@Sol Maybe I'll make a video. The test here is interesting, but it takes a long time to do.
edit I'm stupid sorry
Last edited by Ave; 01-13-2019 at 04:33 PM.
Join my Enneagram Discord: https://discord.gg/ND4jCAcs
@ToTheMoon 's (results)
by nonverbal from video was supposed LII
"Hey, that test was very interesting to take! I grabbed a couple of glimpses of all the videos included and after a moment of debating, came to the conclusion that my top faves would have to be:
ESFj/ESE - I enjoyed how stable but energetic they were at the same time, and they looked as if they had so much of this combo in them that they could just share it and spread it all over their surroundings. I wish there were more than just two working videos for men of this type, though, two vids were a bit scarce for grasping the general idea of this type.
INFj/EII - they mesmerized me. Very attractive men. Kinda want to meet each one and talk with them at length to get a better understanding of them (this happens to me sometimes and I usually leave disillusioned when all the mysteries go away ).
ENFJ/EIE - they look warm and very considerate of others but so much fun at the same time. Didn't look very bright to me though . Which ultimately didn't really matter! (Sorry about that judgment.)
INFp/IEI - so soothing! They look like they would be very accomodating and able to offer great understanding without being imposing and judgmental.
I also liked INTj/LII but more like... they're such sweet children, slightly lost in the world, I want to hug them and tell them they'll be alright. Very warm feelings from me.
[...]
When I made your test, I noticed my strong negative reaction to IEE, to my surprise. I didn't have this strong a reaction to any other type (except INTp who were just... eww. So disheveled. Kinda scary at that). I wonder what that means. They annoyed me so much. They all looked like they were desperately calling for my attention and/or sympathy, like they needed me to see them and only them. I saw so much faking in them it disturbed me. This could be related to the fact that I saw my old boyfriend in their expressions. Or this could be that I'm in strong denial about myself, if I'm indeed one of them . But I'm pretty convinced that I do and I like myself a lot and I'm pretty aware of the way that I am, so there's that.
After watching these videos, I can't see IEI for me, I'm definitely not that nice and flowy like they are."
So I've finished the test, and here are my results :
1-EII
2-EIE
3-IEE
4-SLE
5-ILE
6-SEE
7-IEI
8-LIE
9-LSE
10-ESE
11-SEI
12-LSI
13-SLI
14-ESI
15-LII
16-ILI
@Hamouchou
you prefer FN types as 3/4 of them are in top - 3 first places. this may point on your TS
the only missing FN is IEI what can be explained that it's superego for SLI - the worst IR. while conflictors on a distance can be perceived positively. as to have superego in top is low possibly, then the situation points on SLI as most possible among TS
6/8 of your up half are E types and all bottom 4 are I types. So you prefer E types, what points on your introvertion.
Also most of up half are F (5/8) and N (6/8) types, what with 3 FN at top points on good possibility of TS. Most at up half are P types (5/8), what points on some more for your P.
SLI's semidual got 5th place - the closest place to top. on 6th place is SLI's mirrage - the type on border between good and neutral IR - it supplements 2nd function. Against LSE besides EIE at top is their semidual at bottom. SLE's semidual is at bottom too.
The strangest is SLE at top. Mb you had important SLE woman.
By IR test the most possible types are SLI and lesser for LSI.
The supposed by VI and by your communication was SLI with assurance by me. The test shows good and main possibility for SLI, some more than for LSI as 2nd variant to think about.
IR test has worked relatively good on you.
You need to choose between delta and beta quadras - which values and types are closer, more yours. Your type is SLI, but you need to study and to watch on practice the typology more to understand it.
I like Dimitry Novoselov- doesn’t show too much emotions and is very informative and serious
-
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 LSI group speak too slowly too involved and I don’t have patience for them. Just get tothe point
-
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
"TIM SLI"
try to type people near you to check IR effects with them to be sure. novices sometimes change opinions about own type later. only when you'll see regularly and IRL that IR effects fit to the theory - then you'll have strong basis to trust to concrete your type. also you'll can trust in your typing skills in this case and hence to use the typology in your life
some % of mistakes will stay, so even when you are sure in someone's type - it's better to watch him for several monthes. if assured opinion stays - then you may make decisions based on the typology.
it's especially important with typing women for pairs, where emotions make harder to think reasonably. also nontypes factors are important too and needs a time to understand a human better, including when it has good IR for pairs as duality/semiduality/activation. we all understand this, but it needs efforts to follow this and it's useful to remind about this
-
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
@Sol
Why do you have the key here at all. Curious people are always going to check the key. You just put the temptation there by posting it. When I took tests in school I was not given the answers along with it. I found out the answers after I finished the test.
“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
@Sol, don't remove the key!
“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
“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
I may change the key periodically with list's updates. But not to remove.
Quiet people which more hear you, than flood by own speaking what you are harder to hold, - is more about introverts which hence fit to your preferences more.
If you'd did IR test comletely and without knowing the types there - then it would be rather more significant to describe your preferences.
Nontypes factors may reduce and distort IR effects in your consciousness.
You knew the key, about LSI there and also you wish to think yourself EII - so you were predisposed to accent on negative.
You need to evaluate impressions not directly but to _compare_ 2 groups: E vs I types, - to decide which group is _more_ comfortable for you. Also it's better to do IRL.
Not by 1-2 humans of a single type by 1-2 clips per every.
People which want to do the test correctly will have no problems to do not open the key before it should to be.
The interests of minority of alike 20% which may have no enough of selfcontrol are lesser important than to leave the possibility to use the test without my assistance. Also, that minority is not expected to have the patience to do the test correctly (takes ~8 hours) - as it needs even more of selfcontrol.
> You just put the temptation there by posting it.
the ones following temptations live by instincts, not by thinking about better ways. to use the typology is for more responsible ones
> When I took tests in school I was not given the answers along with it. I found out the answers after I finished the test.
Making school tests better than your real skills you did not thought as a problem for you. In other case there should not be a significant problem to do not look at answers page. Also the test is assumed for adults, but not kids with undeveloped psyche to follow the reason.
In Herbert's "Dune" there is an episode (if I remember it correctly) of a torture by an illusionary pain - proof after achieving mature age. If an aristocrat has good selfcontrol and does not remove the hand - he deserves to live. In other case he should die, being not responsible enough to have the power. Knowledge is the power.
Last edited by Sol; 03-08-2019 at 05:56 PM.
“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
I know Dune.
Edit: Adults cheat too. It is naive to think they don't. It is not always about self control. It is about curiosity sometimes. The reason more people do not take your test is because it takes a lot of time. Then again by socionics standards that is your polr so there you have it... It is devaluing other people's time to ask them to take a test, you estimate to take 8 hours, when they have other things to do as well. People have school, careers and families to deal with too.
“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
Lol I just noticed the key. You are something else because you are blind. Then why didn’t you make a test without a key if you didn’t want people to know the results also Dimitry VIs like my husband. And, never mind that someone who met me real life said “she’s a Socionics master” and that’s exactly what I am. I don’t need your approval and your test is so bad
-
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
1) the test (in now format) is a secondary method which is useful to show which types are more possible, but not to show clearly the concrete type. and not many ones gave me videointerviews for primary typing method, the results of which secondary method may support or to oppose against, 2) people are skeptical to the test's efficiency compared to the needed efforts; in case there was better objective basis to trust - they'd did it more.
Sooner or later there will be objective basis. What I do now - show on practice that IR work and try to develop how to use them for typing and mb to prove duality hypothesis.
It may take up to 20 years to make normal IR test instead of the pack of random youtube bloggers lol the sorting of which is analysed without formalized system still. Besides better videos, it needs to develop a calculation method - so the types sorting gave a number to possibility of every type to be correct. It's all rather raw. People understand this. What they do not understand - that even this raw test is better than anything else for IR analysis. It took me 15 years of regular typing to get the typing skills enough to create this list. The only alternative is to study the typing themselves and to type people near IRL - this takes monthes, but not 8 hours what they think as "a lot". Many people even still think it's ok to post a questionnaire to be correctly typed lol - sure they'll be typed by noobs and being novices can be impressed by the arguments to accept the bs they get. To understand the use of something it needs some knowledge, while the ones who asks abour own types mostly have no it. And there is nothing objective to change their own perception. They see just another dude on forums which does alike anyone else here - posts own speculations. Someones (mb 50%) did the test badly as did not follow to recommendations - how those cases can be distinguished from normal testing? Here is a mix of relatively good and so so results, - leads to not good general impression. While the reasons behind this are unknown - mb it's not good test, this reduces the wish to do it for many ones.
> It is devaluing other people's time to ask them to take a test
to study the typing and to type people by yourself for IR checking will take much longer. the current recommendations is the only and still partial alternative. try to offer better way, having strong N and kind of lesser devaluing of peoples time if you do not know better ways, then there is no basis to claim about the devaluing
the example of SLI above I suppose was glad to spend some hours to get a proof of his SLI. he still needs to do own research and own typing, but at now has alike 80-90% chance his type is SLI. while some dudes here try to understand own types for years without IR or with lame own typing
> you estimate to take 8 hours
8 seconds would be much too, as there can be other things to do during them
When you'll know about better IR checking alternative - then I'll hear with an interest your words about time devaluing.
I myself checked own type by IR with IRL people for several monthes to be sure in it. To check by the existing videos in Internet there is no sooner way with acceptable accuracy - I tried to use a single clip per a human - that gave significantly lower typing matches in my experiment on socioforum, only 2 clips have given the average matche comparable with IRL interview in SRT-99. You need at least 2 examples per a type to generalize the impressions and such to be able to remove nontypes factors. As are used bloggers but not special typing videointerviews - I've added 3rd example. Mb you may watch a clip for lesser time in case you are N type, but S types need to watch longer to understand correctly the impressions - those 3-4 minutes are based on my own experience of me being S type. All my recommendations are not taken from nowhere - they are practical minimum.
The monthes is the time for alternative approach on comparable IR checking. But 8 hours is so much compared to monthes and years. People may do incompetent flood, to discuss heresies or random stuff on the forum with other noobs for several hours per a week - this deserves more of their time, sure. Flood's time is holly time. Aylen's time police watches and protects you. Oh that IR test - 8 hours of unholy IR checking, unholly by Ne devaluing IEIs standards.
According to this shouldn’t you be LSE?
@Sol imagine that... an introvert liking an introvert. He must have no patience for his IEE dual according to your logic which you just applied on me because you are denial.
H- you are SLI. I suggest that you join an mbti group on IEE and there meet a dual. Tell them I told you that you would make a great match with 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 do think that I relate more to Fi dual seeking rather than Ne. My interactions with ESI and EIIs have been very refreshing and "humanizing", but I think that my general attraction to extraverts is a stronger indicator than one position, wouldn't you say so ?
EDIT : Lol, nevermind.
“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
Here are 2 ESI on this forum: @aster and mb @Luminous Lynx.
Types of people could be other than you suppose and those interactions be too limited to notice IR effects as expected.
ESIs from the list you've placed to bottom (what is expected for SLI having them as subrevisie), while EIE - LSE's superegos to top. This excludes LSE for you. Besides other factors which point on SLI as more possible.
Also, LSE do not change types is profiles so easily. We are reasonable and so do mistakes only after good thinking.
Oh.. I imagined you alike
damn Internet
Base T types to decide or to make a claim prefer a good basis - the most reasonable types. So they change opinions not easily, especially public claims.
I saw a dude which changed types in own profile several times during ~3 monthes. He was on the forum for several years. Seems depending on the types of girls (in their profiles) with which ones he flirted on the forum in that moment. The initial type which he claimed himself was SEE. Then his profile had SLE, LSI and the last what I saw was LSE when he flooded with ESI which claimed herself as EII. I saw he uses more flowery language than T types, far from my own style and strange situation with his type - noticed him, and he has reacted with strange anger as seems I opposed to his game.
Last edited by Sol; 03-10-2019 at 11:33 AM.
“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
“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
If those were not noobs with unstable opinions. And there was no objectively bad typing skills even at experienced in typing (mb <10% of active in Socionics), what is seen in real typing matches <50%.
Then what those think about own types would be important.
also
aster claimed it as EII (what is close), kept doubts during this and seems the same stays.
Lynx (seems) claimed it as ESI, until recently has changed it.
-
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've never see this method of typing, looks interesting though, here are my results.
1. SLI (I found the style of video and demeanour engaging)
2. ESE
3. ILE
4. SEE
5. ILI
6. LII
7. SLE
8. LSE
9. LSI
10.SEI
11.EIE
12.IEI (would have scored quite a bit higher, but there was a sense of detachment/distance in the videos)
13.LIE
14.IEE
15.EII
16.ESI
Last edited by JonMoon; 06-04-2019 at 01:13 PM.
@JonMoon
It needs to place ESI. The list above has 2 IEE.
Thanks for the heads up, should be edited now
@JonMoon
Fe valued type
more alpha, but not ESE
most possible types: ILE, SEI, LII
among them SEI has higher chance
Thanks for the response I'll look into those types.
wrtyhdrfyhgbdfccfc szdfvhbjgyfcfc sdxcvghdrfxfc zsxsx
Last edited by Anglas; 07-09-2019 at 09:34 PM.
EII
IEI
IEE
SEI
ESI
ILI
EIE
LIE
ILE
SEE
ESE
LII
LSI
SLI
LSE
SLE