Hello.
Can you guys give me your opinions about her type?
I typed her but I'm still not sure...
Can you type her?
Hello.
Can you guys give me your opinions about her type?
I typed her but I'm still not sure...
seems ILE
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
I think she is ILE/ENTp.
Interesting! I actually typed her IEE...
well that would be the other alternative. She just seems more like ILE to me. Dominant subtype.Originally Posted by Daisy
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
actually now I think you could be right.
I would have to watch more of her
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
I'm not sure but I think she is Fi/Te valuer more than Ti/Fe, for the Ne/Si I guess it's obvious...
And if she's IEE dominant subtype, her Fi will be subdued, which makes sense.
But let's not focus on the subtypes... I think my only argument for now that she's IEE is the way she explains things. For me she is bad at it... for ILEs I think they're the best at explaining things because of Ti. In her videos, she focuses more on her own experiences and how she relates to the theory rather than speaking about the theory itself...
seems *SFP
Last edited by Sol; 10-29-2017 at 01:21 PM.
I feel like shes a delta NF
she could be EII, she reminds me of me a little
some days I feel like I could be IEE so that's why I leave it at delta NF
I actually went through something similar where I consciously had to try an make my emotions more apparent in order to get along with some people
I think EII is a bit weird typing for her though. Don't you think she fits the Exxp temperemant more than the Ixxj?
Last edited by Kernel; 10-29-2017 at 02:58 PM.
maybe? I don't really think of temperament as something you can reliably judge except over time, maybe she's just making a video so she makes them when she's feeling more outgoing
i also think temperament relies maybe a little too heavily on stereotypes. if say Ne/Fi can easily present as introversion according to those stereotypes, and Fi/Ne can present as extroversion, precisely because the creative is what gets "put out" there, along with the demonstrative [1]. not to mention i think temperament is actually what subtype tries to kind of get at, in other words temperament varies within type, and in an effort to account for that, that is part of the reason people really gravitate towards subtypes. so I definitely think one should establish base type before subtype (a common mistake is to try to account for subtype up front) to get into a discussion of temperament is to make the same mistake by proxy, etc
so I think the classic problem of temperament, sub type, and determining between mirror types is difficult because it goes to the heart of personality theory, which is where the real difference between behavior and cognitive function lies. in other words, the finest point of distinction as to whether we're discerning between behavior or the underlying psychic mechanism is at its most subtle between mirror types, and you see this come up all the time "am I IEI Fe or EIE?" etc--and subtypes get brought into it, but subtypes beg the question. If we say "well, its IEI Fe and it only looks like EIE" it is really only an assumption if we don't dig into what the underlying mechanism is, because you could just as easily say, based on appearance "this is EIE- Ni" or whatever the case may be. And I think in this sense temperament is unhelpful because it essentially does the same thing--looks to explain things via the outer manifestation
in this case, I really think the best way to resolve things once its been narrowed to this point is just to get insight from the person themselves based on information only they have access too, which would be look to how the conclusions they reach indicate a certain cognitive process like rationality/irrationality... she strikes me as not that irrational, at the very least its ambiguous to me, so its hard.. for example she doesn't give off a lot of the verbal ticks I associate with certain kinds of irrationality, namely intuition dominance
https://youtu.be/v-hIVnmUdXM?t=344
to me this is a good example of rationality v irrationality. to me camile is irrational based on her mannerisms, although she is highly intelligent and Te creative. so its not like what she's saying is nonsense or in any way inarticulate, its just its set against an irrational backdrop. in some ways peterson has less to actually say, but he's more structured
[1] to me the demonstrative tends to be in the form of powerful short bursts though, so it needs to be understood from within the perspective of time, to really add to the analysis without just confusing things by negating or offsetting the attitude of the creative
Last edited by Bertrand; 10-29-2017 at 12:28 AM.
Maybe LSE
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
She is a difficult case.
I've been watching other videos in her channel and I'm now considering ILE and LIE
She really seems logical though.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Haha actually the reason I posted this video is that because I felt similar to her, I typed myself NF delta but still not sure...
Last edited by Kernel; 10-29-2017 at 07:21 PM.
So what is her type?? Are you sticking with IEE
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Not really, I'm still skeptical about it. Until now we have ILE, LIE, delta NF and xSFp to consider...
She seems Delta NF, tbh, not Alpha NT
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote