Your typing of forum members

[nifl]

Anyhow, I was not misinterpreting your post as written

i said he was closer to ethical because of his behaviour, to which you responded by implying that i said that showing emotion at all or joking around a lot makes someone ethical (joking around a lot is indeed more common for ethical types, especially outside intimate or comfortable situations). any typing is ''stastistical'' or based on perception of likelihood, since there's no objective proof of types as of now
i'm not sure which ethicist you are, but it is likely that you are one since you keep misunderstanding relatively simple logic

[seeking it]

i said he was closer to ethical because of his behaviour, to which you responded by implying that i said that showing emotion at all or joking around a lot makes someone ethical (joking around a lot is indeed more common for ethical types, especially outside intimate or comfortable situations). any typing is ''stastistical'' or based on perception of likelihood, since there's no objective proof of types as of now

I thought you were outright retyping him.

Also I don't know your methods and views on typology, and I will not assume from zero info so yeah I still stand by my claim that it's useful to add context to ensure your opinion doesn't look ambiguous to others.

i'm not sure which ethicist you are, but it is likely that you are one since you keep misunderstanding relatively simple logic

omg lol

1. Don't generalise about people so fast from 1 single misunderstanding
1b. Don't assume it was not YOU who misunderstood my idea lol
2. Don't generalise to type from just the fact that we didn't see eye to eye on your opinion

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Alive is most likely IEI, which is close to your suggestion. he thinks too simplistically and illogically for ILI - his claim about sensors being focused on material reality all the time is a simplification that's unlikely for any logical type to make, especially a Te type which is focused on practice more than theory. also he's less boring than the typical logical type IME

I think I'm just overgeneralizing to make a point to be honest. I'm just tired of the idea that sensing types are acclaimed artists or scientists, and that S types come to this site to discuss an obscure theory, or that they upload videos on youtube to talk about their life and what they are doing.

[pasleine]

I think I'm just overgeneralizing to make a point to be honest. I'm just tired of the idea that sensing types are acclaimed artists or scientists, and that S types come to this site to discuss an obscure theory, or that they upload videos on youtube to talk about their life and what they are doing.

seems to be a correlation with type and how-much-they-post
i've seen a lot of IEI/EIE long term members on here, i think i've noticed them more than any other type. where the SLE might be like hey guys and then kinda leave after a few months lol

[on a peaceful hiatus]

seems to be a correlation with type and how-much-they-post
i've seen a lot of IEI/EIE long term members on here, i think i've noticed them more than any other type. where the SLE might be like hey guys and then kinda leave after a few months lol

The point is that SLE don't come here at all

[pasleine]

The point is that SLE don't come here at all

ever?

[inaLim]

seems to be a correlation with type and how-much-they-post
i've seen a lot of IEI/EIE long term members on here, i think i've noticed them more than any other type. where the SLE might be like hey guys and then kinda leave after a few months lol

Ended up here because my family situation was super fucked beyond what MBTI could make sense of. I tend to come back around fall/winter holidays when I have to deal with my Se PoLR sister and dad the most, and I tend to lose interest by the end of january. I was around a lot more during lockdown.

There's only so many ways to keep saying the same things before it's just obvious people are talking past each other.

I mostly check back for beta / gamma music reccs tbh.

[seeking it]

I think I'm just overgeneralizing to make a point to be honest. I'm just tired of the idea that sensing types are acclaimed artists or scientists, and that S types come to this site to discuss an obscure theory, or that they upload videos on youtube to talk about their life and what they are doing.

Why are you tired of NOT boxing people in to this unproven theory?

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Why are you tired of NOT boxing people in to this unproven theory?

Why are you so affected by what a random guy on the internet does? What is wrong about speculations about what some types are or aren't interested in? This theory has been around for decades and still no one cares about it, so the old way clearly is not correct. It's just delusional from my point of view, having studied this theory for 8 years in-depth, to think all types are eager to learn this unknown theory.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Grendel is not a Delta type

[seeking it]

Why are you so affected by what a random guy on the internet does? What is wrong about speculations about what some types are or aren't interested in? This theory has been around for decades and still no one cares about it, so the old way clearly is not correct. It's just delusional from my point of view, having studied this theory for 8 years in-depth, to think all types are eager to learn this unknown theory.

omg alright

[nifl]

seems to be a correlation with type and how-much-they-post
i've seen a lot of IEI/EIE long term members on here, i think i've noticed them more than any other type. where the SLE might be like hey guys and then kinda leave after a few months lol

Beta ST probably have the lowest average interest of all types in psychology, being logical types with Ne in the superego
@Alive
it's unlikely he's Delta, yeah
Grendel is however mb intuitive, mb ethical

[nifl]

@seeking it

I thought you were outright retyping him.

I am, ILE is unlikely to be his type

Also I don't know your methods and views on typology

it's not a question of views or methods. there is no objective proof of types yet, therefore typing is as of now a matter of perceived likelihood, not proof.

Don't generalise about people so fast from 1 single misunderstanding

if you mean yourself, you show more traits of ethicists than logicals in multiple posts. so does he.

omg lol

...

1b. Don't assume it was not YOU who misunderstood my idea lol

what idea? it's good to refer clearly for the sake of argument. this nebulousness can be a product of the avoidant tendencies of ethicals in areas of logical discussion - or of the better understanding of context and abstraction of intuitives

2. Don't generalise to type from just the fact that we didn't see eye to eye on your opinion

it is also assumed from other posts of yours, but:
considering the sensibility and simplicity of my opinion in this case, your manner of opposition to it is more likely for an ethical type. maybe an intuitive, too

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Grendel and seeking it are likely some more IEI's tbh

[nifl]

Grendel and seeking it are likely some more IEI's tbh

Grendel may be, seeking it makes me suspect Ne valuing because of their continued interest in external opinions on their personality/how they come off

[on a peaceful hiatus]

seeking it makes me suspect Ne valuing because of their continued interest in external opinions on their personality/how they come off

but isn't that something that almost all humans desire to know? although logical types might care less about that has they can work in environments where they are hated.

[nifl]

but isn't that something that almost all humans desire to know? although logical types might care less about that has they can work in environments where they are hated.

as per theory, Ne valuers are more interested in it, and Se types feel the most uncomfortable when other comment on their personalities, motivations and thought processes

[on a peaceful hiatus]

as per theory, Ne valuers are more interested in it, and Se types feel the most uncomfortable when other comment on their personalities, motivations and thought processes

Hmm, this might be an aspect of russian theory I'm unaware of. Personally I do not give a shit how I come across. Some people will understand me, others won't. I think it's related to unvalued Fi

[Squirrel]

The16typesforums : type number 17

Your typing of forum member thread : ILE

Enneagram forum: IxI

The member who is reading this: IEI

[seeking it]

@seeking it


I am, ILE is unlikely to be his type

I wanted to come back to this thread to mention that @PrelapsarianAdam might be LIE, but either way he seems rather theoretical and logical. I would not exclude the original ILE self-typing at this point.

it's not a question of views or methods. there is no objective proof of types yet, therefore typing is as of now a matter of perceived likelihood, not proof.

I was referring to how different people approach Socionics in different ways.

if you mean yourself, you show more traits of ethicists than logicals in multiple posts. so does he.

Alright you're entitled to your opinion/perceptions about my type, I just find it amusing, the idea that I'd be any kind of Ethical.

what idea? it's good to refer clearly for the sake of argument. this nebulousness can be a product of the avoidant tendencies of ethicals in areas of logical discussion - or of the better understanding of context and abstraction of intuitives

The idea was originally about how dabbling in typology should not obscure previous knowledge about people. So when I thought you were retyping the guy based on how he jokes around etc I was calling you out on that. Because it gets more complex than just sorting such behaviour into two basic categories of Ethical/Logical type. And I would assume most people have the knowledge to see that if they don't let Socionics introduce chaos in their heads.

But yeah, a statistical approach for bringing up options (not some "final typing") is okay

However, I just do not think that using strong wording for typing is justified by the statistical approach in this case; like, using words such as "likely" when the statistical approach would indicate a lower likelihood (say a likelihood of 60% rather than 90% for someone being an Ethical type, so hardly over chance, which would be 50%). (Here I am referring to the typing of PrelapsarianAdam really, I won't argue your typing of me here.)

it is also assumed from other posts of yours, but:
considering the sensibility and simplicity of my opinion in this case, your manner of opposition to it is more likely for an ethical type. maybe an intuitive, too

Man, when you said that you were using a statistical approach, I had no problem with that. To be very clear, I don't oppose such a method.

I will take your considering me as an intuitive a compliment.

Grendel and seeking it are likely some more IEI's tbh

Okay, another point for Beta NF for me. Someone in my type me thread also considered Beta NF for me. Maybe I am in a period of my life where I seem more intuitive

seeking it makes me suspect Ne valuing because of their continued interest in external opinions on their personality/how they come off

Man, if you seriously think that's type related....... its a basic human desire to want to get to know yourself more, and it helps asking others about how you seem to be, to avoid too much bias, it's just good to have an external anchor or reference point too.

For the record, I did not do that for a large part of my life, this has become an interest of mine now only more recently.

but isn't that something that almost all humans desire to know? although logical types might care less about that has they can work in environments where they are hated.

Yup.... it's a basic human thing. And that fits me well, I usually don't care, this is a newer interest of mine, I made it a project as well, a task that I just have to complete (not that I do not enjoy it sometimes & I do understand personal growth is never truly a completed project, but yeah).

[Grendel]

Beta ST probably have the lowest average interest of all types in psychology, being logical types with Ne in the superego
@Alive
it's unlikely he's Delta, yeah
Grendel is however mb intuitive, mb ethical

Let's hear your typing then.


Don't much care for alive's opinion because he l i t e r a l l y only ever types people as ieis.

[Metamorph]

Don't much care for alive's opinion because he l i t e r a l l y only ever types people as ieis.

False: Gulenko and Taylor Swift (even though most people have actually retyped Gulenko himself to IEI now.)

[nifl]

Let's hear your typing then.


Don't much care for alive's opinion because he l i t e r a l l y only ever types people as ieis.

as said, you seem somewhat more intuitive and ethical
a typing video thread would make you get more qualified and broader opinions

[Squirrel]

@Alive , what about doing a video questionnaire ?

[on a peaceful hiatus]

@Alive , what about doing a video questionnaire ?

How about no

[Squirrel]

How about no

Even though you said before that you're open to the idea, it's completely an expected response from someone who has no evidence that he's a logical type except that he doesn't care about people.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Oh I care about some people. I just don't have the motivation to talk about trivialities of my life. The whole concept of sitting alone in a room talking about myself seems bizarre to me. I was mostly convinced that only ethical types do that sort of stuff

[nifl]

@Alive , what about doing a video questionnaire ?

there is one of him interviewing AWellArmedCat in a video typing thread of his
he's quite good at it, asks good questions

[pasleine]

@pasleine - IEI

i would say the 1 thing about you typing IEI is that i dont see exactly why
do you have a good example of EII that i could perhaps compare myself to?
after all IEI and EII have the same strength in functions, just different preferences

[on a peaceful hiatus]

i would say the 1 thing about you typing IEI is that i dont see exactly why
do you have a good example of EII that i could perhaps compare myself to?
after all IEI and EII have the same strength in functions, just different preferences

sadly I don't have that many EII examples. I think it's one of the types that's least likely to become a public figure. I think Mr.Rogers is an EII with a dominant subtype, and Eric Rosen an EII with a normalizing subtype. Eric Rosen is a chess player that uploads videos on youtube but doesn't really share anything about his life. I have a couple of german examples but their response to interviews is pretty much I have nothing to say with a friendly smile

[Fluffy Princess Unicorn]

i would say the 1 thing about you typing IEI is that i dont see exactly why
do you have a good example of EII that i could perhaps compare myself to?
after all IEI and EII have the same strength in functions, just different preferences

Hi, welcome to the forum. I see you've already met the forum meme. Since you're new here, I'm just going to inform you that he types literally everybody on the forum as IEI. He's like those bad contestants on shows like X Factor and Britain's Got Talent that show up to their first audition, brag about how well they sing/perform, then humiliate themselves. Except, when everyone else tells them they're not very good at what they're doing, they just deny it and say everybody else is too stupid to see their super awesome special talent. The real reason he doesn't know of EIIs is because he just types all of them as IEI, not because there aren't many EII public figures. I might sound like I'm being a dick, but that is only because he treats people that disagree (which is literally everyone) like shit. You'd learn all of this on your own without my help eventually, but I figured I'd spare you from wasting any of your time on asking him for resources or input.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

How is pasleine new when he has joined 2021? I mostly just research stuff and voice my opinion in a very direct and for some people harsh way. Some people don't like that, but they usually self-type as sensing types so pasleine should be good

[pasleine]

i'm not sure, i don't tend to evaluate people based on objective qualities like that so i kind of doubt thats true, true that i joined a yr ago but to be fair i kind of forgot i signed up until i started posting again. so while i might have some knowledge of socionics, i don't have near enough information to make qualified assessments. so i am more or less "new" in the real sense
people here seem to have subtly different opinions on everything here. i do think the way you assess things has to do with your type
& i don't think i'll be recognized as my own self, Alive, & i dont have the drive to be, so i can imagine myself in that invisible quadra. its just that right now i am trying to find my people and understand everything, since lately i haven't found myself good at doing so. i don't value Fe though

[Beautiful sky]

Sky is not EIE. Rather than focusing on her stubborn manner of interacting with certain people, I suggest considering instead her lack of persuasiveness—no offense, Sky. She doesn’t tailor her message to her audience. She persistently says the same things pretty much the same way and has been doing so for years, regardless of the feedback received. Any change in how she communicates is slow, incremental, and apparently related to her internal processes and not to external demands. She doesn’t step back for a larger picture, instead picking at granular details.

This is actually incredibly similar to how Sol communicates, by the way. Both of them think they have the right system, with very little give-and-take. They just don’t have the same system, so they are at odds here.

They are also almost never entertaining.

It’s an Fe desert.

I have to use this

[Squirrel]

@seeking it

If you're sure of being Beta ST and just stuck between LSI-Se and SLE-Ti , find the function you use Fi or Ne

SLE-Ti use Ne very much , LSI-Se suppresses Ne's information and strongly reject it

LSI-Se uses Fi very much, SLE-Ti suppresses Fi's information and strongly reject it

[nifl]

@seeking it

If you're sure of being Beta ST and just stuck between LSI-Se and SLE-Ti , find the function you use Fi or Ne

SLE-Ti use Ne very much , LSI-Se suppresses Ne's information and strongly reject it

LSI-Se uses Fi very much, SLE-Ti suppresses Fi's information and strongly reject it

seeking it is most likely ethical

suppression and rejection of information relating to both superego functions is not unusual, not just one. using a superego function ''very much'' is highly unlikely. a SLE who uses Ne very much, for example, is most probably an ILE

[Squirrel]

seeking it is most likely ethical

I said " if "
final verdict is hers , she knows best what she really is

suppression and rejection of information relating to both superego functions is not unusual, not just one. using a superego function ''very much'' is highly unlikely. a SLE who uses Ne very much, for example, is most probably an ILE

I know, but PoLR is more rejected especially in the case of Creative Subtype

Creative Subtype uses Role more than Leading Subtype

Not more likely, because Subtypes don't cancel dimensions , SLE-Ti is still 4D Se and 2D Ne , but uses Ne more than Se Subtype , while ILE has 4D Ne

[on a peaceful hiatus]

The subtype gibberish here is sometimes really hard to read.

[lavos]

Producing subtypes have better control of the role function, they also have its full element (example in the case of SLE, SLE-Se will only have -Ne, while SLE-Ti will have the full -Ne/+Ni). They might use it more or less, depending on various factors, which include: the enneagram type, the DCNH type, type health, and experience. For example, a C-SLE-Se that is an enneagram 7, will probably use much more -Ne than an N-SLE-Ti that is 6w5. But the SLE-Ti will have the full element (-Ne/+Ni), and better control of it.

Hope it is understandable. If not fully, ask, I can explain further.

[maresnest]

Producing subtypes have better control of the role function, they also have its full element (example in the case of SLE, SLE-Se will only have -Ne, while SLE-Ti will have the full -Ne/+Ni). They might use it more or less, depending on various factors, which include: the enneagram type, the DCNH type, type health, and experience. For example, a C-SLE-Se that is an enneagram 7, will probably use much more -Ne than an N-SLE-Ti that is 6w5. But the SLE-Ti will have the full element (-Ne/+Ni), and better control of it.

Hope it is understandable. If not fully, ask, I can explain further.

i’ve heard of the inert/contact subtype but not the accepting/producing (“accepting/creative” as it says on the survey?) subtype. is there any meaningful difference between them?