William Shatner (ESFP), Leonard Nimoy (INTP)
friends
William Shatner (ESFP), Leonard Nimoy (INTP)
friends
I also say IEE. And yes, IEEs can be rambunctious, but only when they feel comfortable with the people they are with. At the very very least, IEEs like to be playful and silly with the right people. The "IEE silly switch" was a thing around here years ago.
Off-topic: @Eliza Thomason the respectful thing to do is to refer to people with gender pronouns that match their self-identification. It's disrespectful and hurtful to refer to Kat as he/she or male/female mix. She is a woman.
It's also not an "in" thing, it's a pretty real personal struggle and the suicide among transgender teens are very troublesome. The only reason you see it more in the media now is because activists have carved out spaces for transgender people to find their voices and speak out.
You don't have to label yourself because others don't label you. As a white, heterosexual, cisgender, middle class, educated woman, you are not facing the discrimination and marginalization that a black transgender woman faces. If she is is looked down upon and disrespected because she is different, she has to fight the struggle within and for her community and that involves self-identification ("no, I am not a deluded person with a deviant life-style, I am a transgender woman and this is what that means"). Same for other members of marginalized groups. If you can go through your life not worrying about your identity, it's probably because your identity is considered "normal." Lots of people don't have that privilege.Its foreign to me because its not where i am right now. I do like to understand, though. Where I am is with Mother Theresa who refused to call a gay person "gay" or "homosexual". She would ONLY call them "Beloved of God". To me, that's right, that's correct, that's the truth. To be seen as who you are in the eyes of God is the ultimate truth. That is how I want to be seen. And the Golden Rule says, treats other how you want to be treated. So, I do not want to be seen as "Eliza, the Heterosexual", which would make me want to say, "No. Please don't talk about my sexuality; that's private, between me, my husband, and God." No, I want to be seen as who I am, beloved of God, and that's how I want to see Kat, and you, and everyone else. Because that, to me, is truth. And I want to follow Mother Teresa's lead on this because I think its right.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
Well its good that we can all state our opinions. I said mine - I think that "rambunctious" is a good distinction between IEE and IEE's lookalike. Because Look-alikes look alike. But there are distinctions, and this, to me, is one of them.
But, aside from the differing opinions expressed, I would LOVE to see some Socionics articles or write-ups that allude to IEEs being "rambunctious". So if anyone finds it, please show it.
Lets add boisterous to rambunctious. Also rowdy, obstreperorus, uproarious. This is just not IEE, in my opinion, not even at a party with close and comfortable friends or colleagues, celebrating out, with plenty of drink. IEE will be laughing and being silly and fully engaged with the best of them but if an observer were to describe each of these partiers over the evening, IEE, among her group of friends, is not going to be given the moniker "rambunctious". Even in this situation, ripe for it. But her Lookalike or her ESE friends - yes, this fun quality would shine here; they would be the life at such a gathering. In fact, in my experience I would say this situation, with close SEE and ESE friends, would bring out the closest thing to rowdy and wild this IEE gets to. Because I would join in and follow their lead, with them, mirroring them, but in a slightly "quieter" way.
That's my opinion.
Of course, if I were with her in a social situation I would refer to and of her as "she", and "she" only - because this is how she is presenting herself and how she wants to be seen. To do otherwise would just be wrong, and rude. Or if I were Kat's neighbor/acquaintance/colleague I would address/speak of Kat as "she" alone, never he - both to her and to anyone who spoke of her. Furthermore if anyone insisted on calling Kat "him" to me, because of Kat's transgender issue, I would make my boundary as to what i think is right, and say "I understand your point but I will speak of Kat as "she", as that is how Kat prefers to present herself". Also I would not engage in discussion with anyone on the topic of her gender/transgender, because its gossip and not respectful. That's how I would want to be treated, so that's how I would treat Kat.
That's all I can say on this subject for certain, as I like to think on these things for myself and come to my own conclusions on them as to what I think is right and not right, better, best and worse, etc. I do not want to just swallow whole someone's opinion, or popular consensus of how I should think about a thing and react to a thing. Other issues related to this don't need thought through because I can cross them when I come to them. Because Kat is a person, and simply should be treated as a person with dignity because persons have dignity.
Here in this forum post, when I just discovered she is he, and was just being presented with videos where Kat describes his birth as a male, his youth as a boy, and his teenhood as a young man, followed by his/her new gender identification and drug-supported change to a female-style body, I do not see any obligation to pretend-away the gender confusion in my thought considering Kat. I am just expressing my own thought as I think it.
Its not either/or. Its both/and. Its a personal struggle, AND its an "in" thing. Other personal struggles are NOT "in". For example an engagingly written story about a teen plagued with suicidal thoughts all his life who turned to Jesus and now lives in great joy, having been suddenly and completely cured of suicidal thought - even with glam pics to accompany - thats not going to make the lifestyles page in the daily news no matter HOW MANY hundreds of lives this story will inspire and SAVE. However, an engagingly written transgender story will. That's all.
Add cisgender to something I do not want to be called again, ever. I also don't want to be known as Eliza the heterosexual or Eliza of the ?class or Eliza the educated (unless I am interviewing for a job). Anyway, what makes you think I am white? I haven't posted a pic!
But Eliza the IEE, here on 16T, that's good. Because it crosses gender, race, culture. We are all one of the types. Just one. And it puts us on pretty equal footing, I do think. We all have about the same number of people who think we are the bees knees, a bore, stiffling, trite, arrogant, annoying, or spectacular and intriguing...Socionics is great!
Yes, good.
Yes. And that's why I said I was not commenting on her gender identity issue because to do so would be silly since I have not struggled with that. But even though cannot identify with Kat's particular struggles, I do identify with struggles because, like Kat and the rest of humanity, I have had struggles. I identify strongly with Kat as a fellow human being that God is close to, and for whom God's love is unfathomable.
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
Thanks for an attempt at a backing up these opinions. However, look at it. There is no rambunctiousness here. "An impression of theatricality" as as close as it gets. And notice how the "impression" word softens "theatricallity". Yes, vivacious and coquettish at turns and extravagant. But notice - extravagent follows artistic and impatient. And even impatient is also not a synonym of rambunctious. None of these are near synonyms for rambunctious.
Rabbunctious: Boisterous. Rowdy. Obstreperorus. Uproarius. Those are rambunctious synonyms. And these are not like any of the descriptor words above. See? They are sort of alike, but look closely, and you see they really are NOT. The overall description is a very different picture than SEE outgoingness.
Someone else at the party will be those things, and IEE will light up and enjoy and support. But IEE is not going to lead the fun band.
IEE: has a closed posture at a party, in spite of her open friendliness. Pretty hard to be rambunctious with a closed posture. Also, Delta is not going to abandon her caution against possibly hurting feelings/offending anyone.
[I don't know about other types but this is so true for me: "When focusing directly on something or someone they rarely blink."]
IEE hidden agenda: To Understand. Yes, I really want to understand this and these distinctions and why people would have a wrong guess. In this case I think that there is some confusion over Lookalikes. If one already has it in mind that various IEE-lookalike celebrities or friends are IEE, then I can certainly see why one would say Kat is IEE. But I think Kat is "IEE lookalike".
Anyway, thanks for trying Darya, and giving us something solid to discuss. I don't think we are going to find any rambunctious IEE descriptions in Soicionics, though.
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
@Eliza Thomason I am guessing you have never seen a drunk IEE in a group of betas or alphas. Young drunk deltas can get rowdy even among themselves. Each quadra has a type that kind of easily fits in with other quadras. It would be IEE for delta, SEE for gamma and ESE for alpha. I have seen all those types enjoy themselves in a lively beta atmosphere. Not that they seek it out often but when they are there they can get into it. I am surprised you cannot concede to the fact that some IEE can be rowdy, especially the sx/so E7 variety. There are IEE party girls out there and once they had a few they can be the life of the party.
You approach all this through you christian perspective, which is fine, but not all deltas have your religious values and that is most likely the biggest fact in this discussion. I have been to enough concerts and small show venues to know that deltas aren't all prim and proper.
This has turned into a game of semantics at this point but Kat is not particularly rambunctious either but you would not know that from a few minutes of video. She is rather subdued in her more serious videos when she is not being light-hearted.
Also keep in mind the timeframe and culture most of these descriptions were written in. I think it was a pretty oppressive one for women.
I am aware you self type sx/so but don't recall seeing your enneagram type.
sp last can make an IEE look SEE I imagine. This happens with @Kim all the time when people type her SEE. Kim is very intuitive which I learned from one on one conversations over a period of time.Social/Sexual
This Seven has a lot of energy although not always a productive energy, as it often contains a frenetic quality. These Sevens usually have a great sense of humor and many comedians are soc/sexual sevens. The social and sexual instincts go hand in hand with the type Seven fixation. These Sevens want to keep things light. They have fast sharp minds that incorporate social awareness into their humor which they use to get by in their interactions with the world. On the down side, commitment is a big issue for this subtype. They cultivate many friendships and can thrive on winning people over, making them laugh and entertaining them but intimacy can feel threatening and constraining. For others, interacting with this subtype of Seven can feel draining, because they are “on” so much of the time.
With the self-pres instinct least developed in the stacking, they tend to lose focus on their many plans. On the down side, their health and commitments can fall by the wayside in lieu of the buzz of the newest excitement.
In intimate relationships, this subtype is “the charmer,” but they maintain their freedom from any strong ties to the one person. They may end up in marriages or long term commitments where they hook up with someone reliable and stable, someone with a much more low key personality. This gives them the stability they don’t have themselves. This eventually leads to trouble if the soc/sexual seven doesn’t realize that responsibility for his or her own life can’t be transferred to another. It’s not that the soc/sexual goes into the relationship with this kind of pattern in mind. It is just easy for the dynamic to default to that dynamic.
Sexual/Social
This subtype has a lot of energy, crazy, intense energy and this energy is going to find a way to manifest. This subtype of Seven can have the biggest extremes in behavior and with material success in life. With the self-pres instinct last in the stacking they aren’t afraid of taking risks, so they sometimes become very successful, as in the case of rock stars, but they typically also take too many risks, look for too many easy ways out. With the self-pres least developed, they can become dependent on others to add a much needed stabilizing element to their busy hedonistic lives. They have many of the same issues and share many of the same problems as the other sexual first subtype with regards to relationship addiction and have even more dependency issues then the sexual/self-pres. They can lose focus and drift similar to the social/sexual subtype and their high energy can likewise be draining for others.
With this subtype, you have drama mixed with mental energy. What separates them from Fours who they might resemble superficially is their planning and future orientation. Their drama and intensity is focused on what they are going to do, not on what has happened. They are usually blind to their past, moving forward and not looking back.
Last edited by Aylen; 04-03-2016 at 10:43 PM.
“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
She's adorable! Fun. I like her. SEE a possibility for sure. Also maybe her lookalike?? Naw. The strong impression I got was EIE. And her timing and type of humor and her friendly mocking way reminds me of my good LSE friend who I went to high school with Ij ust mentioned elsewhere. But I don't know. At any rate she has a very familiar way , bringing to mind, so much,various people I know - this likely has to do with, wow, she graduated from my high school Also that was truly my work home in recent years, before I moved here, where I sub-taught. Small world. Also from that school, the writer of short story, "The Lottery", which a lot of people read in school....
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
Lol, @Eliza Thomason, we obviously know some different IEE 's. I know quite a few who have zero problems being the life of the party and can be loud as hell. There's various degrees of intro/extroversion in them, from shy/nervous to crazy ones.
Question:how do you type Drew Barrymore? Cause she was not exactly subdued when she flashed Letterman on his show, just saying.
I also type Sarah Silverman IEE, but there's a chance she's ILE. Why the hell would SLI's need a calm, stuck up person, they're already half dead themselves.
SHE'S SEE FINAL
The way she feels about it. She's sensitive to changes in Static condition and look of things. Insecurity about her physical appearance will change her emotions. LISTEN TO HER.
Why people type without listening is just crazy. LISTEN.
-
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
I have. I have been one. Like I say, we mirror the admosphere, but don't lead. Our rowdy has a reserve, like I said above, "Delta is not going to abandon her caution against possibly hurting feelings/offending anyone."
Also I said, above:
"IEE hidden agenda: To Understand. Yes, I really want to understand this and these distinctions and why people would have a wrong guess. In this case I think that there is some confusion over Lookalikes. If one already has it in mind that various IEE-lookalike celebrities or friends are IEE, then I can certainly see why one would say Kat is IEE."
That's what I think. I think you also have some confusion over what is the distinction between these lookalikes. So I am curious what you think the distinctions are. What differences would help you discern the two??
Makes sense.
Sure.
You have to read closer what I wrote. We get rowdy, but its slightly but distinctively different from SEE's rowdy. Its a different kind of party-girl than her lookalike. And "rambunctious" would be a distinction.
No, not at all. You did not read with discernment. This is an wrong assumption you are making here about my approach to this topic. Look: I said:
"IEE: has a closed posture at a party, in spite of her open friendliness. Pretty hard to be rambunctious with a closed posture. "
Think on that. I would have to look up the closed-posture thing - not sure where I saw it, and this almost hard to notice at first becaseu IEE is open in spirit at a party. Not her posture though. There is a reserve to her "let-loose and get-wild," if you can call it that. This is not morality or religion-related, its type related.
"Socionics crosses gender, race, culture" is what I said in an above post. Though I thought this was obvious, I will now specifically add: religion, morality and time period to that statement.
No. Its not semantics. Words have meaning. And one way to tell the difference between two lookalikes is to discern the meanings of the words in the Socionics descriptions.
And of course SEEs can be serious! They have every mood. The do not approach life like its a big party, just because they can party, and well.
"
I don't agree that the time frame descriptions makes them any less true, or changes their essential meaning.
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
-
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
Here Kate Moss the "child woman quality" Infantile women enough said
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu7-0_7ajJ4
-
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
No. Read your own posted description above! Is that a calm, stuck up person? No!
There is a widespread lack of acknowledging the actual meaning of words here. If you aren't going to see that, then you will mix up lookalikes. It doesn't take any special talent. You just have to read the words slowly and acknowledged their actual meanings.
SLI does fine with SEE, but drama, which SEE brings more of, makes SLI tired. Requests for his actions are easy for him but the requests for his emotions - which SEE provokes more than IEE does - wear him out and stress him....
I got this. Probably because I am an IEE, the psychologist, and so I just get this, as the Psychologist does. Consider that this might be the truth of it!
Deltas have a sort of calmer blandness, which compared to Betas can seem a bit half dead.
[cant look up Sarah S. now, but I assume she has a bit of that half-dead, boring calm to her? Just a shadow of it? And a tiny bit moralizing? Definitely serious? At least - earnest? That'd be Delta...even though, hmm, those things don't help the comedy. She plays the straight person, maybe? Okay, that's an important role.]
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
Wait, you were a party girl???
I brought up religion because you went on a tangent after I mentioned she was raised by christian parents. I probably shouldn't have mentioned it. I know SEE that don't party. I would like to see what you mean by posture though. There is a lot on body language and it is influenced by psychological factors that would not be socionics related.
Can you tell me why culture and timeframe does not effect type descriptions? From what I can tell the descriptions were NOT based on say 1970s American values. Was partying something women did regularly there? I would have to look more into prevalent beliefs in the Soviet Union at the time but I am sure they were oppressive.
This isn't even about Kat anymore for me. I don't care if she is martian. I have said many times the descriptions are sexist and outdated. That is my opinion but I see it changing in American socionics descriptions. If I read the original Russian translations first I probably would have ran and missed out on all this.
My assumption is that you put your faith first therefore everything is seen through that lens. Maybe I am wrong and you consider yourself IEE first and christian second. I don't want to misunderstand you.
“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
-
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
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
Watch Kate Moss at 3:00 minutes into my post. That shy embarrassed witholding like confusion about being a sex symbol that speaks of an infantile woman. I love her. I love all IEE. I love them
-
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
I watched it. Wow she is beautiful. As to her type, maybe, but I don't have a strong idea of her type. I would say maybe to the IEE (though its not my first thought, but, as to positive type-ID nothing strong and sure comes to me).
But as the negatives come to me quicker, I can say for SURE not Kate Moss is not SEE, and of course I could list other types she definitely is not...
But anyway, the way I like to type someone is to experience them naturally over time, not trying to analyze them, and sometimes early-on, and other times late-in to "knowing" them or experiencing their person, things will occur to me. This can also just be reading how they write and what they say on 16T. In fact I habitually always accept a person's self-type her on 16t, then I "experience" them as I read what they write and "the person that is" becomes so clear and so specific and unique that it shines through their writing, and then certain clear ideas come to me. And if that person is opposed to what they have self-typed, since I notice "nots" first, whatever their type - that often jumps out. (Like, "This person cannot be "x" type because "x" type does not__".)
Back to Moss. While not being ready to type her (if I ever am), I say yes, she has that child-woman thing that also an IEE has - whether Moss' is the IEE brand of childlike or not, I can pin it. If I analyse my way of being childlike, I don't know, it gets too personal. I would have to think about how to explain it.. Hmm, see, my IEE way is to search for personal examples, and when I do all I get from me is a shocked: "I can't tell[I] that!"[/I] etc. It feels like I am telling my secrets! I dont' explain my way, I just "be" my way, and its nice.
Okay, lets go to "nots". I am comfortable with nots. I woudl say yes a childlike way is Moss' essence and no, she is definitely a SEE as she lacks sultry-sexy, she is not earthy, direct. Childlike way is coquettish and I cannot see describing a SEE that way. Yes, like "kittenish" vs. "here-I-am, come and get it". Yes, I can relate to Moss' "Me? Sexy? How embarrassing to talk about this. I wonder what exactly you mean. I am just - me!" Whereas a SEE is comfortable with her own sexuality, "Yes, I'm sexy" not "Who, me? Now I am embarrassed." Childlike hides passion - its there, waiting for you to uncover then its like a new surprise to her.(when I fell for my husband I could not make the passion go away and I wrote him blaming him, "You did this to me on purpose!" I suppose like a child, not responsible for her own passion). Its intriguing because she is feeling it, and wants to hide it, and the guy sees it, wants to uncover it, hmm, how long can she pretend, "I don't' know what you are talking about"... Sorry for the specific male/female but I can only speak from my own experience. Its a flirting game but all very subtle that an IEE might do, while hidden passions seethe, while a SEE more likely would just get it all out on the table. I think IEE can revel long in the romance heat while a SEE would get down to business....
Yikes. This is either going to make no sense at all, or too much sense and I am going to want to come back and edit it out.
But in the area of romantic attitudes, childlikes are going to be subtle and evasive, and like a child sensitive and very reactionary to subtle touch. While aggressive are confidently surely forward. And assertive. I can't exzplain that so much since I am not that. Really, if I could describe it as I sense it, it would be a good "tell" for the differences between SEE/IEE Lookalikes. Romantic approach between these two look-alikes just does NOT look alike at all!
So I am struggling to explain this, but yes, Maritsa, you are right, that shy withholding confusion about sex would characterize IEE, and NOT the SEE. Now there you go, that's a tell. Good word choice, Maritsa. And Moss probably is a childlike in romance, and certainly not an aggressor. I am not really seeing victim, but, that could be it, too..
So how do you think a victim-type would be about that same question? (Or would it be asked of one?) Maybe a more confident attitude, exuding, "Yes, I know I am sexy, I just can't help it?" "Or, "Yes, I'm sexy - catch me if you can"? Tell me what you think the outward attitude difference is.
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
I was just trying to find myself.
Actually I ignored that completely because she all she did was mention it, not explain it. It clearly wasn't an important point in her story. An IEE would have run with that one, explaining how her parents beliefs affected her, how she agreed/disagreed and what seems true or right to her, explaining how her beliefs changed and what they are and where they are evolving now. But that's not how a SEE would write and that's not how Kat writes/talks. I mean, where is the "Lately I have been realizing..." Nope. Not IEE.
Maybe thats a SEE lookalike.
Discussed here on the forum once; somehow related to a Reinin. I have to find it.
Well, for example, some of the IEE examples/stories that are written of are either shocking or embarassing like how the IEE wife ignores her poor husband when he comes home, to a house milling with casual guests, including her latest she is sleeping with. I don't know, maybe they did that more in the 70s being more unaware of the STDs? But this is a culture without the influence of Christian values - not my experience. So different time, different culture, influencing the behavior yet I can relate to the IEEness of the polyamourous wife.
I think the same author wrote of a husband-stealing SEE. Now, my dh's SEE daughter is not going to steal someone's husband. She was raised better than that. But given the right upbringing, yeah, and for the reasons that author wrote.
More on polyamorurs IEE wife - maybe she is sx first, and I relate. But she doesn't have what I have. I know God is real, because I know Jesus, who is known to those who want it. Because I know Him, I love Him, and I want to what He wants, and I trust Him. He MADE us. He knows what He designed us for and what is good and what is not - no matter how it might seem to me - and believe me, I am like anyone else in that I think what God asks sometimes is TOO MUCH. But His yoke is easy and His burden is light because He helps us with everything He asks of us. Which can seem too much, yes, because our ways are not God's ways. God's ways are best. See how that changes it? This is a way of believing that is completely outside type.
Recently Dh and I made new couple friends. What a nice surprise,. Like a present. They are keepers. Husband is a LSE. I recognize my brother in him immediately. Only, this LSE REALLY practices his faith, a true, deep, admirable, longtime faith. Yet while being so much like my LSE brother! His presence, his posture, his busyness - so many things! My LSE brother, while he does not put down the Christian influence on his roots, he does not practice it; he is worldy. Its really neat to see the difference - to see what it looks like for a LSE to walk in faith.
Christianity and religious faith or beliefs is a thing outside of type. Also so is culture, race, gender, and even psychological disorders (its interesting to compare my disordered ex with other healthy ESEs I know. So different, but the same.
I don't think sexism changes it. Its a bit more work if you are a type more intensely feminine and you are a man, and visa versa. But you can rewrite articles changing "he" to "she". I have done that with some Duality articles, when I want to share them, since both types are written as "he" I change the "she" one to "she" and "her". Its just a bit more work filtering out what is sexist, what is cultural - the core is still there.
Well, I hope I explained it above. The LSE example might help. I don't "first, second" it. Its just two parts of who I am. I have in-common with Christians, and in-common with IEEs. I think that's why that spiritual -styles article appealed to me, because there are so many different Catholic spiritualities (ways of practicing your spirtuality), and yes, they suit different kinds of people. Hmm, what would you be, Aylen? Maybe Benedictine - spiritual battles. If I have characterized that correctly. Yes, you need a Benedictine Cross, Aylen. Keeps you safe. Here: st-benedict-medal1.jpg
(I would be more than happy to send you a blessed one, if you want).
Interesting that Benedict created order for the monastic orders, still practiced/lived to the letter the world over these 15 centuries - and I see you, like me, tending to be more the "sail needing a rudder". Benedict had a sturdy rudder. And he sailed - so high.
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
-
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
LOOK...I'm not positive this Kat person is IEE, that was my guess. It's not about her, it's you typing your identicals based on your personal behaviour, which is wrong. There are thousands of different IEE's. You obviously hang out in very religious circles which skews your perception. Don't patronize me and tell me I will mix look-a-likes, I can tell Ne from Se when I see it in people I know well, tyvm.
Btw, you haven't answered my question...how do you type Drew????
These descriptions are MBTI, but I think they're pretty accurate for a big portion of IEE's and SEE's- it obviously can't be completely off, can it? And stop hanging on to semantics, I'm not a walking English vocabulary
enfp.PNG
esfp.PNG
Example of a dual family. lol I am not sure about him and his wife but watch him with his daughter. It is adorable.
The whole thing is cute but at 3:00 the interaction kills me.
and it is so funny how he gets his wife laughing even though she seems so controlled emotionally. They seem perfect for each other.
Last edited by Aylen; 04-04-2016 at 07:24 PM.
“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
@darya, I don't mean to be patronizing to you over semantics etc.- I did not realize I was coming across that way but I see it now and I'm sorry. Your post sparked some real insight but I don't have time to write it - busy week. I will get back to this topic later.
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
We agree on something!
That was my first impression within seconds of turning on the first video. He is a more hyped up version of my youngest sister (ESE). She is not so over the top but I swear every time I visit her we end going out and she makes me karaoke (after a lot of convincing and literally pulling me by the arm as I protest.) then when we get back to her house she will keep me up past sunrise singing to her home karaoke. It is fun to do once a year which is about how much I see her. She does it all the time.
“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
@darya Drew is ESI
-
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
Since Kate Moss's temperament is obvious from the interview as fidgets a lot while seated she's Ep temperament hence IEE and FINAL
-
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
The full section of the -section of the IEE Filatova profile is as follows:
That is very similar in many respects to the SEE- section you quoted. The IEE is also describing as manipulating and toying with people...as though it was a game! They also have a great range of mood, and places great importance on remaining diplomatic while being inclined to act in disputes when their own principles are at stake.All possibilities must be made aware to others so that they may act on them. IEE easily makes contact with others and rapidly becomes the soul of the company. Is able to connect with spectators and students, and is ready to play with their attention. Her behavior is noticeably impulsive, her mood frequently varies, but she tries to hide all of her negative experiences from others to avoid their judgments.
IEE possesses the gift of inspiring those that surround her towards activities, which can be considered promising and revealing in the long-term. She finds it rather interesting to manipulate – literally to juggle with the moods of others. Here she is an experimenter, curiously observing the reactions of others to her emotional provocations. She wonderfully manages the emotional sphere, she gives compliments to others and is sincere for she is always ready to notice the positive traits inherent in others, but she may sometimes chaff, and attempt to tease a little… this is never done with actual spite but in a playful manner, as if it’s a game.
Benevolence and optimism are generally inherent in people of this psycho-type. They are eager to offer aid, but one ought not to rely too heavily on their promises for they are often forgetful, and easily distracted by other people.
By wonderfully understanding the moods of people IEE knows how to deftly avoid conflict, to extinguish such with a joke. But when the reason for conflict aligns with her inherent interests she may get caught up in the conflict, in such situations she acts actively and decisively.
Improving your happiness and changing your personality for the better
Jungian theory is not grounded in empirical data (pdf file)
The case against type dynamics (pdf file)
Cautionary comments regarding the MBTI (pdf file)
Reinterpreting the MBTI via the five-factor model (pdf file)
Do the Big Five personality traits interact to predict life outcomes? (pdf file)
The Big Five personality test outperformed the Jungian and Enneagram test in predicting life outcomes
Evidence of correlations between human partners based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of traits
If you are truly following Teresa of Calcutta's advice, does this mean you do not publicly express yourself as female, IEE, Christian etc., as well as your views on politics and other matters?
I would prefer it if you did not mention that "horrible [wo]man". She is... "someone we all want to forget. So why remind us?"
Improving your happiness and changing your personality for the better
Jungian theory is not grounded in empirical data (pdf file)
The case against type dynamics (pdf file)
Cautionary comments regarding the MBTI (pdf file)
Reinterpreting the MBTI via the five-factor model (pdf file)
Do the Big Five personality traits interact to predict life outcomes? (pdf file)
The Big Five personality test outperformed the Jungian and Enneagram test in predicting life outcomes
Evidence of correlations between human partners based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of traits
Andrey Pyzh (ENTJ), Tatyana Kulikova (ISFJ)
Last edited by Sol; 05-19-2016 at 04:25 PM.
Sol only types Russians correctly
-
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
Technically they are not a couple, but only sit near and talk. Though, there is a potential for relations. Besides types, that girl has similar interests and should be physically in the taste of the guy (taking into account the look of his previous woman).
The magic is: as you understand those examples less, you more trust to external opinion and less use your fascinating typing skills.
-
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
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 05-25-2016 at 10:22 AM.
-
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
probably. have some doubts about Middleton still
William (ENTP), Kate Middleton (ISFP)
Catrific and Joey are probably SLI-Si + IEE-Ne dualz