Gulenko's typings of forum members AKA Big G SquaD

[Lolita]

I checked a few testimonial vids about DarkAngelFireWolf69's typing in his channel. It comes off to me as if it's life changing. I don't know if clients are given a personalized type description, but if they were, is it really that accurate? I'm kinda thinking I should go get typed, but I'm still trying to improve my knowledge of socionics so I can be a good judge of his assessment of me. I think I only saw one who didn't agree on the typing so far, but to be fair I do think that with my limited knowledge he was typed correctly.

It can be “life changing” on a systematic level depending on the individual’s reasons for getting typed to begin with. I believe the purpose of typology is to learn how to throw away your delusions and you can’t do that unless you go through processes. If you’re wanting to be ego stroked or verified as a type, then that’s likely to be disastrous. For me, I was already typed by Jack of WSS right from the start when I got into socionics to give me a sense of direction. After spending more time investigating socionics, and understanding the IMs better, I knew that what I was typed didn’t totally fit (although it was an ok typing). After observing several people here get typed by DarkAngelFireWolf69 and I thought they’re accurately typed, I did some research on him. I decided to get typed so I can know what my real type is since he created DCNH system and that accommodates the variances within the same type. Sure enough, I’m rather a “rare” type to go seek out DarkAngelFireWolf69 and I’m not a “stereotypical” SEE where it would be obvious because I have developed PoLR to where it doesn’t bother me. This is likely why I was typed SLE by Jack when DarkAngelFireWolf69 sorted out that I’m an SEE with developed Ti. Finding that out in itself was totally worth the money because I know what to work on. I think G is truly amazing.

[Aster]

I checked a few testimonial vids about Gulenko's typing in his channel. It comes off to me as if it's life changing. I don't know if clients are given a personalized type description, but if they were, is it really that accurate? I'm kinda thinking I should go get typed, but I'm still trying to improve my knowledge of socionics so I can be a good judge of his assessment of me. I think I only saw one who didn't agree on the typing so far, but to be fair I do think that with my limited knowledge he was typed correctly.

I was given a small type description. I’m not sure if it is exactly ‘personalized’. But I haven’t seen that exact description that he gave me for IEI-N in the book or on the website. They may give it to others in their conclusion that receive the same type. But it was accurate for me.

in my case, when I sent in my video, I hadn’t been doing much research at the time on socionics (and hopefully forgot a lot) or read that much into gulenko/his book to where I understood +/- functions. And I didn’t want to do a refresher that way it wouldn’t have as much of an influence on what I said. Of course it could have some, because I do know the basic theory. But imo, you are better to go into it naive that way your answers won’t be as swayed... not that I’m saying you would, but I think if you know something it could be unconscious. And then read more about his theory, the book etc. afterward to see if you think it matches. Of course, it’s up to you, but that would just be my advice

I saw the SEE guy who thought he was SLI. I thought he seemed clearly base ,IMO. He didn’t look very happy about it

of course I agree it’s impossible to get everyone right.

[Lolita]

I am trying to understand how different types of people got typed, why do you frame a question like that?

Yup. So is everyone else here, including the people who already got typed. What sets you apart from others in this respect?

I am certain of my type and dont need confirmation at this moment.

Ok, but then wouldn’t you be better able to understand the process by going through it yourself? You’ll be able to gather more data on your end rather than collect it through unreliable 3rd parties. If you’re married to your type and afraid he won’t type you as you want, then you’re in no better position to be above hobbyist nor scrutinize his typings.

If he shares people's videos and types with me, I would pay but he cannot do that due to data protection act/law.

Plus, it’s his work. If I spent my life working something I’ve dedicated myself to building up and branching out, I wouldn’t let anyone know my trade secrets either. That’s also called work product, and that’s legally protected.

As I said, I am trying to understand how different types of people got typed by watching videos and seeing his conclusions. He has zero benefit and harm from this. As I said, if he shared his database with me, I would pay.

Gathering info from 3rd parties here won’t really be much help. The point is he gets no benefit from people revealing his process and even then, what good would it serve you as you’re trying to undermine someone’s hard work.

It is impossible to be certain of 7.8 billion's type by watching two videos. Yes, people can get angry if they didnt get what they want. However, some angry or pleased people will be typed wrong.

Why would it be impossible? You’re relying too heavily on the possibility of something to being the answer but cannot rationally explain why. Cognition isn’t personality. It’s not behavior, either. Although Western take on typology heavily relies on behavioral analysis and that’s wrong. Behavior is learned. Cognition is hard-wired. It’s not getting to know someone through the span of their lifetime. It’s testing a person to see how they think. That’s all. DarkAngelFireWolf69 researched enough to determine that’s what it takes. The possibility that he’s not always right is there. But who’s got his level of expertise that’s gonna challenge him? Tantalov maybe? It’s not going to be hobbyists. The Ti policing really needs to be taken down 3 notches. Not just you. But every other person who believe themselves experts and are so gun ho to correct G just because they take a passing interest in a subject that someone else dedicated their entire life to.

This is not an arbitrary assumption. Human mind, information metabolism is complex. Everyone goes through different kind of life paths which some evidently effect how their brain work besides socionics. So different type of people doom to possess different levels of difficulty when it comes to typing. Hence, noone can type everyone on earth without a margin of error. My knowledge of socionics is irrelevant, this is not about me or him, noone can do this. There is a margin of error in different kinds of works. Socionics or anything related to psychology is more complex, unknown and unprovable to clarify. Hence I can say this without having an expert knowledge for socionics and other typology, psychology areas.

You say it’s not arbitrary but don’t explain why specifically 2 videos isn’t enough. So yes, what you say is arbitrary since it’s based upon the limited information you have on G’s process and can’t adequately challenge it.

I brought that up, because I basically say that if he is certain about all people's type without additional videos besides two videos, he will make a mistake and although, you never claim that he cannot do any mistake directly. You are mentioning his phd and experience like you claim otherwise. To be sure, are you saying that he cannot make any mistake about someone's type?

I never claimed he’s perfect or can’t make mistakes. You come off wanting to police someone who’s knowledgeable on a subject that infinitely surpasses yours and you’re still unable to drum up the tangible arguments to challenge. I love a good challenge if there’s any merit to it but you’re gonna have to do a lot of investigating to even make a dent.

If you do, then you are saying his method/skills are flawless which would be inhumane/almighty since people who have lots of experience and phd in medicine, science, engineering etc can do mistakes, making mistake about socionics's type or attachment style or something related to typology, psychology is much more easy. This isn't about DarkAngelFireWolf69, if there was any another socionist I would say the same thing. I can even say noone can type everyone with %100 accuracy. DarkAngelFireWolf69 can decrease his margin error by asking for additional videos when he is uncertain or refunding as dead suggests. Some other people can decrease their margin errors in different ways. Having a room for improvement doesnt decrease the credibility or success of a work.

Nope. I say what I mean and I mean what I say. Sure, people make mistakes. Again, you’re looking to catch G being “wrong” but you don’t have the ammo to take a shot. Whether people are typed right or wrong by G, they’ll either embrace it or reject it. How would you know who’s actually typed wrong if they’ve embraced it or they reject the right typing? You don’t know the process, so you haven’t an idea of where to start.
Bottom line is I immensely respect G because of his hard work and brilliant continuation and refinement of the energy model, +/- system, and DCNH. Until you’re able to level the same amount of forceful contribution to challenge him, you’ve got nothing to stand on.

[Lolita]

I was given a small type description. I’m not sure if it is exactly ‘personalized’. But I haven’t seen that exact description that he gave me for IEI-N in the book or on the website. They may give it to others in their conclusion that receive the same type. But it was accurate for me.

in my case, when I sent in my video, I hadn’t been doing much research at the time on socionics (and hopefully forgot a lot) or read that much into DarkAngelFireWolf69/his book to where I understood +/- functions. And I didn’t want to do a refresher that way it wouldn’t have as much of an influence on what I said. Of course it could have some, because I do know the basic theory. But imo, you are better to go into it naive that way your answers won’t be as swayed... not that I’m saying you would, but I think if you know something it could be unconscious. And then read more about his theory, the book etc. afterward to see if you think it matches. Of course, it’s up to you, but that would just be my advice

I saw the SEE guy who thought he was SLI. I thought he seemed clearly base ,IMO. He didn’t look very happy about it

of course I agree it’s impossible to get everyone right.

lol I got really excited to see another SEE but he’s too entrenched in western typology and doesn’t get the DCNH system yet and he hasn’t had time to investigate Model G, although somehow I think he would actually take the time to learn it. He’s unhappy but he’s quite rational about it, which is where the Te kicks in. He’s very sturdy and assertive, sharp, articulate, and all that time he was giving off Se cues just like me. I knew me and him are the same type when I watched his moves. I replied to him to give a sort of explanation but I doubt it makes any difference. I’ve watched a few of his MBTI videos before and he was throwing Fe all over the place, acting crazy Ne, etc. But that review video shows his true self, he’s very controlled and assertive. You watch my review video and I’m a candyass

[Lolita]

I was actually typed by WSS too. I was typed ILE. I could see p over j temperament but I read about cognitive styles and I don't think I am Causal-Determinist, though I might have to ask for more info from Casual-Determinists here. But anyway I do think I exhibit good amount of Fi too. I'm still about to check out DCNH system though. I surely don't care for ego-stroking, but I kinda need some solid reasoning for my type.

I totally understand where you’re coming from. Western take on socionics is very MBTIish with the dichotomies but that’s not how a person’s type is determined for socionics. It’s about where the functions are placed in the stack. I think due to language barrier, DarkAngelFireWolf69 wouldn’t go into detail to explain in depth and the person is left to their own devices to do the legwork to connect the info on themselves. This was the exciting and fun part for me! After that, I moved on to accurately typing my family and friends (some stayed the same type but some drastically changed). My mom is SEE-D (elevated Te and Fe) and originally I thought she’s LSE which wouldn’t make sense cuz she’s a powerhouse and is very direct with confrontations whereas LSE avoids such methods. Then I thought my dad was LSI or SLI and for a time I thought he’s SLI to be mirror to my mom as LSE but no, he’s really LSI-N. He supervises my mom and me!! So yeah, it’s a domino effect if you’re going into the process wide eyed and open minded. I just wanted to find my real type.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSJOpuTQk-0

this SEE reminds me of a person that I can't remember right now. a shame that he mentions his type so soon because I want to know if I come to the same conclusions. I just immediatly saw him as extrovert.

saw this video as a youtube add on my phone just now. the guy reminds me a bit of that SEE

https://youtu.be/9jMrVr6rk-w

[megedy]

I checked a few testimonial vids about Gulenko's typing in his channel. It comes off to me as if it's life changing. I don't know if clients are given a personalized type description, but if they were, is it really that accurate? I'm kinda thinking I should go get typed, but I'm still trying to improve my knowledge of socionics so I can be a good judge of his assessment of me. I think I only saw one who didn't agree on the typing so far, but to be fair I do think that with my limited knowledge he was typed correctly.

It's really useful and informative. The assessment you're given has maybe one sentence in each section that could've been copy-pasted (at least comparing mine to other people's), but the rest of it is all based around what you said, or how your body language points to a certain type. He's pretty good at seeing through what you're saying and getting down to the cognition, too. So if you say something that's contrary to how he types you, he explains the contradiction. It's very well-reasoned and you get the impression he does really take the time to watch each video carefully, which IMHO makes it worth the wait.

[Sol]

Due to typology censorship of Gulenko's fans among moderators a part of the important criticism was hided in other thread.

[megedy]

Due to typology censorship of Gulenko's fans among moderators a part of the important criticism was hided in other thread.

hehehe oh no there's a fightin' thread

also i should point out for anybody confused about astrology: like duh your sun sign isn't all of your personality, your ascedent sign is how people see you and your moon governs your emotions v_v jeeze it's like some people have never read their natal chart before.

[The Reality Denialist]

I just checked myself from the camera. Yeah, I'm look physically so unhinged while "sitting" on my chair (even with stimulants) that anything but Ne base would be highly heretical. I wonder what would his response be after first vid. To waste the money or not to waste the money.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Due to typology censorship of Gulenko's fans among moderators a part of the important criticism was hided in other thread.

thank you that you're blessing us with your objective criticism.

anyway, comparing a theory like socionics to astrology (which seems to mostly appeal to ethical types, especially delta NF) seems pretty stupid to me tbh. I'm getting really tired of this comparison, especially since it most often comes from people who don't understand the theory very well or don't know much about socionics.

[SlytherinPower]

hehehe oh no there's a fightin' thread

also i should point out for anybody confused about astrology: like duh your sun sign isn't all of your personality, your ascedent sign is how people see you and your moon governs your emotions v_v jeeze it's like some people have never read their natal chart before.

Wonder if people mostly view you as your rising sign online? I'm Libra rising, Taurus sun, Leo moon, Gemini mercury.

[megedy]

I just checked myself from the camera. Yeah, I'm look physically so unhinged while "sitting" on my chair (even with stimulants) that anything but Ne base would be highly heretical. I wonder what would his response be after first vid. To waste the money or not to waste the money.

If you're already confident in your type as ILE, seems like it'd be interesting to "test" him & see what he says But it would be kind of redundant if you're 100% sure you're going to hear back ILE anyways.

[Nobody]

I just checked myself from the camera. Yeah, I'm look physically so unhinged while "sitting" on my chair (even with stimulants) that anything but Ne base would be highly heretical. I wonder what would his response be after first vid. To waste the money or not to waste the money.

If you hire and pay yourself, you can confirm your own thoughts and get bonus monies. Can't lose.

[flames]

@flames, I think maybe when you have issues like we do, it just makes us hard to pin down it can be hard to see passed all of it imo.

so are you going with 7w6 now? I could see that for you. Or 4w3 fix? What made you change your mind ultimately?

I’m ok right now, thanks for asking I never got too thin. I started chewing and spitting when I was in my early teens. it started when I thought my face was fat. Lol. I didn’t think about food too much when I was younger, honestly. I hardly ate. I started getting obsessive about it in my early 20’s and was weighing myself several times a day/counting calories/documenting my weight/aiming for like 800 cal a day or less. Visiting pro Ana sites for tips & tricks (my bad lol) But I never get to the point where I wanted to keep loosing and loosing. I’ve only went under 100lbs once when I had adderall to help me lol. But I still think about my weight a lot, but right now I’m not being overly obsessive about it, not as bad as I was. It varies.

I agree. Also I have been going with 7w6 for years now. That seems to be the most common typing of me from other people as well. But I have convinced people I was any type I typed myself as at the moment in my history. I am still not sure of my heart fix - I have typed myself with all three in the past, and even as all three as a core type, too. I have been rolling with 2 lately and seeing how it feels.

[Sol]

hehehe oh no there's a fightin' thread

There is always a fighting for different opinions people have.
The bad is when emotions are used to argument logical theme. But what I said contained useful info related to the current thread and should not be removed.

[Exodus]

if he types like me, he probably already has an idea about your type within the first few minutes of your first video. the rest would be about confirming the hypothesis.

It's possible to have an impression near the beginning, but if this doesn't ever change by the time you've gotten to the end of the video, then something is seriously wrong.

[Exodus]

Not a forum member, but Gulenko typed TheEndlessKurtis as SEE, and he posted the analysis:



https://www.dropbox.com/s/7ot4534vib...76393.pdf?dl=0

Personally I think this is a terrible typing, I think Kurtis is a clear Fe valuer. Gulenko mainly types with Jungian dichotomies but rational/irrational is not a reliable indicator.

[squark]

alright, I’ll just put my Gukenko typing vids up here for a short amount of time, but god I am so awkward

1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbSm...&persist_app=1

2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9xn...ature=youtu.be

Full Conclusion: https://imgur.com/a/UT0959g

if anyone has any thoughts on what my enneagram type could be, I’d be curious to hear them

Idk about E-type, but I saw your videos. I feel like we're somehow similar even though we have different strengths/weaknesses. Like a likeable cousin hah, Idk how to put it. The whole video thing though is one reason why I've been reluctant to have Gulenko type me, even though I'm curious. I've read his book, and like his approach, but I'm not sure how accurately I could even represent myself in a video. A friend of mine did get typed though, and one of the questions was about comparing himself to other people and he used me as a comparison point. Gulenko decided from the comparison that I was clearly a sensor and in contrast my friend being typed was intuitive. So, there's that anyway. I liked your videos though and didn't think you seemed awkward. =)

[Tallmo]

Personally I think this is a terrible typing, I think Kurtis is a clear Fe valuer. Gulenko mainly types with Jungian dichotomies but rational/irrational is not a reliable indicator.

So what do you think his type is then, if not SEE?

[squark]

Yeah I agree.

Alot of the stuff I relate to in more classical model A socionics could be gamma NT, while in G's system and writings I get the sense that this gamma NT stuff I relate to isn't particularly relevant to type. Indeed, alot depends on which traits one considers relevant to type, and different schools of socionics are really slightly different typology systems.

Your typing is one I'm more curious about since I've interacted on forum with you a bit and have my own opinions. I understand that G typed you as LSI-C? Which parts of gamma NT did you most relate to? Based on what you've said about yourself online, gamma NT seemed to fit imo also. Idk how personal it is for you, but what kind of reasoning did he give for your type? Interesting to see how he got to the conclusion he did.

[WVBRY]

Your typing is one I'm more curious about since I've interacted on forum with you a bit and have my own opinions. I understand that G typed you as LSI-C? Which parts of gamma NT did you most relate to? Based on what you've said about yourself online, gamma NT seemed to fit imo also. Idk how personal it is for you, but what kind of reasoning did he give for your type? Interesting to see how he got to the conclusion he did.

Yes, G typed me as LSI-C.

The parts of gamma NT I relate to are mainly my values, which are more gamma imo. I devalue big groups with emotional atmosphere, especially if the people in the group are not particularly close. It feels pretty impersonal to me. I also see work as something that (should) lead to personal fullfillment, and not something along the lines of "obey or lose your job", which betas (betas may correct me if they feel I'm wrong) often value. I value personal integrity, not sacrifing your values, not even for a "common good".

I will PM you G's report. Edit: it seems you have the PM function deactivated for your account.

[squark]

Yes, G typed me as LSI-C.

The parts of gamma NT I relate to are mainly my values, which are more gamma imo. I devalue big groups with emotional atmosphere, especially if the people in the group are not particularly close. It feels pretty impersonal to me. I also see work as something that (should) lead to personal fullfillment, and not something along the lines of "obey or lose your job", which betas (betas may correct me if they feel I'm wrong) often value. I value personal integrity, not sacrifing your values, not even for a "common good".

I will PM you G's report. Edit: it seems you have the PM function deactivated for your account.

Thanks. I turned it on, didn't realize I had it off.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Not a forum member, but Gulenko typed TheEndlessKurtis as SEE, and he posted the analysis:



https://www.dropbox.com/s/7ot4534vib...76393.pdf?dl=0

Personally I think this is a terrible typing, I think Kurtis is a clear Fe valuer. Gulenko mainly types with Jungian dichotomies but rational/irrational is not a reliable indicator.

"terrible" lol. it's a totally understandable typing (and I would have given him the same type). I looked at a lot of your typings here on this site and I think you have no authority to criticize him since some of them are really awful.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Yes, G typed me as LSI-C.

The parts of gamma NT I relate to are mainly my values, which are more gamma imo. I devalue big groups with emotional atmosphere, especially if the people in the group are not particularly close. It feels pretty impersonal to me. I also see work as something that (should) lead to personal fullfillment, and not something along the lines of "obey or lose your job", which betas (betas may correct me if they feel I'm wrong) often value. I value personal integrity, not sacrifing your values, not even for a "common good".

I will PM you G's report. Edit: it seems you have the PM function deactivated for your account.

I would be interested in seeing your video interview if you're comfortable with that.

[khcs]

INFP Yesenin ???

[on a peaceful hiatus]

INFP Yesenin ???

ah yes. the focused gaze, the erratic head and facial movement, communication without pauses. all these things are a clear sign of introversion.

[Lolita]

LOL Krutiss self-types as SLI which hates Fe. Krutiss is most definitely SEE, he just doesn't want to accept it because he's freaked out about the descriptions of Se and doesn't see himself as someone who's "forceful." He also doesn't understand DCNH. He has more Se than I do because I'm normalizing subtype and he's dominant which is modeled after the EJ temperament of Te and Fe, and he's really too good with both. He's very assertive and clear and concise in communicating his thoughts. He's quite forceful about leveling his arguments with G. I mean, I say I'm a candyass and I'm really mild and soft-spoken but I'm still Se base anyway.

[Adam Strange]

LOL Krutiss self-types as SLI which hates Fe. Krutiss is most definitely SEE, he just doesn't want to accept it because he's freaked out about the descriptions of Se and doesn't see himself as someone who's "forceful." He also doesn't understand DCNH. He has more Se than I do because I'm normalizing subtype and he's dominant which is modeled after the EJ temperament of Te and Fe, and he's really too good with both. He's very assertive and clear and concise in communicating his thoughts. He's quite forceful about leveling his arguments with G. I mean, I say I'm a candyass and I'm really mild and soft-spoken but I'm still Se base anyway.

I thought Krutiss was most likely LIE, although there were some glitches there. Certainly not an Si-dom.

[Lolita]

Yes, G typed me as LSI-C.

The parts of gamma NT I relate to are mainly my values, which are more gamma imo. I devalue big groups with emotional atmosphere, especially if the people in the group are not particularly close. It feels pretty impersonal to me. I also see work as something that (should) lead to personal fullfillment, and not something along the lines of "obey or lose your job", which betas (betas may correct me if they feel I'm wrong) often value. I value personal integrity, not sacrifing your values, not even for a "common good".

I will PM you G's report. Edit: it seems you have the PM function deactivated for your account.

This doesn't make any difference but from a distance, I thought your Ti and Fi are both well developed, but wasn't sure which one was lead function, but I knew you had to be an XSI. I took a stab that you're ESI (this was months before I got typed by G so I went off of a more westernized understanding of functions and Model A) and a very forceful one at that, but you didn't seem to hate Fe, but rather receptive to it. So then I thought, LSI because they can appear to be ESI due how similar Ti and Fi works.

I mean, with Gamma, they hate Fe. I've always hated Fe and think it's manipulative, fake, full of histrionics, etc. I mean I couldn't ever see myself being Fe or "valuing" it. It turns out I have high dimensional of Fe, along with Fi , but I'm not particularly Fe as I don't engage in it yet... not until I creep my way to becoming a dominant SEE! I could be D subtype on a personal level, but that's another thing. Even for Fi, I couldn't apply it to myself because there's just limited but biased information about Fi which I hate, but it's true, I really HATE people who use Fi wrong, including other Fi egos. So that's my Fi punching other people's Fi. I'm very anchored in my principles (Fi) and I use it as my maxims (Ti) and I'm resilient about it. I don't give a damn what others say, think, blah blah. "I'm right, you're wrong and if you keep persisting in pushing your stupidity on me, I'll go out of my way to make you feel like shit and suffer a mental breakdown." I mean, that's indicative of how fortified I am and I have extra Fi development since I'm normalizing. I'm not vindictive like ESI but... I'm as close of an SEE to being ESI. You just don't strike me as hating Fe stuff and preferring Fi over Fe. You seem really receptive to what others say and open to more possibility (which I know has something to do with C subtype since that obscures Ne PoLR/Brake) but I think your Ti is stronger than Fi because you're more strict about enforcement of rules of structure that falls under your purview (such as your Discord chatroom having rules and enforcing them). Fi on the grander scale is about harmony and I don't see you bypassing Ti order to preserve Fi relations (Ti can alienate personal relations).

[Lolita]

I thought Krutiss was most likely LIE, although there were some glitches there. Certainly not an Si-dom.

He's too sensory focused to be LIE. You're probably seeing the Te, which he is indeed very good at. Dominant subtype have well developed Te and Fe, modeled by EJ temperament. My mom is SEE-D and she can come off as LSE at first glance.

[Lolita]

I agree, he isn't LIE. Facial expressions are also not restrained so I think he is ethical. I think he's correct that he's S because he carries himself well, he doesn't look like an intuitive who would have a problem with the physical side of things. He even said that he knows his internal states and is good at maintaining physical comfort/homeostasis. So he's not Si polr.

His pinned video is "INTJs are ballers", praising how cool and respectable INTJs are (NiTe, not TiNe) - duality? Lol

People should watch his other videos, he's not LIE at all

LOL Yeahhhh that's what makes it hilarious cuz he praises his real dual. His other videos makes fun of things that don't make sense and he's theatrical about it which shows how well he engages with his Fe since SEE has high dimensional Fe, just not something we want to "consciously" use I guess. I actually do like ILIs a lot, even when I first got introduced to socionics and didn't know about duality, etc. I don't think I'm good with Fe, but people tell me that my Fe is actually really out there. I think Krutiss is the same. He's just the "stronger" version of me (normalizing subtype can become dominant).

[Lolita]

considering that I mostly work on a typing gallery, I wonder if it would be a cool idea to add people that got typed by DarkAngelFireWolf69 to a different gallery on my website with real people (no celebrities) to show visual similarities. I have been thinking about this idea for a while, but I find it rather awkward to ask my friends such a question. I'm also not sure if people would be comfortable with it.

I think you can gather the video links of people who did their reviews publicly.

[Lolita]

I think the issue with astrology, and I’ve studied traditional astrology and learned to calculate predictive positions, is that it’s not psychological but people seem to mistaken it to somehow psychologically revealing. Astrology is very ancient, from the Ancient Babylonians (Chaldeans) and they created it to learn of someone’s fortunes and misfortunes; what the world has in store for the person. Astrology never cared about a person’s psychology or personality or whatever. I think it’s hilarious there’s ridiculous people who reject DarkAngelFireWolf69 as “worthless” but they think astrology, which entirely based off of fatalistic premise, is somehow more accurate than psychologist who was trained from Augusta and spent his life refining and defining socionics in his field of psychology.

By the way, I’m Gemini sun, Taurus moon, Aries Mars. I’ve had random ppl read my chart and they say I’m weak and dependent on others or that I need to be more self-assertive. RIGHT.

[WVBRY]

This doesn't make any difference but from a distance, I thought your Ti and Fi are both well developed, but wasn't sure which one was lead function, but I knew you had to be an XSI. I took a stab that you're ESI (this was months before I got typed by G so I went off of a more westernized understanding of functions and Model A) and a very forceful one at that, but you didn't seem to hate Fe, but rather receptive to it. So then I thought, LSI because they can appear to be ESI due how similar Ti and Fi works.

I mean, with Gamma, they hate Fe. I've always hated Fe and think it's manipulative, fake, full of histrionics, etc. I mean I couldn't ever see myself being Fe or "valuing" it. It turns out I have high dimensional of Fe, along with Fi , but I'm not particularly Fe as I don't engage in it yet... not until I creep my way to becoming a dominant SEE! I could be D subtype on a personal level, but that's another thing. Even for Fi, I couldn't apply it to myself because there's just limited but biased information about Fi which I hate, but it's true, I really HATE people who use Fi wrong, including other Fi egos. So that's my Fi punching other people's Fi. I'm very anchored in my principles (Fi) and I use it as my maxims (Ti) and I'm resilient about it. I don't give a damn what others say, think, blah blah. "I'm right, you're wrong and if you keep persisting in pushing your stupidity on me, I'll go out of my way to make you feel like shit and suffer a mental breakdown." I mean, that's indicative of how fortified I am and I have extra Fi development since I'm normalizing. I'm not vindictive like ESI but... I'm as close of an SEE to being ESI. You just don't strike me as hating Fe stuff and preferring Fi over Fe. You seem really receptive to what others say and open to more possibility (which I know has something to do with C subtype since that obscures Ne PoLR/Brake) but I think your Ti is stronger than Fi because you're more strict about enforcement of rules of structure that falls under your purview (such as your Discord chatroom having rules and enforcing them). Fi on the grander scale is about harmony and I don't see you bypassing Ti order to preserve Fi relations (Ti can alienate personal relations).

This is interesting, thanks for your perspective and writing this up. I may have more later, if something comes to mind, but thanks in any case!

[khcs]

ah yes. the focused gaze, the erratic head and facial movement, communication without pauses. all these things are a clear sign of introversion.

This is not how psychology works. Told you already. Learn Socionics first.

[Lolita]

This is interesting, thanks for your perspective and writing this up. I may have more later, if something comes to mind, but thanks in any case!

Sure thing!

I think it’ll help to break down the functions characteristics +/- in Beta vs. Gamma Quadras to remove yourself from personal analysis and read up on how they operate within Model G

Ti+ (LSI, EIE, SEE, ILI) Logic of uniform structure (linear, direct deduction; LSI)
or
Ti- (SLE, IEI, ESI, LIE) Logic of fractal structure (fragmented, multidimensional; LII)

Fi+ (SEE, ILI, EIE, LSI) Ethics of forgiveness (forgiving, giving benefit of the doubt, kindness; EII)
or
Fi- (ESI, LIE, IEI, SLE) Ethics of disapproval (suspicious, holding a grudge, keeping others at a distance; ESI)

I do this sort of thing to help me understand the types better.

[qaz00]

People criticize it because they only know the basic horoscopes from newspapers/internet/social media. I am not saying astrology is accurate but their criticism in this case only pertains to those types of horoscopes, because clearly they haven't spent time knowing what actual astrology is like. lol maybe spend more time learning before criticizing.

But to think that I've encountered people who criticized me from learning about astrology is funny, because they are quick to say it's bullshit, when I am only studying it. Studying =/= believing. And if I say something about it, you know that it comes from a well-informed place. And if some people use astrology in their lives, why do we even have to care? Same with people who criticize others for their religion - the way we live our lives is up to us. Like, live your own life instead of criticizing people's beliefs that are important to them lol.

When a system is created on doubtful fundamentals, does it really matter if you use a simple version of it (horoscopes) or advanced, with more elements? It's interesting that socionics and astrology are quite similar in this case. People like Gulenko imo chose the bad way of developing the theory, instead of trying to prove existence of basic concepts like functions or intertype relations with help of statistics, neuroscience and already proven psychological concepts they make some intellectual acrobatics in isolation, adding systems on top of systems. It's a problem because it distances socionics from science, limits its potential and makes it a "psychological astrology".

I think for some people astrology is some sort of mental exercise, a tool to understand yourself better but I'm probably too much of a dumb sensor to get it. I agree there's no point in personal dislike of people who learn astrology, it's only a problem when someone sees it as a truth and not an option, but then it's a bad sign about this person's way of thinking in general. Even if you convince them to believe astrology is nonsense, they may then choose to believe in something equally doubtful. Whether religious, astrological or socionical, fanaticism is dangerous as it often leads to behaviors against common sense, mutual benefit and morals.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Gulenko said that for socionics to advance, we need to have tools that can objectively measure brain functions. right now we don't have these tools, that's something that Te valuing types have to invent.

Gulenko pretty much does what every alpha type does. he formulates theories based on observations. he invented DCNH because he saw that in a group of people with the same type, everyone would take different roles based on their temperament. that's why he links them to DCNH.

EJ = D sub
EP = C sub
IJ = N sub
IP = H sub

so D sub introverts partly behave like EJ temperaments in groups (talkative, initiating etc.), but irl they are still introverts and so on. people can believe this observation or they don't. having typed thousands of people myself, I can say that I can definitely observe the dynamic he describes.

[megedy]

I do agree that astrology is a fun parlor game, and it's interesting to study without necessarily believing whole-heartedly. Definitely not the same as socionics, though, as astrology is all predetermined whereas this is more of putting names to observable patterns.

Also, a little off topic, but didn't Dario Nardi do some brain scans showing there's an observable cognitive basis for the functions? Obviously it's complicated but if the matter of people not taking it seriously is just down to not having enough academic proof, it seems like there's at least some interest brewing. Problem is we can't all go and join a study to get our heads shoved in an MRI machine to get typed yet, so we have to make do with a personal journey of self-discovery. Which...is not that bad though?