I’d rather be labeled an LSI than an ESI any day.Originally Posted by Baboooshka
I’d rather be labeled an LSI than an ESI any day.
･ﾟ*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:･ﾟ
Typing me LSI is a minor "thing" now and I've been super pleased. Maybe Im NOT a blob of feelings who can't think and was born to wash dishes.
lmaoooo
As much as I pick on them, I love ESIs and I feel like most people share that sentiment
･ﾟ*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:･ﾟ
This is not probably right place to reveal my plans regarding Ne PoLR concentration camps... let them taste their own narrowly defined (by others) medicine.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Soundofconfusion - ISFP - Dumas
Lol
btw. I'm still anticipating to get typed by khcs.
How’d you come up with that?
INFP mb
You was born to watch theatre shows.
have you considered that you are a normalising EIE?
No, it doesn't fit. "Normalizing" doesn't fit in any of the types. Like I said, the only EIE that fits pretty well is harmonizing. I know my type. I don't mind the question.
The type descriptions I am referring to are from the classes. I don't know if they have been published to the public or not so I am not going to share, what was shared with me, in public since I was asked not to. I don't know if you have seen them or not but if you did you might understand. I can relate to it but I do not type myself EIE-H.
Last edited by Aylen; 10-14-2019 at 11:00 PM. Reason: typo
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
the reason I asked was that I think forum moderators might often be N subtypes, since they probably have a certain desire to keep order.
I don't really have that desire since it is a lot of work. I think I was recommended to be a mod by my friend Starfall (another mod who has taken a break from here). Mu asked me and I said ok. She helped me out with modding until she left. I wish she was still here.I still have her elsewhere so it's ok.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
an order is Ti, J. moderators are random people, generally. they should visit regularly, so are taken from active members.
Order is Te. Ti is internal consistency while Te outer consistency
No Te is not order neither is Ti
Te observes external behavior and actions of objects and determines the best suitable role or position for the given object. Judges it's effectiveness.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
ok mate
Going to wall of text here for a reason.
moreTo say an idea is subjective is often used as a term of reproach, but this is to overlook the fact that no thought is possible without the thinker and that his share in it is responsible for its ultimate shape.
The merits of extraverted thinking -- namely, its 'down-to-earth nature', its concentration on objects, and the discipline that this imposes -- is at the same time its limitation; it becomes all too easily tied to facts; it cannot see beyond them, or free itself for the purpose of establishing an abstract idea. It becomes clogged by a mass of undigested material, and tries to escape from this dilemma by artificial simplifications -- by inventing formulae and concepts which appear to give coherence to what is really disconnected.
A creative thinker like Charles Darwin, who is an excellent example of an extraverted thinker, could give order and meaning to the mass of facts he collected, but where the creative idea is lacking the thinker compensates by producing more and more facts, until there is a mountain of material, often of doubtful value.
When the life of an individual is mainly ruled by thinking and his actions are usually the result of an intellectually considered motive, he may fairly be called a thinking type. The pure type is more often found among men than among women, whose thinking is usually of an intuitive nature. This type 'thinks things out' and comes to conclusions based on objective data -- what he calls 'the facts'. He likes logic and order, and is fond of inventing neat formulae to express his views. He bases his life on principles and would like to see others do the same. Wherever possible his family, his friends, and his working associates are included in his 'scheme of living', and he has a strong tendency to believe that his formula represents absolute truth, so that it becomes a moral duty to press its claims. This can lead him into equivocal situations through assuming that 'the ends justify the means'. He believes that he is rational and logical, but in fact he suppresses all that does not fit into his scheme, or refuses to recognize it. He both dislikes and fears the irrational, and he represses emotion and feeling, and tends to become cold and lacking in understanding of human weakness. He neglects the art of friendship and of relationship to other people, and is often a family tyrant. He can sacrifice his friends and family to his principles without the least idea that he is doing so -- it is all for their good. This type of man tends to have unfortunate love affairs, as his repressed feelings are likely to burst out with a violence beyond his control and to attach themselves to unsuitable women. In addition, he suffers from irrational moods which he does not admit, and doubts about his beliefs which he stifles with fanaticism. He often has a strong sense of duty, and his formula for life may include much that is good, even noble, but his manner of putting it into practice will lack warmth, tolerance, and those human qualities that refuse to be fitted into schemes and formulae.
His thinking, however, is positive -- it produces something, either new facts or new conceptions.
"Even when it analyses, it constructs, because it is always advancing beyond the analysis to a new combination .... It is, in any case, characteristic that it is never absolutely depreciatory or destructive, but always substitutes a fresh value for one that is demolished. This quality is due to the fact that thought is the main channel into which a thinking type's energy flows.8"In contrast to the extravert, the introverted thinking type is not interested in facts but in ideas; the chief value of this type of thinking lies in the new view it presents.
Jung says of introverted thinking:
"External facts are not the aim and origin of this thinking, although the introvert would often like to make it so appear. ... it formulates questions and creates theories; it opens up prospects and yields insight, but in the presence of facts it exhibits a reserved demeanor. As illustrative examples they have their value, but they must not prevail. Facts are collected as evidence or examples for a theory, but never for their own sake ... its actual creative power is proved by the fact that this thinking can also create that idea which, though not present in the external facts, is yet the most suitable, abstract expression of them.9"
The introverted thinking type is interested in the inner, not the outer reality. What is important to him is the development and presentation of the 'primordial image, and its shaping into an idea. This has for him a compelling power; he has a vague notion that the idea may be of use to the world, sometimes even a conviction that it would be saved if it only knew, but these are secondary considerations, and not of vital importance to him.
The introverted thinker viewed from outside is usually a distinctly odd character. Because of his concern with inner realities he gives little or no attention to his relationships with the world. He does not notice what is going on or understand how other people think or feel; he is either shy and silent in their company or else makes some inappropriate remark.
The absent-minded professor is the typical example of an introverted thinker. An amusing story of the philosopher Schopenhauer illustrates the characteristics well: it is said that he was standing lost in thought in the middle of it flower-bed in a city park, when a gardener shouted to know what he was doing, and who did he think he was? 'Ah!' said Schopenhauer, 'if only I knew the answer to that!' 10
The weakest point in both the thinking types is their neglected and under-developed feeling function. To understand what Jung means by feeling, one needs to make a distinction between the different ways in which the word can be used: feeling hot or cold is a sense-impression; feeling that something will happen, that someone is deceiving you (or having any similar experience) refers to a 'hunch' or intuition; when, however, one says 'I feel sorry' or 'I feel that is bad' or 'good', one is making a valuation of an emotionally toned experience. It is in this sense that Jung uses the word feeling when he speaks of a 'feeling function'.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
You reject the theory basics.
As Ti has the relation to laws and hierarchy, so it has the relation to an order. Te has the relation to the reason and objective result. To act reasonably needs an order. To interpret something as a fact also needs a class of objects, where that fact can be situated. Te/Ti act in the same time, that's why the both are developed similarly.
All J functions is about an order, but not about irrational thinking and chaose.
My point exactly. Your post said "you Do x" which is Te because you made an observation. Te is not about facts either. It's only human to relay to facts as one makes observations but Te makes facts based on personal experiences as well.
Te makes better relation to laws in terms of external laws than Ti does. In fact LSE will have no problem pointing out to people what the laws of the land are as you did once I'm sure you can remember.
I seriously wish you would learn the functions and what they mean sol...one day I pray to God. One day.
Introduction to Te
Extroverted logic is an rational, extroverted, and dynamic IM element. It is also referred to as Te, P, algorithmic logic, practical logic, or black logic (because the symbol is black). Extroverted logic deals with the external activity of objects, i.e the how, what and where of events, activity or work, behaviour, algorithms, movement, and actions. The how, what and where of events would be the external activity of events, activity or work would be the external activity of a machine or individual(s) and algorithms describe the external activity of objects.
Since Te perceives objective, factual information outside the subject (external activity) and analyzes the rationale and functionality of what is happening or being done or said. "Quality" to a Te type is how well an object performs the functions for which it was made. A Te type can judge a person to be "effective" if he is able to achieve his purposes without wasting any energy or producing unwanted side effects. So Te types basically evaluate people and things using the same criteria.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
When was the last time you looked at a love interest and said "you'd be a good mother" that you did Te lol
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Beautiful sky
record your husband's clip. I'd look what LSE is there which does not value the reason, impossible without the order
what happened? sol you need rest
he puts the same things in the same place
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Te is dynamic inaction; Ti is indolent liveliness
Te is objective thinking
"dynamic inaction" is the oxymoron
while Reinin's traits are baseless and even look senseless
Te is tied to action lol. Te polrs are unproductive
@Reyne LSE final
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Well thanks to these posts I was able to successfully type my co-worker LIE lol. You type virtually identical to how he speaks. Like I literally read all your posts here in his voice lol. He has scored LSI on the test and relates heavily to LSE description, but the cognition in how you write and he speaks is eerily similar.Says who? You can't type for shit.
Says who? You can't type for shit.
lol Fuck you. I don’t adhere to your pissy enneagram profiles or your flawed and flimsy typing method, which by the way, you yourself completely contradict. You are the biggest coward on this board when it comes to self-assertion, dominance or confrontation, on any matter. You like to be aggressive with those who don’t push back on you. But you’ve never gotten rowdy with me, most probably because you know I’d turn your ass every which way but loose. You are no 8, motherfucker. I’ve never lived my life based on fear or cowardice. My chief motivator is ANGER and my vice, a gluttonous lust for it, which is why you feeble minded, disingenuous simpletons insist on labeling me an ethical type. But name one “emotion” I broadcast around here besides anger. I’ll wait.
Cute. But no.
1.) Everyone is capable of everything. Lemme repeat> Everyone is capable of everything. Once more for the cheap seats in the back> Everyone is capable of everything. The differentiating factor is that our usage of the functions vary in scope and strength. Point out where I utilize 4D Fe and 3D Fi. I’ll wait.
2.) To an ant, raindrops crash like massive, inescapable tidal waves; but to an average sized adult, rain drops aren't remotely as overwhelming, awe inspiring, and noteworthy. You, motherfucker, emotionally speaking, are an ant. And Fe raindrops will therefore appear larger and more threatening to you than to others; I'm more like a scrappy kitten (avoids getting wet when possible but won't die from the occasional sprinkling), whereas an actual Fe dominant, would be the human being with a more nuanced, sophisticated relationship with emotional downpours and flooding. Just because I’m a higher evolved species than you are, does not mean that I’m an ethical type. There needs to be a moratorium on those with utterly deficient ethical skills typing anyone who’s somewhat better than them at it as “clear as day” ethical types. Ridiculous.
3.) Any human without significant developmental disabilities, be they a logical or ethical type, should be able to sufficiently “express the feelings/hopes/fears/anxieties/moods of communities/movements/groups” if at the very least, they know how to read, watch, and listen, which is what I do. I know what’s going on with people because I. READ. FUCKING. BOOKS. I also watch television (documentaries, the News, interviews, film) and more than that, I observe, engage and interact with people on the regular and listen to what they have to say...like a normal fucking person. Both Te and Fe are beholden to the tribe and what’s going on with the tribe; it’s just they engage the tribe along different parameters. I'm far more competent at providing Te services than Fe ones. But I shouldn’t have to point that out to an alleged “typing expert."
4.) This bit right here seems the most challenging for certain sensors to understand. Basing your judgments purely off of what can only be immediately beheld with the senses is A LIMITED way to perceive the world. It’s certainly a valid, vital perspective but only ONE, which does not tell the complete story. There are a plethora of "behind the scene" variables and factors that matter when typing someone. Moreover, to a certain extent, you must allow other people to speak to their experience, an experience that exists beyond what you see yourself, and that has to count for something. When I’ve said time and time again that I am not an empath (which one would have to be to varying extents in order to be an ethical type), and damn sure not one that experiences affective empathy (by way of contagion), which all types that value Fe experience to some degree, you must take my word for it. There has to be some level of trust that I know myself well enough to make such a declaration. It’s impossible for you to know the full inner workings of my mind and body. PERIOD.
5.) Oh and I also VI as a LIE based on Filatova’s portraits, which are exceedingly more reliable and empirically based than any of your disastrous VI templates. But again, you'll just have to take my word for it. Unless you want to trade pics.
6.) You also acknowledge subtypes, but then seemingly refuse to acknowledge that a LIE-Ni would have strengthened intuition and ethics and so accentuated Fi and Fe would be par for the course > like some ersatz NF. DERP.
7.) You get no awards for your paltry, insufficient, ill conceived and poorly reasoned “observations.”
More idiocy. Are you feeling dizzy and lightheaded today? Did you not receive your daily rations or whatever stale, crusty ass bread they feed you people these days?
1.) Any type can be “rude” or “nice”; those things are not type related. Furthermore, I am a complex human being with agency and can use this platform in whichever way I choose–perhaps I use it to blow off steam. You do not know me or see me in my day to day life. This persona is only a fraction of who I am. A true logical type would be able to understand that distinction. Even still, if one were to actually go through my posting history, they’d see that in totality, I’m clearly Te > Fe. Only the dumb, willfully obtuse or flat out trolls say otherwise.
2.) I can manifest a particularly mean, nasty, sadistic streak when I want to, which if one were to THINK about it, makes sense for someone with submerged ethics. I rarely if ever feel bad for the shit I say because I’m not emotionally attached to any of it. They are just words to me. Most of the time, I don't say things to make people feel bad. I just give my raw, unbridled thoughts, which is what Te types are known for.
3.) A while back you said that I have strong intuition (which I do), but now all of a sudden I'm a sensor? lol How logical, consistent and coherent of you.
4.) And if logical types can't be rude, then logical types also shouldn't believe in random, illogical, superstitious ass tarot cards and bitch and moan and cry in the Random Thought Thread about all the evidently intelligent women that don't want him.
Not for nothing, LIEs and LSIs have mirage/illusionary relations and under the right circumstances, like when we press hard on our hidden agendas (Se and Ni, respectively), we're easily mistaken for each other. Too many times have I initially mistyped one as the other.
@Alonzo seeing you back here made me scream on the inside. Christmas came early.
“I want the following word: splendor, splendor is fruit in all its succulence, fruit without sadness. I want vast distances. My savage intuition of myself.”
― Clarice Lispector
Well I called him over to tell him I found his twin online and had him read your posts out loud and he could not deny the similarity. I was basically reading your arguements with k4m and sol to him. said he likes your avatar too
so LIE for him confirmed
“ Extroverted logic deals with the external activity of objects, i.e the how, what and where of events, activity or work, behaviour, algorithms, movement, and actions. ”
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Me: (live footage)
Also Me:
The cynical, workaholic, absentee parent in every cheesy Christmas film that miraculously finds the Christmas spirit by realizing what's most important in life at the very last minute, and manages to make it home just in time with likely shitty, bargain bin gifts in tow.
Happy Holidays, young sir. I hope you are well.
I said dynamic inaction, which is a form of action, yes?
Improving your happiness and changing your personality for the better
Jungian theory is not grounded in empirical data (pdf file)
The case against type dynamics (pdf file)
Cautionary comments regarding the MBTI (pdf file)
Reinterpreting the MBTI via the five-factor model (pdf file)
Do the Big Five personality traits interact to predict life outcomes? (pdf file)
The Big Five personality test outperformed the Jungian and Enneagram test in predicting life outcomes
Evidence of correlations between human partners based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of traits
@angelic ESE final from me
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Oh would it be okay if I asked why you think I am ESE?@angelic ESE final from me
ᶠᵃᵗᵉ
Leaving this here because I'm tired of repeating myself and I think it's important.
@bouncingoffclouds perhaps this can help you as well. And FWIW, I think you are EII.
This actually makes a lot of sense and reflects some of what I've seen between my family members. Thank you for that @Alonzo .
@bouncingoffclouds Out of curiosity, what is making you adverse to wanting to try out the system and work it out until you can satisfactorily type yourself first? Do you think other people can do it better than you just because you’re new?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
