jet city woman's type

[jet city woman]

I still don't see how you know they're mistyped. We don't even know who these people are. And it's not relevant what their true types are anyways. That isn't the point. All we need know is that they used both systems. And it shows there aren't straight functional correlations. It's a mess. And the reasons for that is because many things are defined differently.

Lol, stray, you crack me up. "All we need to know is that they used both systems. It's not relevant what their true types are anyways." I hope you're not fucking serious. You silly bastard.

Because many of those typings don't seem possible, based on what I know of the types and the function sets. Think about it. I just provided you with an example above.....Not that many things are defined that differently. The first four functions are even in exactly the same positions in both systems, as in ISTj/ISTP is TiSeNiFe. (Yes, I know the function definitions are different here and there, but it mainly appears that most are attempting to describe the same function, and there are many similarities between them vs. another function. At the end of the day, introverted sensing is introverted sensing, for example. Is it my dominant function, or is another function my dominant function? If I'm choosing a different function as my dominant when typing myself in socionics, WHY am I doing it? Is it because of the function definitions, or is it for another reason? I need some sort of detailed explanation and proof of. And I can't find ONE PERSON who can give me a decent or realistic explanation here, as to why they believe they are typed differently in mbti than they are in socionics. All I've found thus far are obvious mistypes.) I really don't see that there's very much room to flip around functions, or to consider once one is sure of the functions they are using in one system, to be flipping a T-dom function to T-inf lol. It's not THAT big of a mess. If you're going to be flipping around functions, it looks as if you would have a definite REASON to, which I'm not finding that people have, other than they would prefer to be another type.

If I look at the self-typings here that are correct, they look pretty much the same in both systems. It's observational as well. Of the people that I know of that I'm sure are typed correctly, they are typed as introverts with a j/p switch and with extroverts, the same. It's really the only thing that fits them. At the end of the day, there are so many obvious mistypings on that chart, it looks like TypC all over again. lol........Sorry you can't see that. Then again, you're one that enjoys mistyping yourself, so maybe you CAN see the reasons for yourself, and no, they aren't good ones lol.

[Absurd]

This thread delivers.

Thank you.

Phew. That was an interesting story. Even though I didn't read it.

....Jet City is cool....I like her....so far. So she could be LSI.

But if shes 6w5 like she claims, she is ESI.

Jetson, ESI aren't "nice". They seem a bit cold and bitchy, but I can tell deep down inside they kinda care.

You know what Agee, I have always thought you're pretty dumb but you have just proved otherwise. I think it is a beginning of a beautiful friendship.

I cannot read the walls of text in this thread. Where's Aquagraph when you need him, to simplify? j/k... jet have you considered ESI for your type? (just curious)

Parts of what follows below were actually painful to write. However, because of the ongoing misinformation campaigns launched by LSI and her operatives I feel it is my duty to write this. The nitty-gritty of what I'm about to write is this: One of the things I find quite interesting is listening to other people's takes on things. For instance, I recently overheard some folks remark that LSI just keeps on saying, "I don't give a [expletive deleted] about you. I just want to enslave us, suppress our freedom, regiment our lives, confiscate our property, and dictate our values."

LSI's propaganda factories continuously spew forth messages like, "LSI's philosophies are all sweetness and light" and, "LSI can be trusted to judge the rest of the world from a unique perch of pure wisdom". What they don't tell you, though, is that there is unmistakably an evil dimension to LSI's scribblings. Or, if "evil" is too narrow of a term, perhaps you'd prefer "muzzy-headed". In any case, LSI should not reinvent and manipulate words and criminalize ideas. Not now, not ever.

My point may be made clearer by use of an allegorical tale. Suppose a hypothetical group of three people is standing in a room. One of those people realizes that the screeching from LSI's doolally lynch mob reaches an ear-splitting pitch each time I mention that I don't see why LSI wants to utilize legal, above-ground organizing in combination with illegal, underground tactics to engage in an endless round of finger pointing. Another goes on and on about her inconsiderate put-downs. But the third can't understand why her intimations are unequivocally not on the up and up. In this hypothetical situation, it should be obvious that if you think that this is humorous or exaggerated, you're wrong. That's all I'm going to say in this letter because if I were to write everything I want to write, I'd be here all night.

Efficient gamma is efficient.

[jet city woman]

i hate to say it but this one actually makes some sense to me. she's obviously driven by her emotions.

You should ask my S.O. Finale what I am doing when I'm trolling and/or "being driven by my emotions". He sits right beside me. He'll tell you "laughing hysterically". But a lot of people online (mainly F-types) think I am pissed or upset. They project how they would feel in that position, onto others. If it looks like a duck, then it must be a duck, right? Motive doesn't ever enter the picture.

Just like my S.O.s mom told me, "when he looks in the mirror, he sees a moooonnnnnssssttttteeeerrrrrr!" about my S.O., when there was no such thing occurring. We laughed for like days afterward.

[Kim]

I say EIE.

[munenori2]

You make a lot of claims, jet, and a lot of appeals to obviousness and authority, but I don't really see how you reach your conclusions via premises of any kind. Take that as you will.

[jet city woman]

I say EIE.

Cool. This means my dual is LSI. I don't think it would be too hard to fall in love with myself.

You make a lot of claims, jet, and a lot of appeals to obviousness and authority, but I don't really see how you reach your conclusions via premises of any kind. Take that as you will.

Prove me wrong. That's what it will take to make me believe otherwise. I base my conclusions on observations and experiences with some theory, mainly. If someone can actually prove it wrong, I will accept it, yet no one can thus far, nor does anyone try to. I don't doubt that you can't reach my conclusions, actually. I don't believe I am any sort of authority at all. In fact, I haven't put very much time into this...... I would actually like for someone to prove me wrong, if it leads me to truth.

[squark]

Socionics IE descriptors:

Fe: internal dynamics of objects
Te: external dynamics of objects
Fi: internal statics of fields
Ti: external statics of fields
Se: external statics of objects
Ne: internal statics of objects
Si: external dynamics of fields
Ni: internal dynamics of fields.

internal means implicit or undefined.
external means explicit or defined.

fields are connections and interrelationships. static fields are structural.

If you want greater clarity, look up the information or ask about it. But, these are how information elements in socionics are defined. It's not the same as MBTI. I believe someone asked you how you're Ti-leading? It'd be interesting to hear your explanation of that.

[jet city woman]

Socionics IE descriptors:

Fe: internal dynamics of objects
Te: external dynamics of objects
Fi: internal statics of fields
Ti: external statics of fields
Se: external statics of objects
Ne: internal statics of objects
Si: external dynamics of fields
Ni: internal dynamics of fields.

internal means implicit or undefined.
external means explicit or defined.

fields are connections and interrelationships. static fields are structural.

If you want greater clarity, look up the information or ask about it. But, these are how information elements in socionics are defined. It's not the same as MBTI. I believe someone asked you how you're Ti-leading? It'd be interesting to hear your explanation of that.

Because I am sure my dominant function is Ti in both systems, through function definition, observation, and comparison. ISTj also fits relations-wise and with the erotic styles, in my life.
As for the IE descriptors, what is your point in posting them? I assume it's to show they "aren't the same as MBTI", although I already know MBTI is not the exact same as socionics, and I've already noted that. The function definitions however, are usually very similar ie they mean similar, and seem to be describing the same/similar function. They aren't closer in description to another function than they are the same one in MBTI.

I actually prefer these pages when typing: http://www.socionics.us/theory/log_eth.shtml They actually offer the means to evaluate easily.
Interesting, I started getting into reading this, and evaluating. I definitely fit these like a glove:

weaknesses

ethics
often feel helpless when forced to deal with others' feelings, emotional reactions, and subjective factors I actually just wrote about this in another thread.
more subject to emotional manipulation and not recognizing others' true feelings and attitudes in time

typical doubts

often are unsure of their right to have feelings for others and display emotions
often unsure that their partner really has feelings for them

behavior in relationships

manage and diversify structure of relationship
show their feelings for partner by doing things for them


Pretty close in definition between mbti/socionics, it appears.

[squark]

Because I am sure my dominant function is Ti in both systems, through function definition, observation, and comparison.
As for the IE descriptors, what is your point in posting them?

wtf? That's not an answer. My point was so that you can see that they are not the same in both systems, and so you could learn what they are in socionics. And I gave more clarity specifically on Ti so you'd have a background for explaining how it's your leading. How is structural logic, Ti the primary way in which you metabolize information?

[jet city woman]

wtf? That's not an answer. My point was so that you can see that they are not the same in both systems, and so you could learn what they are in socionics

Well to me it is an answer. I already knew mbti and socionics are not the exact same, and I noted that above.

And I gave more clarity specifically on Ti so you'd have a background for explaining how it's your leading. How is structural logic, Ti the primary way in which you metabolize information?

It just is. I'm not going to copy the information. Either one believes I fit the mold, or they don't. I'm generally not very persuasive lol......

[squark]

Well to me it is an answer. I already knew mbti and socionics are not the exact same, and I noted that above.



It just is. I'm not going to copy the information. Either one believes I fit the mold, or they don't. I'm generally not very persuasive lol......

K, you don't know, you can't explain, you just believe. Got it.

PS. If you want to go back and change a post, change what you've said and add things, just make a new post. Not many people are going to go back and reread a post they've already responded to hours ago to find out how many ways and times you've changed your mind since then.

[ashlesha]

You should ask my S.O. Finale what I am doing when I'm trolling and/or "being driven by my emotions". He sits right beside me. He'll tell you "laughing hysterically". But a lot of people online (mainly F-types) think I am pissed or upset. They project how they would feel in that position, onto others. If it looks like a duck, then it must be a duck, right? Motive doesn't ever enter the picture.t

Just like my S.O.s mom told me, "when he looks in the mirror, he sees a moooonnnnnssssttttteeeerrrrrr!" about my S.O., when there was no such thing occurring. We laughed for like days afterward.

i don't think you're usually upset. maybe sometimes but I think its usually more for the rush of conflict and you've said as much. regardless of WHICH emotion it is you definitely seem more concerned with satisfying yourself emotionally than you are with either learning or explaining things. (well you flat out say you wont explain)

and dude if you were interested in learning you would stop using your erotic style as proof of being lsi when esis are also aggressors. like people keep tellingggg you.

I agree with you about functions though I really don't get how people are so drastically different between mbti and socionics unless they're going strictly by letters.

[FoxOnStilts]

"I'm just interested in learning show me proof."
goes to
"I'm not going to answer your questions; Ti fits me and that is that."

I'd expect a Ti type to be able to explain themselves within a system; hell, get joy of of explaining how the things fit together. You come off as more dogmatic, but as if you don't actually have a grasp on the system. And you're incredibly defensive about your type (this is where you come in and say "lol no I'm sitting here laughing at you idiots with my bf because I soooo don't care", which is still defensive, no matter how much you claim to "not care"). Why even make a thread if you're just going to be defensive and not play along with other people trying to help you find your type? Did you just expect people to come and reaffirm your initial typing?

Geez, ESI. And not the @lungs kind.

[ashlesha]

I'd expect a Ti type to be able to explain themselves within a system; hell, get joy of of explaining how the things fit together.

yeahh this is what i was trying to get at with the "learning/explaining" thing, i couldn't find the right words.

Geez, ESI. And not the @lungs kind.

lol

[Finale]

Well, since this "Absurd's Circus" thread was moved out of Everything Goes and now is here, plus other members are starting to take it seriously, I think I owe it at least one non-troll reply....

Objectively, I cannot say what either Jet or myself are in socionics as I simply do not have the experience or expertise with it to make such a determination. Socionics is totally new to me and I've been enjoying learning and reading about it. I am fairly well versed in Jung, MBTI and Enneagram though so I have pretty high certainty in our typologies in MBTI as well as Jungian functional representation.

I current believe myself to be LIE for several reasons: 1) The description fits me well, 2) The socionics function ordering and function descriptions fit me well (Te/Ni), 3) I'm ENTJ in MBTI and Enneagram Type 8, and 4) while testing can generally be inaccurate, I've taken multiple tests that all confirm the above.

As far as Jet goes, as I'm with her everyday IRL, I can say she clearly illustrates herself to be MBTI ISTP, as well as a Ti-dom from a purely Jung standpoint. Unfortunately, she is what I would consider a "borderline" case even in MBTI due to the flaws of any typology that tries to take more analog functional measurements and truncate them into 16 slabs or types. While most of her personality does base in ISTP, she has many of the struggles INTP's have as well.

Socionics? Like I said, I don't consider myself an expert enough to type her there.

Some points about Jet that may yield insight:

• Like many INTP's I work with, she does have difficulties getting her points across in writing. Many INTP's compensate by writing very elaborate, lengthy and fluid pieces so as their loose associations are better understood. Jet as sensing secondary hasn't had luck with this as of yet.
  
• Jet's first reaction to anything in reality or online is dissection and detail exploration. She's very old-school though and prefers paper over the glow of a computer screen, so if it's not in book form, then it's printed to be read. This is also why she tends to give more psychological credence to things that have more print form than online-only.
  
• On the dissection/detail exploration, her favorite pursuit is lengthy, details-oriented discussions on components, pieces and artifacts. Her biggest intellectual pitfall is one I see in all Ti-doms and that she gets hung-up on points of details that will disallow her to continue forward to get to the "big picture", which slows the learning process. i.e. we often have to take some things for granted/accept them on face value when learning new things because once we get to the big picture, those details we left behind will explain themselves much easier. She cannot do this- she'll need a detail clarified 100% and understood before she can proceed to the next thing, item or detail. If she can't, she'll pretty much boycott ever getting to the big picture entirely and shelve the whole thing.
  
• Jet has a long history of posting lengthy, multi-page replies with her justifications of what she believes and why, but usually to either fall on deaf ears (troll-fest internet) or with associations where others do not see the connection. (See the first item on this list for that). Often times explaining the associations is more effort than explaining her initial point, so now the scope, scale and effort required has multiplied. This only leads to frustration with the receiver, not so much a call on the speaker for Jet. This has led her to a more "I believe this because it is so" stance when her explanations do not suffice. She will put more time into her explanations if she senses there are ears that may understand them, else it's a moot point to even try.
  
• 9 times out of 10, if she is communicating with certain people, her points make it across as they can connect the dots of her associations along with her communication style. I get her clearly 99% of the time and can usually throw a couple sentences to connect her associations so most people can understand her as well. I believe this is where her bias with "F-types" may have stemmed.
  
• She has learned to deal with that frustration more healthily by making it a game. As so many have trolled her, the trolling back and thrill/fun of this becomes the preferred method if all else fails.
  
• Jet's systems can often times be impossibly complex to the point of being over-engineered. Everything in her life must have structure, order and organization.
  
• Intellectual systems of any kind are like drugs to her and she eagerly jumps to them, studies them for weeks (books, high-lighter pens, printouts all over the house, notes, etc.). She has jumped from mechanical engineering to electronics, to psychology, to dsm/disorder studies, to typology, mbti and now socionics.
  
• We consume, on average, 5 hours a day in intellectual discussion. She wants to discuss, debate and run details/pieces and components with me every day. She needs at least that much intellectual discussion a day else she goes bonkers.
  
• Jet is one of the most dissociative people I've ever met. She has an ISTP stare (also found in some INTP's) of being in her own head-space often and this produces many of her insights, be they right or wrong, with our discussions usually to determine that through objective and subjective dialogue and exploration.
  
• I do like the concept of her being ESI. That would make her my dual, no? Does that mean the sex would instantly get better?! (or knowing my luck, you sick bastards would then gang-up on me and re-typed me as a conflictor....)

Ok, sorry for the broken thoughts, typo's and such.. I'm doing this quickly while drinking my coffee before leaving for work, while also at the same time carrying on a discussion with Jet about psychology...

[Absurd]

Well, since this "Absurd's Circus" thread was moved out of Everything Goes and now is here, plus other members are starting to take it seriously, I think I owe it at least one non-troll reply....

Ahh, I see you're one of my circus monkeys and seeing this joint is beginning to get loaded with ESI corpses I can say my missionary mission is a success. I have always opted for quality over quantity, anyway. And don't get so smart for you aren't. I can shut you up in matter of minutes.

Objectively, I cannot say what either Jet or myself are in socionics as I simply do not have the experience or expertise with it to make such a determination. Socionics is totally new to me and I've been enjoying learning and reading about it. I am fairly well versed in Jung, MBTI and Enneagram though so I have pretty high certainty in our typologies as well as Jungian functional representation.

Say it subjectively, har dee har har. MBTI is quite different from socionics. MBTI compared to socionics has its functions upside down and not really for saying upside down is not quite the truth as well. So you have a choice between sticking to socionics and sticking to MBTI on this forum. The latter you're going to get crucified for, I can tell you already. It's not just you, it applies to everyone who actually prefer it over socionics not to mention argue for its sake over socionics on a socionics forum so don't take it personal - it is not.

I current believe myself to be LIE for several reasons: 1) The description fits me well, 2) The socionics function ordering and function descriptions fit me well (Te/Ni), 3) I'm ENTJ in MBTI and Enneagram Type 8, and 4) while testing can generally be inaccurate, I've taken multiple tests that all confirm the above.

Congratulations.

As far as Jet goes, as I'm with her everyday IRL, I can say she clearly illustrates herself to be MBTI ISTP, as well as a Ti-dom from a purely Jung standpoint. Unfortunately, she is what I would consider a "borderline" case even in MBTI due to the flaws of any typology that tries to take more analog functional measurements and truncate them into 16 slabs or types. While most of her personality does base in ISTP, she has many of the struggles INTP's have as well.

Here we go:

1. Jet is Ti dominant by holy Jung beta scriptures,

2. That means she's Ti dominant in Socionics alpha scriptures,

3. If she's Ti dominant in both Jung and Socionics:

a) Jet is LII,

b) Jet is LSI,

c) Jet is not SLI,

d) Jet is not ILI

Socionics? Like I said, I don't consider myself an expert enough to type her there.

Whoops.

Like many INTP's I work with, she does have difficulties getting her points across in writing. Many INTP's compensate by writing very elaborate, lengthy and fluid pieces so as their loose associations are better understood. Jet as sensing secondary hasn't had luck with this as of yet.

On the dissection/detail exploration, her favorite pursuit is lengthy, details-oriented discussions on components, pieces and artifacts. Her biggest intellectual pitfall is one I see in all Ti-doms and that she gets hung-up on points of details that will disallow her[...]

You're making a reference to people you have typed INTP or self-type this way via MBTI. I hope you're following me.

Like some ISTP's and many INTP's, this leads to frustration with the receiver, not so much a call on the speaker. This has led her to a more "I believe this because it is so" stance when more simply (read: lack-luster) explanations do not suffice.

Again.

Jet's systems are impossibly complex to the point of being inefficient. Everything in her life must have structure, order and organization.

Clearly a sensor or a person who looks for it.

All in all, no problemo with ESI. Gammas are always welcomed. Oh yes they are.

[squark]

Well, since this "Absurd's Circus" thread was moved out of Everything Goes and now is here, plus other members are starting to take it seriously, I think I owe it at least one non-troll reply....

Objectively, I cannot say what either Jet or myself are in socionics as I simply do not have the experience or expertise with it to make such a determination. Socionics is totally new to me and I've been enjoying learning and reading about it. I am fairly well versed in Jung, MBTI and Enneagram though so I have pretty high certainty in our typologies in MBTI as well as Jungian functional representation.

I current believe myself to be LIE for several reasons: 1) The description fits me well, 2) The socionics function ordering and function descriptions fit me well (Te/Ni), 3) I'm ENTJ in MBTI and Enneagram Type 8, and 4) while testing can generally be inaccurate, I've taken multiple tests that all confirm the above.

As far as Jet goes, as I'm with her everyday IRL, I can say she clearly illustrates herself to be MBTI ISTP, as well as a Ti-dom from a purely Jung standpoint. Unfortunately, she is what I would consider a "borderline" case even in MBTI due to the flaws of any typology that tries to take more analog functional measurements and truncate them into 16 slabs or types. While most of her personality does base in ISTP, she has many of the struggles INTP's have as well.

Socionics? Like I said, I don't consider myself an expert enough to type her there.

Some points about Jet that may yield insight:

• Like many INTP's I work with, she does have difficulties getting her points across in writing. Many INTP's compensate by writing very elaborate, lengthy and fluid pieces so as their loose associations are better understood. Jet as sensing secondary hasn't had luck with this as of yet.
  
• Jet's first reaction to anything in reality or online is dissection and detail exploration. She's very old-school though and prefers paper over the glow of a computer screen, so if it's not in book form, then it's printed to be read. This is also why she tends to give more psychological credence to things that have more print form than online-only.
  
• On the dissection/detail exploration, her favorite pursuit is lengthy, details-oriented discussions on components, pieces and artifacts. Her biggest intellectual pitfall is one I see in all Ti-doms and that she gets hung-up on points of details that will disallow her to continue forward to get to the "big picture", which slows the learning process. i.e. we often have to take some things for granted/accept them on face value when learning new things because once we get to the big picture, those details we left behind will explain themselves much easier. She cannot do this- she'll need a detail clarified 100% and understood before she can proceed to the next thing, item or detail. If she can't, she'll pretty much boycott ever getting to the big picture entirely and shelve the whole thing.
  
• Jet has a long history of posting lengthy, multi-page replies with her justifications of what she believes and why, but usually to either fall on deaf ears (troll-fest internet) or with associations that others do not see the connection. (See the first item on this list for that). Often times explaining the associations is more effort for her initial point so now the scope, scale and effort has multiplied. With her, this leads to frustration with the receiver, not so much a call on the speaker. This has led her to a more "I believe this because it is so" stance when more simply (read: lack-luster) explanations do not suffice. She will put more time into her explanations if she senses there are ears that may understand them, else it's a moot point to even try.
  
• She has learned to deal with that frustration more healthily by making it a game. As so many have trolled her, the trolling back and thrill/fun of this becomes the preferred method if all else fails.
  
• Jet's systems can often times be impossibly complex to the point of being over-engineered. Everything in her life must have structure, order and organization.
  
• Intellectual systems of any kind are like drugs to her and she eagerly jumps to them, studies them for weeks (books, high-lighter pens, printouts all over the house, notes, etc.). She has jumped from mechanical engineering to electronics, to psychology, to dsm/disorder studies, to typology, mbti and now socionics.
  
• We consume, on average, 5 hours a day in intellectual discussion. She wants to discuss, debate and run details/pieces and components with me every day. She needs at least that much intellectual discussion a day else she goes bonkers.
  
• Jet is one of the most dissociative people I've ever met. She has an ISTP stare (also found in some INTP's) of being in her own head-space often and this produces many of her insights, be they right or wrong, with our discussions usually to determine that through objective and subjective dialogue and exploration.
  
• I do like the concept of her being ESI. That would make her my dual, no? Does that mean the sex would instantly get better?! (or knowing my luck, you sick bastards would then gang-up on me and re-typed me as a conflictor....)

Ok, sorry for the broken thoughts, typo's and such.. I'm doing this quickly while drinking my coffee before leaving for work, while also at the same time carrying on a discussion with Jet about psychology...

thanks for the insight finale. what you've described honestly sounds more like Te dual-seeking to me than Ti leading on a quick read-through. But, unfortunately I don't have time right now to really look at it closer or respond.

[Absurd]

Boom

Funniest thing is, lungs compared me to Jet self-typing ESI herself. Priceless.

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

the long posts are majestic,absurd

[ashlesha]

Boom

Funniest thing is, lungs compared me to Jet self-typing ESI herself. Priceless.

i have no idea how you're contextualizing this so that it actually matters at all.

i did not say the two of you are the same type.

you take actual information. then you contextualize it in whatever fashion is convenient to you. and then, voila! absurd's special brand of bullshit.

anyway, you can be ESI. or you can type me EII. you can do whatever you want. i really don't know what you're angry about or what it is you want lol. but its not honestly a matter of people being consistent or correct or whatever, otherwise you would actually try to try to make sense. so you must have some kind of agenda but i don't know what it is.

[Absurd]

i have no idea how you're contextualizing this so that it actually matters at all.

It doesn't to me, but I think it does to you.

i did not say the two of you are the same type.

I know you didn't. I didn't say you did. Calm down

you take actual information. then you contextualize it in whatever fashion is convenient to you. and then, voila! absurd's special brand of bullshit.

Oh really?

anyway, you can be ESI. or you can type me EII. you can do whatever you want. i really don't know what you're angry about or what it is you want lol. but its not honestly a matter of people being consistent or correct or whatever, otherwise you would actually try to try to make sense. so you must have some kind of agenda but i don't know what it is.

I'm not ESI, never self-typed ESI, never thought I am actually ESI. It doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever and I don't know how the heck such idea comes to ones mind plus I'm not angry about anything and no, I don't have any agenda except for the socionics one.

[jet city woman]

K, you don't know, you can't explain, you just believe. Got it.

Lol, I just don't care to explain. It's not worth the trouble or the effort. I don't really care whether people think I am LSI or not.

[ashlesha]

It doesn't to me, but I think it does to you.

oh so you were fishing and not even attempting to say something of value. my bad

[Absurd]

oh so you were fishing and not even attempting to say something of value. my bad

No, I usually compare opinions of different parties with my own and that of this theory has to offer and when I notice that certain people see, excuse me, want to see something that isn't there I can deal it with two ways. I can solemnly object and denounce their paranoid schizophrenic musings and cut through them like a scalpel or give them what they want to see stinging them when they least expect it.

I prefer the former approach though. So don't get angry(?) after you have been mentioned

[ashlesha]

No, I usually compare opinions of different parties with my own and that of this theory has to offer and when I notice that certain people see, excuse me, want to see something that isn't there I can deal it with two ways. I can solemnly object and denounce their paranoid schizophrenic musings and cut through them like a scalpel and give them what they want to see stinging them when they least expect it.

I prefer the former approach though.

what the fuck/who the fuck are you talking about?

actually noone in particular, i assume.

but yes you're a big bad dog woof woof

[Absurd]

what the fuck/who the fuck are you talking about?

actually noone in particular, i assume.

but yes you're a big bad dog woof woof

Yup, they see what they want to see, anyway, I'm done here. I'm sure Jet wants her thread back.

[squark]

. . .

Intellectual interests and discussion are NTR. "Being in own headspace" often - sounds likely introversion related. That she needs you to be her translator of her own thoughts with a number of people, that she has "loose associations" which are difficult to convey, and that she has difficulty seeing the system itself (the big picture) without every detail explained to her shows weak Ti and Te.

I usually think that if you can't condense something down into something understandable to someone else, you probably don't fully understand it yourself. I know that's not always true though, and that there are different ways of understanding something. If she is always making connections that are vague and difficult to describe, that sounds much more like Fi than like Ti. Ti is defined, measurable connections, Fi is not. You can understand something just as well with Fi as with Ti, but the manner in which you put it together and explain it will be different. Both the way you describe what she does, and how she describes it sounds like Fi to me.

[Finale]

Hi Squark!

A couple of clarifications as I was not very clear given the rush-job typing trying to get out of the house this morning to work :-) :

..and that she has difficulty seeing the system itself (the big picture) without every detail explained to her shows weak Ti and Te. ..

She doesn't have difficulty seeing the system itself, it's just when studying something new she insists on knowing every detail and if there are weak details, it irks her sometimes to the point of throwing the whole thing out (i.e. "flawed" if the sum of the parts do not make up the whole, etc. etc.).

...you probably don't fully understand it yourself. I know that's not always true though

Which would be the latter with jet. We can have very in-depth conversations that illustrate her understanding in these scenarios. And like I said, in company with myself and my peers, they have no problems understanding her.

If she is always making connections that are vague and difficult to describe, that sounds much more like Fi than like Ti.

Not what I would consider "vague" actually, so sorry if that is how it came across. She has no such issues with certain company.. such as the heavy thinkers and engineers I work with.

I struggled with this problem myself in my youth (and sometimes still do as this reply suggests!) and needed to learn to take my thoughts back a few steps before explaining them... else lose half of any given audience. :-)

I can say that jet has studied/read socionics at least 20x more than I have so her knowledge on the subject is much greater than mine. I am learning more about socionics every day but until I have enough under my belt, I generally do not feel qualified to make any kinds of determinations. I do find discussions and typing on this forum.. very ... almost surreal .. to say the least, especially as it's supposed to be loosely based on Jung Cognitive Functions. I'd really love to see some Socionics resources that define it's use of the T/F/S/N functions (aside from how Socionics stays true to Jung with J/P vs. the hack-job MBTI does with J/P and introverts..).

[FoxOnStilts]

Finale comes in to explain what Jet can't explain about herself in a logical, organized matter and sets it up in a coherent, logical argument that's easily understood.

Just sayin'.

[Finale]

LOL Fox, actually she's asleep right now but can do a great job explaining it herself, just we differ in opinion on whether it's even worth it with this crew here.

I don't blame her though given, for example, Absurd's reply pretty much ignored a lot of what I posted and though I made fairly clear. While I don't believe I'm the best communicator, when you start to see patterns only in select locations, it does make one think about things.

So yes, it does make one eventually want to throw in the towel on certain sites (just save retorts to general "blah-blah" and troll fun), and save more hearty discussions for elsewhere where they might be received, understood, discussed and/or recognized.

[FoxOnStilts]

I will add that initially I thought she had made this typing thread and was then being stubborn and pissy and not explaining anything after asking people to type her, but now i see this is not the case and a certain amount of defensiveness is to be expected.

[Finale]

Yeah, this wasn't "Please Type Me!" but instead Absurd Trolls Again.

It was also in Anything Goes and was moved here... for .. who knows why.

[Pookie]

I love watching women argue.

Throats are never left unslashed.

[jet city woman]

"I'm just interested in learning show me proof."
goes to
"I'm not going to answer your questions; Ti fits me and that is that."

I'd expect a Ti type to be able to explain themselves within a system; hell, get joy of of explaining how the things fit together. You come off as more dogmatic, but as if you don't actually have a grasp on the system. And you're incredibly defensive about your type (this is where you come in and say "lol no I'm sitting here laughing at you idiots with my bf because I soooo don't care", which is still defensive, no matter how much you claim to "not care"). Why even make a thread if you're just going to be defensive and not play along with other people trying to help you find your type? Did you just expect people to come and reaffirm your initial typing?

Geez, ESI. And not the @lungs kind.

wow, Fox. and I had a little respect for you.
disappointing.
At least you finally figured out I didn't create this thread. That's one down.

[Absurd]

Yeah, this wasn't "Please Type Me!" but instead Absurd Trolls Again.

It was also in Anything Goes and was moved here... for .. who knows why.

I think you're way too stupid to even comprehend it.

[jet city woman]

Hi Squark!

A couple of clarifications as I was not very clear given the rush-job typing trying to get out of the house this morning to work :-) :


She doesn't have difficulty seeing the system itself, it's just when studying something new she insists on knowing every detail and if there are weak details, it irks her sometimes to the point of throwing the whole thing out (i.e. "flawed" if the sum of the parts do not make up the whole, etc. etc.).


Which would be the latter with jet. We can have very in-depth conversations that illustrate her understanding in these scenarios. And like I said, in company with myself and my peers, they have no problems understanding her.


Not what I would consider "vague" actually, so sorry if that is how it came across. She has no such issues with certain company.. such as the heavy thinkers and engineers I work with.

I struggled with this problem myself in my youth (and sometimes still do as this reply suggests!) and needed to learn to take my thoughts back a few steps before explaining them... else lose half of any given audience. :-)

I can say that jet has studied/read socionics at least 20x more than I have so her knowledge on the subject is much greater than mine. I am learning more about socionics every day but until I have enough under my belt, I generally do not feel qualified to make any kinds of determinations. I do find discussions and typing on this forum.. very ... almost surreal .. to say the least, especially as it's supposed to be loosely based on Jung Cognitive Functions. I'd really love to see some Socionics resources that define it's use of the T/F/S/N functions (aside from how Socionics stays true to Jung with J/P vs. the hack-job MBTI does with J/P and introverts..).

I wonder why you waste your time. It's obv a lost cause, which is what I knew from Day 1 of joining this site lol..... this site is for trolling purposes only, hon.

"lost cause

a cause with no chance of success"

Yet you spend your time daily on other sites "training" kids....... some of you guys amaze me with the patience you have. Even if it's 1% success rate, Finale will work work work at it. Some people just don't have it and never will, yet you keep trying.......


----------------------------


As far as ESI, I don't see anything in this thread that would compel me to believe I am ESI or Fi-leading. I'm sure as my studies continue, I will take it into account. From direct experience and some general analysis, I would say that I am more-than-likely not, even with limited socionics experience. With the knowledge I have at this time, I type myself LSI, and that's what I am and will continue to be until 1) Someone who knows better has a well-produced argument and is well-respected enough in my eyes to convince me otherwise; or 2) I convince myself through studies, which is more-than-likely what would happen if it did happen. At this time, I don't have alot of time to pour into socionics, as I am working on growing my business, and it takes me a lot of time to make certain transitions, and I don't trust or have enough faith in socionics right now to even really discuss it in socionics terms. I don't know if this will ever occur, tbth, but I will continue my studies nonetheless, little by little.

In my daily life, as Finale has tried to explain with it looks like the same failures that have occurred when I try to communicate (due to misinterpretation and misunderstanding coming from the other party), I need to use Ti often, and I need another T-type to converse with (preferably NT or ISTP, but ISTJ or ESTP will do), which is one reason why I reject the ideas of duality. As Finale explained, I need several hours a day of conversing with him and/or another T-type in order to sustain sanity lol. I really can't see even living with an ethical type, as this would strip me of the deep conversation/debate/argument that I need from people I identify with and who can relate to me on my terms and from my current understandings. One reason. I don't think it's very difficult to see that I prefer logical vs. ethical, if one would do an analysis of, which I find to be a useless exercise in written form and for the purposes of this forum.

In further studies, if I find that for some reason ESI fits me better, I will change my type, as I certainly have much more studying to do within the system of socionics.

[thePirate]

As far as ESI, I don't see anything in this thread that would compel me to believe I am ESI or Fi-leading. I'm sure as my studies continue, I will take it into account. From direct experience, I would say that I am more-than-likely not, even with limited socionics experience. With the knowledge I have at this time, I type myself LSI, and that's what I am and will continue to be until 1) Someone who knows better has a well-produced argument and is well-respected enough in my eyes to convince me otherwise; or 2) I convince myself through studies, which is more-than-likely what would happen if it did happen.

I don't care what you type yourself as, my only problem with your bullshit is that you go into threads responding as if you are actually LSI (which you aren't) and that's going to confuse people who are trying to get information.

[Pookie]

"Someone who knows better has a well-produced argument and is well-respected enough in my eyes to convince me otherwise"

That wreaks of Aristocracy, ST/NF

[jet city woman]

I don't care what you type yourself as, my only problem with your bullshit is that you go into threads responding as if you are actually LSI (which you aren't) and that's going to confuse people who are trying to get information.

Lol.... Lemme tell ya' what buddy, you have said so much fucking stupid shit on this forum, that there isn't enough I could say to catch up.... Now go ogle some poor girl with Double-D tits in tinychat to the point where you couldn't get laid in a fucking harem. If you're aggravated with people responding while mistyped on this forum, then you must have gone crazy already. This forum has more mistypes than I can imagine.

Now, if you want me to change my type to something you believe I am, you're going to have to stop trolling and start convincing. Thus far, all you've done is troll, which is the only thing you're apparently good at in life. One of those things apparently isn't getting laid, since it's been > a year since you have been, confirming my theory that guys who troll women aren't getting laid.

"Someone who knows better has a well-produced argument and is well-respected enough in my eyes to convince me otherwise"

That wreaks of Aristocracy, ST/NF

What can I say, I'm a self-described elitist. Yea, pretty much I agree with you....... I'm typed correctly, but there's always that 1% chance that I may not be in my mind, since I haven't mastered the system of socionics. Of course, being an e-type six, I am usually not 100% sure of anything lol.....

I love watching women argue.

Throats are never left unslashed.

Lol, for some reason, I bring out a lot of cattiness in women online. Maybe that's true for all women, IDK.

[ashlesha]

ftr, i just saw this and contributed to the conversation. i have zero interest in trying to persuade you to change your self-type and it will be easy to drop it.

i do find it kind of disappointing that you think of "F types" as being incapable of having deep conversation. i think if you continue being interested in socionics after some time you'll probably see this isn't the case and maybe this will change your opinion on your own type, maybe not. or you'll just type anybody capable of intellectual discourse as a "T type." whatever.