I watched a Youtube video where someone from WSS interviewed you, and I thought you VI’d either ESI or LSI.Originally Posted by carrina
I watched a Youtube video where someone from WSS interviewed you, and I thought you VI’d either ESI or LSI.
I guess thats fair
ESI-Se is ok for you remembering a few posts on Se etc from you
Lol
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
k i guess.
Okay since I should be studying for a final, I am naturally contemplating socionics. Veil's thin today @Aylen
It's something I've been thinking about through Si: (and maybe it'll show whether I'm good with Si or not, assuming I'm still decisive ixtx)
I am marking vibe because it has nothing to do with information processing. Quick and dirty decoder ring:
<> heart/earth/sx/frozen in rock/human fulcrum
[ ] head/air/so/lost in space/mind fulcrum
{ } gut/water/sp/trapped in glacial slide/spirit fulcrum
Hopefully this will serve as a lightning rod because even someone as ethically simplistic as I can be influenced by personal feelings
I'm trying to do this by intertype, under the presumption that duality > activity » opposite-communication-style supervision (extx with ixfx, ixtx with exfx) are the best relationships if subtypes match, and matching subtypes should be evident by the organization of the table
Mirror, semidual, and quasi can all be good relationships, but have less spark.
Illusionary has a lot of spark and even more potential for conflict
Identical with same subtype can come to peace, but opposite subtype identicals might as well be in different quadras
And that's it for advantageous. Everything else, including the above relationships with wrong subtype, depends on how much effort you put forth for any good to come out. (Good relationship require effort also, but a little effort goes further. I think you will find this reflected irl: how much you care about someone isn't dependent on how well you get along with them, and yet certain people are easier to get along with, and mutual feeling will resonate)
Contrary is by far the worst relationship, and conflict can be quite awkward. Super ego appears to have spark but will prove disappointing, yet on an impersonal level you may respect one another tremendously. Benefit is the most dangerous. More than anyone, your beneficiary will sparkle, and if you follow them into the firefly night, they will dash your head against the rocks. Opposite subtype duality may also prove treacherous.
I have very little insight into the (
Ne ILE
<Applejacks>Ti ILE
{Alioth}Ti SLE
{K4M}
[Ashton]Se SLE
<Niffer>
{Ananke}
[Tiger]Se SEE
[Woofl]
{Bled}Fi SEE
{Dolphin}Fi IEE
[Raver]Ne IEE
[Wace]
<Guava>Si ESE
<Abbie>Fe ESE
[Suz]Fe EIE
[Golden]
<Jadae>Ni EIE
{McBain}
<Darya>
[Maritsa]Ni LIE
<Mu>
{Total}Te LIE
{Narc}Te LSE
<Adam>Si LSE
[William]Ne LII
{BG}Ti LII
[Hacim]
{Hitta}
<Myst>Ti LSI
<MBD>
{Megane}Se LSI
[Shiver]
{Vois}
<Spider>Se ESI
[Blackburry]
<Troubadour>Fi ESI
[Lungs]Fi EII
{Emmym}
[Refi]Ne EII
<Andreas>Si SEI
{Silke}Fe SEI
[Chryss]Fe IEI
{Bullets}
<Starfish>
[Cassandra]Ni IEI
[Theo]
{Inumbra}
<Aylen>Ni ILI
<Persephone>
[Contra]Te ILI
[Kimu]
<Capitalist puff>Te SLI
[Redvillain]Si SLI
{Aqua}
In case you're a dumbass and didn't read the preceding explanation, let me reiterate:
THE ABOVE TABLE DOES NOT REPRESENT MY ABSOLUTE TYPING OF YOU, BUT RATHER THE BEST FIT TYPING IF INTERTYPES WORK IN THE PRECISE MANNER THAT I DESCRIBED.
And they probably don't
Last edited by Encrustacean; 12-14-2016 at 06:28 PM.
Baby gurl, I’m yr window into senescence
#pick-up lines I plan on using
Yeah soooo true. could you please maybe elaborate on this and give more concrete examples if you can cuz I think you're so right.Contrary is by far the worst relationship, and conflict can be quite awkward. Super ego appears to have spark but will prove disappointing, yet on an impersonal level you may respect one another tremendously. Benefit is the most dangerous. More than anyone, your beneficiary will sparkle, and if you follow them into the firefly night, they will dash your head against the rocks. Opposite subtype duality may also prove treacherous.
The experiment failed because I realized halfway through that I was comparing you more to the archetypal interactions in my mind, which from the outset was not my goal... but it's still interesting to note the typing differences between when I was judging based on how I've come to expect y'all to act (personal) versus this time, how I would expect you to interact (impersonal). The system ambitiously claims insight into both sides, and they seem to converge the more clearly I see you, but this is an illusion.
I will attempt to explain without writing 100 pages. If knowledge of a person's social fingerprint brings their type into focus here, where I have a wealth of flawed, self-conscious data, then out in the real world where my data is influenced more directly by the ebb and flow of society rather than the whims of this tiny theoretical hub, then it's paradoxical how for people I know really well, like my mother, the system diverges again, wherein an individual usually moves in set patterns between two to six archetypes, with shadows stretching to ten to fifteen, and only one or two ridiculous typings to guide me back to the type of best fit. And really, since people who've never heard of socionics do not act with their primary deference to internal consistency (this would limit growth and perpetuate error) and especially do not act in deference to socionics (which would be a sign that they'd allowed a flawed attempt at unification to completely overrule their deeper inclinations—brainwashed, in a word) ...since real people do not act this way, it is ridiculous to think they should obey the archetype. And watching them... Sorry, sometimes they don't.
What I'm saying is, sociotypes change more than people do. If you've ever had the experience of casting your eyes over your previous selves with little need to spare criticism, and subsequently felt yourself "waking up," this means you've experienced a global shift in ideology. You almost cannot understand how the you who took these actions could have been so blind to the point of view you witness from your current window. Socionics claims to depict your vantage point, yeah? How can any theory be more indelible than the influence it claims to depict. External to these undercurrents as you begin to understand where you're headed, socionics has no inherent meaning. It is chaos.
It is impossible to evaluate something you haven't been humble enough to understand. If you go to the movies and do not submerge yourself in the fiction of it all—if you remain aloof and watching only actors pretend to do this and that with a screen around them and little people queuing with popcorn in every direction, then every show is a comedy, and all of them utterly meaningless. But if you suspend disbelief about the premises of it all, you will tap into a project of thought that surpasses the limited workings of your own mind, no matter how great your mind (and trust me when I say my mind works better than any of you know, and I have been more humbled than any of you might guess...not because you lack insight but because we've been through nothing together, if not this project, and precious few of you were suspending your disbelief).
In conclusion, socionics is pure Maya, and useful if and only if you're willing to bear in mind its nature
Baby gurl, I’m yr window into senescence
#pick-up lines I plan on using
This is why you will always be my identidual regardless of theory.
The veils were very thin...
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
@carrina If I had to choose a type for you I would definitely go with ESI. A lot of your post kind of remind me of myst's, but with Fi orientation instead of Ti, and correspondingly you seem to seek Te out of things rather then Fe. Se subtype would be obvious.
Lol k @ the subtype bit.
How do you think I seek te? I'm fairly conscious of te related things. Not sure what examples you could recall from this forum but if you can, please do tell
I'll troll myst a little to see what you mean
First sentence of this comment in the LIE-ESI duality article sounded a little Te seeking:
Also, "I call bullshit" seems to be a favorite line of Se creative/Ne polr types, from my experience.
Which does your nomenclature give more weight to, heart/head/gut fixation or sx/so/sp functional stacking?
That's not very good typing material just for the record.
"I call bullshit" is more, se valuing in general. And also just some people who're just blunt. It's not really specific enough. I've seen gamma nt's act this way more than any other type. Next in line is beta st. Then maybe SEE and afterwards ESI.
I think people compare ESIs to LSIs too much.
Last edited by carrina; 12-16-2016 at 03:21 PM.
I'll warn you ahead of time that I tend spew around a lot of Ne as part of my type, so try your hardest not to be offended if I sound too hypothetical in my reasonings.
I would say it is true that all Se/Ni types tend to be more critical and slower to accept new information then Ne/Si types, however I would argue that this tends more noticeable amongst Ne polrs then other Se/Ni types. An SLE/SEE would be more likely to passively disregard something they view as too hypothetical, since it is their role rather then polr, while an LSI or ESI would be more openly annoyed. ILIs can be critical as well, but for them it is more game in which they are trying to demonstrate their intellectual abilities rather then the result of of any real frustration.
To me it seems like are seeking a typing explanation that is very professional and well-substantiated, free of any doubt or hypotheticals, which circles back to my belief that you are Te-seeking with a strong rejection of Ne. An LIE such as @Adam Strange would probably be able answers in way that would be most suitable for you.
@Muddytextures
Did I say anything about disliking hypotheticals?
I'm pretty comfortable throwing around hypotheticals myself.
Is this the basis of your argument?
I may have just missed it, but where is your example of me not being comfortable with hypotheticals
In general, I'm open to thinking about and coming up with alternatives, and providing reasoning for them, although I don't claim to have reached alpha status here lol.
I think it's reasonable to assume that people regardless of type will wonder what you're talking about if you try to type them.
Are you perhaps misinterpreting my directness as annoyance?
Indeed, gamma and beta introverts are slow to accept new information, but I don't think that's relevant here. Can you point out the "new information" here that you're claiming I'm receiving slowly?
I'm not really asking for you to substantiate your claims, rather I'm leaving the opportunity for you to make sense, as I've learned to give people the benefit of a doubt sometimes instead of just assuming that they're wrong, when maybe I just didn't catch what you're saying. That's what this line of questioning was about, not so much demanding substantiation. In general, just for the sake of conversation.
@carrina
It would be better just to regard my typings as passive "votes" rather then things I'm trying to set in stone. I can easily change my opinion of someone's type based on new information I receive and it would become quite tedious and tiresome for me if I had to provide an in-depth explanation for every typing. I'm a bit better at making things make sense in my own mind and less so for others, unfortunately.Anyway I'll give this a shot and see what I can do:
When I talk about Se/Ni taking in information more slowly, I'm relating towards their skepticism. Ne types tend agree with new information on the basis of it "sounding cool". Ni types will instead try to compare it against their existing worldview and reject what doesn't fit, therefore coming off as more critical. Extroverts as a whole lean more towards Ne's acceptance of information on this since their Ne is stronger, and Introverts will lean more towards Ni since it is stronger. So therefore ESI will bit more skeptical and critical then an SEE.
The outspoken skepticism of the LIE-ESI article again led me to believe you are ESI. Granted, I'll admit I don't really have much experience with SEEs, but I generally associate that more with ESI then SEE.
One example of you being skeptical of hypotheticals could be the skepticism of the hypothesis I just made about you not liking hypotheticals.
I was summoned here by the invocation of the @ sign, @Muddytextures and @carrina.
Honestly, I don't know if I can add anything sensible to this convo. My typing procedure is not canon, and I tend to gather and filter info in a manner described as Vortical-Synergetic, which works for me but is pretty hard to justify or explain. I basically gather data and compare it to things I've seen before.
Frankly, Carrina is a puzzle to me. Her avatar picture looks about as ESI-Se as it gets, but her writing really reminds me of LSI Myst's, in the sense that she is asking for detailed, no-nonsense proof that an argument hangs together logically, rather than just taking someone's word for it. I haven't really seen that kind of questioning in ESI's so much as I've seen it in Myst, but Myst is an exceptional example, and I don't know that many ESI's or have that much experience with them, to be honest. Maybe ESI's do that, maybe the theory predicts that, IDK. I'd have to bow to Muddytextures' explanation, given here:
which I think is a really good distinction, and quite perceptive.
So, being unable to decide on a type between the examples of "avatar choices" and "writing styles", I fell back on VI. Carrina has made some videos and posted them on Youtube, and I've watched them half a dozen times to try to decide between LSI and ESI, which are the two types that she seems to me she could be.
So, this was really difficult, because the impression I have of LSI is that of a logical hard-questioner, and that of an ESI is that of a "softer" searcher. I guess that is Ti and Fi, respectively. But I found a few frames where carrina looks more ESI than LSI, so I'm going with that. Like this one:
Carrina Murphy ESI.jpg
There is also the issue of the necklace she is wearing. I've seen ESI's wear things around their necks, but not LSI's. Limited sample, I know, but there it is.
I'm pretty sure this is not going to be a satisfactory explanation, but it's what I've got right now.
P.S.
Carrina, if you don't want that pic on this thread, let me know and it's gone.
Your typing is so superficial.
What is your argument against her self type as opposed to what you would prefer her to be (dual)?
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Woo there take a deep breath and take a moment to chill out plz.Your typing is so superficial.
What is your argument against her self type as opposed to what you would prefer her to be (dual)?
K good.
I mentioned him in a post and he responded. He's only offering his thoughts on the matter.
I had already moved on.Woo there take a deep breath and take a moment to chill out plz.
I mentioned him in a post and he responded. He's only offering his thoughts on the matter.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
@Cassandra
This is the comment I made on your blog. Apparently you couldn't see it but I notice you took IEI off for me too and now changed me to ESI. How do you get ESI for me now?
Edit: I deleted my comment by request. I assume you can now see it on her blog.
Last edited by Aylen; 12-18-2016 at 04:54 PM.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Mmm descriptions of IEI's - so much for them not being feisty. Being snarky doesn't mean Agressor lol.
"They may exhibit a propensity for good-natured, friendly, lighthearted banter and try to promote good will and inclusiveness. On the other hand, IEIs can also direct their emotional influence through a mode of expression that limits their affable levity; they may take on a formal, toxic, serious, or even shock-jock emphasis as situations require."
"The IEI female is very responsive to any tomfoolery and pranks. With her it's truly never boring. Being brave to the point of self-forgetting, even reckless, she can propose to her friends some very risky activities and diversions that without her no one else would have imagined. For example, she may suggest in the middle of the night to climb up to the very top of main building of the university and get to the spire itself, to which there is no access and to which the doors have been locked up. Much excitement and exhilarating fear to be experienced by all! And all of these adventures will be invariably accompanied by the crystal ringing of her laughter.Also they drive very rapidly and love to travel, so that you are guaranteed to have new impressions."
"If he is in a constant state of discomfort, begins to behave provocatively, rudely, and aggressively; does it to hide his soft nature. "
The IEI female is not completely defenseless, she knows how to stand up for herself and achieve what she wants. She uses emotions as the finest tool of influencing others (which she does often without any pangs of conscience). As long as everything is going well, she can be as playful and soft as a kitten, but if something isn't right in her view she can become angry, threaten, promise to leave if you do not do as she wants."But in a circle of close friends he can sometimes behave uninhibitedly. Likes to fool around, to create unusual situations. Stirs people up to evoke positive emotions. At home can be moody, capricious, stubbornly gets his way, may put on tears, even provoke scandals. These emotional outbursts pass quickly, however, without hurting him very deeply. His emotions are very flexible, switching on and off consciously."
Dunno how Bullets (Cassandra's supposed identical) isn't snarky, feisty and even rude at times, but ok...Much more than Cassandra, who seems to be very against anything even remotely reckless (drinking, drugs, bla bla) and blushes when anything provocative is said.
EDIT: Forget to add this bit from descriptions: IEIs may tend to be stimulation seekers. This does not necessarily mean that they seek to surround themselves with alcohol, members of the opposite sex, and debauchery, but rather that they often seek some form of mental, social, or other stimulus. Some IEIs may be especially prone to enjoy such adventuresome sensations as lighthearted mischief or playful aggression.
Yes, total prudish princesses, those IEI's.
Last edited by darya; 12-18-2016 at 04:48 PM.
Memories of the "easy breezy iei" guy have been triggered. I guess only a few people left remember him.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I detect Ne polr like sonar and I don't think Aylen is one. Getting fussy and argumentative occasionally just sounds like generic valued Se to me and not specific to Se ego. When an Se ego gets argumentative, you will no doubt feel the weight of their Se. When an IEI gets argumentative it usually just seems like they are overacting towards something and need to calm down.
this has only been the primary basis of my resentment towards you for however many months.
i've only quoted this from the wiki at you like 3 or 4 times already:
"Reliable information rather than the finished analysis is what attracts the ESI: facts and explanations, not answers limited to the conclusions, which they tend to see as mere opinions."
she mad
･ﾟ*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:･ﾟ
Aylen, Dh and I watched Breakfast at Tiffany's last night and I feel certain that Holly Golightly must be an IEI, like you. Do you think so?
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
Because she's one of the most clearly visible intuitive people here.
That´s why ILIs are their activity partners, they´re pretty good at that
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I honestly can't get how the same person can get typed ESI, ILI, IEI and EIE. The world is upside down.
Note on MBTI, Socionics, Enneagram and Variants
Those who have spent some time studying MBTI, socionics, and enneagram types usually notice that they overlap in several traits, making it easy to mis-attribute traits from one system to another. Here are a few common "crossroads":
- SO-first need for connection with the greater social scene may be mistaken for extroversion. SO-last stackings, to the contrary, highlight traits commonly attributed to introversion.
- Social instinct is sometimes mistaken for Fe, ethics in general, and "Aristocratic" trait in socionics. This is because stackings with SO instinct have a proclivity to interpret events within socio-cultural context and may exhibit a pronounced interest in 'soft' sciences.
- Social, inclusive, friendly, and sometimes bubbly nature of SO-firsts and SX/SO can lead them to be taken for Ethical types.
- SX-first craving for enlivening, intense experiences and sometimes lowered barrier to confrontation can be mistaken for extraverted sensing (Se) and extraverted feeling (Fe). SX-firsts may inadvertently draw attention to themselves in a way that overlaps with socionics Fe-HA. SX/SO stackings often exhibit contarian, revolutionary attitudes that is often confused for belonging to Beta quadra. On a more rare occasion SX emphasis and insistence of their personal preferences, likes and dislikes, is also mistaken for preference for Fi.
- Self-preservation (SP) instinct's focus on practical and pragmatic matters may be easily confused for sensing and logic. Income and salary concerns, planning, scheduling, budgeting, can be mistaken for strong sensing orientation, Si/Se, as well as extraverted logic, Te. In particular SP/SX's interest in things that serve as common denominators of life (family, food, daily activities and chores, etc.) can lead them to consider themselves to be Sensing types.
- The dry sobriety in communication of SX-last stacking can lead them to view themselves as Logical types. This is further reinforced if their main enneagram type is within the head triad.
- Eneagram's head triad, 5-6-7, can be mistaken for T-preference.
- Adventurism and search for more satisfying experiences of type 7 can be confused for extraverted sensorics, Se, resulting in erroneous typings of ENxPs and ENxJs - as ESxPs.
- Focus on emotional needs, friendship and family bonds, and social obligations of type 2 can be mistaken for preference for extraverted ethics (Fe).
IOW, the only typing you can rely on is your own which requires introspection and being honest with yourself so trust yourself. You already know your type anyway.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Well, if they were actually IEI then none of the other typings would be very far off, would they?
That being said, it says more about the people typing said person than anything.
Had an epiphany this morning on your stacking while reading through other people's discord chat. They weren't talking about you but it sparked something. If you want to meet me on discord later today or maybe tomorrow I can explain it.
As for me choosing sx/sp>sx/so, I explained it in response to someone else in another thread. I will find it and link you. I actually considered it until I was sure it was less likely.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
That note is awesome!
Add E3 as a possible source of mistyping. They are least in touch with the "heart" matter of the triad and highly efficient in getting something done, which can be mistaken for Te. For distinguishment, one has to look for their sense of accuracy and attitude toward factual knowledge. Also another good indicator: non-Te E3 is serious when working, non-serious outside of their "performance".
E9 can be incorrectly assessed as an F-type as well, look for the reasoning behind their accommodation mode.
@KanRen: new LIE.
A mix of @Bane and @Adam Strange, basically, lol.
Less robotic Te than Adam's, closer to Bane's flexibility with social stuff*, but still role Fe (for Bane too, ofc).
*: so I can kinda understand why @golden considered EIE for KanRen.
The "Plan".
@Starfall
EII. Never saw a Beta NF typing thread getting closed without permanent (at least temporary) bans.
Posting Permissions
