Because you are one?Originally Posted by Mega
How come I got ESE with like 20% then?
Because you are one?
How come I got ESE with like 20% then?
IEI-Fe
1
3
3
2
2
3
3
2
2
3
2
2
3
3
4
3
2
2
3
2
2
3
4
4
3
2
2
2
3
2
3
3
4
3
2
3
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
3
2
3
3
3
2
1
3
3
3
4
3
3
2
3
3
4
4
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
3
3
2
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
The file only opens if you have microsoft office which I don't have so can someone please do mine.
Username: muddytextures
Self-type: Alpha NT
1
1
3
1
0
1
0
1
3
2
1
2
1
1
1
4
3
2
2
4
3
4
4
3
4
2
3
3
3
0
2
2
3
2
0
1
2
0
0
1
1
3
3
3
3
2
1
2
3
2
1
2
1
3
1
3
4
4
1
3
1
2
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
0
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
2
4
2
2
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
3
4
1
1
4
2
2
3
4
Last edited by Muddy; 10-14-2015 at 02:35 AM.
Sorry, I don't know how to put an excel file or picture. I'm so illiterate.I'll just type the results.
muddy type:
Si 53%
Te 58%
Fi 38%
Se 33%
Ni 33%
Fe 35%
Ti 58%
Ne 73%
I 80%
J 30%
E 20%
P 70%
ILE: 7,11%
SEI: 10,2%
ESE: 1,4%
LII: 12,92%
EIE: 0,71%
LSI: 3,9%
SLE: 3,19%
IEI: 6,31%
SEE: 1,69%
ILI: 13,12%
LIE: 1,17%
ESI: 2,54%
LSE: 2,34%
EII: 8,43%
IEE: 3,77%
SLI: 21,19%
I've never seen such strange results...73% Ne and SLI as the leading type. Ok...
You and @Aylen have my thanks.Sorry, I don't know how to put an excel file or picture. I'm so illiterate.
muddy type:
Si 53%
Te 58%
Fi 38%
Se 33%
Ni 33%
Fe 35%
Ti 58%
Ne 73%
I 80%
J 30%
E 20%
P 70%
ILE: 7,11%
SEI: 10,2%
ESE: 1,4%
LII: 12,92%
EIE: 0,71%
LSI: 3,9%
SLE: 3,19%
IEI: 6,31%
SEE: 1,69%
ILI: 13,12%
LIE: 1,17%
ESI: 2,54%
LSE: 2,34%
EII: 8,43%
IEE: 3,77%
SLI: 21,19%
I've never seen such strange results...73% Ne and SLI as the leading type. Ok...
So yeah..... its no wonder why I'm having a little difficulty narrowing down my type. Completely mixed results and yet it all seem accurate. Identify strongly with introversion, strongly as perceiver , strongly with intuition, strongly with logic, which adds up to ILI/INTp (which is what I thought I was originally) but yet I identify much more with alpha and its information elements. Right now it looks like I'm either I'm a very irrational LII, a very introverted ILE, a very intuitive SLI or an ILI who defected to alpha.
This test is just a bunch of adjectives about concrete traits, not about information processingSo yeah..... its no wonder why I'm having a little difficulty narrowing down my type. Completely mixed results and yet it all seem accurate. Identify strongly with introversion, strongly as perceiver , strongly with intuition, strongly with logic, which adds up to ILI/INTp (which is what I thought I was originally) but yet I identify much more with alpha and its information elements. Right now it looks like I'm either I'm a very irrational LII, a very introverted ILE, a very intuitive SLI or an ILI who defected to alpha.
Anyway of those options you list in this way, the alpha NT ones require fewer assumptions - meaning you are one of those two or you aren't described by the theory
I agree alpha NT is still the most likely but I identify too strongly as a perciever for LII and too strongly as an introvert for ILE for either of them to make complete sense. If there was an IP alpha NT type we would have a clear winner but unfortunately there is no IP alpha NT type. DCNH subtypes could definitely be influencing this though.
@Simo @Galen @Pink @Serpent @DaftPunk @Narc
looks like @Kore has stopped posting the charts. the spreadsheet is available now to calculate your own results (download it here). just copy and paste your answers into it.
the OP has been edited to include the link to the spreadsheet (in English or Russian). if you're not able to open the file, i can post your results if Kore doesn't want to do it anymore.
Don't have Microsoft Office so even if I download it, I can't edit it. Would really appreciate if you calculated it for me.
Me neither@glam
lol awMe neither
daftpunk1.jpg
daftpunk2.jpg
Thanks glam. Lol my results look really fake even though I at least tried to be honest.
np!
serpent1.jpg
serpent2.jpg
I am just on a business trip. I can still post charts if people want me to, once I am back.
@Muddytextures oh i had calculated your charts before i saw nondescript had already posted them for you... oh well here they are
what about google docs or open office?
yeah, maybe. i think the file has macros, which won't run in Google Docs, but i'm not sure if the macros are actually required to do the calculating or not. they may just be in there to collect the survey data (username, age, etc.) on the first page of the spreadsheet.
OK so why is everyone still posting all their answers - does Kore still need it for data collection and analysis? I didn't read much past the first page
Anyway my results:
myst.png
worry not @Kore. i am all for your data gathering!
Because people want to share their results.
I don't gather data anymore as it's biased now.
People can make fit the test to the wanted result since the spreadsheet is available.
Nondescript's example was very revealing here.
I don't worryIt's just the data I got before the spreadsheet was posted is simply not sufficient.
What do you think makes you an Irrational/Perceiver? Just because I recently asked someone to explain why they thought they were an Irrational type and the explanation virtually defined Rationality itself.Not saying you are going to do the same but I'm curious because the devil's clearly in the details.
Eh, I didn't need the spreadsheet to know how the test worked. Wasn't it obvious to anyone else -after halfway through the test at least- that the adjectives are grouped by IEs and then by I/E and J/P?
In any case if you truly want to conduct an experiment and if you want to use such tests for it, you will need people who have never heard of Socionics yet know themselves well.
Clap clap, standing ovation.Eh, I didn't need the spreadsheet to know how the test worked. Wasn't it obvious to anyone else -after halfway through the test at least- that the adjectives are grouped by IEs and then by I/E and J/P?
In any case if you truly want to conduct an experiment and if you want to use such tests for it, you will need people who have never heard of Socionics yet know themselves well.
I am like the opposite of the bolded part. I know these systems just fine, but kinda feel like I don't know myself well enough. Often feel like both choices fit etc.What do you think makes you an Irrational/Perceiver? Just because I recently asked someone to explain why they thought they were an Irrational type and the explanation virtually defined Rationality itself.
Eh, I didn't need the spreadsheet to know how the test worked. Wasn't it obvious to anyone else -after halfway through the test at least- that the adjectives are grouped by IEs and then by I/E and J/P?
In any case if you truly want to conduct an experiment and if you want to use such tests for it, you will need people who have never heard of Socionics yet know themselves well.
Passivity and having a "I don't give a fuck" attitude. I tend to take life for a bowl of cherries and very rarely take things seriously. Where as other people always seem to be worried about getting stuff done I'm more focused on simply sitting back and enjoying things the way they are. I've even come into conflict with heavy j types sometimes for not being serious about my work. I dislike long periods of physical labor, avoid household chores, and procrastinate on just about everything.What do you think makes you an Irrational/Perceiver? Just because I recently asked someone to explain why they thought they were an Irrational type and the explanation virtually defined Rationality itself.
Yeah. Do more observation of yourself -and optionally others- while checking the theory -this theory, other theories, other people's observations on you- against that. You will never get anywhere otherwise.
No, you really need to spot things about yourself. It's ok if you let others do it first but you need to verify yourself. Otherwise you'll just continue bouncing around like you've been doing it for a while
The Reinins are even worse in terms of that, you will not get anywhere with grammatical analysis on them, you have to see your own thought processes that are never fully revealed from these written texts. Some Reinin dichotomies then do make sense to me but yeah, only if I ignore any external stereotyped manifestations and instead focus on the core concepts on how the thinking processes work. Other Reinin dichotomies still don't make sense, the ones where I cannot see such core concepts.
Eh, Irrationality is not about laziness or not taking anything seriously. I recommend you read Jung's concepts on Irrationality and Rationality. One thing's for sure tho', you are no EJ.I don't want to get into stereotypes here but this does sound like some sort of introverted Si valuer, I can't say more than that.
Hahah, well.Eh, I didn't need the spreadsheet to know how the test worked. Wasn't it obvious to anyone else -after halfway through the test at least- that the adjectives are grouped by IEs and then by I/E and J/P?
In any case if you truly want to conduct an experiment and if you want to use such tests for it, you will need people who have never heard of Socionics yet know themselves well.
I did when I came back to it later but at first I went by common definitions of the words. I was not thinking Reinin dichotomies. If I was I would have chosen yielding 3 and obstinate 1 just because I relate to that one more. In my defense I was sick when I took it the first time.I still am not sure why I scored 50/50 on j/p since I am pretty sure I went back and changed many of those 2s. I actually had like 24 2s that I narrowed down to 15 which was quite a feat because I really could not decide since it was about even on some. I imagine some people will mistype just by not knowing what the dichotomies actually mean even after reading the site. It took me a couple of reads to sort it and I had to ask about some. I did type myself by process of elimination at one point just by using Renin but then I went on to look at the IEs and it was clearer that way. I do admit for the longest I was confused about what Ne was. I was thinking it was some kind of magical element and I wanted it. When I finally understood it, I was like, "oh, sounds kinda tiring." lol
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
Hahah, well.
It's not reinin dichotomies anywayI did when I came back to it later but at first I went by common definitions of the words. I was not thinking Reinin dichotomies. If I was I would have chosen yielding 3 and obstinate 1 just because I relate to that one more. In my defense I was sick when I took it the first time.I wouldn't worry about the J/P thing, this test is just a bunch of adjectives that may or may not work for typing someone correctly. Btw it's ok to go with 2 when you can't decide, the scoring treats the 2s the same way as any of the other answers, simply as a number between 1 and 3. So it might as well stand for the option of "a bit of both" or "neutral", etc.
What was revealing? I could also be misinterpreting myself-the common dangers of self typing. Self typing is what I'd recommend the least for a person to try-let others infer meanings and spot things within you. This is especially notable when trying to spot Reinins within you: static / dynamic and positive / negative in particular. In order to spot them, you have to use heavy duty grammatical analysis-a thing that could very well crush you and leave you exhausted. So, why not just leave to others to do that is what I always say.Because people want to share their results.
I don't gather data anymore as it's biased now.
People can make fit the test to the wanted result since the spreadsheet is available.
Nondescript's example was very revealing here.
I don't worry
That's what I originally typed him
-
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
@Serpent
serpent.jpg
Oops just noticed you got the chart earlier
Not surprised to see SLE as my suggested type.
Hard to see you as any Ti ego however based on your previous posts on Ti, so why are you not surprised?
Because I don't relate to Fi buzzwords which automatically assume that you're this happy-go-lucky special snowflake.
That J/P thing doesn't determine EII over IEI. You probably know that MBTI it's actually the opposite way around...
INFj, don't get that one often.
Si Te Fi Se Ni Fe Ti Ne I J E P 60% 65% 58% 30% 45% 43% 55% 73% 60% 50% 40% 50%
Type % ILE 6.36% SEI 5.70% ESE 4.60% LII 12.81% EIE 2.98% LSI 3.46% SLE 2.63% IEI 4.27% SEE 2.82% ILI 8.13% LIE 4.56% ESI 3.62% LSE 7.03% EII 13.39% IEE 6.80% SLI 10.84%
@Fay my laptop is out I am getting it back on Wednesday... If you can wait... If not maybe somebody else can do it. I already see that you are a p type.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
