That's weird I always assumed you were an ESI, for some reason I thought you had ESI on your profile somewhere.
That's weird I always assumed you were an ESI, for some reason I thought you had ESI on your profile somewhere.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
I have met three people from the forum, including Ashlesha/Kassie, who said LIE. She said noticed how high strung and jittery I appeared irl, (which is something people online don't pick up on) and said I reminded her of Si polr for this reason.Originally Posted by Adam Strange
I understand, still I am hesitant to type based on such criteria as avatars.FWIW, your avatar pictures have seemed to me to be consistently ESI. Fi/Se.
I did at a brief point.
Did you think ESI because of this, or is there another reason? Does it just fit with my general vibe?
Why?
I haven't interacted with you much yet so seeing that is probably the only reason I thought that. I'll have to read the thread more to have a better opinion, I've only skimmed it so far.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Regarding the evolution / involution dichotomy, I was hoping you could immediately relate to the given examples, rather than on the general principle.
Let's suppose for a moment that you are indeed a negativist and a right type (evolution, that is). You should belong to one of the following types : SEI, ILI, EIE, LSE.
It implies at least one more thing : you are a dynamic type, and not a static one (you can check whether this is the case or not).
Now, I have an additional question : would you say you have quite a stable mental state, compared to other people ?
Let's be more specific : are you the one people come to, to tell about their torments, or to vent ? Or, are you the one trying to get rid of your uncomfortable state, by talking to stable people ?
Yeah, the evolution/involution thing is not as clear to me as some other dichotomies for example central/peripheral.Regarding the evolution / involution dichotomy, I was hoping you could immediately relate to the given examples, rather than on the general principle
Let's suppose for a moment that you are indeed a negativist and a right type (evolution, that is). You should belong to one of the following types : SEI, ILI, EIE, LSE.
It implies at least one more thing : you are a dynamic type, and not a static one (you can check whether this is the case or not).
Now, I have an additional question : would you say you have quite a stable mental state, compared to other people ?
Let's be more specific : are you the one people come to, to tell about their torments, or to vent ? Or, are you the one trying to get rid of your uncomfortable state, by talking to stable people ?
Oh, my mental state is not that stable tbh. I've usually sought out others who have a more stable state than I do. I've had breakdowns in the past, which have been quite transformative or me. That sounds D-A cog doesn't it? I've become more stable with age and learned to limit what causes these more extreme states, but I can still sense the tendency is always there.
If you are indeed from a central quadra, that leaves you with EIE and ILI. Now, that's where I should read more of your posts, including your questionnaire. But I've by far exceeded my reading quota for today, that's why I won't (or I could sink in a deep fatigue and we don't want that). I'll do that later. I leave you with the dreadful introspection for now
Lol I came back reading the whole thread and @BaruchJorgell broke it down almost to the conclusion that I came to. My way is not nearly as rigorous, my eyes glaze over reading all those renin dichotomies.
You do not seem like an EIE in reading these, I think even IEI would be debatable. It also kind of seems that you probably wrote that questionnaire at a weird time in your life.
This sounds like me, but it could be D-A like you said.I've had breakdowns in the past, which have been quite transformative or me.
I was thinking Gamma the whole time I was reading the questionnaire. I thought ESI does fit with a lot of this, but there are some things that sound like an Ni dom.
Like you mention over and over that you liked to daydream a lot.
You seem like an emotionally intelligent person who has control over their Fi relations. I would normally break this down with quotes but I'm a multitasking RN.
Which makes sense for ESI.
I don't really like subtypes but I think you are one of those elusive ILI-Ni types.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
No worries, I appreciate it.If you are indeed from a central quadra, that leaves you with EIE and ILI. Now, that's where I should read more of your posts, including your questionnaire. But I've by far exceeded my reading quota for today, that's why I won't (or I could sink in a deep fatigue and we don't want that). I'll do that later. I leave you with the dreadful introspection for now
You've helped alot, whether you realize it or not.
And thanks to everyone else that contributed as well.
How do you distinguish Ti from Ne?
I think both of them can be theoretical in their own way.
It may be because he may not like assumptions and hypothetical stuff. How does Ti work with Ne-polr?
"theories are someone else's take on their experience, not yours"
Ti adheres to its own logic and Ti egos can clash with each other due to their own logic, experience, don't you think so?
If I were to be right, I could see both Fi and Ti, but the confusion is here:
- Whether you value FiTe or TiFe.
- Whether you are Fi-base + Ti role or vice versa.
But from what I've deduced, I didn't see Fi-base, way too low for Fi valuing to try to manipulate despite having a good Fe, but it's ignoring.
Another possibility is LIE, which seems to be a case why you may look like ESI rather than LSI, as in the quadra value.
What so ever, which is also a tad strange in my opinion, I didn't see Ne PoLR. Your preference for Fi is rather suggestive as well. LSI/LIE.
I find uncertainty somewhat annoying, but I don't mind new input.
Gulenko also describes D-A cognition as never feeling certain about its own conclusions. Given the amount of time I've been into socionics vs the fact I have typed as several types in the past, makes me think I have this. Vs people who have gotten into socionics, typed themselves, and never had to look back (ie Adam, FDG).
I'm not particularly impatient about formulating a system of truth (Ti) or personal values (Fi). In fact, I don't particularly want to do this. It seems any system of absolute truth can be torn down by the opposite perspective (to every thesis there is an antithesis), I had to learn this fairly young.
MyResearch, I agree that I don't really come across like Varlawend or DF in my vids, though I don't know what that proves. I know 3 ILIs who are fairly nerdy in appearance and one who is a male model in contrast. I think people of the same type rarely appear to have much in common. I agree that I use alot of Ti, which ILIs should (as opposed to LIE). The sense of justice I was mentioning in the other thread does seem more Ti valuing, but I've seen some ILIs to whom that seems important so idk.
I didn't say you look different because of anyone's nerdiness or lack of it
What I notice is that people generally have similar posture, eye and lip movements and a communication style. DF is clearly T creative, it is very apparent that he uses both Ti and Te, however, valuing-wise it is not easy for me to tell if he values Te or Ti. Varlawend is very Ip and Ni (he is probably H-Ni) in the way he moves and talks. You don't fit to those descriptions.
How are you Ip? How are you T creative? Why are you Ni-dom? These are my questions.
Cognition styles are awesome, however, anyone can relate to each one. It is better to go with IEs and temperaments imo.
I didn't say you had. My point is that people of the same type rarely appear to have anything in common, if we go by images rather than traits. But ok, that isn't what you were doing.I didn't say you look different because of anyone's nerdiness or lack of it
Irrational because I notice my fitness for work depends alot on my state and mood. I don't have a stable work state, thus I am not as reliable as IJs. I can be really enthusiastic about work one day, and feel totally out of it the next, which rational managers don't really appreciate too much. I am more aware of my internal state and how it changes, than I am of "what needs to be done".What I notice is that people generally have similar posture, eye and lip movements and a communication style. DF is clearly T creative, it is very apparent that he uses both Ti and Te, however, valuing-wise it is not easy for me to tell if he values Te or Ti. Varlawend is very Ip and Ni (he is probably H-Ni) in the way he moves and talks. You don't fit to those descriptions.
How are you Ip? How are you T creative? Why are you Ni-dom? These are my questions.
Introversion due to behaviors, but also due to being lost in my process most of the time. Trying to broaden my circle of acquintances is draining for me.
T creative I don't have an argument for.
Ni dom because I daydream alot. I disagree with G that "his imagination is based on what he has experienced directly". Though alot of what I imagine is visually based, to some extent on movies I have watched, games I have played, dreams I had etc. G seems to attribute visual imagination to Si, especially in rationals. He also seems to think having flashes of visual memory is related to sensing. I don't particularly agree with this though.
I agree to an extent. You can pick and choose elements of any cognitive style as relevant to one's own cognitive style.Cognition styles are awesome, however, anyone can relate to each one. It is better to go with IEs and temperaments imo.
Still, I think I looked at more than just the surface here. I can see how I would be negativist is I said in some other posts, for example approaching situations as a matter of "how do I avoid the negative" rather than a "what rewards do I reap here". I don't think a positivist type like LIE or LSI would see things that way. LIE's outlook when approaching a project tends to be "how much money am I getting out of it, hopefully as much as possible" I have noticed. Mine is more like "how do I avoid bad relations with others and being upset in my internal rythm". Sure, if it's a job, I'll look at the salary but in a way that seeks to maximize making money. I've turned down jobs where the employer was willing to negociate the salary simply because I didn't trust him. Though I know you don't think I'm LIE, just throwing that out there.
This could be a result of irrational subtype or maybe because you are p.
I also have a vivid visual imagination. Can you give other examples in terms of how you use Ni?
Agreed.
Irrational subtype - maybe.
SENSORI also have a vivid visual imagination.
Yeah. For example, predicting others' behaviors. I can do this fairly accurately. Once I get an image/model in my mind of a person and their character I can predict their behaviors pretty well. Tbh I am rarely surprised by people's actions. I wrote this the other day: https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...=1#post1470597Can you give other examples in terms of how you use Ni?
Anticipation too, like foreseeing negative outcomes and being prudent, though I've seen LSIs do this too.
If G says so..SENSOR
I also do that. I think Ti, Ni and Ne have their own ways to make predictions. Can you give a more detailed spesific example?
I agree with things above. I think they want to avoid from negative outcomes, however, I wouldn't say that they are good at seeing them. Both xSIs spend too much time on workplaces that they cannot get any good outcome. ESIs spend more time than LSIs I guess due to their low T. When I enter new workplaces, I can easily tell what is going to happen after a few months because I observe how I am and others getting treated, rewarded, penalized, recognized, ignored. I generally do something that can potentially bring lots of noise, tailored in a way that company wants as a way to test their response and also in order to prove myself. According to the amount of response I get and my observations, I exactly know what is going to happen. However, sometimes xSI's way works better ofcourse.
When I am working with LSIs, if we have to get some help from other departments, and eventhough they witnessed that they cannot help in the past for a few times, they sometimes believe that they are going to resolve it because they promise to do so. Again in terms of relationships, if they are not e1, most of them are ok with getting involved with someone who has a gf/bf, they don't think that person can do the same to them and how it could affect them.
The bolded line though is something I heard some LSIs say it. LSIs also prepare before starting to work and going to meetings due to their Ni valuing. Can you give examples that illustrates how you avoided a negative outcome?
Last edited by myresearch; 08-21-2021 at 08:44 AM.
I've just read your questionnaire. It's hard not to consider EIE. The interest in drama and the frequent impersonations are typical of that type.
But what really makes me consider EIE is your concern for relationships, and all your problems in that area. It makes me think of the Fi+ controlling function. In short, the controlling function is what you think about almost constantly, without being able of improvement. It is how you waste your energy.
Last edited by BaruchJorgell; 08-21-2021 at 08:41 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
