I hope this website doesn't hijack my life
You can call me Ricky. I have been on a few typology forums in the past. It's kind of my weakness. I need to allow myself a certain amount of time on here a day I think lol.
I'm not a complete newbie to socionics. It's been my main focus, typology speaking, for a year or so now. But I'm still not 100% sold on my own type and I'm not super confident in typing others either. All I know is MBTI was a good starting point, but I consider it mostly meaningless at this point. I wish socionics was more well known. It's too complicated to explain to most people I know. It took me myself a long time to warm up to the idea even though I live for this shit. There are still a lot of aspects of socionics I still haven't quite mastered.
I'm more well versed in the enneagram than anything really, but partly that is because it is simpler to explain.
Excited to discuss. Nice to meet you all.
Queen of the Damned
“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
What's the purpose of SEI?
Hi Ricky, welcome!
Are you sure you want to do this?
Real life experience was for me the key that changed everything. I had been reading about this Socioincs theory, and I didn't really know what to think about it. My background was Myers-Briggs. Then I had a period when I was dating online and meeting lots of new people for a coffee. I noticed that the chemistry roughly could be predicted by the Socionics relationships. I didn't know all the details, but I noticed that it worked. It was a lot about learning what the phenomenon actually was about. I was also doing practical work in gardening with a team with many people. It was easy to see how the type played out and strengths and weaknesses. This was in 2010.
What do you consider your type in Myers Briggs? That's always a starting point.
A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
(Jung on Si)
this is an alt. calling it.
Yeah I would say you are a "loser" for wasting your time here even for three minutes a day but hypocrisy of course.
I often sometimes wonder what it would be like not to be gaslighted by any media the Jews made, not books/movies/ tv shows/video games anything. Not internet forums.... and you'd just live in the world naturally like how it is. I guess that's what Amish people sorta do right, but they are still allowed to read books aren't they? But not even that.... like you shouldn't write as it's just a bunch of narcissistic projection anyway even if you are good at it. You know, you just kinda had the balls to live in the real brutal natural world 24/7 without being influenced by all this stupid garbage media. Like you implied, life is there to be lived. Can you really do it being trapped in somebody else's dream?
Would this be 'too boring?'
your life is worthless anyhow
There's a name for mammals that live that way.
Originally Posted by Bullets
We electrocute them for food.
We can still be that way without being animals. It's dumb that so many people are gaslighted by the media. They just repeat stuff they saw in a tv show instead of coming up with something original themselves.