Why I don’t believe Si egos or sensors without Ti as a general rule of thumb make very good typists..

[Braingel]

Something that struck me, is that enneagrammer is also very much XSI in how it replaces Se aesthetics (typing by collages) with Ne essence and underlying dynamics behind things.

[Braingel]

XSI typology schools:

Gulenko
Enneagrammer
Vultology

possibly Kiersy, but can also potentially be Ni PolR, with Si subjective experience replacing Ni evolutions overtime.. But I believe that it fits Ne polr better..

[maresnest]

Ti types (Alphas especially) are too reductive and literal sometimes. “This person likes cooking and decorating his home” = Si-base no matter what. They don’t care what the person’s overall vibe is like, how they say what they say, or care to dig deeper into why they might display certain superficial traits. I’m exaggerating of course but that’s what it looks like sometimes

i think that statement in itself is reductive (of course you said you were exaggerating ). i think examples of people that type like that isn’t type-related and are caused by a lackluster understanding of the theoretical basis of the typology system (though ego may make them come off as confident of their own perspective of this even if it’s not all that), and of not stopping to think that there may be other reasons for someone liking to do something, such as your example in cooking and decorating their home.
one has to consider it not in isolation, but in context to that person in other circumstances, and also have evidence for other features of their presence that give one an idea of who they are and how that all fits and ties it together holistically.

[necrosebud]

What you mentioned sounds like sensors in general and potentially more due to intertype (seeming imperviousness and intransigence to Ni/Fe approach to things) which I also experience the same with basically any Se ego.

[Braingel]

I have heard from Karniv, the source of Aushura typing G as an ESI is Rick DeLong.

[Braingel]

Something I had written awhile back, made in a more coherent structure and with clarifying notes, as it was a scattered, cascading thought process as I generally am..


WSS: “the food” or information someone wants eat
SCS: how someone digests info
Beebe: scs+ how digestive tract can change under stress and block off


I believe Beebe is probably the best Jungian system.. It is the most dynamically focused on how people shift under stressors.


“The food” someone wants eat doesn’t mean they can actually digest food like that…. There’s a difference between wanting eat, and being able to process what is wanted eat.


Jung: the start of the digestive system. He set the foundation, but it wasn’t completed.
It didn’t explain lower processes..
The “mouth”, “teeth”, “esophagus”


Also, something like enneagram can affect behavior, as can pathology. And whilst some pathology would correlate to certain values, not things that any person can develop, like PTSD.


Of the digestive system equivalency..
This doesn’t make WSS entirely worthless, because the food you want eat is important and you need know what you’re putting in yourself and why..


But if a system like SCS already captures this with super ego means, it then makes it somewhat pointless.


And the kind of people (ITR) that you may want that can also affect internet chemistry (structure/more congestive typology of it).


I’d say WSS is your natural food craving, and food being my metaphor for food one wants intake..
It doesn’t mean the person digests the info very well, with what they’re trying consume and what properties in other peoples’ wants of what they want eat are absorbing well into how they process.
As in how they literally mentalize information and focus on it. It’s literally just about what’s being put in, and then.. The anus, like how it shoots out into behavior at others and makes stains or evolves things to grow


It isn’t the esophagus, the intestinal tracks


WSS is merely the food being put in, and how the anus shoots out (behavior)


In truth, all these systems have their representation. Of the processes of how humans consume, or metabolize info AND consume.
And they aren’t wrong, when they’re treated as if they’re encapturing merely only the processes they do indeed symbolize.


One more thing to add to my metaphor: the food one wants eat may cause them ails, sickening their body, in spite of the illusory feel good. And I am aware that functions would influence how someone sees things which can influence traumatization, but fight/flight responses can easily affect things that exert behavior, without it being related to one’s outlook directly, as once something is digested in, it can erode the functions and force up a behavior that isn’t inherent to survive. Gag reflex. This is why I have so often been typed “EIE” in other models, and whatnot,.


https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...bc7b66b3ea103&


https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...0670addcb37c2&
@WVBRY @Expansion @The Reality Denialist @on a peaceful hiatus @BrainlessSquid

[Braingel]

(Gulenko is also a “food” model, to be clear, but a mentality that is like “I need eat this”, regardless of if it is good for the person of their ability to digest)..

[The Reality Denialist]

I just see Jung describing modes of consciousness. I don't think there ever will be any essential development in that area after it was written, and this only can correlate but not cause traits. There may only be new ways to detect this.

[Braingel]

A system like scs is even more important for a case of trauma, where someone’s seeming behavior can masquerade their inherent faculties, due to an altered amygdala, learnt survival strategies that an environment may have forces focus on, even if these aren’t great.. And this sort..

Functions will affect what you focus on in a traumatic environment and how you internalize it, but neurosis can happen and blow up things and maybe even result in higher used functions to look immature and less healthy.,

[Braingel]

Typing someone from “observation” who is highly traumatized is a pretty bad way to approach typology.. Typing someone EIE or SEE because the person is reactive and dramatic is bad. Typing someone who breaks boundaries from trauma triggers or who posts a lot of physical proof of things a certain way is bad of they’d been gaslit their entire life and learnt that behavior as a huge maladaptive strategy to survive that.. It would be something like extroversion if it happens in a broad context, but if it’s isolated to triggers and specific things, you can’t use that as a basis, and the entire reason they do it to begin with matters. Even the whole VI ordeal, someone who is highly traumatized may even physically alter on their appearance.. I mean, it often gives in bags and a more dead eye look from deprivation of sleep.. and a slouched posture..

Even when it comes to ego block placements, you probably have approach it with more care, as ego functions may even show unhealthy behavior that have been learnt to survive. You can probably see a lot of super egoic patterns in a highly traumatized person, but it can be very easy probably, if you don’t actually delve into how a person processes in a deeper 1-1 interaction with that person, to maybe even not correctly grasp their ego versus super ego, if they operate from a place of pure dysfunction. Because the ego block wouldn’t even healthfully show up.

[Braingel]

A big thing for a highly traumatized person, would be to isolate their reactions and triggers from their actual essence and personality. It may or may not have do with cognition. Whilst cognition gets in the outlook of everything mostly, there are times where a behavior that juxtaposes the inherent outlooks formed via how one has internalized info from their functional lenses forces itself out like vomit.. This upset stomach may frequent if a bad enough environment lives in. What is making the person vomit to begin with may say something of the enneagram type and of super ego functions their own self… Or they may not, and may just be a pure trigger, like, some phrase a person says that was said amid a time a person was beaten or nearly died..

Those juxtapose reactions can even happen to perceived traumatic stimulus with others or things that aren’t actually of psychological menace beyond the perception.. But trigger with a hyper-vigilant nervous system that is on guard from having to put up in living in a traumatic area, and it won’t drop until the environment is put out.

[Ave]

Your self-typing as an ili was probably correct.. I don’t like model G, at all, for the most part.. A few things with it are okay. But if you want seriously bloom at your type, look at John beebe, look at classical aushura remodeled.

As an alternative typing to my SHS one, I would think beta NF describes me better than ILI.

[Ave]

I Googled John Beebe, if I understand correctly he isn't specifically into socionics or anything Aushra did?

[ChaosConductor6669]

A system like scs is even more important for a case of trauma, where someone’s seeming behavior can masquerade their inherent faculties, due to an altered amygdala, learnt survival strategies that an environment may have forces focus on, even if these aren’t great.. And this sort..

Functions will affect what you focus on in a traumatic environment and how you internalize it, but neurosis can happen and blow up things and maybe even result in higher used functions to look immature and less healthy.,

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/04/harvard-researchers-study-how-mindfulness-may-change-the-brain-in-
depressed-patients/

Some pharmaceuticals actually do work on the amygdala without negative side effects IME; though it still takes consistent use combined with natural exercise.

[Braingel]

I Googled John Beebe, if I understand correctly he isn't specifically into socionics or anything Aushra did?

Nope, but I noticed he overlaps SCS, and I’d shown Lena this…

I know you’d believe otherwise, but I see SHS as mostly a waste of time beyond a few ideas it has.

[Braingel]

If I gave the scs typings I’d have on this forum, for some users, they’d find it ridiculous.. A few “EIE’s” would be ILE’s and SLE’s, for instance. A few EII’s may be IEI’s and LSI’s.. Some IEI would be SEI, EII or ESE.

[Braingel]

As an alternative typing to my SHS one, I would think beta NF describes me better than ILI.

For SCS, forget social mission and most renin dichotomies. Avert upon ego blocks, Accepting/producing (I don’t know this dichotomy, but know it’s used), observatory/evaluatory, mental/vital, and static/dynamic. Only static/dynamic will remain, and it’s a slightly different definition.

[Braingel]

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/04/harvard-researchers-study-how-mindfulness-may-change-the-brain-in-
depressed-patients/

Some pharmaceuticals actually do work on the amygdala without negative side effects IME; though it still takes consistent use combined with natural exercise.

CBD

[Braingel]

Kiersy, Vultology, Model G, enneagrammer, WSS, all these schools suck when you use them beyond what they symbolize, to define someone’s overall contents of process (which is what the majority of people do when they type someone in a model, and they don’t even realize what the metric of that system is). They’re mostly observational. Yeah, you can’t always access a person deeper because of circumstance, but when you can, you should always throw away observation.

[Braingel]

Kiersy, Vultology, Model G, enneagrammer, WSS, all these schools suck when you use them beyond what they symbolize, to define someone’s overall contents of process (which is what the majority of people do when they type someone in a model, and they don’t even realize what the metric of that system is). They’re mostly observational. Yeah, you can’t always access a person deeper because of circumstance, but when you can, you should always throw away observation.

Basically, these schools are just:

Kiersy: your archetype and role.. A bit of big 5 without a 5th..

Vultology: physical details of patterns. They may or may not relate to your type.. It can be good to gain awareness maybe, for people who are unaware of sensory patterns they’ve.

Enneagrammer: an archetypal, static representation of enneagram beyond line movements.. Completely does away with deeper internal content of how types move about neurosis or transcendence, beyond it’s indirect observation of behavior that doesn’t perceive other factors.. Very ne polr. The line movements are the primary compensation, aside from you’d figure some behavior is also rooting in neurotic motives. Would also put it as your animal drives and way of perceiving world in a very watered down way..

Model G: outward social role and aspirations. Behavioralism that may or may not correspond to functions..

WSS: functions you prefer to use and prioritize

[Braingel]

Jungian functions are something cognitive, meaning they manifest primarily inside of a person. Whilst behavior externalizes from how information processes within a person to inform their outlook, to assume every single behavior is resulted from functions is wrong. Whilst functions would inform how certain beliefs and emotions develop, there are universal means that impact behavior, but you may say that the intensity of this, and some specific coping mechanisms are relative to the individual.. And their type and functions.. But you can’t equate every single behavior motivated in socionics. You have enneagram, you have environmental stressors that push survival strategies beyond even maybe an ego or super ego element that the environment demands develop or the person dies.. That informs behavior looking contrary to the inside processes.. You’ve transient mental health episodes, you’ve neurodiversity that have universal properties to even be made into a diagnosis to begin with.. But type would affect how it shows differently for what isn’t a common “observation”.

You cannot always “see” something that is deep inside of a person.. You can’t see food going throughout a digestive tract, but you know that it happens, for a food to start out in a various form and excrete otherwise.. You know that’s there, and how that has taken form in that start to finish process may say something about its digestion. And this is how it is for knowing the cognition; you make intuitive inferences of how something in that whole process of synthesizing is operating for it to excrete beliefs and sometimes behavior, and if you do have the lens of a function that allows you to see into the process (Ni, Fi, Ne), then you can access it better.

[Braingel]

Furthering my comment on trauma even able to make ego functions look “bad”.. It can make even ego functions manifest immaturely, not just super ego or low functions, bc you’d literally approach the world mostly on the mental block and survival mechanisms that are toxic will also show via the ego. The person’s primary faculties that allow mobility towards the world.. The mental functions in general, would be how trauma shows itself mostly… Maybe the unconscious functions help trauma to heal.

[Braingel]

Or the unconscious functions, certain ones, harbor traumas of their own as well..

[Braingel]

Well, it’s not as internal as an introverted element, but of the extroversive ones, it would be the most focused on inside, because it is looking past the surface of things, and looks at the underlying means, which requires a bit more of internal grasping. But it isn’t as deep as Ni.. And there is also an ability to grasp the potential of a surface as well, from being able to grasp the properties..

It is for this reason, a lot of ENFP’s in mbti and other systems misidentify their own selves as introverts.. Because being a more internally focused person with emotions and their own mental sphere of ideas, living more in their head than body, they can feel more detached from direct social reagents.. But this person will always indeed push out of itself and avert upon potentialities that may initially grasp some internal properties that optimize potential, but expanding with this info, into the outer and exploring that terrain and oftentimes, quickly going about with other ones.. It will never go as deeply in as an introverted function, that penetrate an object’s deeper underlying, and not just these “inner surface” potentials that sort of roam around.. It just goes into the layer beneath the surface, to “quickly” grasp and flash ideas of what it is encompassing.

Seeing those outermost inner layers allows it to spring right back up, and create and link from those things, weaving new connections that aren’t even directly related, which creates new opportunities, new potentials..

[Braingel]

Ni is far more sedimentary, and goes deep down the caverns of one’s conscious, floating quickly in a simultaneous grasping of it all relative to one zone in.. It isn’t just these potentials of the inner world, that lay on the outermost part of the inside.. it is how the person has transcended throughout their entirety and of intricate themes with this all, and being able to see the deep meaning, extracting that, and is how things work as they do, as the time measurement sees how it came to be and of which process leads up to what, which is time Eval..

[Braingel]

In this extent, Ne is more superficial than Ni, because it is dwelling mostly on the outermost layer of inside, and just sees it broadly, and springs its conscious right back up into the world and spreads those qualities out into actions and new ideas, forming unrelated relations between two objects, including the surface of an outer, and just keeps dwelling mostly in this constant making of new worlds based on its quick spring down a bit, quickly see what is an the outside of the inner, and then focus completely outside reality in making anew..

Ni isn’t as “quick” as Ne at all.. Ne is rather scattery and jumpy, but it is quite apt at seeing the potentials of things, and of asking “what ifs”, understanding the concepts of things based on how they possess qualities that aren’t in direct view..

You can call Ne a surface function, like all extroverted elements, because it only is able to access the inside at its outer… It is incapable of going as deep as Ni, seeing how things interweave a function and whole.. It doesn’t grasp the raw, full picture of an inside like Ni does… It grasps the energy of this that permeates from the deep workings the Ni will be able to perceive. And the Ne user does this better than an Ni user, they’d be better with vibes and stuff, in this way, as vibes are just inner outer surface qualities, really. That often can though, say something about someone’s overall, deep working.. But often not the full. It’s a snap shot.

[Braingel]

When you’ve am XIE or XII, you’ve a person who is capable of doing both these things well, making them arguably “more intuitive” than a direct perceiving base…. It’s just that they prefer one thing more, it occupies their mental space more often, and at times, with more strength, the other mean can demonstrate better…. This is how I experience my Ni in some conceptions of it, like in aushura, and like in 8 model expanded mbti..

[youfloweryourfeast]

Yeah I think in some ways language and communication could be a healthier way to type people rather than behavior or physical attributes, though a lot of that is still used and it's not necessarily bad, but I think other things need to be looked at.

[youfloweryourfeast]

Also another thought Ne may be able to apt adapting to society tho idk, and I agree it doesn't go in depth as much as ni, but they still won't share the same abilities an se user does sensory skills/breadth so it not commonality for me to meet other Ne since it wouldn't still make sense for them to be common. I think it could also cause someone to have to develop in the case of a intuitive type ways to adapt would create stressful life or developing tactics.

[youfloweryourfeast]

Now thinking if Ellie is Ne base mybe Alpha nt I think she could be an ILE and she does use se role some form, the only type consider otherwise was LSI for her. And she seemed to like fe environments to extent and some of the toxic places, but not as much forceful for se exactly

[Ave]

Yeah Kara is right here…listen to her Ni

The simping is a bit out of hand.

Tbh kinda messing around with calling it simping but this does feel like a "listen to the prophet" type statement.

[Ave]

Kiersy, Vultology, Model G, enneagrammer, WSS, all these schools suck when you use them beyond what they symbolize, to define someone’s overall contents of process (which is what the majority of people do when they type someone in a model, and they don’t even realize what the metric of that system is). They’re mostly observational. Yeah, you can’t always access a person deeper because of circumstance, but when you can, you should always throw away observation.

I'm kind of on the fence about typing someone through observation of behaviors. I think it is a part of the picture, at least.

I think your digestion analogy is pretty poor. A better analogy would be emotions. You can observe a person's emotions on their face, it is often difficult for them to hide. In the same way I think you can observe typological features through body language and attitudes.

Since you mention Enneagrammer, and I'm mostly into the Enneagram as a typology system these days, I think they are onto something when they say Enneagram type related motivations are largely an automatic process, therefore you can detect it partially through attitudes and body language. My problem with E-grammer has more to do with how many things they consider to be signs of attachment object relation. I suspect they also have a tendency to type people as "attachment/bermuda until proven otherwise", though this is probably not some hard rule they follow while typing clients, it's probably a tendency nonetheless.

[Ave]

There could be maybe some ni creatives on here more than Ne leads but still not a lot. Most ppl on her are xSTPs 20% some NFJs 2-3% and entjs and ent 3% Enfps rare bc they are conflicts with LSI but IEEs could be living somewhere far away. Then some delta types not really on here but some living on their own.

And how did you come to these numbers?

[Ave]

who are EviLena and Karniv? to be fair, Gulenko and Aushra made some wild typings back then, but Gulenko changed his opinion and Aushra can't do that anymore. I doubt she would still hold the same beliefs now. I think many of the postings I have made 3-4 years ago were pretty incorrect. it's just a very flexible field in which new information can change your view on types drastically at any given moment. at least that's how it is for me.

I think it's weird, coming from my own background in esoteric studies, to build a school of typology on a dead person's writings, since that person can no longer speak up, change their mind, or evolve their own teaching. There is no way to be "in the know", it's a bit like evangelicals basing everything they believe on the bible, who's authors are long dead and who's writings are usually taken out of context (if the context is even known with exactitude). There is athing called transmission of knowledge from teacher to student, and this doesn't happen through writing, but through face to face communication.

[Ave]

Jungian functions are something cognitive, meaning they manifest primarily inside of a person. Whilst behavior externalizes from how information processes within a person to inform their outlook, to assume every single behavior is resulted from functions is wrong. Whilst functions would inform how certain beliefs and emotions develop, there are universal means that impact behavior, but you may say that the intensity of this, and some specific coping mechanisms are relative to the individual.. And their type and functions.. But you can’t equate every single behavior motivated in socionics. You have enneagram, you have environmental stressors that push survival strategies beyond even maybe an ego or super ego element that the environment demands develop or the person dies.. That informs behavior looking contrary to the inside processes.. You’ve transient mental health episodes, you’ve neurodiversity that have universal properties to even be made into a diagnosis to begin with.. But type would affect how it shows differently for what isn’t a common “observation”.

You cannot always “see” something that is deep inside of a person.. You can’t see food going throughout a digestive tract, but you know that it happens, for a food to start out in a various form and excrete otherwise.. You know that’s there, and how that has taken form in that start to finish process may say something about its digestion. And this is how it is for knowing the cognition; you make intuitive inferences of how something in that whole process of synthesizing is operating for it to excrete beliefs and sometimes behavior, and if you do have the lens of a function that allows you to see into the process (Ni, Fi, Ne), then you can access it better.

I agree that not every behavior points to something typological in a person. But probably, part of it does. That's why I say it's part of the picture.

[youfloweryourfeast]

edit* Am not sure yet abt it, I'm researching a lot of things rn to see if it's true since idk if those types are more common, but am figuring it out, I'll private dm you later my full conclusion. (listed with proof)

[Braingel]

I think it's weird, coming from my own background in esoteric studies, to build a school of typology on a dead person's writings, since that person can no longer speak up, change their mind, or evolve their own teaching. There is no way to be "in the know", it's a bit like evangelicals basing everything they believe on the bible, who's authors are long dead and who's writings are usually taken out of context (if the context is even known with exactitude). There is athing called transmission of knowledge from teacher to student, and this doesn't happen through writing, but through face to face communication.

The mental and vital track is very spot on and I noticed it aligns with John beebe. If you look at my “real type” thread of me being an actually EII, you’ll see my thoughts. Modern socio has done away with that whole concept, and it’s highly important in my opinion.

SCS isn’t taking every single thing from aushura, it’s just filling in what is incomplete. Some things aren’t directly based on Aushura. But a lot of it is, like mental/vital. Then I am also evolving it with John Beebe, and with my own insights. I last night had a vision and wrote out how this all works overtime to some people in charge of scs, I was going post it here, but then I’d my torrents of delving into my core in my EII thread..

[Braingel]

Literally because of my intuiting scs and beebe (I’ve barely studied scs by the way, I filled most of it in myself) I reached some profound healing insights last night… Almost as much as enneagram has in that regard.

[Braingel]

I think it's weird, coming from my own background in esoteric studies, to build a school of typology on a dead person's writings, since that person can no longer speak up, change their mind, or evolve their own teaching. There is no way to be "in the know", it's a bit like evangelicals basing everything they believe on the bible, who's authors are long dead and who's writings are usually taken out of context (if the context is even known with exactitude). There is athing called transmission of knowledge from teacher to student, and this doesn't happen through writing, but through face to face communication.

I mean, just look at this thread https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...-Aushura-Beebe third page especially. I am actually FiNe in typology that goes deeply psychological, which I have always typed FiNe in mbti and other places.. But yeah, I have an enfj shadow.

[Braingel]

I think it's weird, coming from my own background in esoteric studies, to build a school of typology on a dead person's writings, since that person can no longer speak up, change their mind, or evolve their own teaching. There is no way to be "in the know", it's a bit like evangelicals basing everything they believe on the bible, who's authors are long dead and who's writings are usually taken out of context (if the context is even known with exactitude). There is athing called transmission of knowledge from teacher to student, and this doesn't happen through writing, but through face to face communication.

Believe me, when I say you’d find the mental and vital track highly intelligible. And this has been extricated from the conscious of socionics. It’s a long lost concept, eradicated by Filatova and Gulenko.. And this entire concept I have figured goes right into John beebe, and aushura and Beebe merely express different potentials of manifestation of those functions, relative to health, which is what I’d told the scs people, so they can evolve that and expand.