Some of you know me, some of you don't.
Go wild!
![]()
Some of you know me, some of you don't.
Go wild!
![]()
ESFP 7w6 ESE-Fe
im just pulling that out of my ass
언제나.
Sexy
Narcissistic
Egotistical
Loyal
Intelligent
...oh wait you mean typology?
Cute.
InvisibleJim
Know I'm mistyped?
Why I amnow.
Why I was, once.
DISCLAIMER
The statements expressed in this signature may not necessarily reflect reality.
resolute IxTx
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
hehehe
Edit: I think it would be interesting to get Hemo over here right now and see what she says.
*feels like Howard Stern*
You always seemed like an ISTj to me, personally.
ISTjs are the tough 'military guys' in the Beta quadra, NOT estp. (somebody like that wouldn't be my dual) estps are more of the fantasy 'movie star' action hero that is more idealistic (Ni dual seeking vs. Fe dual seeking)
Being fidgety is related to IJ temperament as well. My INTj dad has the shakes so bad! =/
Also the fact you like passion in other people REALLY points to Fe dual-seeking.
Just curious, why do you think in your head that you are Te valuing and not Ti valuing?
Fidgety is an agreeable approximation. I am Fe PoLR. However, the prioritisation of N over S is based on reactionary S/Id breakthrough.
Because although I'm process inclined and I base my logical/critical judgements on dissonant external evidence as opposed to attempting to tick all the internal head-maths boxes. In addition I am always willing to layout the critical analysis box for review to others (Te parent, not Ti parent).
16 types doesn't understand Ni either. This doesn't surprise me, although, socionists should be more familiar of the consequences of Ego vs Id positions.
Anyway, many people have asked me how I can very quickly gauge if claimed Ni dominants are 'as they say' before they change type many months later.
It's really quite simple.
To earn a place in the Ni dominant seat (which is much more exclusive than suggested by typology forums) one must be constantly seeking highly individualised external environments to the point of madness to the onlooker...
It is the nature of the Ni dominant to seek an 'individual' frontier. To be Ni dominant is to seek rejection of Se. Se is a function driven to relate in the moment to sensory input from individuals around you. Ni is the opposite, it seeks to expel individuals around you to free up mind space.
To locate the Ni dominant look for the individual who is willing to push their friends away for space often for extended periods of time and also to travel totally against societal grain in doing so.
This is true of all Ni dominants. We are incredibly fickle and particular beasts and you can see that it is 'borderline' present in the Ni 2nds, the ENxJs.
What you tend to find is that Ni dominants are both 'early adopters' and 'early leavers' and can also be frictional in doing so. The mindset of Ni is such that it is actively resentful that others have encroached on it's intellectual and psychological head space.
What I tend to find on Typology forums is 'weak Ni counter-rationalisation' from many members of typology boards to label themselves with a more 'favourable' in their view type because they feel organised and thus J and mystical and thus Ni... really, come on.
Until you can clear that from the mind, you might as well look for the simpler factor: Id breakthrough, but this is not 100% in screening due to others being capable of manufacturing the required 'experience' in the correct 'order' to fool the logical classification.
This is a repeat of a post I made on INFJsforum recently.
I doubt it. Considering it simple suggests potential overlooking. "Infinite" particular cases with particular characteristics in an issue which is not falsifiable.
Probably sarcasm in bolded, but sarcasm usually emerges from common/particular ideas with an external or internal emotional attachment, ie, the opposite of being objective. Why "more exclusive than suggested"? it could be or it could not be, but how to measure it?To earn a place in the Ni dominant seat(which is much more exclusive than suggested by typology forums) one must be constantly seeking highly individualised external environments to the point of madness to the onlooker...
The rest is simply the "definition" of being introverted, nothing exclusive of Ni doms. But if you want to consider them the most introverted I have to disagree. Basically because this is a too subjective question for being properly answered, and because my particular subjective impression is the opposite. The most introverted individuals I have observed IRL and forums tend to manifest J behavior and thought patters, which favors LIIs, more if Ti sub.
Completely disagree. This is again a question of introversion and the way you describe it is much more related to being a enneagram 5 than an ILI. That "Se rejection" seems like withdrawn -> E5 (and not only, but probably the most extreme).It is the nature of the Ni dominant to seek an 'individual' frontier. To be Ni dominant is to seek rejection of Se. Se is a function driven to relate in the moment to sensory input from individuals around you. Ni is the opposite, it seeks to expel individuals around you to free up mind space.
To locate the Ni dominant look for the individual who is willing to push their friends away for space often for extended periods of time and also to travel totally against societal grain in doing so.
And anti-Se is Se-PoLR, ie, LII not ILI.
Another behavioral patterns which could have multiple different causes.This is true of all Ni dominants. We are incredibly fickle and particular beasts and you can see that it is 'borderline' present in the Ni 2nds, the ENxJs.
More of the same.What you tend to find is that Ni dominants are both 'early adopters' and 'early leavers' and can also be frictional in doing so. The mindset of Ni is such that it is actively resentful that others have encroached on it's intellectual and psychological head space.
LOL Jim. Everybody wants to be a Ni dom? And everybody except Ni doms try to justify what they "really are not"?? C'mon. In fact there is a lot of self-confirmation bias and argumentation in users who are still more likely Ni doms, and this happens for almost any type, specially if they have "desirable characteristics".What I tend to find on Typology forums is 'weak Ni counter-rationalisation' from many members of typology boards to label themselves with a more 'favourable' in their view type because they feel organised and thus J and mystical and thus Ni... really, come on.
For example, until now I've seen only a collection of supposed Ni properties which are most likely non Ni related (or not directly related). This is the most typical way of self-confirmation bias: "I have this set of characteristics, I am Ni, therefore these are Ni properties...".
I would like to read something more consistent about what Ni is for you.
This sentence stablishes a false correlation. Defining an element as paradoxical does not justify/prove that such element is in fact the "true pardox manager".
About this question, paradoxes, I think the paradoxical skills of Ni are "a bit" overrated, the same way the formal logic skills of Ti are overrated. I mean, those processes due to their nature may very well be the most useful for dealing with such concepts, but there's a trend for stablishing a correlation between that behavior and types which is far from being objective. Like or you are an "Homo Paradoxum" or you aren't an Ni ego; similar to or you are an "Homo Logicus" or you aren't a Ti ego.
There's a full set of gradation in such skill and the external manifestation of it. A non Ti ego could have stronger skill in logic and manifest a stronger "Ti behavior" than a Ti ego, and the same for Ni. The most which could be affirmed is that the average Ti ego > the average non Ti ego, and the same for Ni.
Non Ni egos can't think in paradoxes? Like saying non Ti egos can't solve math problems. This sentence is false. And inmediately some forum users gone mad... I do not say that you've affirmed this, it's only a critique against what seems to be a too strong correlation.
Logic, paradoxes, etc, all of this are concrete manifestations of processes in brain, that amazing dynamic organic machine (and if the brain is dynamic there could not be real static users, only apparent ones). But the difference between individuals is quantitative, not qualitative. It could be bigger or smaller, but manifests as a position in a continuos scale. When it's big it seems "qualitative" but there's not intermediate values that are forbidden.
Probably some users would want to kill me, but regardless what model A says/suggests, a 50% sensor/intuitor or logic/ethic is possible. And this is clear looking at the real brain and understanding functions as the conventions they really are. User X is an intuitor XOR user X is a sensor is a fallacy. The physical frontier between green and blue is arbitrary.
Last edited by ssss; 08-26-2011 at 12:55 PM.
Yes, this is all very well and good, but you are overspecifying most of it to the point that it is no longer safe to the level of accuracy of what you say it does.Originally Posted by InvisibleJim
Also, no, Se-defensive/rejecting and reacting to changes in Se is Se inferior in Jungs books and also position 3 in Model A. Of course this type of behaviour is notable within both aspects of the Super-Ego! It's an excellent point you are making, but I just ain't ILE budd.![]()
To be able to think in paradoxes you must be able to hold opposing ideas in mind and change your axioms depending on what perspective you take. However, you yourself have stated that from your point of view this is not possible:
This does not imply you can change your particular ethical axioms at will, the same way a Ti user cannot change their logic axioms at will.
Oh jesus, please don't take it personally and rant about it. I believe in self-typings thus if your own impression of yourself is coherent with ILI, then ILI will be. But don't rant on me for expressing an opinion which I clearly specified as being unsubstantiated. The nature of Ni has little to do with it, given that I have only read a handful of your posts, thus I don't have much information upon which I could try to base an inference about your usage of such or such function.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Defensive about our opinions aren't we?
Okay let me educate you. There can be several Se Super-id types are inertia-driven with regards to sensate activities. However you will note that they will always be reactionary negative to spontaneous/unexpected sensate changes.
So whiplash is a highly appropriate summary of the situation.
Sorry if I just Ni jizzed on your monitor.