intuitive, irrational
not EIE/IEI, I think
intuitive, irrational
not EIE/IEI, I think
Interesting, so your thinking is it’s more likely I’m between ILE, ILI or IEE, then? I can understand that I probably don’t appear very rigid.Originally Posted by blaecaedre
Is there anything else that makes you consider irrational over rational?
Also if it helps, there’s a recent short video I posted in another thread, might give you a better idea.
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...=1#post1528443
just your behaviour on the video
your persistent interest in being typed (multiple threads and videos) is a point in favour of valued Ne
try to type the ones you know well and feel your relations to them, what intertypes fit best - this is the best way to decide on your type
So, update, for anyone who cares.
After much consideration, I think it's most likely that I am an introvert, not an extrovert.
Extrovert/introvert in Socionics gets sometimes conflated with 'bold, open, confident/shy, withdrawn, lack of confidence', so my grounds for thinking I'm an introvert is not based on that. Rather, I'm going to be using Gulenko's own
distinctions for the dichotomy. I'll be looking at each point he mentions, and comparing them to myself.
From Extroverts and introverts. Extroversion / introversion dichotomy in socionics (socioniks.net)
Extroverts and introverts. Extroversion / introversion dichotomy in socionics
On the physical level, extroverts are distinguished by their ability to spend energy in activities that require no deep thought. They actively explore the outside world, influencing it with impulsive actions. An extrovert behaves energetically since the energy is born within them with some excess and it needs to be put to good use somewhere.
An introvert does not have such energy reserves as an extrovert, so they behave more restrained and conservative with their efforts. They would rather under-do than over-do. They draw energy from the outside. They require a push from more energetic people
So, off the bat, I would say that I am very much not someone with excess energy reserves, and much of my time is spent in deep thought. I may think about the outside world on occasion, but I typically tend to not act on it (I'm very much a homebody, if I don't have someone encourage me to go somewhere, then I won't see much reason to, unless it's something that needs to be done. I don't really behave all that impulsively.
Self-reflection comes pretty naturally to me; I don't need to force myself to do it, I just flow to it when the situation requires. I don't feel 'empty' without outside information, (which I understand is typically why introverts are famously 'resistant' to 'forced loneliness; extraverts feel the need to absorb outside information, which means they have to go out and about, even if they're still kind of reserved and shy in some ways). Informal communication is difficult for me, I don't talk much about my interests, hobbies or ideas unless I've built a rapport with the person I'm conversing with (part of this is my doubt that others are interested in what I have to say, but I think extraverts naturally don't feel that way or don't care so much about it). I can talk about why I like something, why I think something is interesting without much external information (I can still be influenced by external factors, but I need to absorb it into myself first).Psychologically, extroverts are more open people in informal communication. They understand themselves through other people. Direct self-reflection is a problem for them. Without receiving information from the outside, an extrovert feels inner emptiness. This information vacuum is more difficult to experience for them than the energy vacuum.
Introverts, when they communicate informally, automatically close off. Their inner world is protected from the intruders. They know themselves very well. They have difficulties with knowing other people. Having no external information causes an introvert to generate it themselves. It is much worse for them without external energy supply.
I have not really been in a position of management/leadership much myself, but I would feel much more confident with a smaller group of people than a larger one. I don't tend to 'want to be noticed' for the most part, but to a degree I do enjoy influencing the opinions of others (so this is a point to extraversion). I generally avoid taking responsibility for other people, and I don't explicitly commit to 'competition and expansion'.In a society, extroverts show expansive tendencies. They are more often endowed with leadership skills. They tend to better manage larger teams than smaller ones. In public life, they need to be noticed, to actively influence the opinions or actions of people around them.
An introvert is less likely to become a leader of large groups. They emerge as leaders in smaller groups, for example, in a family unit, serving as their support. It is more difficult for introverts to take responsibility for other people, and it is always more convenient for them to avoid competition and expansion.
So, putting Gulenko's small note about intelligence/IQ scores aside...The intellectual activity of an extrovert is fast. An extrovert processes more information per unit of time than an introvert. An extrovert usually appears more "intelligent" with higher IQ scores because this measurement requires completion of tasks quickly within a limited amount of time.
Introverts think more slowly. They delve deep into a subject and work it out better but lose on speed. Introverts win intellectual competitions only when the time to complete tasks is unlimited.
I generally spend a lot of time thinking about subjects, excessively so. When I run into a problem or new information, I literally get stopped, and I have to work out the kinks before I can move forward with the rest of it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, aside from the article, I'll relay what I know about myself from childhood. While this might seem unnecessary, I've been lead to believe that - assuming sociotypes truly are genetic, and don't drastically change when growing up - some basic assumptions can be made of a child or young person's type.
- When I was young, I was never considered 'bold' or 'outgoing'. Even when I felt like I was doing well in school (ie. had a welcoming social group, performed at least adequately in learning), it was always hard for me to really go out and do stuff. 100% of the time I went somewhere, it was because friends invited me out, and I never took the initiative myself.
- As mentioned, I never really seeked to be in positions of leadership. There was one time I wanted to be part of the school representatives council (it wasn't a big deal, honestly), but I wasn't elected to one of the top positions, and my input into matters was fairly minimal. The most 'extraverted' I ever really acted, was when I was doing theatre stuff, but in those instances when I wasn't actively performing I kept to myself a lot of the time.
- Even now as an adult, with no truly severe physical or mental issues health, I genuinely don't feel the need to go out into the world. I'm not afraid of it, but to an extent I am 'less certain' of it than I am of myself, and a lot of the time I just don't think to leave the house at all. Even when I do, I typically feel it's too much of a hassle (I think this can be related back to the 'energy' stuff Gulenko was referring to).
...So, that's my take on my typing so far. If I've made any significant errors in how I've approached this, or if there's something vitally important I have missed, please let me know. I'd rather be proven wrong and corrected than 'proven right' and going about in a circle.
From your interactions with forum members one thing is quite obvious, you have a good Fi consideration which is not what EIEs want to do, they ignore it. I would like to point out that in model G the control (ignoring) function is like a secondary polr. Dr. G said that it is a painful function which is always activated the TIM always want to rectify those IEs to satisfy that of the lead function. However the PolR just put a TIM in freeze so to speak, if IEs related to the polr are "in the air" then the TIM just stops his social mission activities, it's painful but as long as it's not there then it's okay (i.e. it's not always on like the ignoring/control). The TIM has a lot of information about the control function but it doesn't "do" it so to speak. I think this is very important to understand. So EIE/ESE should be less "diplomatic" than let's say IEIs for instance, and remember that EIEs are more in the Fe- side of the Fe spectrum even though not exclusively of course.
You seem to depict a more Ip-ish temperament overall so IEI might be a possibility although it has to be further correlated imho because with all those subtypes and accentuations in our toolbox, we could easily make a case for either one. I think we can "try" a type and take some time to confirm or rule it out (like you do) because 1) we are not dealing with an exact science and 2) we all do mistakes and nobody is perfect (not even Dr. G ahah !)
Personally I find it extremely difficult to set a diagnosis with only a few minutes of video and a questionnaire but it's just me and my typing skills are not very sharp but it's a work in progress ahaha !! take a look at this video ( I like those guys she identify as an ILI even though I find her very warmth and she emotes a lot..) and note that It's not about Dr.G ahah ! (at least I hope so...)
(Use the subtile function and then the automatic translation)
Lack is the Muse of all Poets
Unfortunately, there were some parts of the video that weren't clear (not blaming anyone, using an auto-translate tool is sometimes unreliable even at the best of times), but I got the gist of it.
I think you are right that I favor Fi in my comments here, I'm always trying to figure out the best way to phrase things diplomatically, (sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't). Though that being said, it may be that my 'trying' to be diplomatic is, in fact, more of an indication that I'm a logical type rather than ethical (for example, 4D Fi people don't need to put much effort into connecting with people, it comes naturally to them when necessary, even if they value Fe).
And I agree that short video questionnaires are never the 'best' way to type someone, the best way is to interact with them for a long period of time, long enough for someone to see in between the 'cracks' to show their true type.
hey @Manatroid92 you look up right and bottom left the most so I doubt you are Ip
https://socioniks.net/en/article/?id=205
PS: If you borned in 92, LSI is possible, but I still think your body language is N
In that video he's looking down by default due to camera shyness so it's kinda hard to tell but I'd say the overall body language is very dynamic, there's something about the static types like LSI where it looks like their face muscles are doing the minimal work possible, like only the mouth moving when they talk and after saying something or changing their expression they always seem to return to a neutral state. There's a lot more movement and facial distortion in the video.
It's funny, there's definitely more up right movement but he does give a very introverted vibe, if he's an Ej he'd have to be a very introverted subtype like EIE-HN.
He has another video here: https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...ourself/page20
and he again looks up right bottom left the most so I thought mb its his general thing.
There are some instances that he looks up (not right not left straight up) mb thats due to general dynamics and/or intuition, I have seen some other people do the same.
I think LSI is a hard sell for me most specifically because I've very much not a practical or hands-on person. I tire pretty easily from physical effort, have some issues minding my health (not serious ones, just little things like neglecting to sit properly at my computer, making sure I don't eat too much, not dressing warmly enough one night and catching a minor cold the next day), and I'm sort of fearful of sustaining physical injuries. I'm also not very good at physical care for others either.
It should be mentioned that I'm not always so shy. When I'm doing something enjoyable with family and friends I can get more excitable, but I don't actually know 'how' excited I appear to be compared to everyone else, haha. But I think this can be relatively common for a lot of Introverted types, anyway, when they're among familiar company (eg. I've gotten more sociable with my coworkers at my job since I've been there for about 2 years now).
The way I see it: if it's between being a very specific introverted version of a DCNH EJ core-type, or one of a few possible Introverted core-types not yet taking into account DCNH, it seems the latter option is more likely.
From @nifl in the forum member typing thread:
Your typing of forum members - Page 164 (the16types.info)
IJ and EJ seemed likely solely based on eye movements. I added LSI comment just notice that 92 and lol thats how I figured one lsi could be lsi and then turned out to be lsi lol but as I said I think your VI is N>S so I didnt expect you to be hands on practical.
Based on your forum posts, you also seem like J.
Bleh, I literally just came back from the thread I just linked, saying that I probably do appear to be irrational instead of rational.
Now I don't know what to think!
Tbh I understand your frustration, you are hard to crack hence I am curious about your type. Make a plan to go G even it is not gonna happen soon pleaseBleh, I literally just came back from the thread I just linked, saying that I probably do appear to be irrational instead of rational.
Now I don't know what to think!
Haha, I'm only a tiny bit frustrated, and not with anyone in particular. It's just odd how two people came to entirely different conclusions. And I am aiming to be typed by G, yeah, even if it's maybe a long time away.Tbh I understand your frustration, you are hard to crack hence I am curious about your type. Make a plan to go G even it is not gonna happen soon please
Hmm, you'd think so, but this sort of probability rationale doesn't work very well with typing oneself, it's something to be done very careful so instead of analyzing the statistical likehood of someone being something we should just look at the person. I've interacted with such very specific EIEs typed by Gulenko so it could very well happen that you're one of them. Everyone is a very specific person in their own way. Maybe I could even ask them for their take on the video. From what I've gathered I have a strong opinion that you're dynamic, negativist and process and I very likely intuitive, so the choice for me would be between EIE and ILI. You seem more ethical to me but that's more of a hunch and general impression from the way you talk and all, I'm no professional.
If we're going purely by eye movement bottom left would actually be Ep instead of Ij
Can you explain why, he looks at up right which suggest EJ, down left which suggests Ij.
I dont think he looked down right much
That's what I'm saying friend, down left indicates Ep temperament according to Vik GCan you explain why, he looks at up right which suggest EJ, down left which suggests Ij.
I dont think he looked down right much
Balanced-stable temperament.Eye movements: down to the right.
Kinesthetic representation. The sense of emotion, the sense of touch, the sense of movement, the sense of smell. "How do you feel when you feel joy?", "How do you feel when you run?", "Remember how a mustard plaster burns?". Interestingly, there are no constructions in kinesthetics; we can't imagine the sensations that we didn't actually experience.
Flexible-agile temperament.
Eye movements: down to the left.
Internal dialogue, insular auditory representation. Self-talk, an internal conversation. This direction of view also coincides with the function of speech control, when a person carefully selects the words that he is going to pronounce. This direction of view can often be seen in the interpreter during interpretation, in the speaker making a responsible message, and in the person giving an interview.
Oops true. @Manatroid92 Ep or Ej, I confused Ep one with IJ one. it seems like you can run from being J but not from being E
Is this thread borderline verging on trolling now?
I would not put much emphasis in NLP stuff, those are just correlates (As fascinating as they are !) even if Dr. G accords a significant value to NLP ideas (they are well integrated to Model G (A model to rule them all !) at the physical level) . From a profane POV one could say that using NLP stuff to confirm some Socionics stuff is like using an "Obscure theory" ( Hi @Alive !) to confirm another. But that will be blasphemy from our point of view, ahaah ! Anyway, since the devil is in the details, I would like to point out this :
1) in NLP, the eye directions for a left-handed person would be the opposite of that of a right-handed person.
2)Okay, It's pretty self explanatory in the horizontal axes (right is left and vice versa) But it's not clear when it's combined with the vertical axes ( diagonals). I didn't find a clear and satisfying information about that (I didn't put a lot of effort to find it out either ahaah !). Maybe you guys can help.
3) "When working with someone it is important to calibrate their NLP eye accessing cues to ensure that you are interpreting the signals correctly."
source : https://www.planetnlp.com/nlp_eye_accessing.html
Neuro-Linguistic Kvlt Deprogramming is my new band name.
It looks like Gulenko forgot to show up to St. Carl's telepathy class. Tsk tsk.Balanced-stable temperament.Eye movements: down to the right.
Kinesthetic representation. The sense of emotion, the sense of touch, the sense of movement, the sense of smell. "How do you feel when you feel joy?", "How do you feel when you run?", "Remember how a mustard plaster burns?". Interestingly, there are no constructions in kinesthetics; we can't imagine the sensations that we didn't actually experience.
Now that you wrote this, it turned into trolling and let me tell you this is not a coincidence.
This is not a random thought thread.
He has his own methodology of typing. But this is not why dont people dislike G thread.
If you people have things to say about Manatroid92's type, I am sure some of us would appreciate it.
Otherwise, there is no point to fill someone's thread with unconstructive posts. There is sideline posts thread etc. But if discussion gets too out of topic I will move posts myself to a proper place.
It is not good to type anyone based on one indicator alone. I am unsure about Manatroid92's type hence I thought this could point towards to something and since he has a very distinct eye movement pattern now I doubt Ip type for him.
Pendulum seems to have his own understanding. I dont think he is typing based on that alone.
That being said, if Manatroid92's least favorite things are greed and violence, I would probably type Manatroid as EII rather than IEI. Isn't Se supposed to be "greed and violence?" Plus, being pro-responsibility is more of a rational thing last I checked.
I totally get it. I used that stuff in my attempt to type @Fransiskus because 1) we have to use any means available and 2) Dr. G uses it so why the heck shouldn't we ahah ! You're right about not basing a typing on only one indicator. That's what I meant. In fact everything works in "clusters" imho and if we have to use ideas from different systems as a tool to better "fine tune" a typing so be it (beware of confirmation biases though). There is a French saying that I like which illustrate that mindset : " Faire feu de tout bois " which roughly means " making fire with all kind of woods" i.e. to use everything available in order to a get a desired result.
Isn't Baruch Spinoza EII though?
No, and I'm not sure how one would come to that conclusion. Who is doing the trolling: me or the others in here?
Yes, I agree that assessing NLP is certainly useful as a tool for typing purposes, but too much analysis regarding it in a thread that's about just one individual is a little wasteful. Not that I don't appreciate it being used here, quite the opposite actually, because I think it's really interesting! But I think it's possible to get too stuck on those details at the expense of the theory itself, especially if the pattern for the one getting typed isn't 100% nailed down (which seems to be happening in my case, at least). It may be that I'm sort of an outlier in this case.
I personally don't mind a couple off-topic comments here and there, but I appreciate you wanting to keep the thread clean. You can move them at your own discretion if you think it's needed, but I'm not being put off by them.
I dont know and the answer of that question wouldnt change anything I wrote.
For the record, I think both you and @Pendulum have been pretty consistent about your stances, which I appreciate.
It's certainly true that EIE and ILI were strong considerations for me at differing points, I can't say they no longer are, but I have not thrown them out of contention, to say the least.
Yeah, I can understand that. I am honestly not sure if my apprehension of greed and violence can be attached so easily to type, though. I think my reticence to them are maybe more philosophical/political than simply inherent to myself, and I think it's very possible that had grown up in an environment that condoned or even promoted both, I may have had an entirely different view on them both.
I think IEIs themselves would probably reject the 'greed is good' mentality (EIEs too, I would guess), because not only are they not sensors (who are *generally* more materialistic), but they're the type of ethical that are much less concerned with profitability for its own sake (Ti-valuing instead of Te-valuing).
...And to throw a spanner into the works, I am now re-considering ILE. Please let me know if it's not possible.
Ahh unfortunately when it comes to you, most things seem possible...And to throw a spanner into the works, I am now re-considering ILE. Please let me know if it's not possible.
You are not Te base though, we can gladly scratch that.
Well I'm back in 'ere again, goodness gracious.
And no, I haven't been able to get a G/SHS typing done yet, due to the same reason I've mentioned before.
I'm still dealing with indecision, unfortunately.
I can understand if people might get frustrated and thinking I'm just neglecting what's been said already in the thread (and others, I guess). On the contrary, I've been taken it all into account to some degree. And I haven't been looking only here too,
but other sites and forums for articles or sources that might help.
So, I guess I'm essentially bumping this thread as a 'cry for help'.
Just curious, as I also don't consider Te-base for myself either. But for my own understanding, what signs are there that can point to someone being one, exactly? As someone who works in an office environment, I'm fairly certain I have seen at least a couple people who fit the bill (my boss/supervisor, and the company's director, specifically), so I think it may be helpful to know for sure at least in that immediate capacity.Ahh unfortunately when it comes to you, most things seem possible
You are not Te base though, we can gladly scratch that.
BUMP it is.Well I'm back in 'ere again, goodness gracious.
And no, I haven't been able to get a G/SHS typing done yet, due to the same reason I've mentioned before.
I'm still dealing with indecision, unfortunately.
I can understand if people might get frustrated and thinking I'm just neglecting what's been said already in the thread (and others, I guess). On the contrary, I've been taken it all into account to some degree. And I haven't been looking only here too,
but other sites and forums for articles or sources that might help.
So, I guess I'm essentially bumping this thread as a 'cry for help'.
Business (Pragmatic) Logic (P) — extraverted logic; the function ofthe psyche, manifesting itself in mobile, perseverance and endurancebehavior.
combined with
Extroversion — an active, but energy-consuming attitude of the psyche,leading to extension and expansion. In most cases, both thecommunicative and the intellectual extravert appears the clear leader insociety.
Very active and mobile person who gets stuff done and productive and looks things that way in summary. I havent seen you expressed any of the stuff in terms of Te base gaze and you dont seem that way, hence I eliminated for you.
According to introverted T types I can say extroverted T types more act, do than think in comparison.
This does sound a lot like my boss specifically, I think she may be a Distancing LSE. She's basically always doing something, kind of appears like she has a "everything needs to get done!" vibe to her. She's quite polite and gregarious for the most part, but if something doesn't seem 'right' to her she'll have a skeptical-as-hell look on her face (I don't even know if she knows about it, haha). And then sometimes the manufactured friendliness drops and she'll say something pretty directly. When we were starting to trickle back into the office after the worst of the pandemic went away, she'd always make sure visitors signed into the reception's register, haha.
Takes her health and appearance fairly seriously, and she seems to genuinely care for others even if she sometimes comes across as a bit of a steamroller.
The director, I'm not completely sure about, I think he may be an LIE-H. He's definitely more 'chill' at first blush, and he's quite jovial, but for similar reasons I'm not sure he's an ethical type. I've never really talked to either of them outside of work, though, so I don't really have a full picture of them, could be the director is actually an ethical who just takes business seriously at times (understandably so, I guess, haha).
No, LII.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
Hm, may I know why you have changed from considering xII/ILE to IxI? Because I didn't see Ni-Se value so I'm just wondering here.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
That's not much of an argument, but to be fair, I didn't give much of an argument, either. I'm just not inclined to believe things solely because most people say them.
I could argue if I wanted to, but I suppose this isn't the correct thread to do so.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
