Typology Random Thoughts

[SacredKnowing]

Reading more fully what he actually said, he actually seems to think a theory must be based on observations.

A theory can be an inaccurate explanation of observations, but it must be based on observations in order to be a theory. At least, a scientific one, which is the only meaningful sense.

It's a hypothesis that doesn't "need" to be demonstrated, but it would remain unproven if so. A hypothesis still must be a explanation of observations. I don't regard Socionics as even a hypothesis because it lacks precise definition of alleged observations.

What about music theory? Number theory? Computational complexity theory? All of the cool theories are not based on observations.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

What about music theory? Number theory? Computational complexity theory? All of the cool theories are not based on observations.

They could be, if based on observation. I think a good argument could be made for the mathematical universe being a dimension of reality, although I don't currently lean towards such a view.

[SacredKnowing]

They could be, if based on observation. I think a good argument could be made for the mathematical universe being a dimension of reality, although I don't currently lean towards such a view.

Maybe a model is a theory that's not based on observation, and a theory is a model that's based on observation. What do you think about that?

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Maybe a model is a theory that's not based on observation, and a theory is a model that's based on observation. What do you think about that?

Maybe I'm too hardline about how words are actually used and too prone to insisting on my usage.

A model to be me sounds like it's a set of ideas or notions whether or not they have evidence to it, but a theory could just be one idea or statement that explains an observation.

Basically, people have speculations, conjectures, intuitions etc. which may or may not be based on observations.

Then there is the hypothesis, which is a plausible (possible by current understanding) explanation of observations, which can be tested to be established to be true or false to a level of confidence.

Then there is the (scientific) theory which is an explanation substantiated with evidence (observations) to a certain level of confidence.

Then there are scientific laws, which are categorically true explanations of reality for specific conditions: which have been demonstrated to be true in all such cases. The laws of gravity are true in classical physics for example, and are generally useful to be regarded as such, but at the quantum level, our understanding needs to be supplemented. As I understand, gravity doesn't actually exist as a distinct entity.

In the time of Euclid, it was held to be true that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, but this was based on an incomplete understanding of reality, and an incomplete definition. If Euclid had said this applies to planar geometry, he would have been correct. Unless somehow our understanding is still incomplete.

[SacredKnowing]

In the time of Euclid, it was held to be true that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, but this was based on an incomplete understanding of reality, and an incomplete definition. If Euclid had said this applies to planar geometry, he would have been correct. Unless somehow our understanding is still incomplete.

By the definition of a straight line, it is the shortest distance between two points. Therefore this is true for any geometry that has an object named "line" (which is to say, all of them). What Euclid presumed was that given a straight line and a point not on that line, the geometer could construct only one line that is parallel, and that it was logically impossible for there to be a second parallel line that could be constructed through the same point (Why? Who knew how ancient people thought?). Other geometries, such as hyperbolic, allow the geometer to construct more than one parallel line (again, given a fixed point and line beforehand).

[Socionics Is A Cult]

@SacredKnowing

On a sphere, the shortest distance between two points is not a straight line, and spacetime is distorted by mass so that the shortest distance between two points is curved.

Hence there are non-Euclidean triangles.

[SacredKnowing]

@Enters Laughing

You are equivocating line with geodesic. What is depicted on the right diagram are three geodesic. By Euclid's first postulate, a line is the shortest distance between two points, and in absolute geometry all theorems following from the first post late hold in all possible models.

[Still Alive]

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/NpvpYTUSdQ0

I think she resembles Jack from WSS

[Still Alive]

@Enters Laughing the guy in your signature looks a lot like Vsauce

[qaz00]

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/NpvpYTUSdQ0

I think she resembles Jack from WSS

C-SEE-Fi, Jack ILE>EIE

[Still Alive]

@Enters Laughing

[qaz00]

@Enters Laughing

EIE

[Still Alive]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toQ5LdpLzPk

It's almost like similar subtypes get along with each other

[Still Alive]

@one: I have been slowly getting back into Billiards again after not playing for years (used to play at bars in my early twenties against friends of my siblings). I've watched a lot of videos with games of Efren Reyes (who is of course an IEI) in the past couple of days. It really seems to be almost a national sport in the Philippines, I wonder how much you know about him. He has a very likeable personality, no wonder he got famous (and I got hooked on the way he plays). Guess I will try to improve my skills a bit in the next months. I do sometimes dislike that I switch between my interests so much but what to do.

https://gemoo.com/tools/upload-video...76372031115264

[godslave]

If there is indeed 16 types, it is highly probable that each type has its own spectrum i.e an x number of ways for an individual to be that type. In socionics each of the 16 type images can be thought of as a picture within the type spectrum of each type. It's like a very short static sample of a much larger and longer waveform. You can think of each sociotype like a prism that would decompose the visual spectrum in different colors.

Imho, most people* with decent typing identification skills don't built more than two or three type images per type (core TIM (no subtype) + two subtypes). However when we use DCNH, and according to this , we might have a basis of 12 subtypes per types and certain number (?) of additional possible permutations. But that does not come even close to the x number of points contained in each type spectrum. One could think as each carrier of a TIM as the unique representative of his or her subtype.

As I've already said it in this forum, sociotypes are not the entire personality. Indeed, the personality is a unique iteration of an individual's way of being resulting of factors that, for the most part, depend of his or her biography. The sociotype is just one aspect of the personality albeit substantial. As a matter of fact, "Sociotypes" (an SHS nomenclature) are closer to the Temperaments (general behavior) than TIMs which deal essentially with the metabolization of information aspects.

Consequently, it is possible that a significant amount of people interested in typology might indeed share the same type. Let's face it, most people don't even know about typology and wouldn't care if they did anyway !

# @Ikite iru is right !

* Btw, each time we say "most people" we are talking about ourselves from our "superego" functions. It's another way of saying "I am led by society to think/feel/sense/intuit [information related to the superego IEs]". That's something to keep in mind imho.

Edit 2 : Reframed the first part of the second paragraph about type images and subtypes.

[one]

@one: I have been slowly getting back into Billiards again after not playing for years (used to play at bars in my early twenties against friends of my siblings). I've watched a lot of videos with games of Efren Reyes (who is of course an IEI) in the past couple of days. It really seems to be almost a national sport in the Philippines, I wonder how much you know about him. He has a very likeable personality, no wonder he got famous (and I got hooked on the way he plays). Guess I will try to improve my skills a bit in the next months. I do sometimes dislike that I switch between my interests so much but what to do.

https://gemoo.com/tools/upload-video...76372031115264

Oh yeah I agree he could be IEI. Maybe he’s just super focused on games though, because he is never constantly in the news because of random shenanigans unlike other players/personalities here.

[one]

Hm now that I think about it I hate being too focused myself. Offering life to something or being passionate feels bad to me lol though when I wanna be competitive or fixate for some time I can, but they have to end up part of my life like it’s just a random habit. Idk if it’s related to type/subtype though.

[Socionics Is Not A Cult]

“What progress we are making. In the Middle Ages they would have burned me. Now they are content with burning my books.” ― Gulenko

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Abraham - secretly IEI by nature
Moses - secretly IEI by nature
David - secretly IEI by nature
Solomon - secretly IEI by nature
Homer - secretly IEI by nature
Thales of Miletus - secretly IEI by nature
Pythagoras - secretly IEI by nature
Gautama Buddha - secretly IEI by nature
Confucius - secretly IEI by nature
Heraclitus - secretly IEI by nature
Herodotus - secretly IEI by nature
Socrates - secretly IEI by nature
Hippocrates - secretly IEI by nature
Plato - secretly IEI by nature
Aristotle - secretly IEI by nature
Alexander the Great - secretly IEI by nature
Archimedes - secretly IEI by nature
Julius Caesar - secretly IEI by nature
Mary, mother of Jesus - secretly IEI by nature
Saint Joseph - secretly IEI by nature
Cleopatra - secretly IEI by nature
Augustus - secretly IEI by nature
John the Baptist - secretly IEI by nature
Jesus - secretly IEI by nature
Saint Peter - secretly IEI by nature
Paul the Apostle - secretly IEI by nature
Augustine of Hippo - secretly IEI by nature
Muhammad - secretly IEI by nature
Charlemagne - secretly IEI by nature
Avicenna - secretly IEI by nature
Saladin - secretly IEI by nature
Genghis Khan - secretly IEI by nature
Marco Polo - secretly IEI by nature
Dante Alighieri - secretly IEI by nature
Timur - secretly IEI by nature
Johannes Gutenberg - secretly IEI by nature
Joan of Arc - secretly IEI by nature
Christopher Columbus - secretly IEI by nature
Leonardo da Vinci - secretly IEI by nature
Vasco da Gama - secretly IEI by nature
Niccolò Machiavelli - secretly IEI by nature
Nicolaus Copernicus - secretly IEI by nature
Michelangelo - secretly IEI by nature
Ferdinand Magellan - secretly IEI by nature
Martin Luther - secretly IEI by nature
Raphael - secretly IEI by nature
Suleiman the Magnificent - secretly IEI by nature
Galileo Galilei - secretly IEI by nature
William Shakespeare - secretly IEI by nature
René Descartes - secretly IEI by nature
Rembrandt - secretly IEI by nature
Blaise Pascal - secretly IEI by nature
Louis XIV of France - secretly IEI by nature
Isaac Newton - secretly IEI by nature
Antonio Vivaldi - secretly IEI by nature
Johann Sebastian Bach - secretly IEI by nature
Voltaire - secretly IEI by nature
Carl Linnaeus - secretly IEI by nature
Jean-Jacques Rousseau - secretly IEI by nature
Adam Smith - secretly IEI by nature
Immanuel Kant - secretly IEI by nature
Thomas Jefferson - secretly IEI by nature
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - secretly IEI by nature
Marie Antoinette - secretly IEI by nature
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart - secretly IEI by nature
Napoleon - secretly IEI by nature
Ludwig van Beethoven - secretly IEI by nature
Carl Friedrich Gauss - secretly IEI by nature
Lord Byron - secretly IEI by nature
Hans Christian Andersen - secretly IEI by nature
Charles Darwin - secretly IEI by nature
Edgar Allan Poe - secretly IEI by nature
Frédéric Chopin - secretly IEI by nature
Karl Marx - secretly IEI by nature
Fyodor Dostoevsky - secretly IEI by nature
Leo Tolstoy - secretly IEI by nature
Friedrich Nietzsche - secretly IEI by nature
Thomas Edison - secretly IEI by nature
Vincent van Gogh - secretly IEI by nature
Nikola Tesla - secretly IEI by nature
Sigmund Freud - secretly IEI by nature
Mahatma Gandhi - secretly IEI by nature
Vladimir Lenin - secretly IEI by nature
Albert Einstein - secretly IEI by nature
Joseph Stalin - secretly IEI by nature
Pablo Picasso - secretly IEI by nature
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk - secretly IEI by nature
Adolf Hı̇tler - secretly IEI by nature
J. R. R. Tolkien - secretly IEI by nature
Richard Nixon - secretly IEI by nature
Nelson Mandela - secretly IEI by nature
Henry Kissinger - secretly IEI by nature
Jimmy Carter - secretly IEI by nature
Elizabeth II - secretly IEI by nature
Che Guevara - secretly IEI by nature
Pope Francis - secretly IEI by nature
Muhammad Ali - secretly IEI by nature
Donald Trump - secretly IEI by nature
Sylvester Stallone - secretly IEI by nature
Michael Jackson - secretly IEI by nature

[Still Alive]

“What progress we are making. In the Middle Ages they would have burned me. Now they are content with burning my books.” ― Gulenko

Victor Freud

[Still Alive]

Hm now that I think about it I hate being too focused myself. Offering life to something or being passionate feels bad to me lol though when I wanna be competitive or fixate for some time I can, but they have to end up part of my life like it’s just a random habit. Idk if it’s related to type/subtype though.

So what I see with IEI most often is that when they start something they like, they become extremly obsessed. Reyes apparently spend every day playing pool when he was young and even sleeping at the bar or wherever he played. I just am not interested in this much dedication. I like to try new things, but 99% I do not need to be an expert, I just want to have fun.

Another player I like is Jeffrey de Luna because he has really sick break-shots

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ1c7ueDLWk

[Still Alive]

Imho, most people* with decent typing identification skills don't built more than two or three type images per type (core TIM (no subtype) + two subtypes). However when we use DCNH, and according to this , we might have a basis of 12 subtypes per types and certain number (?) of additional possible permutations. But that does not come even close to the x number of points contained in each type spectrum. One could think as each carrier of a TIM as the unique representative of his or her subtype.

I think the DCNH subtypes are a subtype section in itself and might be more related to genetics. It also seems to me that every type subsection has its own DCNH category, so even Dominant subtypes can be very reserved poets who don't say much if that's their subtype. they will just be very tall and actively organize get-togethers

[SacredKnowing]

Clotheshorse is either LSE or SLE. According to Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, a clotheshorse is a "conspicuously dressed person". It's very beta in nature, but because there's always an element of conventionality to being a clotheshorse (having lots of cool clothes is just being a cool guy), there's also a tint of delta quadra. It's probably both LSE ∪ SLE.

In science fiction, the Vulcans are alpha quadra while the Romulans are beta quadra. Both value , but in vastly different ways.

Clotheshorse is SLE.

[Adam Strange]

Bill Browder sounds exactly like a friend of mine whom I type as ESE-Si.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ3oWzjJsWY

[godslave]

Recently I came to realize that ultimately attachment styles theories are not that different from typology and can be put in parallel with the good old Temperaments. To me, any idea based on a premise that postulates "you are the way you are and/or behave the way you do because you are one of these types of persons which happen to have [something pertaining to some kind of human behavior classification] is de facto a typology. It doesn't matter how you call it and explain it at this point.

Personally I think that Bowlby's attachment theories are interesting and explain a lot but they are also overrated in my humble opinion. However, some people adhere to this theory as if it was the Alpha and Omega of all things Psychology or some kind of Rosetta stone that would help the Champollion of Psychology wannabes to decipher the mysteries of the language of our souls. Alas, and as much as I like to keep things simple, we all know that nothing is more complex than the human's mind. All we can do is to observe the expression of the Human condition in all its spectrum.

Indeed, great Arts esp the classic literature and plays since the dawn of civilisation have depicted the Human condition in its full expression. From the Ancient Greek Tragedies, all the way to our modern ways of expressing it, art has and continue to elevate us to a higher level of understanding of our very nature. Indeed, people will always soliloquize about the question of "Nature vs Nurture" and most of us will be biased to think that the answer is either one. Indeed, thinking in multifactorial terms is a luxury that requires to acquire a global vision of the spectrum of the Human condition, that takes the most valuable of all goods people can afford, time.

[Adam Strange]

Last year, my Gamma ESI-Se interior decorator chose the flowers for my garden, and it was a riot of bright, bold colors all summer.

This year, my Delta SLI-Te son chose the flowers for the garden, and it is all shades of green and light pastels.

I much prefer the Gamma garden.

[Distance]

Apparently Rusted Typology host is now an SEE. It makes better sense now, he was lively in animation all the time in his presentations.

He formerly typed as SLE.

[Still Alive]

@Socionics Is A Cult: I'm currently suspecting that the Biden situation will be similar to Liz Truss (she insisted on staying in office but ultimatively got kicked out due to too much pressure). I really think the democrats will insist on keeping Biden, but the media coverage and pressure will be extreme (in the sense that especially in the internet age people will pay a lot of attention to any media appearances by him from now on, Ni-doms will evaluate any sign of weakness or mental decline and use it to their advantage). Considering how poor Biden's state is, there will be plenty of situations that Republicans can use to their advantage to show how weak he is. The Democratic situation is so bad it's not even funny. Kamala Harris is a horrible choice, and people suggesting Hillary just make me laugh. What a trainwreck. The moral rationality of Dems is pretty much defenseless against momentum and propaganda. In France Macron blundered too. The Right will gain a lot of power in the near future and I still think Trump is going to win the election unless some miracle happens for the democrats.

Ultimatively though, the right has no concept for the future. They don't grasp global warming, nor will their anti-immigration view help against the declining birth-rate of the west. It's a desperate attempt to get back to how things were in the past, but the present doesn't even remotely look like the past anymore. It will just result in even more tension and declining political relationships and an attitude that's anti-science and more concrete. I also think that the right cannot do anything against the complex, interconnected systems that IEI have created on a global scale without reducing the wealth of pretty much the entire population they represent. I'm not a political analyst, though. I just see it through a vague typology lense. Trump is an idiot, but with everything that's gonna happen in the next years, I fear about what comes after him

[Socionics Is A Cult]

@Socionics Is A Cult: I'm currently suspecting that the Biden situation will be similar to Liz Truss (she insisted on staying in office but ultimatively got kicked out due to too much pressure). I really think the democrats will insist on keeping Biden, but the media coverage and pressure will be extreme (in the sense that especially in the internet age people will pay a lot of attention to any media appearances by him from now on, Ni-doms will evaluate any sign of weakness or mental decline and use it to their advantage). Considering how poor Biden's state is, there will be plenty of situations that Republicans can use to their advantage to show how weak he is. The Democratic situation is so bad it's not even funny. Kamala Harris is a horrible choice, and people suggesting Hillary just make me laugh. What a trainwreck. The moral rationality of Dems is pretty much defenseless against momentum and propaganda. In France Macron blundered too. The Right will gain a lot of power in the near future and I still think Trump is going to win the election unless some miracle happens for the democrats.

Ultimatively though, the right has no concept for the future. They don't grasp global warming, nor will their anti-immigration view help against the declining birth-rate of the west. It's a desperate attempt to get back to how things were in the past, but the present doesn't even remotely look like the past anymore. It will just result in even more tension and declining political relationships and an attitude that's anti-science and more concrete. I also think that the right cannot do anything against the complex, interconnected systems that IEI have created on a global scale without reducing the wealth of pretty much the entire population they represent. I'm not a political analyst, though. I just see it through a vague typology lense. Trump is an idiot, but with everything that's gonna happen in the next years, I fear about what comes after him

Bettors give a 50% chance or less of Biden being the Democrat nominee i.e. they think it's more likely he'll drop out, or that delegates will choose someone else, or that he'll die.

If so, the most likely nominee would be Kamala Harris, as she's already on the ticket (Biden will most likely suggest her as his replacement, and delegates would most likely choose her even if he doesn't).

I think the Democrats will be more likely to win with Harris than Biden in his current state, and I still think Biden would most likely defeat Trump if he stays.

[godslave]

People must shift paradigm and not think of TIMs as something pertaining to identity. Although it is convenient to say that a person "is" a TIM because saying that a person "is the carrier of a TIM" is too long to write/say, we must not make the mistake to literally think that we are a TIM. You see, "I am" is such a strong declaration. Think of all the things it implies. That conceptualisation puts a person in a position where the TIM becomes a significant part of the identity of the person. It would have been okay if that identity didn't come with a set of ideas about how that TIM is supposed to behave. These sets of ideas influenced by the reading of TIM descriptions * written by socionics "experts", are at the core of "type images" construction in the subject's mind.

The more the subject learn about TIM via descriptions the more he will have the tendency to identify with the description of the TIM that is according to the subject, the most relatable. From that point, the initial thought "I relate to that TIM" soon becomes " this type best fit me" and the last iteration of this chain of thought is " I am that type". Note how the subject progressively doesn't think in terms of "TIM" anymore but has already replace that concept by the term "Type" ** which might seem anecdotic at this point but unfortunately is not, far from it. At this point the crystallization has already occurred and the subject trapped themselves () in the "I am an [TIM]" cage.


* There are so many available in the internet, some of them differ which makes it challenging to obtain a coherent picture of the whole for everybody.

** Probably because we are, as typology aficionados, unconsciously used to the association of the terms "type descriptions" and not "TIM description" from that point the "TIM" part doesn't exist anymore and it's the behavior of the type that prevails. This is why I prefer very concise TIM (Models) description like this.

TIM Models descriptions

The abstract А-Model has 16 different instance models, each of them define a particular type of information metabolism (TIM). Altogether there are 16 instance models of information processing, hence, 16 TIMs. This section contains descriptions of these 16 models.

A TIM model - is a formula that describes in its formal language characteristics of the information processing by the psyche. Although a TIM model is accurate, it is presented in a specific form, which could be hard to understand. To help exemplify the model, one could make a collective description of the brightest representatives of each TIM. But even so these descriptions would be greatly generalized. For the sake of simplification they are always compromising with the truth.

Descriptions presented in this section, unlike descriptions made by other authors, attempt to isolate particulars related to differences of personal story factors from the specific TIM-related characteristics. It is an effort to present descriptions of the TIM models, rather than descriptions of particular representatives of the TIMs.

PS. #Aushra was a witch anyway !

PS2. I like video games but I don't believe that I am Sam Fisher when I play him !

[Still Alive]

Bettors give a 50% chance or less of Biden being the Democrat nominee i.e. they think it's more likely he'll drop out, or that delegates will choose someone else, or that he'll die.

If so, the most likely nominee would be Kamala Harris, as she's already on the ticket (Biden will most likely suggest her as his replacement, and delegates would most likely choose her even if he doesn't).

I think the Democrats will be more likely to win with Harris than Biden in his current state, and I still think Biden would most likely defeat Trump if he stays.

Michelle Obama would probably be the best option. She reminds me of the description of the Creative Subtype, though. ("May actively renounce something if it hinders him personally.") Creative Subtypes only do things that really interest them. The pressure might get too much and Biden gets thrown out like Truss, but if they really decide to go with Kamala Harris, I doubt that's going to be any better (although it's not impossible that Trump will fuck up in some way considering that he's surrounded by Yes Man and conspiracies seem to be the only thing he pays attention to nowadays.

Ultimatively, it doesn't matter much to me anyway, as both parties won't really be able to fix the issues that are coming in the next years/decades. In essence, they are both just a drop in the ocean and things will get worse regardless of who becomes president.

[Rusal]

Ne polr for LSI is a pipeline to theories and discussions about unusual cognition development: dual n back, streaming, etc etc. LSI's interest in Socionics might come from the same source after observation of other people: "what do they have that I don't?" "how do people develop a patently individualized personality? "am I special then?"

Edit: I'll ad: Ne polr for LSIs makes them hate the 'digging' for opportunities of Ne because they can't see themselves out of a formal system,eg: make easy money on informal basis like an ILE can. All the same they recognize that to make something for themselves outside the system you need qualities like sniffing out new opportunities, meaning they accept not all Ne is bad (although it can come with other unsavory personal traits in the LSI's opinion) and that they should abandon their fixation on rules for something more dynamic and so they tend to try to always keep up and thus an interest in cognition development is born. Not to mention practices from out there experimental side of Reddit and such can actually drive them to recognition in formal (in the "anti Ne" sense) society., which they are also after.

[VewyScawwyNawcissist]

all the problems of SEI Te PoLR, LSE Ni PoLR and LSI Ne PoLR are into play in an arguement between relatives im hearing right now thats blowing my b rains out i could do all that simple shit myself and force it on u on top of if u guys are not autistic i wonder if it makes it wores or disordered. cuz u just react emotionally and attempting to put each other down are u even thinking. literally just shut the fuck upp. the LSE waits for someone else to do smth and doesnt give relevant information, the LSI says something about organization/promises, doesnt want to deal with shit and gets mad, djk,a;'d\sa/

[Adam Strange]

all the problems of SEI Te PoLR, LSE Ni PoLR and LSI Ne PoLR are into play in an arguement between relatives im hearing right now thats blowing my b rains out i could do all that simple shit myself and force it on u on top of if u guys are not autistic i wonder if it makes it wores or disordered. cuz u just react emotionally and attempting to put each other down are u even thinking. literally just shut the fuck upp. the LSE waits for someone else to do smth and doesnt give relevant information, the LSI says something about organization/promises, doesnt want to deal with shit and gets mad, djk,a;'d\sa/

One of the best things about my divorce is that I don't have to spend a week every July and December with my ex-wife's family.

[Distance]

[Socionics Is Not A Cult]

[SacredKnowing]

The emotions may be a solution for the problem of information overload.

[Distance]

Of all the type vacillations i've done here at 16T, i've come to fully recently realize, that i'm gilded on the emotive plane, all thought things converge at once, riding in the F train of thought in full array of colors.

My colors feel like mostly divine-gold and silver and copper, ornaments of thought, give rise to strong essences of deeper things.

T = white, F = prisms of color.

Realization = from re-reading my posts.

Ethical, no doubt.

[Still Alive]

Of all the type vacillations i've done here at 16T, i've come to fully recently realize, that i'm gilded on the emotive plane, all thought things converge at once, riding in the F train of thought in full array of colors.

My colors feel like mostly divine-gold and silver and copper, ornaments of thought, give rise to strong essences of deeper things.

T = white, F = prisms of color.

Realization = from re-reading my posts.

Ethical, no doubt.

You are not going to reply to me but why spend so much time talking exclusively about MBTI to now use the term "ethical"? Why even care about whether or not you are ethical or logical when it takes you years to come to some confident conclusion? When it's not immediatly clear where you fall into, why should the dichotomy of T vs F even be a concern to you? As someone who is in the middle of that spectrum, are you more compatible with someone who is a clear cut ethical or logical, or should you go for someone who is also on the fence? You won't find an answer with socionics, so why care about where you are in the system?

[Distance]

You are not going to reply to me but why spend so much time talking exclusively about MBTI to now use the term "ethical"? Why even care about whether or not you are ethical or logical when it takes you years to come to some confident conclusion? When it's not immediatly clear where you fall into, why should the dichotomy of T vs F even be a concern to you? As someone who is in the middle of that spectrum, are you more compatible with someone who is a clear cut ethical or logical, or should you go for someone who is also on the fence? You won't find an answer with socionics, so why care about where you are in the system?

Alive, it simply because i want to chart my thoughts. I pattern match and it is where i start in form. Some here like godslave like my posts, others maybe not so much. We are the same in some respects, in finding a type. He is better with structure in logic forms, if A therefore B, in rational forms. I just feel via analogy forces. Others here too might find my thoughts of a benefit.

As far as type, i know ILI and LIE are out. LII too, EII, SLI SLE LSI etc.

I came here to have a little fun, i posted here in my intro last year. I like perspectives and i like to know what people's think.

I like to blab. It's an outlet. You can ignore it if you like.

My motives for posting are my way of processing, you might know it better, but i could never follow your template because it is how you think.

My advice to anyone here, is drop the type wars, treat it like something enjoyable. I get a laugh in shout a lot of the times.