Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 121 to 160 of 214

Thread: Can you help? Am I ENFp or INFp?

  1. #121
    I'm a fruit Kiwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    169
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ToTheMoon View Post
    Thanks! I can definitely see Ne in my VI as well.
    No, thank you for your sober attitude in the post above.



  2. #122
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi View Post
    No, thank you for your sober attitude in the post above.
    Thanks .
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  3. #123
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @ToTheMoon Well, I can say you're extremely better than I am at people negotiations. You're able to put into neutral words what you're feeling and de-escalate conflict. When I've found myself completely misunderstood by people who insisted that they knew me, what I meant etc. my reaction was heh, nevermind, that's not important for your type. Just have to say I'm impressed by how you handled it. Higher level ethics maybe then.

  4. #124
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squark View Post
    @ToTheMoon Well, I can say you're extremely better than I am at people negotiations. You're able to put into neutral words what you're feeling and de-escalate conflict. When I've found myself completely misunderstood by people who insisted that they knew me, what I meant etc. my reaction was heh, nevermind, that's not important for your type. Just have to say I'm impressed by how you handled it. Higher level ethics maybe then.
    Wow, thanks. I do have that diplomatic streak. If I speak out my initial gut reaction, it always turns out to be so much drama. I learned it's better to tone it down. Maybe I've had a talent for it that I developed over the years.
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  5. #125
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,668
    Mentioned
    250 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ToTheMoon View Post
    Hi Eliza, and thank you for taking your time to answer my posts again. I had to think long and hard before answering because I just have no idea how to put into words what I have experienced while reading your response. I don't want to sound insensitive, I don't believe that I'm a brash person, so I hope you can take my answer as a polite try to create some distance between us. I totally appreciate your enthusiasm and eagerness to answer in detail! That was very kind of you to take a lot of time to do it. I think it benefitted me greatly, because I could see some pieces of the puzzle that were eluding me before. So in the name of science , I want to say what I felt while reading, and again, please don't take it the wrong way.

    Your answer felt very overbearing and like you were trying to see things in me that aren't there. When you were relating to me, I have in turn found it incredibly hard to relate back to what you were saying. In fact, I didn't relate almost at all. I was surprised a lot of times, trying to figure out how it was that you were relating to something I said, while yourself talking about something completely different and unrelated to my statements. Instead of feeling supported and like I belong, I felt misunderstood and taken for granted --like you just wanted to talk about yourself, using my descriptions of myself as a jumping off point for your own musings. I guess some of my vague statements are to blame, as they offer a wide range of interpretations but it felt mildly insulting to me. But that's fine! It let me find a new perspective on things.

    As I said, I needed some time to think about the things you said. I find it helps me cool down when I write down what I feel and then edit it to sound reasonable to others (which, yes, makes writing posts very long. I think I spent over two hours writing this one). (How Fe of me.) I did that process here as well and came to a conclusion that it was a really great to react to your post the way I reacted because it showed me where my boundaries lie. It's probably not related to my socionics type much, but it is important to me to know those boundaries and respect them. I have trouble with that. So thanks for providing that experience! On that note, there was one statement that stood out most among others. Again, my reaction to it could be unrelated to socionics at all, but to my conditioning and psychological profile instead. But I thought I'd share it here in case someone saw something in it.


    Maybe I'm overreacting here, I'm sure you had the best of intentions when writing this sentence but I'm so sorry, you definitely aren't seeing a whole pic of me. I think it would be a very rude thing to say to anyone because it's so objectifying, but regardless of social conventions, it touched me very deeply and in a very wrong way when I read it. Few things get to me like that. No, you're not seeing me. I tend to believe only personal interaction with someone can allow you to get to know the other person, and even then it's never going to be the full picture, no matter how many descriptions of themselves they give you. We perceive others through our own prism and we only see our reflections of the other person in us, not the person themselves. Yes, we can do a complicated thing like trying to find a type for someone, but we are unable to really see them in their entirety --that is already too complex for limited cognitive abilities of a human being. It's just not possible. I don't think people even see their own selves in their entirety. And that's totally okay. But in my mind, it's definitely not okay to say you see a whole pic of someone. That's like taking away what makes them an individual person, and bringing them down to an object that you can catalog and put away in one of the shelves in your mind. Sure, we all do that all the time, that makes it easier to live and interact with people. But hearing such a thing said openly rubs me the wrong way. Personally, I make these simplifications while still keeping an asterisk that says 'not really what you think they are' about every person I know.*

    *Posting this whole paragraph makes me very uneasy because I'm aware it can create discord and hurt feelings. I thought of erasing it altogether but decided it should stay here, 'for science'.

    I hope this didn't sound too blunt. I don't know how better to put it. Thanks again for taking all the time you took! It helped me see some things I couldn't recognize before.
    Wow, this has been up for two days and I am just now seeing it. So I will add my feedback to the other feedback you got for this.

    I guess I just feel out of touch here on The16T forum now. There has been a lot going on in my life this past year (major shifts and changes) and I spend less time reading on the forum, so I don't' know what is being said, or has been said when I do sign on and read. So when I sign on I just read randomly, and your post caught my interest. I also spend a long time on posts I do write, which have been lately little more than these two long ones to you (which is one reason why I generally don't get on the forum with any intention to write, because when I start one it can get long, and that takes time I don't have).

    When I responded to your typing question, which was interesting to me, I wrote a long one, and then you asked me to write more, and I simply wanted to be accommodating. I guess I thought you LIKED what I wrote, and wanted more of the same? Did I completely misinterpret you there??

    I should have realized I had said all I could, really, in the first one. I sort of realized it, because I was surprised you asked for more comment. So my second one, yes, did get into thoughts I had about me, as well as what I was saying about you, in effort to respond to what you asked. Rather ADD of me, I guess. I should have said I feel I have said what I can on the subject, rather than squeeze out more thoughts because I thought it would be helpful to you, based on what I understood you were asking. I certainly wish I had now.

    And I also likely spent well over two hours, probably more, responding. And I also do lots of editing to get my thoughts out right (yet, i attribute this, personally, to strong Fi and less-confident Fe), though lately I feel I have to cut off my efforts in that area because I have a stricter real life schedule to stick to. So maybe that contributed to this horrible miscommunication.

    The pain of seeing I have communicated poorly perhaps relates also to past personal history which has included painful spans of being misunderstood in certain key familial relationships (including a longtime marriage to one who I only years later realized had purposefully misunderstand me all those years because he enjoyed my discomforted reactions to being misunderstood). Because of my past experience in this I make a strong effort to be understanding of others, so it's quite painful to see in this case I have done the opposite of my intention and I am truly sorry for that. But yes, it is also painful for me as well to be misunderstood, so you do not have to worry about needing to create distance between us because I am sure that is the natural consequence here.

    I do want to explain the comment I made that you grossly misunderstood, about seeing the "whole picture of you". I certainly did not mean it so literally as you interpreted it and reacted to it. I meant I saw a holistic overview of you. This is typical ENFp holistic- panoramic thinking, taking in an overview of the whole. So maybe you aren't ENFp and this sort of thinking is then naturally foreign to you.

    But I am not trying to type you now. My way is to initially accept self-typing, up til the point I feel quite strongly someone has mistyped - and then I will only say something if I feel they will not be hurt by an opposing opinion of their self-typing. But I will not try to type you at all now, because I have offended you once, and do not want to do so again.

    I am sort of gobsmacked that I came across to you as overbearing when you explicitly sought my opinion, and am rather wondering how that could have happened. I just thought you sought my thoughts, so I shared them. I don't think my opinion rules, or that you have to accept all, or any of it. I can't imagine how I came across that I felt my opinion was somehow infallible, but apparently, I did.

    I am glad you were blunt, because I prefer the truth of things. Primarily, if you hadn't told me, I could blunder on and bother you more, and I sure don't want to do that. Truly, being understood is not so important to me as not offending. I would rather say nothing else and thereby not risk offending you any more.

    I am truly sorry I offended you. Please forgive me.
    Last edited by Eliza Thomason; 01-29-2019 at 03:59 AM.
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  6. #126
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    ...
    First of all, please don't worry, I really wasn't offended! As a side notw, the comment you made was one I hoped I'd avoid by using my technical approach in my last post but alas . We do seem to function in different ways, don't we? I'd say your considerate and kind response here truly confirms you are a high Fi user and that's a beautiful thing.

    I guess the biggest misunderstanding happened when I asked for more of your relations towards my statements. I should have stated my motivation for asking that and I didn't. To clarify right now: I asked for them because I didn't want to judge right away, based on your first answers, and wanted to dig deeper to see your approach to the more personal bits that I shared. I only asked for that to have a better understanding and an easier way to analyze and confirm/deny my initial bias towards what you wrote in the first place. I probably should have said so, so you wouldn't feel obliged to try and focus on me more. Goes to prove that my Fe is only working for me when consciously engaged and I tend to forget that others can't read me as easily as I think they do.

    I'm sorry for causing the misunderstanding and possible hurt feelings on both sides. You're right that I did just that --even if I did it totally unconsciously, it doesn't really excuse me. I now see that I did it out of my silly conviction that to share my personal judgments would be a worthless thing to do. More work on F needed.

    I am truly sorry I offended you. Please forgive me.
    I do forgive you and please don't worry about it anymore! There are no hard feelings on my part.
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  7. #127
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hi, I'm back after a longer while of studying and thinking and I have my answer, and by golly, @Beautiful sky was right! I'm SLI. No question about it.

    I'm not going to go into full detail here because it's kind of personal (unless someone's super interested, then I can do it for science) but reading about function dimensionality and going back to basics again and reading about information elements and choosing which definitions to stick to really helped me finally put my finger on my whole experience of being me.

    I should now write a book called 'From IEE to SLI or a recount of ways one girl tried and failed at being her own dual. A socionic memoire".

    Thank you all for participation, this has been great and eye opening.
    Last edited by ToTheMoon; 02-12-2019 at 11:46 AM.
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  8. #128
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    23,883
    Mentioned
    576 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ToTheMoon View Post
    Hi, I'm back after a longer while of studying and thinking and I have my answer, any by golly, @Beautiful sky was right! I'm SLI. No question about it.

    I'm not going to go into full detail here because it's kind of personal (unless someone's super interested, then I can do it for science) but reading about function dimensionality and going back to basics again and reading about information elements and choosing which definitions to stick to really helped me finally put my finger on my whole experience of being me.

    I should now write a book called 'From IEE to SLI or a recount of ways one girl tried and failed at being her own dual. A socionic memoire".

    Thank you all for participation, this has been great and eye opening.
    it's common for a person to manifest their dual nature but be the other dual. the mind is a funny thing
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE

    Best description of functions:
    http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

  9. #129
    aka Feathers, Penny Dreadful Babooshka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Behind your tonsils
    TIM
    479 so/sx
    Posts
    620
    Mentioned
    69 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    That's interesting, TTM.
    I heard that we can type as our duals if we have a distorted-enough image of our idealized self BUT not sure how much I buy into it. It's pretty hard for me to imagine a SLE typing as IEI for example. Or ILI into SEE and vice-versa.

    But the image of the self isn't the only thing worth considering here, really. Lots of forumites gave their opinion on the QA, and just as many people saw EII or IEE in you. Unless you are a method actor, I don't know how you'd really bamboozle all of us like that.

    This is my input. Annnd, for the record, I'm not forcing anything on you. You're one of the sweetest and most wholesome members on here regardless of sociotype.(seriously, I still envy your tact. Wish I could handle conflicts without being PA, at the very least) You're still amazing!
    4w3 7w6 9w1 so/sx

    "You see, there are still faint glimmers of civilization left in this barbaric slaughterhouse that was once known as humanity. Indeed that's what we provide in our own modest, humble, insignificant... oh, fuck it."

  10. #130
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,044
    Mentioned
    167 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    fk socionics tbh

  11. #131
    a two horned unicorn renegade Troll Nr 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Cognitive disorganization
    TIM
    Ne-ILE-C 7 ELFV?
    Posts
    3,990
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I can say that I'm a huge hedonist considering taste and such. I was talking with SEI and she said she had very same issues with sweet tooth and stuff. I must say that I'm not so good at telling those things apart and so on and it is far from optimal understanding.
    Sol mb F type due to his inability to think alternatives.


  12. #132
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hahah, thanks all for your comments! Hilarious stuff there .

    Okay, so to clarify some of the confusion.

    I was talking with a Ne dom friend when I was in the beginning stages of getting sick early last week. I'd had a high fever for a couple of days and she was mortified and told me to go to the doctor immediatelly to which I was kinda unfazed and meh. I don't go to doctors because I'm very rarely sick. I get colds, I get sore throats, I get stomach problems all the time but I'm not sick. And this is when it hit me. I just know my body and am tuned to it so well that I don't have to worry about it. Where my iNtuitive friends run around chasing doctors after every sneeze, I raise my eyebrows and think 'drama' and take another sip of my tea with honey and lemon and am good in three days. (Okay, I did call in a doctor this time but that was when my fever hit 40C/105f after a couple more days and I started getting worried because that was unusual.)

    Sick in bed, I started thinking about Si. And sure as hell, those tantrums I threw in my youth (ones I mentioned somewhere on the first page of this thread) where everything new and different felt like an attack on me? That was coming from Si. That wasn't mature and wise Si but it was Si alright. With my maturing, came an understanding that stuff happens to take different forms and different people experience it in different ways and I've embraced it and started looking at life through this lense. So that 'weak' Si actually had the potential to grow, when nurtured, and it did. Looks like maybe 4D functions can do that. I think mature Si can appear a bit like Ne in that it helps me recognize and accept and even enjoy that everybody's different --and that's why I thought I was using a lot of Ne. But Si is not Ne in the way that it won't produce myriads of ideas per second and it won't help me look at a problem from all possible perspectives at once, and then throw in some impossible ones just for the sheer novelty of it. And, well --I was never really good at these, no matter how hard I tried. I was always good at automatically and unconsciously assessing my body's needs and others' needs (I have this superpower where I can look at your posture and then touch your back in the exact spot where it hurts the most; which, while cheeky, is actually great for giving a good massage), and I was excellent at aesthetics in the general sense, not just the artistic one. Recognizing different harmonies and making things harmonious is my forte. So that got me thinking, yeah, Si is where I'm actually good at.

    About my starting point of ENFp, and why. I seriously think there is only so much nature can do when it's put in the face of overwhelming nurture. And so, me, an aesthetically inclined and very rigid Si dom, went on to study cultural anthropology of all things. Now I don't know what take on this subject there is outside of where I live, but here, on my university, it is an explosion of Ne. Even the slogan of our faculty read something along the lines of 'surprise/astonish yourself with the world'. When I was writing my theses, I would get no structuring and all my lecturers would suggest to me was to 'just write about it'. I went to my studies hoping to find structures and systems and mechanisms that run the world so I could better understand it and all I got was a lousy sense of self in a post-modernist academia and a mild trauma after travelling to the former eastern block countries for research --constantly putting myself in situations where everything felt new and like I couldn't have prepared for it was incredibly hard for me. That was a lot of exposing myself to Ne. Interestingly, during my studies a lot of my friends started mentioning I was acting rude and insensitive. My manner of never beating around the bush and being sarcastic towards other people weren't exacly buying me anymore of their patience and liking. So I started curbing myself, toning my opinions down, becoming more mediative and using what I personally consider 'frills' around my various statements in order to not offend anyone. In short, I went training myself in Fi, and to some degree of success, I believe.

    Needless to say, I wasn't the same person when I left the faculty (I stayed for about 10 years). I am much more relaxed and a lot of my former rigidity went away because --nurture happened and I was ready to listen and learn. Not that it was a smooth ride. It wasn't and I know that I overdid it a lot and lost myself in the process more than once --identity crises were aplenty during that time and after.

    In short, for the last 10+ years I was so focused on functions other than my 1st and 2nd that when trying to type myself, I simply took them for granted. They worked for me silently in the background, they didn't stand out, and all I could see were my attempts at improving myself in areas where I wasn't as good. Yep, there's a lot to be said here about over-idealizing self. It actually feels really good to have this sober look at myself. Takes a lot of pressure away. For me, the sudden realization that I'm really not and also don't have to be as free-flowing and spontaneous and adaptable and easygoing as I thought I should be feels liberating. I can go back to being my down to earth, punny, endearingly stiff and just a tad uncaring (gasp) personality with no regrets --although I'm sure it will take some time, getting it back. After all I've worked very long and hard to bury it with all the goodness and fluff . Maybe I'll just forge it into a special personal combo and turn out a cute smiling butterfly made of metal and retractable spikes. I mean, it could happen.
    Last edited by ToTheMoon; 02-13-2019 at 08:00 PM. Reason: typos
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  13. #133
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    1,821
    Mentioned
    129 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I dont know. I think you might be overthinking things. You seemed like Harmonizing subtype so that can also create confusion.

  14. #134
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    I dont know. I think you might be overthinking things.
    Just when I finally felt I wasn't .

    You seemed like Harmonizing subtype so that can also create confusion.
    I haven't read on subtypes in socionics yet but I am enneagram 9 so there's that.
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  15. #135
    I'm a fruit Kiwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    169
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @ToTheMoon
    some advice you never asked for: Just take your whatever-type, stick to it as long as it makes sense to you. You don't have to prove anything to anyone.



  16. #136
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi View Post
    @ToTheMoon
    some advice you never asked for: Just take your whatever-type, stick to it as long as it makes sense to you. You don't have to prove anything to anyone.
    Well put.

    I do find that once I settle on a type within any typology, the need to identify with a type (any type, even the one I end up with) vanishes. I guess I just got there. Along with the need to identify vanishing, the need to prove anything to others vanishes as well.

    Side note. Not sure what others think about it and I'd be curious to listen. In my short but intense learning experience with different cognitive typologies, I have found them to be, well, pretty static models. My view of personality is dynamic, meaning that it is like a living organism that can expand and contract; develop and decline; grow and withdraw; put life force into a facet or leave it lifeless. This is mostly a lens I'm seeing myself through, and the various changes in the way that I am and had been in the past. Anyone here with similar idea of a malleable self? I think the approach that hits closest to this dynamic view is the one guys from cognitivetype.com propose --then again, I have other issues with their solely VI-based take. Perhaps I've been looking to define myself in the wrong place all along. Typologies are like candy, though, I just can't help myself .
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  17. #137
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    1,821
    Mentioned
    129 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ToTheMoon View Post
    Well put.

    I do find that once I settle on a type within any typology, the need to identify with a type (any type, even the one I end up with) vanishes. I guess I just got there. Along with the need to identify vanishing, the need to prove anything to others vanishes as well.

    Side note. Not sure what others think about it and I'd be curious to listen. In my short but intense learning experience with different cognitive typologies, I have found them to be, well, pretty static models. My view of personality is dynamic, meaning that it is like a living organism that can expand and contract; develop and decline; grow and withdraw; put life force into a facet or leave it lifeless. This is mostly a lens I'm seeing myself through, and the various changes in the way that I am and had been in the past. Anyone here with similar idea of a malleable self? I think the approach that hits closest to this dynamic view is the one guys from cognitivetype.com propose --then again, I have other issues with their solely VI-based take. Perhaps I've been looking to define myself in the wrong place all along. Typologies are like candy, though, I just can't help myself .
    Of course personality is dynamic. But Socionics doesn't capture your personality in it's fullness. It only concentrates on the IM type, that is the certain profile of cognitive processing.

  18. #138
    General Settings wonderland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    In between.
    TIM
    Not your dual.
    Posts
    67
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ToTheMoon View Post
    Well put.

    I do find that once I settle on a type within any typology, the need to identify with a type (any type, even the one I end up with) vanishes. I guess I just got there. Along with the need to identify vanishing, the need to prove anything to others vanishes as well.

    Side note. Not sure what others think about it and I'd be curious to listen. In my short but intense learning experience with different cognitive typologies, I have found them to be, well, pretty static models. My view of personality is dynamic, meaning that it is like a living organism that can expand and contract; develop and decline; grow and withdraw; put life force into a facet or leave it lifeless. This is mostly a lens I'm seeing myself through, and the various changes in the way that I am and had been in the past. Anyone here with similar idea of a malleable self? I think the approach that hits closest to this dynamic view is the one guys from cognitivetype.com propose --then again, I have other issues with their solely VI-based take. Perhaps I've been looking to define myself in the wrong place all along. Typologies are like candy, though, I just can't help myself .
    I only think of socionics as how one goes from point A to point B in their head, decision process, not as personality.
    There are people I know who are considered kind, generous, good people inside and out that I find grossly self-interested, abrasive, demanding. Why is that? Why do they rub me off the wrong way while others just luv luv LUV 'em? It's not always socionics explainable, some stuff are, but not all. Being in an opposing quadra environment can take a toll on a person, mostly children, though it can make one "grow out" of type related stubborness and make one more open to differences.
    Quadra values fly off over my head, I don't believe in them, like I can't stand type descriptions or anything very detailed, because each detail can become an arguing point as to why X is not Y type, and that can be a neverending bunch of non-sense. Every person has a different way to percieve the world, coming from a different background, family, everything. 16 types for 7'684'216'257 persons, that's cray, and only one number is going up.
    Each people we have crossed has had a different idea of who we are, some liked, some hated, and why is that? The list can go on for days, and socionics will only be one item on it... unless people explain everything with functions, but then again, we all have a different view of each function, just like if I say "flower", no one is going to have the exact same image in mind. Some people will see the word, but in which way is this word written?
    I think of socionics as a way to classify people coldly, outside of their feelings, which is great for me.
    I also noticed that it's possible to have functional preferences that has nothing to do with valued functions, in a more or less conscious fashion of trying to be someone you're not, be it by wanting or feeling forced to, or even just liking the function in others.
    I find that if I care what type I'm supposed to be, which one to live up to, I get really crazy and distressed, because I want to do things well. Too well. That's why I don't talk about my type, I don't want people to come at me demanding I prove them stuff because whatever.
    I like who I like and that's it.

  19. #139
    Number 9 large's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Baking bread
    TIM
    ESTP 7w8
    Posts
    2,300
    Mentioned
    195 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ooo View Post
    fk socionics tbh
    Hardcore

  20. #140
    a two horned unicorn renegade Troll Nr 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Cognitive disorganization
    TIM
    Ne-ILE-C 7 ELFV?
    Posts
    3,990
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, as you talk it seems to be quite distant of generating any sort of view. Sounds like it wants to get there. So the idea never becomes fully crystallized. If we think of it as complementing IEE's thought process it seems to do it quite well. Being away from discomforting things is also very SLI like quality. If IEE painting fluffy pictures to your mind sounds like a duality then you should be fine with SLI typing.


    EII? Ummm... well let's say that those views are still pretty far from tangible humanist thinking.
    Sol mb F type due to his inability to think alternatives.


  21. #141
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,003
    Mentioned
    83 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    In general, these two types are very different with respect to information processing; data filtering and rationalization are in such opposing configurations that distinguishing between the two types should be fairly straightforward. Which description better suits you although you should keep in mind that they were written for specific individuals:
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...iption-by-I-O?
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...iption-by-I-O?

    a.k.a. I/O

  22. #142
    عالم نفسي thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    7,946
    Mentioned
    277 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ToTheMoon View Post
    Hi, I'm back after a longer while of studying and thinking and I have my answer, and by golly, @Beautiful sky was right! I'm SLI. No question about it.

    I'm not going to go into full detail here because it's kind of personal (unless someone's super interested, then I can do it for science) but reading about function dimensionality and going back to basics again and reading about information elements and choosing which definitions to stick to really helped me finally put my finger on my whole experience of being me.

    I should now write a book called 'From IEE to SLI or a recount of ways one girl tried and failed at being her own dual. A socionic memoire".

    Thank you all for participation, this has been great and eye opening.
    Hmmmmm

    You do realize that SLI is pretty much the exact opposite of how you described yourself in the OP?

  23. #143

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    9,594
    Mentioned
    868 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    You do realize that SLI is pretty much the exact opposite of how you described yourself in the OP?
    she'll can after a rational thinking during practical typology usage. there will be a strong mess in IR effects, at least
    as she mentioned the possible EIE semidual, so the reasons for that opinion can be emotional. emotions and thinking match not good
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  24. #144
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    23,883
    Mentioned
    576 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    Hmmmmm

    You do realize that SLI is pretty much the exact opposite of how you described yourself in the OP?
    She’s SLI
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE

    Best description of functions:
    http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

  25. #145

    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    EIE-Ni
    Posts
    130
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    OMG this person is not SLI!

  26. #146

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,538
    Mentioned
    258 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sounds way more ENFp than INFp. Especially what you were judgmental about, and also the tone of your posts is more Delta than Beta.

    I don't judge most situations as unhealthy/healthy as I'm a very shades of gray type of person. (both SEI/IEI are like this imnsho) Very very few things are all good or all bad... every cloud has its silver lining and every rose as its thorns. So I don't know the specifics of your situation, but maybe you are being too hard on yourself by labeling yourself as 'unhealthy.' Unhealthy is more of a physical thing to me lol, like the person is too fat or out of shape and doesn't eat the right things.

  27. #147
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've already settled on a type and you guys keep talking about me in my absence. It's both fun and scary to watch .
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  28. #148
    queentiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    236
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ToTheMoon View Post
    I've already settled on a type and you guys keep talking about me in my absence. It's both fun and scary to watch .
    Love your attitude hun, don't fall into the pitfall of letting others dictate your type like I did for a while
    "You're just like me, you're out your mind
    I know it's strange, we're both the crazy kind
    You're tellin' me that I'm insane
    Boy, don't pretend that you don't love the pain"

  29. #149
    عالم نفسي thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    7,946
    Mentioned
    277 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beautiful sky View Post
    She’s SLI
    You can say that all you want, it doesn't make it true

    You said "it's common for a person to manifest their dual nature". Sorry but this is complete nonsense. People don't and can't consistently act like their duals. Confusing someone for their dual type is a relatively rare phenomenon.

  30. #150
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    23,883
    Mentioned
    576 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    You can say that all you want, it doesn't make it true

    You said "it's common for a person to manifest their dual nature". Sorry but this is complete nonsense. People don't and can't consistently act like their duals. Confusing someone for their dual type is a relatively rare phenomenon.
    She said it too
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE

    Best description of functions:
    http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

  31. #151
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Umm, guys, please, don't get into arguments in this silly old thread. I'm just a stranger on the internet, who cares if I'm right or wrong? I picked a type for myself after careful consideration of many apects and I'm by far the best expert on myself there is, so no one can really contradict me. Not to sound rude but why make it a personal agenda and power play when it's about another person none of you really know? Let's take a breath and step back and make it impersonal and leave it at that .
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  32. #152
    عالم نفسي thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    7,946
    Mentioned
    277 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ToTheMoon View Post
    Umm, guys, please, don't get into arguments in this silly old thread. I'm just a stranger on the internet, who cares if I'm right or wrong? I picked a type for myself after careful consideration of many apects and I'm by far the best expert on myself there is, so no one can really contradict me. Not to sound rude but why make it a personal agenda and power play when it's about another person none of you really know? Let's take a breath and step back and make it impersonal and leave it at that .
    I honestly don't care what type you are. What I do care about is people understanding socionics, and having honest discussions where people support their arguments. Fortunately most people here would probably get that what @Beautiful sky is saying doesn't make any sense. If you don't then I won't try to convince you. btw, you can close the thread to prevent further discussion, since you've figured it all out (for now, at least).

    Also, typing someone requires both knowledge of the person and knowledge of the theory. Usually the latter is the more critical factor.

  33. #153
    FarDraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    TIM
    5w6-38 sp/sx
    Posts
    357
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi View Post
    @ToTheMoon
    some advice you never asked for: Just take your whatever-type, stick to it as long as it makes sense to you. You don't have to prove anything to anyone.
    I agree with this with one caveat: be open to changing your type as new information is available. For example, I have typed myself INTp for the time being despite some thinking I'm INTj, though I haven't had enough relationships (impersonal, personal, business, etc.) to type myself on the basis of IR. Instead, I read through the profiles (carefully), found that I don't relate to Ti base as much as I do Ni base (after thorough reflection, though I'm still contemplating this) and went from there. As I obtain more IR information, I can reevaluate my type on that basis and try to reconcile that information with information I have already accumulated.

    Moreover, type has a tendency to fluctuate when you're either uncertain of what you want or who you are, so waiting until you've comfortably settled might be the best way to be certain about your type. I don't know about your situation financially, mentally, emotionally, etc. so only you can determine whether you're "ready" to be typed. Typing too firmly preemptively leads one to idealize themselves to something that isn't true. I've found myself falling into this trap in recent months - I always have to remind myself that I'm not at the stage where I can be completely certain about these things.
    ----- FarDraft, 2019

  34. #154
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Meh, I'm back to square one again, of course. I had already forgotten why I chose SLI and I came here to remember and I almost convinced myself reading my explanation post. Almost. It felt kind of confirmation biased. I got suspicious and skeptical about it. It's too easy to explain different behaviours with functions. I still can't see myself and still feel like too many functions apply to my experience of being myself, whatever that self is because I can't tell anymore (if I was ever able to). Le sigh.

    Anyone give me a link to a good, honest and scientific description of functions, please? No psychological/behavioral mumbo-jumbo, please, if at all possible.
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  35. #155
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,044
    Mentioned
    167 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    sweety, not sure that's possible :/

    but have you read Jung's descriptions of the functions? https://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm

    most people in here give most credit to his descriptions, just keep in mind that that stuff was written 100 years ago... and that socionics has developed from that point on, with new descriptions of the functions and the types.

    and here's the founder of the socion with an essay, The Dual Nature of Man, where she gives some practical descriptions, how the types look like and other little things. I don't really find her text very useful, for many reasons, but it's one of the best attempts at "objectivity", for sure.


    here's a little fav of mine instead, easy and nice http://www.the16types.info/info/index.htm

  36. #156

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    9,594
    Mentioned
    868 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ooo View Post
    most people in here give most credit to his descriptions
    most people here "give most credit" to Socionics functions descriptions which are more correct and wider than outdated, muddy and partly wrong expanded Jung's texts about functions. what is interesting at Jung - the core terms about functions only, but not his incompetent thinking about consequences of own core theory which he could not even to understand good as mistyped himself and have misleaded by his texts alike you to think yourself as EII while having opposite quadra type IEI - it's much due to the mess about functions his texts do
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  37. #157
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,044
    Mentioned
    167 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    if even Jung fails about typology.. what do you expect out of every goddamn mortal, Soli?

    I'm just human : )

  38. #158
    ToTheMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Poland
    TIM
    not this again
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @ooo
    thanks for the links! Good reads. I did read me some Jung recently, and decided to stick to just the function descriptions. Not really sure I follow all of his writings but it is the core, right? I like to think that it's good to know the source of all sources.
    @Sol
    I find that descriptions vary from author to author. Likely because authors themselves being just one type perceive the other types from their personal bias, no matter how much they try to remain objective. That's the curse of being human. I relate to way too many type descriptions, that's also the curse of being human. That's why I want to look into basics, ie. functions, I believe they would be less muddied by biases than types.
    At this again.
    9w1 sx/so
    Cancer Sun, Mercury and Mars, Virgo Ascendant and Moon, Taurus Venus. Fortunately spiced up with Uranus on IC.

  39. #159

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    9,594
    Mentioned
    868 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ToTheMoon View Post
    I find that descriptions vary from author to author.
    There are 2 authors the core theory of which you should take into account. Jung and Augustinavichiute. The more core the theory is and closer to Jung - the more trust it has.
    Anything other - you should not trust and to use until will get the typing and watching people experience (takes years) in types where will see it may be correct, or better when will see objective experiments to proof that sometimes.

    What you may read at other authors is interesting only in borders of the said by those 2 above. More in borders of core basics, core definitions said by them.
    Those other authors may say the same by better words and without redundant "water" (Jung and Augustinavichiute have weird language), without much of doubtful (Augustinavichiute's texts, partly Jung). You read their popular Socionics books and texts to get the core theory by easier way. All other authors have the same, similar part - it mostly fits to Jung and Augustinavichiute core theory. And the more often you meet something what is similar - the more trust to that you should to have.

    So instead of paying attention on differences between authors - you should find and do this for similarities.
    It's what I did and this allows me to see the core theory working as should. In general, as nontypes factors are significant and may distort to some degree a behavior. Alike was with me, when my surface behavior since some painful events (and because of LSI father influence) got many traits common for introverts and so I got in tests more often introvertion, had significant and some monthes of doubts about E/I in myself.

    You'll can understand own type by IR effects sometimes. Only the correct type may fit to what you'll get. To irrational impressions which people inspire in you. In case you'll be typing people IRL.
    SLI is not your type.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  40. #160
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,044
    Mentioned
    167 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ToTheMoon View Post
    @ooo
    thanks for the links! Good reads. I did read me some Jung recently, and decided to stick to just the function descriptions. Not really sure I follow all of his writings but it is the core, right? I like to think that it's good to know the source of all sources.
    agreed

    also, I place functions descriptions before anything else, functions + model A actually. the descriptions of the types, as you've said yourself, tend to be super confusing, I recognize myself in at least 4 profiles (depending on who writes the articles - as you've said yourself, again-), so yeah, if you play within the rules functions + model, you can come close to addressing the right type... I think all the rest is just stereotypes.

    good luck in finding out what your socion type is ~

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •