Delta Dispersment Theory

[Cuddly McFluffles]

People do however mess up the folder structures on their computer and countless other silly things like saving everything to the desktop, which annoyies me to no end.

http://rampageproductions.net/article186.aspx

[Beautiful sky]

Are you sure your Delta Maritsa? Your method of typing seems very detail focused, valued based and a little aggressive...Ti, Fe, Se = Beta. You also seem decisive > judicious.

EII can focus on details or lean towards Ne and lose focus of details. For that, you may read about my type in the following link:

http://www.socionics.com/prof/infj.htm

" INFjs are very conscientious in their work . They do everything carefully, paying great attention to the quality of their labour."

I believe also that the dual descriptions in Socioniko are also clear on that perspective.

http://socioniko.net/en/1.3.rels/dual.html
The Humanist willingly helps in this work, doing it diligently and qualitatively
While The Administrator creates comfort on a whole, his dual perfects all the details.

This dual pair is characterized with certain reticence, isolation from other people, hard work, and attention to details and integrity in everything.

[moredhel]

But, you didn't use the word efficiency, which is what your duals respond to. You might want to use some of the Te words in the future to give your type signals to indicate that you're a Te base type and explain why you've ordered something in the order in which you see fit, and say that is because you ignore SYSTEMS IN FAVOR OF EFFICIENT METHODS..

Ahh but that would be attention to detail, it was more efficient just to say it felt right , means I didn't have to think about it.

[moredhel]

http://rampageproductions.net/article186.aspx

Why are there 291 articles all listed in the sidebar O_o it made me cry just a little.

Ok Maritsa this is why i think your using Ti as a valued function and not a role function.

EIIs are not easily able to abstract themselves from the human dimension and apply "cold" logic. When they try to do this, they easily become unsure if their reasoning is correct.

EIIs feel that not everything can be classified under the system since everything has its unique individual attributes.

Thats the wikisocion description of a EII's Ti role function. Now it's my impression that you are quite comfortable classifying things within a system and are very decisive in your reasoning. A typical EII would be hesitant to disgree with somones self typing and would place a lot of value on the person and their history in considering a type for them.

That said that is just my POV, I'm happy to agree to disagree, this is not a type Maritsa thread after all. I know I personaly wouldn't like this much scruitny put on my type unless I deliberatly asked for it.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

http://rampageproductions.net/article186.aspx

Why are there 291 articles all listed in the sidebar O_o it made me cry just a little.

The site has been up for around six years, and he's been doing weekly columns for however long. Tends to build up after a while.

[Absurd]

Ok Maritsa this is why i think your using Ti as a valued function and not a role function.

Took you long enough.

[Beautiful sky]

[quote=moredhel;791912]

Ok Maritsa this is why i think your using Ti as a valued function and not a role function.

EIIs are not easily able to abstract themselves from the human dimension and apply "cold" logic. When they try to do this, they easily become unsure if their reasoning is correct.

EIIs feel that not everything can be classified under the system since everything has its unique individual attributes.

Thats the wikisocion description of a EII's Ti role function. Now it's my impression that you are quite comfortable classifying things within a system and are very decisive in your reasoning. A typical EII would be hesitant to disgree with somones self typing and would place a lot of value on the person and their history in considering a type for them.

That said that is just my POV, I'm happy to agree to disagree, this is not a type Maritsa thread after all. I know I personaly wouldn't like this much scruitny put on my type unless I deliberatly asked for it.

What is cold logic?
I'm not comfortable with raw mathematical analysis...is that cold logic?
An EIE can't use Ti as a valued function because it's DS, something that is relied on one's dual to do. I can, however, like you, occasionally use Ti, like you use Fe, as my role. By the use of your Fe, you are able to look-a-like ESFj, this is why they call your relations look-a-like and this is the very same reason why I also look-a-like INTj. Put the big picture together; get it?

Why would an EII be hesitant to disagree with someone else's self typing if they don't have all the pieces (or as you call "factors") to conclude that that self typing is self evident? This doesn't make sense to a Te valuer..get it?

Moredhel, please don't let what Maritsa says about your type phase you. For the longest time she typed me as SEE, among several other types at varying times, and was pretty aggressive about it and upset at me when I didn't heed her. We're on good terms now and she currently agrees with my self-typing but for awhile it was a little... um, unpleasant, and I had to practice just letting it go.

Actually, for that matter, please don't let what anyone here says about your type phase you. You sound like you've done at least as much study as half the people here, and if what you've decided about socionics works for you - in your everyday life and relationships - I wouldn't worry about it.


As for her type, I'm ok with her being EII.

Minde, I've given you the opportunity, on several occasions to discuss your sunk in feelings. You, however, have declined those invitations. And, now, your sunk in feelings are boiling up again. If you would like to carry this further...PLEASE DO IT IN PRIVATE. As an EII, I value private conversations.

[Absurd]

Hey Minde, I'm LSE and value deep, intellectual, emotional and private discussions as well, think about it

[Minde]

What are your experiences fellow deltas?

My best relationships are with people with whom I can develop a "static," enduring bond. And that happens best after continuous or regular interaction that allows us to go deeper than the surface, or just small talk. Deeper even than doing fun activities together (though activities do let me see people better than talk).

Working together toward a common valued goal, especially when it's a little tough, seems to allow me to connect to people the best. When things get tough or uncomfortable facades crack and I can start seeing people for who they really are.

But that can be hard to manufacture, as you pointed out. I don't have a good answer for how to make it happen, except that whatever it is will probably be uncomfortable. It would for me anyway.

Low-maintenance, high-security friendships are what I seek for.

I find myself tending toward that, too, though I thought that was just because I'm too lazy.

I think a lot of people from every type can relate to finding it difficult to form meaningful relationships with people since it's not always easily obtainable to find places where there's that kind of open social environment to meet new people without coming off as intrusive or having to fake a facade.

I like this point. I think loneliness is pretty widespread. But it might be felt differently by different types; and the solution(s) might be different for different types.

As such, I think I tend to have more Alpha friends. It seems like the Alpha SFs I have known irl are more likely to take the initiative to call me out and they usually plan all the fun stuff to do together. They seem more adept in keeping the momentum going imo.

I can relate to this a bit. Alpha SFs are pretty good at the whole making it fun and comfortable thing.

For me it's a little bit harder because I don't always comfortably initiate things. But I'm trying to get better at that, and it helps when I can feel confident overall/on the inside, because then fear doesn't get in the way.

[Minde]

People aren't constantly messing up their math.

Speak for yourself...

Hey, I resemble that comment.

One of mine is conjunctions without a comma, though it's grammatically correct lol.

I'm always paranoid about my commas. That's one part of grammar/punctuation that I don't feel I have a good grasp of. Do you have any good rules for them?

I'm fairly new to socionics and typology in general and I've started typing all the people in my life.

I did the same thing! It must be type-related.

If it's type related, what does it mean if I've confidently typed very few of the people I know, after learning socionics for years now?

http://rampageproductions.net/article186.aspx

Ha! I'm working on a project right now that reminds me of this.

Ahh but that would be attention to detail, it was more efficient just to say it felt right , means I didn't have to think about it.

Huh. That's kind of a new idea for me.

Minde, I've given you the opportunity, on several occasions to discuss your sunk in feelings. You, however, have declined those invitations. And, now, your sunk in feelings are boiling up again. If you would like to carry this further...PLEASE DO IT IN PRIVATE. As an EII, I value private conversations.

I don't think I have any sunk in feelings with regard to you. Like I said, I feel we're on decent terms and I hope to remain that way. That said, history is something that really happened, and sometimes it's useful to look back and learn from it.

Hey Minde, I'm LSE and value deep, intellectual, emotional and private discussions as well, think about it

I'm sorry, I don't get it.

[moredhel]

Took you long enough.

I was hoping not to get into a huge typing discussion, that and I don't like going into detail unless it's necessary to support my opinion.

What is cold logic?
I'm not comfortable with raw mathematical analysis...is that cold logic?
An EIE can't use Ti as a valued function because it's DS, something that is relied on one's dual to do. I can, however, like you, occasionally use Ti, like you use Fe, as my role. By the use of your Fe, you are able to look-a-like ESFj, this is why they call your relations look-a-like and this is the very same reason why I also look-a-like INTj. Put the big picture together; get it?

Why would an EII be hesitant to disagree with someone else's self typing if they don't have all the pieces (or as you call "factors") to conclude that that self typing is self evident? This doesn't make sense to a Te valuer..get it?

OK no offense but you seem to place a lot of importance of dualisation. Your super-id functions aren't just sitting there waiting for a handsome prince to come and activate them. They are a part of who you are, more so than your super-ego functions, which IMO define you mostly in your discomfort and ineptitude at using them. For example I will normally favor Fi over Fe in a social situation, because value > skill. Also not to be nit picky but in reviewing my post I didn't actually use the word "factors" yet you quoted me on it.

That said I accept that it's possible you are using Ti as a Role function and that is where your detailed thinking is coming from, but as an EII Se would be your PoLR...and from where I'm standing I find that difficult to believe.

OK damn that was probably too much of an opinion to end in saying 'I'm happy for this discussion to be over', but while I feel this conversation is good exercise for my socionics knowledge and general ability to defend a viewpoint, I am happy to go wit the agree to disagree opinion.

But that can be hard to manufacture, as you pointed out. I don't have a good answer for how to make it happen, except that whatever it is will probably be uncomfortable. It would for me anyway.

Duly noted. It is alright I seem to be finding a few deltas hidden away in the corners of my life. With knowledge of socionics suddenly what before would of seemed like an unusually easy and pleasant conversation with an acquaintance I can now recognize as a compatibility of values and therefore a potentially rewarding friendship to keep an eye on.

If it's type related, what does it mean if I've confidently typed very few of the people I know, after learning socionics for years now?

I've confidently typed about half of the people I am close to and placed tentative types on the other half. Not to sound egotistical (there's a pun in there somewhere) but I feel that Te doms would be very good at typing people quickly given a small set of information where as Ti doms would be more accurate than Te given a large set of information. I think as an Fi dom you would place a lot of value on the person as a whole and may have trouble viewing them objectively enough to type *shrugs*, probably means you pick up things in a person that make them appear to be a certain type and therefore can type them correctly, more easily than Te. BTW this is purely a rushed idea meant to spur further discussion and not my definitive standpoint.

Quote:
Originally Posted by moredhel View Post
Ahh but that would be attention to detail, it was more efficient just to say it felt right , means I didn't have to think about it.
Huh. That's kind of a new idea for me.

How so? I was only being half serious

Ok that enough from me. Really feeling the Ni PoLR I swear I just lost an hour

[Slacker]

She also greatly overstates how much people use their role function. People don't behave as if they value their role function. She values Ti. This whole thread is very frustrating for me as she's made it all about her. If you don't do one very minor thing exactly as her (potentially as mistyped as she is) boyfriend does it, you must not be LSE?

[Absurd]

I'm sorry, I don't get it.

I didn't get it and still don't when Maritsa wrote that, no worries.

I was hoping not to get into a huge typing discussion, that and I don't like going into detail unless it's necessary to support my opinion.

Fair enough.

[Minde]

Duly noted. It is alright I seem to be finding a few deltas hidden away in the corners of my life. With knowledge of socionics suddenly what before would of seemed like an unusually easy and pleasant conversation with an acquaintance I can now recognize as a compatibility of values and therefore a potentially rewarding friendship to keep an eye on.

Yeah, I think just getting out in general and then having an idea of what you're looking for so that when you find it you can focus on it is a good strategy.

I've confidently typed about half of the people I am close to and placed tentative types on the other half. Not to sound egotistical (there's a pun in there somewhere) but I feel that Te doms would be very good at typing people quickly given a small set of information where as Ti doms would be more accurate than Te given a large set of information. I think as an Fi dom you would place a lot of value on the person as a whole and may have trouble viewing them objectively enough to type *shrugs*, probably means you pick up things in a person that make them appear to be a certain type and therefore can type them correctly, more easily than Te. BTW this is purely a rushed idea meant to spur further discussion and not my definitive standpoint.

Heh, I appreciate the attempt to tie it to socionics. It is true, though, that I tend to see people through the prism of their unique characteristics and relationship to me. So lines and firm distinctions can get blurred. It's naturally easier for me to classify people based on the feel they give me (which is non-verbal) than on hard facts (which can be verbalized), and that doesn't seem to me the best way to type socionically. Therefore I hold off on typing. Also, I tend to have the "What if I'm wrong? What if I've missed something or misunderstood something?" fear.

Ahh but that would be attention to detail, it was more efficient just to say it felt right , means I didn't have to think about it.

Huh. That's kind of a new idea for me.

How so? I was only being half serious

I know, but it's still something that would be kind of new for me to try. Usually when asked a question my instinct is to explain until they get it (perhaps because I appreciate the reverse). I value clarity and mutual understanding, so it can be hard for me to just let go when I know there's more I could have done to make it better. So the idea that it can actually be more efficient (and thus overall helpful) to simply say, "This is how I feel," and leave it at that is novel.

Ok that enough from me. Really feeling the Ni PoLR I swear I just lost an hour

This forum (and many others, I'm sure) eats time for a living. That's why my posting here can get sporadic and why if I don't respond to something you say here for a week or more that you shouldn't feel offended.

[Beautiful sky]

OK no offense but you seem to place a lot of importance of dualisation. Your super-id functions aren't just sitting there waiting for a handsome prince to come and activate them. They are a part of who you are, more so than your super-ego functions, which IMO define you mostly in your discomfort and ineptitude at using them. For example I will normally favor Fi over Fe in a social situation, because value > skill. Also not to be nit picky but in reviewing my post I didn't actually use the word "factors" yet you quoted me on it.

That said I accept that it's possible you are using Ti as a Role function and that is where your detailed thinking is coming from, but as an EII Se would be your PoLR...and from where I'm standing I find that difficult to believe.

Te and Si are a part of who I am, but they don't get used the way I want them to get used. Te, for my brain is not assimilating information or factoring them in fast enough like an LSE would. For instance, today my boyfriend (LSE type) and I were at a museum where there's a lot of visual information (some also has to do with the capability to use extraverted sensation to view everything and come to quick decisions about what things are as a whole. While I tend to not come to those decisions quickly, he will. So information from the function Te tends to go inside of my brain rather slowly, but I find that after he and I discuss a lot of the things, we agree with each other because of how information circulation gets us to reach a conclusion. This prevents duals from fighting and arguing or at least causes them to reach an agreement quickly, creating a pleasant relationship. I've had other relationship and they've gotten boring and emotionally, mentally unsatisfying because the significant other individual does not offer up information processed from the function Te or enough of that available function, depending on their type. I am a lot spoiled about Te because I greatly enjoy it.

On the word "factors," you didn't use it. I made it as an example.

Se is a visual related detailed function (hence sensory or through ones senses) while Ti is analysis of the available information from a person's subjective viewpoint; that may be observed in my example of the museum situation with my boyfriend and I. I am capable of detailed thinking because Se doesn't evaporate into thin air, it is still an ego, conscious block function (the best explanation is that it sits at the end of how information circulates in the brain); For an Fi person, the information enters through Fi and filters through and exists from Se for conscious cycle. It is stressful for another person to offer up information through Se to me rather than Te, but I, myself, can use my own senses to avail them to Ti...analysis. I avail more Ne to analysis than to Se and remember that both can look the same because both are perception functions and both gather up impressions from the outside environment.

I've confidently typed about half of the people I am close to and placed tentative types on the other half. Not to sound egotistical (there's a pun in there somewhere) but I feel that Te doms would be very good at typing people quickly given a small set of information where as Ti doms would be more accurate than Te given a large set of information. I think as an Fi dom you would place a lot of value on the person as a whole and may have trouble viewing them objectively enough to type *shrugs*, probably means you pick up things in a person that make them appear to be a certain type and therefore can type them correctly, more easily than Te. BTW this is purely a rushed idea meant to spur further discussion and not my definitive standpoint.

Fi does place a lot of value on the person and relationships and yes, I think you would agree that the reason why I type confidently is because I am good at reading people and reading or getting to know people is exactly in the domain of interpersonal relationships and something that I do quite well. And, this is why I'm confident in typing people. I do place a lot of value on the person as a whole, but that doesn't mean that I don't have the tools of analysis (Ti Role) to not analyze what type I'm getting the feeling (subjective Fi function) that they might be. While you may look at the facts or lock in on a few words and miss the whole picture, often needing your dual to bring your focus outwards, I need more facts to come to a subjective conclusion or feeling, but if I lack facts than I might be hasty to make certain conclusion while at other times I wonder what possibilities () there might be.

In your case, I wonder, and again this is from my subjective shot at typing (please excuse me for the overanalyzes of this situation -Ti Role tends to do that as Fe role causes LSE to get sudden bursts of excitement)...

Why you're making so many typing errors....I wonder if it's because you're more concerned about being perfect at your profession or study, which is, as you said the sciences and math or whether it's type related.

And, my mind just swirls the questions around and creates a situation where a person is an individual an not just a pegged type creating a statement like "here's James and he's this type of an ESE" as an example.

....

Moral support, creating close relations is much more important than teaching a person your personal history.

[Lobo]

I'm always paranoid about my commas. That's one part of grammar/punctuation that I don't feel I have a good grasp of. Do you have any good rules for them?

I've had English teachers who really ingrained certain rules and/or tips for better writing when it comes to commas that I still remember. Ok, things are going to get PRETTY DAMN EXCITING NOW:

- Commas after conjunctions
- Avoid commas right after "to be" conjugations
- Always add a comma to divide a sentence with two different subjects

I don't remember anymore now.

[moredhel]

OK Maritsa, it's becoming apparent you have a fixed viewpoint on the issue of your type and for efficiency sake I will raise no more points, as it would achieve no result.

For the record I still think your confusing your super-id and super-ego functions and not properly considering how the Se function manifests itself in a valued position vs a non valued one, but I'm new at this so you should be happy to consider that inexperience on my part, me not knowing you well enough to dispute your type or functions appearing differently online vs IRL and move on as it seems you are very convinced of your type.

In your case, I wonder, and again this is from my subjective shot at typing (please excuse me for the overanalyzes of this situation -Ti Role tends to do that as Fe role causes LSE to get sudden bursts of excitement)...

Why you're making so many typing errors....I wonder if it's because you're more concerned about being perfect at your profession or study, which is, as you said the sciences and math or whether it's type related.

Alright I think this line of conversation needs a new thread. I would love to go into my process of typing and compare it to other types, but this is going a little off topic.

I know, but it's still something that would be kind of new for me to try. Usually when asked a question my instinct is to explain until they get it (perhaps because I appreciate the reverse). I value clarity and mutual understanding, so it can be hard for me to just let go when I know there's more I could have done to make it better. So the idea that it can actually be more efficient (and thus overall helpful) to simply say, "This is how I feel," and leave it at that is novel.

Yes when explaining something to someone I use detail very selectivly, I will often give a super high level picture of a topic/subject/opinion and drill down based on the responses I get. I find this builds up a dialouge between you and the person your explaining to. I hate being talked at in detail mainly because I can connect a lot of the dots myself and I like to have a chance to add my own spin on topics to help build my understanding.
When explaining something to a Ti valuer I find I'm often answering a lot of consises questions and they want all the details. In contrast explaining something to a Te valuer they will take my high level description and we will drill down together through conversation, certain details are assumed while other come out more naturaly.