I changed my self typing on the chart to IEI-Ni to be more specific because subtypes are important. Well not important as in like super important but they add much needed detail in the play-doh of your persona. The world isn't just a cloudy ball of fluff.
its interesting to me that so many other people see me as IEI-Fe but I know myself to be IEI-Ni.
No, you neurotic weasels do not see me better than I see myself- but its still interesting to me.
I'm not sure if I should add myself. On the one hand I feel like I've made enough of an impression that people can draw conclusions about me, but on the other hand I've only started posting here recently.
I added some typings. !!
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
Bertrand mb added. he floods enough
@Mio Q
Do itttt! Wouldn't hurt adding in your name either way :')
I'd like to be added as well
@Director Abbie why is the first row no longer fixed? This makes it very difficult to compare typings.
edit: nvm, I fixed it
Not with mine, for example. As I openly doubted in her being EII, about what we had not a calm discussion.
And mb also wants to see my video very much. I'd look at her one with a pleasure too. There would be a chance to type at least one (!) girl on two largest socionics forums (this English and the other Russian) during 10(!) years to my dual (with assurance). There is summerprincess, but I keep some doubts.
Not quite! I only typed people I'm familiar with, and at least a couple of them didn't have anything in their self-typing column, partially because they themselves are unsure of their types (and/or don't care). And the ones I agree with I've thought through, so it's not blind.
Haha, thanks for the backup.
Our conversation was so calm! I was calm, at least. So long as they're civil and respectful, questions or doubts as to my type are fine.
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
@Minde what I mean is you didn't dispute them (except possibly @jessica129, not sure what her current typing is).
Of course agreement can be thoughtful, but self-typings don't generally have a high degree of accuracy.
Interesting, any particular reason you believe this? I actually think that if people have done a few tests and read a bit and report the most frequent typing they get on tests than the chances of that typing being at least close to the real type are pretty high.
I honestly think sometimes this forum rather confuses typings instead of elucidating them.
Plz add me Abbie i rly care about s0cionics
Don't we all?
“I want the following word: splendor, splendor is fruit in all its succulence, fruit without sadness. I want vast distances. My savage intuition of myself.”
― Clarice Lispector
I hope on your indulgence to me - wild Russian barbarian.
They should to have not worser accuracy than experienced typers give in case of minimum study of the typology (a couple of books or comparable) theory and watching how it works on people near, to understand own type by its traits and IR. It's also obligate stage, after the initial gathering of others' opinions, - to be sure in own type - the self-typing, as there is no basis to trust others when they have typing matches <20-40% and have nothing objective to trust them. Especially to the ones who followes heresies and strange theoretical interpretations.
I suspect he follows the bias that the more "smart words" a typer knows, the better he types. Even if those words baseless heresy.
To know classical theory and to study to apply it correctly on practice to understand own type - will take some time. Several monthes of efforts. Those who do not do this - indeed have lower chance to understand own type correctly than an experienced typer (which uses normal theory).
> I actually think that if people have done a few tests and read a bit and report the most frequent typing they get on tests than the chances of that typing being at least close to the real type are pretty high.
Tests are helpful, but it's not enough. In <50% the average of the tests results is expected as the correct type. I was LSI in the most of test, for example.
> I honestly think sometimes this forum rather confuses typings instead of elucidating them.
Mostly because sometimes people do not give videos.
Last edited by Sol; 04-27-2018 at 05:58 PM.
lol this list is golden
Actually, looking at the spreadsheet I tend to agree with self-typings more than I realized. In a few cases we only came to agreement after lots of discussions, e.g. @Cuivienen used to type as LIE, @Owl as EII, @Number 9 large as LSI, etc. Who knows what some other people might have typed as if they did it on their own.
People can usually get it in the right ballpark excluding external influence from MBTI etc., it's just narrowing it down to one type from the last two or three that tends to be the difficult part.
Hi again,
good bye
You know, for an LSE getting LSI on tests is not that bad. First, it got that you are rational - that's pretty good. It also was on the money that you are ST club, that's also pretty good. Maybe it just somehow assumed introversion and that might have something to do with your subtype (could you be Si subtype?). Anyhow, my point is that those tests are close to your self-typing (and I have no problem accepting LSE for you).
I get EII on tests recently. I'd say that's not too bad since it got that I'm Fi ego, and leaning delta.
Overall i think tests can give you some guidance, like a starting point.
Good tests may to have accuracy ~30 % or higher. So they are useful, as it's far from 1/16. But to use only them is risky. 3/4 correct dichotomies they'd show in >40 %.
> Maybe it just somehow assumed introversion and that might have something to do with your subtype (could you be Si subtype?)
My surface behavior _changed_ some closer to introversion since teenager years by non-types reasons. I do not support subtypes. The degree of functions balance may differ in different people. I may to have a little better N, for example, than average LSE - as I train Ne for years by typing and had some Ni practice earlier. If I'd communicated more with base Fi types - my F would develop higher than average for this type.
> I get EII on tests recently. I'd say that's not too bad since it got that I'm Fi ego, and leaning delta.
I doubt in your Fi. I do not remember whether I saw your video. I'd could to say the impressions from you by it.
Bertrand isn't in it?
Award for least intuitive enneagram typing for me on spreadsheet goes to @silke for 9w1 sp/sx but if you would like to show how you arrived at that I would be interested to see it. You can put it in the enneagram typings thread if you wish since I have already had two others type me 9w1 too and most of my responses to it are probably covered but I will add the fine distinctions here so you can tell me how you arrived at this?
Highlight what you think fits OR use a description of your choice.You perception of my instincts would also be appreciated now dazzle me with your Ti baby!
To quote my girl @fox (with her permission) who is gone but not forgotten. <3Self Preservation Nines
• Often preoccupied with physical comfort, maintaining routines and satisfying appetites.
• Exceptionally good receivers and appreciators; the best things in life are free
• Grateful for what they have and treasure it
• Can be reliable, dependable and consistent
• Specialize in a defense of small horizons
• Self Preservation Nines are especially prone to diminish their own expectations, to not quite hope for much out of life-a defense against disappointment
• Could be financially well-off but have a self-image of someone poor or destitute
• Distract themselves with pleasant domestic activities. Live conservatively
• Consume food and drink for anaesthesia. Tend towards addiction, especially to numbing substances, smoking pot, overeating to the point of stupor
• Can have a love of the minimal and enjoy the repetition of known routines
• Sleepy; may be slow moving, lack energy and be physically lazy
• The cliche of the couch potato goes with the low side of this subtype
• Can be extremely neglectful and messy
• A spaced out, unfocused mentality; lack of rigor
• No enthusiasm for anything; life is purgatorial, just killing time
Intimate Nines
• Loyal in love; patient and enduring; able to stay steady in long term relationships
• Realistically see their partners limits but accept them
• Good listeners; supportive non-judgmental friends
• Often focused on an unconscious ideal of romantic union
• Nines with this subtype are sometimes mistaken for Fours because of the way they can melancholically yearn for what they don’t have
• May have high expectations of romantic partners and be prone to jealousy
• Often this dynamic represents a yearning for a distant parent
• The ideal of romantic union blocks out the real relationship. It is a way of staying disengaged from your priorities, a distracting obsession
• Find their attractiveness and self-worth in how others see them
• May idealize people while deleting their flaws; could tolerate being mistreated or abused
• Can be fickle in love. After committing to a relationship they can grow critical of their partner and develop a wandering eye
• Indiscriminate; might have multiple serial relationships, searching from one person to the next, obsessing about whether their current partner is “the right one”
• Some Intimate Nines get involved with two partners and can’t decide between them, a pattern of triangulation
• Can be romantic on the one hand, callous on the other
• Sometimes feel driven by lust, especially when the have an Eight wing
Nine with a One Wing
• Nines with a One wing tend to have been “model children.” They instinctively worked to please their parents by being virtuous, orderly, and low maintenance
• Idealistic; a quiet moral authority plus good-hearted peacemaking tendencies
• Often have a sense of mission, public or private; work hard for the welfare of whomever they are committed to. Good with detail
• Unpretentious yet dignified; generally empathetic, have the “common touch;” An elegant simplicity of manner and speech
• Can be well-liked, modest, endearing; gentle yet firm. Some have a striking quality of grace and composure punctuated by bursts of spontaneity and sweetness
• Sincere, practice what they preach; effective, good natured and idealistic.
• Rule-bound, obedient/compliant; perfectionistic and self-critical
• Can be compulsively orderly, overly controlled, unemotional and disassociated
• Can act on weird principles that don’t make sense; A dubious, fractured morality
• May be visibly successful but don’t really feel connected to their achievements
• Passive tolerance of absurd or damaging situations; so normal they’re strange
• Exceptionally conservative in their habits of living and around making changes
• May go passively self-neglectful. Dutiful to what they shouldn’t be
• Minimize, tell themselves they had a great childhood, everything’s fine
• Placid numbness can creep over them. exceptionally out of touch with feelings. Intolerant of their own emotions; gradually deaden their souls
http://www.ninepointsmagazine.org/fi...nes-tomcondon/
@Tallmo
Thank you for giving me the D! But what kind of D is it?
Last edited by Aylen; 05-01-2018 at 09:07 PM.
“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
Can I be typed and crucified by the masses too please?
good bye
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Seeing her left brainy subtype sounds funny to me. Olimpia OTOH, there is no dispute.
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
No need to remove it. I was just confused because that's all that was there. I am sure you have posted this but what are the signs for DCNH for you? Like Troll gave his in another thread so I understood his method. A link to a post you have made will do. I just never saw anyone do it without a base type before.
“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
add pls @FlutteringShyxx
And when is "TBA soon" gonna be announced?
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
*reminder to type Aramas in the spreadsheet*
^ shameless self promotion
add Saoirse pls
@Director Abbie you can add me