XoX's type - Evidence and Discussion

[Expat]

How can it be a good argument against INTp when I can relate to almost all of it? What is the difference between XoX and me then, based on what he writes about "team spirit"? You have to point out a difference, otherwise it is certainly not a good argument against INTp.

Can you make an argument that addresses the issue of how such an obviously Fe>Fi view point (which is not to say, again, thall all Fe>Fi types agree with it) can fit an INTp, rather than make it all about yourself?

Do you even understand why this is a Fe-Ti viewpoint? If you do but don't agree, fine, perhaps it isn't and I'm wrong about it, but can you tell me why you don't agree then? Or is all your understanding of Socionics based on comparing yourself to descriptions and others to yourself?

[UDP]

How can it be a good argument against INTp when I can relate to almost all of it? What is the difference between XoX and me then, based on what he writes about "team spirit"? You have to point out a difference, otherwise it is certainly not a good argument against INTp.

Can you make an argument that addresses the issue of how such an obviously Fe>Fi view point (which is not to say, again, thall all Fe>Fi types agree with it) can fit an INTp, rather than make it all about yourself?

Do you even understand why this is a Fe-Ti viewpoint? If you do but don't agree, fine, perhaps it isn't and I'm wrong about it, but can you tell me why you don't agree then? Or is all your understanding of Socionics based on comparing yourself to descriptions and others to yourself?

ESFp

So p-type in the end...my dual? I would like a dual like that. ESFp would be a benefactor to my wife possibly so that would fit her too.

Anyways if he is Gamma then they CAN have team spirit in the way I like it.

ENTj

Hmmmmmmm....those eyes seem sensory to me? But who knows. He doesn't sound at all like Expat in interviews.

You must remove this INTp stuff from your head.

The reason why it is so hard for you --- 9 pages --- to figure out your type is because you think discussing it here will determine it, when in fact you need to become less superficial and study socionics more - not just read profiles either, but try to see and discover the functions in real life. You do not seem to know what you are talking about.

You can get a general sense and understanding of your type from the profiles, but until you use reality and human interaction to reinforce your understanding it's all superficial. And as said before, until you know your type, it will be difficult to accurately know the types of other people.

I would ask you "what type do you most want to be, and why?" - but I doubt you could even answer that legitimately.

[UDP]

It is one thing to not understand something - but it is something else to say and 'believe' you know something when you really do not.

( LII )

[Phaedrus]

How can it be a good argument against INTp when I can relate to almost all of it? What is the difference between XoX and me then, based on what he writes about "team spirit"? You have to point out a difference, otherwise it is certainly not a good argument against INTp.

Can you make an argument that addresses the issue of how such an obviously Fe>Fi view point (which is not to say, again, thall all Fe>Fi types agree with it) can fit an INTp, rather than make it all about yourself?

No. I don't know how to do that. But if I had said something similar to what XoX has said, you would think that I am not an INTp, and you also suggested that I am not an INTp based on the fact that I said that I could relate to most of the things he said. So, if I can relate to it and be an INTp, so can XoX. What's the problem with that counter argument? Obviously you can't determine that XoX is not an INTp by that line of reasoning.

Do you even understand why this is a Fe-Ti viewpoint?

I think I can see (roughly) how it can be interpreted that way. But since I know that I am an INTp, I automatically know that spotting such a Fe-Ti viewpoint from someone's posts is not a conclusive argument for his type.

If you do but don't agree, fine, perhaps it isn't and I'm wrong about it, but can you tell me why you don't agree then? Or is all your understanding of Socionics based on comparing yourself to descriptions and others to yourself?

No, but I'm basing my understanding of every typology on the types -- not the functions. And I proceed very cautiously when I try to incorporate more dimensions into my understanding of the types so as to avoid making mistakes that will lead me astray. So far everything is going in the right direction, slowly but surely I am making progress. My foundation seems to be solid and corroborated. But this Fe-Ti thing is still not absolutely clear to me, so I try not to make any strong assertions in this area until I am sure that I have got it right.

[Phaedrus]

I propose that we ignore what Phaedrus says about types until he stops using other systems as arguments for Socionics typing.

I propose that we try to get as much information about XoX's as a person as possible. How can knowing more about his preferences be bad in the typing process?

[XoX]

So p-type in the end...my dual? I would like a dual like that. ESFp would be a benefactor to my wife possibly so that would fit her too.

Anyways if he is Gamma then they CAN have team spirit in the way I like it.

ENTj

Hmmmmmmm....those eyes seem sensory to me? But who knows. He doesn't sound at all like Expat in interviews.

You must remove this INTp stuff from your head.

No I don't "must" to do this. From my sig you can see that INTp is not my number one candidate atm.

And the smiley faces there in the quote should show that the comment was meant to be humor. Even though I do like the guy a lot and wouldn't mind him to be my dual. It would have been a cool coincidence if he was ESFp and my dual. I think he is a rational though so I would have to be rational too in order to "dualize him".

The reason why it is so hard for you --- 9 pages --- to figure out your type is because you think discussing it here will determine it, when in fact you need to become less superficial and study socionics more - not just read profiles either, but try to see and discover the functions in real life. You do not seem to know what you are talking about.

I agree with the fact that I probably should study socionics more (but it takes time and effort and they are scarce resources). I know haven't studied socionics theory in a level which would be required e.g. in an academic setting. Nor am I intending to atm. I'm reading stuff randomly though and the knowledge slowly increases.

You can get a general sense and understanding of your type from the profiles, but until you use reality and human interaction to reinforce your understanding it's all superficial. And as said before, until you know your type, it will be difficult to accurately know the types of other people.

Well I do use reality and human interaction to reinforce my understanding. Then again I have limited opportunites to do it so the material is scarce and thus unreliable still.

I would ask you "what type do you most want to be, and why?" - but I doubt you could even answer that legitimately.

I might disagree with your definition of what is "legitimate" as you are obviously referring to pure Ti which you so love and which is not my preferred function. I find e.g. Ni or Ne or Te description of types to be potentially as legitimate. And the others too. I don't share your enthusiasm with Ti, sorry.

However, the fact that I am not voluntarily forming a Ti-understanding of the kind you think I should might mean something (e.g. that I'm not a Ti-ego type like ENTp and potentially even Ti-PoLR type like ENFp). You are just so totally Ti that it might be too much for many non-Ti PoLR types too.

And about the "what type you'd like to be most". I once without thinking threw out ENTp or ESTp but I didn't base that on any deep understanding of those types. It was just a "throw". Then the concept of "like" and "dislike" itself is hard for me to perceive in an absolute sense. There are good reasons to be any type. It depends a lot on the context.

But ok let's throw out some analysis to irritate you

I would like to be extrovert. Being oriented in an extroverted way opens more opportunities. It is really not about like or dislike. I just tend to think extroversion = more opportunities, more energy, more "contacts", more everything that means something.

T/F I don't really care as both have their advantages. I would still pick T for subjective reasons (I still think I'm T and I like myself in this). If I end up being F then I might have to reconsider this. Anyways I would like to concentrate my thoughts away from people and more into "things" as I do now. Not a very INTj explanation but it is something.

So I'm ET now, lol.

S/N is difficult too. As I perceive myself to be N and I like it I would subjectively choose N. My general interest in understanding phenomena surrounding me would also require N. I choose N.

Irrational/rational...clearly rational. I would like to achieve such things which, I think, require rational and preferably EJ temperament. Rationals and especially ENTjs have advantages in many work contexts which I like (e.g. in field of business, engineering and technology). They also have consistency and durability which other temperaments are understood to lack (except perhaps for IJs but IJ sounds too...IJ, heh).

So I end up in ENTj. In my current life situation and context I would mostly want to be ENTj. Te, Ni as strenghts sound good. Business logic, algoritmic thinking, no-nonsense understanding of the world, capability to produce concrete results, effectiveness. Good values. Ni I like too. Strategic forecasting, understanding of consequences and free association which is not tied to static structures and concepts, being able to model processes around you and their developments, visual thinking, "mystical thinking" . And such.

I don't care about Fe and especially I don't care about Si. Aesthetics have zero meaning to me. I don't necessarily need to fulfill any sensory desires. Fe...ok I do wish I had the ability to survive in a group setting and even have influence over other people but I would never trade any kind of people skill over cold hard competence.

Se hidden agenda sounds good too. I don't want to be totally Se. I want to be somewhat detached from "this world". But the desire for power, strenght, capability to find the "internal fighter" when needed. Being able to demand and enforce when needed. Ok, perhaps Se hidden agenda is not all this but I have a feeling I would not mind it. I almost feel like I have it and it is yearning for more. It is hungry because it has not gotten what it yearns the most.

I won't go into dual stuff or id, super-id stuff since they are secondary.

Ok there is some adhoc-analysis. Not very Ti but it wasn't intended to be so try to stretch yourself and chew it still. I'm interested in how you see that and how it differs e.g. from your point of view?

[XoX]

It is one thing to not understand something - but it is something else to say and 'believe' you know something when you really do not.

( LII )

"A" for philosophy. "F" for relevance.

[FDG]

"Se hidden agenda sounds good too. I don't want to be totally Se. I want to be somewhat detached from "this world". But the desire for power, strenght, capability to find the "internal fighter" when needed. Being able to demand and enforce when needed. Ok, perhaps Se hidden agenda is not all this but I have a feeling I would not mind it. I almost feel like I have it and it is yearning for more. It is hungry because it has not gotten what it yearns the most. "

Uhm, I don't know man, this idealized version of Se people have. I have two modes. The carefree living, sociable and funny adventure loving, fast thinker, this is when I do not use the demanding part, when I start being demanding I immediatly feel my stress levels rising and rising (which in turn makes me more demanding)

"I don't necessarily need to fulfill any sensory desires."

Any? Maybe you meant, many, but without fulfilling any sensory desire, life really turns sour...don't you think?

[aestrivex]

I propose that we ignore what Phaedrus says about types until he stops using other systems as arguments for Socionics typing.

approve

[XoX]

"Se hidden agenda sounds good too. I don't want to be totally Se. I want to be somewhat detached from "this world". But the desire for power, strenght, capability to find the "internal fighter" when needed. Being able to demand and enforce when needed. Ok, perhaps Se hidden agenda is not all this but I have a feeling I would not mind it. I almost feel like I have it and it is yearning for more. It is hungry because it has not gotten what it yearns the most. "

Uhm, I don't know man, this idealized version of Se people have. I have two modes. The carefree living, sociable and funny adventure loving, fast thinker, this is when I do not use the demanding part, when I start being demanding I immediatly feel my stress levels rising and rising (which in turn makes me more demanding)

"I don't necessarily need to fulfill any sensory desires."

Any? Maybe you meant, many, but without fulfilling any sensory desire, life really turns sour...don't you think?

Perhaps Se is your role function then not a base

Well "any" is most likely one of my typical exaggarations. I just felt like writing "any". I was feeling like that because UDP instilled a desire to communicate in absolutes. But ok..I like might have meant many However sensory pleasures are not at the center stage in my life. When younger they were more important but their role is slowly diminishing and so far I find that to be good developments. Perhaps it means my Ni or N subtype (whatever type I am) is slowly getting stronger?

[FDG]

Well "any" is most likely one of my typical exaggarations. I just felt like writing "any". I was feeling like that because UDP instilled a desire to communicate in absolutes. But ok..I like might have meant many However sensory pleasures are not at the center stage in my life. When younger they were more important but their role is slowly diminishing and so far I find that to be good developments. Perhaps it means my Ni or N subtype (whatever type I am) is slowly getting stronger?

Ahh ok this makes sense. It could be an indicator of Ni taking over the Si, but really, now everything has been said.

[XoX]

XoX, if you want to test the hypothesis that you are either an INTp or an INFp, here is what you can do:

1. Try to determine whether you are a Merry Subjectivist or a Serious Objectivist in the Reinin dichotomies.

2. Determine whether you identify more with the socionic club of NTs or the club of NFs, and whether you identify more with Keirsey's Rationals (NTs) or his Idealists (NFs). There are some tests on the internet, and you can take Keirsey's Four Temperament Sorter (or whatever it is called), and you can read the descriptions on Internet.

3. In the Enneagram, compare 4w5s with 5w4s (only those two subtypes). My opinion is that an Ni-INTp should identify more with 5w4 and an Ni-INFp more with 4w5. Snegledmaca might disagree, but at least if you identify more with 4w5 I take that as an argument for INFp and against INTp. Try to compare more than one pair of type descriptions.

4. Compare socionic type descriptions of INFps and INTps. You find DarkAngelFireWolf69's on Ganin's site, and you can read misutii's translations of Filatova's on this site. And we also have Stratityevskaya's.

Even if you are none of those two types, the result of such an investigation might be helpful.

I propose that we ignore what Phaedrus says about types until he stops using other systems as arguments for Socionics typing.

Correlation between enneagram and socionics has been widely discussed here many times and for example Expat has made very thorough threads about that and gone as far as claiming that certain enneagram types (when properly understood) can NOT be certain socionics types. So perhaps we should ignore Expat too then?

I propose you use real arguments and not try to use Fe or whatever to control how people should think.

[implied]

does anyone ever wonder if XoX can eventually talk himself tired?

[XoX]

does anyone ever wonder if XoX can eventually talk himself tired?

I remind you what was the purpose of this thread. This was from the first post.

"I decided to put up a typing thread. The point is more or less to collect evidence for and against different types.
This is especially a database for my own notes but anybody is free to contribute. I hope this can restrain me from talking about my type in every thread I contribute to. I'm pretty much starting this from zero meaning I discard much of the evidence and conclusions collected and reached so far by labeling them "not reliable". I only include the most recent stuff here. Every piece of evidence not included here is not considered."

So the purpose of the thread is pretty much that I could talk myself tired about my type here instead of spreading this garbage in all threads. It didn't 100% succeed as some of it spilled over but mostly this is a success. Think if all this would be spread all over the forum. And besides this thread has good contributions from many people in the theory of socionics itself. It is useful reading for those wishing to learn.

Anyways I thank everyone who contributed, especially Expat who did also a lot of PM contributions. This has clearly increased my knowledge of socionics. The type is yet to settle but good progress have been made. I think I will check some of the posts which I haven't yet and see about the descriptions and such a bit more but judging from the level of general frustration it is better to tone down the public part of type search a bit I might write some more "diary pages" here and if someone wants to comment on those it would be ok.

Anyways I would kindly ask the trolls (like implied here) to stay away It is not helpful or needed and doesn't contribute to anything.

[Creepy-bg]

what a dick

[XoX]

[Creepy-bg]

[UDP]

does anyone ever wonder if XoX can eventually talk himself tired?

That's my problem with INTps, they never seem to shut up.

[XoX]

The enneagram thing was mentioned so I just throw it here: 5w6 is my current guess. I thought about 5w4 and such too but somehow I don't think I'm quite there. 5w6 sounds more me. I might have not understood type 4 well enough though and that is why I don't relate to it.

[UDP]

I would ask you "what type do you most want to be, and why?" - but I doubt you could even answer that legitimately.

I might disagree with your definition of what is "legitimate" as you are obviously referring to pure Ti which you so love and which is not my preferred function. I find e.g. Ni or Ne or Te description of types to be potentially as legitimate. And the others too. I don't share your enthusiasm with Ti, sorry.

However, the fact that I am not voluntarily forming a Ti-understanding of the kind you think I should might mean something (e.g. that I'm not a Ti-ego type like ENTp and potentially even Ti-PoLR type like ENFp). You are just so totally Ti that it might be too much for many non-Ti PoLR types too.

Also from the LII handbook, I was somewhat harsh to try to flush out more real, usable answers from you.
You're 'lack of Ti enthusiasm' may take away Alpha and Beta quadras.

So I'm ET now, lol.

S/N is difficult too. As I perceive myself to be N and I like it I would subjectively choose N. My general interest in understanding phenomena surrounding me would also require N. I choose N.

Irrational/rational...clearly rational. I would like to achieve such things which, I think, require rational and preferably EJ temperament. Rationals and especially ENTjs have advantages in many work contexts which I like (e.g. in field of business, engineering and technology). They also have consistency and durability which other temperaments are understood to lack (except perhaps for IJs but IJ sounds too...IJ, heh).

....

I don't care about Fe and especially I don't care about Si. Aesthetics have zero meaning to me. I don't necessarily need to fulfill any sensory desires. Fe...ok I do wish I had the ability to survive in a group setting and even have influence over other people but I would never trade any kind of people skill over cold hard competence.

...

Ok there is some adhoc-analysis. Not very Ti but it wasn't intended to be so try to stretch yourself and chew it still. I'm interested in how you see that and how it differs e.g. from your point of view?

If you were Ej or ENTj, then IJ types would seem appealing to you in some way.
Do ISFjs seem appealing to you?

What would you like in a partner?


I don't really know what your type is... you just do not seem like an INTp at all. I'm not saying it couldn't be, but for the sake of pushing this process along, I say you have to do a lot of proving and explaining to realistically call yourself INTp.

How you feel about 'your perceived dual' may answer more questions.




PS: - for fun - if you and I were in a relationship, or if we had to work together on a group project or team, what do you think would most irratate you from a socionics perspective? What are you looking for from others - both in a personal relationship, and a group setting?

[Expat]

Correlation between enneagram and socionics has been widely discussed here many times and for example Expat has made very thorough threads about that and gone as far as claiming that certain enneagram types (when properly understood) can NOT be certain socionics types. So perhaps we should ignore Expat too then?

Yes and this is obvious, but the key phrase is "properly understood". Someone who does properly understand what it is to feel like, say, an Enneatype 1 can't really identify best with, among all types, say, ENFp. IF I think that someone properly understands the Enneagram types, I find that information useful for Socionics typing.

But in your case, I can't see how any useful information is going to be gotten by comparing, of all things, 5w4 and 5w6.

You're 'lack of Ti enthusiasm' may take away Alpha and Beta quadras.

Assuming that he correctly understood what Ti means.

Non-Ti logical types (ie Te ego types) are not intimidated by the use of Ti, especially not in the way that UDP just used it.

Anyways I would like to concentrate my thoughts away from people and more into "things" as I do now. Not a very INTj explanation but it is something.

Did you use "as I do now" meaning "than I do now"? It looks like it. So you concentrate your thoughts on people these days and you'd like to focus more into things?

It seems to me that your area of confidence is indeed much more into people than things - I mean, look at your approach to typing. You do want to find your type - this is obvious - but you prefer a people approach to an information approach.
How typically INTp - or Enneatype 5, if anyone insists - is that?

Business logic, algoritmic thinking, no-nonsense understanding of the world

But that's precisely what you don't like when faced with it.

Ni I like too. Strategic forecasting, understanding of consequences and free association which is not tied to static structures and concepts, being able to model processes around you and their developments, visual thinking, "mystical thinking"

That's good for Ni.

I don't care about Fe and especially I don't care about Si. Aesthetics have zero meaning to me. I don't necessarily need to fulfill any sensory desires. Fe...ok I do wish I had the ability to survive in a group setting and even have influence over other people but I would never trade any kind of people skill over cold hard competence.

That's where the key issue is. That's the key to the whole misunderstanding. You thinkyou don't care about Fe, but you so obviously do it hurts. Only you are thinking of Fe as merely accepting Fe (as in Fe EJs) and not as creating Fe (as in INFp and ISFp). And you are so Fe>Fi that you can't even conceive what Fi>Fe is like. Your "default mode" of thinking is Fe - that is, your instinct is to assume Fe drives in other people. Only you take it so much for granted, that you don't see it.

[Phaedrus]

The enneagram thing was mentioned so I just throw it here: 5w6 is my current guess. I thought about 5w4 and such too but somehow I don't think I'm quite there. 5w6 sounds more me. I might have not understood type 4 well enough though and that is why I don't relate to it.

From what you say here it is not exactly clear if you followed my instructions or not (to compare the two subtypes 4w5 and 5w4 with each other). But assuming that you have compared the Enneagram types well enough to be able to determine that you identify more with a 5 than with a 4, that is an argument for INTp rather than INFp, and if you also think that you idenitfy more with 5w6 than with 5w4, that is an even stronger argument against INFp. It may not be a very strong argument against ENTp though, so it might be a good idea to reflect somewhat on type 7 (the "Ep" or even "ENXp" type).

If we summarize the results so far, I think that this is more or less confirmed:

1. I don't think anyone seriously dispute that XoX is an irrational (P) and that he is an intuitive (N) type of some sort. That leaves us with four possible types (as you seem to think yourself): ENTp, ENFp, INTp, and INFp. (You cannot be an ENFj, because you are not a rational type.)

2. I agree with Expat's conclusion that the things said about being "competitive" etc. "is strong evidence for someone not being Delta". Can we all agree then that it is time to exclude ENFp from the list of possibles types?

Okay. Three possible types left: ENTp, INTp, and INFp.

[UDP]

Assuming that he correctly understood what Ti means.

Ah, yes.

That's where the key issue is. That's the key to the whole misunderstanding. You thinkyou don't care about Fe, but you so obviously do it hurts. Only you are thinking of Fe as merely accepting Fe (as in Fe EJs) and not as creating Fe (as in INFp and ISFp). And you are so Fe>Fi that you can't even conceive what Fi>Fe is like. Your "default mode" of thinking is Fe - that is, your instinct is to assume Fe drives in other people. Only you take it so much for granted, that you don't see it.

Unfortunately, my actions may have furthered the aspect of this becoming a "personal matter" - that is, XoX may be even more stubborn, and try to prove one type, instead of really trying to figure things out.

I hope that isn't the case, and I'll apologize preemptively, for the sake of avoiding that detour.

[FDG]

lol i want her body

[Ms. Kensington]

video VI?

[XoX]

video VI?

TO ALL:
VIDEO IS OFFLINE NOW AND I MIGHT MAKE A NEW ONE LATER TO SEE IF THE RESULT IS THE SAME. But I am not seeking to make my face generally known or being a "myspace whore" etc. I wish to remain rather anonymous. I let the young and the beautiful become models I want to keep the group who VIs me rather smallish. Now there is a trend to the other direction...which bugs me The whole VI thing was supposed to be a rather small part of this all.

[XoX]

From what you say here it is not exactly clear if you followed my instructions or not

Oh, I haven't yet but I'm planning to in the future when I have the time. 5w6 was the result of one other enneagram typing session in the past.

[XoX]

Unfortunately, my actions may have furthered the aspect of this becoming a "personal matter" - that is, XoX may be even more stubborn, and try to prove one type, instead of really trying to figure things out.

I hope that isn't the case, and I'll apologize preemptively, for the sake of avoiding that detour.

I don't know if you have furthered of this becoming a personal matter or not but my "stubborness" in trying to prove one type or another is not related to that. And I'm really trying to figure things out but so far certain things bug me and I have to be able to explain them away or I will be left in a state of uncertainty and feel like a type is "forced" on me using an argument which is not natural way for me to process information. This will eventually lead to me discarding that type as the uncertainty will start to grow after this thing cools down. I'm not sure if this is "Ni" but I'm rather sure that if I now accept INFp without explaining these bugging things I will discard it sometimes later as I did the last time I tried to "be INFp". It cannot be prevented. So I still have to push a bit more.

I wonder if "to understand" hidden agenda manifests this way? Or "to know"?

Apparently my thinking process is a bit different from e.g. yours or Expat's because even if I understand how your arguments make INTp a near impossibility they don't explain away why certain things point more to INTp than e.g. INFp and why my self-perception seems to be more INTp (e.g. when comparing myself to profiles). Managing to explain away these things which bug me can actually increase my understanding of socionics so pondering them is useful even if the end result would be discarding INTp. I don't think it is just a waste of time in any case.

Currently I have nothing more to add to ENTp thing but we can see it as a "black horse" in this competition. ENTp descriptions seemingly match me better than INFp descriptions (accoring to Jonathan's critique of ENTp profiles, relating to them would be more characteristics of INTp than INFp).

I will get back to your previous posts laters. They were interesting.

[FDG]

XoX, do you know anybody that has very similar movements and gestures to you?

Is there anybody that you have typed for sure as a given type? What are the worst relations that you have had, the ones that you feel bad even when the person is just near you?

[Phaedrus]

I don't really know what your type is... you just do not seem like an INTp at all. I'm not saying it couldn't be, but for the sake of pushing this process along, I say you have to do a lot of proving and explaining to realistically call yourself INTp.

If I remember correctly there has been another guy on this forum that didn't seem like an INTp at all to most of the forum members. And he also had a lot of proving and explaining to do in order to realistically call himself an INTp. I don't know whether he succeded or not ...

[XoX]

I propose that you use relevant arguments and not alternately paint Expat as a hero or villain as the mood suits you.

All this chaos and mayhem seems to make me moody I will try to avoid painting Expat in the future.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[UDP]

Maybe we need to do the "Knight of the Mirrors" bit

to flush out Don Quixote?

[Creepy-bg]

I will try to avoid painting Expat in the future.

painted blue cheese. This gets sillier and sillier. Xox, I highly doubt that you're INTp. Te just doesn't seem real likely for you from what I've seen.

I was picturing him done up in one of those airbrush bakinis like at Hugh Hefner's house

[XoX]

In case it is of any use I apologize from Expat that I was suspicious of his motives and all that. Also a little bit from Ishy.

I guess I also need to apologize from anndelise Because the reason is hard to explain here I will let it stay as a secret

[Creepy-bg]

In case it is of any use I apologize from Expat that I was suspicious of his motives and all that. Also a little bit from Ishy.

I guess I also need to apologize from anndelise Because the reason is hard to explain here I will let it stay as a secret

wow your pissing people off right and left!

[UDP]

It doesn't mean "only" that. It also means that you could give me more time developing my concept instead of attacking it immediately with full force and then when I develop it further keep attacking the initial wording I used instead of the more developed ones.

I think this is difference between INTj and ENTj. INTjs tend to give way more time to develop the argument and only when they see it fully matured start attacking it viciously

Maybe.

INTjs may be more patient, if the see you making progress.
That depends on their analysis of your structure. If they see your structure is bad, then it doesn't matter how much progress you make, as it's in the wrong direction, so (I) would comment on that ASAP. To each is own of course, but if we're going to actually discuss things, then so be it.

........ 11 pages down the road and you still aren't clear on things..... that isn't 'appealing' to an INTj, (necessarily)..........



So anyways,
What do do you think you are, XoX, and why?
Write it out for me, please. You can just write one or two types, and one sentence describing why - that's all I'll ask for.

XoX currently strikes me most as an ENFp who thinks it wants to be some other type. But have I read every post in this thread? Certainly not.

[XoX]

XoX, do you know anybody that has very similar movements and gestures to you?

Is there anybody that you have typed for sure as a given type? What are the worst relations that you have had, the ones that you feel bad even when the person is just near you?

Well there are not many I relate to. However in some interviews Christian Bale
has similar discussion style and body language as I have (using a lot of hand gestures and searching for words (I do that often). I also think he has many features similar to me. His face shape for example. I also could see myself acting some of his roles e.g. the one he does in Batman Begins.

In this video he is very much like me. Almost like a copy. Even my wife immediately noticed the similarities in body language and discussion style and everything. Of course I have a bit of variation e.g. in my energy levels and whether I listen more or talk more but this person in the video is very very much like me:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Bzxc2Grx7w[/youtube]

So if I had to pick a celebrity who is most likely my identical it would be him (based on what little I have seen him of course, couple of movies and couple of interviews).

About my worst relations...a tough one...I rarely if ever have really bad relations. I almost always have some problems in every relation but never really I dislike someone to the point of calling a relations bad.

One of the worst relations had been with an ex-Boss who I often refer to. I think that person is ENTp. My only known ENTp. But could be ENTj. I stick with the ENTp since he was more like the ENTps who have been VI'd here and I believe he was strong in Ne and Ti but not so strong in Te. It was all about developing abstract concepts for him and the actual solution development was left to other people (like me). Also concept development seemed like the only real skill there is to him. So it was like "here is a concept, use it to develop an innovative solution for me, but remember that I don't really appreciate your contribution because doing new concepts is the thing I appreciate, so basically I only appreciate myself". Then I was like...yes..I'm really motivated now, lol. But ok I guess we appreciated each other's strenghts enough to keep working together.

It was a long time ago and I have typed him afterwards based on memories. Even though we managed to work together for quite a long time it got worse and worse all the time. These was some weird curtain of misunderstanding which kept on bothering us. And certainly somekind of war of values. Then both of us thought to have better understanding of certain things and it was a bit hard to respect the other person's point of view. It always seemed a bit faulty. We also appreciated somewhat different skill sets in people. We had to share something though as we cooperated so long. There was an ESTj too in the same team who had good relations with both of us and had some trouble understanding how he doesn't have any communication problems with either of us but we had communication problems with each other.

What else...male INTjs can bug me. But I also like them. Female INTjs are more peaceful somehow. I have one male INTj friend and he can piss me off badly because he is so stubborn in his opinions and refuses often to listen to counter arguments on things he has "already thought about and reached a conclusion". Then again we have had some good moments there too which is why we keep contact. And the INTj guy was a work mate too and a rather good one. I really respected his abilities and learned from him and the communication with him was way better than with the ENTp despite the fact that I always had to get pass his first line of defense to get him to actually listen (he also had problems with the ENTp but not quite as much as I did and a bit different, in their case it wasn't really about communication problems but some other problems).

What else...I can't figure out anything else, lol. The thing is I'm not in contact with too many people generally so I don't really recall anyone who really pisses me off. I would have to ask other people whether I piss them off. I'm quite immune to annoying behavior myself. And I'm pissed of now I probably won't be tomorrow. I kind of forget that I was pissed off. Umm.

[XoX]

If you were Ej or ENTj, then IJ types would seem appealing to you in some way.
Do ISFjs seem appealing to you?

I'm pretty sure my father is ISFj and I also know couple of others and I'm not at all like them. If you ask if they would be appealing to me as a partner...perhaps yes. I don't think they are my duals though. I don't see any duality with my father. We have had our problems when younger but we are peaceful and ok now. We don't relate "intellectually" really but we don't have any reason to fight either and generally see each other weekly. We never really talk about anything besides sports and such topics. In ISFjs I think I dislike the most that they are quite negative and somehow always manage to stress about everything. When I was still living at home this constant feeling of stress was annoying. After I moved out our relation got better because I didn't have to take my daily dose of stress from him.

What would you like in a partner?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...difficult question. I try to give you something. But as you probably notice my criteria are quite practical in nature. Not many clear socionics traits there.

My partner would have to be trustworthy and give me a lot of freedom in arranging my schedules. And I mean A LOT. I do my own things a lot (generally work, studying, playing games or working out) and I don't want to let them go or compromise too much. My partner is also free to do their own things and hobbies and I wish they have some so that they are not always wanting my attention. I don't need or even want too much time together. Just a perfect amount of quality time. I can see how my ESTp sister-in-law could never take this. She is so jealous about everything her boyfriend does. She would want all the attention all the time. I couldn't give that really. Even if I like ESTps they might be too needy for me.

Then I want control over family financial issues. What I mean by this is that I want to plan the long term future of our family finances including holidays, investments, big spending (like cars, houses) etc. I don't want to control how we use money daily (even though I require that everything happens according to my strategic plan ). So I don't micro manage money usage but I want to set the strategic guidelines. If this is not possible then complete financial independence and separate finances is ok but I'm not sure if I would get married or make babies in this kind of arrangement. If I commit then managing finances means a lot. The bottom line is I want total control over my own finances and preferably also over the other person's finances. And by control I mean strategic control not micromanaging.

What else...it would be cool if my partner took some care of their bodies and such. I'm not really too picky about how they look. I just want them to work for the betterment of themselves. I hate wasted potential or if someone lets themself physically deteriorate slowly even if they could affect it

Then non smoker is a must and no drugs. Alcohol use should be in control and no gambling. With alcohol I'm more liberal but the older I get the conservative I get. I like people who are in control of themselves. Sexually someone who like conservative values in society and is preferably political rightist (but not extreme right). Preferably a Christian but not the kind of Christian which I don't like, lol. Politics and religion is less important than the other mentioned things though.
Even if I like my partner to promote conservative public society I prefer a sexually liberal partner. By this I mean sexually liberal in what we do together but not a Pamela Anderson who wants to show her tits on TV. I want liberalism to stay behind closed doors where it belongs Oh and not a vegetarian. It is not a must but something makes me doubt I could live with a vegetarian. However she can be bit of health freak like I am. But I don't want someone who don't eat something because of some value they have. Rather someone who is willing to try and explore different healthy diets with me and generally spend time thinking and learning "health issues". Damn my list is rather long and useless and confusing already so I stop oh and it would be nice we could share some interest. It can be a sports/physical thing e.g. working out together or an intellectual thing like socionics or both. If we have similar line of work it would be cool too. I love to talk about work at home and get new ideas. I certainly don't want to separate work and home.

I'm totally busy so I didn't have time to think socionics characteristics but just blurted. Perhaps there are some included there

PS: - for fun - if you and I were in a relationship, or if we had to work together on a group project or team, what do you think would most irratate you from a socionics perspective? What are you looking for from others - both in a personal relationship, and a group setting?

From a socionics perspective...urgh As in which functions and such irritate me...urgh. What mostly irritates me is if I can't set my own pace of work or life and have certain independence of thought and decision. Currently that's all I can figure out. Oh and I dislike people who increase my stress which can ge considerable even without anyone increasing it Rather someone who can lower it.

[UDP]

It seems like you can cross of rationals, if IJs stress you out.

ENTp or ENFp, then?
ISxp, if you want someone who won't 'stress you out'.

What would be more relaxing - someone to take care of physical things and ethical, Fe things
Or someone who would take care of physical things and mechanical, Te things?


I concur that a relationship between our types and selves would be unappealing for both of us.