Dichotomies: Extraversion and Introversion

[EyeSeeCold]

It's not spam, you are recreating MBTI for real. I was saying something technically correct.

It is spam. If you took a hard look at my last post you would see I was not doing anything of the sort. There's nothing MBTI about grouping types based on one of their functions in the ego. It was a purely aesthetic rearrangement, and I did nothing to affect the system/functions/meaning/interpretations of the types.

The fact that you didn't catch it, or didn't attempt coherency is why it's spam. You formed an opinion based on a strawman of my position, posted it, and didn't give a damn about anything else.

ahahahaha, PoLR as fuck

It has nothing to do with Se, nor PoLR. It's about you guys acting like you've lost your damn mind every time activity starts to get a little concentrated. It's getting damn old.

[EyeSeeCold]

It is spam. If you took a hard look at my last post you would see I was not doing anything of the sort. There's nothing MBTI about grouping types based on one of their functions in the ego. It was a purely aesthetic rearrangement, and I did nothing to affect the system/functions/meaning/interpretations of the types.

The fact that you didn't catch it, or didn't attempt coherency is why it's spam. You formed an opinion based on a strawman of my position, posted it, and didn't give a damn about anything else.

Same goes for the rest of you, including late joiners and especially you Aiss.

[MisterNi]

Same goes for the rest of you, including late joiners and especially you Aiss.

lol

[EyeSeeCold]

It sucks that that had to happen, I now realize what I was trying to convey could have been explained using the examples of the Erotic Attitudes.

Erotic Attitudes are groups due to the Ego's Irrational function. What I was talking about was groups due to Ego's Dynamic or Static function. They both are purely aesthetic groupings.


You guys were completely off, but I understand the knee jerk reaction to something that's MBTI-esque.


Here's that section redone if anyone wants to take it up again:
What if Society was grouped as Dynamic Je(Pi) Egos and Static Pe(Ji) Egos? It would be an interesting perspective, and I think the divide is highly underestimated in terms of behavior manifestation.

[Aiss]

It is spam. If you took a hard look at my last post you would see I was not doing anything of the sort. There's nothing MBTI about grouping types based on one of their functions in the ego. It was a purely aesthetic rearrangement, and I did nothing to affect the system/functions/meaning/interpretations of the types.

The fact that you didn't catch it, or didn't attempt coherency is why it's spam. You formed an opinion based on a strawman of my position, posted it, and didn't give a damn about anything else.


It has nothing to do with Se, nor PoLR. It's about you guys acting like you've lost your damn mind every time activity starts to get a little concentrated. It's getting damn old.

It's more about you acting like you lost your damn mind every time you've got a new pet theory.

It's NOT about the mere arrangement, or any other coincidence, which you'd have realized long ago if you actually listened to what I've been telling you.

This:

Dynamics have Je, or an outward flow of Rationality; Statics have Pe, or an outward flow of Irrationality. The outward flow of energy is something that can be said to be an objective source of information about a person and if focus is turned to that, in a way, couldn't it be said that: Dynamic types are society's Rationals and Static types are society's Irrationals?

is EXACTLY where P/J stuff originated. EXACTLY the same reasoning. EXACTLY what MBTI got wrong. It didn't accidentally end up in the same arrangement having nothing to do with the system, it's the same rationale behind it. You just reinvented it.

And it does affect interpretation of the types insofar that it ascribes external traits that originate purely from this hypotheses but find no confirmation whatsoever in reality.

[EyeSeeCold]

It's more about you acting like you lost your damn mind every time you've got a new pet theory.

It's NOT about the mere arrangement, or any other coincidence, which you'd have realized long ago if you actually listened to what I've been telling you.

This:



is EXACTLY where P/J stuff originated. EXACTLY the same reasoning. EXACTLY what MBTI got wrong. It didn't accidentally end up in the same arrangement having nothing to do with the system, it's the same rationale behind it. You just reinvented it.

And it does affect interpretation of the types insofar that it ascribes external traits that originate purely from this hypotheses but find no confirmation whatsoever in reality.

Tell me, Aiss, what does MBTT have to do with this:

"Hey, what if I grouped all the Je egos in one group and all the Pe egos in another".

How in any way, shape or form does that aesthetic grouping have to do with actually tampering with the system of Rationality/Irrationality by proclaiming Je=J, Pe = P?

It is the same grouping as Static/Dynamic. Cool your jets and you will see as such.

[EyeSeeCold]

Look, put bluntly I was saying:
Dynamics are Profiteor and Emoveo Ego types
Statics are Intueor and Factor Ego types

Not dismissing anything, but looking at it in one way.

That's it, all, and nothing more. Anything else is quite absurd.

[EyeSeeCold]

If you can't face intellectual criticism of your ideas (regardless of whether you think that criticism is well-founded or not), then you simply shouldn't post. Nobody's being overly rough with you here.

Hiding an opportunistic lust for bashing others under the guise of intellectual criticism is pathetic. Aiss is the only one here who genuinely took me on, and even then, cognitive perception biases led her to inaccurate assumptions.