Quote Originally Posted by implied
Quote Originally Posted by Rick
Quote Originally Posted by implied
http://www.socionika.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=201

not a bad topic on her. i'm surprised at the discrepancy of opinions here.
Those folks favor the "crystal ball" VI approach, rather than simply studying people directly. I think we are more advanced here then they are, actually.
i tend to agree that they do a sort of "crystal ball" approach and v.i. is hardly an exact science (btw, i do like that you reference videos for this.) i just find it sort of intriguing that one board would say ENTj/INTp while another board may say ISFp. i could easily buy her as ESFp. i don't see much , either. i do, however, find it telling that no one really wanted to peg her as a type. i think gamma works well.
That thread was funny. They were looking only at intuitive types (bizarre, huh??), and Lytov pops in and says that she is known in Hollywood for being sexually uninhibited, and they argued back, "you mean ILIs and LIEs can't be uninhibited??"

Here's a somewhat more respectable forum (in Russian) where she is typed primarily as SEE, with a few saying SEI and one dude from the Vilnius school popping in with LIE again. Lytov seems undecided as to SEE vs. IEE.
http://www.socioforum.ru/topic554.html

So I think the Vilnius boys are smoking something.