oh my god i keep repeating the same things am I not expressing myself right or is it inevitable that some people will never get it? serious question to anyone.
first, im not concerned with having accuracy in socionics because I don't think it's valid in the first place. so my credibility in typing is not much of a concern to me.
second, I did not make a poll because finding my "true" type was not the purpose of this thread.
ugh, this is the last time I will repeat these points in this thread.
I know it wasn't but people are going to come to all sorts of conclusions, no matter how wrong they are, like expressing Se art artistic freedom of speech aesthetic conclusions.
You have a ridiculous memory!! Haha that's awesome.Originally Posted by Absurd
Yeah, I didn't have as much of a basis on myself before, and I continually learn more about socionics, relate to it more, apply it more in my life, and I feel my typings now are MUCH more accurate than they were in the past. At this point I think ESI makes more sense than my previous IEI typing for Kassie.
On that note, I leave you with smilies, because I know how much you like them Absurd.
To respond to this, and from your previous post, if you truly don't care about your type, but people's impressions of you:
I do think you care a lot about the relationships you have with others. You care about... stuff like people's impressions of you.You also have a great memory, like Absurd, but focus on how people have treated you in the past. Haven't met you in real life, but my impression would be you're the sort of quiet girl, maybe a bit shy, who has values and holds people accountable for their actions. Willing to stick up for what you believe in, and fight someone, if necessary.
Hope that helps.
I do have a damn good memory even though I don't remember my childhood which is weird.
That means you just can't be LSE, or WA will shoot you, stab you, and cut your head off. You know, you ever wanting to be LSE, having Kassie as ESI. Semi-duality. It is settled, decided, and confirmed. Maritsa be blessed.Yeah, I didn't have as much of a basis on myself before, and I continually learn more about socionics, relate to it more, apply it more in my life, and I feel my typings now are MUCH more accurate than they were in the past. At this point I think ESI makes more sense than my previous IEI typing for Kassie.
That's what I meant when blabbing about domino effect. Some person better show up to defend his typing list.
You have to do better than that to piss me off. Anyway, talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand.On that note, I leave you with smilies, because I know how much you like them Absurd.
Uh? You can easily type people you have never met. It's not like the internet is an alternate reality, most people behave just like they do in real life.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Don't count yourself out, I believe you CAN do it, transform your thoughts so we can understand. I thought you wanted my impression of you, because that's what you had asked for. What is it you want?
Many forumites have difficulty following instructions because they misguidedly interject their own issues into discussions or simply because they barely read what it is they're reacting to. So spare yourself the whip, unless you're into that sort of thing.
Having interacted with you quite a bit in chat, Kassie, I don't see any major incongruities in your self-typing of EII. Subjective observations: (1) You come across as introverted--you don't always put yourself out there. This may be why some people impute statements or whatever to you that you never made--they got an impression of something you did not say. (Just a thought.) Possibly IRL this is less likely to happen than online, with body language to go by etc. (2) You seem Fi-ish as opposed to Fe-ish, and much more at ease with people who self-type as Fi-valuing than as Fe-valuing. IRL I often feel judged by Fi-valuers, whatever their intentions (hard for me to grasp), and online I have felt that way a bit with you, quite the same sensation. (3) You seem Ne-ish; the kinds of associations you make, and some of the, um, bright and clever words you use fit with how I experience people whom I've typed as Ne ego IRL.
So ... just stuff like that. As I said, subjective.
I don't like how descriptions and stereotypes of Delta NFs cast them as really ... square or stiff or something. You don't come across like that--you seem pretty hip, actually.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
All I think for sure is you're introverted.
I think Se-valuing > Ne-valuing, but I could be wrong.
My impression is EII. I'll have to disagree with woof on process/result thing as I see process >> result from your posts. As you write you create a narrative that is always rolling forward, not going back. You mention main points towards the end of paragraphs/posts. It is actually reminiscent of how ILEs write (they are the other CD process type). Picking between EII and IEE I'd say you sound like a rational type rather than irrational. Picking between Ne-creative and Se-creative vibe-wise I get this sort of ephemeral translucent feel from what you write that I usually pick up from Ne, like I can just walk through it. With Se-creatives their Se can feel a bit like getting slapped on the face lol totally different vibe.
I type you ExI for three reasons:
1) You come across as an introvert. Which is to say, you very much seem to direct your energy inward.
2) I like you, and I appreciate having you around on the forum. Being a Te type, I'm supposed to appreciate Fi, and so it suits me to think of you as Fi base.
3) You have historically self identified as Fi base. I rarely challenge another person's self typing, especially if I like/respect that person.
Last edited by Timmy; 10-06-2011 at 09:17 AM.
lol, what?
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
EXACTLY. So are you saying absurd isn't LSE then either? Since you are supposedly EII? I do think this kind of misunderstanding, to this degree, may be type-related. I do wonder whether mirror relations can have this kind of misunderstanding, but then again Absurd isn't IEE and you have a mutual misunderstanding with him apparently too.
Also if you dont care about your type, why the "type me" thread? And why the sense of relief when people confirm your EII typing, and the arguments when people dont? If you dont think socionics works, why do you spend so much time here? One reason socionics might not be working for you is if you're mistyped btw. Socionics works fine for me irl, very predictable even when I dont expect it to be or when i doubt my assessments.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Assumptions made:
* that Kassie says Absurd isn't LSE
* that Kassie badly wants to be EII
* that this is a "type me" thread
* that Kassie is relieved at being typed EII by some
* that Kassie doesn't argue with people who type her EII, or that she picks arguments based on the typing received
* that you need to believe in socionics to come here
Neither of which is supported by any evidence whatsoever, nor are they likely a good intuitive insight either, since in some cases there exists evidence to the contrary.
thank you golden, Timmy, siuntal, and everyone else who understood. your feedback was interesting and just what I was looking for. (:
wa, i suggest clearing your mind, maybe some meditation, and then a reread of everything ive said in this thread. its all here. if you're still confused I hear there are supplements that help with mental functioning.
I've picked up on the Fi through my interactions with you, and you are most likely a rational type. So there's IxFj. I think Delta NF works easily enough, but I haven't really considered ISFj (though perhaps I should have at least considered it). I know you said you wanted explanations, but I don't have much. I don't really deliberate typing or try to build up a database of phrasing/behaviour in order to determine valued functions, though this has certainly happened before with people whose type is obvious just from their mannerisms/spheres of thought. But rather than this I usually just take the image of a person I get after interacting with them for a while and find the best fit with the images of ideal types I have created through the studying of the theory. So it is all highly subjectivized according to my own definitions and perceptions of the archetypes.
But yeah, I think INFj is probably the best for you, if not ISFj.
See this is exactly what i'm referring to. You praise people who type you EII and if someone comes along and feels against that typing, you get annoyed. So obviously you do care about your type and you do see some validity in socionics, otherwise you wouldn't be reacting this way. Why the insincerity then?
I know it's not pleasant when someone sees through your facade. Hey, I can't help it.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
I remember there was no misunderstanding before, correct if I'm wrong. Anyhow, don't imply things you don't mean at all and there won't be any misunderstandings. Communication consists of a message, a sender, and a receiver. The sender can imply, but the receiver can only infer.
Welcome 'back.'
I don't see that. I never told you this WA, but in reality I'm blind.
I guess she's blind as well.So obviously you do care about your type and you do see some validity in socionics, otherwise you wouldn't be reacting this way. Why the insincerity then?
She doesn't have such a stare or focused look like Aiss and anndelise told me I have. Better don't try that.I know it's not pleasant when someone sees through your facade. Hey, I can't help it.
Last edited by Absurd; 10-06-2011 at 04:03 PM.
I've changed my hypothesis about your type several times now and I'm still thinking about it...
Once I placed 2 kitties whom I dearly love near each other.
They starting fighting and hissing.
I was sad.
She is wiseWhy I love LSEs:
beyond words
beautiful within
her soul
brighter than
the sun
lovelier than
love
dreams larger
than life
and does not
understand the
meaning of no.
Because everything
through her, and in her, is
"Yes, it will be done."
A couple years ago I was put in charge of decorating the college for Valentine's Day. I made some gorgeous, fancy decorations from construction paper, glue, scissors, and imagination. Then I covered a couple cabinets with them. But my favorite was the diagram of a human heart I put up. So romantic!
No, she's asking people to outline what qualities of hers struck them as as salient and how they arrived at their typings of her, not necessarily what the results of their deliberations happened to be. If your thinking weren't so heavily distorted by some weird personal agenda you might be able to actually read what was rather clearly said.
I don't mean to gang up with you with everyone else, but I really think you are misunderstanding some things in this thread... I'm fairly certain she didn't praise them for confirming her type but because they simply presented their thoughts on what her type was which is what she asked for. She is getting frustrated because with people that seem to be arguing her type rather than stating their thoughts and those who are interpreting this as a type me thread when it isn't. I really don't think she cares about socionics or believes the theory to be true, but maybe has some sort of vague curiousity about it still.
See this is exactly what i'm referring to. You praise people who type you EII and if someone comes along and feels against that typing, you get annoyed. So obviously you do care about your type and you do see some validity in socionics, otherwise you wouldn't be reacting this way. Why the insincerity then?
I know it's not pleasant when someone sees through your facade. Hey, I can't help it.
“No psychologist should pretend to understand what he does not understand... Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand nothing.” -Anton Chekhov
http://kevan.org/johari?name=Bardia0
http://kevan.org/nohari?name=Bardia0
I have always been hesitant to type you as EII because I don't see any post where humanity, love of human kind, deep compassion and caring for something morally outside of your faith concerns you or evokes a strong reaction in you (especially from your judging side); if you do notice consistencies between things, many types with strong and notable access to Ti and Te can do this equally well. Because of that, I've typed you as SLI or SEI.
Don't include or exclude yourself from a quadra because of another person's type. Many factors contribute to relationship dynamics, maturity, age/culture, etc.
I will take this post as an example of your preference for perception rather than Fi type of rationality, which would pretty much try to "teach" or lead others as an example of their concluded rational with regards to lying. Instead, your general comment is "I hope I'm not? I don't try to be." Those are the things for you and not how you would like the rest of the world to reflect in your rationality. A rational type just doesn't do it because they hold themselves to a based and concluded rational/standard. When I read your posts, all I see is someone who perceives their environment and does not make rational judgments to it and holds others to that judgement.
I lean towards you being SEI because in many ways you're like Minde; you estimate the emotional atmosphere and you are restrained in your tone of speech, acting more like a peacekeeper or peacemaker rather than assertively stating your ideas and wanting those ideas to thrive on their own (a role of Ti); there are many conclusions that I've made, as you can see, put those are just some observations.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 10-08-2011 at 08:15 AM.
-
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
Your insistence on the loud expression of moral compassion and caring as a necessary manifestation of Fi is irksome to me.
I noticed that you hardly ever take into account the context of a situation in coming to your wild conclusions. Better a suspension of judgment than a premature and mistaken one. To judge prematurely is not related to type, though it does have a direct relation to the wrongness of ones conclusions.
He who laughs last, thinks slowest.
I don't insist that she does it, but naturally, it's just not there for her. Any expression of a firm feeling judgment might work, but everything is softly delivered with no firm reaction. I also don't type her as EII because she doesn't have any sort of an ideal (Ne/Si related) that she holds on to that she can muster up support for.
Partly because I'm a static type and I don't observe dynamics, especially of actions and partly because even in context one does and says what they are, naturally and if you're a judging type like Fi/Te than you're inclined to state things like "that's good/bad" and I'm inclined to state my feeling judgment indigestion, such as in a feeling reaction way, "I can't believe she's smoking in front of kids [static observation] she's going to kill them [in a very affirmative tone of voice, with assurance that this is wrong because she's going to hurt them];" after which I'll go on about some rant about the inconsiderateness of the person based on my feeling judgments of what a consideration is like, compare this with my boyfriend, "I can't believe she's smoking at 6am." Based on the example, I do Fi because I convey emotions in terms of how I was affected by something (such as "I did not like that"), or my expression of what value/moral right/wrong the woman smoking is doing.
You've judged here. Your judgment is based on a conception that you have built and the concept is, "better a suspension of judgment than a premature and mistaken one." It's sort of a conclusion of how one should act-maybe, am I correct?
What makes it "better, than"? Whatever you conceive works well, correct? Well, that happens to be a matter of judgment.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 10-08-2011 at 03:20 PM.
Dual type
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
The similarity between Minde and kassie is possibly because of the common E-type (I type kassie as a E-9, even though she thinks she's a 4); there are other EIIs who type as 6 and then there's yourself, who is probably either a 1 or a 2. There are differences in how each of these come across, which is dictated by their motivation (basic fear, basic desire, etc). I'm certain this is not Socionics type related. Any type can play peacekeeper, that has little correlation with what sort of information they prefer to process.
True but the similar restrain proceeds over making one's ideals firmly held up takes precedence in their case.
Dual type
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
Hannibal Lecter is a humanist as well.
Where, but similar income ampere, that it deters in their, that is indicated with regard to this ideal, reports that the priority of situation reached regularly.
That's Absurd
In the Wiki http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=EII
Dual type
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
No. Not only is he a humanist, he is also a brilliant psychiatrist, philosopher, doctor, connoisseur of music and last but not least, a cook.
I think Ashton, in fact, has him under EII.
I gently took out a spider from the bathroom; it was an unusually big spider; my boyfriends said to me, "thank you for being humane about it." I really don't think EII have the capacity to kill.
Dual type
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
As for my typing of you, I'm currently seeing you as a gamma SF too, and ESI seems believable. I know I had written ESE to you in the letter, but I often have problems deciding which type of S/F is which. (Darn it, I'm out of time, I have to go to work or I'd say more.) You could be SEE too.
But yeah, when I type people, I strongly consider all of their intertype relations. That means if I change my mind about one person's type, then I have to reconsider a dozen other people's types as well, and possibly change a few if necessary. So it strongly influences my typing if you get along well with particular people, or don't get along well with other particular people.
I'm sure the spider is very thankful as well. In spider world it is kill or be killed, so EII values do clash with spider values, I'm afraid. Anyhow, this thread is about Kassie, exclusively, but what are your thoughts on humane killing?
Thank god you typed me LSE.
Which is why, he must be EII.
She is wiseWhy I love LSEs:
beyond words
beautiful within
her soul
brighter than
the sun
lovelier than
love
dreams larger
than life
and does not
understand the
meaning of no.
Because everything
through her, and in her, is
A couple years ago I was put in charge of decorating the college for Valentine's Day. I made some gorgeous, fancy decorations from construction paper, glue, scissors, and imagination. Then I covered a couple cabinets with them. But my favorite was the diagram of a human heart I put up. So romantic!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
