this is how I feel about myself (and about IEEs in general)

[Olduvai]

From Wikipedia:

Mismatch theory is a concept in evolutionary biology that refers to fluidity in fitness criteria.The essence of mismatch theory is that organisms possess traits (including behavioral, emotional, and biological) that have been passed down through generations, preserved by natural selectionbecause of their adaptive function in a given environment. However, the given environment of the evolutionary period can be quite unlike the current environment. Therefore, traits that were at one time adaptive in a certain environment, are now "mismatched" to the environment that the trait is currently present in. This can present a number of problems for the organism in question.

I think Delta as a whole might be "mismatched"; I think Deltas are better suited for hunter-gatherer, gift-based societies

[applejacks]

From Wikipedia:


I think Delta as a whole might be "mismatched"; I think Deltas are better suited for hunter-gatherer, gift-based societies

Can you expand a little? I'm not sure I follow your train of thought.

[Olduvai]

Can you expand a little? I'm not sure I follow your train of thought.

I think IEE's "program" is better suited for a set of conditions that is different than the current set of conditions (at least where I live). I think IEE might've been a common type in the early days of Homo sapiens, but I think they are relatively unfit for the modern world. In short, I think IEE is a "dying type", and I think Delta is an "archaic quadra".

This is hard for me to explain; I agree with Carl Jung's characterization of Fi-egos:

The depth of this feeling can only be guessed - it can never be clearly grasped. It makes people silent and difficult of access; it shrinks back like a violet from the brute nature of the object in order to fill the depths of the subject. It comes out with negative judgments or assumes an air of profound indifference as a means of defense.

The primordial images are, of course, just as much ideas as feelings. Fundamental ideas, ideas like God, freedom, and immortality, are just as much feeling-values as they are significant ideas. Everything, therefore, that we have said about introverted thinking is equally true of introverted feeling, only here everything is felt while there it was thought.

However, the very fact that thoughts can generally be expressed more intelligibly than feelings demands a more than ordinary descriptive or artistic ability before the real wealth of this feeling can be even approximately presented or communicated to the world. If subjective thinking can be understood only with difficulty because of its detachment, this is true in an even higher degree of subjective feeling.

Sorry for rambling; I truly believe IEE is obselete, and that makes me feel very sad. I see mostly Fe- and Ti-egos where I live; I honestly think Fi/Te is "on its way out", evolutionarily speaking.

[applejacks]

I think IEE's "program" is better suited for a set of conditions that is different than the current set of conditions (at least where I live). I think IEE might've been a common type in the early days of Homo sapiens, but I think they are relatively unfit for the modern world. In short, I think IEE is a "dying type", and I think Delta is an "archaic quadra".

This is hard for me to explain; I agree with Carl Jung's characterization of Fi-egos:


Sorry for rambling; I truly believe IEE is obselete, and that makes me feel very sad. I see mostly Fe- and Ti-egos where I live; I honestly think Fi/Te is "on its way out", evolutionarily speaking.

Where are you, and how do you see them as they're unsuited or unfit for current conditions?

Wouldn't that then mean that IEE types would feel outcast or insufficient? As Carl Jung states, if Fi is truly more difficult to be understood than subjective thinking, shouldn't Fi-egos feel misunderstood all the time? Or are you stating that Fi-egos must rely on other Fi-egos / Deltas because of the nature of Fi, and because of that, they are inferior?

No offense to anyone, but I imagine quite an unstable world if Fi/Te dissolves and is replaced completely with Fe / Ti. In many of our recent IEE / Fi thread discussions, we've discussed how Fe handles the raw emotion of situations, whereas Fi tries to get to the field of influence causing of the emotion ( @anndelise explains it more eloquently than I). And in this case, I don't think I can agree that Fi is "on it's way out", simply because there is need for both.

You might have a case for how Fi-egos may be on the downward trend, but I don't believe, even if that were true, that that makes us obsolete.

[Olduvai]

Where are you

I'm in Michigan.

and how do you see them as they're unsuited or unfit for current conditions?

Because as you're now discovering, our thinking isn't very precise. I don't think this was an issue back in the day, as the problems that needed solving were simple and of a practical nature; but nowadays, the problems are complex and deep, and I don't think IEE possesses the mental rigor that is necessary to tackle them.

Wouldn't that then mean that IEE types would feel outcast or insufficient?

Yup, and that is exactly how I feel.

As Carl Jung states, if Fi is truly more difficult to be understood than subjective thinking, shouldn't Fi-egos feel misunderstood all the time?

Only if they're surrounded by types who are incapable of understanding them, i.e. Fe/Ti people (Ti-egos especially).

Or are you stating that Fi-egos must rely on other Fi-egos / Deltas because of the nature of Fi, and because of that, they are inferior?

No, IEEs are inferior because they think in too broad of terms.

I'm not so sure I can debate, because I'm most certainly biased, but I imagine quite an unstable world if Fi/Te dissolves and is replaced completely with Fe / Ti.

The world is already unstable.

In many of our recent IEE / Fi thread discussions, we've discussed how Fe handles the raw emotion of situations, whereas Fi tries to get to the field of influence causing of the emotion ( @anndelise explains it more eloquently than I). And in this case, I don't think I can agree that Fi is "on it's way out", simply because there is need for both.

I'm not sure that's a correct characterization of Fi and Fe, but I'd rather not get into a debate about it because I made this thread to sulk, not to argue.

You might have a case for how Fi-egos may be on the downward trend, but I don't believe, even if that were true, that that makes us obsolete.

Sorry, but I really don't think you're an Fi-ego; I meant it when I said "LII".

[applejacks]

@Kenneth Chesney -

1) I personally believe IEEs to be quite capable of solving deep, complex problems, even if their Ne thinking is broad and jumpy at times.

2) Solving deep, complex problems isn't always the requirement. Sometimes coming up with a new idea, injecting innovation, or amping people up towards a unified vision is equally as important.

3) Sorry if I come across as debating within your sulking thread. You may commence sulking if you still believe all of this, but I'm perfectly happy with my IEE broad thinking, colorful ideas, charm, and natural talent for innovation and creativity

Sorry, but I really don't think you're an Fi-ego; I meant it when I said "LII".

lol.

EDIT: Also, I'm very sorry to hear that you feel misunderstood. Sounds like Michigan may not be the state for you. Have you thought about moving?

[Olduvai]

I think Fe/Ti people view "type" as a "label" when it is really an "essence". Here's another quote (all I can do is quote others; I can't explain this shit myself):

It was (and is) common to think that other animals are ruled by "instinct" whereas humans lost their instincts and are ruled by "reason", and that this is why we are so much more flexibly intelligent than other animals. William James took the opposite view. He argued that human behavior is more flexibly intelligent than that of other animals because we have more instincts than they do, not fewer. We tend to be blind to the existence of these instincts, however, precisely because they work so well -- because they process information so effortlessly and automatically. They structure our thought so powerfully, he argued, that it can be difficult to imagine how things could be otherwise. As a result, we take "normal" behavior for granted. We do not realize that "normal" behavior needs to be explained at all. This "instinct blindness" makes the study of psychology difficult. To get past this problem, James suggested that we try to make the "natural seem strange"

On this view, all normal human minds reliably develop a standard collection of reasoning and regulatory circuits that are functionally specialized and, frequently, domain-specific. These circuits organize the way we interpret our experiences, inject certain recurrent concepts and motivations into our mental life, and provide universal frames of meaning that allow us to understand the actions and intentions of others. Beneath the level of surface variability, all humans share certain views and assumptions about the nature of the world and human action by virtue of these human universal reasoning circuits.

In short, the circuits of the brain are designed to generate motion -- behavior -- in response to information from the environment. The function of your brain -- this wet computer -- is to generate behavior that is appropriate to your environmental circumstances.

[Beautiful sky]

I think IEE's "program" is better suited for a set of conditions that is different than the current set of conditions (at least where I live). I think IEE might've been a common type in the early days of Homo sapiens, but I think they are relatively unfit for the modern world. In short, I think IEE is a "dying type", and I think Delta is an "archaic quadra".

This is hard for me to explain; I agree with Carl Jung's characterization of Fi-egos:


Sorry for rambling; I truly believe IEE is obselete, and that makes me feel very sad. I see mostly Fe- and Ti-egos where I live; I honestly think Fi/Te is "on its way out", evolutionarily speaking.

I feel that way about EII too sometimes. That they are a dying type especially since there are plentiful LSE and they are all finding SEE to marry. However my opinions have changed. I find that LSE do love me and want me very much. That despite the perception of fun and adventure they get from SEE who apprehend their qualities, like they want to be perfect for LSE, the LSE figures them out soon enough and knows that what they want more of from the relationship, they are not getting. So, for me it's as simple as advertising myself the way I am and I get a ton of LSE suitors. Yes, most of them have been previously married to SEE (I can tell by VI-ing their kids), but I find that sudden willingness to grab onto me once they've found me. It's a nice feeling to be discovered and finally understood.

[Olduvai]

I feel that way about EII too sometimes. That they are a dying type especially since there are plentiful LSE and they are all finding SEE to marry. However my opinions have changed. I find that LSE do love me and want me very much. That despite the perception of fun and adventure they get from SEE who apprehend their qualities, like they want to be perfect for LSE, the LSE figures them out soon enough and knows that what they want more of from the relationship, they are not getting. So, for me it's as simple as advertising myself the way I am and I get a ton of LSE suitors. Yes, most of them have been previously married to SEE (I can tell by VI-ing their kids), but I find that sudden willingness to grab onto me once they've found me. It's a nice feeling to be discovered and finally understood.

Honestly Maritsa, at this point I consider you part of the problem; your head is firmly cemented inside your rectum. You're practically delusional.

[Olduvai]

Perhaps this will help:

Evolutionary psychology is founded on several core premises.

1. The brain is an information processing device, and it produces behavior in response to external and internal inputs.^[4][14]
2. The brain's adaptive mechanisms were shaped by natural and sexual selection.^[4][14]
3. Different neural mechanisms are specialized for solving problems in humanity's evolutionary past.^[4][14]
4. The brain has evolved specialized neural mechanisms that were designed for solving problems that recurred over deep evolutionary time,^[14] giving modern humans stone-age minds.^[4]
5. Most contents and processes of the brain are unconscious; and most mental problems that seem easy to solve are actually extremely difficult problems that are solved unconsciously by complicated neural mechanisms.^[4]
6. Human psychology consists of many specialized mechanisms, each sensitive to different classes of information or inputs. These mechanisms combine to produce manifest behavior.^[14]

If "IEE" is a set of specialized adaptive mechanisms, and if specialized adaptive mechanisms were designed for solving past problems, then I think that "IEE" was designed to solve problems that were present during the early days of our species, problems that are no longer problems in our modern world. Furthermore, I think that the problems present in today's world are better solved by other types.

[anndelise]

No, our thinking isn't precise, and we are prone to a number of errors, but we still have the capacity to experience whether something is contradictory, or if something isn't making sense. It might take us a while to figure out what, and how, and we wouldn't be figuring it out via Ti methods, but we still have 1D Ti. And with books and classes now that teach 2D Ti we can improve our polr some. (We also have 2D Si, 3D Ni, and 3D Fi to help us see how things connect.)

Also, just because other types might be better at the applications of solving a problem, doesn't mean we are obsolete. We have the advantage of thinking outside the box, as well as approaching a problem from multiple perspectives. We can help the TiNe consider the Fi implications, or point out variables the FiSe didn't notice.

Also, as psychologist types, while there are humans in need, and humanitarian problems to be solved, Delta NFs will still be needed in society. Admittedly, capitalism might make life difficult for us, but we are still needed by the people.

[Olduvai]

No, our thinking isn't precise, and we are prone to a number of errors, but we still have the capacity to experience whether something is contradictory, or if something isn't making sense. It might take us a while to figure out what, and how, and we wouldn't be figuring it out via Ti methods, but we still have 1D Ti. And with books and classes now that teach 2D Ti we can improve our polr some. (We also have 2D Si, 3D Ni, and 3D Fi to help us see how things connect.)

Also, just because other types might be better at the applications of solving a problem, doesn't mean we are obsolete. We have the advantage of thinking outside the box, as well as approaching a problem from multiple perspectives. We can help the TiNe consider the Fi implications, or point out variables the FiSe didn't notice.

Also, as psychologist types, while there are humans in need, and humanitarian problems to be solved, Delta NFs will still be needed in society. Admittedly, capitalism might make life difficult for us, but we are still needed by the people.

lol, I don't think you're Delta NF, either

[anndelise]

lol, I don't think you're Delta NF, either

Thankfully my type doesn't depend on what you, personally think.

And, considering your typing errors, perhaps that's why you don't see any Fi/Te in your area. It's not because they aren't there, but because you're not recognizing them.

[Olduvai]

Thankfully my type doesn't depend on what you, personally think.

And that is why you're not an Fi-ego.

And, considering your typing errors

"Typing errors"? I'll concede that I've misunderstood the definitions of the information aspects, but I rarely commit a typing error.

perhaps that's why you don't see any Fi/Te in your area. It's not because they aren't there, but because you're not recognizing them.

lol you can think that if you want, but defining Fi as "Implicit Field Statics" is a lot different than seeing it in practice. It's funny: in a lot of ways you're smarter than me, and that makes you better at understanding the theoretical aspects of socionics, but when it comes to actually seeing types for what they are, you're fucking clueless. I suggest you peruse the following threads of mine, as they might help you get a handle on what the types actually look like:
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...n-Michaels-SLE
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-Videos-of-LII
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Duck-Commander
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ctures-of-SLEs
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...f-Duck-Calling

[anndelise]

I honestly think this reasoning is Ti/Fe in nature. It's "I am this because others say I'm this"; with me, it's "I am this because I myself know I'm this". I don't need external validation; hell, I never mention typology to the people I know IRL. I feel like they'd find it creepy.

Originally Posted by anndelise
Thankfully my type doesn't depend on what you, personally think.

And that is why you're not an Fi-ego.

Make up your mind.

You put applejacks as Ti/Fe because she dared to ask her husband what he thought.
Yourself as Fi/Te because you don't need external validation.
And me as Ti/Fe because I don't need external validation (especially yours).

Too funny.

"Typing errors"? I'll concede that I've misunderstood the definitions of the information aspects, but I rarely commit a typing error.

I'm sure you believe you're almost always right. But that doesn't make you actualy right.

lol you can think that if you want, but defining Fi as "Implicit Field Statics" is a lot different than seeing it in practice. It's funny: in a lot of ways you're smarter than me, and that makes you better at understanding the theoretical aspects of socionics, but when it comes to actually seeing types for what they are, you're fucking clueless. I suggest you peruse the following threads of mine, as they might help you get a handle on what the types actually look like:
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...n-Michaels-SLE
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-Videos-of-LII
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Duck-Commander
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ctures-of-SLEs
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...f-Duck-Calling

And I suggest you peruse the beginning to middle of my blog if you want a clearer idea of how to see the aspects of the elements. I did up a post for each one. It may not be all Ti'd up for you, but I think I did pretty good getting the essence of each across.


Also, I notice that when confronted with info that doesn't suit your theoretical belief system, that you prefer to attack the person rather than look at the rest of the information they provided you.

Fwiw, I am sorry that you feel lonely and isolated. NeFi might be the shyest of the extroverts, but we still need relationships in our lives. People we can trust and turn to with our ideas and frustrations. People who can help us bring those ideas to fruition, help us get around a real world obstacle, ...or at least let us dream big and cushion us when we fall.

(And, even if it turns out that you aren't NeFi, I still am sorry that you feel lonely and isolated.)

[InvisibleJim]

You don't need to worry.

Nature abhors a vacuum.

[Olduvai]

woof, you're such a manipulative fucking cunt. I shake my head in disgust every time I see "woofwoofl marked this post as constructive"; it's pathetic how much of a tryhard you are.

[woofwoofl]

woof, you're such a manipulative fucking cunt. I shake my head in disgust every time I see "woofwoofl marked this post as constructive"; it's pathetic how much of a tryhard you are.

bwaahahahaha!

How's that case for me being ILE working out for you?

[Olduvai]

bwaahahahaha!

How's that case for me being ILE working out for you?

hah, you've already made the case for me

also:

This will probably sound dumb, but I was just reading all the threads about your "minor" misunderstandings with other forum members (you sure are in demand lately) and I just wanted to say that I see your pov and think your typings make much more sense than those of other members, including their own self-typings, which to me often seem completely off.

I'm a newbie and I don't have a professional grasp of socionics, but I would like to think I have some intuition, feeling if you will, to sense different groups of people.

So in my opinion, on many SEE's I know irl, there's no way woof is one (he sure is very intelectual and intuitive for a SEE), ILE on the other hand makes perfect sense

[woofwoofl]

hah, you've already made the case for me

also:

This will probably sound dumb, but I was just reading all the threads about your "minor" misunderstandings with other forum members (you sure are in demand lately) and I just wanted to say that I see your pov and think your typings make much more sense than those of other members, including their own self-typings, which to me often seem completely off.

I'm a newbie and I don't have a professional grasp of socionics, but I would like to think I have some intuition, feeling if you will, to sense different groups of people.

So in my opinion, on many SEE's I know irl, there's no way woof is one (he sure is very intelectual and intuitive for a SEE), ILE on the other hand makes perfect sense

oh my god! Mind telling us all which user you quoted? That quote sure as hell flows a lot like your writing style. You may have just made an ass of yourself in a way I would have never previously expected... wow...

[Olduvai]

oh my god! Mind telling us all which user you quoted? That quote sure as hell flows a lot like your writing style. You may have just made an ass of yourself in a way I would have never previously expected... wow...

well, I hate to sell him out, but since you're basically forcing my hand: it was @darya

inb4 "b-b-but he's a new member"

and it makes sense that you might see parallels in our writing styles; he's basically a more rational and articulate version of me

[wacey]

BTW, could you two just get a room already.

[Olduvai]

lol woof, you make me want to pull my hair out

[wacey]

Around the farms where I live, everyone helps each other out with the unspoken, soft rule, that eventually they will return the favour. For example, I help bring their heifers in for calfing (a big chore), then they will have us over for a big dinner sometime, and maybe pick up my vehicle tires or lend gasoline.

I just couldn't for the life of me understand how a sociotype could be disappearing, surely a cognition style would survive momentary fluctuations in society values? There are almost 8 billion people on the planet, that's a lot of introverted feeling out there. I think Fi is everywhere, it's so obvious, in work forces, in schools, in clubs, everywhere? If you are doing a technical job, like working as a mechanic, then at times, one would need to be more logical and methodic, but surely at lunch break an Fi- valuer would have his or her moment? Would not coworkers need to cooperate, understand one another? Would not part of understanding one another be about getting to know each other, such as their family, their children, what they think of such and such and so and so? Would not someone who shares their inner world, including logical thoughts, personal feelings, emotions be of great value and worth if they also performed their duties? In my own line of work, when all the "busy" work is done, do I not get a chance to discuss sentiments, convictions, thoughts on life situations, friends, family, ect? These people are there, if you know how to look. Just open yourself up to love. I'm not trying to give you some cheesy BS. You are so guarded I think.

On this very site can Fi not be going on in the back ground, behind all the Ti/Te/Fe/Se/Si/ Trolling that you are seeing K.C.? Do you really think that an Fi-ego would be that obvious?

In regards to this idea of having a bread winner for yourself and in return offering new ideas ect. I think that frankly a SLI would start to feel pretty resentful after having to do all the work. I realize it's tough making a living and supporting yourself, but I think it is un realistic to believe that someone else out there who will do it for you. Does not God help those who help himself? I was there, I thought screw it I just can't make it on my own. A decade later, and I'm still here. It's funny I even made a thread about it years ago, "I am not helpless….." This incredible women that I know, an IEE, single mom, a rancher, a log truck driver, a friking goddess, such a warm and grounded individual, She does all these things, supports herself, and she is IEE. You got to drop the "I can'ts" or the elaborate reasons of why you can't do, be, have, make whatever (exuses) and telling yourself it's because of your cognition style of IEE. It's a trap mate. As a older guy here, I'm telling you, it's a trap.

I dated an illusionary partner for years, so I could certainly empathize with being surrounded by people who value something and are in many ways on a different wave length, it can be so disheartening, but only in small increments, like a drop of water in a cave, over centuries, erodes the earth below it, so to does being around people that do not suit your nature erode your sense of self.

[Olduvai]

Around the farms where I live, everyone helps each other out with the unspoken, soft rule, that eventually they will return the favour. For example, I help bring their heifers in for calfing (a big chore), then they will have us over for a big dinner sometime, and maybe pick up my vehicle tires or lend gasoline.

I just couldn't for the life of me understand how a sociotype could be disappearing, surely a cognition style would survive momentary fluctuations in society values? There are almost 8 billion people on the planet, that's a lot of introverted feeling out there. I think Fi is everywhere, it's so obvious, in work forces, in schools, in clubs, everywhere? If you are doing a technical job, like working as a mechanic, then at times, one would need to be more logical and methodic, but surely at lunch break an Fi- valuer would have his or her moment? Would not coworkers need to cooperate, understand one another? Would not part of understanding one another be about getting to know each other, such as their family, their children, what they think of such and such and so and so? Would not someone who shares their inner world, including logical thoughts, personal feelings, emotions be of great value and worth if they also performed their duties? In my own line of work, when all the "busy" work is done, do I not get a chance to discuss sentiments, convictions, thoughts on life situations, friends, family, ect? These people are their, if you know how to look. Just open yourself up to love. You are so guarded I think.

On this very site can Fi not be going on in the back ground, behind all the Ti/Te/Fe/Se/Si/ Trolling that you are seeing K.C.? Do you really think that an Fi-ego would be that obvious?

In regards to this idea of having a bread winner for yourself and in return offering new ideas ect. I think that frankly a SLI would start to feel pretty resentful after having to do all the work. I realize it's tough making a living and supporting yourself, but I think it is un realistic to believe that someone else out there who will do it for you. Does not God help those who help himself? I was there, I thought screw it I just can't make it on my own. A decade later, and I'm still here. It's funny I even made a thread about it years ago, "I am not helpless….."

I dated an illusionary partner for years, so I could certainly empathize with being surrounded by people who value something and are in many ways on a different wave length, it can be so disheartening, but only in small increments, like a drop of water in a cave, over centuries, erodes the earth below it, so to does being around people that do not suit your nature erode your sense of self.

you're one of the nicest people around here, but I think you're way off with this post

[wacey]

You are questioning your worth as an IEE? And you don't see it in your life?

[Olduvai]

You are questioning your worth as an IEE?

Honestly, yes. I truly don't think I'm good for much; I can type people but that's about it.

And you don't see it in your life?

Not at the moment. I've made some pretty stupid choices in my life, and I'm unhappy with the state I'm currently in. Furthermore, I'm skeptical as to whether I'll be successful at anything, as it seems like I'm always "missing the point" or "doing it wrong".

[woofwoofl]

I'm skeptical as to whether I'll be successful at anything, as it seems like I'm always "missing the point" or "doing it wrong".

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...plaining-to-do
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...hread-split%29

Johannes Kenneth Toby Mozart "Butt Commander" Keith Chesney typology anthem:

[Olduvai]

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...plaining-to-do
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...hread-split%29

Johannes Kenneth Toby Mozart "Butt Commander" Keith Chesney typology anthem:

super ironic post here, @woofwoofl, because you're the king of "doing it wrong" and "missing the point" when it comes to socionics

you'll never understand, of course, but you're probably one of the dumbest people here as far as typing goes.

[Beautiful sky]

Honestly, yes. I truly don't think I'm good for much; I can type people but that's about it.

Being able to do this much you should be able to position yourself quite well in the social circle. Good luck with that because you can't type for shit let alone understand the nature of society and the role of individuals within it.

[Olduvai]

Being able to do this much you should be able to position yourself quite well in the social circle. Good luck with that because you can't type for shit let alone understand the nature of society and the role of individuals within it.

aww, did I hurt your feelings? sorry babe

[wacey]

@Kenneth Chesney -

Life is amazing for 6 - 8 months. After that, all of those personal problems that were still lurking only became magnified under the microscope of a serious relationship, because now the person you love is witnessing you deal with them.

Hah, for me it's 4 months, especially if we live together.

IMO type is learned behavior, and likely not biologically innate. when you're born your psyche starts adapting to its environment in a way that is beneficial to yourself and your well-being. thus, every type is an adaptive function, not just IEE, and occasionally the following happens:

(...) traits that were at one time adaptive in a certain environment, are now "mismatched" to the environment that the trait is currently present in. This can present a number of problems for the types in question.

/2cents

I think learned behaviour is certainly a factor. Could it not be said that a child has a defining personality type from birth though? For instance, at around 2 years old it could be said a child is "active", "shy", "outgoing", "sensitive", "shock-proof", "social", "independent", ect. Many adjectives used to describe young people, and how their outer behaviour matches or does not match the behaviour of their parents seem to suggest that in least in part cognition/ personality types are inborn.

I believe that adapting to ones environmental sociotypes is an activity that only enhances or supplements the development of ones in born sociotype.

[wacey]

Welcome to the Life of Adults.

[Olduvai]

Welcome to the Life of Adults.

lol, that makes me feel somewhat better, in a "maybe I'm not alone" type way. Lately I've been trying to be more "socially compliant", especially while at work. I've made a habit of saying "yes" to things and following through with my promises. I've decided to just "be myself" and not give a fuck what other people say or think. The result: I feel valued and respected by other people. So there has been progress, but I still feel pretty useless as a human being.

[applejacks]

@Kenneth Chesney -

I've been where you are. I put all of my hopes and dreams on an "ideal mate", and kept saying things like "when I find him, THEN I'll ______."

But let me explain what happens when you do find them. Life is amazing for 6 - 8 months. After that, all of those personal problems that were still lurking only became magnified under the microscope of a serious relationship, because now the person you love is witnessing you deal with them.

I am the perfect example for your expressions of loneliness. I always thought... "when I have a partner, I will no longer be lonely." But during our first year of marriage, when my partner was busy most days setting up a dental practice and too exhausted to go out and do things afterwards, I was lonelier than I ever was to begin with, because now I was married and couldn't go out and just get attention whenever I wanted it. So I finally had to learn to deal with it in healthier ways that wouldn't manifest bitterness or resentment, and now my husband had to watch me learn how to handle it, which as difficult. When someone you love sees the a less attractive side of you, it can be incredibly painful.

So when you build a relationship in which you expect your partner to MAKE you happy, it's a recipe for failure. In that example, I was under the assumption that my partner should MAKE me feel less lonely. But he was busy providing and setting up a future for me (for us!) He was giving love in a way that I was not receiving it, so I had to re-tune myself to understand that he was trying, but in a different way.

Bottom Line: Nobody can make you happy or less lonely or fix any problems you suffer personally. It's unrealistic for so many reasons, and if you don't understand that, you'll never be able to have a healthy, interdependent relationship. Human beings are complicated creatures. Somehow in our minds, we think adding one into our life will ONLY help us, but the truth is, it only complicates things further. To make it work, you have to be a sustainable, independent adult so that you can address both YOUR problems and any problems that arise in the relationship. Otherwise, the relationship is a dependent one, and eventually something will break.

If you've never had a serious relationship, none of that may make sense. But I'm telling the truth. You need to learn to be happy on your own first. Don't prolong your life and don't expect someone to come along and fix your problems, because it doesn't happen that way. I totally get that you're lonely, I've been there, but the more sustainable you become on your own, the better your relationship will be with someone in the future. Somehow, life only gets harder when you have a partner because you can't always have your way. Enjoy it now!

EDIT: This was directed not just to you, but to everyone. I only hope to share in my experience if only to spare others from making the same mistakes. But please understand, I do sympathize.

[Olduvai]

@Kenneth Chesney -

I've been where you are. I put all of my hopes and dreams on an "ideal mate", and kept saying things like "when I find him, THEN I'll ______."

But let me explain what happens when you do find them. Life is amazing for 6 - 8 months. After that, all of those personal problems that were still lurking only became magnified under the microscope of a serious relationship, because now the person you love is witnessing you deal with them.

I am the perfect example for your expressions of loneliness. I always thought... "when I have a partner, I will no longer be lonely." But during our first year of marriage, when my partner was busy most days setting up a dental practice and too exhausted to go out and do things afterwards, I was lonelier than I ever was to begin with, because now I was married and couldn't go out and just get attention whenever I wanted it. So I finally had to learn to deal with it in healthier ways that wouldn't manifest bitterness or resentment, and now my husband had to watch me learn how to handle it, which as difficult. When someone you love sees the a less attractive side of you, it can be incredibly painful.

So when you build a relationship in which you expect your partner to MAKE you happy, it's a recipe for failure. In that example, I was under the assumption that my partner should MAKE me feel less lonely. But he was busy providing and setting up a future for me (for us!) He was giving love in a way that I was not receiving it, so I had to re-tune myself to understand that he was trying, but in a different way.

Bottom Line: Nobody can make you happy or less lonely or fix any problems you suffer personally. It's unrealistic for so many reasons, and if you don't understand that, you'll never be able to have a healthy, interdependent relationship. Human beings are complicated creatures. Somehow in our minds, we think adding one into our life will ONLY help us, but the truth is, it only complicates things further. To make it work, you have to be a sustainable, independent adult so that you can address both YOUR problems and any problems that arise in the relationship. Otherwise, the relationship is a dependent one, and eventually something will break.

If you've never had a serious relationship, none of that may make sense. But I'm telling the truth. You need to learn to be happy on your own first. Don't prolong your life and don't expect someone to come along and fix your problems, because it doesn't happen that way. I totally get that you're lonely, I've been there, but the more sustainable you become on your own, the better your relationship will be with someone in the future. Somehow, life only gets harder when you have a partner because you can't always have your way. Enjoy it now!

EDIT: This was directed not just to you, but to everyone. I only hope to share in my experience if only to spare others from making the same mistakes. But please understand, I do sympathize.

I appreciate you, applejacks; you're the nicest supervisor a gal could ask for. I'm actually in the process of re-enrolling at my soon-to-be alma mater; I've got two classes I need to take before I can get my degree, and I'm hella excited to be done. I realized that I need to "make my own life"; I found the following scene from Castaway to be very inspirational:

(Castaway is my SLI friend's favorite movie)

[applejacks]

I appreciate you, applejacks; you're the nicest supervisor a gal could ask for. I'm actually in the process of re-enrolling at my soon-to-be alma mater; I've got two classes I need to take before I can get my degree, and I'm hella excited to be done. I realized that I need to "make my own life"; I found the following scene from Castaway to be very inspirational:

(Castaway is my SLI friend's favorite movie)

Thank you for sharing that! I didn't even remember that scene, but it's beautiful!

Identical, Supervisor, whatever... we all may be wrong. Bottom line is, we're human and we all need support. So I'm happy to hear you're taking the reigns. What will be your degree / field of study? Keep us posted! I struggled in finishing my degree because I kept changing my mind and wasn't sure what I'd do with my life, but Dad told me that the degree is just a "rite of passage." It's a trial of whether or not you can commit and follow through on something on your own. Once you do, you'll find doors opening up all around you, as long as you're looking for them. (He was right, in my case)

Best of luck! Let us know how it goes! (And thanks again for the clip!!)

[anndelise]

I appreciate you, applejacks; you're the nicest supervisor a gal could ask for.

You're a gal?

[Olduvai]

You're a gal?

lol, no. twas a joke.

[Radio]

IMO type is learned behavior, and likely not biologically innate. when you're born your psyche starts adapting to its environment in a way that is beneficial to yourself and your well-being. thus, every type is an adaptive function, not just IEE, and occasionally the following happens:

(...) traits that were at one time adaptive in a certain environment, are now "mismatched" to the environment that the trait is currently present in. This can present a number of problems for the types in question.

/2cents