What's her type? I love her!:
Seems EP to me
What's her type? I love her!
Seems EP to me
Patricia Bright - ESFP(?)
LSE, her whole channel is aparadise.
She's what I wished I could be like on an operational sense. Mad respect and a bit of envy.
There is something strange about her. I can't believe I'm watching this. Something about cell phone and hand bag and purse and ....Originally Posted by Playing With Fire
[video=youtube;sphQXLiME38]
LSE, her whole channel is a
She's what I wished I could be like on an operational sense. Mad respect and a bit of envy.
Lots of super ego. I'm kindof seeing EIE too...
But LSE could be right.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
When she first appeared on screen and I took in her appareance and she opened her mouth and started talking...I had this kneejerk ESE/SEI impression becaue she gave me mad Stepford Wives vibes.There is something strange about her. I can't believe I'm watching this. Something about cell phone and hand bag and purse and ....
Lots of super ego. I'm kindof seeing EIE too...
But LSE could be right.
But quickly it became clear that while she's warm and even affectionate when reffering to her audience, she's all about chop-chop.
I just can't see how she could possibly share a type, or even Quadra with Onision. Yeah she seems to be a sane decent human being, is older and a mother but even taken those diferences in consideration...
But all this tutorial gurus talk is making pay attention for the first time to the possibility that the ones we enjoy watching have a very direct link to our preffered IMs.
No she is not warmWhen she first appeared on screen and I took in her appareance and she opened her mouth and started talking...I had this kneejerk ESE/SEI impression becaue she gave me mad Stepford Wives vibes.
But quickly it became clear that while she's warm and even affectionate when reffering to her audience, she's all about chop-chop
I just can't see how she could possibly share a type, or even Quadra with Onision. Yeah she seems to be a sane decent human being, is older and a mother but even taken those diferences in consideration...
But all this tutorial gurus talk is making pay attention for the first time to the possibility that the ones we enjoy watching have a very direct link to our preffered IMs.
She makes me really suspicious. Something is not right. She is acting too much. Being too perfect. I'd like to see a normal interview with her or something where she is not talking directly to the camera.
There isin her. But what does that mean for her type?
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
NikkieTutorials might be ESE. SO/SX seems about right.
I dunno, I like her. She seems like shes trying hard but in a genuine way
at first the cosmetics and work done made me a little suspicious but it dissipated fast
So, if we look at it this way: Is
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
This really has nothing to do withSo, if we look at it this way: Is
) and interpersonal etiquette/presentation (
). "Dress for success" is very anti-
This really has nothing to do with
You're telling me LIEs don't dress for success now? Please.
Ok, I watched a little more and Gamma SF is possible (again, LIEs may *value* dressing for success but are less likely to be competent in the area of managing physical appearance due to weak sensing and ethics). I don't really feel like pursuing this typing further though.
...
You're telling me LIEs don't dress for success now? Please.
Superficially looks IEE. Lots of NeFe, ESE is also possible.
@Playing With Fire @Bertrand
I think she is LIE
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
yeah, that could be it, might explain why you're picking up bad vibes and me not so much
@Tallmo
I love how you say it like it's a fact she's not warm. It's not, it's your perception of her so at most an opinion.
I see absolutely nothing fake or put upon, but clearly she makes you feel some type of way which is fine, we all react to people differently.
Ain't no way our lady is LIE, just no freaking way. There's zero, nada in form of
You can't stand her 'cuz she's your Supervisor, so you're projecting all this things on her.
For comparison sake:
This is a LIE Youtuber:
Last edited by PrettySavage; 04-24-2018 at 04:56 PM.
I see her as kindof fake. But that's not related to my typing of her. I know several LIE/LSE who are very natural and not fake at all.
Supervision can only be experienced face to face. I don't have anything against LSEs. Let's not get carried away.You can't stand her 'cuz she's your Supervisor, so you're projecting all this things on her.
Either way, the reason I am negative against her is probably because of Fe Role.
Maybe she is LSE? I dont' see it. But we both see EJ type. It is just that I thought LIE is more likely.
I agree, she seems LIE.This is a LIE Youtuber:
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Never said or implied the fakeness you sense is due to her being LSE. This particular impression is not due to how your both typings relate to each other imo.
Absolutely disagree, people do feel corrected and and pressured by people with mastery over their weak and sensitive functions even when they are not being directed at them. It's literally the definition of "I feel attacked", when most of the time there was no attack at all.
No need to rectify you have nothing against LSEs, I never thought you did. I was never carried away in first place, so chill.
Ok but why? Why is she likely LIE? So far you failed to present any evidence or reasoning, you just keep on insisting she isn't LSE. I'm open to discuss it and maybe be proven wrong, but you gotta give me something to work with.
Last edited by PrettySavage; 04-24-2018 at 04:58 PM.
My own experience is that it's not until we actually interact that supervision shows itself. And when we interact it is not that I feel attacked or anything like that, just a strange inner feeling of uneasiness, that seems to come from nowhere, and also that the person seems to be in some strange way "above me" or "cooler than me", myself being gray. Even some kind of "compatibility" that makes things even more confusing. And this all just from simple everyday stuff like "Hi, what's up" There is something "devilish" about the supervision chemistry.
I often like watching Te people on youtube, like the woman you posted. The contrast with interacting with real people is huge.
Anyway, about her type. I think I have a problem with deciding about ego/superego. LSE/EIE LIE/ESE. I don't see it clearly because she has a strong persona. I see Te/Fe as base/role and Si/Ni as creative/polr, but to sort them out seems more difficult. But it's possible that I can't type her at all.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
im guessing he think the Si isn't that great, even though theres a lot of it, its more like "there was an attempt" rather than "there is deep understanding" or if it is a good attempt the goodness comes from the Te Ni quality of what it conveys over the real Si content. In other words, Te Ni could convey a "Si concept" in the abstract, but it is not a Si portrayal of Si. Sort of like how people can talk about Se in a Ne way etc. the devil would be in the details of the information he's picking up not the more or less outer "topical category" of discussion
Might be,
yeah sometimes I think I make xLEs really uncomfortable for that reason. I feel like I have a teacher that just wants to run at the sight of me and all I want to do is talk about stuff that by all accounts we both find really mutually interesting
that's funny cause I think of Fe as clownish, but I get what you mean
the it clown really terrifies me, I even had a nightmare I walked into a room with everyones head turned and when they turned around to face me it was all it clowns
i woke up and could barely summon the courage to make it to the bathroom, cause in my darkened apartment I kept imagining the it clown being in the room once I turned the light on
I actually think this is why stephen king is so brilliant because I think the it clown is an archetypal fear that he gave shape to
In terms of actually feeling fear his best so far to me has been Bag of Bones. The Dead Zone and The Shinning were also tense, and The Thommyknockers too.
I got way too much fear in my life already but I say that with the utmost reverence for king
Agatha Christie can inspire more fear in me then Stephen ever could, but that doesn't diminishes his genius at all. I did almost go insane when I watched 1408 in theaters though, that's some twisted shit. Loved it.
What's jojis type?
https://youtu.be/cw4-bqSpVdo
https://youtu.be/R3habuLgROU
He's the guy behind
Pink guy
https://youtu.be/OLpeX4RRo28
And
Filthyfrank
https://youtu.be/OFQQALduhzA
mb INTP (crazy one)
@Tallmo @Bertrand
I actually described what I came to recognize and therefore name as Supervision after coming into Socionics based on observations of other people interactions/relationships. Because to be honest I'm yet to encounter someone who makes me feel exactly as described by theory.
EDIT: second part is now proven to be incorrect, so I took it off.
Last edited by PrettySavage; 11-04-2017 at 11:45 AM.
that's a great description of supervision and I think its very true, because its an entire asymmetric dynamic that involves all the functions bouncing off eachother in a peculiar way. which means until you're in the person's presence certain functions are attenuated such that you may not feel the force of your supervisor to the full extent of what "supervision" really entails. for example, SEEs can blow me up in a moment, cause it usually takes me a while to make my point meanwhile they've got a crazy gish gallop going and they just bury you, same with ESE. online I can unwind any problems at my own pace which makes it much easier, so I don't feel nearly as supervised
Why intp
impressions from nonverbal
Acacia Brinley Clark (acaciacutie), ESE-Si:
2:05 onward, so much
I see. You know joji is a fucked up crazy shit.
But it's not because you behave like an introvert there is you're already an introvert xD
She seems ESI. Lots of Fi language in the first video (which arguably could be scripted), and in the second one she seems concerned with all the small details of the wedding while simultaneously seeming sort of naive and prone to making factual errors (his absurd jokes seem to go completely over her head). Also shamelessly advertises a scummy spam app in the first minute of the video. The second video as a whole also is about the rather "boring" and practical subject of planning a wedding with lots of attention to the budget.
Ryan Higa: IEE
Maybe for Sean: EII
Jaclyn Glenn - LSE
Honestly... I may be wrong and working off stereotypes, but something right here is super fucking Delta.
I normally trust people right away and then I'm proven wrong and then I'm disappointed every time which is like you know learn your lesson but I don't so I don't I just don't want to make this video because I think a lack of aggression in certain social settings is interpreted of weakness and I really kind of hate that and it's not so much that I don't like have emotional reactions to people when they treat me like shit but it's more that like I'm kind of dumbfounded because I trusted this person you know I make friends with people and have certain expectations in my mind of how you treat someone who is your friend or who is you know a partner in a relationship or who is a family member like you have certain expectations of these people and you give them the benefit of the doubt a lot of times.
Last edited by chrys; 11-10-2017 at 06:41 PM.
What type is this guy?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
