If I post a video, will people type me?

[QuickTwist]

That's not what that dichotomy indicates. The reason why I picked emotivist for you is because you require certain quality information. Please read it

I gave an example for each characteristic of constructivist. You're saying I misunderstood the premise of the dichotomy in the first place as so that is why I am emotivist instead?

[Beautiful sky]

I gave an example for each characteristic of constructivist. You're saying I misunderstood the premise of the dichotomy in the first place as so that is why I am emotivist instead?

The dichotomy is not about your personal emotions

[QuickTwist]

The dichotomy is not about your personal emotions

I understand that. I prefer a directive approach to an emotional appeal type of approach.

[Beautiful sky]

I gave an example for each characteristic of constructivist. You're saying I misunderstood the premise of the dichotomy in the first place as so that is why I am emotivist instead?

These are why I picked emtivist

Prefer the new and novel over the old and known.
Information perceived as unprofessional or low-quality can leave them indifferent.

[QuickTwist]

These are why I picked emtivist

Prefer the new and novel over the old and known.
Information perceived as unprofessional or low-quality can leave them indifferent.

That is like 2/5 correct?

[Beautiful sky]

I understand that. I prefer a directive approach to an emotional appeal type of approach.

I'm going to stop here and give myself time and see what other information you present.

I'm getting stressed

[Beautiful sky]

That is like 2/5 correct?

Yes but in you and the information that you display they are seemingly dominant and repetitive which causes me to think of them as typical attitude

[QuickTwist]

I'm going to stop here and give myself time and see what other information you present.

I'm getting stressed

Take a break. relax. don't get stressed out on my account.

[Beautiful sky]

Take a break. relax. don't get stressed out on my account.

It's explaining the details and fine properties that stress me out not you

[QuickTwist]

What other info would you like me to present @Maritsa?

Look over the watson word structure and dichotomy analysis that I posted here.

[Beautiful sky]

What other info would you like me to present @Maritsa?

Look over the watson word structure and dichotomy analysis that I posted here.

It will happen over time as you become more active and make relationships and tell us about your experiences. I'm not worried

[QuickTwist]

It will happen over time as you become more active and make relationships and tell us about your experiences. I'm not worried

Good. You should know that I do not make relationships easily, however.

[Beautiful sky]

Good. You should know that I do not make relationships easily, however.

Is it something that you might want to try?

[QuickTwist]

Is it something that you might want to try?

IDK, its my natural disposition to be detached from people emotionally. I mean I have a lot of sympathy for people and a good deal of empathy, but I am inhibited to actually bond with people on an emotional level. Its a very strong characteristic I have.

[QuickTwist]

@Maritsa, I have a question. It has do do with my view on morality and how that corresponds to my type (if it does).

I'm a moral relativist, which means for any given society the people of that society will makes rules that govern that society and what work for one society may not work for another. I also believe that this works on an individual level and gets extremely complicated when thinking about a relationship between two parties. In effect there is a social contract that the two parties make and there are certain lines that cannot be crossed. The reason it gets complicated is because there is ofc murder and other harmful acts where one party believe, in effect, that they are justified in doing harm to another person. This whole theory really revolves around the perspective of the golden rule "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Now obviously I have to highlight that it is only the perspective of what a person can tolerate in effect to feel they are justified in doing harm to another person when viewing this in the vein of the golden rule. This all assumes that we are dealing with people that are relatively average intelligence and have their own personal view somewhat in accordance with what the standard norms are for a given society. Given that I believe all this what does it say about my type, or rather, how do you explain how that I believe this corresponds to my type?

[Beautiful sky]

@Maritsa, I have a question. It has do do with my view on morality and how that corresponds to my type (if it does).

I'm a moral relativist, which means for any given society the people of that society will makes rules that govern that society and what work for one society may not work for another. I also believe that this works on an individual level and gets extremely complicated when thinking about a relationship between two parties. In effect there is a social contract that the two parties make and there are certain lines that cannot be crossed. The reason it gets complicated is because there is ofc murder and other harmful acts where one party believe, in effect, that they are justified in doing harm to another person. This whole theory really revolves around the perspective of the golden rule "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Now obviously I have to highlight that it is only the perspective of what a person can tolerate in effect to feel they are justified in doing harm to another person when viewing this in the vein of the golden rule. This all assumes that we are dealing with people that are relatively average intelligence and have their own personal view somewhat in accordance with what the standard norms are for a given society. Given that I believe all this what does it say about my type, or rather, how do you explain how that I believe this corresponds to my type?

It corresponds with white ethics :Fi which deals with what is right to the individual and not black ethics which reflects sociatal ethics

[Beautiful sky]

I believe that the "objective" here (the last one) is more of the beta take Maybe Beta types can respond

http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~alatus/phil12...jectivism.html.

[QuickTwist]

I believe that the "objective" here (the last one) is more of the beta take Maybe Beta types can respond

http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~alatus/phil12...jectivism.html.

I believe in both subjectivism and conventionalism. The reason for this is simple: you can't shape the moral underpinnings of individual based on the society because the society is based on individuals. You also can't say the moral underpinnings are not based on the individuals in that society. It is my personal view that as individuals start to change their views (often times influential people of a movement of the people) that this starts to bleed into what the moral underpinnings are of a society as a whole as more and more people are inspired, influenced and given knowledge of the revolutionary moral ideas that the individuals have. Basically its momentum based. the individuals come up with morals, usually scholars, and then the trickles down into society. Its works much the same way in how a blacksmith fold iron over and over until everything is uniform and strong.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Reinin's dichotomies are baseless bullshit, but not normal Socionics

I agree with the general direction of this sentiment. They certainly should not be used as a primary means of establishing your type in any case, and Reinin himself apparently has that view. At best, they confused the whole process. At worse, there is little or nothing to back them up, and you will waste an inordinate amount of time.

[Beautiful sky]

I believe in both subjectivism and conventionalism. The reason for this is simple: you can't shape the moral underpinnings of individual based on the society because the society is based on individuals. You also can't say the moral underpinnings are not based on the individuals in that society. It is my personal view that as individuals start to change their views (often times influential people of a movement of the people) that this starts to bleed into what the moral underpinnings are of a society as a whole as more and more people are inspired, influenced and given knowledge of the revolutionary moral ideas that the individuals have. Basically its momentum based. the individuals come up with morals, usually scholars, and then the trickles down into society. Its works much the same way in how a blacksmith fold iron over and over until everything is uniform and strong.

But not moral objectivism, correct?

[QuickTwist]

But not moral objectivism, correct?

I believe in moral objectivism, I just think it will never be obtained so to be realistic all you can do is be as morally objective as is possible. The problem with moral objectivism is that society would have to be so much different in almost every aspect in the way things are done that to be heuristic about it its much better to adopt the idea of moral subjectivism, at least in this stage of our evolutionary development. There are animals who have a better idea of how to run society than humans, namely elephants.

[Aylen]

I have some info. I don't know how it will relate to Socionics, but found it interesting none the less.

I took much of what I have written from another forum. I recommend this form of typing, however subjective it may be. Much of whether you believe this info to be valid is dependent on your confidence that IBM has in Watson, the super-computer.

Attachment 7451Attachment 7452

Here is the site that it comes from: https://personality-insights-livedemo.mybluemix.net/

This is interesting and there is a thread about it somewhere around here.

What other info would you like me to present @Maritsa?

Look over the watson word structure and dichotomy analysis that I posted here.

I have done this before using my forum posts but the results vary so much that I am not sure if they are that reliable.

Personality Portrait

3321 words analyzed: Decent Analysis

Summary

You are a bit compulsive and easily rattled.

You are melancholy: you think quite often about the things you are unhappy about. You are intermittent: you have a hard time sticking with difficult tasks for a long period of time. And you are unconcerned with art: you are less concerned with artistic or creative activities than most people who participated in our surveys.

Your choices are driven by a desire for efficiency.

You are relatively unconcerned with tradition: you care more about making your own path than following what others have done. You consider helping others to guide a large part of what you do: you think it is important to take care of the people around you.How did we get this?
You are likely to______

Put health at risk

You are unlikely to______

Buy healthy foods

Click on an ad

Follow on social media

I rarely follow social media but sometimes I check fb. I don't shop and I do not click on ads since most are shady. I don't focus on things I am unhappy about all the time but yeah I can be melancholic. I am into art and creative expression. I find it amusing that it says I am driven by efficiency. This was based on the past couple days posts. I do not consider helping others to be a major driving force. It is more of a byproduct of being true to myself.

I also posted text from some thing I have posted previously and got this result:

3188 words analyzed: Decent Analysis


Summary

You are a bit compulsive, easily rattled and can be perceived as dependent.

You are intermittent: you have a hard time sticking with difficult tasks for a long period of time. You are unconcerned with art: you are less concerned with artistic or creative activities than most people who participated in our surveys. And you are melancholy: you think quite often about the things you are unhappy about.

Your choices are driven by a desire for well-being.

You are relatively unconcerned with tradition: you care more about making your own path than following what others have done. You don't find taking pleasure in life to be particularly motivating for you: you prefer activities with a purpose greater than just personal enjoyment.

If I put all the text, from those two examples, together it is totally skewed and the output looks nothing like the above. I suppose my results depend on what kind of mood I am in but I consistently have it rate me high in emotional range, love, practicality and stimulation seeking so it does recognize patterns. It scores me low in openness unless I post some of my creative writing or personal stuff I only write to others, and will not post on the forum, then imagination/intellect goes way up and emotional range goes down. I get high on fiery in most things I post on the forum even if I am not putting "fire" into it.

I think it is a useful tool for analyzing something quickly but it changes, dramatically sometimes, in various areas. It just depends on what I am writing about. Thanks for reminding me about this. I had thought about this recently. I should look more into how it analyzes. I am going to look for the thread someone else created, about Watson, to see how it compares now, to the older version. I have used it to analyze other people's forum posts before.

I only took it as an "in the moment" expression for them. I analyzed one really destructive post that completely lacked empathy and the result was that they were a compassionate person, easily hurt, or something like that. It also rated it high on imagination. I was like . What is their idea of imagination.

So, out of curiosity I analyzed my response to you here, including this sentence and the results were a bit more accurate based on what I am writing in this moment. Maybe less text is better.

This is like my psychological portrait frozen in a moment of time. But my personality is dynamic and does not remain frozen in time. I would encourage some people to use this tool, with an open mind .

*when I say I don't shop above, I meant for food. I like healthy food but I kind of eat whatever is handy. It just happens to be healthier stuff so I have grown used to it. I don't care much about food at all unless it makes me queasy to look at or think about. Then I care enough to avoid it.

[QuickTwist]

@Aylen, I wouldn't put too much stock in the watson thing unless you get a strong analysis or higher. Just my 0.2.

[Aylen]

@Aylen, I wouldn't put too much stock in the watson thing unless you get a strong analysis or higher. Just my 0.2.

It was surprisingly accurate in that brief analysis I did of my response to you. I was feeling those things due to other pressures in the moment. I had a chrome problem right in the middle and got a bit overwhelmed because my escape key would not work.

Just curious, did you ever write one long cohesive piece for evaluation or did you just use random stuff with or without continuity? I notice if I post random samples of my writing it can really skew results. If I write a long cohesive piece it doesn't always fit me. I was surprised to find that some of my poetry was high intellect + imagination but low on the emotional scale. Then other samples were the opposite. Like you seem to have a balance of both in your writing.

What do you think is a valid sample of writing? I don't have anything I wrote for school anymore and the last thing I wrote was a technical report anyway (very boring and forced to get certified).

I am not sure if it is fair of me to use poetry and stories for analysis since the people/things I write about don't always represent my personality. They might represent the person I am thinking of when writing. :/

[QuickTwist]

It was surprisingly accurate in that brief analysis I did of my response to you. I was feeling those things due to other pressures in the moment. I had a chrome problem right in the middle and got a bit overwhelmed because my escape key would not work.

Just curious, did you ever write one long cohesive piece for evaluation or did you just use random stuff with or without continuity? I notice if I post random samples of my writing it can really skew results. If I write a long cohesive piece it doesn't always fit me. I was surprised to find that some of my poetry was high intellect + imagination but low on the emotional scale. Then other samples were the opposite. Like you seem to have a balance of both in your writing.

What do you think is a valid sample of writing? I don't have anything I wrote for school anymore and the last thing I wrote was a technical report anyway (very boring and forced to get certified).

I am not sure if it is fair of me to use poetry and stories for analysis since the people/things I write about don't always represent my personality. They might represent the person I am thinking of when writing. :/

As I understand it, what it says is to post things in there that you write on a frequent basis from an informal "you" standpoint. A technical paper is not going to be the best thing to analyze as well as artistic writing. Since its looking for certain criteria, its likely best best to post things that you would actually say, meaning speech, in your everyday life. As I understand it it is technically suppose to work through twitter as well, but it remains to be seen whether it is best to use short pieces or long ones. I took mostly long posts I had made on another forum (ones that are on average a decent degree longer than the posts I make on this forum). The reason it works for me to do longer written posts is because sometimes it takes me a while to get around to what my point is and I can be a bit long winded when I am explaining. I also understand that watson is not going to be able to detect the subtleties of my jokes that are often much shorter posts in contrast.

[Beautiful sky]

Hi, QT! Good to see you around again!

I still see SLI for you. I was reviewing Delta values, especially for Te & Si, and see many of them in the way you approach your discussion about these topics. I'm copying them below for review.

As a highlight however, I notice many SLIs struggle with school, not because they are incapable, but because of the reasons listed under "subdued elements." When things are forced on them that don't make sense or aren't aligned to their values, they tend to have a negative response. Often times it's kept in their mind instead of expressed, unless to someone they truly trust, and it snowballs. And they might even use it that negative response to "fuel" another area of their life as a way to adapt, such as their fitness or work. Thus, the "reality" mixes with the "imagination" of the mind.

Other random observations that go along with the notes below:

-You discussed the need for having "peaceful" environments.

-You discuss your rationale and thought processes, rather than sharing specific experiences.

-You use words that are inclusive, such as the word "we", e.g. "this is the way WE think", saying "we" as in humans.

-You mention that your face may or may not match your emotions. From personal experience, this is a TeSi trait. My husband does it, and it took me awhile to figure out that he can be happy and content without always physically showing it.

Hope this is helpful



Delta is characterized as Judicious, Serious, and Aristocratic by Reinin dichotomies.

Valued elements

Te and Si

• Delta types make a point of talking about the rationale behind their actions and emphasizing the productiveness or unproductiveness of different ways of doing things - even in such emotional areas as personal relationships.
• Delta types value peaceful, refreshing activities where they are doing something useful and balancing out their inner world at the same time.
• Delta types have the philosophy that they will have to rely on their own industriousness to achieve their goals rather than on luck, speculation, group effort, or strong leadership.

Subdied Elements
Se and Ti

• Delta types do not fare well in high-pressure situations where they are being forced to do things, are facing threatening opponents, or are submitted to rigorous discipline, but wear out quickly and look for a more peaceful and welcoming environment.

After retreading the tread and thinking about everything I'm also going with sli.

[QuickTwist]

After retreading the tread and thinking about everything I'm also going with sli.

The perpetual cycle of self evaluation continues!!!

Tune in next week to see if I could be ENFp.

[Sol]

They certainly should not be used as a primary means of establishing your type in any case

RD is a hypothesis which is too far from Jung to use it at all. Such hypotheses without convincing link to core theory may be used only after experimental proof. The tries to do this by Lytov and Talanov gave no good support to them.

and Reinin himself apparently has that view

The description of RD used today is taken from Augustinavichute's work where she said her words are rather speculative. She did not relate to RD as seriously as to her model A, for example. Model A is hypothesis with some doubtful points, while RD are the derivation from Model A (hypothesis of 2nd level) wich also have much less basis for used interpretation than Model A had during creation from Jung's model. RD are just a fantasy. When today we see people using RD with meaning similar to Jung's dichotomies and functions, - it's nonsense.

At best, they confused the whole process.

As most baseless fantasies, RD should be wrong, at least by significant part. While using of wrong theory naturally leads to wrong typings. To notice this hard as average typing match is low (~15-20%) and addition of more bs in typing process makes minor changes.

[Sol]

I believe in moral objectivism

Ethical idealism of logical types is charming. It's reason is tendency to simplify things wich are hard to operate by. Reality always has details and contradictions. Sterile, abstract idealism removes them.

[QuickTwist]

Ethical idealism of logical types is charming. It's reason is tendency to simplify things wich are hard to operate by. Reality always has details and contradictions. Sterile, abstract idealism removes them.

That's a short post, but a great one.

[nickelslick]

I need a dislike button.

[QuickTwist]

I need a dislike button.

You don't like that I self typed too many times and one of them was LII, your type?

[nickelslick]

"reality has details and contradictions"

Grrrr.

About your typing, you don't strike me as LII. Maybe you should go through a process of elimination to narrow the options down first.

[QuickTwist]

"reality has details and contradictions"

Grrrr.

About your typing, you don't strike me as LII. Maybe you should go through a process of elimination to narrow the options down first.

Process of elimination is difficult for me. Its not natural for me to operate that way, at least not in the way you are describing. I usually just gather a lot of info in IP manner and then the solution just pops into my head. Unfortunately I've been dealing with the struggle of typing myself for some time. I have "Official" evidence that I am INTP, but with so much cognitive dissonance its really hard for me to gauge.

[applejacks]

The perpetual cycle of self evaluation continues!!!

Tune in next week to see if I could be ENFp.

stranger things have happened here!

[Beautiful sky]

The perpetual cycle of self evaluation continues!!!

Tune in next week to see if I could be ENFp.

Lol you just see action, action, action don't you? :/

[QuickTwist]

Lol you just see action, action, action don't you? :/

I've been trying to find my type and who I am and how I fit into this world since I was born. Believe me its not easy, but I'm not giving up even though my sanity tells me I should.

[Beautiful sky]

stranger things have happened here!

Your Ne is magical

[strangeling]

I've been trying to find my type and who I am and how I fit into this world since I was born. Believe me its not easy, but I'm not giving up even though my sanity tells me I should.

/In case you're correlating those together
Type won't help you find out who you are or how you fit into things; it only reflects what you already know about yourself, which does change with experience. So it's probably best to consider it a tentative thing and not take it too seriously, just because of that.

[QuickTwist]

/In case you're correlating those together
Type won't help you find out who you are or how you fit into things; it only reflects what you already know about yourself, which does change with experience. So it's probably best to consider it a tentative thing and not take it too seriously, just because of that.

It gives a framework to work with, with clear indications of one thing or another, at least, in theory.