A lot of women can come across as a bit emotional regardless of their typeOriginally Posted by Bertrand
I think she is an SLE to be honest. (And that you are an LII.)
Nah, go on Discord or a Skype chat. Real time > a pre-planned and manufactured video. You can't fake things so easily.
ok I went and pooped and I still think you need to make a video. not because it will absolutely determine type, but its nevertheless the single greatest piece of evidence you can produce to move things forward
Then jump off the boat, 'cuz as I've already said previously on the thread I can't post my face here.
As for your previous questions:
-I only ever typed as Logical, and that struck me as accurate both because ( just a very general picture) lack of logic is painful to me, and because most of my problems since to come from my instability in dealing with Ethical issues.
-On the other hand, as much as I might suck at the emotional department (PC speech, sugarcoating or softening punches, being vulnerable) and may look like I don't care I actually care A LOT. Too much IMO, it drives me nuts. I also don't understand how I can be accused of not having morals when in fact I think I have too much, and see myself as quite judgy and uptight about bothand
;
-Not sure about Rational/Irrational because I check half of the traits of each type. I'm only sure of about 4 dichotomies;
I definitely have noticed patterns in terms of relationships with other types too, but still can't fit them into a type.
Sounds a lot like ethical PoLR. Means that one has some conscious control over it while not showing it IRL. Suggestive IE is usually the place of total incompetence.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
SLE. Broken down:Then jump off the boat, 'cuz as I've already said previously on the thread I can't post my face here.
As for your previous questions:
-I only ever typed as Logical, and that struck me as accurate both because ( just a very general picture) lack of logic is painful to me, and because most of my problems since to come from my instability in dealing with Ethical issues.
-On the other hand, as much as I might suck at the emotional department (PC speech, sugarcoating or softening punches, being vulnerable) and may look like I don't care I actually care A LOT. Too much IMO, it drives me nuts. I also don't understand how I can be accused of not having morals when in fact I think I have too much, and see myself as quite judgy and uptight about both
-Not sure about Rational/Irrational because I check half of the traits of each type. I'm only sure of about 4 dichotomies;
I definitely have noticed patterns in terms of relationships with other types too, but still can't fit them into a type.
"I suck at sugarcoating or softening punches" = Se-ego and also Fi-PoLR. Gamma SFs are more discriminating.
"A lack of logic is painful to me" = Ti as this is subjective
"I may look like I don't care but I actually care A LOT" = Fe valuing (this is the HA, something you value but are not good at)
That's a really good distinction actually, thank you.
It's worthy of notice that these were the exact types I was seriously considering when I first joined the forum. Then for the first time since I got into typology many we're insisting I was types I never considered before which threw me into a loop.
What would you say it's a good way to find your Suggestive?
why cant you post your face here ?
Professional matters.
what are you, a spy?
What are you, a gossip blogger?
im not the one making excuses, there's a reason for wanting you to post a vid that doesn't involve my occupation necessitating it, but apparently for you it does? that was my question, how could your "professional matters' possibly bear on the issue? the bottom line is you can just say "I don't want to post a video, but I'll do lots of things short of that in order to facilitate the typing process" without turning it into some kind of struggle for dominance
with that said the kind of paranoia and willingness to start pissing contests does seem kind of Fi polr Se dominance
"Making excuses"? Would you listen to yourself?
You sound like you are under the delusion that you're in a position of making any demands of me and I'm obligated to either comply or provide you with "satisfying" reasoning to not to. I don't owe you shit.
You also have to be either someone who never worked, or is just obtuse to not be able to think of several occupations that might demand for non disclosure of identity.
If you have nothing else to contribute, then stop pestering.
honestly that sounds totally crazy, but w/e
also I had a secret military clearance so I'm not totally ignorant to how stuff works
sorry for suggesting posting a video might be a good idea when it comes to being typed, didn't mean to enslave you
And you sound totally illogical , what's "crazy" about not being able to expose your image if you know anything about military policies?
If you can't spot the contradiction, then it's your PoLR. Not that "how stuff works" doesn't already reinforce the general belief about which one it is.
whats the idea here that I don't understand that "non disclosure" precludes making a video? No i get that, what im saying is I doubt that's what any policy actually forbids, and even if it did its stupid because it could not actually facilitate any possible military objective. if it does in fact exist and has some military rationale its probably something like "our underlings are too stupid to know what videos could constitute national security threats, and we're too lazy to create a granular policy and actually oversee it, so we'll just make a blanket prohibition and assume their bitch asses will be too scared to think to violate it (as if we'd check it any way). yes, that will surely keep us safe from this spectre of whatever it is we're trying to prevent." honestly it just sounds like amateurs all around
@Bertrand & some other peeps, y'all leave my girl alone aye. If she neither can't nor wants to do it then that is set in stone
I don't understand that this is even the case, thoughIf she neither can't nor wants to
she's making it sound like she would but her job forbids it, which sounds not true to me. I guess im just confused, because I get the idea, I'm saying the idea makes no sense. what kind of military says you can't post inoffensive videos of yourself that don't divulge any protected information. its so weird. even in the united states people working in top secret SCI areas can still do whatever they want online as long as its not related to their work. its not like anyone gives a shit that mook #40454 who mans the computers is a SLI or whatever. I mean is whoever the phantom enemy is really going to hunt your bitch ass down now that they've seen your face. im sure they could get it from 10 other sources anyway. the whole thing sounds like overactive imagination, maybe its just shitty leadership making asinine policy, I dunno
The U.S. tends to have a relatively "live and let live" type attitude (race and gender aside). In other words, say whatever you like, but if you get into shit because of it you're going to face the consequences alone.
I have never been to South Korea but can easily imagine that there might be far less freedom about what you can share online with impunity.
@Bertrand
I can't possibly believe that someone could be THIS obtuse, so I'm going with you're just playing dumb to either piss me off or see if I'll accidently give you any more info.
If you really are as ignorant as to not know contracts such as this exist then God bless you, for you live in an alternate innocent reality.
An FYI: I used the military example you gave in the first place, you're the one going into conspiracy mode. I can't believe you're so bad at filling in the blanks and takes everything so literally. Actually I can, it's type related so it can't be helped.
So the idea is shes works for the ROK in an official capacity and they explicitly forbid posting youtube videos of oneself, even if they don't relate to work or divulge sensitive content in any way? I find that hard to believe, mainly because I dont believe the ROK is stupid, which apparently cuvininy doesn't have a problem accepting, which seems vaguely racist but whatever
the idea that you signed a contract provision that blanket precluded making any youtube videos is so dumb im not sure I want to fill in the blanks. I mean really, can you link me to something that says this is common practice in some form of trade or occupation? its like you're expecting me to be play along and be like ohhh ok right, as if I must be the dumb one if it sounds stupid. no, I'm pretty sure you're just bullshitting. but whatever I'm not that married to it. I probably couldn't even type you with the video, the more puzzling thing is why bend over backwards to try and pretend you're being held up by forces beyond your control when you could just admit to not wanting to make one, which, as chae pointed out, would be totally fine
GET. THE.FUCK.OUT.OF.MY.THREAD
And congrats if getting reported for harassment is what you we're looking for.
And you keep on exposing YOUR over imaginative teenage mind when you keep babbling about spies and military on your own. You're ridiculous, jumping to wild scenarios.
Yet another meaningless diversion. Stop speculating. She and I hardly get on, but in fairness, the details of her employment contract are not your business.
Oh and I see you called me a racist again. How original.
@Playing With Fire
Just send Bertrand a picture of yourself so he can fap, and then this trainwreck will end. He isn't brave enough to ask you directly.
@Cuivienen
Lol, Anteater can fap to his image of me as a Russian spy if he wants to, he doesn't deserve to lay eyes on me.
If that's what he was aiming for with all this, then I actually can forgive him. He ain't getting none from anyone any time soon with his "techniques"
Arrest him in thickly accented Russian, and then put him in solitary confinement. Infantile type men like to be sexually humiliated.
Oh, there's someone out there for everyone, at least, I like to think so.If that's what he was aiming for with all this, then I actually can forgive him. He ain't getting none from anyone any time soon with his "techniques"
Argh, now you're making him sound so inviting
Lol, you're sweetOh, there's someone out there for everyone, at least, I like to think so.
Wow. I guess I'm a decent wingman for LIIs, thenArgh, now you're making him sound so inviting
I am hot and spicy, but with just the right amount of sweetness to balance the heat.Lol, you're sweet
Since Ethical PoLR was mentioned, I thought I'd share something I posted somewhere else a couple days ago that might shed some light into that:
I was waiting for BTS to show up on the red carpet with an IEE, and we were commenting on everyone's fashion. She kept asking me about Kelly Rowland's outfit, I tried to evade the questioning 'cuz it was obvious she loved it and just wanted me to agree with her sentiment, which I didn't. After she pestered me for a while I gave my (partially negative) assessment, and she got upset. As usual she was trying to convince me to "see things her way", basically she's always saying that I should low the bar for everything.
Basically what she said, what's in quotes is verbatim:
-come off as too "dry and categorical" constantly durng critiques
-"professional level" demands about everything
-too rigid and unforgiving in judgements
-never seem to relax
-"Why can't you just enjoy things?" a.k.a uncriteriosuly and undiscrimniantly like things like she does
-my self sufficiency disturs her, she even brought up a shitty "friendship" she prefers to maintain with a fucked up person to being alone as an argument
She was utterly incapable of understanding that that's the way I am and I can't help it or change it. And utterly incapable of understanding how one can be happy this way. She kept insisting that she didn't think it was wrong to be this way, but it "worried her, because I'm too young" lol. As much as it worried me until very recently that she's so laissez-faire and clueless being as old as she is. After I explained to her that that's how my mind works and that yes, I'm absolutely happy and unbothered she seemed to finally understand.
This sounds more like LIE than SLE. I understand that you have typed as both in the past.
If I were you, here is how I would tackle the problem:
SLE is an Irrational type, LIE is a Rational type. If you can discover with some confidence whether you are a p or a j, then you will have gone a long way towards finding your true type. I wouldn't worry about Fe vs Fi type questions, as in either case the Ethical function will not be in your ego block (i.e. weak and poorly used).
Here is some info on Rational/Irrational, it's kind of technical but see how you feel after going through it:
http://www.socionics.com/articles/irra.htm
Yeah I tried this before but them moved to Dichotomies since planning vs improvising didn't get me anywhere. With me is like this: I usually do "plan" (I can flesh it out later if it's important) things out, but very seldom do I follow it, at least faithfully. It's almost as if I just need to plan so I feel more confident or better yet, "prepared". But when it comes to the crunch I more often than not just do what is best, either because there were factors I wasn't aware of, because I just have a better idea on the fly, because I notice something's off etc. Sometimes is dependent on other people involved, sometimes just on how I "feel" (here it doesn't mean emotions per se, more like an instinct or intuition).
I think it has something to do with my attitude to theory versus practice. The plan is the theory, the implementation is practice, and obviously the second is more important.
I have severe discipline problems when it comes to many things, but am very diligent in my area of interest, I guess that's why I can't really decide between Judicious and Decisive.
By the way I took the test again after making progress in self understanding:
It certainly would explain my whole flip-flop self typing thing, and also some patterns in intertype relations. I mean it totally would explain my "difficult" relationships with EIIs (and sometimes ESIs), LSEs and IEEs. And why I've been declaring my undying love for SEIs since my MBTI days years ago
Last edited by PrettySavage; 11-30-2017 at 11:35 AM. Reason: Image link was broken due to account delete
@Retsu77
If I am not mistaken, you self-type not unlike OP.
Have a look through her posts - what do you think? Any similarities?
You're doing the exact same thing Chae did before that set me off. Thankfully I'm in a great mood right now, so I'll let it slide.
I forgot to add this in our convo yesterday, but if you're 100% sure Anteater is LII, then I'm 200% he's ExI. I'm sure we recognize Logic as very different things, since you think its presence it's a matter of opinion, while I think it's either objectively there or not.
I am just trying to help you find your type, that's all.
Bertrand already knows that I think he is an LII, but that's not really the point.
The convo you are talking about here was a PM.
You're tagging someone I never even heard of in my typing thread on your own accord.
Yes it's not the point because I'm talking about what I think because it has a weight on how you access functions, what has transpassed between you two is not of my interest.
And? If you want me to be careful with your "privacy", then extend me the same favor because I consider this my territory. This is an open thread so anyone can post, but inviting people to weight on my type without my consent is the same as going to a party and inviting strangers over without the house owner knowledge.
See you have your sensitivities, I have mine. You respect my limits, I respect yours, it's as simple as that.
And?
So am I.
The difference is that this is a public thread, not a private message which I only sent to one person - you. So while you may have started this thread, you tacitly implied that you were happy for anyone on the forum to join your party. Unlike me. I specified who I wanted to invite.
I now understand that you don't want random people to comment in your type me thread, as it is a personal topic.
However, who I choose to mention in other threads is my business.
The fact that you see nothing wrong with this behavior should inform you of one of the possible whys people don't respond to you the way you wish they would. It's simply rude and entitled.
There's no "may" here and as for the rest, I explicitly told you how I worked before so the surprise at me retaliating is illogical. Even more considering that you believe I'm SLE, nothing I did/said would be surprising or off brand then.
No, you don't understand at all. Random people can comment to their heart's content as long as they come on their own. What I hate is the notion of being discussed as if I'm not present, besides what I've already explained.
As for your last sentence I have no idea what you're talking about, I didn't mention your interactions with third parties apart from this thread, and only because it included me.
Anyway I'm sick ad tired of this, from now onward let's just not. So far it's been much more trouble than it's worth for both, and I'm trying to focus on being productive.
Interesting points found during my readings today:
What is Ne?
Ok, so this definitely ain't a strong function. ILE, bye byeBasically, when ILEs or IEEs see possibilities (i.e. 'alternative configurations') in a phenomenon, what they see is which non-essential things of the phenomenon can be removed or substituted by other non-essential things to arrive at the realization of another possibility. The non-essential aspects of the phenomenon are translated into variables that can be experimented with. These variables can take on values within a certain bandwidth, which is set by the essence of the phenomenon, i.e. the phenomenon does not just take on possibilities, but also impossibilities.
Coming up with ideas is easy to Ne-base types. Turning them into reality is a different story: how to get from A to B is of lesser importance to Ne-base types, and requires the application of other information elements that are not their strong points. Which explains why so many IEEs and ILEs get stuck in the idea phase.
There is an important psychological relationship for Ne-base types between seeing essences and possibilities. It is the perception of possibilities that generate a sense of self-esteem in the individual, and not so much the perception of essences. While perceiving essence often works as an 'aha-erlebnis', seeing the possibilities is the expression of their creative ability, and as such appears much more worthwhile. But seeing essences is a precondition to seeing possibilities, which is why Ne-base types are always on the lookout for new essences. The resulting perceptions of possibilities in a sense have the same gratifying effects on the Ne-base mind as mind altering drugs. For as long as it lasts, of course, after which the individual needs to look for another hit. A failure to find such a hit leads to a sense of boredom.
What is Ni?
What makes Ni in intuitives different, is scope and priority. Intuitive types are capable of "seeing" much further into the future and with greater accuracy, provided they can fall back on sufficient life experience to draw from (the fore-mentioned framework), and apply Ni properly in terms of social roles, i.e. IEIs are better at applying their Ni skills in the domain of human behavior and social processes, whereas e.g. ILIs are generally better at applying it at processes of a technical nature.
Priority is also important in intuitives. Especially for intuitive base types it is natural to focus on possible or inevitable consequences of situations before anything else.
In addition, Ni "sees" processes and outcomes in situations where most sensors would deny that there is any data to go by. E.g. an Ni type could be faced with an individual and know that this person is going to try to deceive them at some stage, where most other people would think this person is trustworthy, since the person is 'obviously' not showing any outward signs of being otherwise. This is, of course, a matter of focus and priority: what kind of information do you consider more interesting or important?
So what is Ni?
Ni, at it most basic level, is the capability to observe a process in action (something that is happening before their eyes), and next "see" the future consequences of that process. For Ni egos, the focus is on the unfolding of the process, for Ne egos (when giving Ne some slack in favor of Ni) it is on the outcome of the process.
An important aspect of Ni, is that the insights derived from it typically can not be explained or proven by Ni alone, since Ni "sees" things, it does not deduce or induce insights in terms of verbal or mathematical thinking processes.
it's that simple really, why do people complicate it so much? Fetishism?
The differences between Fi and Fe
Great points, very accurate.This difference between Fi judging a person and Fe judging the emotion is expressed in the type of emotions and feelings involved.
Fi deals with emotions such as hate, love, compassion, sympathy, respect, trust, loyalty, moral outrage, dread, resignation, cynicism, shame etc. All of these involve judgments about other persons, objects or events.
Fe deals with emotions such as fright, startle, surprise, shock, anger, grief, sorrow, anxiety, joy, euphoria and depression, and is less inclined to pass value judgment on another person, although another person can clearly be seen as a positive or negative source of emotions, and as such can lead to a value judgement.
Affective emotions (Fi) last longer than reactive emotions (Fe), which confirms my own observation that Fi value judgements have a much larger long-term effect: If you are the object of an Fi value judgement, this is much more difficult to overcome than being the subject of an Fe value judgement. With the latter, you, the object, is being evaluated as a source of pleasant of unpleasant emotions, which may change when you change your emotional expression. But this is more difficult with Fi, since Fi involves the emotions of the person making the judgement about you, which are much more difficult to change.
With Fe, what you see is typically what you get, as there is not much beating around the bush. Fi, which drives rationalized behavior (in the non-Socionics, sociological sense) much more than Fe, all is not what it seems.
Let me elaborate with an example: suppose you have violated the boundaries of an Fi ego type, how do these react? First of all, it depends on how serious the violation is. You might never know the countermeasures the Fi ego takes against you, because it is done so subtly that you never notice measures are being taken or can't make the connection; or the measures are taken by proxy, meanwhile the Fi-ego behaving with courtesy and respect towards you. Or they are taken after a while, when it's no longer apparent what motivated the measures). It can be something as simple as not being invited for tea, or playing dumb, pretending to not to have the skills required to solve another person's problem. But when the matter is serious enough to be dealt with immediately, the response is quadra-dependent.
As said, with Fe, what you see is typically what you get. If you violate the principles of an Fe-ego (which is more likely than violating their boundaries), they are more likely to retaliate openly. For example, they will try to modify your feelings as to make you feel bad (and thus make you back off or toe the line), either directly or by turning the group emotionally against you.
The Difference between the Role and Mobilizing Functions
Promising possibility, will have to ask around.Using your Role Function is perceived by other people as something that is rather over the top, as manipulative or aggressive, and potentially harmful, either physically, socially or in some other way.
I don't think role function is always percieved that way, or even most of the time. in fact its perceived as generally appropriate under the circumstances as a matter of norms. the only time it would be seen in that pejorative would be if the context merited an exception that was failed to being made and it was perceived by someone who could perceive and understand that failure... over the top gestures tend to come from mobilizing because, as the basis for self esteem people don't use them purely for social adaptation (as is the case with "role", by definition), rather they tend to overdue it precisely because they're looking for positive feedback, which implicates a willingness to expend surplus energy on it, which is what lends it its overdone quality, especially under circumstances where it is threatened. a failure on the role function may go totally unnoticed, whereas people can overreact to negative feedback on mobilizing.. so their initiative taking in that regard may put them in a exceptional circumstance which they are poorly equipped to handle, which elicits criticism, which tends to intensify the effort, but more effort is not the solution so much as is context sensitivity, so it can tend to "get away" from the person... people can use negative defenses which is when it becomes manipulative and aggressive, a sort of reverse psychology that usually ends poorly "people think I'm bad?? watch how bad I can be!" etc.. anyway I'm sure role can fall into this but it definitely doesn't seem to default to it
Jesus you can't help yourself, can you?
Here, this should make you full so you don't come back:
isnt the joke of that meme that shes not really obsessed with her and its all narcissism speaking
are you being ironic x9999, because if so consider me impressed
Posting Permissions
