Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Silke's mistakes on LSE subtypes

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    318
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Silke's mistakes on LSE subtypes

    Silke made the mistake of classifying Sarah Kaufman as the Te subtype (why?). Sarah Kaufman is the Si subtype. The Te-subtype is never as versatile as she is and Te-subtype women are excessively sensitive and never that competitive nor well-coordinated nor publicly outspoken. It should be obvious from reading her twitter page that she's the Si subtype.

    Silke incorrectly classified Christopher Hitchens as LSE-Te (why?). Christopher Hitchens was the Si subtype. The Si subtype is more charming, adaptable, observant, better at deductive logic (unlike the Te-subtype, they always seem process and negativist), more articulate, combative with people they don't know, and is usually heavier, and better-looking and has better social skills while actually liking people less and has better memory. Christopher Hitchens was all of those things. The Te subtype is never a public intellectual and they're nowhere near as quick and adaptable and funny while simultaneously being not ugly/stupid-looking. The Si subtype is more elegant/feminine. the Te subtype is pretty routine. The Si subtype is more in control of their emotions. The Te subtype doesn't usually care to compete (the Si subtype is the opposite), and is too tolerant of over-conformity (the Si subtype is the opposite) and they're nowhere near as creative and even if they are creative, they're not as elegant.

    Arthur Conan Doyle was probably the Si subtype. Why did Silke say he was the Te-subtype?

    One of the most visible contrasts ever between the Si-subtype and the Te-subtype is shown in the Presidential debates of 2000 between Gore (Si-sub) and Bush (Te-sub). Gore was more combative, didn't plan as much (Bush held his hand out to shake his hand while Gore waited), more flexible (Bush kept getting stuck on certain things and he was nowhere near as direct, e.g., it took him forever to counter Gore's very dishonest and vague statement that his tax cut proposal was for "the wealthiest one percent" and when he did it he was too agreeable), more elegant, had a no bullshit attitude, more articulate, more detailed, and more objective/impersonal, less oriented to the American people and more to the topics, situations, and facts than Bush was. Gore was highly Open to Experience while Bush was not. The Si subtype is often mistaken for ILI-Te (for which many people have mistaken both Hitchens and Gore but it's obvious that Hitchens and Gore are driven by Ne and not Ni-valuing) at times, I guess because both have great associative memories and the way they argue and criticize with their wit.
    Last edited by Disturbed; 10-08-2019 at 10:09 PM.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    318
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I feel like an idiot for this thread. Sarah Kaufman may have been the Te subtype. Christopher Hitchens was an ESI-Se. Al Gore may have been an ESI-Se. But I'm a lot better a discerning between ESI subtypes and knowing who is an ESI now, though I'm not perfect at knowing who is an ESI (or any other type). My earliest focus had been on SLE and ILE, I got those two mixed up occasionally at first, just a few people (mistook a few SLE for ILE) but the differences are usually pretty obvious. Both SLE-Ti and ILE-Ti are more common in females, ESI is way more common in males.

    One thing that made me confuse ESI, ILI, and LSE is that LSE-Si and ILI-Te are said to be heavy (and ILI-Te said to have no neck), yet ESI-Se can also be very heavy and have a neck that's not prominent.

  3. #3
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    25,408
    Mentioned
    631 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Oh lord typing celebrities is a joke
    -
    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

  4. #4
    myresearch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    381
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Why Silke?

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    318
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by myresearch View Post
    Why Silke?
    He didn't list the typings here? Maybe it was someone else, but I thought it was Silke.=)

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    12,179
    Mentioned
    1114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sarah Kaufman not LSE

    Quote Originally Posted by Beautiful sky View Post
    Oh lord typing celebrities is a joke
    needs good typing skills and relevant method as VI to be other
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

Posting Permissions

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