I've started with one and was all too sure of it, but it was proven to be wrong. Now I'm more circumspect about it and am considering 4-5 possible types.
I've started with one and was all too sure of it, but it was proven to be wrong. Now I'm more circumspect about it and am considering 4-5 possible types.
I've considered ESI and EII, although EII only for brief periods of time.
“No psychologist should pretend to understand what he does not understand... Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand nothing.” -Anton Chekhov
http://kevan.org/johari?name=Bardia0
http://kevan.org/nohari?name=Bardia0
Same here with ILI, IEI and EII. Well, I first mistyped as INTJ in MBTI and eventually realized myself, as well as with the input of others I interacted with, that I could be MBTI INFJ. One friend who wrote blogs on MBTI thought MBTI INFP but his reasoning was horrible (he said I had Pish humor and seemed more authentic than people-pleasing). I still considered it since I was apparently wrong before and tried to better understand the differences. Eventually I looked into other theories to help me and became a lot more sure of IEI after getting into Socionics. Socionics has a lot more structure to it so it was easier for me to type myself. I have speculated briefly on other types although I only seriously considered three and mistyped once.Originally Posted by Aylen
EDIT: I guess, technically, I only seriously considered IEI for Socionics. At most I looked into EII but nah.
There's a max. of 6 that I considered possible. I've never considered ESE, SEI, ILE, LII, SEE, SLE, LIE, LSE, IEE, SLI.
3: IEI, EII and EIE.
Two types seriously, and one other cursively.
Then I met people who saved me, brought me back to life, showed me how to laugh again. I don't want to be this type, but the intertypes cannot be denied.
Technically, I guess I only seriously considered IEI. The others felt oh so wrong. I have no doubt now but I will still jokingly type myself SLE or EIE.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
IEI and LIE
And also EIE and ILI rightIEI and LIE?
For myself, I believe I've considered the 5 types by various differing arguments.
Which type are you, if you don't mind me asking?
Only 10 for me.
Easy Day
Oh yeah.And also EIE and ILI rightThose too. But I've ruled those out now.
LII, IEI, ILI, and perhaps EII.
I didn't realize I was so all over the place (one from every quadra).
Last edited by nil; 07-08-2014 at 05:23 AM.
are we all confused EIE?
I'm Fi- and Se-phobic like hell so INTj and ENTp. This one time I thought ISTp and then I read the description.
Warm Regards,
Clowns & Entropy
ILI and lately IEI mostly.
Also questioned a bit the possibility of being LIE or even EIE considering the external influence.
Ni and Se valuer for sure, and definitely an Ni ego.
Consider looking into EIE
I did. Really enjoyed it! I was pointed toward a facebook group called "Word Socionics Society" set up by Jack Oliver Aaron, who I met yesterday.
I worked out my typing only yesterday morning, and the meet up only cemented my conclusion.
Are you surer of your typing now?
Cool, glad it worked out. Perhaps your thinking that you were your mothers' supervisor could have had to do with your subtype in DCNH?I worked out my typing only yesterday morning, and the meet up only cemented my conclusion.
Are you surer of your typing now?
Yeah. I mean, I was sure of my type in the beginning and just wanted to hear others' input. It did make me less sure but more so momentarily.
I don't know too much about DCNH. I think mirror fits better than supervisor. Me and my mother always have a kind of power-struggle and rivalry going on. We both seem to be in our superego a lot of the time. She focuses a lot on Si because she feels she has to, and myself on Te for the same reason. Without her, no one would do the housework, and I always feel that it's my job to optimise everything.Cool, glad it worked out. Perhaps your thinking that you were your mothers' supervisor could have had to do with your subtype in DCNH?
Yeah. I mean, I was sure of my type in the beginning and just wanted to hear others' input. It did make me less sure but more so momentarily.
That makes sense. We are aware of the Super-Ego's 'shoulds' but have more trouble with the POLR than the role. The Super-Ego can be a bit inflexible or rigid so I imagine you guys' power-struggle could be you guys hitting each others' POLR via the role. I can somewhat relate to your mothers' role and housework, haha.
Same here, on the Ti side. ILE is the only type I seriously considered. I was carried away from time to time towards:
- SLE - my brother proposed it to me, and I considered it because I am somewhat competitive and I don't find myself naïve - as ILEs are described. I think I have a sharp sense for uncovering conmen & frauds. Non-competitive sports or games (for "fun" xD) are totally boring and make no sense to me.
- EIE
You have described our relationship perfectly there. Yeah, there's always a little bit of resentment there. I guess, subconsciously she is feeling obliged to do the housework because my Dad is LII and therefore "Infantile" (in the romance style sense). He gives out signals that he needs a caregiver, so my Mum pulls up the slack.
.
Last edited by Skepsis; 09-05-2015 at 03:46 AM.
The only Te-type I could at all imagine is ILI. The alpha NT, beta NF are other bets.
As a simple example, that is a super Ne compatible trait in Jungian terms. Now yes socionics =/= Jungian typology, but at the same time, the definitions of IE have us wonder often why they are defined as they are, and why select this one over that, etc.
The only way I can answer this question for the socionics definitions is general quadra values, with the acknowledgement that human beings adapt to circumstances, but certain patterns of information are probably more ideal than others.
Being sensitive to socionics Se, more than average for your type for instance, needn't be that it forms the core of your worldview and preferred mode of informational existence, which is alpha.
Otherwise, I honestly find it crazy and ludicrous that people don't show signs and hints of belonging to other information-valuations than their main one.
Oh how come?Consider looking into EIE
Many reasons.
If I understand you correctly here, indeed people use all IEs - for example in guesswork anyone uses N and F even when that is not prioritized (ST - N, F are weak, subdued). The difference between types is precisely these prioritizations and predominant conscious focus.
Sure, that was my general point, and even an emphasis that I think the extent to which the nonpreferred IE are accessed may depend a lot more on circumstance/necessity/other temperamental features than covered by 1/16 types.
I think here the difference is between valued vs necessity. A relatively kinetic energy conscious alpha or delta member could basically just come from their personal circumstances and temperament's interplay with their superego block for instance. In other words "this isn't the meat but it is a demand, and I don't prefer it, but I recognize meeting these demands helps keep me away from interference with my preferred mode of functioning, as liable as I am to underestimate it." Another thing is that when operates from the standpoint of avoiding the negative, meeting the superego demands could even be seen as something of a positive/relief; after all, one's general information values and orientation cannot just be broken in half along a dichotomy squarely; it'll be a matter of what generally seems correct.
The other slight point was that I can't help but note how some of socionics IE framings don't go with Jung's original framings, which is fine, but still complicates things for me because Jung's own reasons for framing things as he did can be ambiguous, and more different, legitimate ways of framing things only have one question more the real reason why things are as they are.
In addition to LII, I've also seriously considered EII, ILI, and ILE. I also scored LIE once on a test but I never seriously considered it for myself. Looking at quadra values, gamma clearly doesn't fit. And most socionics tests suck.
Most recently I was torn between LII and EII, considering myself a weird hybrid of the two. I knew that I clearly valued Si/Ne and identified withPoLR. I thought EII for awhile because I'm kind and considerate, and I care about doing the morally right thing. Also, as good as I am at
I don't always want to focus on it. After more self-reflection and discussion with others, I was able to see that I don't really value
but that I clearly do value
than
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
Once again I find myself relatating with what you write. Am thinking you are my twin!In addition to LII, I've also seriously considered EII, ILI, and ILE. I also scored LIE once on a test but I never seriously considered it for myself. Looking at quadra values, gamma clearly doesn't fit. And most socionics tests suck.
Most recently I was torn between LII and EII, considering myself a weird hybrid of the two. I knew that I clearly valued Si/Ne and identified with
ILI, IEI, ILE, and LIE
Just one other ILE, because of Ne. Because I have such carried interests and most of them are intellectual. I figured out, with the help of my mother, that I was really in need of Te, I loved people and was very much a humanist, I lacked the kind of energy that is required of Extraverts and I lacked the emotional and merry dichotomy that ILE would fall in.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
SEI, LII, and EII, all only because of a Type Me thread. Ultimately IEI was the only one that clicked with me, despite people insisting I'm some sort of Alpha.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
