.
.
Last edited by user123; 06-30-2022 at 08:54 AM.
Fe
IEE
I don't know would you post a side profile picture of yourself please
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
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
not EII, at least
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
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
Sol says that user123 is not EII, but he is not sure about whether she is IEE or some other type besides EII. I agree, I thought you could be EII based on your photos, but that is not very likely according to your video. I think your type could be more apparent if you upload a longer video.
How about one in English?
IEE
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
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
the vid is down. :/
among F-N - most for IEI
seems P. J would prepared better to make longer clip
Mmm, I can't really determine. I noticed you pause a couple times, which I was informed takes away from IEE in my own videos, I do see some Ne in your movements I think, but I can't really determine which is stronger of those two typings...
@thegreenfaerie
instead of being informed by random noobs, better read Filatova's book
about nonverbal a little of useful for novices is there
then you may try to notice all that in my types examples
in case of suggestive Ne - you may get especially good use in practicing nonverbal VI and developing this region
if you'd had base Ne you'd pointed the main attention on general impressions, but not concrete behavior. more to say - about which some noob just said by doubtful reasons - you seem naive in Ne related opinions
Well, I do thank you for the book recommend Sol, but you know very little about me and about where I'm strong/confident and where I am weak. The most concrete person here is you and the way you type people is wack and isn't even open to nuance and the various shades of one's typing. Si base is laughable to anyone who knows me, as is E9. I'm sure you understand the system, but you seem to have little understanding of people and extremely narrow views. It's hard to see you as anything but Ne PoLr to be honest. This is User's thread though and I'm not going to comment further. I know plenty of others who have been invested in socionics a long time and I will speak with them and would rather not speak with you.
Actually I do have one last thing to say, which is to stop following people around and harassing them about their type. Your criticism is not constructive and at this point not welcome.
ESE.
Last edited by Faith; 05-23-2020 at 01:04 PM.
I was thinking IEE.... Not totally sure though.
IEE seems likely. Was that Polish?
longer vide
Last edited by user123; 06-21-2020 at 09:06 AM.
IEE confirmed.
Fe. so I*FP. where IEI is more possible
you may try my IR test
Nah, the dimensionality doesn't mean it's preferably visible. It's only used demonstratively, when truly required. Actual Fe egos use it either constantly (E*E) or creatively (*EI).
I can often tell Fi users in videos because I get a breathless feeling from watching their monologues, it lacks the natural Fe inflection that lets me breath. They don't tend to interact with the camera in a natural way.
I wonder if non-Fe users even notice this?
“I have never tried that before, so I think I should definitely be able to do that.” --- Pippi Longstocking
Your understanding of Fe Leads and Fe Demos is wrong and seem to be based in imaginations rather than real observation or any theoretical source.
IEEs are Emotivists and ESEs are constructivists.
So if you are seeing a "lack of emotional contact" its not because of Fe demo but because you are observing a constructivist type.Constructivist
1. Tend to minimize the emotional elements of interaction, preferring to focus on the 'business' elements.
Constructivists
In contact with other people, constructivist types try to reduce or completely avoid any stages of emotional contact (to "skip" it). They do not consider overall emotional attitude as a necessary element of interaction (in interaction, they discuss or do something together, not always emotionally "re-adjusting")
Constructivists try to get into the right mindset for an activity and it takes time for them to get from one mindset to another. When they are at home, they are mentally prepared for anything that could happen at home and when they are at work, they switch over to work-mentality. They can get overwhelmed by emotions because once they get into an emotional state, they stay in that emotional state for a long time. Constructivists avoid emotional contact with others and they don't think it's necessary to adjust to the conversation emotionally. They use automatic polite responses and customs, like starting with "how are you?" or offering their guests coffee or tea. Practical conversation (talking "business") is easier for them. They like to repeat emotional states - rereading books, watching movies that they have already seen and revisiting places they liked. They avoid movies, situations and people who give them a negative mindset, because they have a difficult time getting rid of that mindset. Constructivists use emotional anchors (carefully chosen music, books, movies) to keep or strengthen their internal emotional state.
Emotivist
1. Tend to concentrate foremost on the emotional background of interaction, with 'business' a secondary concern.
Emotivists
In interaction with other people, they try to get them into the "correct" emotional state (or readjust themselves). In interaction they are drawn into the overall emotional orientation (they distinguish communication and relating as a separate type of activity—as "immersion into the atmosphere"). While discussing some matter, an emotivist may "wander off" away from the subject and "go off" on an emotional exchange.
Emotivists try to enter the emotional atmosphere of the conversation and they try to keep the emotion in the conversation positive. They can talk about various things they have no interest in or do not believe in simply for the sake of maintaining a "positive spirit". Talking business is more difficult and the conversation topic can wander off into emotional exchange. They try to get new experiences and new emotions, which is why they travel to new places and rarely watch movies they have already seen. In emotivists calls for action/requests are not critically estimated and because of it they can get overwhelmed by them. After getting into a theme they stay in that mode of operation for a prolonged period of time and have difficulty switching, "disconnecting" (and because of it try to avoid unpleasant requests).
Last edited by Faith; 05-24-2020 at 01:05 AM.
You have no experience with this forum user to say what she is or not without a doubt. You speak and type based in nonsense not experience. Reinin speaks about experiences and I also have close experience with IEE and ESE. Your experience with such types is not more valuable than mine. Also Reinin proves my point. And if you self type LSI you are also 1DFe, and my Ti is also 4D (but yours obviously not?) so you are shooting another dumb attack instead of actually provide some real argument to support any of your claims. As you often do.
Many Reinin dichotomies are crap and shouldn't be used for initial typing. They're theoretical wankery at best. You're using a theoretical bs "constructivist/emotivist" dichotomy when all that is needed is Socionics 101.
If you truly are claiming that EIE and ESE don't constantly modulate their expression in ways such as voice inflection, natural pausing (very important to prevent the "breathless" feeling) and clear and varying facial expressions due to them being "constructivists" according to Reinin, and LSE, LIE and LII are dripping with such displays because they are "emotivists", I can't help you. You're obviously far too clueless. Use your own understanding (that Ti) instead of parroting other people's dubious theories and accepting them without scrutiny (truly the negative side of Te).
"Constructivist and emotivist" dichotomy may or may not have some subtle effects on choices of conversation topics, but being automatically more engaging or less engaging with expressivity is not it.
Lmao, thats not even what it means. You clearly have not clue what you are speaking about. Why don't you use that 'strong Ti' to just actually take some time to truly think and read and learn instead of parroting made up baseless bs over and over to try to cover the fact that you are just too lazy to think critically?
Mb that and using more than Socionics 101 to type ppl will help you to not actually end up again in a long term relationship with your conflictor.
Last edited by Faith; 05-24-2020 at 12:52 PM.
First, I'm not repeating anything, its evident that you have no clue about what you are talking about, probably you haven't even read reinin text yet.
Secondly, what arguments? unless you call "arguments" to childish socionics insults about IEs, I think you provided nothing that could be called that. Because I wouldn't call an argument to say that Reinin is crap, wankery and bs and can't be used to type ppl and we all instead should accept your typings that are based in your almighty experience and own understanding, experience and understanding that just proves that you are not very able to differentiate Fe Lead from Fe Demo, neither Ne Demo from Ne Lead.
And finally, fine, I also have no interest in arguing with you since you are actually a non constructive type, you self type as an emotivist, so you actually just care about the emotional background instead of concrete info and solutions, so another point for Reinin. Good luck next time you try to type someone while locking down in your eco chamber and ignoring Reinin and Aushra opinions.
ESE's are emotive. Yup. They are probably more driven to drive atmosphere whereas IEE's reflect on atmosphere on individual basis more. In this sense it applies. Obviously this cannot be seen from the vids.
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
It is supposedly observable from very first stances. I find it actually useful for distinguishing between types and VI from ppl you know little.
Constructivists: "I try to reduce emotional contact. I always start with a set of automatic responses (give slippers, pour some tea or coffee...)" "It is so much easier to come into contact over some objective matter (interaction by pertaining to the matter at hand)" "I prefer when people offer me concrete solutions to my problems—it is better than consolations" "If I wish to help, then of course by action. Very rarely I call just to inquire how things are going. I track moods in parallel"
Emotivist: "First of all, I attempt to create a comfortable psychological atmosphere. I try to direct new people into the situation, "build bridges", help them "accommodate" so that they feel at ease" "I strike up new contacts with words, not actions" "Before a dialogue I as if check the emotional states of people involved and try to positively orient them" "It's easier to change the emotional background" "I can talk about various things that I don't believe in or have no interest in simply "for the spirit" of the conversation" "I need new experiences so I am likely to visit a new place. If I return, then I return to a place where "the road has changed" since I last visited"
Ofc ethics still ethics, logicals the same. It doesn't mean logics magically change into ethicals or the opposite, I think is more about in what types direct their energy and how they make contact with the world and others. I think Logical types that are emotivists focus more on the emotional atmosphere in interactions than giving importance to topics. Topics, information etc, are more like an are in second place.
A good example could be just to observe how forum users make contact and what they prioritize in, for example think in how interact emotivists like Adam, Sol, North, etc its obvious that for them, is more important to build up bridges to ppl than stick to theory.
Examples of concrete types would be N9L, Ashlesha, ExEs (who are often absent little participative despite being Fe), and in this case in point, User123, who came with the reason of being typed and and limits her emotive contact/interaction with ppl. Constructivist base most of their interactions in that way...how much or how little is someone/something constructive. They often try to be constructed or give it to others and not so much by the level of emotivity in their relations.
C: ILE, ESE, EIE, SLE, ILI, ESI, EII, SLI
E: SEI, LII, LSI, IEI, SEE, LIE, LSE, IEE
Last edited by Faith; 05-29-2020 at 02:04 AM.
Curious on the dichotomies though, where you decide which one is more important in determining someone’s type? It seems rare to fit all of the dichotomies for one’s type.
You don't type only by reinin dichotomies. But how do you determine Fe demo (xEE) from Fe Lead in VI? There's no objective way to do that besides dichotomies. F/T, I/E, N/S, and then reinin. You also can determine by lead, for example saying "hey, thats Ne". But interestingly no one mentioned anything about Ne in here. It was "oh she's not emotive enough so not ExE and since she self types Delta NF must be so". Ppl don't know how to differentiate between inert ethics from contact ethics. Its unreasonable.
Thats why ppl typings in this forum sucks so much.
Last edited by Faith; 05-25-2020 at 12:57 AM.