for those who type me

[Absurd]

Which is why, he must be EII.

You mean she.

[InkStrider]

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.

One can have firm feeling judgment yet refrain from expressing it, due to not wanting to hurt another with such subjective sentiments.

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.

Are you sure having ideals are type-related? And how are you to know that kassie doesn't have any?

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.

Why not interpret this as simply you being you, instead of marking it as typical Fi behaviour?

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?

No, that's a rule of thumb rather a judgment. When I speak of the suspension of judgment, it has to do with collecting sufficient observations before coming to a conclusion, instead of rushing to make one whether in rash enthusiasm or out of prejudice.

True but the similar restrain proceeds over making one's ideals firmly held up takes precedence in their case.

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.

What does this interaction mean in simple language?

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.

I know an EII who killed ants because it went to his cereal.

[Beautiful sky]

One can have firm feeling judgment yet refrain from expressing it, due to not wanting to hurt another with such subjective sentiments.

Can you be Te and do Te without hurting others? Isn't that like denying yourself being utterly unlike who you are? I don't think this is a healthy and normal way to be, honestly. I have again made my point by saying that neither in a natural state or refrained state is she Fi base type.

Are you sure having ideals are type-related? And how are you to know that kassie doesn't have any?

I'm sure she has ideals and having them is not type related, but what is is the expression of those ideals.

Why not interpret this as simply you being you, instead of marking it as typical Fi behaviour?

If only it were that simple. I promise to point out more examples when I find them of Fi base behavior so that you can see the trend and how that fits with that typing.

No, that's a rule of thumb rather a judgment. When I speak of the suspension of judgment, it has to do with collecting sufficient observations before coming to a conclusion, instead of rushing to make one whether in rash enthusiasm or out of prejudice.

Rules of thumb are made from what and where? And, applied to what and where? To arrive at what? Your rule of thumb arose out of something that you use to apply and follow something else, hence sticking to your structure, model, method...judgment. By all means, continue collecting your observations. I arrive to the answer faster. I have developed my own methods too.

What does this interaction mean in simple language?

That isn't my writing, again.

I know an EII who killed ants because it went to his cereal.

Maybe. I would try to divert the ants and make a way for them to walk the other direction, as humanly possible. There are exceptions, true, but if an EII has a feeling guilt conscience, such actions weigh heavily on one's heart and don't pass without a significant amount of reflection, though trivial it might be. We care, simply as that. We try to live responsibly, whenever and however possible. - This is perhaps my own ideal of myself, one which I strive to realize within me and without (outside of myself, in my environment), whatever the case might be, you'll know that because it's a preformed judgment, I hold others and their actions, behaviors, to my ideal or conception.

[golden]

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.

Or maybe she has the wisdom and maturity to know that running around trumpeting one's compassion can make a person look like a total phony, especially on the Internet, and that making a big show of being "helpful" all the time often masks things like desperate approval-seeking, control freakishness, smug holier-than-thou-ness, and the spurning of rational thought in favor of indulging personal whims.

You really ought to stop using yourself as a benchmark for INFj and consider whether the other self-typed INFjs are the ones who better represent the type.

[InkStrider]

Can you be Te and do Te without hurting others? Isn't that like denying yourself being utterly unlike who you are? I don't think this is a healthy and normal way to be, honestly.

Fair enough.

I have again made my point by saying that neither in a natural state or refrained state is she Fi base type.

I differ. In any case, you need to be close to a person in order for the function to be noticeable.

I'm sure she has ideals and having them is not type related, but what is the expression of those ideals.

Still not type related IMO. But you should expand what you mean by the expression of these ideals and how they relate to being EII.

If only it were that simple. I promise to point out more examples when I find them of Fi base behavior so that you can see the trend and how that fits with that typing.

Okay.

Rules of thumb are made from what and where? And, applied to what and where? To arrive at what? Your rule of thumb arose out of something that you use to apply and follow something else, hence sticking to your structure, model, method...judgment. By all means, continue collecting your observations. I arrive to the answer faster. I have developed my own methods too.

Assuming these methods work. I'm saying that for a method to be sound you need to have sufficient amount of observations to back it up.

That isn't my writing, again.

I don't comprehend it. But you seemed to have. Which was why I asked.

Maybe. I would try to divert the ants and make a way for them to walk the other direction, as humanly possible. There are exceptions, true, but if an EII has a feeling guilt conscience, such actions weigh heavily on one's heart and don't pass without a significant amount of reflection, though trivial it might be. We care, simply as that. We try to live responsibly, whenever and however possible.

What you're seeing in yourself as EII, I think could be interpreted as simply being a good human and not necessarily related to type.

[Beautiful sky]

Assuming these methods work. I'm saying that for a method to be sound you need to have sufficient amount of observations to back it up.

I have sufficient amount of evidence to back my claims. I've done this for a very very long time and I'm very good at it. I sense some relational dynamics that I won't go into, but I don't have to say to you "trust me." You can do that over time.

I differ. In any case, you need to be close to a person in order for the function to be noticeable.

No you do not. All you have to do is read their post and watch their reaction to stimulus -response. Our base functions are like Pavlov's dogs, give a certain situation/phrase/etc...and see/read/hear the response, because it will be out of one's base functions if you use base function related information.

[ashlesha]

thanks nicole and maritsa.

just want to say some stuff that's on my mind.

part of the reason i made this thread is because i think when people type its based wayy much more on personal feelings then they really admit to themselves and others. and maybe i underestimate people (this comes with a huge BUT because i think i'm right). maybe people at least give thought to keeping their biases in check more than i tend to be willing to give them credit for. if my base function is Fi i think this makes sense as a matter of seeing everything through the lens of the base function even if it doesn't exactly fit.

anyway people are so often inconsistent or notice something in one person while disregarding it in another person who is a more or less favorable intertype to them and i don't know how so many of you can just go along acting like none of this exists or like there aren't subjective feelings involved or whatever. or maybe people do notice and it doesn't really get said, like one of those unspoken things because it is kind of awkward and there is some vulnerability involved in voicing something like this. and i can see people interpreting this like mountain dew did, like omg she cares so much about peoples impressions of her. and i do care about SOME peoples impressions of me but its more than that, its also a matter of who can i put more or less trust in and how much i think people are checking their own biases, etc.

i think maritsa serves a certain purpose with this forum as being a reflection of the things everybody does and she does it in a more obvious way and people can project and use her as a common enemy that holds their sins for them. typing men she likes as lse, cherry picking evidence, acting like she has the truth, etc. using subjective criteria and noticing what you happen to notice are inevitable in typing and people act like maritsa is criminal because she does these things more obviously than everybody else. but she's just a giant mirror reflecting the forum back at everyone. most people here aren't really "better" than her, honestly.

[Beautiful sky]

thanks nicole and maritsa.

just want to say some stuff that's on my mind.

part of the reason i made this thread is because i think when people type its based wayy much more on personal feelings then they really admit to themselves and others. and maybe i underestimate people (this comes with a huge BUT because i think i'm right). maybe people at least give thought to keeping their biases in check more than i tend to be willing to give them credit for. if my base function is Fi i think this makes sense as a matter of seeing everything through the lens of the base function even if it doesn't exactly fit.

anyway people are so often inconsistent or notice something in one person while disregarding it in another person who is a more or less favorable intertype to them and i don't know how so many of you can just go along acting like none of this exists or like there aren't subjective feelings involved or whatever. or maybe people do notice and it doesn't really get said, like one of those unspoken things because it is kind of awkward and there is some vulnerability involved in voicing something like this. and i can see people interpreting this like mountain dew did, like omg she cares so much about peoples impressions of her. and i do care about SOME peoples impressions of me but its more than that, its also a matter of who can i put more or less trust in and how much i think people are checking their own biases, etc.

I understand Kassie, but I don't want you to feel like I'm singling you out in any way just because I don't type you as EII. I'm reading what you're writing very very carefully. Many types can understand people, Tis can analyze and then make conclusive categories; Te types can observe dynamically, the actions and other nuances of individuals. Do you see how that works?

i think maritsa serves a certain purpose with this forum as being a reflection of the things everybody does and she does it in a more obvious way and people can project and use her as a common enemy that holds their sins for them. typing men she likes as lse, cherry picking evidence, acting like she has the truth, etc. using subjective criteria and noticing what you happen to notice are inevitable in typing and people act like maritsa is criminal because she does these things more obviously than everybody else. but she's just a giant mirror reflecting the forum back at everyone. most people here aren't really "better" than her, honestly.

I don't cherry pick evidence or act like I have "the truth"; I present the evidence, plain and simple.

That's not why people dislike me. You're not correct in you estimation of people in this case and I'm afraid is very narrow and limited scope in it's observation and estimation with very little attention to . These are the following reasons why people dislike me and myred more...

1. I'm too forward with my opinions and some people don't like me being too sure without proper credentials because some people value emperical evidence above all things. My word without a degree of any sort doesn't matter much to them.

2. Some people don't trust what others say just because they are well read or just because they say it, simply as that.

3. Some people need to see for themselves.

4. Some people need to see with others they trust.

5. Some people are trust their own insight and instinct.

6. Some people want to see all possibilities and keep all of them open at all times..

7. Some people React out of shear reaction/instinct.

8. Some people analyze.

9. Some people go by what they feel who they feel for.

and on.

[Radio]

Maybe. I would try to divert the ants and make a way for them to walk the other direction, as humanly possible.

Ants aren't human, lol. Killing/deflecting ants to protect your food is a human instinct.

[ashlesha]

lol

[InkStrider]

Or maybe she has the wisdom and maturity to know that running around trumpeting one's compassion can make a person look like a total phony, especially on the Internet, and that making a big show of being "helpful" all the time often masks things like desperate approval-seeking, control freakishness, smug holier-than-thou-ness, and the spurning of rational thought in favor of indulging personal whims.

Bingo.

Maritsa, it is precisely this that you are seeing in Minde and kassie, rather than of being SEI. I think the problem is that you base your interpretation solely on socionics and ignore other non-socionics factors.

I have sufficient amount of evidence to back my claims. I've done this for a very very long time and I'm very good at it. I sense some relational dynamics that I won't go into, but I don't have to say to you "trust me." You can do that over time.

Spending years in delusion may succeed in making one very good at being deluded, and in seeing imaginary relationship dynamics. Not saying that you are, but you get the idea.

No you do not. All you have to do is read their post and watch their reaction to stimulus -response. Our base functions are like Pavlov's dogs, give a certain situation/phrase/etc...and see/read/hear the response, because it will be out of one's base functions if you use base function related information.

This is but subjectivity masked in objectivity.

i think maritsa serves a certain purpose with this forum as being a reflection of the things everybody does and she does it in a more obvious way and people can project and use her as a common enemy that holds their sins for them. typing men she likes as lse, cherry picking evidence, acting like she has the truth, etc. using subjective criteria and noticing what you happen to notice are inevitable in typing and people act like maritsa is criminal because she does these things more obviously than everybody else. but she's just a giant mirror reflecting the forum back at everyone.

Excellent. They say that whenever we dislike another, look into ourselves, because the trait that we dislike in another is that which we dislike in ourselves. Likewise for feelings of like. Being harsh towards another is a reflection of equal harshness towards our own selves. Which is why forgiveness brings such relief. We no longer hold others, and hence ourselves to impossible/over-idealistic criteria.

[Absurd]

Hesitating again I see. Anyway, from what I've seen of you some time ago during those sessions and what do I see now is something slightly different. You said it yourself you're not the same person you were yesterday or a second ago.

Domino.

As for Maritsa, hell, she's illogical.

[Erk]

I have not witnessed anything to make me question delta NF, you seem easy enough to get along with.

[InkStrider]

.

[Reuben]

and i do care about SOME peoples impressions of me but its more than that, its also a matter of who can i put more or less trust in

Am I one of them?

[ashlesha]

thank you erk.

oh, Reuben. how can I answer tactfully? no.

[Beautiful sky]

Spending years in delusion may succeed in making one very good at being deluded, and in seeing imaginary relationship dynamics. Not saying that you are, but you get the idea.

What are you talking about? I think you're crossing a line with me and if you're implying that I'm delusional then you're being unrealistic about your assumption that both of those individuals are EII. If this continues with me, you're not going to speak to me any more.

[InkStrider]

What are you talking about? I think you're crossing a line with me and if you're implying that I'm delusional then you're being unrealistic about your assumption that both of those individuals are EII. If this continues with me, you're not going to speak to me any more.

Hey. Relax. That's not what I meant. Check the context. I'd just been pointing out a fallacy in your thinking. The amount of time spent immersed in something does not automatically mean quality of output. Both input quality and process quality play a role in ensuring output quality.

[Absurd]

Hey. Relax. That's not what I meant. Check the context. I'd just been pointing out a fallacy in your thinking. The amount of time spent immersed in something does not automatically mean quality of output. Both input quality and process quality play a role in ensuring output quality.

Fallacies, fallacies, ehh.

Seeing you touch upon fallacies know that amount of time equals quantity and accumulated changes in the quantity of something can reach a threshold after which additional accumulation results in a dramatic change in quality.

Cognitive Styles, anyone?

Don't be so lenient. Maritsa will forgive you.

[Beautiful sky]

Hey. Relax. That's not what I meant. Check the context. I'd just been pointing out a fallacy in your thinking. The amount of time spent immersed in something does not automatically mean quality of output. Both input quality and process quality play a role in ensuring output quality.

And that was an Fi reaction, you can use that to pick out the Fi types.

As for quality of output, I'm giving you every bit of information to put the puzzle pieces together included in all of my posts, which you can do for yourself without this thing you keep bringing up about me typing based on "interpretation solely on socionics and ignore other non-socionics factors." Non socionics factors are irrelevant to what the type will do, how they will react to certain information. For example an irrational type SEE, like Ryene Astraelis, will state that they are a type only to conjure support of that type making general statements like, "obviously I'm Ne>Se" without a clear and rational example and explanation of how they arrived at that and why they are like that; that is done to only conjure up support of their self typing, however given a situation where someone, like myself, doesn't support them because I look at what she writes and realize that she has strong will power and refutes EII descriptions where weak will does not apply to her, sets off some interesting alarms; strong will, not being a doormat, is associated with Se ego types and which she indicate about herself; she will hence try to incorporate herself as an EII, influence the scene -power dynamics, to make it look like they are a "special" EII with strong will (how is that even possible of a type that clearly, very very clearly in every single Socionics reference states that EII is of low will due to incapability of receiving information from the outside world through Se function yet realizing and knowing what's going on with that function and not doing things about it) call themselves a "special" EII. Absurd. Absolutely ridiculous and manipulative. It's like saying, "I really want to be this special thing called an EII even though I don't fit that description." That very manipulation of the scene of “me being a strong willed EII” is what Se types do. Read about it in the Wiki description of what Se mind is tailored to do in any scene.

Wiki: SEE

" An SEE knows exactly which relations he has influence over at the moment, and exactly how much influence he has (i.e. how far can he "push"). If an SEE wants someone that he does not "have", he can spend lots of time thinking about how to get it. The SEE finds it hard to be content with what he has."

[InkStrider]

And that was an Fi reaction, you can use that to pick out the Fi types.

Are you saying that you did that deliberately to me? It wasn't funny.

As for quality of output, I'm giving you every bit of information to put the puzzle pieces together included in all of my posts, which you can do for yourself without this thing you keep bringing up about me typing based on "interpretation solely on socionics and ignore other non-socionics factors." Non socionics factors are irrelevant to what the type will do, how they will react to certain information. For example an irrational type SEE, like Ryene Astraelis, will state that they are a type only to conjure support of that type making general statements like, "obviously I'm Ne>Se" without a clear and rational example and explanation of how they arrived at that and why they are like that; that is done to only conjure up support of their self typing, however given a situation where someone, like myself, doesn't support them because I look at what she writes and realize that she has strong will power and refutes EII descriptions where weak will does not apply to her, sets off some interesting alarms; strong will, not being a doormat, is associated with Se ego types and which she indicate about herself; she will hence try to incorporate herself as an EII, influence the scene -power dynamics, to make it look like they are a "special" EII with strong will (how is that even possible of a type that clearly, very very clearly in every single Socionics reference states that EII is of low will due to incapability of receiving information from the outside world through Se function yet realizing and knowing what's going on with that function and not doing things about it) call themselves a "special" EII. Absurd. Absolutely ridiculous and manipulative. It's like saying, "I really want to be this special thing called an EII even though I don't fit that description." That very manipulation of the scene of “me being a strong willed EII” is what Se types do. Read about it in the Wiki description of what Se mind is tailored to do in any scene.

I couldn't care less what you type everyone in the forum. You are entitled to your opinion, and so does everybody else. What I am interested in is the criteria behind your typings, and the assumptions that you make which affect your typing opinion.

[Absurd]

No seriously, a mod needs to do something with this utter mess.

Anyway, you've got yourself a typing thread you wanted InkStrider

[InkStrider]

No seriously, a mod needs to do something with this utter mess.

Anyway, you've got yourself a typing thread you wanted InkStrider

You're mistaken. A typing thread was not what I wanted, but what you wanted for your own unknown purposes.

I'm out. (My apologies kassie for the derail.)

[Beautiful sky]

Are you saying that you did that deliberately to me? It wasn't funny.

No, I did not, but I noticed my own reaction so you should use it as a good example.

[Absurd]

You're mistaken. A typing thread was not what I wanted, but what you wanted for your own unknown purposes.

Never wanted you to make a thread about your own self-typing, so you're mistaken in great many ways. You said you're going to make it just for me to roam and tear living flesh. No need to get so defensive about it. Kumbaya.

I'm out. (My apologies kassie for the derail.)

Haha!

[Cuddly McFluffles]

And that was an Fi reaction, you can use that to pick out the Fi types.As for quality of output, I'm giving you every bit of information to put the puzzle pieces together included in all of my posts, which you can do for yourself without this thing you keep bringing up about me typing based on "interpretation solely on socionics and ignore other non-socionics factors." Non socionics factors are irrelevant to what the type will do, how they will react to certain information. For example an irrational type SEE, like Ryene Astraelis, will state that they are a type only to conjure support of that type making general statements like, "obviously I'm Ne>Se" without a clear and rational example and explanation of how they arrived at that and why they are like that; that is done to only conjure up support of their self typing, however given a situation where someone, like myself, doesn't support them because I look at what she writes and realize that she has strong will power and refutes EII descriptions where weak will does not apply to her, sets off some interesting alarms; strong will, not being a doormat, is associated with Se ego types and which she indicate about herself; she will hence try to incorporate herself as an EII, influence the scene -power dynamics, to make it look like they are a "special" EII with strong will (how is that even possible of a type that clearly, very very clearly in every single Socionics reference states that EII is of low will due to incapability of receiving information from the outside world through Se function yet realizing and knowing what's going on with that function and not doing things about it) call themselves a "special" EII. Absurd. Absolutely ridiculous and manipulative. It's like saying, "I really want to be this special thing called an EII even though I don't fit that description." That very manipulation of the scene of “me being a strong willed EII” is what Se types do. Read about it in the Wiki description of what Se mind is tailored to do in any scene.Wiki: SEE" An SEE knows exactly which relations he has influence over at the moment, and exactly how much influence he has (i.e. how far can he "push"). If an SEE wants someone that he does not "have", he can spend lots of time thinking about how to get it. The SEE finds it hard to be content with what he has."

I would be more than happy to explain my "Ne > Se" comment if asked; that thread wasn't the place for it.

[Beautiful sky]

Ok, I would love that.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

Done.

[Creepy-Snaps]

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.

Thank you for clearing this up.

anyway people are so often inconsistent or notice something in one person while disregarding it in another person who is a more or less favorable intertype to them and i don't know how so many of you can just go along acting like none of this exists or like there aren't subjective feelings involved or whatever. or maybe people do notice and it doesn't really get said, like one of those unspoken things because it is kind of awkward and there is some vulnerability involved in voicing something like this. and i can see people interpreting this like mountain dew did, like omg she cares so much about peoples impressions of her. and i do care about SOME peoples impressions of me but its more than that, its also a matter of who can i put more or less trust in and how much i think people are checking their own biases, etc.

Thank you again for trying to explain this. I still have to get my 2cents in and say your whole post reaks of Fi and Se imho. That, and the fact you responded so positively towards Te ego people in this thread, does make me strongly believe you're ESI.

I do think typing based on subjective feeling, distance, can be useful... and I looked at some of the Te-ego posts, the people who objectively stated what they thought, as being somewhat USELESS... but you said that's exactly what you were looking for!

thank you golden, Timmy, siuntal, and everyone else who understood. your feedback was interesting and just what I was looking for. (:

Nil, Nicole as well. What I thought wasn't as important, some of the Te-ego posts, you seemed to find the most helpful.

That, and the fact that Bardia understands you perfectly, also points strongly to ESI.

Now, kassie, all that being said, I understand typing yourself isn't as important to you, as it is for some of us. Making a game out of it. I understand you want to know who you can trust. I'd just like to say you can trust me. I do believe we're cross-quadra, but I get along with woof just fine, also as a fellow SF. I understand I also couldn't provide or state objectively, what you were looking for, but I'd just like to point out that I tried.

I think your type is figured out now, so I'll end by saying good luck figuring out who you can trust.

[ashlesha]

lol, I made a point to thank everyone who responded so if extra was given to the Te egos it was accidental. I think this is an example of that selective attention

your input was as interesting as everyone elses ftr. I didn't think you missed the mark. my frustration wasn't aimed at you.

[Reuben]

oh, Reuben. how can I answer tactfully? no.

Always a sweetheart aren't you.

[Beautiful sky]

i think i do act differently from when i first got here and that's frustrating.

I do act -object in motion (dynamics)

a person's subjective feeling sentence would be what I would say is "I feel differently today. I feel frustrated and angry."

that's frustrating - "that's" is in relation to the object and "frustrating" is ethics, extraverted feeling judgement and introverted feeling judgment would be "I feel frustrated because it's making me feel frustrated."

because its not like there's some kind of traceable thing where i could point to one post i've written and say "this is a perfect representation of me entire and whole, caught in time." and i also feel like its unfair for that sort of thing to be expected.

because you see things in dynamics, it may be difficult for you to do just that, find something in statics and have it represent you.

am i being insincere, have i ever been insincere? i've never FELT that way even if i can look at my posts and see they are different.

More dynamics;

and so, like, absurd making a point to say i'm a liar or something its like...i dont know. i hope i'm not? i don't try to be, lol.

the best way for me to reconcile it is to think about how who you are at any given second of time is who you are, if that makes sense. i'm not the person i was yesterday and tomorrow i'll be different. if i try to think of it otherwise it drives me nuts trying to pin down some kind of forever and ever and filling all empty spaces identity that just plain does not exist.

more dynamics
Dynamic types
Perceive events in a continuous sequence – continuous changes rather than discrete states.

i've gotten really skeptical/jaded about socionics and how it merges with the forum and becomes politics and i am more easily able to express when i'm fed up or dislike someone because of the familiarity i've grown to have with this place. those are a couple of things that have changed.

More dynamic observations - describing things that have changed.

Everything you say is delivered softly, with passiveness and nothing affirmative, fighting back with
There are hints of negativist tendencies in what you write about giving up.

Fe - recognizing your own mood and conveying your own states (a state is being "really skeptical/jaded"

[Reuben]

I do act -object in motion (dynamics)

a person's subjective feeling sentence would be what I would say is "I feel differently today. I feel frustrated and angry."

that's frustrating - "that's" is in relation to the object and "frustrating" is ethics, extraverted feeling judgement and introverted feeling judgment would be "I feel frustrated because it's making me feel frustrated."

That's like looking at a penis an analyzing the skin cells.

[Beautiful sky]

Or maybe she has the wisdom and maturity to know that running around trumpeting one's compassion can make a person look like a total phony, especially on the Internet, and that making a big show of being "helpful" all the time often masks things like desperate approval-seeking, control freakishness, smug holier-than-thou-ness, and the spurning of rational thought in favor of indulging personal whims.

You really ought to stop using yourself as a benchmark for INFj and consider whether the other self-typed INFjs are the ones who better represent the type.

But, those are the very things that EII are often accused of looking like especially by the types less so inclined. That's what the Wiki description of the EII says, because we look that way. It's just a matter of reality.