I'm sorry, the English in the first post is a bit broken so it's not very clear that that's the sorting criterion. Was not unambiguous to me at all. I find it better to ask when it's like that.
Yeah, you could put it like you said it now, it was clearer that way to me at least.> I suggest you remove that part, "which causes romantic passion" and only emphasize the "friendly sympathy and psychic comfort" in place of it.
To take into account sexual orientation is important. I may make additional note to don't use romantic feelings for sorting, as seems some people got confused.
Fay mentioned physical attractiveness, probably she initially made similar mistake and maybe corrected later. Also a girl on socioforum seems did same.
F/N generally is not very unambiguous stuff.> OK great now I see what you meant and what was making it so ambiguous.
The most ambiguous thing seems is how F-N types understand what is needed in the test. I need to ask several EII about which criterion they'd sorted T types of own quadra vs T types of opposite quadra. Yep, I plan to hang on a neck of several people in Internet with this question to check is the current criterion acceptable for them too.
Last edited by Myst; 09-19-2017 at 10:19 AM.
For me as S type also sometimes is harder to understand "what is needed". I generally prefer to re-read and to copy what was said to me to get confirmation that I've understood correctly. Similarly, when I say something important I prefer to repeat this several times (sometimes in variations) to be sure the opponent have understood and remembered me correctly.
uuuuuuh I'm in luv
IR test, so this test is only for IEEs?
Also I need video-interview. As in other case the results will be useless, - I'll can't to understand did the test worked good or not.
> IR is meant to stand for Intertype Relationships in this case rather than NeFi.
This may be also thought as a play of words, as the test mostly uses Ne and Fi functions.
Last edited by Sol; 09-22-2017 at 05:45 PM.
(Just note. Didn't forget this. I really want to get back to this asap.)
I think your video would be good to see. As you find Si as important thing in your life.
For example, Se for me is just "be there", I'm not a fan of such stuff - I may dream something in that region, but it's not what I'd want to deal with in reality - like to play computer games VS kill real people at war.
If this wasn't clear in my post before, let me say I find the Se approach important too. I prefer to focus on Se in a conscious way while Si is in the background more as some extra grounding and to take care of dual's PoLR in an unobtrusive way . Without discussing it too much. The original point was that it's quite a strong function and it will still have some output without focusing on it too much directly (again, especially useful for Si PoLR).
Btw Se isn't just war, that's an extreme form of it lol, I don't want war in my country either, don't want that kind of chaos here.
LSI > ILI > SEI > LII in order of attractiveness
My general impressions towards these:
01- Good, most of the people seemed sweet and likable.
02- Potentially negative, put me on edge and felt guarded towards them
03 Neutral, seemed ok-ish and that's about it
04 Good, seem like that people would make great buddies to hang out and work together on stuff with
05 Ok I suppose, wouldn't mind them as aquaintances
06 Neutral, people I'd just have casual relationships with and amusingly watch from a distance
07 Again Neutral, not much opinion either way towards them.
08 Fun if a bit potentially obnoxious, mostly good though
09 A bit too flightly and annoying for my taste but good though mostly
10 Ok put aren't really people I think I'd connect with very much
11 Somewhat guarded, not really people I see myself interacting with much but could get along if needed
12 Good/very good, seemed like fun and pleasant people
13 Good/ok, a bit talkative but still seemed pleasant
14 Good, fun if a bit too "Wild and crazy"
15 Neutral
16 Guarded, seemed a bit overbearing
Last edited by Muddy; 10-07-2017 at 01:07 AM.
@Muddy
To do not open the key, where you've described impressions: remove types numbers and sort types by socion order or randomly, please.
> Very Good: SEI, LIE, EII, ESE
If you've chosen befor opening the key, this points to possible LII.
I removed the types off each corresponding number if that pleases you.
I skimmed them all then examined each one by one using the key after each one. I sneak peeked a few admittedly after the skim but most of them matched my guessed impression anyway. (Typings seemed pretty good btw)
That pleases the ones which will do this test as they need the key stay closed.
> I skimmed them all then examined each one by one using the key after each one.
So you partly sorted with opened key. It's lesser correctly.
> Typings seemed pretty good btw
At least, someone thinks such (besides me).
There are more women examples, so to do this test for men is easier. Also Ne type may help, besides opened key.
There was an unexpected level of consistency in my two most-liked ones: # and # turned out to be SEI and SLI lol. And I type IEE currently. Go figure. I really hated the ESI ones lol. I saw one/two of those videos and I was like, "NOPE!"
I didn't pick SEI because I felt like they would be a bit more critical of me or that they would be paying attention to me in a way I didn't like. SLI just seemed chill.
This video was the one I liked best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-T1OiRQ0
I think that it's important to notice that there are some parts of us that we want to keep to ourselves. That's the privacy part of being an individual. I think certain types have different abilities to read different sides of you. Duals leave the sides of you that you want to be left alone, alone. Other types will impinge on those private places. You could probably say this in Socionics terms, but I think that demeans the significance of this idea.
Last edited by Aramas; 10-07-2017 at 02:04 PM. Reason: Removing numbers
Was this gotten with the closed key?
> Duals leave the sides of you that you want to be left alone, alone.
The main trait of duals - the help in superid regions. You feel pleasure, more harmony with yourself, rise of energy.
You seems say about weak nonvalued regions. Duals help and support you there softly, without significant criticism and don't push there oddly. You can't just leave "alone" any of 8 functions as they are similarly important. Duals may help on conscious or unconscious levels. Even when I'm just close to *II types, I feel lesser anxiety - I copy their emotional state, while get no supressing effects from Ni.
Why would I have read the key first? It would defeat the purpose . Of course, I had an idea that # was SLI based on the old Jewish looking dude. I'm kinda good at VI myself. I guessed # was IEI. Lol. So maybe this doesn't work quite as well for people who already know how to type others. But I was being honest with my attempt still.
Also, with regards to what you said about functions, I'm not sure what I said was necessarily due to Socionics even though it's related it seems.
I went through the ones I liked originally a second time. It was then that I was able to narrow things down or give a secondary impression that contradicted the first.
Last edited by Aramas; 10-07-2017 at 02:13 PM. Reason: Removing numbers
Some people were impatient, especially P types tend for this.
So hurrah, we got 1st good fit to the theory, - in case you'll place your video to check your type is ENFP indeed. It would be useful to see the full sorting from you, but seems you've limited the sorting by 2 "best" types befor opening the key.
You sorted by women, men or both? You've pointed to man example, so I'm curious.
> I had an idea that # was SLI based on the old Jewish looking dude.
as the most Jewish type I find ILI - they more relate to credits having Ni related to time, also Ni relates to mysticism
> I guessed # was IEI. Lol.
when EII man did this test, he've guessed correctly 50% of types groups. that EII was a novice. Ne and Fi are main functions used there. but he sorted strangely - he prefered own type, while all S-T went to bottom. he said that men examples he could to sort more classically, but did not try this
> So maybe this doesn't work quite as well for people who already know how to type others.
They can't be sure in assumptions, so should work in good degree, anyway.
> I'm not sure what I said was necessarily due to Socionics even though it's related it seems.
Duals try to don't hit in your weak functions regions, but try support there. They see you as a kid there which needs help.
> It was then that I was able to narrow things down or give a secondary impression that contradicted the first.
So the correct sorting you were able to do only on 2nd pass, after you have watched all the types. When you did the sorting during the initial watching this leaded you to significantly other result. Interesting. What places had SLI and SEI in the 1st sorting made during watching?
> It sounds like you're just a bit salty about something.
She has troubles in understanding of own type. So it's harder for her to accept IR theory and understand effects of duality. Her type is some F, excluding base Fi ones.
I came into this thread with the idea of checking out this typing method, but while a decent idea, I don't really trust the typings of the people used for the method.
I'm gay, so I looked at the videos of the men. I realized that the intention was for us to use the gender most likely to stimulate romantic attraction/duality. You said to use the opposite sex, but I knew you mean it for the purpose of potentially arousing the strongest feelings of duality, so I broke the rule to fulfil your goal. :P
I didn't do a full sorting because I wasn't that interested in getting the full sorting. I was more interested in finding out which one or two types I felt best about. I have no problems typing others, but typing myself for some reason has always been an issue. I tend to very easily understand the mental attitudes of others at times, to such a degree that I can imagine myself being in those attitudes. Maybe that's an NF thing. It makes it a bit difficult to maintain a sense of self at times. (This is perhaps mixed with enneagram type 9.)
I didn't do the process necessarily by sorting. I just did it by picking out which ones I liked AT ALL (period, even a little bit) at first. After that, I went through and gave them either plus marks, minus marks, or left them neutral, depending on what my second impression was. There was only one that came out with a plus sign. And that was the SLI video set. Curiously enough, LII ended up being in the final running because of one particular individual that you included in the set that I thought was OK. I still felt better about the SEIs than the one LII I liked in the sets. lol
I'm not really interested in making a video for people to see. Sorry about that. I hope that my post gives you some hope about your method of typing though. I think it really does work.
Hence, the lesser quantity of men is enough (for Ne types, at least). This is good.
> I realized that the intention was for us to use the gender most likely to stimulate romantic attraction/duality.
Yep, there was the recommendation to use the romantically interesting sex. As romantically interesting sex/gender is more associated with the soul friendship, while other sex shifts to co-operation (and hence to similar types). Also the impressions from that sex should be stronger.
I'm glad that my hypothesis seems was correct and the recommendation have worked on you. I also saw a girl (EIE) which reported homosexual behavior and showed such interests, - she have chosen quasi-identity type to top and some of her club as the best, while types of duals club placed to bottom, where own duals placed to the lowest 16th position.
> I didn't do a full sorting because I wasn't that interested in getting the full sorting. I was more interested in finding out which one or two types I felt best about.
The problem is the test is not perfect. You are lucky to have Ne type what made the sorting easier. The full sorting is intended to find tendencies, as excellent fiting to IR theory is not expected.
> I tend to very easily understand the mental attitudes of others at times, to such a degree that I can imagine myself being in those attitudes.
It's empathy - common for NF types, especially having Fi in ego.
> This is perhaps mixed with enneagram type 9.
Are you able to assume Enneagram type by impressions from nonverbal on video-interview with unknown language? Like you do with Socionics types. I'd pm you a clip to think.
> I just did it by picking out which ones I liked AT ALL (period, even a little bit) at first. After that, I went through and gave them either plus marks, minus marks, or left them neutral, depending on what my second impression was. There was only one that came out with a plus sign. And that was the SLI video set.
What types you've chosen on 1st step?
> Curiously enough, LII ended up being in the final running because of one particular individual that you included in the set that I thought was OK.
Which LII there?
> I'm not really interested in making a video for people to see.
Your type seems to be NF, at least. Some suspicion is for EII, as high empathy is more common for them, than IEE. So if you have doubts in own type you may check it by creating a second account (afte some time) and a typing thread - then you remove the video (after 2 weeks, for example) - and so keep high anonymity. On the video you may tell any general things you like, as the main text is placed in questionnaires anyway.
There are no subtypes in classical Socionics so I don't even try to use that bs.
> just from that I know his typing performance is low
So you think that I badly identify types because I either badly identify subtypes or don't use them. Your base T is seen excellently.
Also you may try to find someone who'd had with you real typing match >50% to think there is someone who identifies types good from your speculative opinion. That would give you some sense to say that I type badly compared to others in your perception. But objective thinking is not your strong part, what would be at LIE.
I understand that you don't like that I doubt in your LIE opinion about own type. If you'd was real LIE, then you take it simpler.
Your behavior closer to F type.
Last edited by Sol; 10-07-2017 at 07:20 PM.
It is not necessary to have a typing convergence with anyone to confirm someone's typing. The problem is that there is not objetive way to discern people's types. No machine has been invented that can read a person's brain patterns and tell what type their are. When this happens, discussions such as this will be over. Until then, we are just grasping at straws. A hundred people could be saying that someone is whatever type, and they could all still be wrong.
But yeah, you're right; it is always annoying to have someone question your typing, because the action carries the implication that the person being retyped has poor self-awareness, or is not able to use the theory correctly, thus rendering their contributions useless. So ironically, I've exposed your own low typing performance. Subtypes are real, it doesn't matter what "classical socionics" says. Things evolve and advance, you know?
If you doubt my skill so much, I can provide this gallery for reference. Perhaps you'll learn something
Last edited by lavos; 10-07-2017 at 07:46 PM.
Other problems with this typing method (besides the low reliability of the typings):
- You are seeing this people on video. Meaning, you are not interacting with them in any way, and especially not face to face, which is where ITR's really can be experienced.
- The fact that a certain kinship can be felt with someone you are seeing on video does not mean that you have a positive intertype relation with them. There's a myriad of factors at play.
- I don't know how it works for other people, but I might like some particular person of a determinate type, and not others. For example, I might like some SLE's and not others, I might like some EII's and not others. I don't like all SLE's, and I don't like all EII's. I don't even like all ESI's.
- It is possible to like people that apparently don't have a positive ITR with you. I tend to like some ESE's a great deal (for example).
Is this the best you can come up with after being defeated?
For what? So that you can type me "INFP" like you did with @totalize?
There goes your typing reliability.
You said nothing meaningful objective against the correctness of my typings or the method.
I've offered you the easy way to understand that you are wrong and you've rejected it still.
> So that you can type me "INFP" like you did with totalize?
You seem to be F type and INFP is not excluded.
I suspect you was typed to INFP, but prefer to dream yourself better than you are as ENTJ. That's why you may ask this. INFP is not bad version for you - you are intelligent but have hard issues with T. I need to see your video to be sure, - so I recommend to create typing theme with it. You are not base T for sure.
> There goes your typing reliability.
There is nothing objective to think my typings are bad or significantly worse than at others. And as you could see recently, there are chances my typings are not bad objectively.
Stay with your dreams or give your video to help you understand me and yourself.