@Cosmic Teapot mb ISFP
she was emotional in some of our talking in the past and nonverbal allows this
@Cosmic Teapot mb ISFP
she was emotional in some of our talking in the past and nonverbal allows this
New additions: Viktor, Schwiftyrickity, Mrrrmaid, Saiorse, Little Timmy, LuminousLynx
Here are the correct typings for our new additions here at the 16types.info.
ILE-Ti: Myst, Transkar, LuchoisLurking, JWC3, MadCity, Troll NR 007, Falsehope
ILE-Ne: Geneiouws, Lagerdemon, Cubazoan, Nickelslick, Hitta
ESE-Fi: Chipsnunderwear, Suz, Inumbra, Subteigh, Kalinoche, FlutteringShyx, Mrrrmaid
ESE-Si: Mu4, Wacey, Xerx, Esaman, KrigtheViking, Hacim, Little Timmy
LII-Ti: N0ki/Zap, Muddy, Reactance, User Name, Bertrand
LII-Ne: Kimuchi/kimu, Zero
SEI-Si: johannesbloem, chriscorey, the whole English
SEI-Fe: BnD, crazedrat, dinky, Neokortex, Pallas Athena
SLE-Se: herzy, mercutio, ananke, idontgiveaf
SLE-Ti: agee, kill4me
LSI-Se: Spider, Missbabydoll, Pole, Aramas
LSI-Ti: Rocky
IEI-Fe: Allie, Pink, SisofNight, Cassandra, Fay, Summer Princess
IEI-Ni: Starfall/Fox, Glam, Elina, Strrrng, Velvet, Penny Dreadful
EIE-Fe: Cuivienen
EIE-Ni: Gilly, Darya, Bain, Sarinana
SEE-Se: Woofwoofl, Handjob, Number9Large
SEE-Fi: Lucas, Aquagraph, Chae, Vogue Paris, Totalize, Schwiftyrickity
LIE-Ni: Ineffable, Moonraker, Avebury
LIE-Te: Ashton, FDG, Expat, Invisiblehim, Narc, Anglas
ESI-Se: DiscoJoe, EJArendee, Jet City Woman, MisterNi, Scarletluxx, Amber/Rosewood, Strangeling
ESI-Fi: Lungs, Golden, Ouronis, Radio, Suedehead, Galen, Kore/Persephone, Delilah, the Locust, Saiorse
ILI-Ni: Scapegrace, Korpsey, Krieger, Cpig, InvisibleJim
ILI-Te: Marie, Mensupermateriam, Aestrivex, Crispy, Soupman
SLI-Si: Words, Stray, Scarper, LuminousLynx
SLI-Te: kim, daft punk, directorabbie, pookie, Jessica, may, supremacist
LSE-Te: Absurd, JimBean
LSE-Si: William, JackOliverAaron/Echidna1000, BurningIce, Timmy, Smilingeyes, Laurie’s Crusader, Viktor
IEE-Ne: Elizathomason, UDP, Sapphire, Syrup De Gem, Pinoline, Azbestos, Nanashi
IEE-Fi: Finale, Airman/airborne, Adam Strange, Prince Andrei, Niffer
EII-Ne: Aylen, Epheme, Wasp
EII-Fi: maritsa/beautiful sky, zero, mikemex, IBTL, contra, sol, suintal/silke, tela/arachne, Olimpia, thehotelambush
Oh yeah and Yaaroslav….EII-Fi
this is making me laugh a lot <3 ty kill, beautiful list as always
Fuck -- re-hearing first Metal Church album, of course it rules!
Retro-thrash bands, last I heard, trying to outgun '85+ Slayer and outvibe Suicidal Tendencies; cool results, Warbringer really ruled live; still where's the modern/current follow-up to Metal Church style? So many routes open in early 80s that never got traveled down afaik.
Dual guitar harmony in (My Favorite) Nightmare before the two-minute mark, all these years later and just now it jumped out at me.
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
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)
Hi, @crAck. I always test as a D. If I seem Normalizing, I’d like to think it’s because my sx/so makes me fairly competent with groups. I spend a lot of time consciously holding back and letting others express themselves because it results in better solutions.
I have a strong need to be in control (probably from bad toilet training or some such thing, whatever), but I know that too much control squashes initiative, but too little results in chaos. I combat my need for control by looking for the competence in people and then letting them run with it. I have to find it first, though.
Normalizing. Nice.
@Adam Strange there is a test you can take for DCNH? I'm pretty sure I'm H, or possibly C, but I'd be curious to spin the wheel nonetheless.
Join my Enneagram Discord: https://discord.gg/ND4jCAcs
"I take back like half of the exclamation points.....they make me look....eager to please. Which I AM....but I don't want anyone to KNOW that"
- Carrie Fisher
@crAck
Good example IEI normalizing is Jonathan who is done videos with @Ben Vasserlan. @Olimpia is very different indeed. She clearly does not fit in with creative static representation either (check more Ben's vids there are couple of IEI-C). I think I would put her under dominant as there seems to be some personal drive and also topics hover more on surface level.
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
@Avebury, the test I took was in a book (I believe) which said there was some correlation between four types of people and their brain chemistry. Seratonin, dopamine, I can’t remember exactly. It didn’t give me much insight. Certainly not as much as Socionics and the instinct stack.
There’s an introduction to the DCNH subtypes on reddit which associates D with Te and N with Fi. I remember that the book said that Directors like to pair up with Negotiators, and I just went “Duh”. Another system that gets a glimmer of Socionics but falls far short of it.
I see Adam as possibly D sub. Those guys are real world driven ( and I see nothing that conflicts it) just as Olimpia is very keen on relationships of the real world.
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
@crAck, Golden was joking. We’ve known each other for years. EIE and LIE are twins in a way.
And I’m probably not so much subdued as intentionally repressed.
IRL, I’ve been called a “loose cannon” in the past, and have been called “unignorable” more recently. But I’m working on keeping a lower profile.
"I take back like half of the exclamation points.....they make me look....eager to please. Which I AM....but I don't want anyone to KNOW that"
- Carrie Fisher
I think all the IEI’s I know are masterful negotiators. Their descriptions as relations-Normalizing diplomats to the SLE’s seems apt.
Ha, I see pattern of me supervising normalizing types and dominants/normalizers who say that I should act bit more pushy.
Always wishing that N types would twist their mind more [and in the end I end up meeting a wall] while listening creatives seem very cool as they put extra twist.
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
@Luminous Lynx mb ESE, based on the photos
Allow me to put that theory to rest - I am most certainly not an ESE. My Mother is an ESE. I have extensive exposure to ESE. Anyone who knows me would agree I'm not an ESE. I'm not offended by the idea tho tbf, as ESEs are absolutely lovely, I'm simply not one of them.
"We live in an age in which there is no heroic death."
Model A: ESI-Se -
DCNH: Dominant
Enneagram: 1w2, 2w1, 6w7
Instinctual Variant: Sx/So
Questionnaires are more indicative of a possible typing imo. If videos are used for the information that someone says they can potentially be useful, if used for typing by VI they are completely useless.
While I can understand people saying that individuals can obfuscate their own type, presenting what they want to be seen, and flattering themselves and so forth (and that VI can 'look past' what is said and see the essential), I still think VI should only be reliably trusted from the extremely savvy. Any novice or even moderately familiar person is likely going to cause faaaar more confusion than clarity. There are clearly visual differences between the extremities of Introversion and Extroversion, but beyond some basic superficial details, I think that VI should be left to the deeply knowledgeable. The wrong answer is far worse than no answer at all.
"We live in an age in which there is no heroic death."
Model A: ESI-Se -
DCNH: Dominant
Enneagram: 1w2, 2w1, 6w7
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 think its more like there's supervision rings over who sees past who and Se is in a superior vantage point some of the time, in those cases they can do what the supervisee tries to do but at a glance, sometimes this entails VI. Gulenko has actually worked out the entire chain in a giant game of 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.”
Normal typing happens IRL or by video and uses _both_ types of data - common behavioral and nonverbal. More important is that with both kinds of the information the higher chance to get the correct type, than that some typer likes some information more for typing or has better skills with it. You give typing material and then typers may use it how they like - videos are universal and give the both information. It's not reasonable to limit the useful typing info about yourself - this happens when only questionnaires are given. So your words in this context are senseless.
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.
While I do think that some nonverbal cues may be more pronounced in one type than another, 15-20% does not show this as being a reliable method for typing.
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.
@Chakram
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
by stats:
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.
Yah that's kind of unhealthy version of behaviour of Ti lead + Se creative I think.
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
@Number 9 large you're ENFP now. How come?
I'm not challenging or try to redicule - just want to understand your reasoning