Yeah.
You mean you superficially relate to a description. That's not how you determine dimensionality.Because I relate to higher dimensions of Te/Ne but I don't relate to higher dimensions of Ni, in fact I relate to ESp 1D Ni as I pointed out before.
Whatever you posted before implied ILI > LIE overall. But they were mostly ambiguous points.Yeah, you are saying I'm ILI even though most of the information you post implies LIE.
That one can be LIE > ILI though mostly it's just contrasting gamma NT with alpha NT in the context.the Gamma one would explain my lack of tolerance when it comes to impractical speculation and ideas. For example, a friend of mine and I were into card games and he would create innovative decks with spectacular combos that no one had thought of but with little competitive feasibility, while I prefered to build innovative decks with a unique combination of cards that no one had thought of that were competitive and capable of winning tournaments but not as spectacular as his. We also struggled to communicate over the internet because every sentance he put together could be interpreted in more than one way while mine, on the other hand, are all straight-forward.
So then you are more open to novelty than ILI overall because you don't primarily focus on how it's not going to work out? That would indicate LIE with higher dimensional Ne than Ni, indeed.Btw, the ILI description on that site doesn't sound like me but the ENTx ones do.



