1. Ne PoLR types
2. Enneagram sixes
1. Ne PoLR types
2. Enneagram sixes
Yup, I sure am a menace.
Lol why enneagram 6?
Chronic "grass is always greener" syndrome
I've studied and observed myself and others to confidently say my typing is correct. The only thing I'm iffy about is my enneagram instinct stacking. Just to let you know.
I am a scary 6 Ooooooo! Fear meeeeee!
I have heard of concentration camps consisting of PersonalityCafe members. I think the special snowflake syndrome aka being typed as INFJ is the cause.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
It's not this simple. You need to look at environmental factors that can affect mistyping.
Also there are many misconceptions regarding what the IEs actually mean/are referring to
Also NE is about potential, not certainty. NE polr is more likely to look at certainty, since they don't like looking at potential....so don't expect someone to be sure of their type just because they have strong NE.... and don't expect someone to be unaware of their type just because they have weak NE.
It's not going to be any harder for someone with NE polr to realize that they don't like looking at potentials, than it is for someone with strong NE to realize that they do like looking at potentials
Last edited by rtht; 10-11-2021 at 10:28 AM. Reason: spelling
The types of people to use typology as a scapegoat for bad behaviors. This is NTR
If the definition of typology remains limited to the study or systematic classification of types that have characteristics or traits in common then no type can ever be a danger. When the definition incorporates a specific doctrine (model?) of types, then science is often transformed into something like scriptural studies, where all outside opinions are dangers to the “bible-thumpers” who prefer to limit conversation to specific agendas. On average, NT-types tend to operate outside the box more than other types – except when they're in control of the box.
A danger to typology communities seems to me to be people who don't draw a line between between typology and bias, prediction and prejudice, theoretical model and reality. NTR
Anyone making youtube videos about typology.
The point of typology is to categorize people, and socionics in particular, even to try to predict the tonality of the relation of people in interaction with other people. No point wasting time with these theories if you don't accept that this is the use that these theory have. Most I see in this thread are a bunch of triggered sixes because they know I'm right that they are a danger to typology.
This forum only exists because of me. Ten-ish years ago, it nearly went offline. But I was the one who bought it (and later sold it) in the nick of time.
This forum is now ground zero for people being introduced to Socionics. Think about that: Socionics, a theory that revolutionizes our understanding of the human mind and society (for the rest of human history—perhaps tens of millions of years or more) was saved by yours truly. That makes me the most important human being to ever live. Yup! More important than Aushra herself.