.
.
you can all come visit me. i live in the midwest.
I like you Joy, but I'm getting frustrated by you now. All these threads do is cause more confusion and complication than is necessary. There's a lot written here, but nothing that could clarify your type. It may not be, but it's almost as if your purposely deliberately to transforming yourself into an "XXXX". I could attempt to type you, but it would be a complete waste of time, since there is no information or behaviour patterns described.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
yeah, I didn't want this thread to be about me, just the poll. I know my type. Thanks though. (:
Okay, I understand. :wink:Originally Posted by Joy
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
See, at least I never claim to KNOW my type. This shit is just embarassing.Originally Posted by Joy
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
good grief, how many times do I have to say to automatically insert "IMO" into every one of my sentences?
I was saying that I currently don't have any doubts as to what my type is.
Yes, I realize that. However, this is stupid, as you will, just like me, try to change your type at some point in the next month or so. You used to be SO sure that you were ENTp, then you were DOUBTLESSLY an ISFp, now you're CERTAIN of your ENTj-ness. Stop pretending to be certain. You're not fooling anyone.Originally Posted by Joy
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
yay italy! DDOriginally Posted by heath
*shrugs* my type doesn't change no matter what I or anyone else thinks it isOriginally Posted by gilligan87
note that this topic is two years old.
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
Joy is a black box.
Joy's lover is a white tetris shape.
Ezra is a confederation of three miniature black boxes now, compacted together.
Te concentrates on communicating with people and with working together on things. Ti asks what it means that X is working with Y to Z which wanted to work with X, but can't because X is already working with Y. This creates structure.
This inaccurate definition is probably why you think you're ENTj. Ti sees the forest; they want to build a complete system with as little emphasis on specific data as possible. Te sees the trees as separate but connected things, like links in a chain.Originally Posted by Joy
When you explain things, you always do it in a Ti way, trying to convey some overall principle concisely rather than just stating it as it is...there's a search for coherence with you.
4w3-5w6-8w7
the only way in which Ti exhibits a preference for specificity is by splitting hairs. In an effort for precision, it will do this to make sure it has captured the most accurate answer. Nonetheless, it always acts out of a desire to tie everything together into an overall system.
4w3-5w6-8w7
Both thinking fuctions seem to be lacking completely in Joy from my perspective.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
which is why a good amount of people think she's ESFjOriginally Posted by FDG
4w3-5w6-8w7
Remember, like I didn't, that this topic is over two years old. Granted, the definition is laughable, but Joy's knowledge of socionics has developed since then.
I don't think this is entirely true, but that could just be because I'm not sure this concept is even related to Ti or Te.Ti sees the forest; they want to build a complete system with as little emphasis on specific data as possible. Te sees the trees as separate but connected things, like links in a chain.
This makes absolutely no sense. "As it is" and "conveying some overall principle concisely" go hand in hand with one another. I see what you're trying to do here; separate Ti (which you've explained quite well) and Te (which is a shitty effort on your behalf; Te is not about stating things "as they are". If anything, stating things "as they are" is a trait related to Ti blocked with Se. SLEs are extremely good at seeing what is). And, don't quote me on this, but I suspect you're basing your interpretation of Te on Ashton, who is evidently not an LIE.When you explain things, you always do it in a Ti way, trying to convey some overall principle concisely rather than just stating it as it is...
Explain. I'm interested to know why you think that, and to hear your argument for it.
What, you and Ashton? Oh, and that piece of shit... what is it called again? Krae?
what I meant by "as it is" is that Te doesn't try to make something out of all the facts like Ti; they just observe them, albeit as connected, but not in some subjective system.Originally Posted by Ezra
If Joy was ENTj, she would be my supervisor. Joy is not my supervisor (if anything, I am hers). Therefore, Joy is not ENTj.
4w3-5w6-8w7
As your "would-be" supervisor, what is Joy not doing that she "should" be doing? And as her supposed supervisor, what are you doing (to her, or in relation to her, etc) that you "should" be doing?
In other words, how are you deciding whether someone "qualifies" as someone else's supervisor?
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
Right, okay. But I thought this was an SLE thing. I might be mistaken; I could be conflating the ESTP of MBTT (who I assume might be good at this) and the SLE.
Bad reasoning. It's logically consistent, but your basis can easily be proven false. What if someone came up with a completely flawless argument for your being a type different to IEI? Would that mean Joy could be LIE? And what about your reasoning vs. hers in terms of who has their type correct?If Joy was ENTj, she would be my supervisor. Joy is not my supervisor (if anything, I am hers). Therefore, Joy is not ENTj.
Let's start here: I can say with 100% certainty that ashton is not my dual. Now, that leaves two options: ENTj and ENFj. I have spoken with him on the phone; he is very uncomfortable in an Fe atmosphere (which was clear because Steve and I had an Fe dynamic going on that he didn't participate in). I have read about the supervisor relationship; this is exactly how I feel when I speak with him. On an abstract level, it is almost like getting approval. In reality, I just see him "keeping me in check." With Joy, I feel the opposite - like I'm supervising her. It became more apparent recently when I corrected a few of her posts and observed how she responded. More so, she does not resemble you - and you are, beyond all doubt, Te-leading - in any way in the context of her posts.Originally Posted by Expat
I was being somewhat flippant, making a simple logical statement because I'm tired of the bullshit. There is no argument for me being anything other than IEI, so that road is a dead-end. Look, she has provided shitty arguments for her type (without arguing)...by saying what she thought Si polr meant, by the inaccurate definitions of Te and Ti.Originally Posted by Ezra
4w3-5w6-8w7
.
what...? the three types people have voted this dude are ESTp, ENFj and ENTj. 3-1=2Originally Posted by Elro
and Diana, who are you?
4w3-5w6-8w7
.
lol, let's not piss on the bush. why did you make that joke?Originally Posted by Diana
4w3-5w6-8w7
.
o lol, okOriginally Posted by Diana
4w3-5w6-8w7
here is an accurate description, by me of course, of Te and Ti
just so we have a foundation...Originally Posted by ME
4w3-5w6-8w7