Was Ausra Augusta not ILE?
I'm going to give an answer: she does not VI as ILE to me - but that is all I can really say. I remember writing in the past that she does not seem ILE to me at all, but I have seen a number of cases in which someone seems a certain way in pictures, but they come off very different in person. However, I have to admit there is a possibility (not necessity) that she comes off as a different type than how she typed herself.
In any event, discuss this issue please...
She reminds me faintly of Richard Dawkins. VI-wiseOriginally Posted by jason_m
ILI-Te and her VI templates were atrocious....
Looks quite bit of ILE to me although she is quite stone faced in her photos. Probably because she had to deal with relations between people. Would wear anyone down when PoLR-ing life.
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
the fact she mistypes herself ILE shows just how awful her VI templates are...I mean, she comes out wrong on her own type and that's using her own VI templates. Very bad.
Uh, since she actually created Socionics, how can she be wrongly typed in it? The perception that she’s some other type is only a piece of the abundant and obvious evidence that Socionics has drifted and splintered into many divergent versions of itself.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
Maybe she was more 'Ni' than 'Ne' or 'Ti' than 'Te' in the Jungian system that preceded it, and she confused which functions she actually had... I look at those pictures and I see a lot of Se. Maybe she was SeTi and didn't realize how strong-willed she was... But this is just speculation. Like Kill4Me said, those are terrible templates to use for any kind of VI... They're probably just not accurate...
I'd post at personalitycafe even if it's not broken. I study the MBTI, the Enneagram and Socionics. I am not really attached to any system, and I'll study any of them..,
This sort of reasoning sound like it is coming from IEI head as only their own truth carries significance instead of trying to calibrate one's own own understanding to external factors which is a necessity in order of trying to handle it.
[I generally think that IEI is generally the worst type in external calibration unless they actually start to cross reference their understanding against multiple sources which is rare.]
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
Well go post there man; it’s more active!
This thread needs better typing material...
In the following video she also speaks at 1:30
Looks ILE Creative to me.
If you want to search for more videos type "Аушра Аугустинавичюте" in youtube
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Maritsa subtype
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I'm not sure in her ILE. Old people are harder to type by VI. Among other possible is EIE.
Jung mistaked about own type as LII, while he had ILI
mb even type
I suppose she should agree with this possibility to use in future argumentation: "Ah, dude I have the same type as Augustinavichiute. So just shut up."
So the one who created, for example, a rifle can't miss by it. Nice example of irrational Fe idealism.
She "actually" created some hypotheses - additions to Jung's types. A theory. This does not mean she was good in practical usage of Jung's typology and that new theory. She should do a lot of mistypings as anyone, some of them are seen in her actors list. Could mistake in own type too, alike Jung did and some other well-known authors.
Also some of her hypotheses mb wrong - it needs experimental basis to be sure in other. I'm sure in some theory she was wrong. Sometimes she controverts to Jung clearly without any good basis.
The most known her controvertion to Jung - what function is the weakest. The intersting is that not lesser popular Russian name for 4th function is "pain function" - and that is more correct, than "point of least resistance" / weakest. If you have lesser pain due to anesthesia of lesser conscious state - this does not mean there are lesser problems.
''So the one who created, for example, a rifle can't miss by it.''
Depends what one is shooting at.
Should have responded sooner: the videos tell a different story. To me, she seems incredibly ILE in them... (I was getting something like Ayn Rand from the pictures and I don't want to talk about it.)
she looks emotional
Can anyone translate?
there is autotranslate option
Aushra Augustinavichiute (The old lady on the video clip) - ENFP - Huxley
Huxley is at the left side and Dostoevsky appears to be at the right side. How is that possible? They may not be the same person.
A double.
Join my Enneagram Discord: https://discord.gg/ND4jCAcs
So, a rabbit is a kind of marsupial because a rabbit has legs like a kangaroo?
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
Probably SLE
Yeah, SLE-Ti is another option.
I am not familiar with VI but I don't find anything against ILE.
But I think she should be ILE because it's very obvious that she is the mirror type of Jung. The relationship between she and JUng is a relationship of mutual corrections. Jung is obviously LII. So I type her ILE. Her theoretical creation is also of the style of ILE: She understands and deciphers Jung's Ne-Creative concepts, and creates a better systematic structure with her Ti-Creative.
Her descriptions of Ne is very good. Although her definitions and examples for Se are correct, they are not as good as her Ne analogies.
I don't see any reason to question Jung's and Aushra's self-typings. They both have superb understanding of the elements and functions. Their self-typings seem to be very valid for me.
She's ILE -> NeTe. And yes, Socionics is fundamentally wrong
Flirt with ideas
Date opportunities
Marry problem-solving
In Model A, ILE has 4D unvalued Te. That's quite correct, she values Ti and creates Ti systems.
There came up a discussion in a thread about whether logical types could work towards a theory about relationships. Tallmo, I think, gave the same reason for a logical type's involvement with Socionics as Gulenko does in the link for his own involvement. I can't find the thread so this goes here.
https://socioniks.net/en/author/?id=1
(Augusta VIs as an logical extrovert alpha/beta type)
Last edited by Rusal; 02-10-2023 at 10:43 PM.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
She was ILE
-
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
I could have sworn I wrote in this thread already. Anyway, IEI in my opinion.
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...ung-s-subjects
Basing one's typings on erroneous assumptions ('logical types will not be interested in a theory about relationships') will lead to mistakes, unsurprisingly.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
she has "angry" nonverbal in my perception. not what ILE or other alphas give me
so I suspect beta of "terribles"
in beta mostly reminds passionate "fuhrer" - EIE
"TIM introvert"
probably, some erroneous assumptions became an obstacle for assured understanding own type
for example as: "model G is Socionics", etc
logical types is the main who should have high interest to "theory of relations". as F types deal with it naturally, without theories
it's F types who come on typology forums and then say doubts in Socionics, more prefer random flooding (most messages on socioforum is not about types)
Last edited by Sol; 02-11-2023 at 12:56 AM.
ILEs cannot regulate distance so expressions like hers are not all that rare when they get into one of their 'cycles'. One or two pictures might indicate SLE but we can't be sure and I suspect not.
I don't base my own typing on Gulenko but his material comes as a rather informative companion to my experience with other people.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
Huxley is a mistype for her, I know my duals and frankly there's nothing Infantile that I see about her. In fact, in my opinion, her VI and body movements seem more like this guy in general. She's basically the old and slow version. I'm Fe PoLR, so it's akin to a miracle that I got through watching either of these videos.Aushra Augustinavichiute (The old lady on the video clip) - ENFP - Huxley
Huxley is at the left side and Dostoevsky appears to be at the right side. How is that possible? They may not be the same person.
probably ILE in semantic method
behavioural... dont know . ive heard LIE in that regard
She made socionics entirely almost, so if she typed herself ILE in the very system she made up, and we are all using, she is probably right. But general the chaotic but structured layouts of information for socionics does obviously indicate ILE.
ILE because she doesn't seem ILE. The fuck? Is that how you start your argument? This discussion is pointless, it's obviously ILE-ENTp, without a fucking doubt. Matter of fact, idea: good way of knowing people didn't understand the point of this all is to ask them what type was Aušra, if they say something other than ILE... then you know the verity of who you dealing with in this bizarre community.
she doesn't really look Se vauling to me but like kinda looks LII ish more I suppose than the average ILE
Last edited by youfloweryourfeast; 07-15-2024 at 08:12 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
