Simon Sinek
ILI?
Im sure he is one of those logic types, he might or might not be ILI. People might guess extroverted personality but I say in Socionics he type as introverted type. Shoot.
Edit; also he share similarities with markiplier from VI POV.
If you want to see, here is a starting point for your research!
https://www.youtube.com/user/SimonSinek
he looks EIE to me, usually NF types build their careers on whining about this stuff instead of actually going out there and building a house from scratch while fighting bears and wolves in central canada
I don't really see how a logical type would be so confident in writing about what he writes - he seems to focus on the domains of feeling types, namely motivation, team building, and so on.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
What, what?Originally Posted by FDG
So ya.. Feeling is part of Jung not Socionics. Team building, motivation. It is not really "feeling" subjects but I see how some people think so. You make not much sense but keep fighting bears or whatever!
What do you believe these subjects are? Which socionics function would make you confident in writing extensively about those topics?
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
It is not black and white like that, imo.
LIE sx/sp 7w8
Ya might be the case! Not sure about the wings and instincts and all that since I do not do them but great work!LIE sx/sp 7w8
ILE-Ti 7w6 sp/so
isn't this Fi?
"We run our decisions through our values that that makes our allies trust us - Sinek (paraphrased)"
LIE imo.
Looks like N is creative and demonstrative. Looks logical and extravert.. Maybe LIE or maybe EIE.
EDIT OK.... EIE probs.
Last edited by The Reality Denialist; 05-29-2018 at 03:27 PM.
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
Good point.
When they fight with wolves it usually means that those creatures are eroticized werewolves and it happens in their imagination.
I'm very much out of words in those situations.
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
Strong Ne, weak Ti, irrational, tactical, aristocratic... IEE or IEI.
Most motivational speakers and self-made gurus have a disingenuous, "snake oil salesman" vibe to them that repels me. It comes in different ways and degrees, but it's almost always there. The more I listen to them, the more disgusted or annoyed I get by what they are selling and how they present themselves. He's one of very few that don't provoke this reaction. Is he opportunistic? Sure, he cashed in on his talent and feedback he got from people in his surroundings. Is he opportunistic in any unethical, deceitful, or hypocritical way? I don't think so.
Last edited by Park; 08-10-2022 at 02:50 AM.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
He's a Logical type. L-base. Not 100% sure if he's a sensing or intuitive type, but I'm leaning Alpha > Beta. LII is my guess.
That is complete bull, he's not a logical type.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Yikes... L is pretty apparent. He's not an ethical type. In all his talks he speaks of people as objects operating within frameworks. Nothing about him says he views people "in color" in a way that an ethical type would.
That has nothing to do with being a logical type. He also speaks about having trouble grokking difficult logical concepts and being dismissive of (and pushing the envelope when it comes to) systems and rules. Strong Ne and weak Ti are apparent, if you've read any Socionics at all. The point FDG made is a valid one, as well.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
It has everything to do with being an ethical or a logical type? "If I've ever read Socionics at all" lol ok.
FDG's explanation goes somewhere and then completely drops off. It's perfectly understandable that a logical type would write about that stuff more so than ethical types. Look at Socionics, created by a logical type. Look at Jung, a logical type. Logical types have no problem with systemizing people the way Simon Sinek does. In fact, the very art of systemizing is referred to as 'logical' in Socionics. So no, FDG did not raise a good point, at all.
Jung and Socionics have nothing to do with Sinek and his work. Sinek is "systemizing" people? The sky is yellow, then.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Isn't that like Simon Sinek's whole shtick? Lol. He does it for like the first 10 minutes, and probably more, in this video: https://youtu.be/QKG4v0oKXRw
ESE
mb ENFP
LSE makes a lot of sense
probably creative subtype
maybe CD
Fe valuing, extraverted... D-ILE-Ne or C/D-ExE-Fe
Why Fe?
VI
LSEs generally have their Fi under like 500 layers of security and I would not expect to see clear signs of it per se (exceptions…) especially in generic public interviews. Fe is useful under these circumstances
i Don’t think he has ignoring Fi because they vibe different (they GET Fi, it’s just not a priority)
Weak and unconscious especially suggestive Fi reads as inadvertently leaking through and potentially impressionable/being able to be influenced
ILE is a much more reasonable typing for him than EXE for those reasons, but I don’t necessarily see why he should have “high” dimensional Ne. He is pretty concrete and anecdotal. He sometimes has a general vague inchoate idea of patterns but I am not convinced on an intuitive type.
@qaz00
A recent interview
https://youtu.be/xhUt35Wo0WY?si=QbdOQFvbIU7PFCWK
I’ve mostly skipped around skimmed it
also enneagram 3 so/sx
yeah pretty clear social instinct, with sexual
edit:
also whoa at 19-22 mins
I don't usually see personally revealing things from him so that's... informative
I was beginning to entertain potentially something like ESE (perhaps due to his strong social instinct?) but after seeing that I am tentatively leaning towards LSE over ESE again
Last edited by necrosebud; Today at 12:26 AM.
His corporate getup and the big glasses are very successful at hiding his type. If you mentally remove the glasses, you may sense he has a similar energy as Edward Norton and Kevin Spacey.
Sorta like an IEE except it's Ni dom. Probably the most corporate looking and Ne-leaning IEI I've ever seen. I see an SLI here felt he's not genuine. I think he is genuine in giving passionate speeches to lead people, though he may like the speeches and the leading (NiFe's strength) much more than actually doing the businesses.
I just don’t see an intuitive type after listening to several several minutes of his stuff instead of skimming it
extremely obvious sensing (Si) type if I may say so
I don’t know precisely what you’re seeing but is it possible you might see him as more complex than he might necessarily be?
He had taken risks and brought some real changes to the corporate world to put an emphasis on ethical vision. LSE would not be so daring with such big strokes with their suggestive Fi/role Fe. IEI and ESE, being supervision relation, may resemble each other at times.
I think there are some people in this thread typing him as Ni or Ne dom too.
What's your type? The Ni craziness/authenticity is obvious to me. However it may not be apparent to other people.
I am not familiar with the first para so maybe you know that side of him better
just going off of vids which I tend to skim because he is the draw but not the content (it doesn’t enthuse me at all)
and based on that, based on his very solid and not defocused (???) gaze and general proclivity towards concreteness, anecdotes again and again and again as a basic personality base not quirk it’s almost as if he can’t do patterns or intuition that well he comes off weak in intuition to me, potentially benefiting from others there
solid, not necessarily perceptive in that way is so easy for NFs
his EYES I can’t even explain it well on text seemingly but so much of it is in his eyes. I don’t think I explain my natural intuitive VI that well, which I mean I kind of expect everyone VIs their own way regardless of whether they call it that
similar for Fi but through different vibes
Ah the crazy eyes of IEIs. When they are young they may avoid eye contact, but when they try to capture you with Fe, they will have the most intense gaze you will ever see in a human being.
Use of personal anecdotes, there are 2 possibilities:
1. How to use stories to draw people in is a "business standard" when they train you communications and storytelling. It's the strength of IEEs but you can learn it.
2. Ni-Se people remember things in a more personal way (Ni), and extract the ”root“ of things. Ne-Si people remember things in a more general way (Ne), and extract the "net" of things.
Again he must have received a lot of business training, in the way of his talks, and how he formulate his thoughts, which is not the norm for IEIs. The Te polr may make his points about Te somewhat weak and performative.
Interesting
I see his gaze as solid, concrete and distant
classic weak Fi logical S type
you may be on point about some of the business stuff or presenting oneself in a certain I don’t know if I pick up on that stuff yet so
we are seeing the same stimuli and person and interpreting through diff lenses
Yes LSE can have intense gaze too. But it's coming from demonstrative Se, used to show power/status, and not so much "people capturing". Simon's gaze is more "drawing people to the same side with him", intense and always on when he goes into a conversation. That would be too tiring for LSE's role Fe.
Some SEEs may resemble thinking types (their mobilizing Te), and their gaze may be similar to Simon's, quite intense and persistent. But there will be much less talk about "my purpose""what I want""my loneliness", and more about what's around them.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote