"Dude, it's cool. I'm not having a manic episode, it's just Fe."
ILE (ENTp)
SEI (ISFp)
ESE (ESFj)
LII (INTj)
SLE (ESTp)
IEI (INFp)
EIE (ENFj)
LSI (ISTj)
SEE (ESFp)
ILI (INTp)
LIE (ENTj)
ESI (ISFj)
IEE (ENFp)
SLI (ISTp)
LSE (ESTj)
EII (INFj)
"Dude, it's cool. I'm not having a manic episode, it's just Fe."
Last edited by Desert Financial; 12-15-2018 at 08:13 AM.
EIE creative with serious normalizing drive. Does not give off that real calmness of normalizing. Hard to say though as depression runs rampant in him. He has his very deep concentration moments which is indicative of creative.
https://socioniks.net/article/?id=223
Creative subtype - Mentor playingProne to reincarnations in different images. Demonstrative, can submit himself. His mood is changeable. In a good mood, courteous, animated, joking, writing aphorisms.In a bad mood, gloomy and irritable, breaks down on loved ones. It involves the synthesis of opposites, transitions from a positive to a negative image and vice versa.
Achieves freedom of expression, from clothing to lifestyle.A detailed review of subtypes of quadra beta in publications:
Subtype LSI « Inspector » , Subtypes EI «Marshal» , Subtypes IES « Lirik » .
Normalizing Subtype - Educating MentorIntelligent and prudent person, self-righteous. Critical and caustic in dealing with opponents. He prefers to distance himself, as loud sounds, sudden movements or unpleasant smells irritate and exhaust him.
Proud and touchy. Painfully tolerates criticism of one’s appearance or habits. Hesitates in the choice between the senses and the mind. An assessment of general patterns in the development of any area.Synthesizes his ideas with other sources, thus building his theory or teaching.
Last edited by The Reality Denialist; 12-15-2018 at 08:10 AM.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Yeah, I usually have 5 different theories in mind, involving many that are not personality type related, but maladaptive mechanisms, illnesses, current life situations, etc. that I think it becomes really hard to find "A Source" for all the behavioral factors, like Socionics for example.
Not just that, but the whole chicken vs egg thing breaks my mind. You might see correlation, but not causality.
I think it was an Enneagram 6 description that to me seemed more like a great thread about unsafe attachment patterns, rather than a "oh, tee hee, that's just who I am".
I agree with @golden and you - it can add a layer and more questions - also it can be fun to explain everything within this model, but more like a mental game or exploration, not as a mask for something you'd need help with. And even if it would explain something, the bigger problem is using it as a proof that these things shouldn't change. We can explain many health and mental health issues by different factors, and yes, some of their development can be understandable if you look about one's history and circumstances. It doesn't mean it's good for you now, doesn't mean your life wouldn't be better by changing it, or that you don't need treatment and support.
Not sure why I wrote this, I basically just rewrote everything you did before me in 2 sentences.
IMO it’s tantamount to the same thing. Dont read a value statement into this. Mental illness is what it is. The mechanisms as to the why and how are redundant at this level of discussion. I dont judge mental illness like others do and I cast a wide net with the term. I see most of humanity as afflicted by some level of mental Dis-ease.
The question at this level is shoukd society cater and chnage to better accommodate a transgender person or should the transgender person accept their place as it stands.
Petterson plays around at this level and you watch him avoiding giving direct answers which is supremely canadian of him.
It's still stupid to call human differences mental illness. That term implies an illness that needs to be cured. It leads to all kinds of fallacious thinking, such as reparative therapy. I don't think you even really know or have an idea what mental illness is, if you're using the term so broadly.
Is that the question? Identity is both individual and influenced by society. It isn't about choosing one over the other. If this is the kind of question that Peterson gets people to ask, then society is fubar.The question at this level is shoukd society cater and chnage to better accommodate a transgender person or should the transgender person accept their place as it stands.
Because it is a world-view, a belief, a modus operandi, that the ego attaches itself to. A fixation, as @waddup mentioned. It is not the ego. And in turn, the ego is not the self, though we like to tell ourselves otherwise. So already, once's E-type is at least twice removed from our essence.
I stated that transgenderism is a kind of mental illness, not human differences. What those people who are, choose to do with it, is up to them. As a gay man myself, I have had to reconcile that my own homosexuality might be a type kf mental illness and / or a kind of genetic fuck up. What I choose to believe about it is a form of mental health. I dont kid myself into thinking its normal though. It has become normalized thanks to media, public opinion swaying, still doesnt make it any less abnormal. Besides I dont see it as an equivalent problem to transgenderism. Humanity is going to start playing with the human genome its already happened in China recently. Look out for the free for all. Chicks with dicks is going to look mild in a hundred years.
The cure is self acceptance. Which could mean accepting your own delusions.That term implies an illness that needs to be cured.
I do.It leads to all kinds of fallacious thinking, such as reparative therapy. I don't think you even really know or have an idea what mental illness is, if you're using the term so broadly.
It is fucked up. That’s Peterson’s entire point.Is that the question? Identity is both individual and influenced by society. It isn't about choosing one over the other. If this is the kind of question that Peterson gets people to ask, then society is fubar.
@Olimpia did you have anything else to say about Peterson as sx/so and in regard to my points from before? I do think you can still make a case for him being sx/so, but I still question this idea you stated earlier about the stacking.
He has sparked controversy in a way that is unusual for So/Sp 1. So/Sp 1 is more often found in Law and similar pursuits. They are more stable and less "impassionate" or socially disruptive, due to the desire to be part of the group.Also, you could even argue he loses composure too often for someone who is supposedly a 1.However, how he has sparked controversy and a "movement"/following of some kind, with a fan base, is much more typical of Sx/So than So/Sp.
Jordan Peterson is known for shouting and even crying during his talks or interviews. He loses composure too often for someone who is supposedly So/Sp 1.
I never said Jung or Augusta should be taken as gospel truth, and in fact I've directly critiqued both Jung and Augusta on my website and blog, not to mention presented an interpretation of socionics that goes beyond what they imagined. The others you mentioned aren't directly relevant to my research. I am familiar with and to some extent find value in other psychological research - taking it with a grain of salt means just that. The difference with socionics is that I can (and have) directly verified it through my own research and personal experience. If you disagree with my conclusions (which are elaborated on my website) then there's not much more else to say. However, your knowledge of socionics seems limited at best so I don't take these kinds of objections very seriously.
You said "it's the only general model we have for normal psychological functioning." Ie. that it's the sole, valid interpretation of how a normal psyche functions. Therefore, your viewpoint amounts to a claim that it's the absolute truth, or the "gospel truth." What about the DSM-5 alternative model of personality, or Kernsberg's model of personality organization, or Big 5, HEXACO, MBTI, WHODAS, or any model that could be synthesized from these systems? You've obviously disregarded them in favor of Socionics, once again dovetailing with the fact that you take Socionics as the gospel truth.
This is what you had to say about ADD in the thread I made about ADD earlier:
That's not taking the criteria for ADD with a "grain of salt." Your viewpoint on the matter amounts to conspiracy theory.
If you think that functioning is "Te", then you confuse objective reality with subjective reality in that you think that objective phenomena literally amount to information elements. Ie. you're tacitly roping people into your worldview about what reality even is with the theories posted on your website. So I'm not interested in reading your website.
Last edited by Desert Financial; 12-18-2018 at 10:11 AM.
The key words here are general functioning. Socionics is more than just a personality type model. It attempts to describe all of human consciousness as information processing by eight interacting functions. MBTI does break things down similarly but I haven't found it to be very accurate or coherent. Big 5 makes no such attempt, it's just a collection of binary traits. If these other viewpoints can be related to socionics in some way then I'd be more confident in them due to my familiarity with socionics, but I wouldn't reject them by default, that's completely absurd. I welcome any and all insight into human psychology.
I was exaggerating, but that assessment is based on the demonstrable fact that Big Pharma is the source of much of drug research funding (in itself a huge conflict of interest), as well as the reproducibility crisis in the humanities, plus the other ontological issues I've mentioned above. The idea that these "disorders" require being given drugs that may not actually solve the problem (or have side effects that are even worse) tends to amplify the issues with the underlying science many times over. But I'm open to being convinced that these things are really disorders and the supposed cures do help.This is what you had to say about ADD in the thread I made about ADD earlier:
"Ne is real, ADD is a fictional disorder used to drug up young children."
That's not taking the criteria for ADD with a "grain of salt." Your viewpoint on the matter amounts to conspiracy theory.
In socionics information aspects are categories of objective information - this is due to Augusta, not me. If you don't like it or can't understand it I suggest finding another forum. Maybe MBTI or Big 5 would be easier for you to understand.If you think that functioning is "Te", then you confuse objective reality with subjective reality in that you think that objective phenomena literally amount to information elements. Ie. you're tacitly roping people into your worldview about what reality even is with the theories posted on your website. So I'm not interested in reading your website.
Gotta be honest here. Being gay is inherently harmless. Two gay people can live together and have a positive partnership that doesn't take away from other people or from coexisting as a member of society.
So it concerns me to see you entertaining it as a possible mental illness. I mean I agree it's abnormal, but not all abnormalities are bad or necessarily undesirable or need to be treated.
Evolution/reproduction, for example, is all about mixing genes, genetic mutations, and really just creating something new and different from everything else. Everybody has something different about them from everybody else; it doesn't mean they need to be normalized. Do you get what I mean? And if you don't, then where do you draw the line between mental illness and human variation?
https://bigthink.com/philip-perry/sc...plex-evolutionA 2008 study published in the open access journal Genome Biology suggests that during our evolution, we reached a point where our brain met the limit of its cognitive capabilities. To overcome this, the organ evolved rapidly in order to increase the rate at which it performed metabolic processes. Certain psychiatric conditions, such as schizophrenia, are a byproduct of these dramatic molecular changes, one prominent theory states.
@Dalek, yes right! even major mental illnesses can be just a natural product of evolution... what looks like a disease might actually be a collective boon to the future.
I know that already. I don't think it is harmless though. Promiscuity leading to the spread of STI's. Gay men are sluts, generally speaking. Grindr, revolving door partners, HIV epidemic, anal sex leading to highest transmission rates, drug abuses, take your pick. Super gonnereah, clamidia, the entire meth culture, cheating, adult children, pretty much all the evils you get otherwise in the straight world and times it by a factor of x6. The homo-lisp, the lame gay communities, the freak shows, the cattiness, pettiness, the "omg you are so butchhhh", cowardice, flakiness, back stabbing, gossip, cruelty, the empty children of men life, the superficial cry-babies of the city, the bitchy Queens. On and on. The biggest problem I have with being gay is other gay men. I cannot stand most gay men.
Mediocre lives that end with separations, cheating and divorces, got it. Empty lives revolving around Muffie the Poodle and trips to Ikea for the newest decorative furniture and the empty sterile lives but there are glowing lights in the hot tub and lets do a gay cruise so we can fuck as many men as possible and Bing you have a grindr message for a dick suck 100m away POZ only straight acting bullshit.Two gay people can live together and have a positive partnership
Sure when they do well they contribute big taxes to make sure fellow man can get child day care and Elemtery schools get the support they need even though it will not benefit the gay couple in anyway shape or form. Plus the pretend respect and tolerance by people that behind closed doors think you are a broken degenerate only after one thing: a piece of meat. Hey, we pay taxes so like, don't hate us.that doesn't take away from other people or from coexisting as a member of society.
I have never been one to be willing to overlook difficult answers.So it concerns me to see you entertaining it as a possible mental illness.
I know that already. I never stated it should be treated, only that it sucks and if I could wave a magic wand I would in a heart beat.I mean I agree it's abnormal, but not all abnormalities are bad or necessarily undesirable or need to be treated.
I don't know. I'm sure someone far more educated and knowledgable about what is good for the entire human population to do is out there answering this question right now. Consider human pollution is actually a force of nature we can;t even comprehend and we see the convoluting of the Earth's surface and its temperature changing and mineral extraction as a part of the entire process if you zoon out way far enough. Basically, you can't know what is good for man, or not, people can't even figure what is good for themselves let alone everybody else. And if they can do they follow through on it?Evolution/reproduction, for example, is all about mixing genes, genetic mutations, and really just creating something new and different from everything else. Everybody has something different about them from everybody else; it doesn't mean they need to be normalized. Do you get what I mean? And if you don't, then where do you draw the line between mental illness and human variation?
Taking the worst in promiscuity and freakishness of gay culture doesn't make a case for it as mental illness. There are freaks and promiscuity with straight people too. STDs are common with swingers and there are plenty of straight weird fetishes involving cross-dressing and bdsm with straight non-transgender people. It's an obvious straw man.
And it's senseless to defer the question I asked you to more educated and knowledgeable people when you are the one using mental illness with such broad strokes. No one else has to justify your silly categorizing, but you.
You're being ridiculous.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Are you a virgin? How long have you been out for? Have you told people at your work place you are gay? Have you stood behind your identity in the face of any real, actual adversity, like a lunch room in a saw mill in Northern British Columbia? Fuck off you have no idea what you are talking about. How many gay people have you met over the years? How far down the glory hole have you even gone? Have you had your dick sucked off in a Park? I'm a Senior talking to a Junior here. Straw man...fuck off to Reddit with this whiny high school debate class bull.
I don't care I am being ridiculous. Its still true. Society values tolerance atm of minorities and marriages. If you have not had sex with the same sex don't cast your opinion I don;t even care about it.
People feel sorry for trangerdered and gay people which is a long way from true acceptance. The sooner you accept that the more well adjusted to the truth you will be.
Identifying as gay is pretty much just saying hi im such and such and I like dick. Tell me how that's not some kind of mental abbheration?
My step brother is a gay doctor (and happily married) and my friend from college is gay and has a nice marketing job. And no, they don't know what you're really talking about because I asked them. But fine, if this is too personal, whatever then.
Right the "gay fantasy". Meanwhile one jerks off on Cam4cams and the other gets his rocks off at the local Bath House every third or forth "business trip'. Shiny and happy. HIV transmission still highest amoung gay men in North America. Free love is not free. Why can't I just blow my load in a 20 cum filled dump hole without consequences? You think this isn't real? LOL clueless.
Society gave gay men a niche. That's all that happened.
Dude, if that's the way you feel, it's fine, but it isn't all about you.
I mean, you can think what you want. We clearly just disagree, but I don't think I want to say any more at this point. So fine.
You are right. It is just me and how I want to live. There is an entire world gay and trans world you are not privy to see. Its not all rainbows. Some dark things. Not everyone likes to have a collectivist worldview about everything, like is being asked of us via cultural indoctrination.
Alright look, I am bisexual (or a 2 on the Kinsey scale) and I do know a lot about what you're talking about because I've done some of that as well, though I've always used condoms and try to be safe (no gloryholes or anything too weird like that). And I'm an introvert, so I prefer deep relationships over casual sex. But no I don't at all feel the way you do about it and I don't think my homosexual thoughts were ever any more perverted than my straight ones.
So can we leave it alone? This is annoying. We don't know each other and this has gotten way too personal for an anonymous internet forum on socionics...
He told that his mathematical skills are not particularly good compared to others. I don't think this aligns particularly well with EIE as they tend to even obsess with it. Maybe IEE?
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Man speaking with him seems XSI. Ni HA.
Damn. I was reading his guide on how to write essays, and the guy loves rules. And "thinking clearly". I'm starting to move somewhat back towards Beta for him. Not Ti ignoring. ILI if Gamma.
https://jordanbpeterson.com/docs/430_docs/Template.docx
I like the general ideas at the beginning, however his actual technique and structure for writing is incredibly stifling and not much different from the essay writing in middle school that made me hate writing. (I do love writing, but not this kind of uninspired boilerplate stuff.)
back to EIE. Restrict me more baby and I restrict you. Together we can become true dungeon masters and inmates. We can switch the roles daily... only and only if the rule is set. Sounds bit like LSI/EIE duality.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
IEI-Ni
just watched this video
he's definitely Se valuing. his obsession with hierachies, "alpha" and "beta" traits etc. personally leave me shacking my head.
@3:45: he compares "diversifying your hierachy of plans" to investing into the stock market. he's very interested in mysterious phenomens, religion, carl jung, symbolism etc. he's extremly pragmatic in most of his convictions. I think LIE creative subtype makes the most sense.
he had a debate with Slavoj Žižek (EIE) a while ago (Beta vs. Gamma)
he interacts too directly with the real world to be an ILI.
interesting how bad he looked 1 1/2 years ago. Golihov mentioned that types with Ni as creative function (EIE, LIE) benefit from fame. it helps them realising their personality in the world.
http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...rted_intuition
(scroll down to the end)
Last edited by Still Alive; 09-02-2019 at 04:56 AM.
in this video, he pretty much talks about the dominant subtype. he also makes predictions for the future (Ni). he does that very often, predicting how things will develop
The Zizek debate was ok, he may just be a strongly contra-flow E1 EIE (I previously typed him ILI). Zizek had the upper hand, and it didn't seem like it was due to supervision—I would expect an ILI debating an EIE like that to be more passive or defensive in their maneuvers, staying within their own 'logic' more rather than going tit for tat. It seemed like they were playing the same game in a slightly different way.
4w3-5w6-8w7
business relationships (EIE/LIE) are often a lot of talk without ever gaining much from the other person, because your role function is pretty much turned off in favor of your base. you basically say something, but the other person doesn't really aknowledge it and develops his own point of view based on his own thoughts