"We live in an age in which there is no heroic death."
My Typing Thread
Model A: EIE-Ni2 -
Enneagram: 6w7, 2w1, 8w9
Instinctual Variant: Sx/So
VI skills are something you only brag about when you have 15+ years / 60 hours per week of professional Socionics experience. I made up the numbers, but you get the point.
I never realized how many idiots there were until I logged on to the Internet. -- Edsger Dijkstra, Dutch Computer Scientist and pioneer in network communication (possibly apocryphal)
rock paper scissors. for example it may be possible SLE sees, at a glance, what LII spends an inordinate amount of time trying to articulate. Same goes for SEE and EII. there is also always a form of reverse supervision that slows the supervisor down and entails useful information that perhaps got "cut out" in the rush to a result. I think this is the basis for a lot of the successes and failures of VI and its mixed reputation
My mom is ILI so she’s the conflictor of everybody else’s mom
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
The big problem of questionnaires and interviews - people who know the theory may falsificate the info, as often people prefer to have some types. this may happen nonintentionally. I saw the examples. You'll never understand by a questionnaire is that real or not. While to falsificate good nonverbal to other type is doubtful.
The problem of nonverbal typing - it's not developed. mb I even was the 1st who described this as a method. and seems was the 1st who experimentally have proved it is effective (my experiment of 2015 year with youtube bloggers on socioforum; it gave matches much higher than random and close to questionnaires matches) - it was correctly done experiment when typers did not know the opinions of other ones, with normal info like video but not a couple of photos, with statistical basis. Some people still think VI as nothing, but there is clear a proof it's useful since 2015 year.
Before me typers described associations and feelings and they never described this as method of typing, never used it as main. I've pointed on nonverbal behavior as the source of that feelings. Also there were heretics who typed by form of the bodies and someones still think that typing by visual data is physiognomy. In English world thanks to Ganin for this misleading. MBT followers may laugh about Socionics just because of what Ganin does.
> if used for typing by VI they are completely useless
Videos are useful for typing by VI, first of all. Though they may to have other info too. They'll be completely useless for typing only in case of completely bad skills in VI. Improve your typing skills and you'll notice better results.
That nonverbal as method gives useful for typing information is proved by typing matches significantly higher than random (average match was 15-20% in my experiment). My experience of the method gives me good results of prediction of peoples behavior. If this not happens with your usage of the method - the problem is in you, not in the method.
Also initial IR effects work through nonverbal. You may easily notice them yourself in communicating with people IRL. They appear as your brain feels types traits in nonverbal of people. Your are using nonverbal for assuming peoples traits, including types related ones. Want you this or not, and despite what you think about all that. In your case the problem is that your type is not clear or mb wrong, so to distinguish IR effects from other factors is doubtful until you'll understand correctly the types of you and of other ones. I suppose your negativism to nonverbal typing is due the situation that it was hard to say clearly _your_ type by video. But it's not such for many other cases. Your video at least helped me to reject some types for you. While in questionnaires people may write just anything, unlike with types related nonverbal. And they write "anything" following wrong self perceptions and predispositions about own types. They easily fool themselves and others by questionnaires. By nonverbal they are doubtful to do this. You baselessly spread own personal experience on the general situation with the method.
It also cannot be my usage of the method because I do not use it. From various video typing/ VI threads (my own included) on this site, I have seen that it is very clearly not reliable. Information can be falsified in a questionnaire yes, as mannerisms can be replicated or interpreted incorrectly, whether intentional or not.
Until it can be developed to a point of actual reliability and also past people's own biases for nonverbal cues that a certain type is disposed towards, I do not think it should be taken into consideration.
the main idea: if something does not work good at you or other one - this does not mean it's bad tool itself. study to use something, then it will work better
average typing match is <20% - it's about today typing methods in general - was gotten in IRL interview experiment in 1999. and it's close to what gave pure usage of nonverbal method by random forum dudes by bloggers clips. your lovely questionnaire (large one, by Eglit) gave close to that match too - special typing questionnaire vs random clips, harder efforts and longer analysis vs short time impressions -> the similar results
it's how "bad" nonverbal method is on practice in general, compared to questionnaires or interviews
use the reasonable basis - theoretical or experimental to think about something
to remove VI is nonsense based on the known subjectively and objectively after my VI experiment. it's the part of useful data and methods
Sol is particularly thick-skulled it seems. I was ok to go with his self-typing of LSE at first, but now i'm no longer certain, LSI is a possibility.
I have been very pestered by him lately, maybe it is type related.
"Inasmuch as it is nothing but pure communicability, every face, even the most noble and beautiful, is always suspended on the edge of an abyss"
Or going outside Socionics, it also sounds like obsessive-compulsive personality disorder / unhealthy E1 in Enneagram.
PS: I don't hate @Sol or anything like that, I just think he has a lot that he will need to fix about himself. That's why I call him out on stuff sometimes.
Yeah lets all gang up on one guy for his wrongdoings so we can forget about our own
And don't jump to conclusions, it's not about forgetting other people's issues or even wrongdoings.
As for "ganging up": apparently some elements of his behaviour got to the point where multiple people notice issues. That, if not fixed, will just lead the person the wrong way even more. And will bother others too even more.
Lol btw you are ENFP now?
I actually don't think Sol is someone that would genuinely loosen up in a Fe atmosphere. You can see he has a decent Fe role from his interactions in here with the other people. He reminds me of no Fi-role. I think LSE is his right type.
when you put it like that social feedback sounds proper as long as it doesn't transform into pure scapegoating
these people aren't innocent victims with no role to play in their own persecution, but neither should the crowd take it too far, and fob off their own sins onto convenient targets in a 2 birds 1 stone style maneuver
They talk a lot about relationships openly because they rationally think the search of the dual is logically one of the most important things. They're actually rationally talking about their relationships, so it's just Te with a Fe mask, but they actually just seek Fi.
For me, Fe is short-term friendliness, sx-first is bad to the bone.
Last edited by Myst; 07-27-2018 at 08:55 PM.
whether Fe is short term depends on what its blocked with and whether it entails an element of globality (either base or - signed)... the problem is "short term friendliness" is how "global friendliness" comes across to someone who only operates on the basis of short term friendliness. in other words, such a person does not always see and appreciate the globality in a more sophisticated usage of a function, where what looks like piecemeal short term applications is a systemic application of Fe to the whole world. in other words, if Hamlet is literally preoccupied with the general state of humanity in terms of emotions, it may look, as a matter of projection, that he or she turns on and off friendliness as is convenient based on who comes near, but its actually not really in their control, they literally live concern for the world, their friendliness is universal within the limits of logical possibility. that's why any "fakeness" is more a projection, as is any suspicion of on/off. what triggers it is other people, its not a role within the meaning of a role function, the role is the opposite, the short term on/off is the business logic. in other words, for some types Fe is universal friendliness and Te is short term-business thinking, whereas for others Te is universal business thinking and short term friendliness. this is what Adam meant ("for me"), but I wanted to clarify because it could create the wrong impression if his statements aren't contextualized as specifically applicable to Fe role
I don't think "talking about relationships" is seeking, if it is then I'm not seeking as I rarely open up about my private life. It's probably more related to sx first (as Myst has suggested before me) and I'm sp/sx. I also agree with Adam that manifests as friendliness in social situations. is more concerned with long-term relationships.
On a side I don't think you can really tell apart from on this criteria. Anyone can be friendly and anyone can talk about or have relationships, type not withstanding. That was my whole point - the criteria being used itt to determine what is seeking is terrible.
That said, I think Adam is LIE and Sol is some kind of beta.
loving from a distance can be beautiful, because its the lack of expectation of reciprocity that keeps it pure, and its its asinine business logic that makes it human