Your typing of forum members

[Clarke]

End is probably Beta NF

>TIM: LII

End does seem to define people by groups, which might imply Aristocratic. In one of the threads, we talked about demographics of the US and he seemed to assign a certain set of characteristics to a certain, fairly wide demographic. I guess I did as well in that thread, although I was pointing out that exceptions and certain archetypes of person exist within that group. I ultimately don't know whether this is meaningful.

Edit: I think that his understanding of strategy/tactics seemed decent to me, although this is coming from someone who's admittedly not that good at strategy/tactics. It's also possible that he just has more information than me, and I'm seeing that as some kind of cognitive skill. I think that's happened before.

Edit 2: I wonder if it's possible that he simply looks like an Aristocratic type.

[End]

End does seem to define people by groups, which might imply Aristocratic. In one of the threads, we talked about demographics of the US and he seemed to assign a certain set of characteristics to a certain, fairly wide demographic. I guess I did as well in that thread, although I was pointing out that exceptions and certain archetypes of person exist within that group. I ultimately don't know whether this is meaningful.

Edit: I think that his understanding of strategy/tactics seemed decent to me, although this is coming from someone who's admittedly not that good at strategy/tactics. It's also possible that he just has more information than me, and I'm seeing that as some kind of cognitive skill. I think that's happened before.

Edit 2: I wonder if it's possible that he simply looks like an Aristocratic type.

I outwardly define people by groups because it is rhetorically effective/practical. Inwardly I actually judge on a case by case basis if I have the luxury. I mean, if you're walking alone on a street at night (ceterus paribus) and some figure in a hoodie is approaching you at an angle and with an air/swagger very well suited for one who's about to mug you you're rather safer if you assume they have ill intentions and give them a wide berth over trying to say Hi to them. Otherwise, just say hi. This assumes the figure looks like a total stranger, however. If they get a bit closer and I recognize their face then I just say Hi and say what's up. Friends are friends even if they don't look like it at a distance.

Hell, we'd probably make jokes about that kind of thing to the point they deliberately put on the hoodie and tried their very best to make it look like they were gonna mug my ass. A dark and downright offensive sense of humor from the prospective of the wokies is pretty much a prerequisite to get me to let my guard down and put you in the category of a true "friend" as it were .

It is a sad fact and hard learned lesson that most people (at least in my direct experience) think in rhetorical and aristocratic terms (my milieu is filled with Beta's and Delta's with a few Alphas that I ironically get along with quite well somehow but that's likely because we don't tend to discuss things like politics and religion and when we do, well, we're all Christians and I'm basically an anarcho-capitalist of the Hoppe strain so that helps a lot when ya really think about it).

Thus, best adapt and deal. Ya might not like it and ya may wish it was some other way, but "hopes and dreams" with nothing to back them up IRL mean exactly diddly dick. This is why the / axis is a thing. Hopes and dreams wedded to practical methods of achieving them. Like I've put it elsewhere, the likes of me are "applied engineers" in our heart and soul. "Good Enough" is "Perfect" in our minds. If it gets the job done (without crossing any major moral lines if we're not utterly broken souls) it's what we're gonna do. Let the / "theoretical engineers" stew about how bad we're fucking it all up in their cushy ivory towers. Far as I see it the lights are still on and the toilets still flush so my "stupid" solution worked just fine.

If it's stupid but it works, it ain't stupid.

[Clarke]

I outwardly define people by groups because it is rhetorically effective/practical. Inwardly I actually judge on a case by case basis if I have the luxury. I mean, if you're walking alone on a street at night (ceterus paribus) and some figure in a hoodie is approaching you at an angle and with an air/swagger very well suited for one who's about to mug you you're rather safer if you assume they have ill intentions and give them a wide berth over trying to say Hi to them. Otherwise, just say hi. This assumes the figure looks like a total stranger, however. If they get a bit closer and I recognize their face then I just say Hi and say what's up. Friends are friends even if they don't look like it at a distance.

Hell, we'd probably make jokes about that kind of thing to the point they deliberately put on the hoodie and tried their very best to make it look like they were gonna mug my ass. A dark and downright offensive sense of humor from the prospective of the wokies is pretty much a prerequisite to get me to let my guard down and put you in the category of a true "friend" as it were .

It is a sad fact and hard learned lesson that most people (at least in my direct experience) think in rhetorical and aristocratic terms (my milieu is filled with Beta's and Delta's with a few Alphas that I ironically get along with quite well somehow but that's likely because we don't tend to discuss things like politics and religion and when we do, well, we're all Christians and I'm basically an anarcho-capitalist of the Hoppe strain so that helps a lot when ya really think about it).

Thus, best adapt and deal. Ya might not like it and ya may wish it was some other way, but "hopes and dreams" with nothing to back them up IRL mean exactly diddly dick. This is why the / axis is a thing. Hopes and dreams wedded to practical methods of achieving them. Like I've put it elsewhere, the likes of me are "applied engineers" in our heart and soul. "Good Enough" is "Perfect" in our minds. If it gets the job done (without crossing any major moral lines if we're not utterly broken souls) it's what we're gonna do. Let the / "theoretical engineers" stew about how bad we're fucking it all up in their cushy ivory towers. Far as I see it the lights are still on and the toilets still flush so my "stupid" solution worked just fine.

If it's stupid but it works, it ain't stupid.

You know, I've speculated for a while that it was impossible for democratic types not to do an analysis based on groups. It seems like a basic survival mechanism to analyze people by their groups so you know who their allies are, and as you said, what threat they might pose to you. Something like this seems to be an analysis of archetypes of human or allegiances.

I wonder if something like this is simply a difference in priorities, or if Aristocrats actually tend to categorize people into groups on a normal basis. I guess the question here would be "if they see a mass of people walking around, do they automatically categorize them into a group or set of groups?". Although something like that might also be a survival mechanism for democrats.

[End]

You know, I've speculated for a while that it was impossible for democratic types not to do an analysis based on groups. It seems like a basic survival mechanism to analyze people by their groups so you know who their allies are, and as you said, what threat they might pose to you. Something like this seems to be an analysis of archetypes of human or allegiances.

I wonder if something like this is simply a difference in priorities, or if Aristocrats actually tend to categorize people into groups on a normal basis. I guess the question here would be "if they see a mass of people walking around, do they automatically categorize them into a group or set of groups?". Although something like that might also be a survival mechanism for democrats.

Basic survival mechanism for anyone or anything that's human far as we'd consider it. You automatically categorize them as a whole at first glance and then start looking for telltale signs of those who are, like myself and others like me, just trying to "pass" so as to not become the target of the mob's attention. A mob they probably differentiate from in a hostile manner in my case (i.e. I live near a city as a Christian Conservative and frequently encounter "Danger Hair" people everywhere I frequent my job included).

This is one big reason why ILI's hate crowds. We can, do, and will pull off a passable performance in a 1v1 scenario. Every 1+Xv1 however complicates things massively. Such that we'd rather just not deal with that BS if we can help it. Granted, if push comes to shove and if a given crowd is otherwise amenable to solutions that require sacrifices on their part (i.e. the "crowd" is composed of mostly Gamma and Delta types) we can come off as the very embodiments of popular Charisma.

That hardly ever happens however. Hence why the LIE's and SEE's tend to wind up actually leading a given crowd while the likes of me end up in the supporting role. They're just plain better at putting it "gently" to the masses. I can do a lot of things, but I just can't put it gently. It just feels wrong to "soften the blow" as it were...

[Clarke]

Basic survival mechanism for anyone or anything that's human far as we'd consider it. You automatically categorize them as a whole at first glance and then start looking for telltale signs of those who are, like myself and others like me, just trying to "pass" so as to not become the target of the mob's attention. A mob they probably differentiate from in a hostile manner in my case (i.e. I live near a city as a Christian Conservative and frequently encounter "Danger Hair" people everywhere I frequent my job included).

This is one big reason why ILI's hate crowds. We can, do, and will pull off a passable performance in a 1v1 scenario. Every 1+Xv1 however complicates things massively. Such that we'd rather just not deal with that BS if we can help it. Granted, if push comes to shove and if a given crowd is otherwise amenable to solutions that require sacrifices on their part (i.e. the "crowd" is composed of mostly Gamma and Delta types) we can come off as the very embodiments of popular Charisma.

That hardly ever happens however. Hence why the LIE's and SEE's tend to wind up actually leading a given crowd while the likes of me end up in the supporting role. They're just plain better at putting it "gently" to the masses. I can do a lot of things, but I just can't put it gently. It just feels wrong to "soften the blow" as it were...

I think that I usually have a different interpretation of crowds. There are generally too many people to focus on for anyone to really notice you, so you can kind of just exist there without really being spotted. However, I guess there's also less maneuverability in a crowd, so if something does happen there, it's not as safe. I guess you could say that there's also the potential of trampling, although I don't think I usually think about that.

After thinking about it at length, I actually think that crowds have another element that makes them unideal: unpredictability. While crowds will tend to be focused on other things most of the time, there's a chance that someone in the crowd will try to interact with you. It's harder to plan on what to say or how to deal with that person because you can't predict their characteristics.

I would say that I generally manage better one to one than with a crowd, if the crowd is focused on me. I've always interpreted it as something to do with the sheer volume of people in a crowd (stage fright), but I guess there's also the possibility that I'm doing some kind of behavior predictive analysis. It's harder to cater to a person's belief system when there's multiple people. It's also harder to see their individual reactions, which can sometimes be useful for seeing whether you said the wrong thing.

Ultimately, I don't really have the memory or self awareness to tell whether I do some kind of group analysis when I try to predict behaviors. I'm pretty sure I'm at least looking at attributes, and assigning certain likely characteristics to those people based on those attributes.

From personal experience, I'd say that I'm fairly bad at leading or motivating groups. It's hard for me to take a strong leadership role in these cases, so I usually make suggestions or maybe try to be a sort of backseat driver.

Edit: I think my most likely role in a group is to be a sort of advisor for the leader. I like to usually contribute information and insight that I think will benefit the group. It depends on the group structure. In an online structure, I'll usually broadcast to the group instead of tell the leader information.

I guess the utility of this post is to show that a certain archetype of human exists. I'm ultimately still not sure what type I classify as.

Edit 2: I guess my potential reactions to people follow the following pattern:
-I see a man walking down the street. He seems kind of a lean-muscular, and is wearing clothing that some people might consider to be "thug" clothing, such as a tank top and maybe baggy pants. He overall looks like someone who could possibly do damage somewhere, or looks mean somehow.
-Based on this information, I judge the man as a possible danger and try to stay away from him in a subtle and polite way, such as keeping distance or taking pathways that avoid confrontation with the man.
-However, if I actually had to talk to the man and he seemed like a cool guy, I'd probably end up getting along with him.
-Past this point, the only things that would influence how I interpret him are usually others' viewpoints or arguments about the characteristics of the man that I haven't seen, like his deep character. I sometimes doubt these, especially if they're from sources that I consider to be unreliable or they're poor arguments in general.

[LugiaYoda]

So Braingel is IEI and INFP. Is she histrionic?

[Clarke]

So Braingel is IEI and INFP. Is she histrionic?

Maybe she just appears INFP for some reason. It's also possible that she's classified as INFP based on characteristics (even cognitive function definitions) that aren't the same as Socionics.

[welcometomania]

@VewyScawwyNawcissist knows @Braingel personally

[welcometomania]

I think it is possible there is a J/P switch but only possibly for women, though

[nifl]

@godslave seems ethical, intuition and Fi more likely

[godslave]

@godslave seems ethical, intuition and Fi more likely

Thank you for your attention.

[Miss Messy]

@welcome have you thought about IEE ? I don't know anything about your life but you seem like one to me

[welcometomania]

@Missmessy if I am one, then (I think) you are an ESI LII***

***@Snowgirl I am so sorry, (now I really meant to say you could be an SEE) (my supervisor)

[AWellArmedCat]

@godslave seems ethical, intuition and Fi more likely

I agree with that actually. @godslave strikes me as potentially NF

[AWellArmedCat]

End does seem to define people by groups, which might imply Aristocratic.

You know, I've speculated for a while that it was impossible for democratic types not to do an analysis based on groups.

Honestly, this is kind of why I hesitate to give the Reinin Dichotomies much thought. I feel like they are perhaps real on some level, but most of the time too hard to detect reliably to really be of much use in typing people. I think determining ego elements should probably take priority when typing someone

[Manatroid92]

I agree with that actually. @godslave strikes me as potentially NF

I had already assumed she was NF, too. In any case, I do firmly agree!

[FreelancePoliceman]

1541039[/URL]]Honestly, this is kind of why I hesitate to give the Reinin Dichotomies much thought. I feel like they are perhaps real on some level, but most of the time too hard to detect reliably to really be of much use in typing people. I think determining ego elements should probably take priority when typing someone

The Aristocratic/Democratic dichotomy I think is especially misunderstood/misused. I don't think it has anything to do with whether you perceive/generalize groups. That's a universal trait. Has more to do IMO with how you communicate and hold yourself in relation to other people/groups. It's difficult to get across without biases creeping in -- even in the words "democracy" and "aristocracy" for instance, where people are conditioned to think of one as good and the other as bad.

I do think it's real/useful for typing people.

As far as @End goes I have no problem with his being ILI personally. He talks a lot about tribes and such, but as much as he may claim he's some rural redneck or whatever, I get the impression he's on the fringe of whatever identity he's claiming, and isn't particularly interested in changing/able to change that. You get the impression that he's mostly just himself no matter who talks to him. I think he's so concerned with groups because he's not really a part of one. He needs a social identity like anyone else, but he can't actually make himself quite fit. At least that's how I perceive him.

[Coeruleum Blue]

The Aristocratic/Democratic dichotomy I think is especially misunderstood/misused. I don't think it has anything to do with whether you perceive/generalize groups. That's a universal trait. Has more to do IMO with how you communicate and hold yourself in relation to other people. It's difficult to get across without biases creeping in -- even in the words "democracy" and "aristocracy" for instance, where people are conditioned to think of one as good and the other as bad.

You mean all the Nietzsche fanboys on this forum who think of "aristocracy" as good and "democracy" as bad? I know, the general population is reversed, but this forum isn't the general population if you haven't noticed.

[godslave]

I agree with that actually. @godslave strikes me as potentially NF

Thank you very much for your attention ! I always appreciate an opinion about my Type.

[FreelancePoliceman]

1541051[/URL]]

Thank you very much for your attention ! I always appreciate an opinion about my Type.

Then I also think you're Delta NF FWIW! What do you think of IEE?

[Sanguine Miasma]

The Aristocratic/Democratic dichotomy I think is especially misunderstood/misused. I don't think it has anything to do with whether you perceive/generalize groups. That's a universal trait. Has more to do IMO with how you communicate and hold yourself in relation to other people/groups. It's difficult to get across without biases creeping in -- even in the words "democracy" and "aristocracy" for instance, where people are conditioned to think of one as good and the other as bad.

And then we also have elitism.

[godslave]

Then I also think you're Delta NF FWIW! What do you think of IEE?

Thank you for your proposition. I think I'm "a tricky one" regardless. IEE is possible. Do you think that it can cohabited with the following traits of my personality (It might help others too !) :

I feel like my personality is a collage of the people I admired throughout my life. Who I really am is a vague thing. I know what triggers me, what and whom I like and dislike. I know my tastes so to speak. When it comes to real people I observe a person and then I kinda make an internal judgement about what kind of person he or she is. Stuff like the "gentle kind" or 'the potential friend kind" or " the psycho kind" or "the sexy kind" etc... I see groups as a cluster of individuals and I never judge an individual by the values or stereotypes of the group to which he or she belongs. However, if the group is the KKK or some kind of extremists and radicals then that person is almost lost to me. He or she has turned to the dark side of which there is no coming back. I don't like redemptions stories when the protagonist has reached a certain point of evil. When I say I judge people is more like I taste "their energy" so to speak and try to adapt to it unless I don't like that energy at all.

I feel like a true chameleon. People always think that I think the same as they do. Sometimes nothing can be further from the truth. I guess That's one of my ways of avoiding conflict but note that If I feel offended or I feel like a person has gone too far or took my kindness for a weakness, then I will instantaneously assert myself and he or she will have a glimpse of my own dark side. I am you + 1 (from a certain point of view). If you're kind with me I will be even kinder with you, if you display an aggressive and hostile energy towards me, after a certain point of tolerance, my energy will project an aura of determination according to my Defcon level your abuse has triggered. I can have Dexter like fantasies. That's my dark passenger side. I can't stand physical violence though. I contemplate those things but I've never actually done them (although I could if need be, I have the skills) . In fact more often than not, imagining a situation is almost as satisfying as really experiencing it irl, to the point of losing interest afterwards. It's like contemplating = "Okay that's done ! next !". I score High in neuroticism btw but my dragon is sealed so to speak (9 fix) .

I like to compare my character to a giant anteater, when I find a subject of interest (that could be a person) I nourish myself with its essence until I feel like I'm full of it (or until my brain has reached its limits if it's a complex subject). I've always had heroes with whom I identified. I've been a fan boy all my life and each person I have been a fan of has influenced and forged my skills so to speak. Imitation is the first phase of learning. "Always two they are, no more no less. A Master and an Apprentice." - Yoda. I feel like I've been an apprentice all my life. For instance I have so many musical influences and my own style is some kind of a Frankensteined one (I play guitar and keyboards (synths geek !)). I like to learn the same subject from different sources, teachers and perspective.My Understanding is like a low dimensional image which gets better and better over time until reaching a (hopefully !) HD level of clarity. If I'm onto something, I'll try and try again until I reach satisfaction.I play to win in general. I play when I think that I can win though.

I live like a hikikomori (Me and my apartment are clean though ahaha! ). I don't have friends. I have the skill to talk to anyone if I want but the problem is that I don't want to. In terms of social contribution I would say that a lamp post is more useful than me. I am very sensible to the mood around me, I think I'm a so called HSP. Every artistic emotional trick work on me if it's well crafted (music, movies, books, plays etc..). I love to cry (In private !! ) at a good Japanese drama, I like when it makes me feel very sad or very hopeful and happy. Arts like Music, movies, TV shows and anime are the sources of most my emotional supply. Without it I would have gone crazy (I mean crasier !). I don't like to watch a new movie with a family member or someone I know very well because I don't want them to see me crying in case of lacrymagen scenes.

Anyway, sorry that was a bit long. Do you thing That all those informations are compatible with IEE and/or Delta values ?

[nifl]

>I live like a hikikomori (Me and my apartment are clean though ahaha! )
>I don't have friends. I have the skill to talk to anyone if I want but the problem is that I don't want to.
hm, unusual for IEE
EII, IEI is somewhat more likely to live like this

>In fact more often than not, imagining a situation is almost as satisfying as really experiencing it irl, to the point of losing interest afterwards.
more usual attitude for introverts and intuitives

>I see groups as a cluster of individuals and I never judge an individual by the values or stereotypes of the group to which he or she belongs.
most usual for Delta - non-valued Fe/Ti is less prone to understand people as a collective, non-valued Se is less prone to judging by external physical characterstics
Delta NF have the most nuanced perception of the personality of the individual of all the types

ethical intuitive seems fairly certain, anyways. the mind is a little too sophisticated for an average sensor. a video would perhaps make the quadra clearer. you seem to communicate with emphasis on pleasant and comfortable emotions, which is more a Fi thing - but tentatively said
from the information given above - the chance of you being introverted rises

[godslave]

>I live like a hikikomori (Me and my apartment are clean though ahaha! )
>I don't have friends. I have the skill to talk to anyone if I want but the problem is that I don't want to.
hm, unusual for IEE
EII, IEI is somewhat more likely to live like this

>In fact more often than not, imagining a situation is almost as satisfying as really experiencing it irl, to the point of losing interest afterwards.
more usual attitude for introverts and intuitives

>I see groups as a cluster of individuals and I never judge an individual by the values or stereotypes of the group to which he or she belongs.
most usual for Delta - non-valued Fe/Ti is less prone to understand people as a collective, non-valued Se is less prone to judging by external physical characterstics
Delta NF have the most nuanced perception of the personality of the individual of all the types

ethical intuitive seems fairly certain, anyways. the mind is a little too sophisticated for an average sensor. a video would perhaps make the quadra clearer. you seem to communicate with emphasis on pleasant and comfortable emotions, which is more a Fi thing - but tentatively said
from the information given above - the chance of you being introverted rises

Thank you for your time. I'm too shy for a video right now. Maybe I'll do it in the future. I also think I'm NF-ish (it feels weird for me to talk about my type I don't know why ).

[nifl]

@godslave
>it feels weird for me to talk about my type I don't know why
introverts are more apprehensive about revealing things about themselves in general, non-valued Ne is less interested in psychological analysis
you're not EIE, I think, but IEI is still a definite possibility

[nifl]

looked at a video of @Manatroid92 again
thinking mb IEE, ILE now, the calmer variety
feels irrational, so that's why XII is less likely in my view - but fairly confident in Ne type

[Manatroid92]

looked at a video of @Manatroid92 again
thinking mb IEE, ILE now, the calmer variety
feels irrational, so that's why XII is less likely in my view - but fairly confident in Ne type

I think irrational suits me fairly well; I used to think I was more rigid/xJ-based, but then I realized that other people define their 'routines' and 'schedules' in a stricter way than myself, and even if I'm given a strict plan of what to say and how to talk about something, I'll almost inevitably diverge from it in some way throughout before returning to the core of the conversation.
Extraversion is less likely to me, but I can understand why you might think I'd appear to be an Ne-base.

[End]

The Aristocratic/Democratic dichotomy I think is especially misunderstood/misused. I don't think it has anything to do with whether you perceive/generalize groups. That's a universal trait. Has more to do IMO with how you communicate and hold yourself in relation to other people/groups. It's difficult to get across without biases creeping in -- even in the words "democracy" and "aristocracy" for instance, where people are conditioned to think of one as good and the other as bad.

I do think it's real/useful for typing people.

As far as @End goes I have no problem with his being ILI personally. He talks a lot about tribes and such, but as much as he may claim he's some rural redneck or whatever, I get the impression he's on the fringe of whatever identity he's claiming, and isn't particularly interested in changing/able to change that. You get the impression that he's mostly just himself no matter who talks to him. I think he's so concerned with groups because he's not really a part of one. He needs a social identity like anyone else, but he can't actually make himself quite fit. At least that's how I perceive him.

You've actually hit the nail on the head there. I have yet to truly find my "tribe" as it were outside a very general "Catholic" identity. Even then I keep running into friggin' "Churchians" who go on and on and on about God's "mercy" they seem to utterly forget about his justice (the other thing he perfectly embodies and will not be denied) and the instant I bring that bit up they recoil from me and push me to the fringe!

Heretic am I? I'd tell them to read the catechism but hey, Kirkegaard was right about most people. They'd rather be in error than embrace the suffering of the cross Christ calls us to.

Funny enough, I ran across a video about how us Catholics/Christians concieve of charity and how it works. It is flawless from both a and perspective BTW:



This is from a literal exorcist. Dude has confronted demons directly. He has felt many a thing on a visceral level I pray I never do. And yet the things he's saying...

I really get it now. For instance, to kill your enemies is one thing. If they converted to Christ, however, you'd win several times over. Dead enemies merely cannot harm you anymore. Converted enemies not only will not harm you ever again, they will actively contribute to your own good!

If your enemy (in the Christian sense) converts he/she/it not only stops being your enemy, they become an active friend. Hell, Sun Tzu even got this concept. If you truly "befriend" an enemy you have won twice over. You didn't just "kill" an adversary. You made a friend.

That vid I posted speaks to me from a direct and familiar viewpoint. This level of shit ought be pretty fucking obvious. Hell, it's so obvious to me I actively regretted a split-second vision of me decapitating a PTB head honcho.

The better version of his end was no such thing. I heard his confession in all its utter horror and hatred. He dared me to kill him as slow and painfully as I could imagine (and trust you me if you ask an ILI to do it you're an A+ Masochist).

[welcometomania]

@Missmessy if I am one, then (I think) you are an ESI LII***

** @Snowgirl I am so sorry, (now I really meant to say you could be an SEE) (my supervisor)

Edited after I grew 1 more brain cell.. sorry @Snowgirl T_T

[Miss Messy]

Edited after I grew 1 more brain cell.. sorry @Snowgirl T_T

No problem

When I was typed in Socionics a long time ago ( before I enter this forum ) I was first typed as SEE/ESI so it's okay

It was a really crazy period of my life, I was more emotional then and seemed more of an ethical type even though I hadn't been like that before

I excluded ESI due to 4D Fi and Te suggestive , SEE because of Ti polr

[Miss Messy]

btw , most people in Arab Typology groups think I'm either IEE or LSE ( but in both cases with underdeveloped Creative function )

[Miss Messy]

(now I really meant to say you could be an SEE) (my supervisor)

But why do you think so ?

[welcometomania]

But why do you think so ?

Sorry, again! never mind what I said (about you being SEE).. your face kind of reminds me of this LSI..

What do you think?

[Miss Messy]

Sorry, again! never mind what I said (about you being SEE).. your face kind of reminds me of this LSI..









What do you think?

I don't know honestly but thanks for the suggestion

[nifl]

''this LSI'' looks like an extravert and an ethicist
@welcome
LII is probably close to her type, which I still think is most likely ILI - LII do not change their opinions so often and are not so doubting as she is. her behaviour is undisputedly that of an irrational

[Miss Messy]

this LSI'' looks like an extravert and an ethicist

She might be Se Subtype ( more extraverted + enhanced feeling function )

LII is probably close to her type, which I still think is most likely ILI - LII do not change their opinions so often and are not so doubting as she is. her behaviour is undisputedly that of an irrational

Should I repeat the same things every time?

Anyway, I have never liked anybody with high Si , they're so boring to me , most people I've felt attracted to ( or interested in or felt they're interesting, choose what you want ) were actually xNxx [ though Ne>Ni ] and I always avoid ESEs , I don't stand them as much as an LII would

Just by looking at the amount of Pe I show in my daily life, it's impossible to be ILI with Ne ignoring and Se suggestive (and again, nothing interesting about SEEs unless they have a pretty face)

[nifl]

@Snowgirl
>She might be Se Subtype ( more extraverted + enhanced feeling function )
no LSI looks like that, even a hypothetical ''Se subtype'', which would only have slightly more expressed sensing, not ethics (unrelated functions).

the types of people a person knows are often defined incorrectly, until Socionics is understood in practice. from your video logic and intuition were obvious, and probably introversion. from your behavior on the forum Fi valuing (politeness is preferred over emotional stirring) and irrationality are likely. in your typing thread you felt it was 'strange' to be discussed by others, and felt like closing the thread - more likely for non-valued Ne and introverts.

forget about experimenting with subtypes until after you've understood your type - they will only make it more confusing. ITR should be minimally affected by a slight accentuation of a function, anyways.
what you will keep repeating is jumping from type to type until you have verified it by reading the basic theory and applying it to your relationships. it takes some time. after you've done this you can begin to think about the expanded theory, and what should be discarded from the basic one. think about your own type not by minor points in model A (such as the differences between functions in the blocks themselves, which is speculative and can mislead if given too much importance), but by dichotomies, ego functions and importantly by ITR. you are doing this, which is good, but I have my doubts that you have understood the types and ITR correctly - try to read Filatova's descriptions of elements, ITR and, to a lesser extent, of the types, they're closer to how the types act in practice.
a few days ago you assessed yourself as a Te type. but being a likely irrational, you're sensitive to doubt. dubious arguments such as physiognomy and pictures from Filatova should not be given too much thought.
if ILI isn't right, try ILE. the possibility that you're Beta ST is practically zero.

also, if you want fresh opinions, you could post your video or a new one again.

[Miss Messy]

in your typing thread you felt it was 'strange' to be discussed by others, and felt like closing the thread - more likely for non-valued Ne and introverts.

No
It is unreasonable for me to upload a video asking for typing me and then saying that discussing my type is a strange thing
I felt that the types you gave me were strange , I'm usually typed by others as either Gamma SF or IEE even before entering this forum ( LSE as a less likely option )

INTx was so strange for me especially that I have so many INTx contacts and all of them are better than me in theories, while they enjoy thinking about theories, analyzing them and drawing conclusions from them, I was the " carefree " among them

try to read Filatova's descriptions of elements

Won't be different that much, strong TePe/PeTe , no Pi ( or at least underdeveloped )

try ILE

While I have a somehow good relationship with LIIs ,we don't complement each other's points of view ( as mirrors type do ) and they often consider me the person who do not like to think about theories in a complex way (carefree, as I mentioned before)

I avoid ESEs while they supposed to be my activity

intuition were obvious,

the possibility that you're Beta ST is practically zero

And the possibility of me being xNxx is below zero

Do you know what I was doing while speaking in the video? I was watching people passing by in the street and listening to the outside sounds, even the door which was a little far from my place and in another room I could hear the sound of it opening and closing

No one around me sees my intuition skills as superior to my sensing skills , and I'm always praised for it

Want more proofs ? just go back to this thread and look at functions chart in the last reply, tell me what do you think

[nifl]

@Snowgirl
>no
that's true, I apologize. checked again - you felt that it was a shock and you had to disappear for a while to process the results. not what a Ne valuing type would usually do (''shock'' about perception and discussion of their psychic traits? they enjoy it), especially not the extraverted ones. you can easily understand that you're not an ethicist because of your communication style, and that you're a rational type is also unlikely.

>all of them are better than me in theories, while they enjoy thinking about theories
this is partially related to Ti types and Ti valued types, not just intuition. Te types are more interested in practice and facts. intuitive logicians from Gamma aren't overly theoretical in general (it's the stereotype for intuitive logicians from Alpha), and their affinity for abstraction is more related to their imagination, perception of trends or questions of a mystical nature.

>While I have a somehow good relationship with LIIs
from the mentioned types, only LSE has this. Beta/gamma sensors and IEE do not.

>I was watching people passing by in the street and listening to the outside sounds
more sensitive to outside stimulation - extraverts and irrationals. any person does this, only the extent is different. try to compare yourself with others. the type is not absolute, but a particular configuration/balance.

>No one around me sees my intuition skills as superior to my sensing skills , and I'm always praised for it
it's certainly worth considering, but it is best to compare yourself with others here. people who are favourably inclined to you may not always give accurate assessments, and the same with people who dislike you. how can I see that i'm a sensor? not by considering myself as an island, but by considering myself in relation to others. i'm more sensitive to questions of comfort than average, but extensive creativity is not what I am best at, for example, when comparing to an IEE I know. logicians may also think that they're developed emotionally, but generally they will have less understanding there if they compare themselves with the ethicists.

>just go back to this thread and look at functions chart in the last reply, tell me what do you think
self reported tests are not so reliable, especially for people who know of Socionics and subconsciously skew the answers

anyways, the discussion of your type is really at a standstill, now. you will understand it better as you keep observing people in practice, ILI or not. it should be easier for you to come to a conclusion, being a logician - for a Te type to choose by the dichotomies isn't hard; as long as you go from a reasonable starting point, such as Filatova

if you want to try an IR test, Sol has one here
follow the instructions and post it somewhere relevant - it could be fun to see. there's no guarantee for the usefulness of the test, it's a subjective judgment

[Miss Messy]

that's true, I apologize. checked again -

No problem

any person does this, only the extent is different.

Yeah but that's what I literally do the whole day, It never drains my energy and happens naturally even without my intervention

but it is best to compare yourself with others here

.

Why ? I don't get the point of doing this
And , how would I do that ?

people who are favourably inclined to you may not always give accurate assessments, and the same with people who dislike you

I've even received it from people who are not close to me , some of them we hardly know each other on a level beyond our names

self reported tests are not so reliable, especially for people who know of Socionics and subconsciously skew the answers

The point here is that the test combines Psyche Yoga and Socionics , 584 questions. Of course, I will not separate and analyze what is each question asking about especially that I might by mistake confuse sensing functions ( Si/Se ) with physics ( PY ) , or between feeling functions ( Fi/Fe ) and feeling ( PY ) , etc. (although there are clear differences between them but it wasn't clear to me when doing the survey)

if you want to try an IR test, Sol has one here
follow the instructions and post it somewhere relevant - it could be fun to see. there's no guarantee for the usefulness of the test, it's a subjective judgment

I'll try it , thanks for the suggestion