Ludwig van Beethoven

[Jonathan]

A possibility that comes to mind is Grieg. Maybe you can think of others.

Ravel. Chopin maybe....

Dmitri's site lists Chopin as IEI. I assumed that was right because I thought he was even before I knew about Socionics. However, I would agree that some of his music effects a sort of rich, flowery texture that may seem quite SF, and may be very comforting to NTs who listen to it that way. Early works, such as the E minor piano concerto, especially give me this feeling (of course, many of the performers are probably SEI.)

Nevertheless, there is probably enough of a sense of free-flowing imagination, leading in all sorts of unexpected places, to suspect that he really was -dominant. Chopin's music is structurally quite complex, although the gracefulness completely hides that. Anyway, if IEI isn't right, SEI seems a reasonable second choice.

Grieg is an interesting case. Just going on the music, it sounds SEE to me me, because I don't get any strong sense of . However, Liszt seems much more extraverted and a better candidate for SEE to me, so maybe Grieg could be SEI...

Anyhow, I see on the "Celebrity Benchmark" list that Nikita Bogoslovsky is supposed SEI. I've never heard of him; I'll have to find about this guy...

[olduser]

seriously how the hell do you hear functions in music? We can barely agree on good definitions of the functions and you people fucking hear them?

pfft.

[Jonathan]

We can barely agree on good definitions of the functions and you people fucking hear them?

pfft.

Well, I'd agree that the Socionics function definitions seem a bit fuzzier to me than I'd like. In a way, using the same Jungian typology structure to understand music is more objective than trying to understand a full person; it's more set in stone; you can discuss it more concretely.

If people can see evidence of type in the way someone writes, or what that person looks like, why not in music? I think music conveys a state of mind quite well.

On the other hand, I'm fully aware that someone may, for whatever reason, compose something that would seem atypical of that person's type.

[Jonathan]

PS...by the way, this discussion, from details of Beethoven's life, has lead toward some reason to consider EIE () as his type. Whether or not that's correct, getting back to the VI aspect, I'm curious....are there any visual features that suggest IEI? Are there any traits of IEI that would be consistent with Beethoven's appearance?

[Phaedrus]

Filatova mentions Beethoven as an example of an ILI composer. If she is right about that, maybe it would also indirectly make the case for Wittgenstein as an ILI somewhat stronger, since Wittgenstein once said that one should be like Beethoven (as a person, especially his working habits).

[Jonathan]

Filatova mentions Beethoven as an example of an ILI composer. If she is right about that, maybe it would also indirectly make the case for Wittgenstein as an ILI somewhat stronger, since Wittgenstein once said that one should be like Beethoven (as a person, especially his working habits).

Interesting. Where does Filatova mention Beethoven? Are there historical typings by Filatova on the net somewhere?

Of course Beethoven has been seen as a model by people of so many different types, but if Wittegenstein means that one should be willing to discard or change an idea until one has find the "right" one, and to discard what may be good in itself but doesn't function correctly with the whole (these being central points to Beethoven's method of composing, as documented through his sketches and historical accounts), then that could be a case for ILI.

[Phaedrus]

Where does Filatova mention Beethoven? Are there historical typings by Filatova on the net somewhere?

She mentions it in her book, from which misutii has been translating type descriptions lately. I don't know where he found it.

Of course Beethoven has been seen as a model by people of so many different types, but if Wittegenstein means that one should be willing to discard or change an idea until one has find the "right" one, and to discard what may be good in itself but doesn't function correctly with the whole (these being central points to Beethoven's method of composing, as documented through his sketches and historical accounts), then that could be a case for ILI.

Wittgenstein was like that of course, but I don't know whether that settles the issue between ILI or LII in his case.


I cannot comment on all the things you have been discussed regarding Beethoven's type in this thread, but you mentioned earlier that

Another theme in Beethoven's music was the desire to create the 'perfect' formal structure...the most concise possible statement.

and that is of course a typical ILI trait.

[Jonathan]

Where does Filatova mention Beethoven? Are there historical typings by Filatova on the net somewhere?

She mentions it in her book, from which misutii has been translating type descriptions lately. I don't know where he found it.

I do a search for "Beethoven" with author "misutii" and get no hits. Where is this post?

[Phaedrus]

Where does Filatova mention Beethoven? Are there historical typings by Filatova on the net somewhere?

She mentions it in her book, from which misutii has been translating type descriptions lately. I don't know where he found it.

I do a search for "Beethoven" with author "misutii" and get no hits. Where is this post?

He was kind enough to send me his machine translated version of the book (which might be on the net somewhere, I don't know).

Where can all of Filatova's type descriptions be found?

I have the book saved as an html file i can send it you if you want, i've been slowly editing the type profiles, so far i have done INFp, ESTp, INFj, ENFj and INTp, i'm averaging like one a month, lol, half way done ESFj.

after your finished checking this over completely please tell me what i edited wrongly, and ill change those with the errors you already caught, these are my fave type descriptions by far

http://the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9464


I have trouble with my e-mail right now, but I could probably send you a copy later. Or you could ask misutii.

Here are the parts about Beethoven from the book:

Balzac, just as Jack, can realize well himself in the business, especially if he belongs to the subphylum with the intensive logic. Business and [razvorotlivyj], it sees well profit and has numerous characteristicss, which bring together it with the jack.
The ability to penetrate in the internal world of man deeply contributes to the artistic activity of the representatives of this psycho-type: S. Bondarchuk, d. Of [banionis], a. Of [shirvindt], J. [mazina], [Zh]. Bolotov also relate to the psycho-type ILI. There are among them writers (M. [Zhvanetskij]), and singers (l. valley), and poets, and composers (l. Beethoven), and artists of ballet (a. Pavlov). ...

Known names of — THE ILI:
L. Beethoven, a. of Pavlov, M. Kutuzov, Yu. Andropov, e. Of [gajdar], i. Of [khakamada], s. Bondarchuk, n. Krupskaya, a. Shirvindt, d. [mazina], d. Banionis, M. Zhvanetskij, M. of Tereckov, l. valley.

[Dioklecian]

I always thought ISFJ for old Beethoven.

[Jonathan]

I always thought ISFJ for old Beethoven.

You know, I've considered ISFj for Beethoven; it would make some sense, just from a functional point of view, though not in terms of personality description. ILI does seem to fit his approach too. I have thought that Beethoven may be distinguished by a combination of very strong and at the same time.

Incidentally, it appears we do have a recording of a (very amateur) composer who many Socionists seem convinced is ISFj. ...though his approach doesn't seem at all like Beethoven (of course he's not anywhere the league, but it sure is an interesting video)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCsGSMze_6Q

[Phaedrus]

I always thought ISFJ for old Beethoven.

You are joking, aren't you? ISFj doesn't make any sense at all.

[Jonathan]

I always thought ISFJ for old Beethoven.

You are joking, aren't you? ISFj doesn't make any sense at all.

Yeah, ISFj has some problems in terms of thinking of people who are ISFj. The case for ISFj is that his music seems to have at the surface a certain emotional intensity, that seems to build up to very clearly thought through form, so one may see it as reaching to (and mastering) .

Actually, by suggesting INTp, you're closer to ISFj than all the other hypotheses put forth (still Gamma ).

One thing about Beethoven as INTp is that whereas Shostakovitch's music seems to be the very picture of INTp as described by Socionists, Beethoven's music has somewhat different emphasis, but this could be explained by different decisions regarding the musical path he chose to follow. It's been said that the activation function may sometimes appear to come off strongly. Perhaps we might hypothesize Beethoven as an Fi subtype of INTp.

Of course, with Tcaud's new theory, we can combine any two types...How about ISFp-INTp (or INTp-ISFp....not sure what the difference is yet )? I sometimes here Beethoven as ISFp, but still reaching for .

There is a good case for him being Ip anyhow.

[Enters Laughing]

I wrote such a lot of shit in this thread.

[marooned]

He reminds me of Isis.

[717495]

Does Beethoven really have POLR-Fe? Gee, he took the emotion in classical music to a new level. Nothing about that seems right.

My guess is SLE. His music and personality, along with VI, fits SeTi. I doubt anything else.

[Enters Laughing]

Beethoven's Fifth is Beta NF!

[Rubicon]

Beethoven transcends types!

[Jonathan]

Does Beethoven really have POLR-Fe? Gee, he took the emotion in classical music to a new level. Nothing about that seems right.

My guess is SLE. His music and personality, along with VI, fits SeTi. I doubt anything else.

SLE seems so far from anything that makes sense to me, but then again everyone has his/her own view. This reminds me of a conversation awhile back when someone (I forgot who) insisted that Mozart was SLE (I think IEE), but I couldn't get the person to mention any specifics.

But getting to your main point, how is strong emotion compatible with Gamma or especially with ILI....I think this is one of the central points of contention.

Depending on your particular model, one view is that strong emotion must only be Fe (according to the view that Fi must be reserved, or that emotion or expression = Fe). Another viewpoint is that Fe != emotion or expression, but rather it is the dynamic approach to emotional things (e.g., ever changing, leading things through emotion), and that more "static" expressions of emotion...e.g., where the emotion is kind of the same emotion until there is a change of circumstances or dynamic expression of logic (change of strategy, such as a clear formal decision) is actually indicative of Fi, even if it is very "strong."

I tend to lean more toward the second point of view...that when expressed musically, Fi may be strong, even if Fi-oriented people appear reserved in public.

Still, I very much understand the sentiment that Beethoven's 5th expresses Beta, and so one of the types I have considered is LSI...seems more likely than SLE. As to whether it is Beta NF, well I know some people are influenced by the type description by Wesiband of that describes EIE in terms of the theme from Beethoven's 5th. I don't think that's compelling enough to go on.

A lot of performances of the fifth seem Beta. But performance seems to influence perception alot. Any performance by Carlos Kleiber always seems Gamma to me (and convincingly so).

I tend to rule out SLE because it seems to me that base-Se in classical music tends to be expressed as a certain sense of depicting being in the thick of action; most composers who I think may be SLE are opera composers, and they create a sort of realistic view of things happening.....doesn't seem to be the emphasis in Beethoven. So, while I'm open to just about any idea, that seems a long-shot. Also, Beethoven's highly sensitive, introspective personality really doesn't fit SLE, in my opinion.

It is possible though that Beethoven used cycles to bring out elements not found in the simple "pristine" types...e.g., starting from say an ILI point of view, he might have chosen to emphasize Ti in certain pieces by reinterpreting the existing Te from a "larger viewpoint" so to speak so as to bring out a sense of Fe as another component.

[Jonathan]

PS....Of course I realize that when I started this thread way back, I asked people to VI him...so I should expect people to say "he looks like EII" and others to say "he looks like SLE." Not knowing much about VI expect from the point of view of comparing the facial expression with the various types, I guess it's hard to get much out of that approach except to find out that opinions for VI are even a bit more scattered than they are for other methods.

[krieger]

But getting to your main point, how is strong emotion compatible with Gamma or especially with ILI....I think this is one of the central points of contention.

Something that may be relevant to that issue: according to those "functional revise" theories that hitta popularized a few months ago, Gamma and Beta value the "+" version of Fe, which is associated with strong, passionate emotion.

[Jonathan]

Something that may be relevant to that issue: according to those "functional revise" theories that hitta popularized a few months ago, Gamma and Beta value the "+" version of Fe, which is associated with strong, passionate emotion.

Yeah, that's the left-shifting hypothesis. Everyone in some aspect appears like the quadra of the type to the left them. I've thought about that too. But those thoughts evolved into the idea of cycles...that someone in Gamma might have a Beta or Delta "wing." Otherwise, I never saw any good reason to believe in left-shifting. Why not just call every one the type to the left of them? It's confusing +/- with values/devalues, which seems to be the core of hitta's argument. But I remain open to the idea that there's something there whenever I encounter someone who seems to be a little like two non-conflicting quadras...and that's where the cycles thing comes in.

[Jonathan]

This could easily be INFj under stress, too...

Possibly. I think at least that we should not expect that composers can only work with functions in the quadra. It is very possible to have a Delta composer make strong reference to Se for an artistic purpose.

I think something people forget when considering types of Beethoven or Mozart (and certain other composers) is that they were both trained early and HARD to be natural musicians....

This is a good point; some of that training can appear like "Ti" to people. This is why some people thought Mozart had to be an ILE or SLE; they hear any good counterpoint and assume the composer is Ti. I tend to think that Filatova is right that Mozart was probably IEE; just as some IEEs master the theory behind Socionics very well and that doesn't make them ILE, so Mozart does not necessarily have to be a strong-Ti type to have good counterpoint.

Beethoven had only slightly more leeway

I'm not sure this is accurate. Beethoven was not a court musician. He was supported by rich friends, and that's why he had leeway to write as he pleased. I don't see any reason to think that he wrote in any other way other than the way he wanted to write. Sure, he wrote a few pieces to please people in terms of the current fashions, which helped him financially. But just because he was a product of his time does not mean that he was restricted. I don't think we should assume that he would have wanted to jump to his later period earlier in his life, or that he would have ever wanted to write like 20th century composers, for example.

He was a slightly less-fluid arranger, having more trouble getting his art to come out on paper/to the ear in the way that he heard it in his head.

This is a sort of cliche; one hears it again and again. I think it's a half-truth. Almost nobody was as fluent as Mozart, but I think that Beethoven's tendency to work things out had everything to do with personality (whether Socionics can explain it is a matter for debate, but I think it relates). Basically, it wasn't that he had difficult notating what was in his head. Rather, he had an inclination to have to perfect things, to work things out, to have a process via revision. If he wanted to, he could write very fast. He was known as a great improvizer. He wrote some pieces, like his violin concerto, quickly and they still came out sounding so perfect. I think he was simply not content if it was an easy process; he was not content to simply write down what came to him. He was after something different.

Still, he wrote more easily than modern composers usually can because again, music and theory were hammered into him in ways we don't today experience.

Probably true, but it is hammered into modern composers that they must be "different" or at least "modern" with their language, and there are so many different language precepts to choose from. Tonal composers even today sometimes write rather fast (e.g., film score composers, jazz musicians). In Beethoven's day, there was more of a set language, and an existing vocabulary/grammar, and a general framework regarding what the whole purpose of art is in the first place.

I say all this because I think that when people try to analyze their personalities based on their genius or the way they wrote it's not quite right. Anyone could be a talented musician/composer with the kind of intense, long and difficult training both men underwent.

It is certainly the case that when I appeal to how the music sounds in considering a composer's type, I am doing so on the premise that their personality "shows through" in the music, despite their training, etc. But I don't see how anything you've said would in any way challenge or contradict that. Perhaps training may in some ways obscure type (e.g., the case I mentioned where perhaps via training a person seems to people to be more Ti), but that doesn't mean the type doesn't show through in what a person chooses to emphasize in his/her art/speech/music, etc. Really, following the same logic you seem to be using, we couldn't type anybody. For example, whereas people will look at a mathematician's use of logic as evidence that the person is LII, you might say the person might just as easily have been SEE but was trained so hard in school as to appear to be Ti. The training-overrides-all-other-considerations argument basically means we can forget about typing anybody, except people who are uneducated.

Personally, I think Mozart=SEI.
Beethoven=EII

Any reasons? I know Keirsey thinks Mozart is ISFP in his system, but that's because any composer is automatically ISFP according Keirsey. Any other reasons to think SEI?

[krieger]

Yeah, that's the left-shifting hypothesis. Everyone in some aspect appears like the quadra of the type to the left them. I've thought about that too. But those thoughts evolved into the idea of cycles...that someone in Gamma might have a Beta or Delta "wing." Otherwise, I never saw any good reason to believe in left-shifting. Why not just call every one the type to the left of them? It's confusing +/- with values/devalues, which seems to be the core of hitta's argument. But I remain open to the idea that there's something there whenever I encounter someone who seems to be a little like two non-conflicting quadras...and that's where the cycles thing comes in.

I don't see how you arrive at this "left-shifting" interpretation.

It seems to me that the theory simply claims that the similarities between any two adjacent quadras can be attributed to both the Judging and Perceiving axes instead of to just one of these.

So where normally we'd say: Gamma and Beta are similar in that they both value Se/Ni, we can now also say: Gamma and Beta are similar in that they both value Fe+, Ti+, Fi- and Te-. The first attributes the similarity to the Perceiving axis, the second to the Judging axis.

[Jonathan]

I don't see how you arrive at this "left-shifting" interpretation.

It seems to me that the theory simply claims that the similarities between any two adjacent quadras can be attributed to both the Judging and Perceiving axes instead of to just one of these.

So where normally we'd say: Gamma and Beta are similar in that they both value Se/Ni, we can now also say: Gamma and Beta are similar in that they both value Fe+, Ti+, Fi- and Te-. The first attributes the similarity to the Perceiving axis, the second to the Judging axis.

I call it left-shifting because Hitta's interpretations of +/- are (or were back when I was on this forum more) somewhat close to values/devalues. And it works out that the valued elements for any type that have + signs are the elements that the type to the left values....e.g., LII is said to value Fi+, Ne+, Si+, and Te+...and so on.

But I see your point that with the +/- system, then what is fundamentally a similarity in the valued irrational elements can be seen as a similarity in valued rational elements (and vice-versa). However, whether that has explanatory value or if it's just a consequence of how one derives the +/- for the rational elements based on what the irrational ones are (and vice-versa), is another question.

[Jonathan]

Excellence in improvisation comes (I won't say completely by any means) but mainly because one is very aware of tonal relationships, key change rules, and a whole lot of other theory they've put into practice many, many times.

I think training is important, but it is interesting how some people improvise well without much training and others know lots of theory but don't necessarily improvise well. Probably in the jazz field (where they still have a sort of system to train people to improvise), they're able to get people to improvise through training. I've always done a lot of improvisation myself, but although I took a lot of theory courses, I was initially self-taught. It is impressive though if someone has learned the discipline to improvise fugues or has a really solid jazz technique.

I just think it's especially hard to type Mozart because everyone who came after him had more room to play (Chopin, Grieg, Liszt, etc.).

From our vantage point it may look as if he was restricted in terms of harmonies, etc., by his time period, but I doubt he saw it that way. He was the product of a period when formal clarity was in and where the complexities of the late Baroque were out of style. But although certain time periods may emphasize certain personality elements, I don't think that prevents typing the people working within that style; rather, the people for whom that style works well tend to rise to the top....or if a very talented person is out of step with the style of his/her time, that person will adapt the style somehow to fit better.

In my view, the Classical period emphasized clarity in terms of sections and where the music is going, and very deliberate, clear decisions to go between sections. To me, that sort of methodical clarity in the way the music changes over time (the dynamic aspect) is music's version of Te. One thing unique about Mozart in that time period was his emphasis on melodic elaboration, as if the music is constantly coming up with new ideas, which to me is a reflection of Ne. So if he was IEE (which I think Filatova got more from his biography, not from the way his music sounds, though I emphasize the latter), that would make sense.

It's not Kiersey, it's actually because I've always identified with Mozart (maybe that's because I'm a piano player and *might* be SEI myself and want to identify with somebody haha I don't know)...

I seem to recall that you had a thread about your type. SEI seemed to fit in terms of what was included in that thread (if I have the right person). But somehow your avatar looks LII to me. ...though that may not even be you, and I'm not even big on VI...it's just an impression.

As for VI, I would say he looks pretty SEI.

Not sure...most of the portraits of him are so stylized. I'm not that good with VI so it's hard to tell. I don't get an obvious SEI vibe from those, but as I've said VI can be pretty subjective.

SEI (think Celine Dion).

Celine Dion has been discussed on this forum, and there was kind of a consensus that she's ESI. I tend to think that makes more sense than SEI for her, although I haven't really studied her in interviews.

[xerx]

Something that may be relevant to that issue: according to those "functional revise" theories that hitta popularized a few months ago, Gamma and Beta value the "+" version of Fe, which is associated with strong, passionate emotion.

That seem to fly in the face of most descriptions of Alpha SFs, who can be extremely passionate and have very strong, sometimes irreconcilable emotions. A major socionics assumption is that functions make people aware of certain aspects of reality, which they then choose to react to. This observation IMO is precisely what make the +/- signs work.

It's all the same Fe but piped differently:

-Fe is defined as the minimization of negative emotions. -Fe experiences emotions so strongly that they can even affect the person physically (esp. in the case of SEIs). Alpha SFs try to avoid strong emotions precisely because they easily experience strong negative emotions.

And the result? They're aware of the harshness of life. Alpha SFs can be quite the humanitarians. Having a depth of understanding for others' feelings of suffering, -Fe is eager to help others and to forgive their transgressions.


+Fe is defined as the maximization of positive emotions. Not fully seizing a moment can negatively affect the progression of Ni events. Beta NFs try to maximize the amount of positive emotions they (and others) experience since not acting in the present can generate feelings of regret, or worse - cause regrettable mistakes (which their -Ni would like to avoid at all costs). That's a bit clunky, but that's how I understand it.

And the result? Beta NFs often rise to the highest positions in society. +Fe can also be driven to humanitarianism, but in the sense of helping others get more out of life.

Celine Dion has been discussed on this forum, and there was kind of a consensus that she's ESI. I tend to think that makes more sense than SEI for her, although I haven't really studied her in interviews.

Oh God yes. Gamma Rational to the core. Maybe even LIE.

[xerx]

"Result" Fe is concerned with evading certain emotions. This for all intents and purposes means the person sees an emotional reaction for its overall effect rather than its specific components.

Focus on the beginning and the end of processes.

By the way, I think phenomena like emo-ness and excessive emotionalism, or having existential angst are not type related. Certainly not Fe related. Some of my absolute favourite authors of all of time are Franz Kafka and Hans Christian Anderson and they were definitely Fe-Creative. Socionics aside though, their personalities were quite complex, and they were unhealthy and probably depressed. That's probably why they're some my favourites.

[Marie84]

This is a good point; some of that training can appear like "Ti" to people. This is why some people thought Mozart had to be an ILE or SLE; they hear any good counterpoint and assume the composer is Ti. I tend to think that Filatova is right that Mozart was probably IEE; just as some IEEs master the theory behind Socionics very well and that doesn't make them ILE, so Mozart does not necessarily have to be a strong-Ti type to have good counterpoint.

I did a project on Mozart a few years ago, and from research I'd have to agree with IEE making the most sense.
His father Leopold may have been an LSI (based on their interaction in letters and such) and his wife was possibly an SEI. He also had a father-son like friendship with Joseph Haydn (possible LSE).
His relationship with Beethoven was a positive one, though Haydn and Beethoven didn't particularly like one another.

Based on VI, relations and other info I've read about him, I'm thinking this may point to ILI for Beethoven

[xkj220]

I concur with INTp.

[krieger]

That seem to fly in the face of most descriptions of Alpha SFs, who can be extremely passionate and have very strong, sometimes irreconcilable emotions.

It doesn't. Their emotions are light-hearted and not very serious, not generally passionate in a focussed, invested way.

Also, what we determine about alpha SFs' emotions depends a lot on who we type as alpha SFs. As the theoretical claims change, so can our typings. The question is only which "picture" ends up being the most coherent.

[xerx]

Also, what we determine about alpha SFs' emotions depends a lot on who we type as alpha SFs. As the theoretical claims change, so can our typings. The question is only which "picture" ends up being the most coherent.

If you've never met any extremely light hearted Beta NFs, or sad and melancholic Alpha SFs then you need to meet more people. (:

And while I'm aware of the possibility of confirmation bias, I generally try to do my best.

It doesn't. Their emotions are light-hearted and not very serious, not generally passionate in a focussed, invested way.

I concur that Beta NF emotions are more "focused" (ie. directly expressed), but in no way does it follow that Alpha SF emotions are light-hearted as a result.

For +Fe experiencing positive emotions is more rewarding than avoiding negative ones. Negative emotions shouldn't be an obstacle in one's way in terms of acquiring happiness and success, etc.
A number of betas I've known almost immediately dismiss wallowing in negative emotions as a petty narcissistic exercise, if not as weakness.

For -Fe avoiding negative emotions is seen as more important than experiencing positive ones. It follows that Alpha SFs are mainly aware of the need to deal with many negative and possibly contradictory feelings than simply shrugging them off.

A couple of socionists have written (and I've personally experienced it) that SEIs try to seem jovial in conversation in order not to upset the mood of others, regardless of how badly they are feeling, even if they feel incredible sadness. That might be the reason Alpha SFs are often portrayed as happy, when the reality is more complex.


-Fi types try to distance themselves from people they consider "evil" in order to avoid being hurt or manipulated by that person. In both the Gamma and Beta quadras, the focus is on maintaining one's integrity and achieving success. Neither quadra has time to wallow in self-pitying introspection.

[xkj220]

If you've never met any extremely light hearted Beta NFs, or sad and melancholic Alpha SFs then you need to meet more people. (:

And while I'm aware of the possibility of confirmation bias, I generally try to do my best.

I concur that Beta NF emotions are more "focused" (ie. directly expressed), but in no way does it follow that Alpha SF emotions are light-hearted as a result. <snip>

What's funny is that what he has said does completely confirm my own observations, and I am amazed that has come from an alpha NT when describing their duals. Such honesty and self awareness. Props to you labcoat.

For +Fe experiencing positive emotions is more rewarding than avoiding negative ones. Negative emotions shouldn't be an obstacle in one's way in terms of acquiring happiness and success, etc.
A number of betas I've known almost immediately dismiss wallowing in negative emotions as a petty narcissistic exercise, if not as weakness.

For -Fe avoiding negative emotions is seen as more important than experiencing positive ones. It follows that Alpha SFs are mainly aware of the need to deal with many negative and possibly contradictory feelings than simply shrugging them off.

I am yet to test any of this, as I have just begun to study the plus and minus elements, so I'll take your word for it.

A couple of socionists have written (and I've personally experienced it) that SEIs try to seem jovial in conversation in order not to upset the mood of others, regardless of how badly they are feeling, even if they feel incredible sadness. That might be the reason Alpha SFs are often portrayed as happy, when the reality is more complex.

Consistent with my observations.

-Fi types try to distance themselves from people they consider "evil" in order to avoid being hurt or manipulated by that person. In both the Gamma and Beta quadras, the focus is on maintaining one's integrity and achieving success. Neither quadra has time to wallow in self-pitying introspection.

You seem to forget that gamma values the - version of Fi, which is blocked with Se. Emotion is not Fe, if you were to link emotion with an IM element (which is incorrect btw) it would more closely resemble Fi. I am aware this may go against some "established" ideas of what Fe and Fi are, but it matters me not. The gamma quadra, as much as it pains them, is full of sentimentals who experience deep heartfelt emotion, which is more often than not, not outwardly expressed.

[xerx]

You seem to forget that gamma values the - version of Fi, which is blocked with Se. Emotion is not Fe, if you were to link emotion with an IM element (which is incorrect btw) it would more closely resemble Fi. I am aware this may go against some "established" ideas of what Fe and Fi are, but it matters me not. The gamma quadra, as much as it pains them, is full of sentimentals who experience deep heartfelt emotion, which is more often than not, not outwardly expressed.

Fi emotion is about the forces of attraction/repuslsion that exists between two objects. Like/dislike is one such type of attraction. -Fi implies that Gammas will be extremely drawn away from people who display negative traits. They have very little time for people that are malicious. They may not care about talking to them, rehabilitating them or giving them second chances. etc.

That implies that Gammas are pragmatists where it concerns ethical matters. It does not imply that this pragmatism somehow makes them less emotional, sentimental or intellectual.

[Marie84]

-Fi types try to distance themselves from people they consider "evil" in order to avoid being hurt or manipulated by that person. In both the Gamma and Beta quadras, the focus is on maintaining one's integrity and achieving success. Neither quadra has time to wallow in self-pitying introspection.

Delta Fi's rarely, if ever, dupe people into "good" and "evil" categories, that would mean rejecting Ne and thus not allowing room for change and possibilities.

If anything, this is more Ne PoLR, that "us" and "them" type of mentality.

[xerx]

Delta Fi's rarely, if ever, dupe people into "good" and "evil" categories, that would mean rejecting Ne and thus not allowing room for change and possibilities.

If anything, this is more Ne PoLR, that "us" and "them" type of mentality.

"-Fi" is Fi blocked with Se. I'm sorry for not specifying that.

[Marie84]

"-Fi" is Fi blocked with Se. I'm sorry for not specifying that.

oic, thanks for explaining. I've never seen Fi+Se written like "-Fi" before

[krieger]

Don't worry so much. It's a 100% useless and redundant separation.

[xerx]

Don't worry so much. It's a 100% useless and redundant separation.

oh.

Can you explain why you think so? They seem fairly useful as descriptors in their own right to distinguish between the IMs. And Gulenko uses them extensively.

[Introspector]

Everyone I've typed as ESI had the same closed tight lips ,Eye brows and solid Fi look on their face
INFj i've typed had a similar Fi face but the stare was diluted