Aw.Originally Posted by jessica129
Aw.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
now I'm offendedOkay. Kiss my ass!!!!!
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" isand not
Goddammit.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
I personally try to base my reasoning on evidence and attempt to remove my personal feelings about a person, since I do accept that facts do not change based on my subjective feelings. Any strong opinion I have of someones type has already been well deduced in my mind, and I'll openly supply anyone with a well detailed, and hopefully, objective explanation as to why I came to said typing if I'm asked so they can judge the evidence for themselves
EII INFj
Forum status: retired
Jessica is SLE-Ti, I'm surprised no one else has noticed the similarity between her and Starfall - it's comparable to Uniden and Abbie.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
Perhaps, but SLEs are awesome and SLIs, just boring.
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant
--> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
If you want to disagree with me, that's fine - but disagreeing before you ask me to flesh out my rationale is a mark of foolishness.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
Also
This only works in theory. It would be okay if you started from a foundation of types that were all assuredly who you typed them as - however that doesn't seem to be the case, in particular with your typing's and those associated with you (galen, polikujm). In talking with you lovely people, what seems to have occurred is the development of a VI bias in where you associate mannerisms with types that those particular traits aren't indicative of. Esentially, what you have done is worked backwards from the outside in which is fundamentally faulty - it is like using stereotypes to type people (oh he's social, must be an extrovert). You have attributed things such as lip biting to VI mannerisms
If anyone doesn't understand the socionix gallery of types, imagine incorporating this sort of methodology into your typings - the results would be alarmingly different and why IMO conclusions arrived by such a proccess should be taken with a grain of salt.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
Nope, that's one of the 'reasons' you gave for typing Shannyn Sossamon as SLE in the chatbox. If HK hadn't purged it, I would happily have looked for the quote.
Also, I don't appreciate you attacking my character in a debate about your methods. You resort to ad-hominems way too much for my liking - FYI it doesn't add any credibility to your argument, it only makes you look like a jackass.
Furthermore, if I couldn't recall examples, the use of such arbitrary observations should be evident to anyone taking a glimpse at that gallery - it's been continually criticized for having such glaring differences from what the average user would consider 'normal' typings. I've been to socionix and read the articles you posted up about your typing methods, as well as seen some of the 'rationale' given(a term I use VERY loosely in this regard) by posters in threads who ascribe to those methods - so, I would beg to differ as per being uninformed.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
Haha! That's more like it.
Sryz Ashy, he ryte
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
If I told you that someone who is particularly sociable is extroverted, what possible context could make that correlation even somewhat valid? Sociability is not about extroversion, period. Lip biting has no correlative value to VI. You have stated numerous times that you don't see the point in fleshing out explanations, so what sort of wealth of information do you delusionally believed you bestowed upon me to be misconstrued? You barely said anything about her - the summation can be concluded as 'She reminds me of other SLE's I know'.
As far as your unawareness of being criticized and unorthodox technique - that's a joke right? I have seen you argue against people who criticize your methods a bunch of different times, although there is more than quite a few I am sure you are unaware of. It would be tedious to go through threads to pick examples, if you would like I can start up a thread to substantiate what I have just said w a poll. It would be a rather pointless endeavor, though, I don't see what either of us would gain. I have read techniques on typing, and excerpts of typing interviews from socionists. I can paste the links if you want - but most sources don't rely so heavily on VI as it was meant as a supplemental way of typing as opposed to a primary of sorts. I have seen articles discouraging relying on it, not the other way around. Most people on here and from other forums attempt to understand type from a behavioral point of view, hence 'the norm'. The use of Vi to the point of dismissing behavioral cues of a type is not 'the norm' by that fact- if this isn't the case, then I would like to see where such emphasis on VI is mentioned as being used primarily, and would also like to be pointed to a forum, or website, or anything, where any sort of majority goes about seriously typing in those terms.
As an aside, if I have misrepresented anything, please clarify with specifics. Again, I have no reason to lie or misrepresent. I'm not trying to 'prove' anything - my point in all this was to highlight the bias evident in such an approach (VI).
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
i have never had trouble with being biased.
You missed the point. I was saying that someone equating sociability to extroversion is the same thing as you equating lip biting as suitable VI information - the context in both cases does not matter because, any way you slice it, sociability is not related to extroversion - and neither is lip biting to VI. No amount of context can make that correlation even somewhat valid, and again, there wasn't even much context to begin with.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/norm
I'm not trying to appeal to a consensus to advance an argument - rather what I'm arguing is that group consensus is the gauge of what a norm is, and what is considered orthodox by definition. Within these parameters there is a mean way of typing that's observable, mainly relying primarily on behavioral characteristics, and semantic clues in order to assess a type. You deviate from that, hence you are not the norm.
I am going to clarify my earlier point - I have never seen you say to dismiss behavioral cues (and I wasn't saying you said that in my earlier post) - however, although you don't advocate this, I have seen you do so in favor of V.I. - for instance, again taking the shannyn sossamon example, people were arguing that her behavior didn't fit the typing you had of her - however, you defaulted back to VI as your main argument. I've seen you do stuff like more than a few times, this is essentially what I was describing above.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
Pirate, homi, its not worth it
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
