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
the colleague, I appreciate that in Trollsionics what I do is seen as a science
P.S. From the modesty point, I'm just the best one. My IR test even worked sometimes as should. It helped several people to accept my opinion about their type. But... in general I will not be thanked for what I did. *sigh*
As long as you are on this forum, you care.
Activity relations actually do get quite conflict heavy here and there. The descriptions of IEI/LSI Activity relations note this too.
You do have an IEI pov pretty much about how you view Ti. The discussion itself was not about your type but if you are unable to let go of the type topic, then that won't help. And yeah, you are unfortunately not getting my point about Ti vs Te. So yeah, best to stop discussing this with you while you are too emotional about it.
I self type as an unknown type, most often typed as iei, sei, ese, eii. Blessings.
I have in fact used IR as well, and that together with Reinin led me to consider the types that i mention. Reinin is just another way of expressing classical concepts, except practicing it is based on observable traits so i'd say it offers an advantage.
Dynamic /Static is a basic dichotomy, whereby you differentiate Je and Ji.
That's fine, we come from different schools of thought on this. For me Reinin at least attempted to make observable Ti concepts that we could otherwise only hope to discern by using a Ti lense, which didn't work for me.
As for IR, i'd like to point out that IR is a Ti concept that an ILE (Aushra sp?) came up with in trying to make sense of failed relationships.
You suck at typing people, including yourself. And for the record, it was YOU who couldn't drop the discussion of my type, when I was trying to focus on the actual topic. I even let your passive-aggressive remarks - you calling my post "Fe" - go because I wasn't interested in this bullshit circle-jerk that you pull me in time and time again.
Having conflict is irrelevant when it comes to inter-type relations. It's the TYPE OF CONFLICT and the fact that you and I can't communicate whatsoever that should give you a clue, but you're so stuck up your ass about bringing your idea of my type up constantly that you fail to even THINK about the possibility that your own bias is clouding your mind.
At least my emotional bias is upfront and I don't hide behind these petty games that you play. Fuck off with your BULLSHIT.
Been wondering if I'm Fi or Fe. Pretty sure I'm some F type, but idk about which.
Sometimes I wonder if you’re an ESI actually @Mio Q , not to throw yet another suggestion at you.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
My noting your type or about Fe was not passive aggressive. Do not distort the facts - the fact is, I was focusing on the actual topic, sharing my analysis of the actual topic of Ti vs Te.
Anyway, I see you are still being too emotional and personal to discuss with reasonably. Not playing any games here. I just simply do not see any point to it while you are like this.
Tho you are often very straightforward, when you referred categorically to the other person as a type they don’t accept, it was a communication move that I have seen with PA forum members such as Maritsa. It’s PA Bc it leaves the other person quietly boxed in. The only option for them apart from accepting it unhappily is to back up and call it out rather than just be able to respond directly to overt content. It will upset many people. It crosses a respect boundary. I know you didn’t mean to.
I can find the specific pivotal quote if you like. Hard to do atm Bc I may have broken my wrist, wtf. :/
Last edited by golden; 06-13-2018 at 12:41 AM.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
Okay lol. Let me add without people have to click before they read the same thing that I’ve only ever seriously considered myself to be SLE under socionics.
You’re so incredibly stupid and bullheaded though that if you wanted me to be your conflictor I wouldn’t mind that. No matter what your own type is too.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
Thanks for the input on this & for describing how it might affect some people in a bad way. Yeah no, I don't try to create such games. The problem I have in this area is that I sometimes do think it would be possibly useful information to the other person if I mention to them my reasoning on type, but sure I realize it may not always be helpful, especially if referring to observations inside the Socionics framework when that might create issues about self-identification or this "boxing in" or any other issue (I'm not clear on what else it could be). It would be good to find a way to discuss some observations and analyses without involving any further such issues that I did not mean to touch on/cause.
EDIT: In the specific case as above, the problem might've actually been that I spoke of "lack of logical consistency" (and that was linked to type as cognition for that type). I was not intending to call the person stupid or incompetent in life in general, no, I just meant that if they do not care about having all theories/explanations consistent with each other then that means a lack of logical consistency, and I meant this in terms of preference: some people just do not seem to need much consistency of such to be able to solve problems and to adapt to situations in life. It's simply a statement on a way of thinking/cognition. But I realize this wording by default has an unfortunate connotation of "you are stupid". I was not thinking of that connotation when I wrote that earlier because I was inside the context of Socionics theory so it was a technical statement entirely like explained above.
And yes, if you want to find that specific pivotal quote (not sure what you are referrring to here), do feel free to. Hope your wrist isn't actually broken.
Last edited by Myst; 06-13-2018 at 05:32 PM.
Your Fe comments were bullshit and unsubstantiated. If you do as you claim, then there would have been a point to those remarks, and you would provide actual reason to back up those hollow claims. Instead, they are off handed comments that you repeat like some slogan as if you are some sleazy salesman selling soap, with nothing to back em up. This is class-A bullshit aimed at nothing but to aggravate me. Congrats, you "succeeded."
You continue playing games right now. You disagree but your own actions speak for themselves.
And "while you are like this," that's right. I am like "this," meaning that I just do not put up with this nonsense. Be straight forward or fuck off. You were the one to make it personal to begin with, so put your money where your mouth is.
If you are referring to me with "the person," then you are wrong about everything that follows. I am of the thought that there is only one "true" system, and that the perceived distinction between the interpretations is exactly that: a difference in interpretation and nothing more.
Your insistent claim of me being an IEI is based on a falsehood.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
This one: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...(thread-split)
You’re supposed to supervise me lol. “Bully someone else” doesn’t sound very aggressor-like :/
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
There is no challenge except for your mental challenges.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
I'm not actually sure what you call "Fe comments" here, clarify. I was mentioning that your Ti description seemed like from an IEI (and Ni) pov, I did not say anything about you as an Fe type directly actually. That is, I was not emphasizing Fe here, while you are. So, yeah, clarification is needed.
Because right now it just looks like you are angry at something I did not even say or imply. And I was never less than straightforward. You are being paranoid about that.
Yes, I was referring to you. As for your claim here that there is only one true system, your original post I was responding to a while ago was about "The view that these theories are each valid within their own theoretical internal structure, separate from one another in its validity - yet with obvious links to each other that ought to not be taken into account when discussing each operational segment - is that of Ti. It separates theory from reality, as any introverted attitude will do, allowing the theory to develop and live on its own, mutating into a different form depending on its 'author' (the Ti type thinking of it). Consequently this becomes yet another separate child of the mother of theories, but one that can't be reconciled with the origin because too many fundamentals have been altered. Abstract theory that lives its own life. As a result, you can be a Fe type based on Jung's, and a Ne type based on a disconnected-from-reality Ti child. This is the opposite from a pragmatic outlook, making this line of thinking not Te." And I was responding to this kind of view, while it seemed like this was your line of thinking as well. If not, that's cool by me, I have no investment in your type either BTW. But your view on Ti seemed really Ni-laden while ignoring important properties of how Ti reasoning is, so that's why I even brought it up in the first place (remembering that I saw some other posts of yours earlier and they seemed IEI).
Gotcha. Clarification inbound:
The first mention of IEI, and not at all what I was discussing.
Uncalled for and completely disconnected from the topic at hand.
Following your own logic, this would then also apply to me:
... because a "one-fit-for-all" is how I think. And this includes topics such as typology. If you must place me in the Beta quadra, your own logic would suggest LSI.
Lol, the bolded there was never my claim. I was contrasting two approaches to typology and trying to discuss them with you, but alas it was all for naught.Yes, I was referring to you. As for your claim here that there is only one true system, your original post I was responding to a while ago was about "The view that these theories are each valid within their own theoretical internal structure, separate from one another in its validity - yet with obvious links to each other that ought to not be taken into account when discussing each operational segment - is that of Ti. It separates theory from reality, as any introverted attitude will do, allowing the theory to develop and live on its own, mutating into a different form depending on its 'author' (the Ti type thinking of it). Consequently this becomes yet another separate child of the mother of theories, but one that can't be reconciled with the origin because too many fundamentals have been altered. Abstract theory that lives its own life. As a result, you can be a Fe type based on Jung's, and a Ne type based on a disconnected-from-reality Ti child. This is the opposite from a pragmatic outlook, making this line of thinking not Te."
If you still don't understand this, then I challenge you to quote me saying that the "separate theories"-approach is the one I employ. You won't find it because I never said it.
I had this out with Myst a long time ago Samson... I think you're right, but realize its totally pointless, still, you're not alone (i was literally saying exactly the same stuff). Myst is harmless and kind of lovable once you just accept she's super in her own world
also niffer tries to insert herself in every possible controversy but its totally superfluous you can cut out 99% of her input too with no loss. Myst whatever her faults may be I don't think generates conflict or misunderstanding intentionally
Are you trying to tell me you got offended at this? Your original response to this did not seem to be in an offended tone ("Pff, you ain't seen nothin yet!").
And BTW it was not meant to be some "insistent typing" of you to "aggravate" you, it was meant as a compliment lol.
It was not disconnected from the topic at hand, since I wanted to find an explanation for why you'd view Ti in that way you described it.The first mention of IEI, and not at all what I was discussing.IEIs do tell me they perceive abstract structures. What you described is Irrational and opposing Se also because "As a result, you can be a Fe type based on Jung's, and a Ne type based on a disconnected-from-reality Ti child."
Uncalled for and completely disconnected from the topic at hand.
I absolutely did not mean it in a personal way, if you have a beef with being typed as IEI, that doesn't mean I will be automatically aware of that. So no, I was not trying to "aggravate" you with it.
Cool ok whatever you mean by "one-fit-for-all" here, but you do not think of Ti the same way LSI does, according to your earlier descriptions.Following your own logic, this would then also apply to me:
... because a "one-fit-for-all" is how I think. And this includes topics such as typology. If you must place me in the Beta quadra, your own logic would suggest LSI.
My point was that you seemed to be approaching the understanding of what Ti is through the Ni of IEIs. Just according to my experience. No, you didn't say you employ it, otherwise.Lol, that was never my claim. I was contrasting two approaches to typology and trying to discuss them with you, but alas it was all for naught.
If you still don't understand this, then I challenge you to quote me saying that the "separate theories"-approach is the one I employ. You won't find it because I never said it.
Alright, it wasn't personal then.
I don't have beef with being typed IEI, I have 'beef' with being retyped on the wrong basis, on claims that never existed. It made me wonder if we were discussing theory (the topic) or if all this was some power-play for my typing that ignores anything I say or do.
The one we had been employing throughout the initial attempt at discussion, that's the idea I used for "one-fit-for-all." There was none other discussed.Cool ok whatever you mean by "one-fit-for-all" here, but you do not think of Ti the same way LSI does, according to your earlier descriptions.
I know that I am not LSI, that wasn't my point. My point is that your own reasoning supports me being Ne PoLR, and directly opposes IEI for me.
In that case, the logical assumption to make would be that my understanding of Ti comes from my interactions with IEI's, whom I must have mistaken for high Ti users. Not that I myself would be one as I don't employ that type of reasoning.My point was that you seemed to be approaching the understanding of what Ti is through the Ni of IEIs. Just according to my experience. No, you didn't say you employ it, otherwise.
You think. To know you may only the objective. Opinions about types are far from this still.
Your talking style is funny, in case it's ESI indeed. So much of bad words and incline to quarrels. The base Fi I knew personally behaved other - they were more passive aggressive, while you oppose openly and easily.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.