Because I'm a petty bitch who must have the last word ...
Because I'm a petty bitch who must have the last word ...
I didnít watched the whole videoed but i believe that youíre mistaking the role function with the demonstrative. The role function is what most likely appear when dealing with peoples you donít know and you sometimes overdo it . I said this before but LII it seems to overdo it with the thx you etc really basic stuff, i did this when making thread thanking peoples for giving feedback on a question i asked and I self type as LII , another user who suspected was LII and I thought too did the same thing overdoing it with the thanks for giving feedback on his typing video. The tooth is FI too I think not so much SI . I donít even think itís necessary to mention it or peoples will really judge her for that but she try to make a good impression how she can and feel the need to clarify why and what about it apologizing for it , not sure if sheís that embarrassed but she definitely fear being embarrassed about it as a low FI non valued and she worry about the impression sheíll give so she get it out the way Everytime so she doesnít have it in mind anymore and feel more free.
What really make me think itís FI role is that the role is really just superficial. In the first vid i didnít watch everything but she mentioned her long time LSE friend ( non valued low FI most likely lose long time friend like that ) anyway they arenít friend anymore and she seemed really lost as to why didnít even seemed like she really care to know why or talk about it .Cause itís 2D FI non valued it canít go that deep into personal relationships and donít really care that much.
Also yes interesting that of all the analysis she is the most skeptical of your one I think itís supervison taking place . Reverse supervision too in need of more clarification although youíre the one who tried to go the most in depth.
The supervisor is usually interested in what the supervisee does and says, but at the same time feels like it is often in need of modification or reformulation from the point of view of his leading function. Because this reframing of issues corresponds to their vulnerable function, the supervisee may often feel frustrated with the supervisor's statements. If the supervisee begins to argue with the supervisor, the differences of viewpoint may quickly become more personal when the supervisor points out perceived 'flaws' in the supervisee's thinking style or way of doing things. Such comments are usually not intended to be damning criticism from the supervisor's point of view, but may well be interpreted as such by the supervisee, due to the inherent sensitivity of the vulnerable function.
Under another interpretation, the main difference between "reverse" and "direct" benefit and supervision lies in the Process/Result dichotomy - "reverse" benefit and supervision occur between Left/Involutionary/Result types, while "direct" benefit and supervision occur among Right/Evolutionary/Process types.
- The Evolutionary type "direct" supervision consists of suppression of any deviations, while Involutionary type "reverse" supervision is demand for more precise formulations and additions.
LII - NE ?
Really curious eyes kind of naÔve lost somewhere but somewhat looking deeper too
I watched more of the videos and it doesnít come to her easy too to talk about what she like dislike her answer arent very deep either when she manage get an answer that she has to really think about, no enthusiasm too to talk about it too this whole video seems like a struggle . She even mention being nervous too at some point mid video maybe cause she is in the superego FI.
The individual recognizes the existence and importance of personal relationships, so he is usually cautious at first about offending others if he does not know them well. To minimize this risk he adheres somewhat simplistically to the relevant social conventions (e.g. political correctness). However, if taken too far this produces stress, as it inhibits his natural introverted logic () inclination to voice exactly what his thoughts are on a given issue or situation, with the expectation that others will appreciate his straightforwardness, rather than accusing him of being insensitive. This caution gradually disappears as he gets to know people better.
He prefers to develop relationships indirectly with others based on open conversation and common activities, and only reveals his innermost personal feelings to those he has known for a long time. He may become confused and suspicious if they are directly solicited by others.
Yeah the tooth FI first second impression. Thanks everyone and sorry about the tooth.
Just go check the user Kuno typing video youíll see FE creative and 4D FI vs 1D FE and FI role . The video seem dead here in comparison , also youíll see someone who actually donít struggle at all to talk about his likes and dislikes.
"In theory. the role function is triggered situationally, when individuals are met with situations that oppose their base aspect of reality."
"It may be called the "reserve" function, because it comes to aid when the possibilities and capabilities of base and creative functions are insufficient and in new situations when a person needs to be receptive of all kinds of information."
Based on these definitions, it would make absolutely no sense for an alleged LII to utilize their role function (Fi) in an environment where Ti valuers (albeit often weak Ti) are not only salient and pervasive but in an environment BUILT for the explicit purpose of learning and self-discovery concerning one's personality--this forum is supposed to function as a "safe space" for everyone seeking to naturally and freely express their TIMs, temperaments, IEs, and various functional preferences; therefore, there would be no need to utilize a role function due to the insufficiency of their base/lead function.
Furthermore, by the time this thread had been created, the OP had already made several videos and mind numbingly tedious threads where she and others went back and forth over her typing whereupon she flip-flopped like the Little Mermaid on acid concerning who and what she believed herself to be: >
(https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...g-About-Myself). By this point, she seems fairly comfortable expressing herself and her recent posting history by no means conveys the dimensions of a Ti base type who had previously been substituting its usage with Fi role. It's pretty clear to me that her logic functions are submerged.
If etiquette/manners and social graces are to be defined as prevailing customs, public standards and social conventions that dictate interpersonal behavior, that's Fe because they are ethics objectively designed for everyone, for the group to adhere to them, e.g., honorifics that intend to denote degrees of respectability and/or authority > Mr., Miss, Ms., Mrs, Madam, Sir, etc.... Fe is more about externalizing and objectively assigning/conveying value.
Fi doesn't seek to control and dictate group ethics; Fi is concerned with subjective ethical principles/convictions and acting based on those grounds. The only way I see Fi as being related to manners is if we're referring to emotional reticence and sensitivity, i.e., not provoking an emotional reaction by saying or doing something that might hurt or offend someone, in a "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" kind of way. Because Fi is about maintaining stable interpersonal bonds and closing psychological distances, it's more cognizant of negative "triggers" and sidestepping them, which could be seen as polite and courteous behavior. Fe would more likely attempt to "trigger" an alternate, more positive feeling in order to counter the negative one, arguably another form of courtesy often convey via expressions like "thank you."
2.) She then says, "So, I have to get a tooth implant (**where she points to it**), and it makes my voice sound like I'm lisping"--these are aesthetic/sensory/concrete data based observations. OF NOTE, she did not say "my tooth is missing," which would've been Se or objective sensory data. Instead, she said "I have to get a tooth implant," which involves her subjective perception of what must be concretely done in order to refine/improve/better (Si-, the removal of discomfort) the objective external reality of having a missing tooth (Se). I'm drawing my conception of Si based on the following definitions:
"The individual physical reaction to concrete reality is the main way we perceive and define aesthetics, comfort, convenience, and pleasure.
This includes the sense of one's own condition and the sensations of people evoked by this interdependence.
Such creativity constitutes the recreation of an object (e.g. a tooth implant) that is able to provide other people with aesthetic sensations (e.g., stirring physical attraction) that were intended by its creator. When an individual of this type is preparing something, he starts from envisioning all the associated qualities that the final product will have (e.g., the OP not commenting on the actual state of her tooth, but what must be done in order to restore it; the final state of the tooth).
the ability to mold and perfect not only one's own aesthetic tastes and habits, but also those of others. We might say that such individuals have the ability to impose their understanding of aesthetics and comfortable life on other people."
3.) Referring to the missing tooth, she then says "it's kind of embarrassing"; NOTE, she did not say "I feel" or "I am" which would denote subjectivity; instead, she said "it is" which conveys "objectivity"; because embarrassing describes the state of feeling embarrassed, when she says "it's kind of embarrassing," she is using Fe-, which Gulenko describes as the "Ethics of negative emotions: to resent, to worry, to rebel, to ridicule." She is essentially communicating that it is objectively humiliating for someone to present with a missing tooth.
"Despite being a strong function, any active discussion of this aspect is rejected by the person with the wish to change the course towards the strong valued aspects of their type. Since the aspect of demonstrative function corresponds to the aspect of the painful function of dual types, in this manner duals stop the influx of unwanted information and shield each other's painful functions. Any actions against oneself or close people are met by rebuffs from demonstrative function. The demonstrative function is more strongly expressed in people of creative function subtypes."
You are inferring that she felt "lost" as to why the relationship with the alleged LSE didn't work out, but she actually explicitly states that their relationship dissolved due to "life differences" and "goal differences."
This embodies what irritates me the most about Se PoLR--data is EXPLICITLY staring you in the face and yet you "ignore" it as if it was never there. It really is OK and even NECESSARY at times for you to "call a thing, a thing" and accept what is being presented at "face value." IMO, video typing is not the natural realm of expertise for inutitive types, and especially those with 1D Se. I respect Gulenko A LOT and think that he is positively brilliant but he does his VI typing method a great disservice if he doesn't have a few types with 4D Se doing the heavy lifting.
To be clear, I don't think I've ever encountered an LII that I didn't see as bright and generally "intelligent" according to how I'm naturally biased to weigh "intelligence" (i.e., strong logical faculties that to some degree mirror my own juxtaposed with admirable intuitive strength in areas where I'm weak). However, my primary frustrations with LIIs are concerned with them often times lacking/not factoring into their analysis/conclusions crucial a,] Se objective raw data/info that would only better substantiate and "ground" or "prove/proof" their evaluations/conclusions via concretized, real world evidence; b.] palpable body based energy that would render their arguments more viscerally persuasive, impactful and authoritative; c.] Fe+ passion and charisma infused into their arguments and general demeanor/presentation which would render them less visibly cold and lifeless.
I don't doubt your intellectual capacity; I think your arguments have largely been logically consistent with the systemic principles/premises/definitions you've based them on; I have been able to easily follow (i.e., understand the thinking behind) your analysis and rationales and you've sourced most of them, which adds weight to the veracity of your claims. I also just think you have a few glaring blind spots that I have no problem pointing out. I don't say this as an insult to the OP, but based off of her posts/videos/interaction with me, I honestly don't believe she shares your capacity. I'm not seeing the "potential" in the same way I feel towards LIIs--her strengths lie elsewhere. I've only been irritated because, unlike you, OP has failed to put forth ANY substantial or cogent analysis whatsoever. I'd be too thoroughly embarrassed to flaunt my ignorance while proffering rebuttals and critiques that are primarily rooted in...ignorance.
I think the OP's overall roundness, softness, and demeanor better correlate to SEI, who by the way, can occasionally manifest "Ne" eyes in so much as they are still Ne valuers and have access to Ne/the state of Ne. Just like as an SLE, I can at times fall into an Ni like trance, though I don't access that state often because it is a weak, 1D function.
Again, no offense to the OP but I'm not really interested in going back and forth concerning her typing--I'm bored, she ain't much of a compelling figure, and I am ready to tap out. If you respond back, don't add any "spice" or I'll feel compelled to come back and drill you into mush because I'm an animal and combat is my kink. But I did appreciate the good faith exchange.
Not sure about the LII typing, but he's right in that what I was saying that I was thankful and about my tooth was just something said so I can get it out of the way and be more free with the rest of the video. If I was so self conscious about my tooth missing I would not have made the video. So rather than it being about an aesthetic appearance thing, I only said it first because people at first judge you based off of something superficial. Problem with your Se is you take everything so at face value, you are like assessing me like an online test, taking data and adding it up so equally. At least his analyzing of me was deeper than that and more human. It's not a competition, and you don't have to be so dominating, it looks really lame. Then you make statements saying you don't care, so we don't want to care about you either and write back to you.
What you seem incapable of grasping is that to EVEN CONSIDER and PRIORTIZE how your aesthetic presentation would be judged is a sign of strong sensory and ethics (wanting to be liked, not wanting to be ridiculed). Do you know how many people on here have made videos looking like something the dog ate-threw up-ate again-and then shat out, wearing ill-put together clothes, recording themselves in disorganized, trashed rooms, under bad lighting, etc... and yet they NEVER preemptively thought to justify the aesthetics of their presentation? I'll tell you, MANY. Sensory leads, more than any other type, are inclined to pay attention to how they present and are received aesthetically. Again, you evidently don't know enough about Socionics and the underlying theory to keep offering rebuttals and yet you still persist with no shame. You look quite foolish, ngl.
2.) And let's not talk about how things "look" or you'll get your feelings hurt. I promise you. I'm simply tired of delusional simpletons selfishly being more concerned with wish fulfillment fantasies about who they want to be instead of who they actually are and could potentially develop to be, which is super fucking important to the effectiveness of the system because it allows OTHERS to better know who they are in relation to you, i.e., intertype relations.
3.) I wouldn't have to be so "dominating" if you weren't so mentally rigid, stubborn and ignorant.
You're right in that I don't know about socionics that well though, but that doesn't really insult me.
You might be right, I could be SEI. SEI is a good type to be, I just don't think it fits me very well, but who knows. I guess Gulenko will be able to tell.
I would be happy to be any type but SLE-C; E864 SX-SO, that's the worst type to be and I fart on it.
Every sociotype represents a different breed of "intelligence." An efficient, effective typing system would incorporate the intelligence from every TIM, in so much as they each represent a valid archetypal/functional purview with key insights. Intuitive types are best at deciphering and untangling conceptual patterns, and sensors are best at decoding concrete, tangible behaviors. Ideally, they should both work synergistically and in tandem.
I'm the only SLE in this thread and I typed you via my niche form of intelligence, which is almost unmatched when it comes to perceiving and analyzing human body language and behavior--Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and his creation Sherlock Holmes (a master of concrete observation) are frequently typed as SLE. I was only attempting to offer my perspective in order to help you, especially seeing as how no one else on this thread analyzed the video from the vantage point that I did.
What you think fits or doesn't fit you has changed dramatically, seemingly depending upon group consensus and approval. You admitted to typing as SEI for a "long time" before being so certain you were a different type...before then changing your mind and being "sure" again. Clearly, your self-appraisal can't be relied upon, and especially when you acknowledge that you don't know enough about the types and their inner workings.
Gulenko is great, but he ain't infallible. Lately, it seems as if there have been more than a few bullshit typings coming from his school.
I could literally read nothing on this forum but @Braingel on her enneagram thread...ALL FUCKING DAY...because she is ACTUALLY an IEI. I'm STILL mulling over snippets of her content that have been reverberating all throughout my scalp. THAT is what it means to have one's suggestive function fed. The REST of you wine mom SEIs stroking your suggestive Ne+ in IEI drag could NEVER. Literally scroll right past your posts every time I see them because they feed me nothing I can't provide for myself. Si and SEIs are fantastic and have their strengths, but I also have strong Si. Not as helpful.
Damn! lol Yeah, I think I may be SEI, so you're right Alonzo about it all. lol I also think Aster is SEI too, and see similarities between us because I was reading through her Aster Petals thread, and there is a stark difference from the way IEIs and SEIs communicate, at least they do on here on this forum. If I am IEI, I'm a weird one then. Or IEIs put a lot of effort into their posts? because I don't see myself writing like them unless I just learned a whole bunch of stuff and have a lot on my mind. Then if I do post like an IEI would, I think I'd be exhausted and need to lie down afterwards. I would not post often I bet. But if an IEI can write as extensively as they do all the time, then that would be normal for that type. I can't relate to that unless I spent awhile thinking something over, then maybe. But no, I am too lazy, and have no capacity for forecasts. I do not give out advice to others. I have no revelations. Likely, an SEI then. Which is weird because my sensing sucks ass. I'm so clumsy and don't know when a bicycle rider is coming towards me, so it's like being a handicapped sensor.
you seem sp/so for instincts
1.) The thing is, you've spoken about having mental health challenges and guess what? That absolutely can have an effect on how we type and perceive ourselves. When I took my first MBTI test in University years ago, I got INTP--the problem is I was experiencing what's called a dry depression where it doesn't outwardly manifest like other forms of depression and so it's easier to go undetected. But I was extremely avoidant and schizotypal, very similar to how average to unhealthy LIIs might present. It wasn't until I began to get healthier that I realized I might be mistyped because my thoughts and behavior were no longer matching the types I once identified as. ESTP and INTP have a lot of similar ways of thinking but they are still quite different types.
TBH, all of the types that you mistakenly typed as weren't too far off the mark from the reality--it's not like you typed as IEI and then LSEl I think EII, LII, SEI, and IEI all fall somewhere within the margin of error for an "acceptable" mistype.
2.) And yes, @Aster, and her whole vibe and energy is SEI Queen Mother. Her Petals thread might actually be the original birth place and evolutionary spawn point of Si. When I first started posting on the board, she was typing as ESI--that always seemed off, too. To her credit, she also didn't veer too far away from her truth, but she's still gleefully missing the mark. She was so eager and quick to type you as IEI because you remind her of herself. And she likely got triggered because if I question you, indirectly I'm questioning her. But because she's generally milquetoast, pleasant and easy going and pretty much only posts the most proud soccer mom selfies ever, I wasn't going to one/two punch reality check her just yet...it was coming, but she gave me the out by chirping up when she should've just sat there and ate her food.
I admit that I can be too aggressive and pushy, at times, but I am sincerely only trying to help the system first, and the people who drive the system, second. Brilliant discoveries like Intertype Relations can only be of the utmost value and effectiveness if everyone is typed correctly. I don't push as hard as I do simply to be right.
2.) With the IEIs, it's not so much that they write more than anyone else, it's the type of things they write about--they go DEEP, peel back the layers on reality, and use metaphor and analogies and symbolism to convey universal truths. To the regular person, it often looks like "woo woo" "airy-fairy" bullshit. Even I have often skeptically looked at like that at first, before eventually finding it to be rather meaningful and profound.
2.) With the IEIs, it's not so much that they write more than anyone else, it's the type of things they write about--they go DEEP, peel back the layers on reality, and use metaphor and analogies and symbolism to convey universal truths. To the regular person, it often looks like "woo woo" "airy-fairy" bullshit. Even I have often skeptically looked at like that at first, before eventually finding it to be rather meaningful and profound.[/QUOTE]
It's really not that deep. They are lighthearted betas who are se-seeking and focused on romance as well as social status.
Lmao at going DEEP and peeling back layers of reality.
I was honest, I'm a pretty honest person and value that very much. How would you even know I was HSP? Maybe Gulenko might say the same thing about me.
I didn't mean to just say extensively, which they do sometimes, but the way they write is definitely different. I like to accept all walks of life, so I might sit down to read and listen to them too.
As an SEI, I wish you guys would STFU about SEIs and leave us out of your dumb ass conversations :)
So if not N, H sub even in that case, their writings even doesnt tend to be long or extensive.
I wish g was quicker lol.
The problem is all of you fuckers want to have your cake and eat it, too. You want to complain about the system, how it's pseudo-science, how it doesn't work, how it's a bust but then the vast majority of you are mistyped. lmao Did you ever stop to think that perhaps you don't get as much as you could out of it because you're doing it all wrong? OF course not, because that would call for accountability and not blame/projection. I'm simply trying to help you out. But you don't actually want help, you want your delusions to be stroked and massaged because you doubt you could ever actually be valued for who you truly are. I'm a fucking maniac, make no doubt about it, but at least I know who I am. You motherfuckers are playing dress up!
You can type me whatever, that label isn't important. According to the typical anecdotes of socionics, I still like my comfort, convenience, practicality and coziness more than I like rules, "grand visions", passionate emotionality and especially group behavior. Religion, politics and team/group dynamics are something I don't want anything to do with at all.
I lead people in my work, but it's because I have the highest overall technical competence and am good at selecting what person is best suited for doing a certain thing, I don't however put any "screws" on them or want anything to do with any kind of team building stuff.
Some major LSI cliches like "inclined to discuss and speculate on philosophical and moral topics. Sometimes he has a certain attraction to religion, mysticism, predictions, and other forms of manifestations of deep intuition. " are something completely foreign to me.
Whereas "Values convenience and quality. Gives preference to comfort in clothing rather than appearance. Sensitively reacts to touch and any extraneous odors." fits well.
This is at the same time an example of why socionics is silly, everyone picks and chooses small pieces of a person they glimpse and draw conclusions about trivialities. It's even worse when "information elements" are brought in, insteads of using tangible traits.
This is Carl Jung on Ni:
It is different with the morally orientated intuitive (or IEI). He concerns himself with the meaning of his vision; he troubles less about its further śsthetic possibilities than about the possible moral effects which emerge from its intrinsic significance. His judgment allows him to discern, though often only darkly, that he, as a man and as a totality, is in some way interrelated with his vision, that it is something which cannot just be perceived but which also would fain become the life of the subject.
Through this realization he feels bound to transform his vision into his own life. But, since he tends to rely exclusively upon his vision, his moral effort becomes one-sided; he makes himself and his life symbolic, adapted, it is true, to the inner and eternal meaning of events, but unadapted to the actual present-day reality. Therewith he also deprives himself of any influence upon it, because he remains unintelligible. His language is not that which is commonly spoken—it becomes too subjective. His argument lacks convincing reason. He can only confess or pronounce. His is the 'voice of one crying in the wilderness'.
Here's what Socionist Filatova has to say about IEI, this time putting more emphasis on the time aspect of Ni:
The IEI’s principal value in this world are the invaluable gardens of his own imagination, with the aid of which it is possible for him to penetrate into the past and future, to feel the surrounding world in its wholeness, to understand the dynamics of present events, and furthermore – to inspire people to any necessary undertakings.
Ni – Program function. Introversion of IEI's intuition dictates that his consciousness is submerged in modeling of processes of time. His thoughts sail, flow, easily going forward and backwards in time. In contrast to the ILI, the IEI is focused on ethics, and therefore he is less concerned with the problems of the material world and production; his interests lie in the development of people's emotions, relations, and potential.
He internally observes everything as in constant motion: children – run, adults – work, some actions are undertaken, rivers – flow, heavenly bodies – move in the sky… for the IEI, time constitutes a kind of aether into which everything is submerged. A dreamer and romantic, the IEI is easily separated from reality and taken by his thoughts into the land of images and insights, from which he derives enjoyment and meaning of his existence. He's drawn to literature containing elements of the fantastical and breathtaking adventures. He imagines himself participating together with heroes of the novels, giving himself up to periods of creative imaginings. His mind, as a rule, focuses on something that is sublime and elegant – he may think of a journey around the world aboard an ocean liner (alongside a refined public), of an alluring cottage with a fireplace and white piano, of beautiful transcendent love…
However, the IEI is also able to sense the imminence of events, to catch the barely noticeable currents of attitudes and dynamics within society. He can feel the precise moment in time when action must be taken; mostly vividly he feels the imminence of crisis situations and danger, at which time he becomes very agitated and disturbed.
He is adept at noticing people's characteristics, idiosyncrasies, abilities and potential, and is drawn towards capable individuals (sometimes for his own purposes). With respect to his own abilities and talents there is an internal, frequently secret, conviction that he exceeds others in his spiritual aristocratism, viewing himself as a member of an elite of humanity, but usually he does not openly demonstrate this perception.
Introverted intuition in the leading bloc impedes him seeing himself from the outside. He finds it difficult to objectively evaluate his behavior, and is inclined to justify himself in everything. His inclination to distance himself from reality and difficulties in self-appraisal can lead to egocentrism and excessive submersion in his own world.
Here is Gulenko's take on IEI, followed by some slight supervision lol:
Romantic dreamer* and visionary**. Curious: not indifferent to anything that is novel, unusual, and fascinating. Leaves an impression by his unexpected, sometimes extravagant behavior and statements. Has a refined sense of humor. Knows how to comfort a person, how to uplift the mood.
In his behavior the IEI is guided by his intuitive presentiments. Due to this quality he is capable of surviving in the most difficult situations. He quickly distinguishes falsehood, hypocrisy, artifice, degradation (even in themselves). Often acts as if he has time to spare and puts off much until tomorrow. Inclined to optimism, believes in a bright future. Pictures and visions that the IEI creates in his mind are usually much more attractive to him than everyday life proves to be. Can calm people down, instill hope and inspire them by telling of coming changes for the better. In conversation, dislikes highlighting mistakes of the past.
dreamer*: a person who is unpractical and idealistic (unrealistically aiming for perfection)
visionary**: thinking about or planning the future with imagination or wisdom; relating to or able to see visions in a dream or trance, or as a supernatural apparition.
Because Gulenko is a Ti base, I know that he is careful and intentional, albeit sometimes too strict and categorical when it comes to the language he uses--technically, his definitions are accurate. However, one would think that 3D creative Ne- should be able to discern and anticipate how some words convey multiple meanings that the average person isn't well versed in and so there must be discernment so as to not potentially confuse. But factoring all the possible ways something might be interpreted (essentially based primarily on guesses, assumptions and hypotheticals) is not the same thing as how people actually often interpret them...cause the average person understands words at the normative and colloquial level. From a 4D Se vantage point, I can see how a lot of his verbiage might be misinterpreted, realistically/practically speaking. IMO, it's still too generalized and, therefore, "vague."
Dreaming/Daydreaming ≠ intuition, necessarily. As previously stated in my analysis to the OP, daydreams are "a series of pleasant thoughts that distract one's attention from the present." Therefore, it's important to get clear and discern if the pleasant thoughts reflect past experiences/sense impressions (Si) or do they concern possible realities of what could be (Ne+) and/or envisioning how your future will unfold before you, via newly created images and symbols (Ni)?
Here's where things get more complicated and problematic: according to neuroscientist Dario Nardi, both Si and Ni leads frequently access regions of the brain that are strong in visual thinking and that predict what will surely happen in the future, and/or apply a symbolic meaning to the future. This holds up to Socionics because all introverted irrational types (XEIs and XLIs) can access the IE opposing their 4D base function via the 2D role function.
However, for the strong Si valuers, their access to that region is not related to imagination or wishful thinking--it's about planning concrete details, schedules or activities that will be accomplished, but closer to the present moment. Whereas for Ni leads, it's more about visually creating their future and crafting mental landscapes that are new, as in they are not a part of a previously constructed past. Another distinguishing factor is that the brains of Si leads often enter a zen/flow state when vividly recalling past sense impressions and experiences whereas Ni leads enter this state when allowed to freely build what the/their futures might look like, potentially extrapolating FAR into the future.
My point is that these are Se data/info oriented factors and variables that must be factored in the typing method and type profiles in order to paint a more (Se) accurate and dynamic picture of what's motivating these different types towards behaviors that might superficially look the same.
We are deep but in a simple way, which is why we are known as the lyricist. Like there is nothing better than a poem even though what is a poem really? It makes you feel like everything makes sense, just by placing ideas and images together in some sort of careful arrangement. It leaves an impression. I still think of SEI as more poetic, because they are more instinctive and they usually have a way with words. But IEI are lyrical yes, it’s a gentle type of poetry.
Last edited by Bethany; 03-18-2023 at 11:58 AM.
Larpers tend to equate being a dick on the internet with SLE
Last edited by MathHysteriaOfSoul; 03-18-2023 at 07:03 PM.
Nothing is real
Oh, and when I figured out you’re that autistic, “Feed The Children” looking ass SEI (that nearly everyone, in a rare case of unanimity, recognized immediately as SEI or SEI-ish), I CACKLED. Yet another delusional mistype going around pissing on everyone’s leg but claiming it’s an April shower.
And I meant to adequately engage that unbearably sad thread where you stage a stilted, stiff back and forth dialogue with your sock pocket account in order to convince everyone that you’re the IEE “Advisor.” LMAO The problem is you’re soooo motherfucking boring and uninteresting that I’ve been dragging my feet getting to that. But don’t worry, I’ll make time for you since you evidently want my attention.
Everyone here is so delusional. I was actually advising her, I got her number and we talked over the phone about very personal matters. It was amazing and I still contact her when I feel like doing so.
Also boring has more to do with your expectations or whatever going on with you than with my type.
I'm actually over this forum, besides people being cluesless about real typology, it can actually be harmful for mentally healthy people
Nothing is real