Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 84

Thread: Try VI-ing me?

  1. #41

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Shackleton

    I can appreciate Star Wars for it's impact and innovation, but this isn't really what captures me when discerning whether a piece of media is good or not to me. Star Wars is too simple, has little of what i find interesting thematically. Sure, Sci-fi universes can be cool, but there's no extended philosophical dissection of the world around them. It all seems very surface-level, to present us with a world, but never to delve into it's depths or center. It invites us to experience but never to ponder or contemplate the essence of what is going on, the big picture. I tend to enjoy universes that seem smaller, but delve pssychologically or philosophically deeper. I would, for example, rather read the thoughts of the Buddha than experience a detailed, sprawling sci-fi world. There's nothing behind that... I can't really enjoy that for the sake of just enjoying it, you know? I tend to have a general understanding that i incorporate into everything i'm interested in. I tend to unify diverse subjecs of interest into a single worldview. This is not to say that i don't ever enjoy sci-fi universes, i just need something a bit more substantial and nuanced in it's presentation of something supposed to be ineffable or all-encompassing.

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @User Name
    I would love to do that, i have time in the weekend probably. Any particular one you would recommend?

  3. #43
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Strikes me as Ni valuing, both Ne and Si devaluing, with no sign of Se. The sense of wonder in exploration (+ pleasant sensational experience) is discarded in favor of transcendental principles and overarching trends.

    What do you think of Trump?

    EDIT: In the case that you're pressed for time, IEI seems about right. I self-type as ILI, no one has seen fit to disagree with me yet, and I generally share your sentiments, though I wouldn't have put it in those words.

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't think Trump is very special, to be honest. He is just a leader figure. Ever since civilisation came to being, we have had politicians and leaders trying to direct the course of our society. I don't like him, simply because i don't like rhetoricians. I don't like people who subvert certain cases and meanings to get what they want, instead of focusing on what is true. Words are a powerful weapon, and i don't think good people dictate and decide for others. I also don't like people who strive for power, on an external level. I find importance to come from within, and if you want to find peace, it has nothing to do with ruling or dictating or deciding for an arbitrary structure made up by humans. There is nothing substantial in being a leader, there is only yourself and if you master yourself, you master everything else as well. I find value in people who don't care for fancy words, but, in their hearts, wish to be good and truthful. And to be good and truthful, at least in my opinion, is to acknowledge that your view is inherently subjective, to be humble in thinking and humble in words, because we all know very little of what is actually going on in the thing we have defined as life. I generally don't like people who think they can define everything and think that their definitions are a reflection of some absolute truth. Definitions are not reflections of truth, but reflections of perception of truth, which might not be accurate.


    Edit: The reason i'm not sure about IEI is because i dislike competition, power, glory, activation - all that jazz, which seems to go with Se, AFAIK? I would much rather eat a bag of chips at home in my bed while reading something philosophically meaningful to me, or simply contemplating and dissecting something i like.
    Last edited by para; 01-16-2018 at 04:56 PM.

  5. #45
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Not much focus on the details, disdain for clear externally defined verbiage (Te devaluing) in favor of abstract ideals (Ti) and flowery sentiments. IEI.

    EDIT:
    Quote Originally Posted by BFGDoomer View Post
    The reason i'm not sure about IEI is because i dislike competition, power, glory, activation - all that jazz, which seems to go with Se, AFAIK? I would much rather eat a bag of chips at home in my bed while reading something philosophically meaningful to me, or simply contemplating and dissecting something i like.
    I don't generally compete, I'm lazy, I'd rather be alone with my thoughts, these are mostly irrelevant. What's more indicative of Se-suggestive is the acknowledgement for the need for external pressure to get moving, and a respect for people that are able to discern exactly which elements of the environment are suggestible to direct and immediate influence as a guiding force in deciding what must be done.

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Haha, i definitely have a thing for short, sweet sentiments with abstract or poetic meaning. But, all in all, i'm pretty reclusive and don't really like to share myself that much, i would rather display my emotion just to myself, you know? So how can i explain Fe-ego? I'm definitely Fe>Te, so don't think i'm ILI either way. I've never really been emotionally dependent, just preferring to sit in my own head and enjoy my fantasies. The main reason i'm hung up on LII is because i feel Ne/Si, though i also feel Ni, but Fe-seeking and Se-PoLR also seems right, tbh...

    Also sorry for my crippling doubt lol, i just have so many contradictions swimming about in my head.

  7. #47
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm skeptical of the notion that anyone with 4D Ti would have trouble navigating Socionics in a linguistic way, and while it's tempting to think of you entertaining the many possibilities for your type as Ne-creative, it seems more likely that you're just having trouble putting together the internal scaffolding.

    You don't need to apologize for anything, you're a likable guy.

    EDIT: I take no issue with anyone disagreeing with me in general, and would be happy to hear from anyone who thinks I'm full of shit, more to the point.

  8. #48
    Insert Password Here User Name's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Italy
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    506
    Mentioned
    69 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BFGDoomer View Post
    @User Name
    I would love to do that, i have time in the weekend probably. Any particular one you would recommend?
    Yes, thehotelambush's one.
    KEEP IT LIGHT AND KEEP IT MOVING

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Shackleton
    To most people, i appear to be erudite and logical in my observations, though i show my idealistic side to the few people whom i feel close. And my idealistic side feels like my core. I asked my mother about how i was as a child, and she said that i was uncompromising, only showing interest in myself and my own projects, and mostly using my parents as support, to provide food or something in that manner. She told me i was extremely intense and ''self-centered'' not narcissistic per se, just drawn in to myself. I was interested in systematizing collections, looking at diagrams, talking about planets and Pokémon as a child. I have only ''recently'' (past 8 years or so) found interest in ''IEI'' subjects.

    Would me being IEI-Ni make me ''appear'' LII to acquaintances? Thanks for all the help, dialogue is indeed much more informative than testing
    @User Name
    Thanks! Will do ASAP when i have sufficient time

  10. #50
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    People tend to equate "convincing" with "logical." It's a self-serving lie, there's no real relation.

    Being withdrawn is just introversion, intensity could be any number of things. It'd be helpful if you could get from her a concrete example of something you said or did that was intense.

  11. #51

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    One of her examples was, when saying to me that i need to do my homework because i needed it later in life, and that i would regret it later, my answer was ''I'm going to live in a house in the forest''. My reasoning was that homework was useless because my life was never going to have a need for any sort of thing related to homework. Another time she wanted to teach my how to bike, but i just said ''i like walking better'' and refused to get up on the bike. Would a Fe-ego type be so concentrated on the needs of the self over a general harmonious atmosphere with others? I was never actually that cross towards anyone, i simply just refused to do something i didn't consider worth my time.

  12. #52
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BFGDoomer View Post
    One of her examples was, when saying to me that i need to do my homework because i needed it later in life, and that i would regret it later, my answer was ''I'm going to live in a house in the forest''. My reasoning was that homework was useless because my life was never going to have a need for any sort of thing related to homework.
    Why would you decide that your life wouldn't involve external assessments of your knowledge?

    Quote Originally Posted by BFGDoomer View Post
    Another time she wanted to teach my how to bike, but i just said ''i like walking better'' and refused to get up on the bike. Would a Fe-ego type be so concentrated on the needs of the self over a general harmonious atmosphere with others? I was never actually that cross towards anyone, i simply just refused to do something i didn't consider worth my time.
    It doesn't sound like you wanted to argue the point but instead wanted her to accept your reasoning on the face of it as a matter of courtesy, which is Fe. Right now you can witness Sol arguing with ooo over this exact typing, and she's doing basically the same thing.

    EDIT: Nah. In retrospect, Fe is more about not addressing certain subjects in principle on the grounds that they'd be inappropriate, sounds more like you just wanted her to respect your boundaries, which could be down to a few things.
    Last edited by Mudlark; 01-16-2018 at 08:00 PM. Reason: was wrong

  13. #53

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shackleton View Post
    Why would you decide that your life wouldn't involve external assessments of your knowledge?
    I always had a clear vision of what i liked, valued, didn't like, loathed, and i was obstinate in my refusal to adapt to the needs of others.
    And i of course had decided that homework, or certain externalized, actualized placements of my time and resources we're a waste.

    I actually mostly wanted to argue the point, as far as i remember. I think it was because i was so sure of myself, that i of course found the reasoning to be sound and therefore had no troubles stating my views in short, concise sentences.

    I will read the thread with Sol and ooo, thanks for all your help!

  14. #54
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Good luck.

    I'm having my doubts as is, but it was fun as an exercise.

    EDIT: I think I'll state for the record you're looking more and more alpha NT the more we dig into it, not ready to commit to anything.

  15. #55

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I definitely identify clearly with alpha values over any other quadra. But, as you said, the search for overarching meaning, the poetically infused descriptions of phenomena and inner life, my general preference of spiritual and psychic subjects over the scientific, and the Ti>Te valuing makes a convincing display of IEI-Ni.

    I'm still sceptical of me being a Se-valuer, as i really don't feel the need for even external pressure. I actually don't feel the need to do anything related to the external world. Fe-suggestive does seem to fit me best, but people one here have said to type your ego functions first and foremost...

  16. #56
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BFGDoomer View Post
    I definitely identify clearly with alpha values over any other quadra. But, as you said, the search for overarching meaning, the poetically infused descriptions of phenomena and inner life, my general preference of spiritual and psychic subjects over the scientific, and the Ti>Te valuing makes a convincing display of IEI-Ni.

    I'm still sceptical of me being a Se-valuer, as i really don't feel the need for even external pressure. I actually don't feel the need to do anything related to the external world. Fe-suggestive does seem to fit me best, but people one here have said to type your ego functions first and foremost...
    IEI seemed likely to me right away, but I'm having difficulty justifying it in light of some of the things you've said. My mind is not working at full capacity right now, gonna have to come back later I think. I wouldn't get too attached to IEI on the basis of being interested in spiritual matters, it's just the relatively low-resolution speech that has me fixated on typing you as some kind of feeler. I'll be back later.

    I'm a novice. I'd welcome any input from anyone else.

  17. #57

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Alright, thanks! My low-resolution speech may have something to do with me not being a native english speaker. I'm not at all married to the thought of being a logical type, i've just mostly tested as one. I would not say i'm particularly more logical or ethical, but i'm clearly more focused on art, literature and stereotypically ethic-type related thoughts.

  18. #58
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BFGDoomer View Post
    Alright, thanks! My low-resolution speech may have something to do with me not being a native english speaker. I'm not at all married to the thought of being a logical type, i've just mostly tested as one. I would not say i'm particularly more logical or ethical, but i'm clearly more focused on art, literature and stereotypically ethic-type related thoughts.
    You're well-spoken, it's more about the content. It strikes me that I have to dig for examples of your reasoning more than I should for a Te valuing type. Putting together an idea of how you think will probably be easier once I've seen you talk in more depth about a wider range of subjects not pertaining to socionics.

    I generally respect Sol's opinion, and he has you as SLI.

  19. #59

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's funny you mention that, because i tend to convey my thoughts/moods in such a way that i sacrifice terminology to dig at something ''deeper'', so to speak. I can sometimes find very strict ways of speaking of things limiting, and refer to multiple seemingly unrelated concepts as directions towards my intended conclusion (or non-conclusion). I tend to abstract to a point where i'm unsure if the person i'm speaking to is even a part of my conversation, lol. Where i do value classification, systems etc. is when speaking of general matters. I really dislike logical incosistency where logic still has value, so to speak. But my ''gripe'' with logic is that i don't find it to be all encompassing. Logic is a self-encompassing system, in a sense. It worls only on it's own parameters, and what it values and doesn't value is determined by it. It effectively molds reality to fit into itself, instead of fitting into reality. This is the problem of interpretation, and why i don't like people who aren't humble in relation to their own subjectivity. Logic is subjective, IMO, because for it to be objective, we would have to have attained omniscience. A perfect system has no chance of gaps. This is also my problem with the scientific method, btw.

    As for Sol's typing, i regard myself being Te or Si-ego type unlikely, to say the least. But i still think i'm a bit too fond of Si and a bit too wary of Se to be totally married to a Ni/Se type.

  20. #60
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That reads like Ti demonstrative, fwiw, consistent with SLI.

    Have you been to wikisocion?

    You're clearly approaching the conversation with the full intent to assess the incoming information in good faith, you're providing examples when I ask for them, I guess my only hangup was that you seemed to be fixating on very broad and imprecise descriptors like "idealistic" and such to the exclusion of the more important aspects like consistency with particular functions, which I guess could be down to low-order Ne.

    EDIT: @Bertrand Do you mind taking a crack at this? I tend to find myself in agreement with you, Sol tends not to want to explain himself in such painstaking detail, I'm relatively untested and would appreciate the input. I think I'm converging on Sol's typing of SLI, but IDK.
    Last edited by Mudlark; 01-16-2018 at 10:06 PM.

  21. #61
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,889
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    no idea but I really agree with his assessment of logic (if we're on the same page). its very useful as a map but when it supersedes the territory itself it becomes counter productive and sometimes downright immoral. I also sometimes wonder if the person on the other end is understanding my words in the sense that I intend him to... I think heightened awareness of this possibility may be a consequence of holographic cognition... (to me the two types most likely to really plumb the depths of that line of thinking are likely to be IEE and LII). I think SLI fits in here too, SLI is mysterious to me in a lot of ways, but the people I type as SLI seem to "get it" but they can't seem to articulate it the way IEE/LII will. rather, they know it, but they're more in a receptive role to the IEE spelling it out explicitly. in the same way SLI spells out other aspects of life to which the IEE is receptive. anyway I feel we're in that territory so to speak, delta/alpha. that's the best I can really do. except to say I have a lazy left eye too I can barely see out of and there's something going on with that too I feel like

    I feel like there's a strong urge to want to get a definitive type right off the bat, but such a thing is rarely so easy... its good to just hang out and let the situation develop and then type becomes more clear, or less clear, but either way more data deepens the conversation and approaches accurate certainty or uncertainty, whereas a lot of what is said at the onset is very much guesswork, which is not totally invalid but more information tends to help and I hate going out on a limb and then being obviously wrong, because some initial impression turned out to not be at all what I thought it was, which can happen no matter how "good" someone is

  22. #62
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    I think heightened awareness of this possibility may be a consequence of holographic cognition...
    I didn't think you were typing as any of the holographic types. You move to ESI or LII maybe? This guy thinks he's possibly* LII, for what it's worth.

    EDIT: Got you on the reread.

  23. #63
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,889
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    well I think cognitive style is kind of a mirage because you could talk about alternate points of view in a causal deterministic fashion, or talk about causal deterministic thinking from the point of view of a hologram and so on and so forth, the point is your base proclivity as a matter of personality, so it manifests as a concern in terms of one category or another but is not the underlying reality, rather a preferred way to conceptualize things. this is something I think people lose sight of in regard to personality thinking of them as "real categories" and not coordinates overlaid on a cloud in order to track relative position, with the labels being identifying marks but not the thing itself. the underlying reality is people are at least trying to talk about the same thing, and they're dealing with the same numinous reality, they just have to parse it some way or another so their preferences in that regard can be said to be a cognitive style or just one aspect of personality itself. in other words, undifferentiated reality is everything at once and its too much, so people break it up by talking about certain aspects preferentially or in preferential terms. i believe this is the 4d nature of the base function which is the overarching casual scheme through time they lay over reality as their personal "identity" i.e.: their personality that extends in time is itself the preference to parse the world in terms of certain interchangeable aspects (logic, ethics, introversion, etc all the possible ways)... in short what I'm saying is once you have a strong grasp on cognitive style itself you can see how no one truly belongs to any style as a determinism and I think can understand the world in any of the different ways, some people are simply more resistant to do so, but in principle we participate in small ways in any of all 4 when it suits us, and that is the doorway to understanding people who simply spend more or all of their time there. I feel like in the end it is hard to get outside cognitive style and firmly establish what precisely one person exhibits because there's always the metaphysical possibility what they're manifesting is more an attribution, i.e.: a projection, arising out of us applied to them, then in any real sense being an absolute property of them. in a similar way it is hard to truly know what one is, because it implies some common intersubjective understanding of the different categories, which is difficult when you realize what I call x someone else may call y, and we may ultimately reference the same phenomena, but to type oneself according to another person's schema is to assume to know that which is difficult with absolute assurance to really know. in that sense we have to trust we mean the same things, and all I can say about the foregoing rant is that such a thing seems to me to again be a holographic way of thinking, but I think you can also think of it in terms of a vortex coming together or a linear determinism or a dialectical integration of tensions, etc. again it is hard to type off cognitive style; it is more an interesting idea than, I think, except in the most obvious and consistent cases, a reliable and meaningful measurement of much

    to make a shitty analogy I think people treat socionics in a newtonian sense when it should probably be viewed in a more einsteinian sense

  24. #64
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, I never really delved too deeply into it for more-or-less the same reason, I guess I'm just in the habit of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The inconsistency caught me off-guard.

    To clarify, it struck me as odd that the types were described as rigidly conforming to their expected cognitive styles, I assumed it was just another crazy socionics wankfest and left it alone.

  25. #65
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,889
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think like cognitive function in general cognitive style is really great for understanding where people may be coming from, but as hard and fast qualities of people not so much. its highly likely gulenko knows this and meant them as properties of type (rather than people), which is itself kind of in flux. it would be interesting to hear gulenko talk about possible distinctions between type and people, which is to say people may more or less inhabit their type but there is also this kind of always latent possible transcendence of it to in virtue of being human and rather type is a kind of box we place people in with limited consistency (subject to the human capacity to transcend such things). I feel like its much easier for Ti to derive cognitive style from type than to (realistically) determine type based on cognitive style, in other words what gulenko has spun out is a consequence of his own system, which while awesome, only speaks to the system and not necessarily the people in absolute terms. in other words he's playing with structural abstractions with contingent applicability to reality. this is not meant to be a slight on him, in fact such things are often high achievements and the best we got, but at the same time their limits should be acknowledged, which is why as a dispositive data point I would not rely on it to tell me about a person definitively. in other words he derived cognitive style from his system and by what hes observed of people, and it is legitimately insightful but is not a kind of absolute truth, its more a consequence of a closed system overlaid on territory but said underlying territory has the absolute right to shift and transform over time, such that to hold to the system as absolute is stultifying in the way I previously described as potentially immoral. I said all that to say cognitive style is in many ways an outgrowth of his axioms rooted in model g and not a direct property of individuals in the way say truly scientifically observable properties are, such as that which we define as properties of say mammals. in other words it is not a biology, not yet

  26. #66

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    157
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    VI = lazy but cheerful. Means SEI.

  27. #67

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'll do a writeup where i share my thoughts with you at length, but,currently, i have problems seeing myself as Si-ego. I'm simply too unaware of my own body and it's position and function internally and externally. When thinking of how i concern myself with my own body, i sometimes ignore bodily signals or have trouble interpreting them. I'm not denying a possible Ti-demonstrative, but i think Ni-Te is, with my current knowledge at least, more likely than Si-Te. SEI is a bit more likely, i think, but i'm still sceptical of Si-ego tbh

  28. #68

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here's (probably) a stupid question, but would it help you in any way if i tried gauging my (kinda hypothetical) relationship with each of the types? What i like and don't like about their description/template?

  29. #69
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, it would.

    I'm about to go to bed, but I can give my input tomorrow.

  30. #70

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Bertrand

    I think, as you said, that there is actually a transcendence or mallable quality to cognition, which makes it hard to determine constancy vs. fluctuation. It can also be hard to discern whether a given cognitive faculty manifests itself through a given system, or something not categorised yet (in reality). What we try to do is categorize these various phenomena, with no regard for the static/dynamic nature of these phenomena, and the source thereof. I agree completely with the assessment of cognitive profiles over actual types in people, because we tend to ascribe these cognitive profiles as a way to group human behaviour, where a multitude of behavioral patters can be ascribe to a single type/function etc. The problems is the absence of reflection towards what the system itself actually is capable of. This is a fault many things bear, but socionics also has this problem. For example, we can explain how dreams arise and what happens factually in the brain when dreaming, but we can't explain or accentuate what dreaming means, or what the essence or underlying root of the experience of dreaming entails. The world seems to have no limit in regards to our understanding of knowing, everything can be made to have reserve, which seems impossible to grasp. The same can be said for recognizion of cognitive features, IMO.

    Your posts are very well written, and i find myself agreeing with a lot of your considerations, especially in regards to problems of an epistemological nature.

  31. #71

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Shackleton

    I don't really interact that much with others, so this is kind of a rough outline
    Bear in mind that negative descriptions are not based on the types themselves, but more the people in my life of that type. So this is anecdotal evidence, not descriptions of types. (I've for example met a few SEE's that i really like, but the overarching theme in my life seems to let me only meet SEE's i don't like.)

    To quickly give an overview, i tend to have best relations with ESE, SEI, LII, IEI and EIE
    I tend to do fine around EII, SLI, LIE, ILE
    I guard myself/feel a bit on edge around ESI, SEE, IEE

    ESE and SEI i just feel really comfortable around, they are relaxed and easygoing, they let me stay disconnected, theoretical and indrawn without pressuring me, and are generally very accepting and relaxed around me. EIE's are extremely funny and tend to put me in a really good mood.
    IEI's are in love with the arts, and i feel rejuvinated after conversing with one, they seem to want to engage themselves in the ineffable, the indescribable parts of existence that i also gravitate towards. I tend to outwardly differ from them, but i find similarity when getting to know them.
    LII lets me have an intellectually stimulating conversation where both parties are engaged, and generally love to discuss philosophical interests. Also LII's tend to share my values.

    I like EII's calmness, but they can be a bit boring to discuss with, as they tend to want to talk relationships and their interactions with others, where i'm looking for more of a discussion of broad, abstract ideas with a lot of wiggle room. The ideas themselves can be emotionally loaded and sensitive, but preferably not about personal relations, as they don't particularly interest me.

    SLI are just nice and calm, and down to earth. My good friend of many years, a (self-typed) SLI really takes it easy, but is capable of being concrete, whereas i really have trouble focusing on the concrete, real part, instead of being stuck in my head.
    LIE, like EIE are pretty funny but can be a bit too competitive and aggressive.
    ILE are great fun, but can be a bit too extraverted and flighty. Loud people in general annoy me.

    ESI's i know tend to be very aggressive emotionally, and don't create an enjoyable emotional atmosphere IMO. They are very obsessed with ''causes''. Also we don't share common interests. They're also too down-to earth, and don't seem interested in abstract or intellectal pursuits.
    SEE's are aggressive and don't like me. They are loud and boisterous. Also they're boring and too concrete and trivial in their observations, same with ESI:
    IEE are simply too relationship-oriented, and they're too obsessed with ''trends'' and new ideas that don't really have any substance. Also they're kind of mean.

    I don't know any ILI, LSE, SLE or LSI that i know of

  32. #72

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also, fwiw, using these descriptions http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/ to see which type fits me best, i related to both IEI and LII, feeling like a bit of a hybrid between the two.

    Edit: after more and more comparison between famous IEI's and LII's, i'm leaning towards IEI-Ni. (is this a good way of going about it, if nothing else?)
    Last edited by para; 01-17-2018 at 05:02 PM.

  33. #73
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @BFGDoomer Yeah, LII seems best fit honestly. Your responses are in keeping with some of my initial observations of you, in that you're giving me honest answers that don't really go into the finer details of your like or dislike of particular things, but are well-written and seem to be given with the full confidence that you understand the terms, which I think suggests Ti over Te (and what's more, my attempts to dig Te out of you have been met with stable resistance so Te-ignoring seems apt). You don't really express any of your sentiments in a way that's conducive to public examination. I and my Te-valuing friends IRL will just rip into a particular example of something we hate, sometimes even describe the scene and use fairly strong language for or against. You're generally unflappable, and a very pleasant easy-going conversationalist, ignoring some of my earlier vulgarity, which I think is pretty consistent with role Fi and low-order Se.

  34. #74

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, i agree with you on the statement that my Ti doesn't seem 4D.

    But, as far as the other cognitive functions go, LII pretty much fits. How do we explain seemingly weaker Ti than LII's are ''supposed'' to have?

    If DCNH is included, i think Ni-LII (harmonizer) fits best?

    Many thanks for your help! I think LII with strong Ni is a pretty good fit. Wha are your thoughts @Bertrand ?

  35. #75
    Mudlark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @BFGDoomer People tend to interpret Ti to be like formal logic, when really it's just linguistic intelligence. The point of Ti is to internally represent meaning with abstract symbols within the bounds of arbitrary systems, so any language really. Even with LSI, their fairly consistent ability to climb the heirarchy within some institution is an example of Ti manipulating a nonverbal language. You've been diligent in learning the terms as I use them, generally not even asking for explanations, which suggests to me you're fairly confident in your use of Ti. I don't consider subtypes helpful, at least in the initial stages.

    My initial thoughts about you having low-D Ti were operating under the assumption that you were having difficulty with the system itself, not difficulty representing your own psyche, but I think that's clearly wrong now.

  36. #76

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thank you! I'm going to fill out the questionnaire in the weekend, maybe that'll clear some things up.

  37. #77
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,889
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think we're definitely on the same page wrt to the "place" of socionics but I don't know if that's enough to really establish type. I'd just say, you know, always stay alert and continue posting your thoughts and see what happens... on the whole typing is a whole person which includes elements of interacting with people, which even on videos is hard to get across because some things just seem to only really come across in person because of how people embody personality and respond to things in their environment (especially a shifting one) in real time, etc. Anyway I do think Ne/Si axis is likely but who knows! I hate jumping the gun. preliminarily I see no problems with LII though

  38. #78
    falsehope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    TIM
    ILE ENTp-Ti
    Posts
    438
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You are hard to type because I don't know anyone with your looks and from the posts it's hard to guess. But let me give you a bit of logic.

    From your descriptions, posts and your signature it's clear that you are both F and N. N is very striking, and your signature “When the heart is right, "for" and "against" are forgotten.” which is very likely F thing. So you are NF. So this way you can give up on the ILI. You also said that you like ESE most, which is conflicting to ILI.

    You said also you do not have best relationships with EII and IEE, but instead you typed IEI and EIE as better along with two other Fe types and one Ti type. As Fe types are accomodating and friendly so it could be biased, let's assume you like Fe more than Fi. So if we already establlished that you are F, and like Fe, therefore you must have Fe.
    This gives two possibilites: either IEI or EIE. Now it's hard to say which one because introversion / extraversion is not how person behaves (but it can predict that but not always), but how person processes information. For example, I am ILE ENTp and everyone unanimously types me as LII, of which I am sure it's not true. Every person I asked whatever I am introverted or extraverted they say I am introverted. And I am as hell. But this doesn't make me introverted in socionics. Same with you, your overt Ni introversion doesn't need to say you are IEI, because you can be also EIE.

    From what you say and how you look I can't decide between IEI and EIE, you have quantities of both. It could be you are IEI but you are not pure IEI, as well it could be EIE, however you have only parially looks of one, so it's very hard for me to decide. I am suspecting you of being EIE Ni subtype but also you could be IEI.

  39. #79
    idontgiveaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,870
    Mentioned
    166 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    IEE. What's your language? I cannot understand

  40. #80
    schwiftyrickty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Kansas City
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    345
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'd say probably IEI-Ni, especially since you are supposedly a clear cut E4. I can't really imagine a 4 LII, though I'm sure they exist. And you seem a little too expressive for LII. How do you feel about SLE in theory? I'm surprised you don't know any. I know tons of SLEs. Seems like I can hardly escape male SLEs unfortunately lol. Not positive I've ever met a female one though.

    It would help me personally if you took this test http://www.sociotype.com/tests/ and posted a screenshot of your results. Make sure you take the extended one, the regular one never works for me.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •