Type me

[Hellraiser]

Hey
Y

What do you study or do for a living? How did you come to do that? What do you like or dislike about it? In. Between jobs. Last job I had was maintenance. I liked the pay and days off, benefits. I dislike dealing with people.

What else do you do on a daily basis? What are your interests and hobbies? Why do you do them?
HOBBIES
Watching movies
Talking about movies, meanings, theories.
Gaming, D&D, Rpgs, FPS.
Working out
Hiking
Reading and writing (Fantasy, Horror)
Going to concerts
Playing bass, guitar and drums.
Listening to music. Metal is my go to. I enjoy all types though.

Describe your relationships with family and friends. What do you like and dislike about them?

FAMILY- Strained. My parents and sibling are very religious. Growing up was ok until I started questioning the bible and it became bad. I Was consistently punished for refusing to go to church or questioning the bible. I would point out contradictions at s young age. Eventually moved out, run an atheist group, debate.

FRIENDS- Pretty good but I can only tolerate them for so long.

What do you look for in friends? In romantic relationships?
Trust

What conflicts have you encountered recently with other people? Why did they happen? Which kinds seem to happen on a regular basis?

People trying to micro manage me or try and boss me around. It happened because at the time I worked with a kiss add. I just unruly told him to fuck off.

What are your strengths? What do people like about you? What do you like about yourself?
My strengths

Rational
Determined
Ambitious
Stand up for myself
Confidence

My Weakness
No tact
Impatient
Unwilling to Follow in Inefficient Hierarchies

What goals, aspirations, or plans do you have for the future, and why?

To finish my degree in computer science and I plan on releasing a book I've been writing.

If you won the lottery and didn't have to work anymore, what would you do?

Invest it and live only off the proceeds. The big treat for me would be immediately deleting my alarm clock application, forever. Knowing that I'd always wake without*being*woken, for the rest of my life, would feel so free.
Take care of my wife and kid. Make sure they are set for life.

What kinds of things do you do to manage and/or beautify your environment (your room, your house, etc.)?

Keep it clean. Add things to my room that makes me happy.

How do you behave around strangers?

Stand offish. I act like I don't want to talk because I dont.

How do you react to conflict? What do you do if somebody insults or attacks you?

Fairly well. I get an adrenaline rush and I wish things right back. Mainly make them look stupid.

Would you ever be interested in starting a business? Why or why not? What role would you play in it? What kind of business would it be?

Yes.
Owner
Gaming related
However I don't like dealing with people so I would never do it.

How do you dress or manage your appearance?

Very important I look and smell good
Beard is well taken care of.
Clothes always look clean. I don't like bunny.
I usually wear well fitted pants, shirts. I look like a meatalhead.

How do you approach responsibility? What do you tend to expect of others?
I'm a responsible person as I moved out at an early age so I learned how to take care of myself at a young age.
I expect nothing.

Your friend bursts into tears. What do you do? How does it make you feel?

Uncomfortable. I don't do well with emotions including my own.

What was (or is) your high school experience like?

I had fun. Did what I wanted. Argued with teachers who didn't make sense. I took hard classes to challenge myself. Growing up my teachers said I needed to be challenged as it was what drove me to become better.

What are your spiritual or religious beliefs and why do you hold them?
Atheist. Religion has no scientific evidence to support it.

What are your political beliefs, and why? How much do you care about politics?

Liberal.

What kind of work environment do you prefer? What do you look for in a job?

My work environment is organized. I hate disorganized work environments.

What is or was your favorite school subject and why?

English
Reading
Geology
Debate

What do you do if you're not getting what you want? What approach do you use?

I've manipulated my work environment to get what I want(Promotion)

Now I try to understand and look at options available to me achieve my goal

Are you comfortable taking leadership roles? In what areas? Why or why not?

If need yes. If I think I'll do better I will take the role.

How often do you get angry? What kinds of things make you angry?

Often

What is your sense of humor like? Do you joke around a lot?

My sense of humor is dry,sarcastic.
I joke with those I care about.

What were you like as a child? How have you changed since then?

Rebellious and still am

OTHER INFIRMATION ABOUT MYSELF

Ive been told I come off intimidating until I let you in

Blunt

Don't like losing

Can be a perfectionist with things I like

I like ACCURATE info

Very competitive

Did sports growing up and was a nerd
Geek/Jock personality

Around my wife and kid I'm caring and funny and protective

It's important to me that my kid is smart

I collect Star Wars memorabilia and Horror.

Love art but suck at it

My wife has said I remind her of characters that tend to be xSTP or xNTJ.

Think fast

Always have an answer ready to go

I like Psychology and Philiosphy

Assertive

Find existing flaws in current systems, point out loopholes and offer creative solutions



​

[Sah Kel Plaisir]

mb LSE ?

[voider]

Rational ST.

[RBRS]

My take is ESTj (I should clarify, as some people might not be getting this, that if I say that you shouldn't be posting or trusting forum answers, my take is evidently not to be also specially trusted). I would recommend that if you are very into this, go for a professional typer, people on forums can be so dense it surpasses what's realistically possible.

[SGF]

My take is ESTj. I would recommend that if you are very into this, go for a professional typer, people on forums can be so dense it surpasses what's realistically possible.

[Sol]

My take is ESTj.

Without a videointerview a typing is too doubtful. Especially when those are too new and may know types theory to filter the info in short selfdescriptions to fit wished types or traits supposed by them before.

> I would recommend that if you are very into this, go for a professional typer

In the existing situation a paid typer, having some experience, is generally some better (if he does not use strange hypotheses and methods) than most people on forums. That "some" is not absolute but about an average, alike experienced typer has an accuracy ~50% when a common forum noob have it ~30%. So a situation when an experienced typer mistakes is not rare. And also it's rather possible situations when correct is a noob but not a paid typer.

But it's baseless to trust them highly as:

- There is no objective proof that some today typing method gives high accuracy.
- There is no objective typing skills certification. Only speculative opinions about someones' types.
- Some of them intensively use doubtful and baseless hypotheses as Reinin dichotomies. Or even own made ones as heretical Gulenko or may use strange methods as typing by static body traits, though they may falsly claim to that they use Socionics.
- No reasons to think that today paid typers have in average high typing match or even between some of them. Based on known experiments today typing methods may give typing matches <50% between anyone and <20% in average. This means common low typing accuracy between anyone.
- Many paid typers trust too much to what is said to them by people who may know types theory and were prejusticed to what types they have, what gives additional possibilities for mistakes. While typers know too few about common behavior of those people to be able to notice the degree they were fooled.

> people on forums can be so dense it surpasses what's realistically possible

Problems with typing by "people on forums" are the same.
Plus: 1) a lack of experience of typing and watching people with known types (it's very rare when is other), 2) some don't understand theory basics correctly, including as read a mess of texts written by random people instead of normal typology books, 3) agreement to identify types without good data for this, as for example having only a questionnaire.

Due to the said, it's common to see disgreements in what types people have. And it's more not a suprise to get disagreements from incompetent noobs which are 99% here.
As there are no _reasonable_ reasons to trust highly to some paid typer or more to say to recommend all of them as deserving good trust. The motivation for such misleading follows from: 1) don't knowing the bad situation with practice and theory in Socionics, sometimes inabbility to understand it due to lack of knowledge of normal theory and understanding of what objectivity is, 2) can be emotional reasons to trust as liking to have some type goten from some paid typer while other sourcers (as "people on forums") gave types which are liked lesser.

-

From general view, an experienced typer (as some of those who take money) can be comparable with a test which has a different approach. For example, tests of different approach are a based on dichotomies and based on 8 functions, while tests of same approach are rather similar. The accuracy of such typers following from ~17% average typing match is somewhere 30-50%, what should be close to not bad tests accuracy. When more of sources give same results - more chance those results are correct.
So an experienced/paid typer may be recommended to be used (better with an excluding of too heretical of them). But it's baseless to think such typers as deserving high trust, what is good be noted near such recommendations.
The only good way on today to be assured in your own type is by IR effects with IRL people having known types, when those IR effects fit good to the theory. You may identify types of those people yourself and then evaluate IR effects. While to understand what traits are more possible to be correct ones - helps in this.

If @Frddy had ENTJ type indeed, he'd uderstood the problem of logical objectivity better. And mb own type more correctly to see more use in opinions which he got on the forum and from other sources, and lesser idealized speculations of some paid typer.
That "ENTJ" is doubtful and was gotten from Protskiy. This and all other today experienced typers may have significant % of mistakes and other paid typers may give him other types easily, to understand what he knows enough but ignores to recommend them in general. Such unreasonable generalization and naive idealizations point on possible weak T, same as his emotionality and personal attention since the title there.

P.S.
@shotgunfingers
To loose a mind is to trust highly to some typer without having for this good reasonable basis. The same is for types traits.

[Sol]

@Hellraiser
do a videointerview
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...=1#post1096450

or use tests. to trust what is said, especially by local noobs, by a questionnaire is useless

[RBRS]

Without a videointerview a typing is too doubtful. Especially when those are too new and may know types theory to filter the info in short selfdescriptions to fit wished types or traits supposed by them before.

> I would recommend that if you are very into this, go for a professional typer

In the existing situation a paid typer, having some experience, is generally some better (if he does not use strange hypotheses and methods) than most people on forums.
But it's baseless to trust them highly as:

- There is no objective proof that some today typing method gives high accuracy.
- There is no objective typing skills certification. Only speculative opinions about someones' types.
- Some of them intensively use doubtful and baseless hypotheses as Reinin dichotomies. Or even own made ones as heretical Gulenko or may use strange methods as typing by static body traits, though they may falsly claim to that they use Socionics.
- No reasons to think that today paid typers have in average high typing match or even between some of them. Based on known experiments today typing methods may give typing matches <50% between anyone and <20% in average. This means common low typing accuracy between anyone.
- Many paid typers trust too much to what is said to them by people who may know types theory and were prejusticed to what types they have, what gives additional possibilities for mistakes. While typers know too few about common behavior of those people to be able to notice the degree they were fooled.

> people on forums can be so dense it surpasses what's realistically possible

Problems with typing by "people on forums" are the same.
Plus: 1) a lack of experience of typing and watching people with known types (it's very rare when is other), 2) some don't understand theory basics correctly, including as read a mess of texts written by random people instead of normal typology books, 3) agreement to identify types without good data for this, as for example having only a questionnaire.

Due to the said, it's common to see disgreements in what types people have. And it's more not a suprise to get disagreements from incompetent noobs which are 99% here.
As there are no _reasonable_ reasons to trust highly to some paid typer or more to say to recommend all of them as deserving good trust. The motivation for such misleading follows from: 1) don't knowing the bad situation with practice and theory in Socionics, sometimes inabbility to understand it due to lack of knowledge of normal theory and understanding of what objectivity is, 2) can be emotional reasons to trust as liking to have some type goten from some paid typer while other sourcers (as "people on forums") gave types which are liked lesser.

-

From general view, an experienced typer (as some of those who take money) can be comparable with a test which has a different approach. For example, tests of different approach are a based on dichotomies and based on 8 functions, while tests of same approach are rather similar. The accuracy of such typers following from ~17% average typing match is somewhere 30-50%, what should be close to not bad tests accuracy. When more of sources give same results - more chance those results are correct.
So an experienced/paid typer may be recommended to be used (better with an excluding of too heretical of them). But it's baseless to think such typers as deserving high trust, what is good be noted near such recommendations.
The only good way on today to be assured in your own type is by IR effects with IRL people having known types, when those IR effects fit good to the theory. You may identify types of those people yourself and then evaluate IR effects. While to understand what traits are more possible to be correct ones - helps in this.

P.S.
If @Frddy had ENTJ type indeed, he'd uderstood the problem of logical objectivity better. And mb own type more correctly to see more use in opinions which he got on the forum and from other sources, and lesser idealized speculations of some paid typer.

@shotgunfingers
To loose a mind is to trust highly to some typer without having for this good reasonable basis. The same is for types traits.

Socionics is in itself a pseudoscientific "discipline" lacking a demonstrable empirical basis. The fact that we are spending our time learning about it, perhaps implies that we are leaving aside a purely objective approach in favor of particular interest or subjective opinions (In fact, the strictly reasonable thing in this case is to completely abandon typologies in favor of classical psychology [And yet we would largely lack empirical foundation, as psychology and specially psychoanalysis are pseudocientific disciplines]). There's not only no empirical basis for typing, there is no empirical evidence for the whole of jungian typology, and typology in general.

Even though the "ability" in type diagnosis cannot be certifiable, it is evident that asking in a forum for typings is an invitation to people to share opinions that are not only subjective and lacking in experience, and not only incomplete or from Noobs, but sometimes completely absurd, and these opinions could perhaps cloud your generalized vision of the theory (However lacking this vision could be originally) (Some forum users associate haircut or car brands with types even, I doubt you can defend such a thing, if anyone can)

The "experienced" typers usually have spent far more time both studying and developing the theory (and the supposed baseless heresies) than most forum users, and tend to have far more extensive experience in typing (even if again, these typings are subjective). If you don't have an extensive experience or knowledge of socionics, using an experienced typer's service can be worthy. Furthermore, it's far more reasonable to trust Archetype Center, Gulenko or WSS typings over forum typings, this is evident as some forum typers can decide their response based on physical traits (Haircut, shirt color, etc) (If you can defend typings based on haircut or clothing, I would consider this debate done)

Typings from this forum, both in ITR and in traits have usually been far off the mark in my case. Talking about liking some results more, your typing about me (INxp) is far closer to my original typing (or what you could call "traits more liked") than Archetype Center's typing. I do not negate some typings on myself, In fact I appreciate suggestions if these make sense. The two test I've tried more times are Gulenko's dicotomy test, for which results are almost all the time LII or LIE, and Sociotype.com tests, in which results are almost all the time ILI or LIE. Despite me not having an extensive network, some close people's types (specially after giving them tests) are recognizable, and through ITR ILI and LIE are the most fitting, with LIE being the most fitting (Which is one of the main reasons why a certain close person [I concede that this person has my level of experience] kept telling me I was probably LIE, and I didn't took it seriously until even the experienced typer was pointing in that direction). I have additionally flooded Archetype center with emails questioning their diagnosis until the point they have stopped responding. I'm interested in using socionics as a tool, if I am not LIE it's not a great deal, as I am not to be modeled after a type, a type is to be modeled after me (and modeled after the rest of the population).

If you have to offer any suggestions on my type, feel free to share.

On a final note, I would like to know the sources of your mentioned experiments.

[Sol]

@Frddy
The common sense of the term "professional" means objectively good skills.
But there is NO objective skills certification in Socionics. No exams which proof that you identify types objectively good. And no even widely accepted ways to check real typing match with someone or with some method.
In today Socionics exist only speculative opinions which often (>50%) contradict between typers, including paid ones.

The only what Socionics has are people which take money for typing. Some of which have good typing experience, use relatively appropriate theory and methods.
When skills of any of them will be evaluated by any other typer in real matches - there will be goten the match so far from 100%, than to think those skills as good will be not reasonable. Optimistically such match will be ~50%.

It's what with "professionalism" in today Socionics.

[aixelsyd]

@Frddy
The common sense of the term "professional" means objectively good skills.
But there is NO objective skills certification in Socionics. No exams which proof that you identify types objectively good. And no even widely accepted ways to check real typing match with someone or with some method.
In today Socionics exist only speculative opinions which often (>50%) contradict between typers, including paid ones.

The only what Socionics has are people which take money for typing. Some of which have good typing experience, use relatively appropriate theory and methods.
When skills of any of them will be evaluated by any other typer in real matches - there will be goten the match so far from 100%, than to think those skills as good will be not reasonable. Optimistically such match will be ~50%.

It's what with "professionalism" in today Socionics.

Agreed. Professional socionist is a scam, imo. This stuff is so subjective that most of what I thought I knew no longer makes sense anymore. It's like the more about it I read, the more questions I have than answers.