Advice. Don't go with the behaviourist approach as far as type descriptions go. The trends you can spot in them that are directly IE related are OK.
Te.Best course in terms of feasibility, effectiveness and expenditure in cost (time, money, effort etc) which I would normally consider a sub-part of feasibility.
That makes sense.In MBTI terms it would be identified as inferior (negative) usage Fi. Even though they are different systems a few of the functions are described in the same way and often times the socionics descriptions seem like in-depth versions of their MBTI counterparts.
Honestly, I don't know you IRL but here you never displayed the Fi+Se, only the Ni+Te, in a confident natural way.As in whenever Gamma Se+Fi could apply to a situation I'm in it often does for me, while Gamma Ni+Te doesn't.
ILI is a Dynamic, ESI is a Static type. Look into dimensionality much yet?Well, most probably that or ESI. Are there any other dichotomies other than romance style that distinguish the two?



