Typology Random Thoughts

[Still Alive]

How often did someone post "your mom" as location on this site? With some quirky picture? You spend enough time on this site and you see the same profile over and over again. The repetition can really wear me down.

[godslave]

Cooking is not an Si activity. It's Te. Enjoying food (texture, taste etc..) is more an Si activity.

[Distance]

[CosmicCat]

ENFJ and ENFP are two halves of the same type. ENFJ (EIE) is very happy and ENFP (IEE) is very miserable.

Twilight by Stephanie Meyer is super duper EIE. Compare its overarching story with the description in an old Gulenko article where he listed the philosophies of each of the types

the world is ruled god, destiny, providence. This is the most mystical or religious minded sociotype, often being in the form of-date, sincerely believes in his messianism, in that he is a preacher of the divine, cosmic or other supernatural forces.

[Distance]

ENFJ and ENFP are two halves of the same type. ENFJ (EIE) is very happy and ENFP (IEE) is very miserable.

Twilight by Stephanie Meyer is super duper EIE. Compare its overarching story with the description in an old Gulenko article where he listed the philosophies of each of the types

When IDR Labs here said ''cognate'' into another's perspective via Fe channels they actually do both, the difference is one leads into a value creating atmosphere ENFJ, where ENFP will passively do it. To gain a perspective, you must be able to walk in those shoes, the difference is mentally or emotionally is my take, to parse a difference, which leads to different mode outcomes. Direct to indirect sublimation. One is process in type, inside, the other results, overlooking it broadly. Is = in, outside = about.

Ne is about connections mechanically in an absolute universe, so what is not directly apprehended, so mental in "spiritual ways" in a semantic phrase. One thing is connected to another, we cannot grasp without it leading to embrace, so your emotive content generation is in a reverse style/cycle. 1st > to second, and the reverse in flows<.

Passive vs active types with Fe.

[Braingel]

ENFJ and ENFP are two halves of the same type. ENFJ (EIE) is very happy and ENFP (IEE) is very miserable.

Twilight by Stephanie Meyer is super duper EIE. Compare its overarching story with the description in an old Gulenko article where he listed the philosophies of each of the types

Hm, since you are a sort of model G ish person, I wonder how and why you see those types on such light. I don’t really disagree, could it perhaps be the merry versus serious?..

Note: I am referring specifically for behavioral/social role part of personality in my inquiry, as I don’t believe the cognitive part of anatomy has anything to do with behavior whatsoever (other than that the information one sees would impact what potential enneagram types they can form, because it impacts what perspective is taken, which informs emotion). Social role is more tied into enneagram a bit, I see, being closer to excretion..

If it is a merry versus serious thing, and you think IEI is supposed be a very merry/happy type as well in terms of social role, am curious, do you see me as just an unhealthy eii or something? I pointed it out but it’s gone, but even Rose, an EII, can have the what I call a counter-flow response under stress (an extroverted defense, but that still takes an introverted approach, in my and her own case, in an online/withdrawn way, and with still the high self-awareness and deep analyzing of inside means and personal feelings—Fi)… There aren’t very many EII on this site, otherwise I would try and generalize a pattern, rather than isolate herself. She’s about one of the only that would be an EII in the behavioral type, by my view (also Acia, who just isn’t here anymore, really).

I am just very curious, because I’ve never seen a model G ish person describe the behavioral type of eie as very happy, but you aren’t really wrong that by Renin, it shouldn’t be an unhappy type in spite being a negativist…

If that doesn’t have to do with it, I’d guess you mixed up eie and IEE on accident…

[CosmicCat]

One is process in type, inside, the other results, overlooking it broadly. Is = in, outside = about.

Why do objectivity and subjectivity have a reversal element to them?

Look outside = about = aboutness = subjects = subjectivity. And the word "subjectivity" means "it's all in your head".

How did this come to pass please?

You put your left foot in
You put your left foot out
You put your left foot in
And you shake it all about
You do the hokey-pokey and you turn yourself around
That's what it's all about

[Distance]

Why do objectivity and subjectivity have a reversal element to them?

Look outside = about = aboutness = subjects = subjectivity. And the word "subjectivity" means "it's all in your head".

How did this come to pass please?

You are both, it is where you start at.

Object/ subject is a false dichotomy in an absolute sense, in the end it is all subjective making objects.

We are two people: a limbic and thinking side, where one reacts and the other pro -reacts.

Here, right now and then later. Here in subject form, later, in object form, standing away from yourself, thru time as a function.

It is a bit of philosophy question, not typology here, but interesting.

Thoughts?

[CosmicCat]

You are both, it is where you start at.

Object/ subject is a false dichotomy in an absolute sense, in the end it all subjective making objects.

We are two people: a limbic and thinking side, where one reacts and the other pro -reacts.

Here, right now and then later. Here in subject form, later, in object form, standing away from yourself, thru time as a function.

It is a bit of philosophy question, not typology here, but interesting.

Thoughts?

I was thinking whether physics needs math. It's debated in the philosophy of physics whether mathematics is needed for physics by logical necessity.

After much reflection, the answer is no.

Physics does not by logical definition, require

Of course mathematics itself requires words in order to sustain its existence. Therefore the idea that physics requires mathematics would cause an infinite recursion. Proponents of the necessity of mathematics for physics must produce a non-well-founded set theory in order to sustain the apparatus of physics. This is another burden imposed upon the defender of the mathematical physics thesis. What is a successful set theory that is not well-founded please?

[Distance]

I was thinking whether physics needs math. It's debated in the philosophy of physics whether mathematics is needed for physics by logical necessity.

After much reflection, the answer is no.

Physics does not by logical definition, require

Of course mathematics itself requires words in order to sustain its existence. Therefore the idea that physics requires mathematics would cause an infinite recursion. Proponents of the necessity of mathematics for physics must produce a non-well-founded set theory in order to sustain the apparatus of physics. This is another burden imposed upon the defender of the mathematical physics thesis. What is a successful set theory that is not well-founded please?

When we say physics it is an attribution to an idea that one thing in space has a pattern of in an action, and we produce a language to describe it. To make a prediction on quantifying it requires something by a measurement so in a number, it tells us something about it, in how it moves and what it does.

A set theory that is not well founded has not found an application, yet.

I suppose if a set theory has a symmetry about it, meaning a patterned structure it likely points to something.

? ? ?

[CosmicCat]

When we say physics it is an attribution to an idea that one thing in space has a pattern of in an action, and we produce a language to describe it. To make a prediction on quantifying it requires something by a measurement so in a number, it tells us something about it, in how it moves and what it does.

A set theory that is not well founded has not found an application, yet.

I suppose if a set theory has a symmetry about it, meaning a patterned structure it likely points to something.

? ? ?

Set theory has the same reversal problem types have. A ∩ B always results in a literally smaller set (exception: special case of perfect inclusion), even though its condensation in formula is A & B.

It also requires practice to move away from literal thinking in mathematics towards abstract thinking. The product of two quantities, for instance, can result in either the multiplication of two values or the integration of two values. This is clearer in physics where work can result in either F • d or it's integral. Q.E.D..

[Adam Strange]

I just wish there was a way to balance discussion between (and I'm sure I've been guilty of one or more of these at some point):

1. Not just seeing everything through the lens of Socionics
vs
2. Respecting an individual's experiences with different people of different types.
vs
3. Understanding there's a "positive" archetype for a type.
vs
4. Understanding there's a "negative" archetype for a type.
vs
5. Understanding some things just aren't going to be type related.
vs
6. Being able to talk about this, without having to have perfect thoughts about everything. People like to attack things people say, without understanding or building upon what they are even saying to begin with.
vs
7. Balancing humor and being critical.
vs
8. Not just arguing a type conclusion, but finding what they agree on, personality-wise, even if not Socionics related.

Thinking about it, I don't think I've had a constructive back-and-forth without anyone here, except SacredKnowing at some points (and maybe Distance at one point, though I'm not really sure about that in retrospect). And I don't know what I'm even really complaining about. I guess I'm saying this

cult thinking <------------X---------------------------------------------------------------------> constructive thinking

The overall feel of the forum is the X.

@RanRanRan, I agree that most of the discussions on this site fall into the category of social reinforcement, rather than foundational theory. But not everyone is good at Ti, and everyone likes gossip.

I'd say that, for this site, the position of the X is actually even closer to "cult thinking" than you've described it, but I don't know how to move it closer to constructive thinking (about Socionics).

[AnakinJirachi]

I’m tired of defending the Intp to raise Bunny over Nikola Tesla. Everyone should just accept supporting Italy in 2006 was Celebi. That spells glitter and chime in boundless auroras of snapshot cakes and shamans of moody dialects rattles the core of Gandalf’s (Zang) staff!!

[spacious]

you'd (i'd) be surprised how relaxing and soothing it can be to talk with others who share your temperament -- fellow IJs, in this case. I'm actually surprised/impressed by how much conviviality and simpatico-ness there can be between me as an Se-creative with Ne-creatives, both LII and EII alike. It's very complementary and reinforcing. It's like we both respect the other's approach and they (especially LIIs) can put into words things I might consider far beyond how I could.

--after talking with an EII for an hour and then an LII for 3 hours

[godslave]

@Still Alive here is the post I previously deleted you were talking about in the chat box. I have edited it a little bit.

---

I Think I've already said it but ITR is the part of socionics that I'm the least interested in. I mean, of course I did my homework and know what is to know about ITR but except for a few of them (dyads,benefit, conflict, supervision) I just couldn't care less about ITR. It probably has something to do with the fact that I'm a Hikikomori and care more about fictional characters than people of real life.

That said, even after a certain number of years of socionics interest, I am still incapable of having the usual socionics discussions most forumites have. Indeed, most forumites almost systematically mention the TIM of the person they are talking about. Typically forumites would say stuff like "My EIE uncle [...] " "My LSI coworker [...]" My ESI ex-girlfriend [...]" etc.. I've also noticed that most forumites feel like they have acquired the legitimity to type others once they self-typed. The rational would go like this "How can you type others when you don't know own type ?" So they first self-type so they can feel like they have earned the licence to type.

Funnily enough, some of them have the audacity to answer questionnaires and ask for forumites their opinions but if said opinion goes against their initial self-typing then it is dismissed... I guess a part of this attitude is due to the fact that people want to participate in the typical socionics discussions right away without being considered as a total newbie. Indeed most of the newly inscribed forumite have studied socionics for years so they feel like they have a certain level of expertise already. They assume that their formation is complete so to speak...

I think that a part of my incapacity to have a typical socionics discussion is due to the fact that I have high standards and I want my facts to be right. In addition, I just don't have the typing skills that require me to be able to mention the type of the people I talk about (even if I rarely talk about people of real life) with a satisfactory level of confidence that meets my standards. Another part of this has to do with the fact that I'm not smart like most people here (I'm rather slow) therefore I might make mistakes that could embarrass me in the future if I'm not very prudent and absolutely certain of what I say.

Indeed, what if something wrong goes with one's own type and one realizes it only after some years ? What about all these "my conflictor SLE boss [... ]", [I had my first date with my EII dual [...]" conversations one has had then ? Wouldn't one feel ridiculous after realizing that he was mistaking all along ? Of course one alternative to work around this issue is to simply deny the self-mistyping and just play the great pretender game or cosplaying like Rusted would say.

Another alternative would be to just rely on the "trust me bro" factor cuz nobody will verify anyway or doubt one's typing skills. I mean it's pretty rare in the forum when a forumite do the usual socionics discussion and another forumites questioning his or her typings (including self-typing) anyway.

Indeed, one of the advantage of having the typing licence card is that once a forumite has earned it (again knowing own type is the license card !) his or her typing of real life people are always correct. They never mistype them cuz they are experts now. You see that's the typing skills level I want to reach...

[Still Alive]

I find it interesting how godslave pays way more attention to other people, which I honestly don't do much at all. I guess I'm good at isolating type because I think its dislocated from personality so you don't have to pay too much attention to who people are and it's more like you look at the broadest similarities possible. I think for the same reason Jung couldn't figure out his type because he was much more focused on all these nuances that people have. It doesn't even cross my mind that there could be a concrete dynamic like wanting to figure out the type to feel worthy of typing others and it's honestly unimportant to me (which I associate with weak unvalued Se) but I generally think it's better to listen than speak. The way I behave here is very different from my usual self as I at least have the opinion that I might be an expert on this topic due to the sheer amount of time I have spend with it. I feel more confident in pushing for my opinion I guess but whatever. I wish I could have had a conversation with Jung or with Gulenko in english but you gotta be satisfied with what you have.

[Distance]

One litmus test for ESI parent is being an enabler. Talk the discipline talk, but it boils down to weak actions for enforcement.

Strike ESI 2: shoos flies out or spiders , wasps out the door.

Something I've noticed across several people, including family.

LSI ESI difference.

[Still Alive]

Conservatives often seem to want to restrict how people behave, that our population needs to get back to traditions, that you can't behave a certain way, and they place much emphasis on authority and the police. progressives seem to often have a "live and let live" attitude, not wanting to infringe upon freedom when people don't harm anyone. fewer than 1% of the worldwide population are transgender, yet the right makes it seem like everyone is gay. I just wonder, do people believe every conservative is an ST type? because reading opinions in typology, it really makes me think that people actually do think that, and that intuitives are progressives, the rare scattered child that wants to leave suburbia to experience the world with naivity. it's really bizarre in a certain way. it's more common in MBTI but still. It makes Se this conservative function. it's very weird, because it should just be related to external reality and not ideology. If that scattered person that's very rare is one type, well that what about the other 7999999999 People on this planet?

[Great]

Quasi-identical relations are frustrating.

[Braingel]

@godslave:

Repost, originally posted in that person’s thread: thought this was typology random thought for whatever reason, didn’t realize this is someone else’s thread, so too much banter there prob wasn’t good (got in trouble for this before). Prob thought that bc it was off topic discussion happening..

And to be honest with you, I believe that being raised around all 4D Se types, with them all pushing me, largely in abusive ways, it also made the “confidence” of the suggestive function (still manifesting in a 1D Se— non physical, only verbal or very infantile physical like throwing things weakly) as well..

I mean… Mother is ESE, father is SLE, sister is LSE. Here is a picture of my family, I am the little girl on the father’s lap: https://replay.dropbox.com/share/kehZTqiuN8X14SBR Look at how detached my eyes are compared to their own, especially the parents.. That isn’t the most revealing picture of my sister, because she is pouting.

Here is another pic of me in very early childhood: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/djp39...=77tlknz4&dl=0

Not only was I raised in a 4D Se bio family, most my extended family is also so, like my uncle Reha, third man in mugshot: (he looks like an LSI, but he’s an SLE like father for sure, would be very apparent via video). https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/losangel...ctims-husband/

Then here is one picture of me and father with a very revealing picture of my father as an SLE-Ti; https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/2ch3d...h5pgw7c96&dl=0

And I got raised around heavy volleyball people and runners and put into these both (and other sports) intensively, really only engaging 4D Se types, easily 85% in my formative development.

(the pictures I gave exclusively for social role/behavioral typology, where characteristics can matter more physically, it’s an Fe and Se realm).

[VewyScawwyNawcissist]

theres something self destructive about ENTJs/LIEs. impulsive and self destructive. go too far too early to achieve their goals when there are other options and considerations to be made. i guess they still take more information than S types perhaps and it may be bc its in a world that doesnt value them and they just get isck of it and jut want to get it over with what they want to do not someone keeping nagign them and holding them back. but i mthinking ESI may not the type to directly gate that. idk if what the ESI provides wont be what they need somehow, but maybe it also has to be the right ESI at the right time with the right thing idk. idk if a Ni lead would be able to provide better perspective overall without what seems superfluous (again idk if its not actually just what they need and ESI can somehow provide it)

[Simple]

And today, I have broken my oath to never log into this site again and here I am!

[Adam Strange]

And today, I have broken my oath to never log into this site again and here I am!

Thanks for logging in, Simple. We knew you'd be back.

[CosmicCat]

theres something self destructive about ENTJs/LIEs. impulsive and self destructive. go too far too early to achieve their goals when there are other options and considerations to be made. i guess they still take more information than S types perhaps and it may be bc its in a world that doesnt value them and they just get isck of it and jut want to get it over with what they want to do not someone keeping nagign them and holding them back. but i mthinking ESI may not the type to directly gate that. idk if what the ESI provides wont be what they need somehow, but maybe it also has to be the right ESI at the right time with the right thing idk. idk if a Ni lead would be able to provide better perspective overall without what seems superfluous (again idk if its not actually just what they need and ESI can somehow provide it)

There's nothing self-destructive about them. But when they've run out of options, they collapse down into either IEI/EII.

Sometimes they collapse into EIE/IEE. Which is also not good.

[spacious]

I was recently talking with an ESI while she was not very guarded (ESIs usually seem to me to maintain a great distance between themselves and others, and so hide what they feel most of the time). I watched her eyes and facial expressions while she spoke, and it seems I recognized for the first time just how much Fi people feel about everything. Talking about the most insignificant thing would make her eyes soften, or refocus, or her expression would shift slightly, not in the way Fe users try to affect other people’s feelings, but reflecting her own feelings. It really astounded me to realize how much she must be feeling and how strongly these feelings must color her experience of the world.

I’ve wondered sometimes if I’m EII, since I’m not particularly aware of using either Ti nor Fi, but I feel now significantly more sure that I’m not. I can barely imagine going through life like that.

wow, this touched my heart!

(I randomly arrived at a page of the Typology Random Thoughts thread from 2021 from when i was searching around for posts about Benefit relations, which then went to looking at the most recent posts from a no-longer active forum poster, an SEE, which led me here.)

[Darth Cultis]

It's really hard to talk about this stuff.

Like, I "know" that most people don't know what they are talking about. I've read Jung's Types. Spent the time to understand his complicated language. And I've spent time linking it with philosophical ideas, trying to comprehend the full complexity of it (because the philosophy of it is really interesting).
But it's philosophy. It's linking well thought-out philosophy to a person's ego in order to explain their apparent Self for an attempt at framing their essence.
And just like in philosophy, people misabuse it. And people want it to be more than philosophy. So you have many schools of thought about it that clearly ignore Jung and pretend to be real in one way or another. And then people say Jung is different, each school is different, and different is different and should be separated. Fine, okay, but simplifying philosophy isn't somehow better than understanding philosophy in full. But that's because nobody wants to go in full...except the philosopher.
So it begs a thought, what good really is any of this, if you aren't a 'philosopher'?

Maybe...that has always been the problem.

[spacious]

It's right there in the description, man.

“He is fashionable, compulsorily neat and undoubtedly slender. He’s very polite, flexible, he’s attentive to me and to others. He doesn’t feel envy and he doesn’t lie. He’s not selfish. He has an opinion about everything. He goes with me to the theater, cinema, to art exhibitions, to concerts. He loves long walks and journeys, tourist trips. He shows much, he says everything that will come to his mind. He helps me in the house”.


I'm not sure what the source of such openness is, although I suspect that its purpose is to compensate for our Dual's low Ni. If LIE's and EIE's tell their Duals everything, then our "I can't imagine that, I can't thread what I see in front of me into future projections" Duals are reassured.

Regarding such openness: I find it sort of amusing, amazing, and perhaps most of all, disarming. Additionally, I much, much prefer such openness to the more guarded and private nature of my Activity Partners, ILIs, about themselves. I find their guardedness/privacy frustrating and unnecessary. I'm also not an SEE.

[spacious]

I seem to have trouble working with SEIs. Conversations with them tend to go like this:

SEI: "What about x?"

Me: "What about x?"

SEI: "This exists...how is it relevant to whatever we're working on?"

Me: "Uh...I'm...not sure...did you have an idea? Maybe...well, no, I'm not entirely sure where you're going with this."

SEI: "Well, it...exists."

Me: "...Well, this is my understanding of what it is...Um, again, where are you going with this?"

SEI, getting frustrated: "Well, how does it relate to what we're working on?"

What especially irritates me is that sometimes the SEI will actually have found something relevant, which I don't realize until later. But they seem to have an expectation that I'll explain their thoughts for them. I don't know how to do that!

This is gold. Roughly maps onto my dynamic working with ILIs, too. I say the 'this exists' things (maybe it's more from my mobilizing Ni) and ILI is like yes, that's true, but that's a more minor point.

Loved this dialogue recreation!!! These types of posts are so fun to read.

[Darth Cultis]

Quasi-identical relations are frustrating.

ohh, what happened to you?

My type is probably eternally questionable, but let's say I'm LII. ILIs sometimes seem kind of psychopathic at times and it's really off-putting. Like, they will demean and put somebody down as a form of entertainment or ego boosting. I...don't...understand...that.

[Great]

ohh, what happened to you?

It's been resolved but I'll tell you about it anyways. I had an SEI boss. He is the owner of a coffee shop. About two years ago, I became manager of the coffee shop. I later quit. One of the reasons why is because I found my suggestions weren't being listened to very much. But we keep in touch. He recently contacted me asking for help with his coffee shop. I help. He pays me my wage but not the tips that I earn. He kept saying that he'd pay me my tip money. I play nice because I also need his reference for a job that I wanted. However, when it came time to give the reference, he's nowhere to be found.

I get pissed and start imagining the worst. Me, being an ESI, start concluding due his questionable character (he has some drama with his business neighbor that I do not intend on airing here) he was not intending on paying me. I go to the state governing body that deals with this sort of thing and file a complaint. He later gets back to me. When I inform him of what I did, he says he had to leave suddenly (an excuse). He ends up giving me what was owed and apologizes.

The emotions that I experienced when he didn't follow through with the reference were anger and frustration. I also felt betrayed, a feeling that I'm beginning to associate with SEIs. While I intellectually know your quasi-indentical has different priorities in life, emotionally, the whole experience was frustrating and bewildering.

TL;Dr: SEI doesn't follow through with what he says, pisses ESI off.

[Great]

In my experience, SEIs value politeness over directness in social situations while ESIs value directness over politeness.

[Simple]

Socionics didnt help me at all in the interpersonal sphere, as whether I like someone and get along with them has got nothing to do at all with socionics types.

[Biscuit]

Socionics didnt help me at all in the interpersonal sphere, as whether I like someone and get along with them has got nothing to do at all with socionics types.

It actually works better in very close relationships , but yeah involving " love " and " likes " in it is totally false

[Adam Strange]

I find that Socionics is a very good, although not a perfect, predictor of compatibility. I'm not entirely sure what accounts for the times when it is off.

A willingness to have sex on the first date? That's a big one. Being smart and thin helps, too.

I've been misled a few times when an incompatible sociotype really liked me, which only caused grief later on. Socionics is inexorable, like gravity. You can fight it, but if you do, you'll only die tired.

[Simple]

I wish I could change my sociotype. I dont know why I feel this way. A lack of self-acceptance? Why?

[Adam Strange]

I need more money.

But then, I wonder if even that would be enough? Needs tend to expand as means increase. Does my avarice even have limits?
I just don't know.

When I was making $16k/year, I swore that if I ever got to $20k, I'd be soooo happy.

Well, I blew through that goal and I'm not entirely happy. Grateful, yes. Happy, no.

...LIE problems.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo6aKnRnBxM

[Adam Strange]

I wish I could change my sociotype. I dont know why I feel this way. A lack of self-acceptance? Why?

Start hanging out with your Duals. You might not accept yourself, but they will.

[Darth Cultis]

Man, this forum is frustrating. I hate all of you.

Eat shit.

[CosmicCat]

Oberlin College in Oberlin, Ohio, U.S.A., seems to straddle alpha and gamma quadra. At least their campus layout, design, and architecture did.

[godslave]

Am I the only one to whom the terms "Intuition of possibilities" and " Internal structure of Objects" / "Essence of objects (including people)" seem to have absolutely nothing in common but yet defines the same Info aspect ?

I mean "what is possible" is in direct opposition to "What is the essence".

The former is undetermined and open (I don't know what it is but it could be XYZ).

The latter is determined and closed (I know what it is and it couldn't be something else). How could Ne be a "what could be" and a "What is" at the same time ?

It's stuff like this that drives me crazy but I guess that I'm wired to see that kind of stuff !!

Also, am I the only one to think that the following pictures might all be about Fe information (Energy/ Internal Dynamic of objects). I mean, this is what happens when you use the term "Object" to qualify both living beings (biological entities) and non-living objects just to sound smart and philosophical...

Objects A :



Objects B :