define "truth"...
define "truth"...
You are a piece of shit, worthless scum that should be hit to death by an albino crocodile.Originally Posted by Phaedrus
I am kindly suggesting you to shut up, Diana, since you refuse to argue for ANY of your claims regarding this issue. I am trying to help Hector find his type, and you are sabotaging and interfering in a very disturbing way with your idiotic and completely false comments, whereas I am telling the truth.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
See Phaedrus, this depends on perspective. It looks to me like *you* are sabotaging his efforts to find his truth through your single-mindedness and bull-headedness.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
You're not helping Hector at all Phaedrus.
All you're doing is claiming that everyone else is wrong, but you're right.
I wonder how your brain works (or is it working at all).
And you're just throwing insults at anyone who disagrees with you. Please. Start finding out why soooo many people disagree with you before saying you're right.
And...
Why don't YOU shut up instead of currupting everyone here with your idiotic and completely false comments through your single-mindedness and bull-headedness.
INTp
sx/sp
phaedrus isn't claiming, he's proving.
i agree with phaedrus and so do many.
i'll open a new topic soon to get rid of this misconception that mbti and socionics aren't describing the same phenomenon.
it will help Hector, because he can rely on the descriptions of mbti too.
not using them is just narrowing your information sources...
Yes I am. Telling the truth is a help -- in most cases. If you don't think that it is a good idea to tell the truth in this case, I suggest that you argue for it.
I am not claiming that everyone else is wrong -- only those who disagree with me. What I say is in line with mainstream Socionics.
Objectively speaking I am much less insulting than some people are towards me. Diana is more insulting towards me than I am towards her, so don't blame me for that unless you are willing to blame her as well. She knows perfectly well that her comments are insulting.
Because I am telling the truth. And truth is important.Why don't YOU shut up instead of currupting everyone here with your idiotic and completely false comments through your single-mindedness and bull-headedness.
Hmmm... Maybe my reaction to this argument will help you all type me!I am mostly thinking that I do not want to respond because I do not want to take sides here. If I felt that I knew what I was talking about I would not hesitate to jump on one side or the other, but as I know very little about personality typing I am nervous of getting involved. However, here is what I think:
Phaedrus's comments seemed pretty apt to me and his points made a lot of sense. However, it has made me even more confused as to what I am. I can not really relate to the INFJ of Kiersey as he mentions that they are the one most likely to have paranormal experiences or something like that which I do not believe in, nor do I ever have anything that can reasonably be characterized as that sort of experience. However, the INFp of Socionics, though having a lot of similarities, does not seem like it can be me because of the drama aspect. I do not have any interest in drama. Plus I do not know if I can be characterized as elegant, though I am not clumsy... Also the whole center of attention thing is not really me. I guess I like being the center of attention amongst people I know, but not in a crowd of strangers. Plus I am just not a moody person. I am pretty even-keel. Despite all this I feel very much as though INFP of Keirsey depicts my characteristics well. So I really do not know. Maybe I am not even NF, though in Keirsey I identified with NF above all else by far (NT was a distant second and SP and SJ did not even finish the race) So I don't know. What Phaedrus says makes a lot of sense to me and I agree with him that there is objective truth and all that, but I do wish that he would be nicer to everyone else. Everybody is just trying to help out, so no need to get angry I don't think. (Maybe there is bad blood here from somewhere else that I am unaware of?)
So hopefully this helps!
This most certainly does not suggest that you aren't INFj.
I read the INFp description again and now I am starting to think that it sounds more and more like me. I don't know though...
I get the feeling that there is the "me that I think I am" and the "me that I am" and that maybe the INFp describes the me that I am better than I thought because in general when I think of these things I think of the "me that I think I am". Does this make any sense?
lol you already understand typing better than a lot of other people
.
For what its worth, I took the test on socionics.us and it says that I am an INFp.
I deleted my post but I will say it again anyway:
Socionics takes time, and the only way you will learn your type is by studying it and taking the necessary time to understand what things are. From there you can understand other people more so...
I imagine, for someone who picks up socionics cold - with no experience what soever,
the first thing to do would be to look at some of the many profiles to see if anything resonates with you
Take some sample tests
and then start learning the material
Really learning and practicing the material --- seeking real life understanding of it --- will correct the flaws in the tests and your feelings.
The more experience you have with socionics the easier it is to differentiate and understand the different energy patterns that surround the types.
In summation, socionics likely requires a large investment of time (and energy) to have a real understanding or profitable return. There is no real way to avoid that. Saying this, however, I hope more people are willing to make the journey with us.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
(I know the above post may not necessarily need to be said to Hector, but it felt like it needed to be said. I am tired at the moment, however)
Also, personally speaking, the awareness that is essential to socionics is a very magnificent requirement.lol you already understand typing better than a lot of other people
That awareness, which, hopefully you will develop, is the key to understanding many things, particularly rising above your own "inherent" disposition to things.
In one sense it makes you have to wonder about 'who' you really are.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
The fact that we disagree proves that it is not certain that what you define as "truth" is true.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
There's an inconsistency in your reasoning here.
It doesn't rule you out as an INFJ, becauce Keirsey isn't telling the percentage of INFJ's that have paranormal experiences. If it's lets say only 10% of them, then there is still a 90% population of INFJ's which could include you.
"paranormal experiences"? LOL No I wouldn't rule out any type based on not experiencing anything like that.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
I took the easyTIM test and here were my results:
ILE: 15.05
LIE: 11.05
IEE: 13.4
EIE: 14.94
SLE: 8.35
LSE: 11.05
SEE: 15.79
ESE: 10.64
ILI: 13.55
LII: 15.25
IEI: 19.89
EII: 15.54
SLI: 15.15
LSI: 15.15
SEI: 13.7
ESI: 13.9
I am thinking more an more that I am IEI/INFp, though I am not sure yet. As a lot of you have been saying, I just need to keep at and see if I find out more in time.
Why INFp > ENFj, Hector?
I don't know. I guess I could be ENFj but I have never considered myself extroverted...
If you guess that you could be ENFj, that means that you are not sure that you are introverted. This is fascinating. How can so many people not know whether they are introverted or extraverted? You should be able to decide your inclination here, and it is not too difficult if you read about the biological phenomenon introversion/extraversion. It is not as confusing as the functions. It is much, much easier to tell the difference.
It really depends on the context. In certain situations I am very extroverted, but it has to be around people I am familiar with and that I enjoy being around. In situations where I do not know anyone and am not comfortable then I am very introverted. For example I never raise my hand or speak in class even when I know answers... So, I do not know which to say.
Hector, I suggest you try to get a better understanding of the biological phenomenon that introversion/extraversion is. It is something you are born with, not something you can change at will. Your different behaviours in different situations is not the most relevant thing to consider here. You can look for sites about the phenomenon on the Internet, and you can read what Jung has said about it. (Parts of his Psychological Types can be found there too.) It is about your general focus, your expressiveness, your energy, etc.
You don't know what the fuck you are talking about. Whether introversion/extroversion is biological is of no consequence to Hector, and all you've done is tell him what an idiot he is. Good job.
Hector: Extroversion is not really about sociability, per se. I suggest looking at the different temperaments. If you are Exxj, you probably like being busy and having a full plate. Not so much if you are Ixxp. Take a look here: http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...t=temperaments
Phaedrus, you suck in every immaginable way. Get a kamasutra book in order to understand all the other possible ways in which you can try to.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
this sounds roughly more like introvert then how extraverts behave.
WTF are you talking about!? I am only trying to help him find his type. IN NO WAY WHAT SO EVER am trying -- directly or indirectly -- to tell him that he is an idiot. Why do people always interpret my intentions incorrectly and assume that they are hostile? That is incomprehensible to me.You don't know what the fuck you are talking about. Whether introversion/extroversion is biological is of no consequence to Hector, and all you've done is tell him what an idiot he is. Good job.
If Hector isn't sure whether he is an introvert or an extravert, the best way to find out is to read some more about that phenomenon. And it is very important to understand that it really is a biological phenomenon, so you don't assume incorrectly that is all about sociability.
Because you don't know how to relate to other human beings. I suggest you to keep talking to your computer instead of trying to communicate via forum.WTF are you talking about!? I am only trying to help him find his type. IN NO WAY WHAT SO EVER am trying -- directly or indirectly -- to tell him that he is an idiot. Why do people always interpret my intentions incorrectly and assume that they are hostile? That is incomprehensible to me.You don't know what the fuck you are talking about. Whether introversion/extroversion is biological is of no consequence to Hector, and all you've done is tell him what an idiot he is. Good job.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
You're doing it again.WTF are you talking about!? I am only trying to help him find his type. IN NO WAY WHAT SO EVER am trying -- directly or indirectly -- to tell him that he is an idiot. Why do people always interpret my intentions incorrectly and assume that they are hostile? That is incomprehensible to me.You don't know what the fuck you are talking about. Whether introversion/extroversion is biological is of no consequence to Hector, and all you've done is tell him what an idiot he is. Good job.
Telling people how easy it should be when they are clearly having a hard time with it just makes them feel like shit. I don't know if that is how Hector feels, but it's a general principle to keep in mind.If you guess that you could be ENFj, that means that you are not sure that you are introverted. This is fascinating. How can so many people not know whether they are introverted or extraverted? You should be able to decide your inclination here, and it is not too difficult if you read about the biological phenomenon introversion/extraversion. It is not as confusing as the functions. It is much, much easier to tell the difference.
Non sequitur.If Hector isn't sure whether he is an introvert or an extravert, the best way to find out is to read some more about that phenomenon. And it is very important to understand that it really is a biological phenomenon, so you don't assume incorrectly that is all about sociability.
If you think that I am incapable of relating to other human beings, and that you are much better at that, you should not expect more of me than you think that I can handle. In that case you should understand that my intentions are not bad, even though they might look that way if you don't know how I function. But instead of doing that, you deliberately treat me maliciously and try to take advantage of what you perceive as my weaknesses. Some people might think that such kind of behaviour of yours is worth praising, but I doubt that most people would be prepared to defend it as a general principle of how people should be treated.
I am IP, no doubt about it based on the link you sent me. The only thing that was wrong about it was that the sports were all off. In high school I played baseball, soccer and winter track and was the captain of all three my senior year... So that part was off but the rest was right on.You don't know what the fuck you are talking about. Whether introversion/extroversion is biological is of no consequence to Hector, and all you've done is tell him what an idiot he is. Good job.
Hector: Extroversion is not really about sociability, per se. I suggest looking at the different temperaments. If you are Exxj, you probably like being busy and having a full plate. Not so much if you are Ixxp. Take a look here: http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...t=temperaments
Yeah, you don't have to take the sports bit too seriously. I don't think most EPs here are into hammer-throwing, either.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
You know you really shouldn't base your estimates on personality descriptions. They'll be right if you're lucky, but I'd say that they don't do better then random in determining people's types. I didn't base my type estimates on type descriptions, but solely on intertype relationships. If I based them on type descriptions I'd have the similar stance as yourself, there is no way I'm INFp, my personality is very much not like it, lol, I make an active effort to subdue what is calledin others, to calm people down when they get, um, overly expressive. Plus I can't stand it as well. The thing is that the descriptions describe perceived personalities of other people, they have nothing to do with reality, they're just some person's best efforts to try to describe what they are seeing. Some are better then others, true, but they are nevertheless nothing more then subjective experiences. There is no rule that says all people of same type are like that, nor even remotely like that. But there are other rules that determine conclusively a person's type. What I'm saying is that you forget about personality descriptions and focus on analysis of either your informational elements, the functional approach or your informational exchange, the intertype relationships approach.
Snegledmaca's arguing here is typical of someone who, in order to preserve his own conception of what type he is, is forced to dismiss at least one very important part of Socionics as irrelevant. We can see the same phenomenon in for example CuriousSoul. The truth is, however, that both of them (and others who argue in that typical manner) are most likely wrong about their own type and in their understanding of Socionics. They have created their own version of it, but their versions are inconsistent with official Socionics.
Type descriptions can not be dismissed. If you don't fit the type descriptions of the type you think you are, then you are not that type. That is a necessary and unproblematic consequence. If you can't find a way, no matter how hard you try, to see yourself as that type, you should stop believing that you are that type and reconsider your understanding of Socionics.
Of course type descriptions are not enough. Every other important part of Socionics must fit as well. But if what Snegledmaca says here is true (and since he has repeated this more than once and every time insisted on its importance, we have no reason not to believe him), then Snegledmaca is not an IEI. He is not an INFp. And since he cannot be an INFp, his understanding of his intertype relations is incorrect too.
I am not dismissing functional preferences. Not at all. Neither do I dismiss any other important part of Socionics. Every relevant part fits me, including functional preferences and typical ILI behaviour. Isha's idiotic comment here is just another example of people insulting me and their own level of intelligence.
*chuckles*
good one isha
hook, line, and sinker
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
You are proving my point. You think that you are in a position to understand the functions, the types, and Socionics in general better than I am, considering the fact that you changed your opinion on what type your are yourself only a few days ago? Your incompetence here is embarrasing.
Well, uhm, I'd say that shows her open-mindedness, her openness to new possibilities, she won't just mindlessly stick to an initial assessment for the sake of consistency, she will find the truth. I think you have a lot to learn from her.You are proving my point. You think that you are in a position to understand the functions, the types, and Socionics in general better than I am, considering the fact that you changed your opinion on what type your are yourself only a few days ago? Your incompetence here is embarrasing.
@Hector: would you mind saying precisely what you so strongly identified with in the IP description?
On Isha's type, she's been quite consistent. Her initial self-typing of INFp was due to not understanding it all well, as I think she herself would agree. Since then, she's been very consistent about being a Gamma and that hasn't changed. If you focus on - and understand - the functional preferences and intertype relationships, that's what you see first, and it makes more sense to doubt whether you are an INTp or ENTj than whether you are, say, INTp or INTj. Yes, it should be simple to know whether you are EJ or IP, but depending on one's life circumstances, it's possible to be unsure, as in steveENTj's case.You are proving my point. You think that you are in a position to understand the functions, the types, and Socionics in general better than I am, considering the fact that you changed your opinion on what type your are yourself only a few days ago? Your incompetence here is embarrasing.
As for you, Phaedrus, during the XoX discussion it became very clear that you do dismiss functional preferences, or that you don't bother about learning them properly.
During that discussion, it became clear - as can be seen by looking at that thread - that:
1) You thought that the divide between Ti-Fe and Te-Fi quadras had been something I had suggested, rather than something intrinsic to model A and quadras;
2) You were surprised, even baffled, at my insistence in saying XoX wasn't an INTp based on the Fe/Fi preference. You weren't disagreeing with my criteria for Fe/Fi - you were suprised at my even focusing on it. That becomes very clear to anyone who reads the whole thread.
3) why are you changing tack now? You have never used functional analyses or quadra values in your typings. Your whole line of argumentation was based, first, on all type descriptions you could find, then later you added temperaments to that, now more recently you have focused on a selective understanding of Smilexian Socionics and Reinin. But you have never built up your case for someone's type on quadra values or functional preferences. So it's a fair assumption that you don't think they are very important or feel confident about using them.
No. That is a false statement.
Absurd. The only thing I thought you had suggested was how that divide could be used to give us a better understanding of the differences in attitudes toward Joy and similar relations in general. And that is still true, isn't it?
I was baffled by your blindness to the fact that you might be wrong in your interpretation of XoX's preferences, and I still am. It is your method that I am criticizing, especially your faith in it, the fact that you think that your interpretations are infallible -- not your understanding of the criteria for Fe/Fi.
Are you completely disturbed, Expat!? Your comments are insulting. How the hell do you know if I have used functional analyses or quadra values in my typings or not? I don't post everything I ever think of on the Internet -- do you? I have said over and over again that everything fits my typings. If it doesn't I don't have a strong opinion about it. Whenever I have a strong opinion about someone's type, you can be sure that I can see him or her fit both the functions and the quadras.
Nonsense. Do I have to mention every aspect every time I say something about someone's type? EVERYTHING MUST FIT.
Such a ridiculous assumption. I had never thought that you were thinking along those lines when it comes to my understanding of Socionics.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote