chips and underwear's type

[The Exception]

They are the same types just explained through different phenomena. Who is to say that NiTe isn't really LI? Who is to say that NiTe is TP? I and a bunch of others just take it for granted that MBTI type = sociotype. Another example: Just because I call a cow, die Kuh, are they different? Don't be silly! As long as they come out the same, they are the same! ffs smh fml!

Not necessarily. They are two different typology systems and there isn't necessarily a 1-to-1 correspondence between the two. An MBTI INTP could be a socionics INTp, a socionics INTj or some other socionics type.

[The Exception]

I suppose for me (when combined with ), is somewhat impressionistic: it manages to capture the whole without being too rigid. But I don't see why this would apply any less to a LII than an EII. So I think the distinction must be more down to areas of competence, as usually associated with type stereotypes. But as I say, not especially useful as a distinction if you consider yourself competent across the board.

It is possible (although I am not sure) that many of my decisions are based more on gut impressions and then are justified more on an ad-hoc basis. I think this may be more in instances where more than one option seems approximately acceptable. In those cases again, I still generally have my reasons for making one decision over another: it is often vital to me e.g. in cases where I must re-evaluate for whatever reason. But again, I don't see this as necessarily alien to a LII.

My thinking can be rather impressionistic as well. An example would be typing someone. I get an overall vibe or impression from them. They remind me of other people that are known to be that type. Sometimes it's hard to justify to others in words why I think that type.

I think that you are good at telling people what to do. That you don't think everything can be placed into a system makes you delta values already and I think you confuse T types not being able to feel and have emotions maybe that's why you're looking into ethical type. Your speech is so often Si..."comfort, comfortable, comfortable to me, to make you and others feel comfortable"

Si can feel hypersensitive because it disrupts comfort

I am capable of telling others what to do when I need to do so. But I don't feel fully comfortable doing that, maybe because I tend to resent it when others tell me what to do when I didn't ask them for it. I am far better at giving people suggestions on a good course of action than 'insisting' someone do something. The insisting part would be more fitting with Se.

I don't think everything can be fit neatly into a system from a practical standpoint but oftentimes with theories like socionics, I have a tendency to get carried away and be rather impractical with it. Start to see things as being socionically signficant that probably shouldn't be. I have to remind myself to step back and say to myself 'this is just a theory.' It can't explain everything.

Regarding comfort, for me it's more than just physical comfort, which Si measures. It's more about emotional comfort. Wanting harmony and pleasant relations between others. That would be more Fi, I think. Of course, Si comfort is still important to me but emotional comfort is even more so. If I could only have one, I'd pick emotional comfort. It's more personal. Physical comfort is not personal and if you're hurt physically its a temporary thing, whereas with emotional hurt it's hard to move on, it becomes ingrained in my psyche.

i disagree, i think those things can be important indicators. curious, why did you point out the supposed "Alphaness" of her humor if you didn't find it relevant?


ah yea, i meant to respond. i've been thinking more about it and i'm not sure if it's socionics related or not - it could be related to her high sensitivity, which has been noted. also we may have interpreted her comment differently, i didn't see that comment as "displaying low confidence" in her judgments, rather, i saw it indicative of some kind of anxiety about what other people think of her (being sensitive). her judgments themselves seem rather confident. but perhaps chips could clarify, idk.


ETA: i forgot to mention that from my POV, the person chips reminds me most of on this forum is Subteigh, an EII who previously self-typed LII. (this is just IMO, not reflective of anyone else's opinion)

I am quite confident in my judgements in the sense that I personally see them to be logically sound, they make sense to me, I know why I think the way I do and I can justify them to myself. But where I'm less confident is in what other people will think of them. I can convince myself easily but what about others?

Interesting that Subteigh switched from LII to EII. I guess it's a trend that the cool people are doing.

[The Exception]

You are getting fuzzy again, LIIs never do this.


They don't seem similar to me in a cognitive sense. Subteigh as I said seems fuzzy while chips is never like that.

I can be rather fuzzy sometimes.

Cannot place you, but ethical is one of the first things that pops up when I think of you.

Actually, you kinda remind me of @Suz.

I'll take that as a compliment. @Suz

[UDP]

From what I've seen of Chips, she is more likely LII > EII. She approaches typology with a kind of alpha NT approach about rules and what things mean, and I don't see her as actually putting Fi above Ti (or Fe, at times); there are instances where someone says a very heavy personal Fi declaration and her reactions remind me of alphas, who, tend to suggest that someone might be mistaken or in the wrong for having such a strong feeling (that is negative), rather than inquiring about the nature of why (Te) someone would feel that way. This is an extremely condensed remark. Maybe more later.

[The Exception]

From what I've seen of Chips, she is more likely LII > EII. She approaches typology with a kind of alpha NT approach about rules and what things mean, and I don't see her as actually putting Fi above Ti (or Fe, at times); there are instances where someone says a very heavy personal Fi declaration and her reactions remind me of alphas, who, tend to suggest that someone might be mistaken or in the wrong for having such a strong feeling (that is negative), rather than inquiring about the nature of why (Te) someone would feel that way. This is an extremely condensed remark. Maybe more later.

I didn't know you still posted here. Thanks for the feedback.

I am interested in knowing the 'why' behind someone's feelings though.

[UDP]

"I am interested in knowing the 'why' behind someone's feelings though."
I'm glad you are not a blockhead.

Some very smart people don't do this, and still think they know enough about people to have substantial input into their conditions - I have been like such on many occasions.

[Suz]

I can be rather fuzzy sometimes.



I'll take that as a compliment. @Suz

ditto!

[Beautiful sky]

My thinking can be rather impressionistic as well. An example would be typing someone. I get an overall vibe or impression from them. They remind me of other people that are known to be that type. Sometimes it's hard to justify to others in words why I think that type.



I am capable of telling others what to do when I need to do so. But I don't feel fully comfortable doing that, maybe because I tend to resent it when others tell me what to do when I didn't ask them for it. I am far better at giving people suggestions on a good course of action than 'insisting' someone do something. The insisting part would be more fitting with Se.

I don't think everything can be fit neatly into a system from a practical standpoint but oftentimes with theories like socionics, I have a tendency to get carried away and be rather impractical with it. Start to see things as being socionically signficant that probably shouldn't be. I have to remind myself to step back and say to myself 'this is just a theory.' It can't explain everything.

Regarding comfort, for me it's more than just physical comfort, which Si measures. It's more about emotional comfort. Wanting harmony and pleasant relations between others. That would be more Fi, I think. Of course, Si comfort is still important to me but emotional comfort is even more so. If I could only have one, I'd pick emotional comfort. It's more personal. Physical comfort is not personal and if you're hurt physically its a temporary thing, whereas with emotional hurt it's hard to move on, it becomes ingrained in my psyche.



I am quite confident in my judgements in the sense that I personally see them to be logically sound, they make sense to me, I know why I think the way I do and I can justify them to myself. But where I'm less confident is in what other people will think of them. I can convince myself easily but what about others?

Interesting that Subteigh switched from LII to EII. I guess it's a trend that the cool people are doing.

Not getting harmony and pleasant relationship disrupts the Si atmosphere and thus Si relates to it poorly. That's still Si base

[Beautiful sky]

I'm not clear if you mean MBTI type or socionics type because MBTI types use all capital letters and the socionics types puts the j/p in lower case to distinguish it from MBTI. I guess you probably mean INFP as socionics INFp (IEI) but just wanted to clarify.

Russian system is both use the same lettering because they are combined there.

[Beautiful sky]

this

involutionary sensing of experiences (Si), strives to not let in anything that may destroy the already existing order, harmony, and way of life; he wishes to distance from physical and and psychological irritants, to preserve the wholesomeness and beauty of relations, of the person, of the world around him. If harmful elements are brought up for discussion, they are usually mentioned as something that needs to be eliminated from one's environment, from one's personality or personal relationships.

[Myst]

I understand what it means for Ti to be "an external function", but it seemed totally irrelevant for you to bring it up (apart from such language being needless in itself). First I was asked to describe in my own understanding after I had said I have historically had problems in conceptualising it, especially in relation to , then after being asked to describe that very same IM, you mentioned that I was "getting fuzzy again" after being perfectly clear about my typical thought process.

No, Ti being an external IE in contrast to Fi is quite relevant here. The thing is I did not have a problem with your Fi description on its own, you actually described that rather well, my problem was that you thought Ti was just like Fi too. So I needed to point out this difference between Ti and Fi. It is also the reason why Fi egos seem fuzzy to me as a Ti ego. (As I already explained, this is my POV. Socionics is about such differences exactly.) Overall I think you should improve your understanding on Ti because you kept saying you think Ti is like Fi in aspects where it most clearly is not.

Reminder on what I mean by "fuzzy": "You in comparison to her sound more vague, less clear, less explicit, less consistent in expressing your thoughts overall. You are somehow rambling, the impression of which I never get from her. Note this is my Ti ego POV You may not sound vague to some other people. But I find it relevant for typing her."

I relate alot to the 5 description but I'm not totally sure I'm a core type 5 anymore. I also relate quite a bit to every type except 2, 7, and 8. Other than 5, I probably relate to 9 the most.

It makes sense that you'd have a 9 fixation too. The LII guy you remind me of also has both 5 and 9, btw.

Why couldn't an Fi say such a thing?

They don't rely on others when deciding how they feel about something.

I can't recall anyone ever asking me advice on Fi related matters.

Yeah exactly.

My thinking can be rather impressionistic as well. An example would be typing someone. I get an overall vibe or impression from them. They remind me of other people that are known to be that type. Sometimes it's hard to justify to others in words why I think that type.

Seems like most people get this vibe thing.

I am capable of telling others what to do when I need to do so. But I don't feel fully comfortable doing that, maybe because I tend to resent it when others tell me what to do when I didn't ask them for it. I am far better at giving people suggestions on a good course of action than 'insisting' someone do something. The insisting part would be more fitting with Se.

Yes, you are very Ne/Si valuing.

I don't think everything can be fit neatly into a system from a practical standpoint but oftentimes with theories like socionics, I have a tendency to get carried away and be rather impractical with it. Start to see things as being socionically signficant that probably shouldn't be. I have to remind myself to step back and say to myself 'this is just a theory.' It can't explain everything.

From a practical standpoint? Elaborate on this more please?

Regarding comfort, for me it's more than just physical comfort, which Si measures. It's more about emotional comfort. Wanting harmony and pleasant relations between others. That would be more Fi, I think. Of course, Si comfort is still important to me but emotional comfort is even more so. If I could only have one, I'd pick emotional comfort. It's more personal. Physical comfort is not personal and if you're hurt physically its a temporary thing, whereas with emotional hurt it's hard to move on, it becomes ingrained in my psyche.

More Si/Ne valuing.

What Fi is, it is about your personal feelings towards things/people. Strong Fi will also be able to see this in other people. Do you think you do this consciously and with confidence?

I am quite confident in my judgements in the sense that I personally see them to be logically sound, they make sense to me, I know why I think the way I do and I can justify them to myself. But where I'm less confident is in what other people will think of them. I can convince myself easily but what about others?

Hm, this is some degree of confidence in Ti with low/devalued Se. Also, seems like conscious Ti (mental ring).

Interesting that Subteigh switched from LII to EII. I guess it's a trend that the cool people are doing.

Lol what do you mean by "cool" people?

I can be rather fuzzy sometimes.

See what I meant by "fuzzy" though, I explained it to Subteigh before, comparing him to you: "You in comparison to her sound more vague, less clear, less explicit, less consistent in expressing your thoughts overall. You are somehow rambling, the impression of which I never get from her. Note this is my Ti ego POV You may not sound vague to some other people. But I find it relevant for typing her." (Obviously "her" = you.)

[Not A Communist Shill]

No, Ti being an external IE in contrast to Fi is quite relevant here.

The issue I raised with Ti being described as an external function was more to do with such descriptions moving away from what was important & obfuscating matters. It is far more useful to describe things in practical terms without needless abstractions.

[Myst]

The issue I raised with Ti being described as an external function was more to do with such descriptions moving away from what was important & obfuscating matters. It is far more useful to describe things in practical terms without needless abstractions.

Lol you are such Te>Ti valuing here.

Does @chips and underwear relate to this stance?

Anyway, I don't see why you'd even begin to think that defining Ti as an external IE is no good. What. Really, that's part of the core definition for Ti as an information element. It is absolutely not a "needless" abstraction.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Lol you are such Te>Ti valuing here.

Does @chips and underwear relate to this stance?

Anyway, I don't see why you'd even begin to think that defining Ti as an external IE is no good. What. Really, that's part of the core definition for Ti as an information element. It is absolutely not a "needless" abstraction.

Again, the point I made was whether this was a necessary deviation for this thread. To describe the distinction in such a way does not get to the meat-and-bones of what we were discussing, and is rather a fuzzy approach.

Why did you ask me if I knew if was an external function, when it is well-known and more readily understood that "thinking" functions are more objective (in the usual sense of the word) and more detached than "feeling" functions? Your attitude to me seemed like pointing out that "of course circles are round, the ratio of their circumference divided by their diameter = Pi", but further, converted into the wankery of describing it as an "external function"...it adds nothing. I'm not saying we can't have those discussions (I have taken part in many of them myself): I just found your deviation peculiar.

"External function" by itself doesn't mean anything: it is understood first by descriptions that are more readily understood and/or which cut straight to the point...and in this case, which are directly relevant to how the individual experiences an IM.

[Myst]

Again, the point I made was whether this was a necessary deviation for this thread. To describe the distinction in such a way does not get to the meat-and-bones of what we were discussing

It does. It is not a deviation, I was referring to this distinct difference in the context of OP's type.

and is rather a fuzzy approach.

Nope, but it is interesting you find Ti fuzzy from your POV and I find Fi fuzzy from my POV.

Why did you ask me if I knew if was an external function, when it is well-known and more readily understood that "thinking" functions are more objective (in the usual sense of the word) and more detached than "feeling" functions? Your attitude to me seemed like pointing out that "of course circles are round, the ratio of their circumference divided by their diameter = Pi", but further, converted into the wankery of describing it as an "external function"...it adds nothing. I'm not saying we can't have those discussions (I have taken part in many of them myself): I just found your deviation peculiar.

"External function" by itself doesn't mean anything: it is understood first by descriptions that are more readily understood and/or which cut straight to the point...and in this case, which are directly relevant to how the individual experiences an IM.

I asked you because you sounded like you didn't have the slightest idea when you said your Fi descriptions could apply to Ti as well. Nope. And again, not a "deviation". It does add quite a lot by pointing out where your ideas on Fi do *not* apply to Ti. I will however not repeat myself on this, I've explained this enough times in previous posts. Unless you have specific questions, there is nothing more to say on this issue.

Also, it is an external IE, not an "external function". As for my referring to the technical terms of the theory, if you or anyone else is having trouble understanding the definitions, asking about them is always OK.

[Not A Communist Shill]

I asked you because you sounded like you didn't have the slightest idea when you said your Fi descriptions could apply to Ti as well. Nope. And again, not a "deviation". It does add quite a lot by pointing out where your ideas on Fi do *not* apply to Ti. I will however not repeat myself on this, I've explained this enough times in previous posts. Unless you have specific questions, there is nothing more to say on this issue.

Also, it is an external IE, not an "external function". As for my referring to the technical terms of the theory, if you or anyone else is having trouble understanding the definitions, asking about them is always OK.

You probably missed my emphasis on describing when combined with rather than in isolation, and thus my reasoning about how an EII in such circumstances might see similarities with what they consider LII behaviours.

[Myst]

You probably missed my emphasis on describing when combined with rather than in isolation, and thus my reasoning about how an EII in such circumstances might see similarities with what they consider LII behaviours.

I did see the Ne in it, that was not my problem. The similarities you guessed at are not going to be there for LII's just because both types are Ne creatives. You talked about ad-hoc justifications and approximations, Ti especially as base function doesn't have anything to do with that. Also I don't think LII's only differ in terms of competence from EII's which was your guess. They differ in terms of focus (Ti vs Fi), difference in competence in a topic is not a given as it depends on non-socionics factors too. Also, we are not talking about behaviour but ways of information processing in the mind.

[Beautiful sky]

You are a strategic type therefore you are not LII

[The Exception]

Lol you are such Te>Ti valuing here.

Does @chips and underwear relate to this stance?

Actually, to some extent I do. Some Ti types I can hardly understand all of their abstractions. It makes sense to them but it's not in a useable format for public consumption. Then what good is it? Also practical examples are always useful for learning new theories.

[Myst]

You are a strategic type therefore you are not LII

LII has inert Sensing, hence a Strategic type.

Actually, to some extent I do. Some Ti types I can hardly understand all of their abstractions. It makes sense to them but it's not in a useable format for public consumption. Then what good is it? Also practical examples are always useful for learning new theories.

"To some extent", heh, I relate to it about as much as you do.

[The Exception]

LII has inert Sensing, hence a Strategic type.

"To some extent", heh, I relate to it about as much as you do.

Ok, prove it.

[Muddy]

@chips and underwear Have you ever known any LSEs? What are your opinions about them? I've known quite a few and when I interact with them it becomes very apparent how much more I prefer getting Fe over Te.

[The Exception]

@chips and underwear Have you ever known any LSEs? What are your opinions about them? I've known quite a few and when I interact with them it becomes very apparent how much more I prefer getting Fe over Te.

I know a few LSEs. I admire their confidence, their practical know-how, and their productivity. I think with interaction I somewhat prefer ESE. I respond very well to positive emotional atmospheres so long as it's sincere and not overly dramatic. Te is more of a mixed bag. I don't always appreciate unsolicited Te advice or when they insist their way of doing something is the one right way and everyone should do it that way. But I'm quite welcoming of Te advice when I ask for it.

[Myst]

Ok, prove it.

Prove what? If you mean the inert Sensing, I was not talking about you specifically.

EII also has it, btw.

I know a few LSEs. I admire their confidence, their practical know-how, and their productivity. I think with interaction I somewhat prefer ESE. I respond very well to positive emotional atmospheres so long as it's sincere and not overly dramatic. Te is more of a mixed bag. I don't always appreciate unsolicited Te advice or when they insist their way of doing something is the one right way and everyone should do it that way. But I'm quite welcoming of Te advice when I ask for it.

Yeah sounds like -Fe of Alpha there if you meant negative emotional stuff by "overly dramatic".

[The Exception]

Prove what? If you mean the inert Sensing, I was not talking about you specifically.

EII also has it, btw.




Yeah sounds like -Fe of Alpha there if you meant negative emotional stuff by "overly dramatic".

Overly dramatic I'd consider 'negative' emotional stuff. Or things like anger outbursts and like. That could also tie into my Se PoLR.

[darya]

Chips could you maybe post a few of your photos?

[The Exception]

Chips could you maybe post a few of your photos?

PLEASE DON'T QUOTE!!


I'm on the right:

#3.jpg

I'm in the middle:

#4.jpg

[UDP]

I know a few LSEs. I admire their confidence, their practical know-how, and their productivity. I think with interaction I somewhat prefer ESE. I respond very well to positive emotional atmospheres so long as it's sincere and not overly dramatic. Te is more of a mixed bag. I don't always appreciate unsolicited Te advice or when they insist their way of doing something is the one right way and everyone should do it that way. But I'm quite welcoming of Te advice when I ask for it.

From what I've seen of your interactions, very limited at that, it fits.

I think the tell for you is that when Fi trumps Fe, and how you react to those situations.

[darya]

PLEASE DON'T QUOTE!!

Thanks for the photos. I though I will have some revelation, but I honestly don't. I don't think you're EII. You look like Ne/Si logical introverted 9w(8?) in these.

[blackburry]

LII.

[The Exception]

Here's 2 more. For some reason the attachments didn't work before.

PLEASE DON'T QUOTE!!




Me and my nephew. This was taken earlier this year when he was 5 months. He just had his first birthday last week.

[The Exception]

Thanks for the photos. I though I will have some revelation, but I honestly don't. I don't think you're EII. You look like Ne/Si logical introverted 9w(8?) in these.

I'm rather skeptical of VI but I'm always curious what people guess for my types.

[The Exception]

LII.

Based on my VI or based on what I've written about myself?

[Myst]

Here's 2 more. For some reason the attachments didn't work before.

Actually they work in your previous post and not in this one.

[The Exception]

Actually they work in your previous post and not in this one.

Fixed. For real this time.

[blackburry]

Based on my VI or based on what I've written about myself?

I base that on accumulation of posts I've read of yours over the years (both those that you've written about yourself and miscellaneous posts), and a vid you posted at one point. I've always thought you to be LII on vibe, humor, and you seem to align with alpha values> delta values. Fe> Fi. Most of the LIIs I've gotten to know have been highly sensitive people once they were comfortable enough to express that part of themselves.
But, naturally, you know yourself best so take my statements with a grain of salt.

[Beautiful sky]

PLEASE DON'T QUOTE!!

The girl next to you in the first picture of this post is ENFp final.

[Aylen]

Here's 2 more. For some reason the attachments didn't work before.

PLEASE DON'T QUOTE!!

Pictures do confuse things. In these you look just like an SEI I know. In your videos you look different but still have warmth. I have said that you vibe "lighter", like an alpha, to me, BUT, you also seem more ethical than some of the other LII. I think Fi is role for LII? Also, I read, women in general tend to come off more ethical than men, even the logical types and ethical men can come off more logical. Like in comparison to @Myst you seem more ethical to me but she comes off very logical.

I think I prefer to read how people process stuff, in different situations, over seeing their videos or pics. Then all kinds of associations will pop up. I need pure data (not really).

[darya]

Pictures do confuse things. In these you look just like an SEI I know.

Funny, she reminded me of a male SLI I know, who has softness and warmth to him, and is also shy and very conflict avoidant (e9), but is def logical and Fe polr. Not saying anything about her type though...Im not that familiar with female LII's.

[Myst]

Funny, she reminded me of a male SLI I know, who has softness and warmth to him, and is also shy and very conflict avoidant (e9), but is def logical and Fe polr. Not saying anything about her type though...Im not that familiar with female LII's.

Actually chips doesn't seem Fe PoLR in these pics to me.

I'll go with alpha introvert