Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 81 to 84 of 84

Thread: Idea about how I can figure out my type

  1. #81
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,814
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pianosinger View Post
    If a person is confused about the theory, being self-typed a certain way, then that probably means they are mis-typed. If the theory makes perfect (or at least near-perfect) sense when applied to RL people and relations, then they are probably typed correctly.
    I'm not sure about this either. I get where you're coming from, but I've seen several people who seem to be in complete denial about stuff and have re-written socionics around their idea of what type they think they are (and not just Maritsa) and they think everything makes perfect sense, but I really doubt they're typed correctly or that they have others typed correctly. If you mistype yourself and everyone else, it can seem to make sense when it doesn't.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  2. #82
    not gonna be around as much anymore
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    TIM
    C-IEE
    Posts
    1,255
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker View Post
    I'm not sure about this either. I get where you're coming from, but I've seen several people who seem to be in complete denial about stuff and have re-written socionics around their idea of what type they think they are (and not just Maritsa) and they think everything makes perfect sense, but I really doubt they're typed correctly or that they have others typed correctly. If you mistype yourself and everyone else, it can seem to make sense when it doesn't.
    But if someone has to rewrite Socionics for it to make sense, then it's not Socionics that is wrong, but the one who's rewriting it-- and if they've rewritten the theory, then does the new theory really deserve to still be called "Socionics"?
    My life's work (haha):
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/blog.php?b=709
    Input, PLEASEAnd thank you

  3. #83
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,814
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pianosinger View Post
    But if someone has to rewrite Socionics for it to make sense, then it's not Socionics that is wrong, but the one who's rewriting it-- and if they've rewritten the theory, then does the new theory really deserve to still be called "Socionics"?
    Well I personally wouldn't call it that, but they do, and often think they're the only ones who truly understand Socionics because they think their "version" is right and everyone else is wrong.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  4. #84
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    26,955
    Mentioned
    701 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker View Post
    This is a very poorly worded question and is specifically trying to get a particular answer. Try to learn to be unbiased, Maritsa.
    Mariella, I've always listened to you and taken your suggestions into consideration. If you have a better way of wording my questions, please suggest them to me.
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?


    I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE

    Best description of functions:
    http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •