"it was 300 a.d. when the people began to discover the power of mind...." let's save the long version for when i decide to write a book about it
haha but seriously there's nothing much to say except i've always been a sucker for finding logic in chaos - in this case thought processes and accompanying behaviours
I wonder what happened in 300 AD.
I've always been a sucker for anything that's supposed to end my doubts, only to leave me more hopelessly confused than when I started. So one day when I was happily writing my novel, an idea popped into my head: "Wouldn't it be a great idea if I typed my characters!" No, not a great idea, with hindsight. It's a good way to waste time when you could otherwise be doing something productive ... like actually writing
How long have you known your type? What descriptions do you relate to? What about the descriptions don't you relate to?
can we just.... ponder over the fact how i mentioned imaginative book writing whilst you're actually writing one? haha the odds are just far too great for this haha anyway, good idea - typing your characters it could keep you on track with following their psychological development. but haha why did it turn out to be a bad idea?
hmm let's see i've known my type for quite some time - can't tell you the exact date cause, well, I haven't kept track of it really but dare I say a couple of year-ish or so? I resonate almost 100% with beskova's description of a female ISTj it's scary how much actually i relate to it tho
very same Qs to you too, sir!
Putting hand to chin just isn’t quite doing it! Although, odds are, I might not actually have mentioned my novel without you mentioning your hypothetical book. Or would I?
Yes, it looks like a good idea on paper. Problem is, I spend more time trying to type them then actually writing about them, and also as soon as I think I have their type confirmed, I then start doubting because the constraints of the type I've put them into seem too narrow for them to breathe as characters. *Takes a deep breath* I also try to VI them, as absurd as it sounds.
I relate to ALL EIE descriptions, especially the top two paragraphs of Stratiyevskaya’s. For some reason, people typed me IEI on here at first, and I persisted with that typing for a few months until everyone started telling me that I wasn’t IEI. After much consternation, I retyped myself EIE exactly two weeks ago, and had this confirmed by an actual Socionist a couple of days ago via interview.
oh man, i had the whole *thinking hard* pose ready - even the hand to chin and all haha i guess we have here what we call a booksception - plot thickens! haha
haha lol exactly this - you should write a book about writing a book but being stuck in character's typology - that would sure be something *literally* yeah VIing them could do the trick especially since you know their faces and gestures and all.
don't mind me calling you Hamlet then haha i'm all for typing self yourself (what even?) cause who knows you better than yourself? lol try saying this 5 times fast
well, nice to meet my hypothetical dual then! (:
Mise en abîme. This is fast becoming a labyrinth...
I would but I think it would be very depressing for the reader. Actually, the way I VI them is by painting them. I don't think very much during the process, so that what is being painted is a reflection of my unconscious perception. Now we're definitely getting into Inception territory...
Go ahead, I've got a skull handy.
The problem with self-typing is you can have some pretty warped ideas about how you actually act. I used to think I was introverted.
I am nothing if not hypothetical.
I don't know - i sure would like to read a book about nothing really! imo that takes more talent than to write a "normal - standardized" book (look at stranger by camus for instance).
ha, lol it doesn't even surprise me that you have one
hmm, i can only partially agree with the last part - i think STs usually have clearer, more objective picture of themselves when it comes to judging themselves which means if you have potential problem with self typing chances are you are in the NF group, no?
mBD, I have reached a verdict on your type.... You are E8 sx SEE-Se. I knew you were similar to me, yet a bit different.
I predict it'll take you around 2 years to realise I am right.
SEE-Se!!
I don't think she is Fi. But she is hiding.
Not LSI IMO - not convinced. But you remind me of sisofnight who types IEI. It would be great boon if you could automatically provide some Ti except I see good at jokes and skilled in maneuvering round people's idiosyncrasies.
IEI for now. Types like SEE are interesting though.
i'm going with e3 enfj for her for the moment.
Holly fuck Miss, you will have all types for you soon. LSI, SLE, SEE, IEI, EIE...
how can you judge me if you haven't ever talked to me in person? all you see is snippets of my personality! lol i like to joke and i cant be an LSI? how do i even benefit from being typed as an LSI? I dont even know. the stereotypes around here are hilarious. somehow it makes more sense that i know my type better than you cause i am me afterall and i know myself better than you. sorry words but it's illogical to trust in someone's typing especially if that person doesnt even know his own type!
I'm only looking for what I see as Ti, and i've alluded to what may be Fe and perhaps Ni that you display. If you care to look a user named Squark self types as LSI and enneagram 1, her posts show what I see as Ti, i've just been waiting to see yourself display it is all.
It's not personal, you know i've been looking about at my own type as well. It's only recently i've developed (or-redeveloped) a somewhat clearer ability for self-analysis.
I think she did not ask to type her.
Else she knows herself better then we all here.
And third thing, somehow everybody ends up with at least 6-8 hypothesis coming from different people in different directions.
I for instance ended up with everything except LSE, SEE and SLE.
Typing overall can be subjective and illusional to some extent...
If she decided to be an LSI, let her come up to another type herself.
Miss:
1) you are sweet
2) you are hot
3) and here I have nothing to say but 3 is better than 2, so here is another for you!
you cant generalize like that - subtypes make huge difference! if they didn't then every single person in this world typed as an LSI would be the same- there are plenty of factors that influence that - DCHN, subtype strength, circumstances and personal character. my ni often shone through when i talked about rules and routines and love of structure so i cant find your arguments valid! ofc it's not personal i just wanted to express my thought and opinions on your analysis of me up there!
yes, exactly - it really irks me when people assume and make judgements without any solid proof!
you can offer to suggest your opinion but you cant argue with someone who clearly knows more about themselves than you do- it's very disrespectful and illogical!
aww thank you Perse so very much!
People make judgements all the time, and you don't need solid proof to get to the truth of the matter. To rely only on solid proof limits your ability to know about your environment. You can work on what you have and you see which pieces of the puzzle glue together in such a way as to make most sense.
She actually did (yesterday in chat).
Also, just cause she says she's LSI doesn't mean she's one. She's Se-base E8, imo. If not SEE then SLE. I see too little Ti for SLE, but that's the second option, and her lack of TI could be just cause of not caring to intellectualise on the forum.
anake i never seriously asked to be typed, i was merely joking! i choose not to display my ti cause i dont take this forum seriously - i dont enter debates on purpose cuz i dont like the potential conflict and dont want to be bothered with it. my base is e1 and that's tried and tested and proven. my polr is Ne and LSI's polr description function fits perfecty so i dont see me as being any other type among other things that also correspond to the LSI function desc! i really appreciate the analysis but i truly dont agree with it