which type do you dislike the most?

[Protozoa]

Socionics may not measure extreme deviances but it's not difficult to extrapolate likely conclusions if we take the functions/information elements far enough. For example, IME, I don't believe I've encountered someone with diagnosed Schizophrenia (delusions, hallucinations, disorganized thinking, abnormal motor behavior) who wasn't an Ne lead or didn't have high D, usually valued Ne, which is all about piercing multiple veils of reality, recognizing ever emergent possibilities and permutations of objects, drawing parallels and associations between seemingly unrelated things, etc.... It shouldn't be difficult to see how Ne gone awry could manifest itself as a distorted perception of reality. Just like any extreme logical type with a 1D ethical function (which can manifest as a biologically induced form of "empathy blindness") could easily be a psychopath (which exists along a spectrum). What makes a disorder a disorder is a disruption of normal physical or mental functions.

One of the things I like about many of the Sociotype profiles is that, unlike MBTI, they give you the pretty and the not to so pretty aspects of how any particular sociotype can manifest--read Strat's harsh take on LIEs and you'll see that she's essentially epitomizing LIE as the "corporate psychopath." lol And whereas I can certainly see glimpses of myself in even her more unflattering descriptions, most of the LIEs I know are not as bad as all that...but some are as bad or worse. But, again, they occupy the extreme margins.

Okay, so that's interesting. I think the socionics model is based on or underrided by Jungian dualistic aspects of personality. The idea that we repress certain dualistic aspects of ourselves to serve our egos. And duality has a place in helping with and balancing the repression of complementary egos.

That said, the psychopath I did know well probably fit best into LSI. However, he was very different compared to other LSIs in that he didn't have the emotions they did to begin with. The other LSIs repressed their emotions in favor of being cold rational people. Once you got to know them, there was a warmness they had. The psychopath LSI didn't repress anything and didn't really show a warmness as I got to know him; he also wasn't someone I could jar on an emotional level. He could however be insulted and annoyed by attempts to degrade him. But that was really it. He was okay to have fun with, but there just wasn't any deep emotions there.

So I don't know. But if Strat thinks LIEs are best represented as corporate psychopaths, maybe she's conflating TeNi psychopaths with F repressed LIEs. I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up before? (maybe it has)

[Alonzo]

Okay, so that's interesting. I think the socionics model is based on or underrided by Jungian dualistic aspects of personality. The idea that we repress certain dualistic aspects of ourselves to serve our egos. And duality has a place in helping with and balancing the repression of complementary egos.

That said, the psychopath I did know well probably fit best into LSI. However, he was very different compared to other LSIs in that he didn't have the emotions they did to begin with. The other LSIs repressed their emotions in favor of being cold rational people. Once you got to know them, there was a warmness they had. The psychopath LSI didn't repress anything and didn't really show a warmness as I got to know him; he also wasn't someone I could jar on an emotional level. He could however be insulted and annoyed by attempts to degrade him. But that was really it. He was okay to have fun with, but there just wasn't any deep emotions there.

So I don't know. But if Strat thinks LIEs are best represented as corporate psychopaths, maybe she's conflating TeNi psychopaths with F repressed LIEs. I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up before? (maybe it has)

Yeah, psychopathy exists along a continuum with extents and degrees, though a substantial amount of "empathy blindness" must be present, which is why it could theoretically apply to any sociotype with 1D ethics. Self-described psychopath James Fallon, the author of The Psychopath Inside: A Neuroscientist's Personal Journey into the Dark Side of the Brain, self types as ILE/ENTp--granted, he identifies as "borderline" and "sub-clinical" vs a "categorical" psychopath but he says that the only mitigating circumstance was that he was loved as a child. lol Throughout my life, I'd say that I've most often come across the "sub-clinical" variety who were usually Fi PoLR types (which shouldn't be surprising if you think it through), LSIs (2 of whom were snipers for the US military), and Te leads (LIE > LSE [especially enneagram 8s]). Here is Strat on LIEs>

- The ability to lead a dangerous and risky game with minimal number of chances,
- ability to "come out of the water dry" under most difficult and most complicated circumstances,
- ability to find support (resources, reserves, associates, allies, creditors) in the most critical moment,
- a talent for leadership, ability to favorably predispose people towards himself, to persuade them, to lead them after oneself,
- ability to quickly come into trust and to easily strike up friendships,
- ability to keep imperturbable and to encourage partners by impending good luck and positive prospects in the most desperate, deadend, and hopeless situations,
- ability to almost instantly (with intuitive insight) come up and think through a plan of action,
- ability to make time work to his advantage.

All of these qualities and features of his TIM help the LIE to become extremely successful in all (even if questionable) enterprises.
- allow the LIE to keep a part of the team, even if with his own actions he "drowns" other team members,
- allow the LIE to keep afloat in all cases and under any circumstances, to remain on top and in control of the situation at all times,
- allow him to drive away potential competitors and block the demands for rights of the partners, who have extinguished their material resources as well as their business proactive or creative potential;
- allow the LIE to displace others from his team while not getting driven away himself.

Of course, all of these qualities allow the LIE to succeed where others will inevitably "drown" (or "break their necks").

Gamma Quadra doesn't like entering into competitions and participating in contests and pageants (with the exception of the hungry for a venture, risk-taker and hot-tempered "player" LIE, who is easily drawn into contention)

...

By accusations of inadequacy it is possible (and even then only in the most extreme cases) to bring back to reason and moral sense a degraded, compulsive gambler LIE, Jack, who lives like a parasite on the means of his family and his partner and squanders money with his friends.

...

showing carelessness and deliberate irresponsibility, the LIE depletes the material resources of his partner, redistributing them as "resources of the team" in his favor, and then moves out of his partner's control, playing a role of a self-determined, reckless, uncontrollable, and irresponsible "simpleton", who has no idea about "team relations", thereby attaining unlimited freedom of action (which mutes his own fears on the complex of "tied hands"), and by this simultaneously blocking or hindering the activity of his partner, depriving him or her of financial support, and with it, of the possibility to continue his work further and to control the intentional use of their shared material resources.

...

Striving in all cases to remain in control of the situation, the LIE tries to control ethical relationships and model them in a way that is convenient for him, trying to extract from them maximum benefits for himself and his future plans. Wanting to remove all obstacles and eliminate all hindrances that arise on his way, LIE blocks professional and business activity of his partners, depriving them of financial (and therefore legal) support.
Puzzling his partner and putting him at an impasse with his "wild" and "most absurd" escapades, the LIE often plays the role of an unpredictable, unruly person (with no reason in his head), who, nevertheless, dashes to undertake something, to keep up everywhere, to control everyone, to make friends with all, and to build relations in a clear-cut, organized, and spotless manner (despite his own chaotic and inconsistent behaviors). As a result, all that the LIE achieves on the level of personal agreements, he proceeds to destroy by his own contradictory actions, making an impression of an unprincipled, irresponsible, and dishonest person (especially when it comes to appropriation of the material resources of others).
- But this does not apply absolutely to all members of this TIM ...

lol@the highlighted. Compare all that to what's found here in this rather sensationalist article (written by Robert Hare, the man who created the Hare Psychopathy Checklist and wrote Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go To Work): https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/a...ing-psychopath

In the Snakes in Suits book, Hare notes:

Several abilities – skills, actually – make it difficult to see psychopaths for who they are. First, they are motivated to, and have a talent for, ‘reading people’ and for sizing them up quickly. They identify a person’s likes and dislikes, motives, needs, weak spots, and vulnerabilities… Second, many psychopaths come across as having excellent oral communication skills. In many cases, these skills are more apparent than real because of their readiness to jump right into a conversation without the social inhibitions that hamper most people… Third, they are masters of impression management; their insight into the psyche of others combined with a superficial – but convincing – verbal fluency allows them to change their situation skillfully as it suits the situation and their game plan.


The authors also note that many psychopaths, of course, are not suited for the business environment:


Some do not have enough social or communication skill or education to interact successfully with others, relying instead on threats, coercion, intimidation, and violence to dominate others and to get what they want. Typically, such individuals are manifestly aggressive and rather nasty, and unlikely to charm victims into submission, relying on their bullying approach instead. This book (Snakes in Suits) is less about them than about those who are willing to use their ‘deadly charm’ to con and manipulate others.

IME, Se valuing, especially strong, high D Se valuing psychopathic types are more likely to go down this particular path.