I um see DEAD as SEE /hides/
I um see DEAD as SEE /hides/
Yes, you can do that. You are one of the reasons why I am convinced I am Beta ST > SF. It's logically natural. I don't get the same stability and linear connection from any other type, except the two Beta NFs. Gamma NT are connected differently to me in the system of ITR. It's not dualised.Originally Posted by BandD
You are SLE-Ti. No LSI has ever really asked me to spend time alone with them before, I think that would weird them out too badly lol.I know my reasonings for thinking u are SLE-Ti are almost completely 4D Fi and probably hurt ur Fi polr though... when I try to explain them, they aren't logical based- more vibe/emotional energy patterns.
I'll try to be more logical about it later maybe. but yeah dual > activity.
No one has ever given me a proper, fully fleshed out logical reason for SEE with good examples. Not just you.
i'm sorry I can't. I don't have creative Te.
i'm sorry I can't. I don't have creative Te.
Very sarcastic and not a good excuse
but it's not an excuseVery sarcastic and not a good excuse
Yeah, and people don't see that underneath the dumb stereotypes which are prepetuated by more extreme examples of ILE in pop culture, such as Rick Sanchez. Are there ILE like him? Yes. But do I think he should be held as the baseline, like the SLE who happen to enjoy fixing cars are? No. Are those activities that people with Se+Ti can gravitate towards? Of course. Like I have said many times before, it's about the IME. About how the person functions and makes sense of the world which is the most important thing. Not the stereotypes, nor the ITR. It's about programming on humans, not archetypes and there are many vairables that need to be organised and made sense of within the context of socionics. Like many subjects/topics with raw data analysis, there are going to be some anomalies within the graphs, aside from the average and the low end of the types. Subtypes can help explain the differences to a degree, as can other established elements.
Why?
The game has been rigged from the start, since everyone started putting biases into the equation.
Hm hm hm I wonder who actually put the bias in the equation
Well, both sides. One side is biased toward the SEE typing, the other the SLE. If we want to be precise.
Equations:
If I'm being honest, I know I value Se, have weak Ne and Fi, which rules out any Alpha and Delta Type, and strong SF Gamma type, due to the Fi.
Out of that, that leaves: SLE, LSI, IEI and EIE as well as ILI and LIE. My Fe isn't strong (either 1D/2D), which takes Beta NF out of the running.
Although I have strong Si, I don't value it like Se, so that means that it's either Demonstrative (4D, strong, unvalued) Ignoring (3d, unvalued), Role (2D, unvalued) or PoLR (1D, unvalued and weak).
On top of that, I think that my Ni is weak, but valued, which leaves it between Beta ST as my most likely type. Out of the functional order and functions being valued, that leaves SLE > LSI > LIE > ILI as my most probable types. You can see that despite having Strong Si and Te being the most probable of the 4D/3D functions, they are "unvalued, thus Delta ST is left out of the running. But if we were going by function strength, regardless of value, then it would be (most likely): SLE> LSI > LSE> SLI.
It's more to do with the fact that I am more:
- Calculated
- Analytical
- Less impulsive, irl
- I don't really "seek" Ni, I'm more into seeking Fe.
The points that contradict this are:
- I can be more unhinged online (I think this is more me winding down than focusing, and having a bad week irl, and having genuine difficulty with processing/forming relationships and emotions)
- IEI seem to mesh better with me than EIE in terms of "completion", which I think is a better word than duality *
* I know that ITR aren't the end all and be all, but from observation, it seems that way.
Posting Permissions
