2015 Type Galen Thread

[Galen]

It's a strong word but I think it's accurate. I don't see you engaging in much lighthearted discussion like Alphas do, or even Deltas sometimes. You seem to have a darker more serious tone and I rarely see you being lighthearted and playful.

maybe I've been super playful this whole time but you're just casually misinterpreting it as me holding serious sentiments that are in actuality mere exaggerations

So how you interact with anyone else shouldn't be a deciding factor?

Sure it's a deciding factor. There are different qualities you look for in different styles of interaction, some of which that are relevant and some that aren't.

So the corollary that your anecdotal evidence that your type has to be compatible with Radio shouldn't be considered?

Sure it should. Why would you say otherwise?

So you 'get on' 'just fine' with most people, then why are you even concerned with a type-me thread?

Where did I say I get on fine with "most people?"

(I'm also not a fan with dismissing any socionics patterns or discussion with 'OH THAT'S BECAUSE OF ENNEAGRAM'. I think it's a crutch when things can't be explained socionically)

This is because you're a blind socionics fanboy without any substantive independent thought on the matter.

Lol? Not sure why you even bring up intelligence. Perhaps you feel threatened by me in a way. At least enough to try to put me down. I'm very smart, thank you

Hah, not too long ago @Narc and I were talking about how saying "I'm intelligent" automatically puts someone into "I'm actually a moron" by default.

But how that relates to the point I made about how you might dismiss this perspective - I'd like to point out that dismissing something and being wrong are NOT mutually exclusive. You can think I'm wrong and believe I'm wrong 100%, but that doesn't actually mean that you're right.

You can dismiss a terrible idea and not be in someone's conflicting quadra. Sturgeon's Law.

This is where I'll simply disagree with you. Radio exhibits Se all the time and virtually no Ne. Just today for example in chat he was talking about how he likes choking people during sex. His romance style is very typical of the Aggressor.

And how long did your relationship with Radio last, praytell?

In most EII type descriptions I find, they abhor any sort of violence or aggression, because of Se PoLR. He often exerts his will and his opinion against others in a manner that Se dominants do. I can't see him as EII. I think your perception and understanding of the functions and types is off because of this.

Typing words on a computer box != being violent. You seem to have a really poor intuitive sense for when someone's being facetious and not.

Perhaps apathetic is a wrong way of putting it. That's from the Alpha perspective, yes. But yes - divorced from reality. In your own words, how you see that --- could you describe how you then are engaged in reality, as opposed to your understanding of how Gamma NTs are divorced from reality?

It's not so much I'm 'engaged with reality' as much as I'm engaged in my own emotional experience that's passively derived from 'reality.' You'll usually find Gamma NTs on here talking about things totally divorced from that side of their psyches.

Others have mentioned they think I'm similar to you as well

One person has said this, and I have no idea why sienna made that comparison because it's patently wrong.

(which I can see in parts but mostly disagree with), but perhaps that piece of information of my self-typing would be relevant to their comparisons and analysis in this thread.

I sure as hell hope it isn't

(sheesh more enneagram crutch answer to explain differences blah blah blah)

Because they are relevant differences that should not be the burden of socionics to answer.

1. How do you type Agarina, whom you say you relate to?

I have no issue with her as EII and some sx/sp. We haven't talked much one-on-one before, but from what I've read we have very similar outlooks on relationships w/ others.

2. Why do you hate the IEEs so much to call them "demon hell-spawn"

methinks your critical reading skills need some exercise. the hilarious demon hellspawn quip was directed at so > sx types, which as @Radio mentioned before was excruciatingly tongue-in-cheek. I didn't expect anybody to take as a serious attack on any type.

and yet say you get along perfectly with the people you 'think' are EII?

I get along with some EIIs, not so much with others, for reasons already expounded upon at length by people like @anndelise.

Have you not considered that it's at least a bit weird to hate one type so much yet vibe perfectly and get along with its Mirror partner?

ugh critical reading skills jesus

(Please provide an answer in socionics terms without using enneagram differences or instinct-stacking as a crutch)

I'm not going to play by your rules for argument just because it's convenient to you.

3. It seems you still self-type Delta after saying this quote and after saying you don't identify as Gamma. If you don't identify as IEE, how do you self-type?

Same as before

Why did you make this thread to begin with?

I wanted attention.

Are you considering either EII, SLI, or LSE as the other 3 non-IEE Delta possibilities, or is this thread simply for your own fun/musings and to reaffirm some idea of your type you already had in your head?

4. If you actually do still self-type as IEE, then how the heck do you explain the differences you feel with other IEEs? Again, please don't use another system of enneagram in your answer. I want to hear a pure socionics answer.

Except that other system does explain the differences perfectly well, dingus.

1. How do you define Te?

ugh this is why socionics arguments are impossible. It doesn't matter how I explain any of the IEs at this point because it's all easy fodder for half-assed reinterpretation and nitpicky bullshit. Most of what I understand of socionics happens at a base experiential level that makes it really tough to explain verbally.

2. Are you saying Te does not equal work

Of course I am, that's literally the thing I just said.

supported by the example of a non-Te ego being a diligent worker? Then how does that make sense when saying you don't identify with a type description of Te-leading because it includes the component of work? Aren't those ideas in conflict with one another?

No, I'm saying that I don't identify with that description in part because it's shitty and dumb.

[Galen]

Ok. Whatever, man. As we've discovered, this thread wasn't really about hearing alternate perspectives about your socionics type, but more about your basking in the yearly tradition of your type-thread and promoting your attention-seeking narcissism. This was a giant waste of time for your to ask others what they thought your type was, and then reject any honest opinions from anyone else. I still have other non-IEE ideas about your type besides LIE, but obviously at this point you don't want to hear them and quite frankly I don't wish to share them.

It most certainly was not a waste of time. Through this thread I got to figure out who knew what they were talking about and who weren't.

I also think this post of yours shows proof of your cowardice to post any functional definition out of fear others will disagree. Hmm, better to stick to the "experiential level" then where nobody can disagree with you or your personal experiences, that way you can always be right.

Because every time somebody asks for a definition of this shit it's always appended with "YEAH BUT SO IF THIS XYZ THEN ALSO THIS OTHER INCORRECT EXTRAPOLATION DUH." It needlessly obligates me to draw in every single tiny fine-tuned detail all the little nuances about what I'm observing into oblivion, only to have them misinterpreted and taken to literally by folks like you who 1) have shitty critical reading skills and 2) don't know how to take what I say as a grab-bag of general observations and try to work an iron-clad systematized in between everything where it doesn't belong. It's frustrating and anxiety-wracking as fuck. If that ain't Ti-PoLR then I don't know what is.

[darya]

It most certainly was not a waste of time. Through this thread I got to figure out who knew what they were talking about and who weren't.

This thread has got me thinking what is it that I find so irritable with many Delta NF's here that I don't otherwise - I happen to get above average with them??? It's probably that we're all just so much more pussified and diplomatic and no one says what we really think about each other. If we would speak our minds freely or know what others really think of us, we would probably just off ourselves or at least become even more misanthropic.