me

[FDG]

He knows the stuff he says is ridiculous, too, but he doesn't care. "

Well this is a good thing, don't you think? Being ridiculous is funny.

[Joy]

He knows the stuff he says is ridiculous, too, but he doesn't care. "

Well this is a good thing, don't you think? Being ridiculous is funny.

I don't know.... being around both of them is frustrating though.

[Gilly]

I told you I wasn't going to link you so you wouldn't sit around all day waiting for me to. That's rather polite, if you ask me.

I never said you shouldn't describe yourself. I said you shouldn't post ten pages of ESI brain-diarrhea mixed with your mangled self-image.

[Joy]

I told you I wasn't going to link you so you wouldn't sit around all day waiting for me to. That's rather polite, if you ask me.

fair enough

(and the Stratevskaya are a bit long... I know I wouldn't want to read through 3 of them plus notes in someone's type thread )

[Gilly]

Thanks for understanding. And...I reread that, and it did sound a little more harsh than I intended. Sorry...?

[Joy]

it's all good

heh I just realized that you're like... my counterpart. Sorta like you're to Gamma and Delta as I am to Alpha and Beta.

[anndelise]

Before I went through the reinin dichotomies, my opinion was:

I vote SF>FS>TN>TS (no way is she an NF/FN)

I don't see Joy as fitting into neither delta, nor beta.

But I decided to go ahead and see what I thought about how the reinin dichotomies described what I see in Joy, and then see what results from that.

Assuming that dichotomies are spectrums...
Extremely strong dichotomies:
Dynamic (more so than any)
Resolute (a very close second)
Declarer (that's one reason I piss people off lol)
Strategist (I lack Tactics mindset almost to the point of detriment)
Positivism

Strong dichotomies:
Serious
Democratic
Emotivism
Careless

Leaning towards:
Compliance
Extroversion
Rationality
Result

My opinion:
Static>Dynamic: Joy claims dynamic, but I haven't yet seen her describe it in a way that is consistent w/ dynamic only. She does not seem to have the same problems with static thinking that other dynamics express. (ie, none of our arguments have been anything like the arguments I have with isfps, isfjs, infps, estjs, istps, intps which tend to center around the static vs dynamic quite a bit) I believe that her so-called issues with "static" are actually issues with "Ti" specifically.

Resolute>Reasonable: I agree.

Asker>Declarer: The majority of Joy's threads are asking people's questions (even though she too easily dismisses inputs that don't fit in with her own belief...which suggests to me a possible J, however, obstinate types are also known for this.) She doesn't "create stories" nor narrate as easily nor as frequently as most declarers do. And when she does narrate something for us, it's either the same darned thing over and over, and/or it's written stilted as if it's worded with great effort to prove a point of whatever type she claims at the moment. (ie, she did this with ENTp, ESFp, another one, and now ENTj.) "Narrating" by referring to functions is not narrating.

Strategy>Tactics: I think I agree.

Positivism>Negativism: annoyingly so

Serious>Merry: I agree

Democratic>Aristocratic: I can believe this

Emotivism>Constructivism: agreed

Careless vs Farsighted: feels iffy, I can't form an opinion on this one as I've seen examples in her writings/attitude of each

Obstinate>Compliance: I do not believe that Joy is compliant in any way, shape, nor form. Even when she "complies" with a "nevermind" or "whatever" or such, it's done in an obstinate way, and isn't really "compliance".

Extroversion>Introversion: I believe she leans towards extroversion.

Irrational>Rational: I believe that Joy believes that she is rational, but her particular *clears throat* mental flexibility *clears throat again* screams irrational.

Result vs Process: I don't know.
_________

Based on what I agree with her on: Resolute, Strategist, Positivist, Serious, Democratic, Extrovert, we get:

Alpha: (10)
esfj 3; isfp 2; Si+Fe=5
entp 2; intj 3; Ne+Ti=5

Beta: (7)
enfj 0; infp 3; Ni+Fe=3
estp 2; istj 2; Se+Ti=4

Delta: (7)
enfp 2; infj 2; Ne+Fi=4
estj 0; istp 3; Si+Te=3

Gamma: (15)
esfp 5; isfj 4; Se+Fi=9
entj 6; intp 0; Ni+Te=6
________

Based on what I both agree and disagree with:
Alpha: (18)
esfj 4; isfp 3; Si+Fe=7
entp 5; intj 6; Ne+Ti=11

Beta: (15)
enfj 2; infp 5; Ni+Fe=7
estp 4; istj 4; Se+Ti=8

Delta: (15)
enfp 5; infj 3; Ne+Fi=8
estj 1; istp 6; Si+Te=7

Gamma: (23)
esfp 9; isfj 6; Se+Fi=15
entj 6; intp 2; Ni+Te=8
_________

so, based on my opinions of reinin dichotomies
gamma>alpha>the other two
SF 22>NT 19>ST 15>NF 13
gamma SF 15>alpha NT 11>gamma NT 8>alpha SF 7
esfp 9> isfj 6> intj 6> entj 6> entp 5

[Joy]

good idea anndelise

there's gotta be something scored wrong somewhere though because according to what we agree on you've got ENTj in the top spot, but according to what I say you've got ESFp in the top spot... (that's looking at each type individually, which I think is important to do when scoring dichotomies since mirrors aren't more similar than other types)

[anndelise]

good idea anndelise

there's gotta be something scored wrong somewhere though because according to what we agree on you've got ENTj in the top spot, but according to what I say you've got ESFp in the top spot... (that's looking at each type individually, which I think is important to do when scoring dichotomies since mirrors aren't more similar than other types)

well, if you really want to look at it that way
entj=6, esfp=5, isfj=4 all the others are lower than 4

so it still comes down to gamma sf over gamma nt

however, you don't want to take into account mirrors
I chose to do it this way instead of function-wise
however, if we do it functionwise we get:
Se+Fi= higher than Ni+Te
yes, that above includes the mirrors, but it explains why i included the mirrors....

[Gilly]

Reinin dichotomies are sketchy at best, and not a reliable way to determine type, IMO. First off, the criteria are so poorly defined and understood that your odds of interpreting the majority of them correctly with regards to a certain person are pretty low, and secondly, they aren't accepted by most of the socionics community, and could very easily be nonexistent.

it's all good

heh I just realized that you're like... my counterpart. Sorta like you're to Gamma and Delta as I am to Alpha and Beta.

You're just realizing this?

[Joy]

dichotomies don't translate into functions at all though...

if we were going to look at mirror pairs we'd have to only count the dichotomies that both types shared

[Gilly]

After reading what Ann said, I'm actually leaning Asker>Declarer.

I dunno, ESFp is beginning to make more sense, to be honest...

[Joy]

Reinin dichotomies are sketchy at best, and not a reliable way to determine type, IMO. First off, the criteria are so poorly defined and understood that your odds of interpreting the majority of them correctly with regards to a certain person are pretty low, and secondly, they aren't accepted by most of the socionics community, and could very easily be nonexistent.

I like them... the reason I'm including them though is because I've beaten the functions and descriptions to death, and people would just argue with me about them anyways.

it's all good

heh I just realized that you're like... my counterpart. Sorta like you're to Gamma and Delta as I am to Alpha and Beta.

You're just realizing this?

lol yeah

[FDG]

dichotomies don't translate into functions at all though...

if we were going to look at mirror pairs we'd have to only count the dichotomies that both types shared

Nope, because a certain set of dichotomies is never shared by only 2 types. Each type is identified by a precise set of dichotomies. If we restrict the set, and thereby relax our criterias, then we end up with more types than just mirrors.

[Joy]

After reading what Ann said, I'm actually leaning Asker>Declarer.

I dunno, ESFp is beginning to make more sense, to be honest...

What changed your mind about my being introverted?

Asker>Declarer: The majority of Joy's threads are asking people's questions (even though she too easily dismisses inputs that don't fit in with her own belief...which suggests to me a possible J, however, obstinate types are also known for this.)

This keeps coming up. I'm not sure how better to explain it... I'm not "asking" a question with those threads, I'm telling people to tell me what they think. What they say most likely won't influence what I think, and I don't intend for it to. I'm just trying to instigate discussion.

She doesn't "create stories" nor narrate as easily nor as frequently as most declarers do.

It's true that I don't do that here (or online, pretty much), but if you talk to people who have spent any amount of time with me irl, they will all say that I tell a lot of stories.

And when she does narrate something for us, it's either the same darned thing over and over, and/or it's written stilted as if it's worded with great effort to prove a point of whatever type she claims at the moment. (ie, she did this with ENTp, ESFp, another one, and now ENTj.) "Narrating" by referring to functions is not narrating.

Yeah, that's not really narrating... it's something else entirely... not sure what. I was obviously trying to convince myself of something in those situations.

As for the asker vs. declarer dichotomy, I think that askers tend to hide questions in statements... like, even if when they're putting something in the form of a statement, they're still trying to find something out. Declarers do just the opposite. Even when something is worded as a question, they're trying to tell you something. If the sentence here doesn't sound exactly like what I do, you're reading my tone all wrong lol. In fact, when I'm writing I often purposely put it in the form of a question so it's not so abrasive... like, I'll be making an assertion, but it's not something that I know for a fact, so, in an attempt to communicate that what I'm saying is an opinion, I put it in the form of a question.

[Gilly]

After reading what Ann said, I'm actually leaning Asker>Declarer.

I dunno, ESFp is beginning to make more sense, to be honest...

What changed your mind about my being introverted

Time

As for the asker vs. declarer dichotomy, I think that askers tend to hide questions in statements... like, even if when they're putting something in the form of a statement, they're still trying to find something out. Declarers do just the opposite. Even when something is worded as a question, they're trying to tell you something. If the sentence here doesn't sound exactly like what I do, you're reading my tone all wrong lol. In fact, when I'm writing I often purposely put it in the form of a question so it's not so abrasive... like, I'll be making an assertion, but it's not something that I know for a fact, so, in an attempt to communicate that what I'm saying is an opinion, I put it in the form of a question.

It's exactly the opposite of this, in fact. Askers put something in the form of a question regardless of their intent; Declarers do the opposite.

[Gilly]

I'm telling people to tell me what they think.

The only difference here would be command vs request, and that's not what Asker/Declarer is about.

[Joy]

Obstinate>Compliance: I do not believe that Joy is compliant in any way, shape, nor form. Even when she "complies" with a "nevermind" or "whatever" or such, it's done in an obstinate way, and isn't really "compliance".

This sounds like it's referencing the words used to name the dichotomy, which are very misleading.

That is a dichotomy that I'm more towards the middle in though.

[Gilly]

Irrational>Rational: I believe that Joy believes that she is rational, but her particular *clears throat* mental flexibility *clears throat again* screams irrational.

LOL truf.

[anndelise]

dichotomies don't translate into functions at all though...

if we were going to look at mirror pairs we'd have to only count the dichotomies that both types shared

I didn't start out translating dichotomies into functions.

I went through the types, using the chart you had made, and scored each of the types with one point if a dichotomy fit them.

Those types are made up of functions. Quadras are broken down into such things as +Se -Fi so in that sense, mirrors both share +Se and -Fi.

as for the other sentence, FDG explained it perfectly


Joy, I can't but help feeling really strongly that had the scores shown high in +Ni and -Te (entj and intp) then you would have jumped on that as proof that you were gamma nt.

[Gilly]

Really, Ann? You think Joy would do that? NEVAR!

[Joy]

Irrational>Rational: I believe that Joy believes that she is rational, but her particular *clears throat* mental flexibility *clears throat again* screams irrational.

LOL truf.

What you're seeing is Dynamicism (lol I can tell I'm going to need to go into explaining this dichotomy as it relates to me) and Te > Ti (because Ti types are a lot less likely to change their opinions about stuff in their "bookshelf"), as well as regular old miscommunications at times.

If you look at the descriptions of rationality and irrationality on Rick's site, rationality makes more sense for me. The INTj I was with said he doesn't understand why I ever thought I was an irrational type. I think this is because I'm quite inflexible, have to have things a certain way, get really upset/unnerved when plans get changed (even if for the better). Whatever "mental flexibility" you think you're seeing is definitely self-directed in a "j-ish" sort of way.

[Gilly]

Yeah, you better get started on the "dynamicism" bit. You've got quite the case to make, because I've done precisely the same "mentally flexible" things

Oh, and this:

Whatever "mental flexibility" you think you're seeing is definitely self-directed in a "j-ish" sort of way.

is bullshit at its finest. Come on, Joy, be real for once.

[anndelise]

Irrational>Rational: I believe that Joy believes that she is rational, but her particular *clears throat* mental flexibility *clears throat again* screams irrational.

LOL truf.

What you're seeing is Dynamicism (lol I can tell I'm going to need to go into explaining this dichotomy as it relates to me) and Te > Ti (because Ti types are a lot less likely to change their opinions about stuff in their "bookshelf"), as well as regular old miscommunications at times.

No, it is NOT dynamicism, because enfps, esfps, entps, and estps are well known for the same thing, and they are each static.

If you look at the descriptions of rationality and irrationality on Rick's site, rationality makes more sense for me. The INTj I was with said he doesn't understand why I ever thought I was an irrational type. I think this is because I'm quite inflexible, have to have things a certain way, get really upset/unnerved when plans get changed (even if for the better). Whatever "mental flexibility" you think you're seeing is definitely self-directed in a "j-ish" sort of way.

I covered this inflexibility already, with this:

Asker>Declarer: The majority of Joy's threads are asking people's questions (even though she too easily dismisses inputs that don't fit in with her own belief...which suggests to me a possible J, however, obstinate types are also known for this.) She doesn't "create stories" nor narrate as easily nor as frequently as most declarers do. And when she does narrate something for us, it's either the same darned thing over and over, and/or it's written stilted as if it's worded with great effort to prove a point of whatever type she claims at the moment. (ie, she did this with ENTp, ESFp, another one, and now ENTj.) "Narrating" by referring to functions is not narrating

what you are describing, Joy, is obstinancy, not "J-ish behavior"

[Gilly]

Yar.

[anndelise]

Irrational>Rational: I believe that Joy believes that she is rational, but her particular *clears throat* mental flexibility *clears throat again* screams irrational.

LOL truf.

What you're seeing is Dynamicism (lol I can tell I'm going to need to go into explaining this dichotomy as it relates to me) and Te > Ti (because Ti types are a lot less likely to change their opinions about stuff in their "bookshelf"), as well as regular old miscommunications at times.

I believe that her so-called issues with "static" are actually issues with "Ti" specifically.

[Gilly]

Wait, since when are Ti types less likely to change their minds? If ONE objective fact comes into play that doesn't coincide with the theory, the WHOLE thing gets thrown out.

My Ti is a regular customer at Borders

[anndelise]

Wait, since when are Ti types less likely to change their minds? If ONE objective fact comes into play that doesn't coincide with the theory, the WHOLE thing gets thrown out.

My Ti is a regular customer at Borders

i believe she is referring more to accepting Ti's

[FDG]

Wait, since when are Ti types less likely to change their minds? If ONE objective fact comes into play that doesn't coincide with the theory, the WHOLE thing gets thrown out.

My Ti is a regular customer at Borders

Hehe wait, not thrown out. For me, it gets thrown in a "limbo" where it still gets used, but I'm searching for something better in the meanwhile.

[Joy]

1.) http://the16types.no-ip.info/forums/...pic.php?t=5877

2.) It does not make more sense to say, for example, that I'm more likely an SF type because I scored 4 in ISFj + 4 in ESFp, and only 6 in ENTj + 1 in INTp.

3.) It seems you've misjudged me.

Joy, I can't but help feeling really strongly that had the scores shown high in +Ni and -Te (entj and intp) then you would have jumped on that as proof that you were gamma nt.

[Joy]

This feels like it's become an argument, and that's not what I wanted. I guess I just got carried away answering your posts.

I do think that I'm ENTj, but I would be equally content being an ESFp or INTp, cause they're both friggin awesome.

[Gilly]

Wait, since when are Ti types less likely to change their minds? If ONE objective fact comes into play that doesn't coincide with the theory, the WHOLE thing gets thrown out.

My Ti is a regular customer at Borders

Hehe wait, not thrown out. For me, it gets thrown in a "limbo" where it still gets used, but I'm searching for something better in the meanwhile.

See, I have one bookcase in the front room, which I keep nice and tidy, but the libraries upstairs and in the basement are basically piles of books, with maybe a few well-organized boxes of old volumes that used to be in the front room.

[Gilly]

3.) It seems you've misjudged me.

Joy, I can't but help feeling really strongly that had the scores shown high in +Ni and -Te (entj and intp) then you would have jumped on that as proof that you were gamma nt.

Joy, that's the chart YOU made. Not everybody agrees with what YOU think. Ann happens to see dichotomies that make ESFp more likely than ENTj, and we ALL know that, had she chosen dichotomies that support ENTj, you would have readily said "Yay, thanks for the petting, ann! You're a good pal to agree with me all the time!"

[Ms. Kensington]

it's all good

heh I just realized that you're like... my counterpart. Sorta like you're to Gamma and Delta as I am to Alpha and Beta.

did you guys type your relation yet?

[aestrivex]

i don't have anything to contribute to the discussion of the last three pages about joy's dichotomies, but i would like to say that she looks almost exactly like an ESFp i know. i didn't happen to notice this resemblance in previous photographs.


as i think joy knows, i have believed her to be ESFp since forever ago.

[Joy]

it's all good

heh I just realized that you're like... my counterpart. Sorta like you're to Gamma and Delta as I am to Alpha and Beta.

did you guys type your relation yet?

Quasi sounds perfectly correct to me. In the past he identified with the semi-dual description.

[Gilly]

It's deinitely a mix of SG's descriptions of Quasi-Identity (although less "misunderstanding" than me being pissed at her for not listening and being stubborn), semi-duality, and super-ego.

[Joy]

here's the chart with the dichotomies that anndelise didn't disagree with me about

[anndelise]

1.) http://the16types.no-ip.info/forums/...pic.php?t=5877

2.) It does not make more sense to say, for example, that I'm more likely an SF type because I scored 4 in ISFj + 4 in ESFp, and only 6 in ENTj + 1 in INTp.

1) you have your scoring wrong
it's entj 6, esfp 5, isfj 4
then there were 4 3's; 6 2's; and 2 0's (INTP being a 0 not a 1)
had esfp been 4, then there would be a slightly stronger case for entj
since there were so many 3's, 2's, and 0's then it seemed unproductive to attempt to place those in some kind of order, hence stopping at the 4 mark. Had it been reversed, say...esfp 6, entj 5, intp 4, then you would be arguing that that showed a more likelihood of entj>esfp because of the +ni and -te being so prominant. (i believe we all would)

2) as for your link, i'm not sure any of us can read minds, it's an awful long post, and i have no idea what support your hoping it will provide.
You're the supposed logical narrator, please do so.


(joy, i'm not irritated nor anything like that. i'm just providing my reasons for my opinion.)

As for the benefits of all this, i realized something about one of the reasons why I have issues with esfps. ENFp and ESFp are both obstinate irrationals. However, while the ESFp is Resolute, at least the ENFp is Reasonable.

[Creepy-bg]

I can't accept this chart... none of the insides of the letters are colored in