Supervisee supervising a Supervisor causes the Supervisor to disrespect the Supervisee... which happened, and I dealt with guilt over disrespectful feelings. Getting out of the house did it for me though. And it caused me to want to succeed so I would not have to go live at home!

Now that I really do have to supervise her, and she wants supervising, and appreciates it, it is natural and easy relations (as much as one can be in the craziness of Alzheimer's. I can hear her right now discussing with herself now in her bathroom mirror, for example...).

[SyrupDeGem]

Ok, so now to address the points in this post and give advice/feedback.

Well its no secret I think SEE is a real possibility for you but you are WRONG, I was implying nothing of the sort. What you just said above that I bolded, is ALL NEWS TO ME. I never knew that. Thanks you for the interesting info. I did not know it was a SEE thing more than IEE.. I also react in the moment, though, when I think bout it now, I in fact is I am less likely than SEE to tell my feeling reactions in the moment. Even though I do sometimes.

To the bolded: Again this is implying we do things differently, as you have already stated two sentences before you think i may be see, this lends the reader to imagine this as evidence you are providing. And actually Eliza, that is exactly what it is. Subconsciously or consciously you are building a public case.

To the bolded italicised: here you suggest that it may happen with you occaisionally but really again you are placing this separately from my reactions/behavior. If you were being fair with this you might have said something like 'I also do this occaisionally' 'this is something i can identify with' but no...time and again you place emphasis on separating yourself with the 'even though' part. What you are saying is 'look at how different Gem is from me (Read, look at the difference between SEE and IEE).

In the situation you mentioned, I was just commenting on what you did/said, and figuring it was an "F"thing and not putting anything on it but F (which should be clear in my post, as I clarified it just for those who seem to need me to completely clarify everything I say), which you seemed to have no quibble with so I was trying to avoid quibbling.

Yah if you did not then go on to say what you later said, which I emboldened and addressed above. I anticipated your response so my initial comment is valid. I could have been more courteous though and I apologise for that.

So your wrong guess at what I meant lead you to a wrong conclusion about my motive.

Please know that there are many times you jump to wrong conclusions about what I meant or why I said it. So your ideas about what I am ignorant or innocent about are often off the mark.

Consider what is written above in my response and then maybe revise. I am open to different ideas, but there is a clear pattern with you which is becomming ever clearer the more we converse and the more i see your conversations with others.

The intelligent thing is weird to me too. I never "rate intelligence" except about subject matters, i.e., my son is more intelligent about math concepts than I ever was. I am intelligent enough for me and realize we are all just using a tiny part of our brains and we are all smarter than we seem and everyone is full of surprises as far as intelligence is concerned.

I'm not 'rating' it. I'm suggesting you think that I do not understand you. I do understand you very well, I'm certain those others which you presume to be See who self type (we can use that it's just as good as identify as) as IEE also understand you. You suggest otherwise, when doing this, yourself and Maritsa makes comments about 'those see's' which is belittling as of course we are fully understanding and viewing your public discourse regarding us. This does give an air of superiority.

I would really just like to get along. But maybe you are like my mother, a type who "likes a good argument", for arguments sake. I do not know what other types than my mother's enjoy arguing, but it whatever types you are, it seems that you and Ann and Kim have this in common with each other and not me. That it becomes such a negative conversation seems to cause you no desire to back out of it.

The thing here is, just getting along would be fine if you did not make the frequent references and suggestions. Also Eliza, you do not back down and you do become frustrated just like the rest of us. Again we have yet another example of your 'us and them' attitude. I do not believe that you can not see how it appears this way. It has been pointed out to you before.

I just don't get it. Maybe @Johannes Bloem explain it to me since he is your identical and should look at all your posts thinking, "Ohmigosh, I can see myself writing the exact same posts!" Right, Johannes?

(and if you think that was a not-so-subtle question at your IEE self-type, you'd be right this time!).

Lol at bringing in a witness. Johannes seems like a nice enough guy, I have talked with him a little, I have no idea what type he thinks I am (if he has even thought about it) but I am pretty certain he does not agree with every type you have typed. This is what makes it subjective Eliza. You will never get full absolute consensus on who is what type. It is a theory and it is self typing testing. The way these things usually (and maybe not correctly but that's another argument) works is by majority thinking. So for example in a society of 300,00 people if 200,000 think you are one specific type then you are most likely that type. On a forum Eliza we can use the same method. You and one or two other people shouting that everyone is typed incorrectly does little to change that. But of course you are entitled to believe in what ever you like.

This is VERY interesting. You said:

I don't see Socionics as "Identifying" with a type. I see you ARE a type, or, you are not. "Identifying" with a type is a subjective view. I see this as an entirely objective matter, so I would not use the term "identify with". Because either you are or you are not a type. So to me, "self-type" is a more accurate word. I "Self-type" as an IEE and I have strong reasons to believe I am that type, reasons good enough for me. I am not personally offended by people who think I am ESE, or SEI or LIE or what have you. I have no "offended!" feeling reaction, just a curiosity to the motive. Are they trying to be mean? Silly and shallow, and then I ignore the little fit. Or do they honestly think that. If they honestly do, its a curious thing of interest for me to explore. If someone were to persist in truly believing I was ILI when I know I am not, I would just get bored of the conversation once I understood where that person came from. I would not feel offended that they truly continue to type me not what I self-type as. And since that is how I would react to being mistyped, I just don't relate to it bothering you or you considering it a kind of personal attack that I persist in a different idea about yours or your friends's types. I believe in freedom of thought, you know. Its okay for people to think different from me.

Ok Eliza, but that is your subjective view. It is subjective. It is not a rule or law of socionics, it is what you personally have gleaned from socionics. To be honest I am not really offended by these things either. I am interested in 'discussing' type but I am not interested in people 'telling me' what type I am, because i doubt that there is anyone here who understand me better than i understand myself. I accept that people can explain things to me, give me new perspectives etc but I do not accept being 'told'.

Also Kim and Ann's idea of "pure and only IEE" is very strange to me. How could I possibly be the only IEE? And what in the world is a "pure IEE"? Either one a type or one is not. One is not "mostly" or "pretty much" a type. If there can be a "pure IEE", than what is an impure one? A crude immoral one?? A crossbreed IEE/ILE or other IEE Combo Type?? What is a "not pure" IEE??

...It just makes no sense.

It does make sense Eliza, you are seeing in black and white here. Open up to (or admit to) a different perspective on what 'pure and only' may mean. It has been stated for you time and again. It is your hierarchical stance on what it is to be IEE and how few are bestowed with such a title. You may again plead ignorance but we are going round in circles and you are refusing to break free of the circular reasoning. Your reasoning seems to be "I didn't mean it like that, yes i can now see..now that you have explained it really really clearly....that it can be offensive, oh you just don't understand me, isn't it funny how you don't understand me because socionics you are SEE and I am IEE, (cycle restarts with...) but i didn't mean it like that'.

Probably all this effort to explain myself is useless though because you don't get me because you can't get it or because you don't want to. Lets see, are all these words a waste, because you won't find ONE point of understanding, you will just find some small point to pick at in what I wrote, and more accusations? Lets see.

I understand much of it Eliza, I hope that my responses make myself clearer to you also.

[Eliza Thomason]

I read this quick knowing I don't have time to respond now. I have an early IRS appointment tomorrow (Yes, IRS, I dread this but I need to get my income/taxes in order so no one Qs me). And I need to wind down not wind up my brain answering this, so I can be rested in the morning. But it does sound way more like communicating than anything else we have said to each other, so, we are improving! I will get to it.

I have a problem/query about communicating with a real-life real SEE I am going to post here tomorrow...

Meanwhile one thing stood out to me, as I have been meaning to start a related post before you wrote it actually:

... It is your hierarchical stance on what it is to be IEE and how few are bestowed with such a title....

Do you mean hierarchical or do you mean Aristocratic? Don't get mad, please! I jut never get why you and Ann and Kim seem to imply that I think IEE is something great or special. It is really just one of the 16 types. I truly think they are all equal! INTJs might have great minds, ESTJs might get everything done, INFJs might make great spouses -- we all have gifts differing and I do NOT think any type is better than another. Like everyone, there is one type I know well - my own!

Also I never noticed how many of what types are here. I thought there might be plenty IEEs because typing seems a very Ne thing to me and being quiet extroverts, discussing typing on a forum seems normal for us.

But yes I do tend to see things in terms of types here, yet, I feel its totally justified on a typing forum. I just never understand that being questioned here. I guess I can be Obstinate about that (not sure if that is correct use of the Socionics term here though), but IEEs are "Serious Obstinate Aristocrats".

But, then when I read on Democratic and Aristocratic, I realize that to half of the 16 types, seeing people in terms of types, even in a typing forum, might be annoying or off-putting, to half of the people! So if I want to get along, I need to tone down my Aristocratic tendencies...

Well, I cannot get started on this now. Must wind down, then the next thing I need to do soon on this forum is get some advise for talking to my SEE friend.

[SyrupDeGem]

Do you mean hierarchical or do you mean Aristocratic? Don't get mad, please! I jut never get why you and Ann and Kim seem to imply that I think IEE is something great or special.

No not aristocratic, I understand aristocratic perfectly well and have annoyed several forum members with this type of behaviour. I can sometimes come across as prudish or snobby, it's not intentional and I am actually very opened minded but i find somethings tasteless and crass and I often comment on those. This does however vary from person to person and these specific traits are not exclusive to IEE nor does every IEE display them.

No Eliza what I meant was hierarchical, I have yet to witness you making a positive case regarding SEE's... you frequently put them down and have issues with them, it seems to be a default mode of yours (and maritsa's especially) to place those which irk you into the SEE camp. If you look at your own posts you will see this. I for one have no issue with SEE at all, because they seriously rock. I have questioned weather I myself am SEE because i do have some triats in common asnd it has been mentioned to me before... so I have looked into it in great detail. If you could cross types together then I'd prob be IEE first with a good splash of SEE, ILE and EII In fact prob the most issues I have with any type would be SLE because of negative experiences and communication issues. Also sometimes even IEE, as i find unhealthy IEE's to be incredibly manipulative and it's very easy for me to spot this since I am (self typed) IEE myself.

But anyway, I digress, perhaps better to respond to my earlier long post and then include this at the end.


Edit: One further question, what percentage people in the general population do you believe to be IEE and SEE?
I'm curious here weather you are closer to maritsa's thinking that idk something like 46% of all women are SEE, or if you are more along the lines of the (Russian university) studied stats which are something like 10% of each.

[Absurd]

No Eliza what I meant was hierarchical, I have yet to witness you making a positive case regarding SEE's... you frequently put them down and have issues with them, it seems to be a default mode of yours (and maritsa's especially) to place those which irk you into the SEE camp. If you look at your own posts you will see this. I for one have no issue with SEE at all, because they seriously rock. I have questioned weather I myself am SEE because i do have some triats in common asnd it has been mentioned to me before... so I have looked into it in great detail. If you could cross types together then I'd prob be IEE first with a good splash of SEE, ILE and EII In fact prob the most issues I have with any type would be SLE because of negative experiences and communication issues. Also sometimes even IEE, as i find unhealthy IEE's to be incredibly manipulative and it's very easy for me to spot this since I am (self typed) IEE myself.

Haley (IEE or SEE) ENFp or ESFp husband ILI or LSI - either way they are duals.

[Eliza Thomason]

@Geminatronix, thanks for clarifying. I am going to get this, and the previous. I just now got sidetracked on another thread which happens way too easy with me and I actually need to ask a question about SEE now for a RL problem I have. Honestly I do NOT dislike SEE! I just don't get the thinking of two SEEs who are in my life sometimes. I do not dislike them though! Other SEEs in my life, like my brother's ex-wife and his previous and current girlfriend, I like also, and I never had any kind of problem with - but I never had to work with them on something, either, and I think that's when Lookalikes run into communication problems. Anyway, I have a communication problem with a SEE now. Or at least I have to have a conversation and would like to do it right...

[Absurd]

Ssmall (IEE) Fi-ENFp Confirm Wife is his dual (IEE) ENFp Confirm

[Eldanen]

I wonder if @Eldanen, who seems to me to write so differently from Scapegrace, thinks Scapegrace is her Identical?

I'm not sure what type Scapegrace is. Btw, I am male. But based on first impression, I don't believe Scapegrace is my identical.

[Scapegrace]

I'm not sure what type Scapegrace is. Btw, I am male.

Eliza has trouble with facts like that. Who posted what. Genders. Etc. You would think she would take that into account when making definitive statements about people, but she can't seem to restrain herself.

[Creepy-theticalanti]

Oh good, I am glad to hear that. And no you don't have to attempt to respond.

I definitely don't think I could have done this at 18. Even when i was stay-at-home when my son was young, and my grandmother (whom I adored and was the validating adult in my childhood, and whom I think may have been IEE), had some dementia (nothing like what my Mom has ) and depression (my mom never was) and she HATED living with my parents (where they moved her when she could be on her own no longer) because she and Mom never got along; they were invalidating of each other) - even then I could not handle care-taking.

Grams used to stay with me every other weekend and she loved being with me and always asked if she could live with me. But I just didn't think I could manage with my husband, and trying to keep up the house and his demands, and also being the Mom I wanted to be. I always regret when she was put in a home at the end, and was so unhappy. This now is my last chance to do the what I think I should do with a parent (my Dad died) or grandparent, so I am glad I can. And my SLI is very willing and committed to help me.

She is ESI. Growing up she ruled our orderly roost, and my parents (Dad SLI) were a untied front and we did what we were told. She took excellent care of us and put her family first. She did not "get" me and I thought she liked boys better, as seemed to much prefer my 3 brothers. That was not so wounding as it might be, I just accepted the reality.(But a bad recurring childhood memory is just after we kids went to bed -always on time!- Mom and Dad downstairs immediately would begin talign about their day to each other, and Mom's whispering "She... she... and then she... in her litany of complaints about me)... And my paternal grandmother, above, was the one from my childhood who accepted and understood me the best, though she lived out of state till I was a young adult and moved up here. She wrote once a week and visited 2x a year..

Maybe she was IEE and her Supervisor role was tyrannical because she felt strongly entitled to be honored as No.1 in my Dads life, and my Dad, a good son, had his priorities straight putting his wife first. Grams had issues with her own Dad and others issues I came to understand very well, that made her actions make sense to me, and understand what was behind her wrong attitude actions toward my Mom, which Mom understandably took umbrage to. Every time Grams would visit, it would be peaceful til the last day, and a completely puzzling (to us kids) shocking passionate angry argument would suddenly break out between Mom and Grams (and we never had those kinds of fights in our house). And my Mom had good reasons for very much needing an understanding, or at least, normally-respectful mother-in-law, and she didn't get that in my dear Grams...

So I have this desire to be a good mother-in-law to my son's wife someday. I pray for him to have an IEI wife someday; I really want that for him, and I read on how to get along with my "Contrary", LOL. At any rate, I know I will hold my tongue if I disagree with any of her decisions or preferences...

I got along fine with Mom till I started to individuate in later high school. I had a very "Introvert" upbringing and my Mom wasn't ready to let me be my own person, and I was subject to stricter curfews than my brothers. NO goignouton school nights, and if I want out on Friday night with friends I was not allowed out on Saturday night, that was that, because it was "too much"... so frustrating for me then. And Supervisee supervising a Supervisor causes the Supervisor to disrespect the Supervisee... which happened, and I dealt with guilt over disrespectful feelings. Getting out of the house did it for me though. And it caused me to want to succeed so I would not have to go live at home!

Now that I really do have to supervise her, and she wants supervising, and appreciates it, it is natural and easy relations (as much as one can be in the craziness of Alzheimer's. I can hear her right now discussing with herself now in her bathroom mirror, for example...).

Ok, so now to address the points in this post and give advice/feedback.



To the bolded: Again this is implying we do things differently, as you have already stated two sentences before you think i may be see, this lends the reader to imagine this as evidence you are providing. And actually Eliza, that is exactly what it is. Subconsciously or consciously you are building a public case.

To the bolded italicised: here you suggest that it may happen with you occaisionally but really again you are placing this separately from my reactions/behavior. If you were being fair with this you might have said something like 'I also do this occaisionally' 'this is something i can identify with' but no...time and again you place emphasis on separating yourself with the 'even though' part. What you are saying is 'look at how different Gem is from me (Read, look at the difference between SEE and IEE).



Yah if you did not then go on to say what you later said, which I emboldened and addressed above. I anticipated your response so my initial comment is valid. I could have been more courteous though and I apologise for that.




Consider what is written above in my response and then maybe revise. I am open to different ideas, but there is a clear pattern with you which is becomming ever clearer the more we converse and the more i see your conversations with others.



I'm not 'rating' it. I'm suggesting you think that I do not understand you. I do understand you very well, I'm certain those others which you presume to be See who self type (we can use that it's just as good as identify as) as IEE also understand you. You suggest otherwise, when doing this, yourself and Maritsa makes comments about 'those see's' which is belittling as of course we are fully understanding and viewing your public discourse regarding us. This does give an air of superiority.



The thing here is, just getting along would be fine if you did not make the frequent references and suggestions. Also Eliza, you do not back down and you do become frustrated just like the rest of us. Again we have yet another example of your 'us and them' attitude. I do not believe that you can not see how it appears this way. It has been pointed out to you before.




Lol at bringing in a witness. Johannes seems like a nice enough guy, I have talked with him a little, I have no idea what type he thinks I am (if he has even thought about it) but I am pretty certain he does not agree with every type you have typed. This is what makes it subjective Eliza. You will never get full absolute consensus on who is what type. It is a theory and it is self typing testing. The way these things usually (and maybe not correctly but that's another argument) works is by majority thinking. So for example in a society of 300,00 people if 200,000 think you are one specific type then you are most likely that type. On a forum Eliza we can use the same method. You and one or two other people shouting that everyone is typed incorrectly does little to change that. But of course you are entitled to believe in what ever you like.



Ok Eliza, but that is your subjective view. It is subjective. It is not a rule or law of socionics, it is what you personally have gleaned from socionics. To be honest I am not really offended by these things either. I am interested in 'discussing' type but I am not interested in people 'telling me' what type I am, because i doubt that there is anyone here who understand me better than i understand myself. I accept that people can explain things to me, give me new perspectives etc but I do not accept being 'told'.




It does make sense Eliza, you are seeing in black and white here. Open up to (or admit to) a different perspective on what 'pure and only' may mean. It has been stated for you time and again. It is your hierarchical stance on what it is to be IEE and how few are bestowed with such a title. You may again plead ignorance but we are going round in circles and you are refusing to break free of the circular reasoning. Your reasoning seems to be "I didn't mean it like that, yes i can now see..now that you have explained it really really clearly....that it can be offensive, oh you just don't understand me, isn't it funny how you don't understand me because socionics you are SEE and I am IEE, (cycle restarts with...) but i didn't mean it like that'.



I understand much of it Eliza, I hope that my responses make myself clearer to you also.

I read this quick knowing I don't have time to respond now. I have an early IRS appointment tomorrow (Yes, IRS, I dread this but I need to get my income/taxes in order so no one Qs me). And I need to wind down not wind up my brain answering this, so I can be rested in the morning. But it does sound way more like communicating than anything else we have said to each other, so, we are improving! I will get to it.

I have a problem/query about communicating with a real-life real SEE I am going to post here tomorrow...

Meanwhile one thing stood out to me, as I have been meaning to start a related post before you wrote it actually:


Do you mean hierarchical or do you mean Aristocratic? Don't get mad, please! I jut never get why you and Ann and Kim seem to imply that I think IEE is something great or special. It is really just one of the 16 types. I truly think they are all equal! INTJs might have great minds, ESTJs might get everything done, INFJs might make great spouses -- we all have gifts differing and I do NOT think any type is better than another. Like everyone, there is one type I know well - my own!

Also I never noticed how many of what types are here. I thought there might be plenty IEEs because typing seems a very Ne thing to me and being quiet extroverts, discussing typing on a forum seems normal for us.

But yes I do tend to see things in terms of types here, yet, I feel its totally justified on a typing forum. I just never understand that being questioned here. I guess I can be Obstinate about that (not sure if that is correct use of the Socionics term here though), but IEEs are "Serious Obstinate Aristocrats".

But, then when I read on Democratic and Aristocratic, I realize that to half of the 16 types, seeing people in terms of types, even in a typing forum, might be annoying or off-putting, to half of the people! So if I want to get along, I need to tone down my Aristocratic tendencies...

Well, I cannot get started on this now. Must wind down, then the next thing I need to do soon on this forum is get some advise for talking to my SEE friend.

No not aristocratic, I understand aristocratic perfectly well and have annoyed several forum members with this type of behaviour. I can sometimes come across as prudish or snobby, it's not intentional and I am actually very opened minded but i find somethings tasteless and crass and I often comment on those. This does however vary from person to person and these specific traits are not exclusive to IEE nor does every IEE display them.

No Eliza what I meant was hierarchical, I have yet to witness you making a positive case regarding SEE's... you frequently put them down and have issues with them, it seems to be a default mode of yours (and maritsa's especially) to place those which irk you into the SEE camp. If you look at your own posts you will see this. I for one have no issue with SEE at all, because they seriously rock. I have questioned weather I myself am SEE because i do have some triats in common asnd it has been mentioned to me before... so I have looked into it in great detail. If you could cross types together then I'd prob be IEE first with a good splash of SEE, ILE and EII In fact prob the most issues I have with any type would be SLE because of negative experiences and communication issues. Also sometimes even IEE, as i find unhealthy IEE's to be incredibly manipulative and it's very easy for me to spot this since I am (self typed) IEE myself.

But anyway, I digress, perhaps better to respond to my earlier long post and then include this at the end.


Edit: One further question, what percentage people in the general population do you believe to be IEE and SEE?
I'm curious here weather you are closer to maritsa's thinking that idk something like 46% of all women are SEE, or if you are more along the lines of the (Russian university) studied stats which are something like 10% of each.

Gem, don't you see now that both you & Eliza are IEE? This is what I mean by LONG posts. I can't even read these. Just so much Ne, going into each different perspective and way of viewing something, with Ti-POLR and inability to keep things concise.

[anndelise]

Both are Declarative types, yes.
Both Obstinate types.
And both with weak Ti.

Differences:
One wants things to be positive and in a positive environment even at the expensive of being clear or resolving anything. The other would prefer to clear things up and get issues resolved even if it means going through a negative/stressful process to get that result.
One has 2D Ne hidden agenda while the other has 4D Ne base.
And one seeks Ti clarity while the other is Ti polr.

Hence, problems in communications and understandings.

[SyrupDeGem]

Both are Declarative types, yes.
Both Obstinate types.
And both with weak Ti.

Differences:
One wants things to be positive and in a positive environment even at the expensive of being clear or resolving anything. The other would prefer to clear things up and get issues resolved even if it means going through a negative/stressful process to get that result.
One has 2D Ne hidden agenda while the other has 4D Ne base.
And one seeks Ti clarity while the other is Ti polr.

Hence, problems in communications and understandings.

Yes I find this is the case from my perspective also. I find that Eliza frequently says things like 'why can't we all just get along' she seeks harmony over resolution. For myself i would prefer to go through it to get to the other side rather than keep sweeping into the ever growing pile under the carpet. I also find it incredibly difficult to just 'be nice'. I also notice Eliza's constant redirection to details about people she knows, always wanting to talk about what they said and did....which takes the focus away from the issues being discussed and places it in an environment she finds more comfortable.

[anndelise]

Yes I find this is the case from my perspective also. I find that Eliza frequently says things like 'why can't we all just get along' she seeks harmony over resolution. For myself i would prefer to go through it to get to the other side rather than keep sweeping into the ever growing pile under the carpet. I also find it incredibly difficult to just 'be nice'. I also notice Eliza's constant redirection to details about people she knows, always wanting to talk about what they said and did....which takes the focus away from the issues being discussed and places it in an environment she finds more comfortable.

I wouldnt be annoyed by her talking about the people she knows and what they say and do...as long as it wasn't being used in place of talking about what others here can objectively see was said/done. Like when she retyped me a while back. Her supporting reasons were that I reminded her of a friend who did/said something I never did/said. And that she was frustrated with her mother so therefore knew exactly the frustration I was feeling towards maritsa. While totally ignoring the actual content of the problems. This made her argument purely subjective. Noone else on the forum could say yay or nay unless they personally knew the women involved. If I'm going to be accused of something, it damned well better be something *I* actually did, , not someone else's problems. Basically, imo, these kinds of subjective arguments help keep her safe in her own little world view without fear of anyone muddying up her bubble.

As an objectivist, I find that quite annoying, heh.

But, I can now see why she feels so much pressure from us...me. She wants the merry little environment, and I want something more serious and "real". The more she pushes for the one, the more I react against it. By the same token, the more I push for objective info, the more she withdraws and hides because it's not the merry positive environment she wants. Which leaves us both totally unsatisfied in our interactions with each other. And the fact that we can both go on and on about our respective sides? Lol..poor readers.

The sad thing is, if she simply stopped pushing, then I would have no reason to push back. Which means I wouldn't feel so stressed by her, I could relax more, and then I could help give her some of the positive interactions she craves here on this forum. It's become a sad cycle.

[InvisibleJim]

Delta NF, the quadra of sad, sad cycles

[anndelise]

[Olduvai]

I just don't get it. Maybe @Johannes Bloem explain it to me since he is your identical and should look at all your posts thinking, "Ohmigosh, I can see myself writing the exact same posts!" Right, Johannes?

(and if you think that was a not-so-subtle question at your IEE self-type, you'd be right this time!)

Wait, so you think I'm SEE?

[Eliza Thomason]

@Geminatronix and @anndelise

Gem, you are right I am way too distractable. Always trying to contain it.

Please refer to this list:

Applicable, useful excuses

- "IEEs are predominantly motivated by their feelings of interest and boredom..."

- "IEEs are often spontaneous and sometimes quite distractible individuals ..."

- "IEEs often tend to mentalize and verbalize matters of personal development, individual qualities, and significant personal experiences, "

There you go.



Sorry!

I appreciate that you and Ann are taking time to explain your viewpoint. I need to give it more attention than in the past, when I have just sat down and started typing my thoughts in response as they stream into my head. It never gets us anywhere and yes I find it easy to go off into personal stories which maybe probably don't address what you said. So please let this sit till I can get back to it properly.

I just did a whole several hours of needed cleaning to make up for time frittered already. Feel better now. Also my aim was to justify taking time right now to type something else that will take me some time probably, one that has been on my mind several days and I want to stop procrastinating since it might be helpful to someone. And my posts here don't seem to be too helpful to anyone. So give me a time think through what you have said better than I have thought through what you have said in the past, okay?

God bless you both and sorry for being too much into expressing my own thought and not so much into understanding yours.

[Eliza Thomason]

Wait, so you think I'm SEE?

No. Whatever I said it wasn't that. You don't seem like not-IEE to me.

I mean yet! I have not read much of what you have written..

(Because you know we negativists decide what people are not..)

[SyrupDeGem]

@Geminatronix and @anndelise

Gem, you are right I am way too distractable. Always trying to contain it.

Please refer to this list:

Applicable, useful excuses

- "IEEs are predominantly motivated by their feelings of interest and boredom..."

- "IEEs are often spontaneous and sometimes quite distractible individuals ..."

- "IEEs often tend to mentalize and verbalize matters of personal development, individual qualities, and significant personal experiences, "

There you go.



Sorry!

I appreciate that you and Ann are taking time to explain your viewpoint. I need to give it more attention than in the past, when I have just sat down and started typing my thoughts in response as they stream into my head. It never gets us anywhere and yes I find it easy to go off into personal stories which maybe probably don't address what you said. So please let this sit till I can get back to it properly.

I just did a whole several hours of needed cleaning to make up for time frittered already. Feel better now. Also my aim was to justify taking time right now to type something else that will take me some time probably, one that has been on my mind several days and I want to stop procrastinating since it might be helpful to someone. And my posts here don't seem to be too helpful to anyone. So give me a time think through what you have said better than I have thought through what you have said in the past, okay?

God bless you both and sorry for being too much into expressing my own thought and not so much into understanding yours.

Lol You need to cite a source (pref with link) Eliza, or it can be something you have written yourself. If you have written it yourself that of course is fine too but some clarification would be good.

[Eliza Thomason]

Lol You need to cite a source (pref with link) Eliza, or it can be something you have written yourself. If you have written it yourself that of course is fine too but some clarification would be good.

Another excuse to procrastine. Besides this video I just posted: http://screen.yahoo.com/popular/baby...144913027.html

Source, http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/IEE-ENFp/ I think I picked it all out of Ego Block Leading Function (no.1 on Model A). Certainly the function leads me on tangents... So none of its my fault!

[SyrupDeGem]

Another excuse to procrastine. Besides this video I just posted: http://screen.yahoo.com/popular/baby...144913027.html

Source, http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/IEE-ENFp/ I think I picked it all out of Ego Block Leading Function (no.1 on Model A). Certainly the function leads me on tangents... So none of its my fault!

Lol okay, but here is one that is much more fitting...from your own chosen resource, which highlights what was being noticed. As you pride yourself on looking at information presented to you I'm sure you will give this serious consideration and not discard it....

"ESEs are highly attuned to the emotional environment around them. They are often focused on whether others around them are having fun, are emotionally relaxed or engaged, or whether everyone around them is getting along or whether the needs of others are met, and they are often inclined to take decisive action to ensure that there exists a positive emotional mood or that others are comfortable and well taken care of." - See more at: http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/t....hs3cGw3m.dpuf

[Olduvai]

No. Whatever I said it wasn't that. You don't seem like not-IEE to me.

I mean yet! I have not read much of what you have written..

(Because you know we negativists decide what people are not..)

Here's a subtler look at Positivism / Negativism:

The main distinguishing trait of Positivist and Negativist types is the preference for comparison (Positivists) or contrast (Negativists). Positivist types are more inclined to spot similarities and draw analogies ("they are so alike", "y is just like x" etc.), while Negativist are inclined to instead look at contrasts or alternatives ("they are nothing alike!"). Figuratively speaking, if Positivists are shown the front side then they will be looking at the front side, while Negativists will try to look at its inverse. If this inverse is not readily apparent, they will start searching for it. Thus Negativists do not seek to present a "negative" or "pessimistic" view of things, but simply the inverse or the alternative one. It is precisely due to such mental preference that a Negativist type such as ILI voices pessimistic predictions upon hearing optimistic forecasts. From a Negativist's point of view, he or she is not being a downer, but rather restoring the balance by pointing out the opposite. Since Negativist types are inclined to look for the inverse, if they are presented with pessimistic information they start searching for its alternatives, for what is absent and not there, such as a more optimistic interpretation. If the same ILI is told that everything is bleak, he or she will proceed to look for evidence that the situation is really not as bleak as it could have been. This distinguishes socionics trait of Negativism from manifestations of personal traits such as pessimism, depression, or propensity to "catastrophize".

[anndelise]

ESE's Ne Mobilizing Function

ESEs are typically quite open to a wide variety of new ideas. They often have a reserved, receptive, and patiently interested view of the academic world. They may be inclined to seek out new, unusual, or interesting information related to goings-on in the world around them, and to share their interests. They may have little confidence in their ability to understand abstract material, but they may typically react to new concepts or information with interest and curiosity. They may seek clarity from others about the unusual ideas they come across, requesting cogent and simple explanations.

ESEs may have difficulty coming up with new or innovative ideas, evaluating the potential of certain ideas, or engaging in conceptual juxtaposition or lateral thinking. Nonetheless, they are sometimes be seen as somewhat more bright and imaginative, energetic, and fantasy-oriented than LSEs (though LSEs can be imaginative as well). They may also come across as kooky, novel, and spontaneous, and may be inclined to offer suggestions for new fun activities or to make observations of unusual, amusing, or bizarre qualities of things, though they may do so in a lighthearted and cheery way, and may be averse to depressive or darkly-themed novelties. Usually imagination in ESEs is a corollary of their charming social persona, and a supplement to a jovial, outgoing attitude.

ESEs may typically have a more positive, optimistic, inclusive, and receptive slant to their emotionalism than beta types. Usually, their emotionality focuses on lighthearted and fun aspects, avoiding darker or melodramatic themes. They may stereotypically preach values of universal tolerance and friendliness.

- See more at: http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/t....on7sNS54.dpuf

[FoxOnStilts]

I'll take Eliza into Alpha, I guess. The scattered, train-of-though way she types reminds me of the way my boyfriend writes in a cringeworthy endearing kind of pat-on-the-head way. Makes me very glad he's a studio art major and only has to worry about making pretty things instead of articulate himself.

[anndelise]

I'll take Eliza into Alpha, I guess. The scattered, train-of-though way she types reminds me of the way my boyfriend writes in a cringeworthy endearing kind of pat-on-the-head way. Makes me very glad he's a studio art major and only has to worry about making pretty things instead of articulate himself.

Awww.

(Tldr at bottom)
One of my neighbors is ESE. She gardens, crochets, cooks awesome food, and has the most comfortable house I've been in. She keeps it clean and mostly organized, though has a few pockets of clutter from projects she works on. She's always busy making stuff, she calls it her Meditation. She has a great imagination and will tell me and her daughter stories about fairies and such. They create little fairy homes in the garden. And she encourages her (possible ILE) teen to explore the world on her own terms. (She's a hippy new-age type.) She laughs and rolls her eyes at my jumpy reactions around spiders, my lack of knowledge in gardening and plants, and at how easily I will initially accept what she says before I realize something is off about it. She likes to joke this way with me, lol. She'll walk with me sometimes, since I walk so much and it's one of the few times we get to chat. But I do have to be careful of the kinds of things I talk about. She'll wave her hand in a dismissive gesture if I'm worrying about something, saying something like I don't need to let negativity into my life, and that if I believe it will be resolved, then the Universe will take care of it somehow. She's always talking about how lazy she is, and how she just doesn't have the energy and time to do the things that need to be done. Which always has me raising my eyebrows cuz...well..if I had even a quarter of that woman's energy I could get quite a bit done and be damned happy about it.

This past weekend I finally confessed to her that I'm just not interested in doing crafting. I wanted to, I tried some. (Because it would give us something to relate on.) But it's just not my thing. She laughed and said it was ok, that I was more of a cerebral person than her, and that that was ok...we'd still have our walks.

But...she does appreciate some of the odd ideas I pop out when she's talking about something. I'll mention something I had read somewhere, sometime, and that maybe blah blah blah. And she'll stop and cock her head, "you know, I hadn't thought of that. I'll have to give that a try."

Tldr: Most times, though, I think SHE is the one patting ME on the head,
(But you are ILE, not quite as scatterd as IEE...close...but even more cerebral..so you can pull it off easier. )

[Beautiful sky]

(Because you know we negativists decide what people are not..)

yes, very much so. In fact, some of you so much so that a lot of the positive qualities of an individual may escape your attention. I noticed that when SSmalls (IEE) finally typed me he picked posts of mine and he pointed to them and said "that...oh so you are EII because you ..." and it was YET!!..after I had been on the forum and interacted with him for quite some time

[Beautiful sky]

@Geminatronix and @anndelise

Gem, you are right I am way too distractable. Always trying to contain it.

Please refer to this list:

Applicable, useful excuses

- "IEEs are predominantly motivated by their feelings of interest and boredom..."

- "IEEs are often spontaneous and sometimes quite distractible individuals ..."

- "IEEs often tend to mentalize and verbalize matters of personal development, individual qualities, and significant personal experiences, "

There you go.



Sorry!

I appreciate that you and Ann are taking time to explain your viewpoint. I need to give it more attention than in the past, when I have just sat down and started typing my thoughts in response as they stream into my head. It never gets us anywhere and yes I find it easy to go off into personal stories which maybe probably don't address what you said. So please let this sit till I can get back to it properly.

I just did a whole several hours of needed cleaning to make up for time frittered already. Feel better now. Also my aim was to justify taking time right now to type something else that will take me some time probably, one that has been on my mind several days and I want to stop procrastinating since it might be helpful to someone. And my posts here don't seem to be too helpful to anyone. So give me a time think through what you have said better than I have thought through what you have said in the past, okay?

God bless you both and sorry for being too much into expressing my own thought and not so much into understanding yours.

You do not need to prove things to these individuals. You don't seem to understand that they have a hard time you being labeled as IEE
LEAVE THEM ALONE. THEY DON'T REASON ON YOUR LEVEL BECAUSE THERE ARE TRUTHS IN WHICH THEY CAN NOT ADDRESS AS IT PERTAINS TO THEMSELVES.

[InvisibleJim]

I can't wait until I'm SEE as well.

I'll grow a round face and a vagina. This will be easy.

[chriscorey]

I can't wait until I'm SEE as well.

I'll grow a round face and a vagina. This will be easy.

Tell that to Helen of Troy.

[Eliza Thomason]

yes, very much so. In fact, some of you so much so that a lot of the positive qualities of an individual may escape your attention. I noticed that when SSmalls (IEE) finally typed me he picked posts of mine and he pointed to them and said "that...oh so you are EII because you ..." and it was YET!!..after I had been on the forum and interacted with him for quite some time

Interesting. And its very true what you said, and yes, its a flaw. Sometimes I do find myself forgetting to notice the positives. Always its an after thought, after I sense I have been in error or unbalanced with someone, and I try to realize why I feel that way. Then I see my error. Then I remedy it.

Maritsa, I ate a part of a hot dog at dinner. I bet you never eat those. My son had a hankering since I never make them and I had an ancient pack in the freezer. I have not had a bite of a hotdog in ages. Like the dark ages. I don't know why I did that. I was just curious I guess. It does not feel so good...

Going to bed!

[SyrupDeGem]

Interesting. And its very true what you said, and yes, its a flaw. Sometimes I do find myself forgetting to notice the positives. Always its an after thought, after I sense I have been in error or unbalanced with someone, and I try to realize why I feel that way. Then I see my error. Then I remedy it.

Maritsa, I ate a part of a hot dog at dinner. I bet you never eat those. My son had a hankering since I never make them and I had an ancient pack in the freezer. I have not had a bite of a hotdog in ages. Like the dark ages. I don't know why I did that. I was just curious I guess. It does not feel so good...

Going to bed!

Eliza, you have failed to read a post addressing this by the very person you brought into the thread... I shall copy paste his info below... no source was cited so you may need to check for that...

"The main distinguishing trait of Positivist and Negativist types is the preference for comparison (Positivists) or contrast (Negativists). Positivist types are more inclined to spot similarities and draw analogies ("they are so alike", "y is just like x" etc.), while Negativist are inclined to instead look at contrasts or alternatives ("they are nothing alike!"). Figuratively speaking, if Positivists are shown the front side then they will be looking at the front side, while Negativists will try to look at its inverse. If this inverse is not readily apparent, they will start searching for it. Thus Negativists do not seek to present a "negative" or "pessimistic" view of things, but simply the inverse or the alternative one. It is precisely due to such mental preference that a Negativist type such as ILI voices pessimistic predictions upon hearing optimistic forecasts. From a Negativist's point of view, he or she is not being a downer, but rather restoring the balance by pointing out the opposite. Since Negativist types are inclined to look for the inverse, if they are presented with pessimistic information they start searching for its alternatives, for what is absent and not there, such as a more optimistic interpretation. If the same ILI is told that everything is bleak, he or she will proceed to look for evidence that the situation is really not as bleak as it could have been. This distinguishes socionics trait of Negativism from manifestations of personal traits such as pessimism, depression, or propensity to "catastrophize". "

So... going by the info above... I'd say you are more positivist?

[Eliza Thomason]

Here's a subtler look at Positivism / Negativism:

That is fascinating, Johannes. That is so much exactly what I do! (I used to attribute that tendancy to to my Libra Sun, Libra Rising - because one of the Libra traits is scales of justice, and so she likes to balance the scales, always weighing all the sides...)

[Eliza Thomason]

I'll take Eliza into Alpha, I guess. The scattered, train-of-though way she types reminds me of the way my boyfriend writes in a cringeworthy endearing kind of pat-on-the-head way. Makes me very glad he's a studio art major and only has to worry about making pretty things instead of articulate himself.

ROTFL!

[SyrupDeGem]

That is fascinating, Johannes. That is so much exactly what I do! (I used to attribute that tendancy to to my Libra Sun, Libra Rising - because one of the Libra traits is scales of justice, and so she likes to balance the scales, always weighing all the sides...)

Lol wut, it is not at all... you fit the positivist profile so much better.