HealthyGamerGG

[squishycans]

https://www.youtube.com/@HealthyGamerGG/videos

He has some really interesting takes on a lot of things and found him through an interview he did with Contrapoints. I like that he tries to find deeper explanations and meanings for psychology terms, relationships, and concepts that most youtube/(armchair?) psychologists seem to take at face value.

He's clearly got his whole thing going on with being this media personality self-help guru psychologist whatever person and it's a little off-putting because he acts like he has answers for everything and some topics he's not so good on, but I guess that's capitalism and he seems to have good motivations either way.

I have an inkling of him being LIE because he is a very busy person that tries to uncover the deeper meanings behind things, but I'd rather hear what other people think about him, socionics or not.

[qaz00]

D-EII>D-ILI

[on a peaceful hiatus]

IEI

[Averroes]

LII

[squishycans]

@Averroes

Interesting. If you see him as your superego, what is it that stands out to you?

[VewyScawwyNawcissist]

EIE

[The Reality Denialist]

EIE

[squishycans]

Okay. Do you all maybe have any LIE examples to contrast with?
Because he feels very dry and to the point about everything, kind of too serious for Fe leading. I don't feel drawn in by his emotional energy. I feel like he's setting an agenda and trying to get through it, even in his interviews. Me personally, I can listen to some of his topics if I'm interested in them, but he doesn't hook me, like say Contrapoints or Shoeonhead, probably both Fe egos. Just a thought.

[The Reality Denialist]

All what he does is about mentoring people. He is successful at it. Bullseye EIE it seems.


He seems to have some interesting beliefs. Like in previous life, he thinks hew was a mother who lost kids or something.

[squishycans]

Yeah...okay...so I'm Ti-ing here. I don't know if my subjectivity reflects reality, but there's a part of this theory that seems not explained or missing. It's about the subtype theory. Umm so I've noticed

Illusionary Benefit ring
LII <> IEI <> ESI <> SLI <> LII
LIE <> IEE <> ESE <> SLE <> LIE
EII <> ILI <> LSI <> SEI <> EII
EIE <> ILE <> LSE <> SEE <> EIE

So Jung devised the 8 functions. Second function, creative function, is more developed and stabilizing for the ego because it's opposite in extroversion/introversion and needed for an adjusted ego, theoretically, you could then intuitively induce, whether witnessed or not. Growth brings you to look more like the type to your right and neuroticism brings you more to the type on the left. These types are very similar in terms of mathematical functional symmetry.

So when a type moves towards their dominant subtype, there's stronger Jungian neuroticism. Less of a static identity, less of a polr. More interchangeable with HA and demonstrative functions. When they move to the creative subtype, there is less neuroticism. You also start to balance the part of the ego that's missing. So an SLI-Te moves toward greater intuition and extroverted thinking because they can "lead" with Te and more easily replace their dominant Si with Ni. But the polr becomes a blind spot. I think Socionics types and the relations and descriptions are made for creative subtypes. The dominant subtypes were not given a lot of consideration, but it seems too important to just leave out.

One thing that has always bugged me is how Big 5 is considered "scientifically validated", but I don't think it is incompatible with Jungian psychotypes. For example, consider the categories (I think these are them, this sounds right - https://www.simplypsychology.org/big...onality.html):

neuroticism - Jungian neuroticism, dominant subtypes. Can include neuroticism from "masking" behaviors. Weaker ego, things like that.
extraversion - self-explanatory
openness - sensing/intuition, but your subtype will balance this. An SLI-Te will have greater intuition, but Fe polr. An ESI-Se will have greater thinking, but Ne polr.
agreeableness - T/F, but again subtype would change this. SLI-Te is Fe-polr and probably not as agreeable as dominant subtype, but ESI-Se will be less agreeable because they accentuate thinking processes.
conscientiousness - rationality/irrationality, but again subtype will influence this, SLI-Te is more rational and SLI-Si more irrational. More balance is ego stabilizing. And ESI-Se will become more irrational. If you think about it, the way these categories are described, it seems like you don't want to be too extreme in any of these.

That said, I could see how Big 5 is considered better. It does add more dynamicism for explaining people and outlining differences in people. But I don't think this is really incompatible with Jung or Socionics either.

That said, HealthyGamerGG types enneagram 1. He has also done a lot of work on himself, clearly. And I suspect now that he is LIE enneagram 1 that moved towards looking like an IEE. He's very much about Te data when he presents arguments and what things say, but also very Ni in breaking things down. I think he's moved towards appearing like an IEE. I don't know if Gulenko's cognitive styles are that important or mean that much or how they are derived, but I do get holographic vibes from him as well, which IEE supposedly are. I know this is a lot of armchair analyzing and nobody will probably agree with me, but I just had to say.

Alright, thanks for reading, if anyone made it this far ,

edit: or he's just IEE? lol.
edit2: no I don't think he's IEE, my instincts see problems with that.

[Averroes]

@Averroes

Interesting. If you see him as your superego, what is it that stands out to you?

He just seems like a wholesome nerdy guy who gives surface-level advice and cool psychology hacks on how to be more productive, pleasant and get along with people. He's good at what he does but leaves much to be desired for me personally. I could see him being ILI also

[Exodus]

Not 100% sure but I agree with LIE. He's a very direct speaker, maybe too direct sometimes, and is focused on data/sciencey stuff.