@Aylen, we seem to have quite a bit in common ^_^
@Aylen, we seem to have quite a bit in common ^_^
“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
awwww! that's such an adorable thing ^_^
Yes I can see this because Fi types get moody and do not know how to express what is going on the inside with actual words. Like I may feel discontent that my SO decided to go to Costco when I wanted him to not go for whatever reason and when he returns instead of saying "I'm pretty upset that you went" I show moodiness or long "don't talk to me face" This is a "call" to speak with me to understand that I'm truly upset...but that I've found no way to change the situation in him or her or anyone else. So what must be done? How does one deal with a situation that they can't control other? Control is a disease...why would you want to control? Just do what you want.
-
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
I think ethical types can get along very easily and a lot of the communication differences can be overcome as long as everyone is communicating in good faith. I think toxic self-absorbed ethical types can make things very difficult (as one could imagine).
I related to everything Golden said above. I try to be accepting of Fi but in the end, I don't really want to think about it nor do I feel that I need to.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Over time I've learned to give people the chart and not blow up the em just cause they mess up. I used to only focus on the outcome of the action and not the sentiment of the person which is useful to me now. So instead of blowing up there are calm signal lights that show the schematic
Shit starts blowing up upon repeated offenses, and an insistence on them. Even then my "fuck you and goodbyes" are alot calmer these days. You can move pretty big mountains with very little push If you do it right. Thanks for your perspective.
Fe demonstrative might have something to do with my flexibility In that domain.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Very few things honestly. A lack of respect for my personal property or space is one. Though the blow up doesn't come from the situations themselves...but the number of times I have to enforce the boundary. Three strikes rule, upping the "force" every time. I think a "blow up" implies a loss of control, which isn't accurate. I just adjust the firmness to the occasion.
As for what will actually get me to erupt I'll keep to myself