Archetype center's typing is finished (And Adam is going to be mad)

[RBRS]

Turns out, ENTj.

We have finished the analysis of your video and the result is as follows. You are indeed a bright representative of intuitive group of types, and in accordance to our methodology it is quite obvious that you are logic-intuitive type from Gamma (so INTP type version is quite close to our result), since you mostly manifest extraverted logic (or black logic — it is the logic of the objective world, the logic of natural and applied sciences) + introverted intuition, so our choice was among two intuitive types from Gamma — ILI and LIE. Also we found out that your type is extraverted (due to dominance of logic over intuition, + a quite significant black sensation answers + some other significant attributes), and you are definitely from central quadra (Beta or Gamma) with valued black sensation (and ability to struggle, to overcome difficulties) and white intuition (the value of time as an important life resource), so our result is Logical-Intuitive Extravert «Jack London» or «Pioneer».
Intuitive-logical introvert has a bit different set of aspects in his speech — there should be dominance of introverted aspects (white intuition + white ethics and little black sensation), while you have the whole set of extraverted aspects: black logic + black sensation + black ethics (ILI ignores that info due to black ethics on blind spot function, or PoLR as it’s calles in western socionics).
You will find attached our description of logical types from Gamma. Attached you will also find some brief terms that are used in Modern Socionics.


Best regards,

Timur Protskiy
Head of Modern Psychology Center «Archetype»
archetype-center.ru

[consentingadult]

Are these conclusions all they gave you, or did they provide a rationale as well, i.e. did they explain what was Te in your video and what was Ni, etc.etc.?

[RBRS]

Are these conclusions all they gave you, or did they provide a rationale as well, i.e. did they explain what was Te in your video and what was Ni, etc.etc.?

They provided me with this, and descriptions. I personally think they are right, at least at the Gamma NT part.

I asked them for more detailed description and this was the response.
Hello! Unfortunately, more detailed justification will require modern socionics teaching from the very beginning and up to the typing methodology. Our type and aspects description contains info to make general conclusion on the type.
If you have any specific questions on dichotomies that were revealed in your answers or ‘why am I not the X type’ — feel free to ask them.

[SGF]

Then it's probable that I'm just an EIE without much social experience then. Or I am a categorically mentally ill insufferable retard with insecurity problems, unable to reach a concrete answer given my mental or experimental inability to get the point of the theory.

I have read some articles on socionics, and I have read Filatova's book (from which I have not learned anything that I had not read before).

Some information elements I am unable to translate into practical application. I can transfer Fi, Se, or Ti among others, but I cannot transfer Fe, perhaps because of the trajectory of my life, or perhaps because at some point I may have fallen on the back of my neck and have definitely become mentally retarded.

The case with Beta is that the general stereotype and the values ​​associated with the quadra fit me, I know that I am weak in Se and I know that I am incapable in Si, (in addition, I refer to the questionnaires) but I am unable to see what kind of role Fe plays in me, that is, I usually do not get what the other person wants to hear specifically, I am a mix between the most infuriating boredom and the most exaggerated cringe in social situations, I am unable to tell a funny story or do the right pacing with my gesticulation in order to make another person laugh at a joke and the few times that I have tried it has gone wrong, and a long list of things.

It is possible that it is because perhaps throughout my life I have not socialized much and since the last comfortable social situation with more than one or two people that I have been in was four and a half years ago. Not counting a recent one that went disastrously wrong, in which it seems I made a very bad impression through excessively dark remarks. Curiously, a younger version of me could perfectly fit some of the EIE stereotypes (Highly ideological, arrogant, invested in revolutionary movements, etc)

It may be that I am an EIE. curiously, while surfing the Internet a while ago I came across a quote about the unnameable that could apply to me perfectly (if they reflected reality)

- "Reinhold Hainish [who was a personal friend of H**** in Vienna in 1909-1912] depicted H**** as a lonely, moody, introverted individual who would, at unexpected moments, break into loud, extended monologues."

Reinhold Hainish book looks like an attempt to make him seem more relatable, but anyways, that man is supposed to be Fe-Leading individual. If this loving and not at all evil entity of light and peace that once bathed the world in a great embrace of nations and races was EIE, maybe I, even having much less power (and I think that is good for me and for everyone) but maybe more mentally deranged, can be perfectly EIE. It gives me a bit of impostor syndrome, but it is what it has. I will have to learn to be my own type.
And yes, I know that comparing oneself to the unnameable is at the same time a reach for the highest forms of stupidity and egocentrism, but sincerely it doesn't matter if that aligns the theory and the diagnosis with the practical observance.

...... now you have your answer.

HAH! I knew I should be able to get along with LIEs!

[Adam Strange]

@Frddy, congratulations on your typing results. It can be nice to have some clarity in one’s life.

Now that you know you are LIE, what are you going to do?

[RBRS]

@Frddy, congratulations on your typing results. It can be nice to have some clarity in one’s life.

Now that you know you are LIE, what are you going to do?

Most probably spend less time in socionics and more in other things.
Btw the "adam will be mad" was in a joking tone

[Adam Strange]

Most probably spend less time in socionics and more in other things.
Btw the "adam will be mad" was in a joking tone

Doing lots of different things is a good plan. Getting stuck on one subject, as I have done, is an indication of some deep-rooted unresolved problems.

And yeah, I figured that you were joking. Being an ENTJ is nothing to get mad about. It can be either a boon or a tragedy, depending on circumstances, but the condition itself is value-neutral. No better or worse than any of the other types.

[Sol]

Today typing is not much objective to suppose an opinion of one of typers as much meaningful. There is no objective certification of typing skills. There is no high typing match between experienced typers, in common. Protskiy mistakes even in own type as LSI, while having LII.

Also when you know types theory what you say about yourself is lesser important as people may be prejusticed to have some types and distort the info for it, including unconsciously. The more what you say (unlike with your nonverbal) specially for a typing is used - the more you may fool a typer.

So based on the said, your type can be other with a good chance.
For example, by your video I supposed your type as introverted and some more possibility of P.
To make a thread in a typing section having "And Adam is going to be mad" - a mention of a forum's member and his emotions is more expected from F types and much doubtful for base T types.

It's good to be assured in your type only after positive IR checking with people IRL. Type them and check IR effects.

-

An addition about a use of "professional" paid typers.

[RBRS]

Today typing is not much objective to suppose an opinion of one of typers as much meaningful. There is no objective certification of typing skills. There is no high typing match between experienced typers, in common. Protskiy mistakes even in own type as LSI, while having LII.

Also when you know types theory what you say about yourself is lesser important as people may be prejusticed to have some types and distort the info for it, including unconsciously. The more what you say (unlike with your nonverbal) specially for a typing is used - the more you may fool a typer.

So based on the said, your type can be other with a good chance.
For example, by your video I supposed your type as introverted and some more possibility of P.
To make a thread in a typing section having "And Adam is going to be mad" - a mention of a forum's member and his emotions is more expected from F types and much doubtful for base T types.

It's good to be assured in your type only after positive IR checking with people IRL. Type them and check IR effects.

It's actually the most fitting if we go through ITR, which is one of the things that has made me trust this typing.

If what ails you is that one can get into the role of a sociotype and its semantics can seem specifically of that sociotype, do not worry, until this moment I was doubting. I spoke spontaneously as things came to mind. The point is that I believe the semantics method is correct, because what is being analyzed is not the speech, but the effect of cognitive processes on speech.
While I was waiting for the diagnosis to come, I thought it was going to be some Beta sociotype, due to some of my answers.

The "Adam will be mad" thing is a simple joke that I came up with.
And let's not forget that they've seen an hour long video, while the one posted here was very short.

[consentingadult]

Doing lots of different things is a good plan. Getting stuck on one subject, as I have done, is an indication of some deep-rooted unresolved problems.

That's funny, for some other types it is exactly the other way around ;-)

[Sol]

@Frddy
base T types tend to gather opinions, other data and then think themselves having the known. they are lesser naive in logical themes, especially with evident high speculativity as today typing

I had opinions about own type from 3 relatively experienced ones. Those opinions seems even matched on LSE as primary version. And I doubted for monthes between different types, and in Socionics in general, until made a check by IR. Objectivity - the main trait of base Te and they prefer good basis to trust. You are other.

[RBRS]

Let's go by parts.

First, it is false that Timur Protsky selftypes as LSI only by himself, this diagnosis was made by Victor L. Talanov.

Second, of course the diagnoses are never entirely reliable, since each socionist uses different methodologies, and in some cases, they operate through different schools.

I think a semantic analysis (that is, not an analysis of what you are saying, but of the underlying influence of information elements on the way you formulate and obtain information) is reliable, and the Archetype center questionnaire does not ask you only about your life or your values, but about definitions and interpretations of works by means of which I imagine they assign the sociotype. In comparison to other methods, I believe it is more reliable (if you search the forum, you will see my opinion regarding related topics in these threads
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...te-to-the-most
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...ing-qualities-!).
Archetype center also has the experience of psychological analysis of more than 5000 socionic and psychosophic typings, and the price of the diagnosis is very cheap compared to other typings, so it is perfect for me.

In any case, I think the typing is right because of the aforementioned and also because it fits, especially in intertype relationships, but also in most other aspects. In intertype relationships, LIE fits me like a glove.
So I'm staying with LIE, until someone poses a coherent and reasonable argument against it. I don't see it expedient to discard their typing and everything else (from descriptions to ITR) because on a 15 minute video I had some random movement, for example.

To finish, have you come to think that the fact that despite researching on socionics and having a sociotype that fits, you have needed three diagnoses to definitively see that you are LSE, can perhaps point more to that you are judicious than to anything else? Because the difference between your experience and mine differs only on the quantity of diagnosis, and I'm not willing to spend 200 euros more on typings right now.

[RBRS]

He assigns himself that type regardless of who else typed him that I think.

https://archetype-center.ru/socionic...ogo/#more-2101

[RBRS]

I have edited it. He self-types as LSI, but his typing is not due to himself and himself alone, it's also due to diagnosis (Talanov)

[Sol]

He self-types as LSI, but his typing is not due to himself and himself alone, it's also due to diagnosis (Talanov)

This changes not much that one with an experience has same opinion.
Without objective skills certification, with today low typing matches and speculativity of methods to have an importance it needs to have several (good when >2) agreements and which always were gotten independently, when those typers did not know opinions of others beforehand. Not a single case and not when one of sides possibly knew the opinion of other side.
Also there should be other people with a typing experience which have another opinion about his type than "LSI", besides me. As it's not rare when opinions about types do not match, and so you may try to find them on forums (among relatively experienced in typing) or to ask other paid typers yourself.

Protskiy mentioned that among main reasons to think his type as LSI but not LII were Reinin traits - doubtful hypothesis.
The only good way to be assured in own type are IR effects with >10 people IRL, and with most and least emotionally comfortable people in the life. He should have such people with supposed types by him, but I doubt he passed that checking and so may similarly rationalize contradictions with IR theory by a heretical nonsense.
Jung, Lytov (had most known Socionics site) - had mistakes in own types. There were or are others too.

[RBRS]

( @Sol I will respond to your two messages in one single thread, so it is faster and easier)

About Protskyi, even if we take into account the Central/Periphery dichotomy, the rest of the system differentiates pretty clearly between LII and LSI mirror types by theory, and comparing Se PolR and Ne PolR can give a huge contrast. Furthermore, if sensing is related to "space/homeostasis" and intuition to "time/Possibilities" very simplistically explained, the S/N dichotomy should be one of the easiest to clear out in self-typing if I'm not wrong. add to that more than ten years practicing and studying socionics and you get a certain result. Albeit central/periphery is one of the main reasons for his typing, I'm inclined to think it's not the only reason. additionally, his companion is typed EIE, which might give a little bit of ITR confirmation.


With different standards on what is a cognitive function or an information element, it is clear that the results of a test, using any methodology, will offer distant results. The special cases would be those that fully fit the sociotype model of all schools, namely @Suspiria with Gulenko and Archetype center, and the case of @Lolita which with Gulenko and WSS got two Se-lead types. That reasoning is easy to understand, but you have told me about demonstrable experiments that this is so, and I would like to see them, as it stands as a mere coherent reasoning line to this point. I would like to see statistics on typing matches (for example, 30% might get conflicting results while a 50% get results neutral to each other, and 20% get results that are similar to the case of @Lolita ) this would be a good way of seeing how much accuracy should be expected from "professional typers".


I have said that they were professional socionists because they are engaged in socionics by profession and not by hobby. I speak of professionals within the framework of people who dedicate a large part of their lives to working in a field, who are not necessarily objectively professionals in the sense of demonstrable abilities.


Going to the issue that diagnoses are subjective, or abilities are subjective, your judgments regarding the rest of the methodologies are also completely subjective. Socionics itself (and practically all typologies) is a tool to better understand oneself, others, develop better relationships, build more efficient teams ... and as such it must adapt to reality. You treat Gulenko's heresies for that very thing, heresies, but the very basis (Jung's Psychological Types and Augustinavichiute) is in itself groundless, with its only fundament being pure speculation. What follows is that the best thing we can do if we want to engage in this is to judge for ourselves what's more likely, taking into account experience and reason, and these assessments will be, to a certain point, subjective (For example, DNCH is far more acceptable than some forms of VI typing, but both are subjective and therefore not "objectively acceptable").


Final note: Pointing at a joke on a headline is a pretty weak argument for assuming weak T. Especially when it mentions one user that has repeatedly insisted on a specific typing different than the one I got (Hence the meaning of the small joke). Also, weak T due to recommend using the services of experienced typers over random forum users is not a strong argument (You have specially recommended the same and tests). I have provided a few more reasons for my own typing in this thread https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...=1#post1436341 but if you have a different suggestion and can back it up decently I am quite open to it, I have asked in that thread for you to share (Do not share in that thread as it would derail the main topic, do it here if possible). I would also like to know to what you refer to in terms of "emotionality" as I came here and went around asking for such kinds of assessments since the start, and I had a contrary assessment by @chocolatte who is a self typed Fe user (Low Fe pointed out from an INFp to another supposed INFp?)

[Sayonara]

What a lovely quinceañera. It's too bad @Sol had to ruin it by using logic.

[Rusal]

I'm curious why you made this prediction and set this timeframe. Is there something I don't know?

Oh no, nothing like that. It’s just an estimate that takes into account ‘people’s time’. Why, just today someone posted a “well, duh” reply to Gulenko’s typing of a person extended to other two untyped people, when there would’ve been more ambiguity in the past.

[Lolita]

Timur basically types everyone as LIE since people believe LIE to be something they’re not. Real LIEs are timelords, the ones who invented “time is money” so they’re not wasting time with identity politics which is a Beta Ni thing. LIEs only care about what’s tangibly profitable.

[qaz00]

Timur basically types everyone as LIE since people believe LIE to be something they’re not. Real LIEs are timelords, the ones who invented “time is money” so they’re not wasting time with identity politics which is a Beta Ni thing. LIEs only care about what’s tangibly profitable.

You described LSE-Te here.