I know you don't agree with it
But yeah what I said above, is what I find works out much better in reality. At least it's not as quickly falsified. If I try to use these more nuanced assumptions like "bold Se" without anything directly necessitating such, it all falls apart very quickly once I try to observe if there is any consistency to it in reality. In general, when verifying the idea of "boldness" of functions, in one situation x thing seems to get explained by the "boldness" of a function, but the same thing in the next situation isn't explained by it or I'd have to continually retype people, which again obviously would very quickly lead to inconsistency. So the "boldness" property of a function is not a valid thing to me. Taking this example of "bold Se", there are also problems with some conceptualizations of Se but we again disagree there heh
Theoretical speculations, while being on the noob level. It's strange for T-S type.
And all that "leave me along pls". In the theme where I even said nothing about him as a person. Just strange overavoidant behavior. It's opposite to what is expected from SLE. His demand can be related to introversion or intuition.
You saw what the photo he've given. SLE would try to make more of himself on the picture, it's expansive type - he'd prefer a closer focus or have croped the image to look such.
He seems as more expansive in ideas world (N), than in material one (S).
> They like logic puzzles or whatever.
ILE like it more.
> PS: You are stubborn... but not stubborn Se type?
S and J types are more such than other ones. SLE can be flexible, but anyway to go where they need just by other way.
To be avoidant dreamer is so strange for them.
Uh certain someone has so predictable logic that once you know exact triggering points [which settles the case for eva] one could produce AI to answer behalf of him.
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
You are doing a theoretical speculation too by declaring that it's not possible for ST types, without checking how it actually works in reality. I've talked to enough SLEs who liked theorizing on this forum. And yeah they are SLE alright.
Chalk it up to their stronger Ne than LSI's. (I don't actually know the reason for 100% sure tho') Yah I type you as that, ofc
Oh and I don't think @Viktor is on "noob level" quite honestly with Socionics. He (and other SLEs) actually get into the theory deeper than me as LSI and... get into the rabbitholes lolol. Sorry : p I do find some observations of the Socionics-theorizing SLEs okay tho' and I don't actually mind hearing some of their "Ti creative" constructs either. I can just weed it out but it can also make me think a bit and actually integrate it into my understanding too.
SLEs as Irrational types do dislike the Rational argumentativeness if going beyond a point. They are a bit more relaxed than LSI with this lol. Willingness to drop the argument and go do some more Se things instead. I've experienced this enough with enough SLEs.And all that "leave me along pls". In the theme where I even said nothing about him as a person. Just strange overavoidant behavior. It's opposite to what is expected from SLE. His demand can be related to introversion or intuition.
Another factor might be their Fe/Ni seeking. They sometimes want more Fe than the 1D Fe and they want Ni inner harmony too.
The last photo I saw had the SLE stare alrightYou saw what the photo he've given. SLE would try to make more of himself on the picture, it's expansive type - he'd prefer a closer focus or have croped the image to look such.
Though of course in general one photo will often not be reliable enough to determine type. I don't know why you expect that from a photo. You have instructions for making quality videos too, and that's for a reason... so then don't expect more reliability from a random photo.
So yeah for example, he happened to have a visible enough Se stare in the last photo I saw but not in the one I saw before that one.
His Ne and Ti are more expansive than LSI's. (Best explanation so far anyway.) That's normal for SLE. Why do you think IEI is their dual otherwise...? They are more receptive to N stuff than LSI (or even LSE).He seems as more expansive in ideas world (N), than in material one (S).
And how did you quantify whether he likes it as much as an ILE lol. Feel free to tell me if you got any details on this> They like logic puzzles or whatever.
ILE like it more.
I don't see any "avoidant dreamer" stuff just because Viktor posted a few ideas on the forum. You think you know his whole life from those posts?> PS: You are stubborn... but not stubborn Se type?
S and J types are more such than other ones. SLE can be flexible, but anyway to go where they need just by other way.
To be avoidant dreamer is so strange for them.
I actually think that there's a point when @Sol says that Reinin dichotomies, Gulenko and "dimensionality" are "heresy".
All of those things are trying to add unobserved things to the observed things (types and functions are observed things). Reinin dichotomies are entirely derived from Model A and dimensionality alone, which is ridiculous. Model A is just a particular categorization of observed behaviors in people, which we call "types". How shall we derive unobserved traits and behaviors from Model A, I don't know.
The error of Reinin dichotomies lies in the assumption of Model A as the correct model of the mind, when Model A is not a model of the mind, but merely a categorization of observed behaviors in people.
How? Bollocks "maths". It's not actual mathematics. Shame to call it mathematics
Eh the error lies in doing logical jumpsThe error of Reinin dichotomies lies in the assumption of Model A as the correct model of the mind, when Model A is not a model of the mind, but merely a categorization of observed behaviors in people.
This forum has mostly been @Myst vs the world lately.
“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
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
@Myst is totally up to the task.
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
Myst is the hero we need.
The hero that my Beta twinkness needs.
“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
thanks for the new addition. keep in the course of your outstanding thinking and fine humour
P.S. Fi types are polite, not vulgar, in common
Actually in practice I would more likely use some combination of strength/boldness/values dichotomies or characteristics of individual functions. My usage of it is consistent though. What is inconsistent is to say that aggression is linked to both Se and extroversion. It raises the question of why that is the case. It's more consistent to say that particular mental/behavioral processes are the result of using particular IM elements, and your functional ordering determines how you use them or how likely they are to manifest.
(If you don't think Se is related to aggression then fine, but this general picture of the types is much more consistent than the use of dichotomies which are essentially axiomatic and don't explain things on a more nuanced level.)
That doesn't make it any less falsified...
How on earth is that inconsistent to say?My usage of it is consistent though. What is inconsistent is to say that aggression is linked to both Se and extroversion. It raises the question of why that is the case.
It's neater to say, not more consistent.It's more consistent to say that particular mental/behavioral processes are the result of using particular IM elements, and your functional ordering determines how you use them or how likely they are to manifest.
I didn't say that. Se is extraversion in the sensory world so yeah it's related to aggression too just fine, I don't see what sounded like I said it's not related to aggression at all.(If you don't think Se is related to aggression then fine
You mean it attempts to create many more causal links, not that it's more consistent.but this general picture of the types is much more consistent than the use of dichotomies which are essentially axiomatic and don't explain things on a more nuanced level.)
Unfortunately those links often don't check out when testing in reality.
That your muddy "boldness", which has no good and clear description and basis, is not even close by the meaningfullness to the strenght or values traits. In case it was not taken from Augustinavichiute's text - it means nothing. [in her original texts I noticed only acceptive-productive dichotomy for functions in the blocks without "boldness" mentiones] Also different her words deserve different trust, and sometimes she says doubtful or wrong.
Where it was evident that you could to use the normal theory to explain something, you have prefered baseless muddy bs. Such appoach is only useful to mislead yourself and others.
The more assertive behavior of EIE compared to IEI is explained by that E types have more interest to external. J types are more assertive as have more stable motivations. Without "boldness" bs.
Last edited by Sol; 05-09-2018 at 11:58 AM.
After a post by @falsehope, i really became curious about if you guys' perception of my type has changed at all? I think most people said i was LII, but there were definite deviations, and i'm still not sure, though i've studied Model A and LII fits me best on that schematic.
To some degree. I suppose it's harder to fool yourself by IR effects with many people than by seeing something only in one human - yourself. With every new human typed among close to you - you'll be checking your IR effects. It's not like to watch yourself in similar situations where you already found how to rationalize possible mistakes. IR should work good if types are correct - at the impressions level, at least.
You and I are definitely not on the same page, and this is about the only thing I agree with you on here.
I do not have an "IEI pov," and your insistent and stubborn need to repeat this beaten and dead horse of yours is what makes it impossible for you to understand my point. I was not speaking from my type, I was discussing Ti and Te. But seeing that you can't help yourself from being a pain in the ass about my type, I have lost any and all interest in discussing anything regarding theory with you.
The constant miscommunication between you and I is proof in itself that we are not Activity partners. Get a clue. I have experienced Activity relation, this is not it. Reading the other person's argument and completely failing to understand its point, every single time we interact - no exception, is NOT Activity. It is not even the same Quadra. This isn't about a disagreement in theory either, this is rooted in an inherently flawed communication style between us. A flaw that is so great that it prohibits any fruitful interaction between the parties involved. Socionics accounts for this in its theory, and it is not you being LSI and me being IEI, that's for sure.
@idontgiveaf - EIE, good chance
Persistence as a virtue is overrated, @Sol.
@Delilah mb SEI
while I'm far from taking seriously Reinin's traits and from trusting to how people percieve own types traits
> these are the types I feel closer to: ESI, IEE, and less likely EII.
it's better to understand which types you like more as to use IR theory. my bloggers examples may help you