There's articles describing clubs. Figured I'd ask & get your takes on it.
NF: Who they (meaning themselves) or people could be
SF: Who they (meaning themselves) or people are
ST: What things or systems are
NT: What things or systems could be
The Clubs: NT, NF, ST, SF. Your take
There's articles describing clubs. Figured I'd ask & get your takes on it.
NF: Who they (meaning themselves) or people could be
SF: Who they (meaning themselves) or people are
ST: What things or systems are
NT: What things or systems could be
I think this is good, but I added one word, as I think this describes the static side of the clubs well; so I just added the word 'how' which I think can include the dynamic side of the clubs as wellOriginally Posted by Stray Cat
NF: Who/how they (meaning themselves) or people could be
SF: Who/how they (meaning themselves) or people are
ST: What/how things or systems are
NT: What/how things or systems could be
Marvel Capeshit Edition
NT:
Gamma NT:
aka "As I always say, keep your friends rich, and your enemies rich, and then find out which is which"
Alpha NT:
aka ''"Logical'', aka '"What if the child consents?"
SF:
Gamma SF:
aka resting bitch face, aka makes "Karen" her look like Mother Teresa.
Alpha SF:
aka the prime source of thirst by basement virgins, aka “I'm always picking up after you boys.”
ST:
Beta ST:
aka "I'm always angry", aka "brb got to kill something"
Delta ST:
aka "Language", aka "I hold the most NPC-tier political beliefs and feel self-righteous about it."
NF:
Beta NF:
aka "I'm a malevolent narcissist isn't that so cute and endearing?", aka "I SAID KNNNNEEEEEEEELLLLLL!"
Delta NF:
aka (said to them) "I don't even know who you are.", aka (once again about them) "why was she up there all this time?"
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Another way to group the types would be NT, NF, SP, and SJ.
Seems like a reasonable enough way to group people. I resonate with your NF club summary, though I suspect it may be more true for IEI and EII than for EIE and IEE. In general I think introverted intuitive types are more likely to spend their days dreaming about their own potential while chronically struggling to realize it. Honestly in my experience LII also have a tendency towards thinking about their own potential quite a bit and seem often to beat themselves up quite harshly over not accomplishing 'enough'. I'm less sure about ILI because I don't know many and the ones I've known better have all been quite old (my grandfather on my mother's side, and two of my college professors). I've met younger ones too. I just haven't been that close with any
“Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
— James Russell Lowell猫が生き甲斐
I got a lol out of alpha NT.NT:
Gamma NT:
Alpha NT:
SF:
Gamma SF:
Alpha SF:
ST:
Beta ST:
Delta ST:
NF:
Beta NF:
Delta NF:
I like most of these but I think NPC political beliefs describes LSE but not SLI. Alpha SF might apply more broadly to many types, and I don't get delta NF. Do you mean they don't notice her?
lol I don't get that one either, I was drawing a blank on that one. Alpha SF and Delta NF were the last two I did and I was running out of ideas lol.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
okay I admit this is true for me- I guess it sounds silly ((and not like I'm unaware of how idealistic and naive it sounds lol)) but even though he's in prison for bank robbery I always pictured my SLE dual crush as some shiny paladin or some magical sage in the sky giving wise advice to others- which is like the polar opposite of that. It is still a 'real' side to me though since he liked reading spiritual books - but one that the real Te world just naturally squandered. lol. To me that is more his true idealized self- even though in reality he's still in prison for the robbery. xD
and maybe also if I don't like you, I'll think you are worse than you really are- I'll just turn u into some Pure Demon that gets vanquished in my stories.
Objectively speaking- I think this is why in the real world 'NTs' are running things because improving upon what systems could be... seems like that is what is objectively valued the most. Makes sense. I always thought this, but you put it in a more succint way. But I think they are all imporant - as if people are shitty too much and aren't nicer/kinder- that will just be reflected in the A.I systems as well. So for example Fi polr in ILE needs protecting/improving even though as a NT they are always so much ahead of the pack anyway.
what i never got was the asymmetry of lumping Se egos and Si egos together, but then going back to clubs for NT and NF.
they should do NP NJ and SP SJ then
Yes, @Number 9 large, I agree.
Did I mention that that scheme was from a comic called “Island types” (which drew ENTJs as raptors..... http://oddlydevelopedtypes.com/content/island-types-34 ), and they said it originated with Keirsey?
When I read that comic, I hadn’t found Socionics yet. Hadn’t encountered the Ti scheme.
NF Gay
ST Straight
SF Mommy
NT Incel
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
NF Charles Manson
ST Charles Whitman
SF Ted Bundy
NT Ted Kaczynski
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
I usually see Kaczynski typed LSI. Out of curiosity, why do you type him LII?
lol well after I thought long and hard about it before I posted, I decided he was NT since he was a genius math wiz.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
ST manager (Delta variant), jock (beta variant)
SF momma (alpha variant), whore (gamma variant)
NF nerve wreck (Delta variant), poof (beta variant)
NT asexual (alpha variant), incel (gamma variant)
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
tfw no beta ST qt bully to choke me out
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
When someone tries to do that to me.. not great. I would bite, scratch and yell usually.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
The types within these so-called clubs have difficulty seeing eye-to-eye even though they share data input and output algorithms. The same processing blocks can be rearranged to produce completely different CPUs; configuration becomes the distinguishing feature even though the ingredients are the same. These building blocks by themselves represent processing preferences but have no real personalities.
a.k.a. I/O
How do SFs relate to NTs?
How do NFs relate to STs?
That depends on the processing configurations of both partners, which include whether input or output has priority. Differing priorities usually mean reduced probably of agreement.
a.k.a. I/O
I wanna say you addressed this theory here: http://www.socionics.com/articles/thestrength.html
What exactly do you mean by input/output? Would it mean that Si is an input for Ne? Are closed loop & open loop mentalities in reference to rational/irrational dichotomy?
N and S represent two different types of input filtering regardless of configuration; the difference between say Si and Se is strictly the configuration in which they're employed because otherwise they're identical. Rational and irrational are misleading terms, which is why I refer to types as being either output or input oriented respectively. Open and closed-loop refer to processing configuration which includes whether input or output is leading (having overriding priority).
a.k.a. I/O
EDIT: Note that what I wrote does not conform to current Socionics modelling theories. See: https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...atterns-by-I-O
Last edited by Rebelondeck; 09-25-2021 at 03:34 PM.
I hear ya.
My ILE buddy has issues with his SEI chick being kinda dull through text messaging. He believes he has to dumb down text conversations in hopes she'll opinionatedly converse. They get on great in real life but her idea of responding to interesting conversation is primarily gifs & emojis
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote