Type This Youtube Guy?
Hey,
There's a guy on Youtube I know of and whose videos I've watched for a while. He's not exactly one of the most famous Youtubers, far from it, but he's one of the most interesting I've found. I am interested in knowing his Socionics and Enneagram types. Since the video I'm going to link discusses his personal experience and feelings in depth, I figured it would be a good example to go from when typing him.
Here's the video:
Please let me know what you guys think.
Your identical, that's why you find him interesting. His eyes are so IEE-ish and all he's talking about is Te career shit.
I actually don't think he's IEE. I knew some people in the past who typed him, but I was curious about getting the forum's opinion. So you think that if someone finds someone else interesting, that makes them identicals? And yeah, the career shit is possibly Te-related.Originally Posted by bulletsanddoves
I'm not 100% sure, but it's a definite possibility.
mb ESE
Types examples: video bloggers, actors
this guy oozes Fe in that totally un self aware manner characteristic of ESE
Are you sure? Check this one out:
yeah i think this a good example of creative Si... the intuitions are relatively straightforward, and the Fe is strong, but its just in a very unique Si package. to me this is very Ne HA from an intelligent person, which is counter to the ESE stereotype, but its all in there
I think you could maybe fit IEE in there but usually IEEs have weirder intuitions not plain intuitions they present as weird
Cool. Thanks for your opinion. I talked to some people about this guy a while back, and they gave me a completely different answer.
I'm probably wrong, but thats how I think of socionics and read this guy
It's cool. I don't have a definite type for this guy or I wouldn't have asked. I like getting thoughts from others. Could you give me some examples of how IEE intuition works? Why is it weird?
dominant intuition with unvalued Fe comes across as really unstructured and irrational, but nevertheless confident, even in its incommunicability, which tends to ruffle Fe types (I feel like Fe tends to focus on delivery to the greatest extent of all the types). this guy seems structured and self assured, like the rational elements expressed are predominant over the intuitions and the intuitions are sort of just "breaking through", whereas I feel like with IEE its more like constant seeming irrationality with moments of lucid communication. in other words, they're sort of inverted in their underlying dynamic
I feel like ESE as profoundly confused person is a stereotype because when health is low, which is to say they're offloading responsibility for their own mistakes, they tend to focus on communicability over coherence or consistency or even correlation to reality, in other words they're a victim of their own success: they profoundly communicate their own confusion. the truth is they're generally no more confused than anyone generally gets under similar circumstances, they're just pros at "putting it out there" thus their heightened confusion or heightened "stupidity" is in many ways a mirage.
the trick to protecting your PoLR is actually to develop you HA, and I think this guy is a great success at that. People knock HA as if it has to be "pathetic" or "weak" but that is the wrong way to look at it. Your HA and development of it is one of the major ways you develop self esteem and avoid pain. I think this guy is lucid because he's got a handle on his HA
the overall dynamic though is he's an excellent communicator and does a great job putting Fe and Si out there as far as I can tell, you could easily see him as an ethical counterpart to a LII, I think
You still didn't give me any examples though
Probably Beta NF. These kinds of negative emotions that have to do with purpose or lack thereof in life are generally NiFe themes.
there's actually a logical error in there: beta NF is the type most likely to talk about purpose or lack thereof. this guy is talking about purpose or lackthereof. this guy is probably beta NF.
it incorrectly reverses the first premise from Beta NF -> TAPoLT to TAPoLT -> Beta NF
please forgive me if I failed to capture your argument correctly, I know I sort of paraphrased what I understood it to be
Well, yeah usually. Identical relationships are very favorable. He also rants about Ne stuff a lot. But it feels more Ne/Te than Ne/Ti.So you think that if someone finds someone else interesting, that makes them identicals?
So if I find my dual interesting, does that make him my identical?
I like this person and I relate to him to some extent. I can definitely see IEE, first video is so #deltanfproblems. What has he been typed before/What do you type him as?(just curious)
It seems like, so far, we've got Delta NF, Beta NF, and ESE. That's quite a few options and 3 out of 4 quadras. I haven't seen anyone say he's Gamma, which is interesting. I really don't know for sure what type he is myself. He owns his ow tutoring business, if that helps.
He also has a website: http://thebookofweston.com
His ideas seem maybe a little half-baked at times or trite, but he's still cool.
We're making an empirical judgment here, it's based on Bayesian reasoning rather than Boolean logic. Most observations do not have the 100% correlation that is implied by the implication connective.
That is, if we know P(T | Beta NF) is high based on theoretical semantics (specification/concretization), we also know that P(Beta NF | T) = K P(T | Beta NF) is high -- this being the observation -> theory or abstraction direction. So if we observe T, we increase our P(Beta NF) accordingly.
I think he's IEI, he reminds me of a teacher of mine that talked and looked like him.
Well that's not over my head at all...
I'm not the one who brought up logic, but I will gladly respond
If you want to learn more:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_inference
Yes, it makes someone with almost different cognitive strengths (and weaknesses), you're identical.
Yes, I'm being facetious.
yeah but there's something trivial about saying "talking about themes associated with beta increases the probability one is beta" without implicating that the entire data set was weighed according to this kind of calculus, and that was the overall verdict (by emphasizing one aspect, it seems to suggest that was the crucial factor weighed against all others). there happens to be a lot more going on in that video than just a discussion of a specific topic. if we take a different video do we say, this video suggest alpha..? perhaps it does, but it answers the wrong questionI'm not the one who brought up logic, but I will gladly respond
If you want to learn more:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_inference
what does it even mean to associate topics with a certain quadra..? "if we know P(T | Beta NF) is high based on theoretical semantics" do we know this?
it just seems like a cloud of words to me
Same here. It's pointless to get wrapped up in convoluted logic when the fundamentals can't even be known. It also draws one away from the act of observation itself, which is more likely to get one a more accurate result in the end.
This guy is soothing. :3
yes in other words, I don't think anyone is seriously disputing the validity of probabilistic inferences per se, but rather the assumptions that were built into the conclusion reached on the basis of the "probabilistic inference" which entailed quite a few leaps that, if broken out and analyzed separately, could easily provide their own probabilistic inferences that could easily offset the initial one. the overall effect creates the appearance of an incorrect reversal of premise->conclusion, which we can argue why that is not a technically accurate description of the mental process at work, but that's getting bogged down in the semantics of describing the dispute while ignoring the substance of the dispute. so in that sense, I fully concede that there may have been no actual incorrect reversal (perish the thought), but that "talking about themes associated with beta justifies an overall conclusion of beta being likely" fails to account for many factors, and that's really the central issue I meant to raise
I'm tellin you its the Si..!
He's okay. I can sense a potential for being pissed off in him and what that would look like.
he's sort of got a Cary Elwes vibe
There needs to be some kind of theoretical model that is taken for granted at the outset. If your interpretation of socionics is different from mine, then obviously you won't reach the same conclusions. You appealed to a model too when you said he "oozes Fe in that totally un self aware manner characteristic of ESE".
In the second video again it is easy to pick out NiFe themes right at the outset: childhood vs. adulthood (as "states of being") and how thinking about them create an uncomfortable emotional state based on an abstract "mode of thinking and being". In fact I see him as a clear IEI.
What alternative do you suggest? It's a hell of a lot better than "he's sort of got a Cary Elwes vibe".it just seems like a cloud of words to me
a picture is worth a thousand words !
as teacher->student, colleagues, pals. boring for other
The purpose of life is important for any types. J types especially, as we tend to "have a plan" for anything and prefer to have an explanation for what we do, but not "just to live".
Types examples: video bloggers, actors
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote