Deserving something. Interesting statement. Does "deserve" in the end only mean interactional determinism with the world? This claim implies stilting the statement towards personally beneficial end result.Originally Posted by HERO
From what I gather is that it contains lots of elements of contradiction that never truly raises to a surface just by starting from group cohesion.
Measuring you right now
gamma NT
BLEGGGH lol He's not a LIE; he's a LSE, in the same vein as someone like O' Reilly.
He's definitely a Te lead (albeit a cherry picking, intellectually dishonest one), but generally speaking, if one reveres the past and insists on adhering to anti-progressive, traditional vales, they are more likely to be a Si user with weaker Ne intuition because their grasp of futuristic possibilities (read: the unknown) are more so rooted in fear and a discomforting uncertainty, and thus there is a preference for upholding what is familiar, and moreover, has been idealized by way of subjective sense impressions. Clearly, Shapiro preferences his sensing over his intuition when he is prophesying doom and gloom about Western cultural values in favor of how we've done things in the past.
LIEs are more inclined towards optimism about future prospects, in that we are more secure in our ability to innovate effective solutions to meet future oriented concerns, implications, consequences, etc.... by way of perceiving the big picture and how the past/present/future exist along a continuum of readily beheld patterns and interlocking systems that will always provide the best answer. We're more inclined to bypass immediate sensory details in favor of what we have confidently conceptualized and intend to carry out, hence the oft ascribed "visionary" label (given to intuitives). That ain't Shapiro, he traffics in fear of the future if we don't adhere to present and past based facts, values, etc.... BLEGGGGGH.
Oh, and I have receipts:
1.)
2.) Readily (read: creepily) found among Filatova's LSE portraits in a rather cut and dry case > enjoy the closeup!
@42:46 "Hey Ben, what is your Myers-Briggs type?"
Ben Shapiro responds, "I can't remember, what is Myers-Briggs? Is this the introvert thing? I'll have to look it up real fast. Yeah yeah, the free personality test. You know I, I did it at one point and I, I cannot remember for the life of me which one, which type I am, I have to look up the types and I'd probably remember so I believe that there are, let's see, so I know I was an extrovert. I know that in terms of sensing versus intuition, I think I was a sensing versus intuition; I believe that when it came to making decisions, I was thinking versus feeling, and when it came to prefer judging versus perceiving I believed that I was a judging, so I was either an ESTJ or an ENTJ I believe, so that's for what, for whatever that's worth that's what I think I was anyway I can't remember, to be frank with you."
Bill O'Reilly has clearly much more force and pressure behind his angry antics, which is a sign of 4D Se. Ben Shapiro seems rather gentle and soft in comparison. With Bill, you'd get the impression he would bash your head in if he could. With Ben, not really. There is no sense of physical threat emanating from him at all.BLEGGGH lol He's not a LIE; he's a LSE, in the same vein as someone like O' Reilly.
He's definitely a Te lead (albeit a cherry picking, intellectually dishonest one), but generally speaking, if one reveres the past and insists on adhering to anti-progressive, traditional vales, they are more likely to be a Si user with weaker Ne intuition because their grasp of futuristic possibilities (read: the unknown) are more so rooted in fear and a discomforting uncertainty, and thus there is a preference for upholding what is familiar, and moreover, has been idealized by way of subjective sense impressions. Clearly, Shapiro preferences his sensing over his intuition when he is prophesying doom and gloom about Western cultural values in favor of how we've done things in the past.
LIEs are more inclined towards optimism about future prospects, in that we are more secure in our ability to innovate effective solutions to meet future oriented concerns, implications, consequences, etc.... by way of perceiving the big picture and how the past/present/future exist along a continuum of readily beheld patterns and interlocking systems that will always provide the best answer. We're more inclined to bypass immediate sensory details in favor of what we have confidently conceptualized and intend to carry out, hence the oft ascribed "visionary" label (given to intuitives). That ain't Shapiro, he traffics in fear of the future if we don't adhere to present and past based facts, values, etc.... BLEGGGGGH.
Oh, and I have receipts:
1.)
2.) Readily (read: creepily) found among Filatova's LSE portraits in a rather cut and dry case > enjoy the closeup!
What you are pointing out there is the strong connection to Type 6 which Si ego types typically possess. Yes, that often makes them more inclined to traditionalism and consersativism (coupled with their weak intuition), but that doesn't mean that just because someone is a conservative, that they must be Si ego (or Se ego for that matter).
As a whole, Rationals tend to lean towards conservatism, and Irrationals tend to be more "open-minded" towards in-coming information and phenomena on average, but it is not a rule; there are liberals and conservatives of every type and in every Quadra out there. Hence I find typing Ben as LSE just because of his conservatism rather simplistic.
Watching him get DESTROYED in that interview with Andrew Neil (who seems SLI by my guess, supervision maybe?) was very entertaining.
All Te leads are inclined to cherry pick the data blocks that neatly fit into their worldview and apply them in a brute force manner when debating, we just have a tendency to notice and be bothered by it more when it's coming from someone diametrically opposed to our own worldview.
btw I like that Rogan interview where he fulmbles to explain his religious opposition to gay marriage. He basically flips the script and tries to use religion and morality to destroy logic. Just funny because it's a good example of how even the most logical types can be prone to cherry picking and resorting to moralistic fallacies when it suits their arguments.
First off, it seems to me that you're conflating a lack of "force and pressure" (which Shapiro does manifest) with his high, nasal, weaselly ass voice--which most certainly removes a fair amount of gravitas from his presentation though that has nothing to do with the energetic manifestation of his "will," as evidenced by his push back below:
I can palpably detect the energy he's dispensing, even if I'm not particularly "impressed," "moved," "intimidated," or whatever by it. Moreover, I think O'Reilly is an enneagram 8 or definitely has it in his tritype, which would mean that he's more comfortable standing in his anger and exerting force/pressure. There are a fair amount of LSE enneagram 1s, for example, who definitely sublimate their anger and any accompanying "volitional will"--I've encountered Te leads who can come off kinda hard, standoffish and aggressive and those who seem more like stiff, uptight, robotic nerds (a la Shapiro).
Furthermore, I have 2D Se and yet I rage harder than anything I've ever witnessed from O'Reilly. Kobe Bryant is a LIE with low D Se and yet he's one of the best basketball players of all time, a sport dominated by Se leads/creatives. Why? Because he has an ungodly work ethic and through experience, has grown to a high level of Se competence, even if not blessed with natural Se facility, which are two different things.
The thing is, I rely on qualifiers like "more" or "less" to add degree, texture and nuance to my statements; I said that, as a Si > Ne user, he'd more likely be inclined towards a "traditional" (catalogued/entrenched/preferred sense based impressions of past experiences) worldview, which should be understood contextually > what's considered to be traditional in Sweden [socially, culturally, politically] differs to what that may encompass in Russia.
What's "simplistic" is you ignoring the additional data I provided where he corroborated his typing as a LSE and also where he remarkably "VIs" as a LSE, according to an empirical method > testing and typing thousands of people with such a high degree of accuracy that readily observable phenotypical patterns manifest, subsequently forming an additional rubric and criteria by which to assess one's type (though not with 100% neatness, considering the breadth of human phenotypical diversity). Other typology systems like DaveSuperPowers have observed and recorded a similar phenomenon, only endowing this particular brand of "VI" with more credulity.
LII could be right
heres the full interview, and yeah the interviewer seems SLI
If the interviewer is SLI that could potentially confirm Ben for LIE because he does look like he is being supervised in the interview.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
just cuz he got rekt in an interview doesnt mean he is being supervised on Si
do you also think that Ben Shapiro supervises all those people that he DESTROYS? lol
I know, I am just speculating, he might be LII. I just always leaned towards LIE in general before the interview and I still lean towards him being LIE even if the interviewer is not SLI.
Of course not lol.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
This is almost exactly what I hate about modern politics. Ben has tell the guy he's "on the left" just because he questions his stance on abortion as very extreme. And Ben responds to the 6 week abortion thing by saying human life exists at conception, implying the 6 weeks is even a compromise for him. And then Ben goes on to say BBC is biased?
My thought becomes - doesn't Ben realize his own extremism is causing these stupid political divisions? Heh, and then I see the interviewer asking that and Ben taking offense and proving his point so well. Love how he ends with an angry Ben by saying "Thank you for your time and showing that anger is not part of American political discourse." I love that interviewer.
So can we all agree that Ben has a serious lack of self-awareness or introspection of the effect of his own political involvements at least? regardless of type. Cause this has always been my problem with him and if he is say LIE and I am ILI, I would have a difficult time getting along with him, whereas I usually get along really well with LIEs. so yeah.
He could be ILI too; that interview was almost crafted as a play on Ben's lack of self-awareness and an interplay of extremes in American political discourse.
Androgynous Robot Dreamer - Not really human, but good at pretending.
It would be particularly enlightening to have those arguing in favor of LIE to show where he uses strong Ni. I suspect I'll be waiting forever.
Shapiro does sound like he is Si/Ne valuing in the debates.
Him seeing people in terms of care-providers or care-receivers is similar to what is written about "Caring-Childlike" types, but does not speak to "Aggressor-Victim":
Shapiro--"Having children truly ends adolescence. We are all either parents or children: responsibility-takers or those who demand from others."
herpderp all smart ppl are intuitive
No. But intuitives are better at seeing connections between things. It's the essence of intuition. Sorry it butthurts you.
Androgynous Robot Dreamer - Not really human, but good at pretending.
No thats not necessarily true baby
Obviously nothing is "necessarily" true with this stuff. But if in terms of the dichotomy, intuitives don't have strength in intuition and sensors in sensing, then why bother even responding to me? Especially when I was just making a point that he could also be a strong intuitive type, not that he is.
What is even your issue here?
Androgynous Robot Dreamer - Not really human, but good at pretending.
Shapiro is definitely not LIE. Said typing reeks of amateur hour.
Channeling Joaquin Phoenix via SLI.
He seems quite rounded and difficult to type, my best guess for a socionics profile is highly intelligent ST of some kind. I think I can detect a comparatively weak Ni compensated for by an exceptional ability to process concrete information.
Greetings, ragnar
ILI knowledge-seeker
You want me to explain the difference? I explained it simply in an unrelated discord. Shapiro argues emotionally with a backing of logic. It's unique that such a person has a master of Fe. Here's how I'd critique that song. I don't like it. Done. Streamlined for all that. If I said why I didn't like it? I don't like rap. If I said why I don't like rap? I'd clarify, I like some rap, but not that rap. There's different kinds of rap, that's the one I dislike. You could keep asking why, and you'll get a similarly terrible answer. It's as if I don't have any internal logic to back up what I just said.
However, if you want me to explain it well, I'd do a ton of preparation, and become Ben Shapiro's cousin for a while. Retreat into my hut, actually listen to the music. Then I'd say it's actually not bad. Bass line in the soprano, melody in the bass. Flipped it. Ah. I like a nice sonorous sound to my music. It's good. Really good. See, the words mean nothing to me, it's everything else. I could honestly agree with him about the lyrics though, they probably suck.
I'll look. This isn't Drake speaking about himself. This is an example of him talking as if he's someone else. Nice Fi polr against an Fi user, Drake. I mean, it's nothing personal, I suck at figuring out how to help people in crisis. Give me a crying woman, and you'll get a crying me. Not really, but that's essentially what happened once between me and my mom. She says something incredibly depressing, I try and work it out. Then I solve it. She says no I won't do that. I break down. All's good now, we're a lot more ready to communicate with each other now and actually do indeed listen to each other.
For fun, I'd love for someone who knows Ben Shapiro to ask him to explain why Yee is a well respected meme.
Figured it out. LIE. I'm extraverted, which is incredibly counter intuitive for a person who doesn't tend to go out much. Don't know how often I'll be on, but don't expect me to respond often. Only option I'm willing to debate is Si vs Ni right now. Mission accomplished.
That awkward moment when Trump is more morally sound and less war hungry than Ben Shapiro:
2DHA of a LIE or 4D
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
Something utterly devoid of Ni.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
yep. that black fry on his head will not save him from cosmic rays
Types examples: video bloggers, actors
Shapiro being utterly "supervised" by an actual strong Ni user (ILI-Te).
Ni-devaluing EXTx type.
Wouldn't take his professed statements too seriously. Guys like this are little more than paid actors for the kabuki theatre.
He has accentuated logic. The way he follows society points towards delta or beta. Does not talk in general terms. He is very factually detailed.
Basically LSE with Si in lesser focus fits very well (much better than LIE):
http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...ile_by_Gulenko
Measuring you right now
He's kind of like Crowder, if Crowder gained an extra 15 to 20 IQ points.
I think he's a LIE with a normalising subtype (DCNH) . it seems that his Ti function is accentuated, making him very pedantic and sure of his views. for comparsion: jordan peterson and sam harris are imo LIE with a creative subtype.
Where is the 3D Ni and 4D Ne in Shapiro? Point it out.
I think Shapiro and Jordan Peterson are really bridging the gap between super egos. It is like dialectical algorithmic types are predisposed of being publicly intellectual debaters/critics.
Measuring you right now
LSE-Te, Normalizing: Ben Shapiro
Great example of Gulenko's description for Normalizing LSE.
EII-2Ne | Harmonic > Dominant | INFJ | The Researcher | 4w5-1w9-5w4 | sp/sx
"Everything comes and goes, pleasure moves on too early and trouble leaves too slow."
Very clear LSE-Te imo
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/socionicstypological/ - Celebrity Tying Database
https://discord.gg/vBjsEgH - Typological Discord Server
LSE
though you should be under the influence of conformism, what is stronger at novices and so to give lesser attention to own IR effects
as you think your type as EII, then you may notice a sympathy to their superego LSI
it's possible by nontypes reasons, but anyway mb taken as a factor against your EII. this fits better to your LII than EII, same as your recent emotionally inadequate behavior on the forum
Types examples: video bloggers, actors
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
