The feeling is very mutual.Originally Posted by Kore
The feeling is very mutual.
“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
The feeling is very mutual.
type me type me
Hmm, I think when I joined you went by Takk or something like that? I should look it up but I will just go with that for now. Probably misspelling it. I haven't seen you post a lot but the general vibe I get from you is Beta/Gammish, so maybe IEI or ILI. I think I have leaned more toward ILI at times but don't remember why. You could be some kind of hybrid in my mind. hah Um, for enneagram I am just going to go with what comes to mind immediately and that would be 458 sp/sx. I feel you have a pretty strong 5 in your tritype.
Just some impressions that could change over time. I think you are the one who started the Tarot card thread that I post to all the time? Again I should look this all up before answering but I just woke up so I will try and go on my memory. Damn I feel uncomfortable not checking before posting this. I hope I don't have you confused with someone else. :/
Edit: I could even see you as E type 459. 4 and 5 seem to be the two strongest. I will go with ILI for now, with either of those tritypes and stick to sp/sx, for now. I just realized that I am not completely sure of you gender as you seem to project an equal balance of feminine and masculine.
Last edited by Aylen; 03-09-2015 at 02:36 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
I wanna be boxed in too!
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
Well I have no reason to doubt your self type, so far. I will say you have the "light" alpha vibe. I have a scale which I mentioned before of light to heavy energy. Not heavy in a bad way, like delta has more of a down to earth feel, and alpha is closer to air/sky, I think. For E type I could see you as 126 or 269, not in order of strength. I have to look for the 5 a bit more in your posts and I will.
In Oldham style I would say something close to "leisurely" but not saying that is your type in that system. This is all in my head, of course... subject to change.
“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 sort of relate to leisurely but it's usually not one of the top styles, it's somewhere in the middle.
Well I have no reason to doubt your self type, so far. I will say you have the "light" alpha vibe. I have a scale which I mentioned before of light to heavy energy. Not heavy in a bad way, like delta has more of a down to earth feel, and alpha is closer to air/sky, I think. For E type I could see you as 126 or 269, not in order of strength. I have to look for the 5 a bit more in your posts and I will.
In Oldham style I would say something close to "leisurely" but not saying that is your type in that system. This is all in my head, of course... subject to change.
It's hard to say what my dominant Oldham style is. I've scored Conscientious, vigilant, solitary, and sensitive on different testings.
Aggressive, dramatic, adventurous are on the bottom.
Enneagramwise, I don't see alot of 2 in myself. 6 and 9, I can definitely see. Some 1 too but I think it's from the 9w1 and not a main type.
I think I long to feel "light" in the way you describe it. I'm not that way all the time. I get down about things, actually quite a bit but I don't think most people see that part about me except for people I'm close to or if I happen to discuss deeper things on a forum. I guess I have trouble understanding people who are attracted to darkness and the like. Usually it's something I find unpleasant, not where I want to say at too long.
I think LII might be a little "darker" or at least more serious than the other 3 alpha types. Compare an LII to an ILI and there is a real difference once you get to know them. ILI being alot darker and heavier in vibe.
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
Thanks for the feedback!
Well I have no reason to doubt your self type, so far. I will say you have the "light" alpha vibe. I have a scale which I mentioned before of light to heavy energy. Not heavy in a bad way, like delta has more of a down to earth feel, and alpha is closer to air/sky, I think. For E type I could see you as 126 or 269, not in order of strength. I have to look for the 5 a bit more in your posts and I will.
In Oldham style I would say something close to "leisurely" but not saying that is your type in that system. This is all in my head, of course... subject to change.
I would like to also request information on the following:
enneagram stacking and level of health, wings of the types in my tritype, subwings too while you're at it
Socionics cognitive style, accepting/producing subtype, inert/contact subtype, DCNH subtype, TPE subtype, erotic style, my VI analysis
Big Five type
MBTI type
DISC type
Cattell personality profile
IQ
EQ
Sheldon somatotype
Likely blood type
Which Hogwarts house I would be assigned to
Which Game of Thrones house I would be assigned to
Which Divergent faction I would be assigned to
Magic the gathering elements
My dominant chakra
The level of hell I would most likely to go
My D&D alignment
My worst vice of the 7
My dominant dosha
My astrological sign
My Chinese zodiac sign
My MMPI profile
My Holland code
My HEXACO type
My personality on the Eysenck model
My Freudian type
My inkblot test interpretation
My handwriting analysis
My palm reading
My Kolb learning style
My Multiple intelligences profile
My Belbin style
Type A or Type B personality
My rating on the Kinsey scale
Anything else you'd like to add that I may have forgotten.
Last edited by The Exception; 03-10-2015 at 08:02 PM.
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
Thanks for the feedback!
I would like to also request information on the following:
enneagram stacking and level of health, wings of the types in my tritype, subwings too while you're at it
Socionics cognitive style, accepting/producing subtype, inert/contact subtype, DCNH subtype, TPE subtype, erotic style, my VI analysis
Big Five type
MBTI type
DISC type
Cattell personality profile
IQ
EQ
Sheldon somatotype
Likely blood type
Which Hogwarts house I would be assigned to
Which Game of Thrones house I would be assigned to
Which Divergent faction I would be assigned to
Magic the gathering elements
My dominant chakra
The level of hell I would most likely to go
My D&D alignment
My worst vice of the 7
My dominant dosha
My astrological sign
My Chinese zodiac sign
My MMPI profile
My Holland code
My HEXACO type
My personality on the Eysenck model
My Freudian type
My inkblot test interpretation
My handwriting analysis
My palm reading
My Kolb learning style
My Multiple intelligences profile
My Belbin style
Anything else you'd like to add that I may have forgotten.
Please make an appointment with my secretary.This is going to take months!
This did make me smile.
“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
Preaching to the choir here! I spent more than half my life in close personal relationships with ILI. LII definitely vibe lighter, ime, even the darker ones. I don't see it as a "bad" thing at all. Just their frequency is different and don't get me started on the different frequencies I perceive among the ILI I know. I have a light to dark scale even within the same type group. I just sort of read everything as energy then try to put it into words.
“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
Keep checking the list periodically. I just added a couple more.Please make an appointment with my secretary.This is going to take months!
This did make me smile.
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
mbti INTPThanks for the feedback!
I would like to also request information on the following:
enneagram stacking and level of health, wings of the types in my tritype, subwings too while you're at it
Socionics cognitive style, accepting/producing subtype, inert/contact subtype, DCNH subtype, TPE subtype, erotic style, my VI analysis
Big Five type
MBTI type
DISC type
Cattell personality profile
IQ
EQ
Sheldon somatotype
Likely blood type
Which Hogwarts house I would be assigned to
Which Game of Thrones house I would be assigned to
Which Divergent faction I would be assigned to
Magic the gathering elements
My dominant chakra
The level of hell I would most likely to go
My D&D alignment
My worst vice of the 7
My dominant dosha
My astrological sign
My Chinese zodiac sign
My MMPI profile
My Holland code
My HEXACO type
My personality on the Eysenck model
My Freudian type
My inkblot test interpretation
My handwriting analysis
My palm reading
My Kolb learning style
My Multiple intelligences profile
My Belbin style
Type A or Type B personality
My rating on the Kinsey scale
Anything else you'd like to add that I may have forgotten.
E 9w1 possibly 952
Kinsey 0-1
Type B personality
Dominant Chakra - Crown&Solar Plexus
Freudian - genital stage fixation
Astro Libra/Aquarius Sun
D&D Alignment Neutral Good
Multiple Intelligence Logical-Mathematical and Intrapersonal
Palm Reading - you're gonna meet a hot dude in the next 3 days if you switch your sociotype to EII (see Jung's concept of serendipity)
Since I have typed others here I guess I should post some of the typings I have received from those who typed my videos. I only asked one person so far, if I can share their typing of my videos, so I start with my girl @darya with her permission. I have to say she is VERY good at influencing my moods. She puts me at ease.
I will probably add them to the op eventually.
Awww, please don't be nervous, I know how you feel - but other people are not as judgmental as you are about yourself, trust me
First of all, you have a bangin' body (sorry for this creepy intro, had to say it
To me, you look like a clear case of IEI, I don't think there's any other option. Clearly INFx and irrational. You're like a more spaced out, slow- motion version of myself when I'm trying to be cutesy with a guy
Anyway, thanks soooo much for sending me your video, I really appreciate it (I would never send it to anyone else!)
“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
Another private typing of me by @Words (from a chat)
^ as good of reason as any.I type Aylen as IEI because.....
Probably 4w5
Oh I've still to write my reasons
Do you have a powerful 9 component?
I type you as IEI because you are a non-corporeal entity
*I added the link.I should watch more Star Trek. I am so behind on the series. It has been years.
“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
......
Nice read.
I feel like you deserve a prize for being the first person to ever accurately read me.
Thanks. Your response is encouraging and I like it too, just can't give you both.......
Nice read.
I feel like you deserve a prize for being the first person to ever accurately read me.
“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 am updating my thread with some new additions based on some insights I had last night. Most typing on this forum is based on attraction/repulsion regardless of sociotype. Even the logical bases are doing it but possibly not as much as others. I was thinking about the EII debate between Maritsa and Subteigh. Intuition tells me that they are both most likely EII with different enneagram and stackings. When I first saw Maritsa she reminded me very much of my EII sister (in the way she wrote about things) but then she and I had a bit of conflict (nothing major) and all of a sudden I wanted to type her ESI since I have had some unfortunate experiences with some, not all, ESI. It was an emotional reaction and it is also a discounting reaction.
A lot of people do this and probably do not even recognize it. Someone makes me feel a certain way or I associate them with someone else who is almost identical in behavior or posting style and I automatically make them the same type in my head, even when intuition is telling me no way. Just about every person on this forum is like a carbon copy of someone else I have met, irl, or on other forums. It is sort of mind-blowing and I have to get past that first to acknowledge them as an individual and not the same person showing up over and over again. On a metaphysical level the symbolism of associating people this way is, we have some lessons, or whatever, to learn and until you learn them you will keep meeting the same person in different forms.
Meh, this is all so elegant and profound in my head but I don't feel the need to express my insights on it any further, at this time.
@Maritsa EII sp/sx 269
@Subteigh EII sp/so 954
These are my subjective impressions of the two of them. I will add to the original post later since I want to update a couple other people as well.
“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
You need to add more animals; there's rain on the savanna right now due to giraffe tears!!
You need to add more animals; there's rain on the savanna right now due to giraffe tears!!
“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
Maybe, but just personally speaking, there are plenty of Betas on here with whom I don't resonate at all, at least a couple of my supposed duals with whom I find communication pretty awkward, and a lot of Deltas and some Gammas I understand and identify with. That said, maybe a few years ago when I was still getting used to the idea of sociotypes, I expected the theory to be more predictive.
I think there's a term for this feeling you mentioned that every person you meet is "a carbon copy of someone else [you] have met," but I'd have to dig through some notes to recover it. I took a psychology class on relationships and the prof talked about it at length, saying that the first thing we tend to do when meeting someone new is find someone we already know to kind of catalogue them. It'd be interesting to determine whether people do this even more absolutely online because they receive less data about others, meaning less information to disprove the link they're making to an already known person.
Absolutely, same. That is when I let intuition inform me rather than my emotion. At least that is how I do it. As a "beta" I don't associate myself with groups so much, or even with other people. It is other people I associate with a group and sometimes the individual within the group they remind me of. In the past I have been quick to argue that there is no one like me and would get indignant if someone compared me to anyone else. I have eased up on that a lot. I usually find that I can identify with more dead people than living people. Maybe because the dead are no longer a threat to my unique identity.
Since joining here I have come to identify with certain people like the 4 in @Starfall and the sultry aloofness in @Kore. There are several others that I see reflect back aspects of me too. A lot of this I learned in therapy. People should not underestimate the power of therapy to help someone make positive changes in their life. I may still think of myself as the center of the universe at times but now I have the skills to recognize that there are other special and unique beings here with me. I spent quite a few years in a solipsistic group and it really messed with my perception of reality.
Oh and I remember you told me I reminded you of a childhood friend in the kids pics thread. I actually liked that but no lie there was a time I would not have.
If you find the term please let me know.
Edit: This may be atypical for beta not to associate themselves with the group but that doesn't seem right to me.
“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
Come on, you can't be serious my dear. I remind you of someone else? I NEVER even once heard that. I heard that I remind someone of someone physically, but in thinking / behavioural style? NEVER.
This means that I've failed and I didn't try hard enough.
I do find the reverting to ennegramic explanations for so much on this forum rather tedious. I think often it is simply enough to say something cannot be decided one way or another, or to see it as being within the natural range of behaviour each individual has (I'm thinking also even with just Socionics, many types can be suggested for an individual, even by just one individual: so why are individuals pidgeon-holed to very specific Socionics/enneangram combos that no one has encountered in real life?
It's not your fault, but you are very much buying into the VI- focussed approach of Maritsa. Of course many individuals look similar (as with personality traits...consider my response in my previous paragraph). I would still say that on Maritsa's standard of the Filatova photos (and taking into account the photos she posted hours ago), she looks especially like the EIE, frequently open-mouthed smiles, photos. She looks very much like a female Roger Federer I thought...but I don't place an awful lot of value in the typing of a few static visualisations.
I am not buying into VI since I do not believe in it but it is fun to think about. I am really just doing the "when in Rome" thing here.
I do find the reverting to ennegramic explanations for so much on this forum rather tedious. I think often it is simply enough to say something cannot be decided one way or another, or to see it as being within the natural range of behaviour each individual has (I'm thinking also even with just Socionics, many types can be suggested for an individual, even by just one individual: so why are individuals pidgeon-holed to very specific Socionics/enneangram combos that no one has encountered in real life?
It's not your fault, but you are very much buying into the VI- focussed approach of Maritsa. Of course many individuals look similar (as with personality traits...consider my response in my previous paragraph). I would still say that on Maritsa's standard of the Filatova photos (and taking into account the photos she posted hours ago), she looks especially like the EIE, frequently open-mouthed smiles, photos. She looks very much like a female Roger Federer I thought...but I don't place an awful lot of value in the typing of a few static visualisations.
“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
You have no reasons to don't believe that type expresses in nonverbal behavior, - what's part of VI methods.
If you'll type correctly you'll notice stable types specific behavior. If you'll check experimental psychology you'll find where personality was modeled to get practical use. With the lack of knowledge you are doomed to keep wrong believes.personality is way too complex to categorize under any current system
physiognomy is bullshit. unfortunally it was popularized as part of VII have a very elegant chin, or so I have been told, but I do not relate to being EII myself
I am not buying into VI since I do not believe in it but it is fun to think about. I am really just doing the "when in Rome" thing here.
I forgot to also say that, without obfuscation (other than attempting a simple translation, rather than mixing typology systems in order to have the cake and eat it), as far as I understand, a E269 Sp/Sx would be most similar to an EIE or an ESE. But why not focus on the typology at hand, and why not also focus on core principles, rather than muddling by with proxies that may not even accurately replace the core theory? (this post is more of a monologue rather than directed at you specifically...or is it a dialogue? ...Reinin obsessivists could no doubt argue it both ways. But some people just want to see the word "quorn").
I look much closer to EII filatova than eie. If I took a picture with my mouth open then someone else took it by accident.
I do find the reverting to ennegramic explanations for so much on this forum rather tedious. I think often it is simply enough to say something cannot be decided one way or another, or to see it as being within the natural range of behaviour each individual has (I'm thinking also even with just Socionics, many types can be suggested for an individual, even by just one individual: so why are individuals pidgeon-holed to very specific Socionics/enneangram combos that no one has encountered in real life?
It's not your fault, but you are very much buying into the VI- focussed approach of Maritsa. Of course many individuals look similar (as with personality traits...consider my response in my previous paragraph). I would still say that on Maritsa's standard of the Filatova photos (and taking into account the photos she posted hours ago), she looks especially like the EIE, frequently open-mouthed smiles, photos. She looks very much like a female Roger Federer I thought...but I don't place an awful lot of value in the typing of a few static visualisations.
-
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
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 10-16-2015 at 11:52 PM.
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
Unfortunately your accuracy rate is less than 30% therefore I have nothing to learn from you. You might also want to check your own "wrong believes" before telling others what their's are.
“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
Please cut the building conflict
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
You gotta type me first
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
LOL, I don't really feel any conflict with him. I just like poking at him to see if he can take it, as good as he gives, since he seems so rigid and formal. It feels like his persona is a prerecorded message and when I poke him he shows a bit more of a human personality.Please cut the building conflict
If I am hurting his feelings though he can tell me and I will stop.
“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 forgot to also say that, without obfuscation (other than attempting a simple translation, rather than mixing typology systems in order to have the cake and eat it), as far as I understand, a E269 Sp/Sx would be most similar to an EIE or an ESE. But why not focus on the typology at hand, and why not also focus on core principles, rather than muddling by with proxies that may not even accurately replace the core theory? (this post is more of a monologue rather than directed at you specifically...or is it a dialogue? ...Reinin obsessivists could no doubt argue it both ways. But some people just want to see the word "quorn").
When you first came back, after I joined, (not this time) I thought you could be IEI 549 sp/sx but you clarified a few things since then.
FTR, I see you as an EII with or without enneagram and stackings. They just add some depth in my perception.
“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
EIE \ ENFj
EII \ INFj
Even with closed smiles, I still think the EIEs on the whole look more like you.
http://i.imgur.com/sJoRgMi.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Ja3dxg0.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/IgzPU1K.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/k52gt8l.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/0VEX1Im.jpg
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tar1495_66.gif
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...epic1495_6.gif
New addition.
Kill4me - LSE 684 final and confirmed. Fi and Ne valuing is a dead give away. lol
“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
Posting Permissions
