@Muddytextures it looks like you're my dual now .Originally Posted by Kill4Me
@Muddytextures it looks like you're my dual now .
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
You are really not getting what socionics is about, you got stuck in stereotypes. I don't see the socionics model as talking about relationships from any standpoint other than people being viewed as information processing machines. Of which it only states a few generalities, not going very deep, but that's not the goal either: anyone who tries to go beyond the limits of the basic theory framework can only blame themselves for doing so. The basic model never states that thought processes don't change based on circumstances, either. TIM is a concept that of course exists inside the framework to which it belongs. Just like any other concept you operate with. TIM is not about personality; it does not imply either that personality is unchanging. Going by the actual definition of socionics type instead, which has nothing to do with personality on its own, no, a person doesn't change the type at will. But it does not follow from that that the environment is to be ignored. I myself don't ignore it. And I never said it's "magically more", you are ridiculous.
So TIM is what? What is objectively static in people?
@Subteigh oh hey this is the first time I've been told LII that's awesome
SLE-Fi? Lol that seems kinda odd.
Some people might say the same about you!
(that is my Fi-subtype showing; see my empathetic abilities there? I related to you and your feelings as a person /preen)
I meant, PoLR is a point of direct psychological stress. If you're SLE-Fi, you would be in a perpetual state of nearly "snapping."
I always attributed that to drinking too much coffee, but I think you might be onto something.
Well, whatever the case may be, you're Delta. Should look at one of those 4 types.
Even though I find it amusing with how people are creatively putting @Kill4Me 's typings into question, I still have to give him credit for at least putting in some effort around here and giving us a starting point for people's types which we can build off of from there. Putting out ideas/viewpoints and then debating them with other people in a non-critical manner is what forums are for, is it not?
You have a cool avatar.
Lol I am soooo LSE!I guess I have been living a terrible lie about myself.
There are no subtypes in normal Socionics. There are traits outside of types wich make people of same type different.
Socionics and MBT use same Jung's types. What needs to be distinguished is reality and bullshit about MBT types are other types.one of the main ways for distinguishing Socionics from MBTI
-.-
-
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
Re: Post #848Great list! Maritsa and Airman LIE, LOL. Kim the reticent SEI. Mu & Golden SEEs, LOL. Lungs, LII. (You analytic, lungs). And that leaves me an ESE, along with Starfall - you type-twin, Starfall.
"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"
.
.
.
Certain fundamentals of organization in the brain is pretty much that. The brain always learns more but this remains. Unless you get severe enough brain damage from some accident etc.
@Subteigh why do you type me sei ?
It's a pointless "starting point". He apparently either kept old commonly agreed upon typings for people or created entirely new random-seeming ones for them.
It's a joke, don't take it seriously lol
No it's not traits, it's actual differences in cognition.
So wouldn't you be better off studying the brain, instead of an arbitrarily contrived system?
I agree some of his typings seem a bit random to say the least, but I guess I simply enjoy seeing the typings made by others and comparing them with mine inside my head. Its almost like a kind of sport for me.
Who said I'm not studying it?
Alright whatever works for ya
Well, Socionics strikes me as the retard-man version of proper education on the human mind, so if doing the other option is something you're already doing, Socionics loses any direct value.Who said I'm not studying it?
Alright whatever works for ya
Don't forget, theories of the mind can never be proven.
lol
including traits of cognition wich have no specific relation to types
It's not more about "traits of cognition" than the actual types are.
Yet, it didn't lose all its direct value.
Your last line is meaningless.
Whatever floats your boat
SLI-Si: pookie, jessica, may
SLI-Te: kim, daft punk, directorabbie
LSE-Te: Timmy, Smilingeyes, Laurie’s Crusader
LSE-Si: William, JackOliverAaron, BurningIce
IEE-Ne: Elizathomason, UDP
IEE-Fi: Finale, Airman, Adam Strange
EII-Ne: aylen
EII-Fi: maritsa, silke, sol, zero, mikemex
Intelligent design typing only requires a good sample size, an ability to grasp similar or different cognitive features in a person, and then the capacity to fit those groupings into the particular types in a way that makes the most sense. once members are grouped together or parsed out into different groupings, it was a matter of deciding on their best fit typologically and there is usually a few people in the grouping who are such stereotypical examples of the type, that it makes the groupings a little more than obvious. Intelligent design typing is an upgrade from the more common collectivist-driven approaches to typing.
I'm sorry I didn't give you the "genuine" answer you deserved before...
I have no idea what your type might be, but in recent times when I am asked and am unable to provide no insight, I refer people to the most recent test I put together:
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Socionics-Test
(I consider that the most objective way of "me" typing someone at the current time, even if I didn't write the type descriptions utilized and even though I don't of course choose how people answer the questions).
oh, we're not so bad on a good day. On a good day.
But our verse suffers.
Null point, blanc point. All shades in-between.
Awww SubT. I am Flattered <3.
Everything interests me but nothing holds me.
I'm not sure you can really speak for IEIs, subT.
But our verse suffers.
Null point, blanc point. All shades in-between.
someday the grapes will be wine
and someday you will be mine
EII-Ne 2w3 - 9w1 - 7w8 so/sx
Sounds good, except your intelligent design typings are based on interpreting forum interactions, not actually hanging out with a person and getting to know them. So congrats on making a new forum game; but I hope you don't take the game too seriously.
good bye
That's asking for too much depth. It's only a vibes like gitters that one gets when they are standing in the snow naked
Dual type
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
Were I questioning my type, I would consider taking your advice, especially considering the amount of interaction we've had. I know it has been more than enough for you to be able to accurately type me and that none of it was tongue-in-cheek. Alas.
Wow, I haven't heard ILE in forever, but now twice within the past couple of weeks.
You never type me; i feel neglected!
lol @ me being IEE. Well but what else to expect from someone who thinks there is a possible Si-SEI or Fi-SLE. @Kill4Me : do you really believe that these bizarre subtypes actually exist or were you joking? Are you for some reason trolling the thread? Because if you really believe that there is a possible remote linking of MBTI and Socionics you should read what the Russians, Lithuanians and whatever said about that: the two systems cannot be equivalent or have anything to do with one another because of the difference in the ways they see the Information Elements. The IEs are too different in MBTI and Socionics so there is no way to match these two systems. Basically MBTI is a shitty version of Socionics (pardon my harshness here but it's a fact).
I'd also like to request the Mods and Mu4 to please ensure that this thread remains SOCIONICS, there is space on this forum for MBTI but here specifically we're talking about Socionics. Anyway this forum has for long lost any credibility among serious Socionists so it doesn't really matter much what people write here.
Last edited by Airman; 01-23-2016 at 03:52 AM.
Posting Permissions
