What is my socionics type? (questionnaire and pic included)

[Olduvai]

But, I feel I might be too "soft" to be a T

maybe that's just weak sensing?

too reliant on outside validation of my own logic to be Ti.

are you sure? because in your next post, you say,

And I really hate it the most when we are in an argument and they don't stick to the guidelines (i.e. MY guidelines) of what is and is not relevant.

At least we can all agree I am an Ne dom...right? aheh

hehehe, I think Ni-ego is still within the realm of possibility.

and it's hard to care or notice if someones' feelings are getting hurt

They shouldn't have gotten into an argument with me then

again, more stuff a type with strong logic would say.

are you emotionally sensitive? does it bother you when people tease you or give you a hard time? are your feelings easily hurt? are you able to process your feelings? are you able to reflect on your feelings and know what it is you're feeling?

[roastingmallows]

[COLOR=#333333]maybe that's just weak sensing?




are you sure? because in your next post, you say,





hehehe, I think Ni-ego is still within the realm of possibility.





again, more stuff a type with strong logic would say.

are you emotionally sensitive? does it bother you when people tease you or give you a hard time? are your feelings easily hurt? are you able to process your feelings? are you able to reflect on your feelings and know what it is you're feeling?

lol you caught me on the outside logic thing...but that is different to me, because arguing is very familiar ground. I feel the rules should be obvious. During that argument I mentioned before, when my gf started to sense she was losing, she started pointing out my flaws as if she could distract me from the fact that she was wrong. I thought that was just so out of line. Not because it hurt my feelings, but because she wasn't playing fair and refused to just admit it. She kept trying these other tactics like crying, and turning it into an attack on my character. Not buying that. I am focused. I'm an arguing machine.

And as for Ni ego...I highly doubt that! I would accept that I could be an ILE, but ILI would be like the last thing I could possibly be. Ni is easily my least understood function, and anyway, I lack the focus. (except in arguing. )

I would like to think I have strong logic. I think my gf (as an Fe dom) would agree that I do. However, I'm generally bad at logical things like math, though I know that is a stereotype, but I'm very verbal and people oriented.

But emotionally sensitive...Not particularly. I definitely don't mind being teased. Fun is my number one priority, and getting upset about that would make me pretty hypocritical since I love to tease other people. My feelings aren't easily hurt, but I tend to get upset when I feel I've been betrayed. Not like crying and stuff, but hatred. If someone does something that crosses my line, I tend to hate them from then on. Processing my feelings...I sometimes will get moody or upset, and I will immediately begin to rationalize my feelings and wonder why I'm feeling that way, and I can usually pinpoint the problem pretty easily. I tend to prefer the idea of Fi over Fe because Fe seems so fake and others oriented, yet there was at least one instance I remember that could point to maybe tertiary (or just very weak) Fe.

In high school, the only time I ever got upset over a girl (and I was quite the player in high school), it was this INFP who was totally the opposite of me; very sensitive, quiet, artistic, deep...I'll admit, I wasn't very faithful or good to her, but I was in love with her and found her fascinating, and I took her for granted and I thought everything was cool. When she dumped me, my whole world was turned upside down and I became very pathetic. I kept writing her disgusting, sappy poetry, and kind of stalking her and trying to get her back with pity, which of course just made her less into me. This is exactly how my dad (TiSe) acted when he and my mom got divorced. He never showed any emotion or affection towards her really (that gf also accused me of being a "robot" and never showing any emotion but happiness. She was a typical 4 and very into her emotions and whatnot. She didn't buy my excuse that "of course I'm happy, I'm with you!"), and never wanted to be around her, but when she left him he got super weepy and pathetic and sad, and it was weird.

[roastingmallows]

Sooo I personally don't consider myself very emotional. But I usually don't like to hurt other people, I have a hard time saying no, and I can't enforce rules. This could possibly point to weak Fe though...

[golden]

A lot of what you say sounds ILE to me. The manner of arguing, the guidelines, the carefulness around others' feelings. I know ILEs who are precisely like that (and ILEs who are not).

But in considering ILE, I wouldn't get hung up too much on the T part. From my pov, at least, not all ILEs seem very T. Ne, Ne, Ne.

[roastingmallows]

One more thing, although I don't easily have my feelings hurt, I am fairly sensitive to criticism. I won't get emotionally upset so much as feel stupid. Like if I show someone a piece of writing (which usually takes a lot of time and polishing before I am willing to do so, especially if I respect their opinion) and they point out even a few flaws, I am tempted to scrap the whole thing and rethink whether or not I have any talent at all. And yet if someone gives me a piece of writing to go over, I will cover it in red ink even if I think it has potential. When it comes to writing I am a bit of a perfectionist. I am a high school drop out. My gf is a master's/grad student and always gives me her papers to proofread/edit. I may not know what she is talking about, but I can spot a misused semicolon from a mile away.

[Olduvai]

lol you caught me on the outside logic thing...but that is different to me, because arguing is very familiar ground. I feel the rules should be obvious. During that argument I mentioned before, when my gf started to sense she was losing, she started pointing out my flaws as if she could distract me from the fact that she was wrong. I thought that was just so out of line. Not because it hurt my feelings, but because she wasn't playing fair and refused to just admit it. She kept trying these other tactics like crying, and turning it into an attack on my character. Not buying that. I am focused. I'm an arguing machine.

it sounds like your girlfriend is some kind of ethical type.

Ni is easily my least understood function, and anyway, I lack the focus. (except in arguing. )

I think Ni is simply the least understood function in socionics. like I don't think it's very clear what exactly Ni is. and lol, I'd be interested to see you in a debate. has anyone ever "defeated" you in an argument?

But emotionally sensitive...Not particularly. I definitely don't mind being teased. Fun is my number one priority, and getting upset about that would make me pretty hypocritical since I love to tease other people. My feelings aren't easily hurt, but I tend to get upset when I feel I've been betrayed.

I honestly think we should rule out IEE.

Processing my feelings...I sometimes will get moody or upset, and I will immediately begin to rationalize my feelings and wonder why I'm feeling that way, and I can usually pinpoint the problem pretty easily.

hmm, sounds like you'd make for a good therapist.

and I do consider myself a physical person as well. I am known to challenge everyone to displays of strength, wit, flexibility and speed if they will play along.

I like to challenge people physically. For example: Races, holding breath, holding body parts under ice water, touching hot surfaces, holding notes, wrestling, lifting, flexibility, balance, etc.

might this be Se-valuing?

I don't care what my environment looks or even feels like most of the time. My girlfriend for example must live somewhere warm and with trees or she is unhappy. Indoors she likes white, uncluttered, neat spaces. I have preferences for those things, but they have little impact on my mood. I prefer dark colors and heavy wood furniture inside and mountains outside myself, but like I said, it's inconsequential to me.

I don't care too much about the appearance of my surroundings, or even the comfort so much.

it doesn't sound like you value physical comfort very much. that's not characteristic of an Si-valuer.

I remember all the specifics (particularly exact words people say)

Te is often associated with the facts of a situation. The who, why, what, when, and where.

The Ne dominants I know are insane. Or I consider them insane. Hence my apprehension in identifying as one of them.

Could you elaborate?

My thought process is linear.

perhaps this means you're a process thinker rather than a result thinker

I like to buy things, but don't care too much about HAVING things, so most of what I buy is consumable instant gratification stuff.

do you value personal interests over personal resources?

But I'm very prone to inertia.

I know it's just a word, but I find it peculiar that "inertia" is often used in ILI type descriptions.

ILIs often still neglect the world around them and become consistently mired in their own inertia

while others, to the contrary, demonstrate complete inertia and paralysis of their will.

[applejacks]

Oh yay!!! Another IEE!! You and I are very similar! We should hang out on Tinychat and compare notes

I'm a little lazy (and hurried) at the moment, but I wanted to write real quick that I love your use of the term "loyal" first and foremost to describe you. This stuck out in my mind because it's been at the forefront of how I define myself and who I want to be- a woman of my word, loyal, genuine, true. These values I consider essential and required without compromise, especially when I was searching for my husband. I love that you carry yourself that way, too, and mentioned it in your video.

Also, I'm happy to see another musical talent join the forum! We have quite the band in Delta land right now. You'll fit right in! <3

Also... in regards to

I wish I could say I'm usually much more charming. I am usually slightly more charming if anything.

Our charm works best when we're able to engage with someone, as opposed to speaking blankly into a screen.


Welcome!!!! *Big, warm IEE hug*

[Olduvai]

Left to their own devices, no IEE values physical comfort very much. They might not even know what it is until it hits them in the face. Such is the nature of the suggestive function.

they might have trouble supplying it, but they still value it, because it's a valued function. as for the nature of the suggestive function,

People focus deeply on the use of this function in day-to-day life, always attempting to digest information received from the environment through this aspect of reality.

[FoxOnStilts]

I welcome you to the ILE club.

Alpha alpha alpha, Ne, Si-valuing, Ti, Fi-polrish from what I can read.

[Zero11]

Tbh the IEE does SOUND more like me. Is it possible for me to be an ESFP in MBTI and an IEE in socionics? Or will I need to rethink my MBTI typing as well if I turn out to be IEE? I know they don't correlate perfectly but I don't know exactly how it works.

Information Elements and MBTI functions aren´t compatible.

[Olduvai]

This is simply not right. As is evidenced by the many undualized, neurotic, hyperactive IEEs and ILEs in the world. In as far Ne-base types are attuned to Si, it is highly subconscious and easily ignored behaviorally.

That's a direct quote from this website. You can also find it here.

Since you've already selected them on the basis of your conception of IEE and ILE, I don't think "undualized, neurotic, hyperactive IEEs and ILEs" count as evidence. You can't say, "IEE and ILE don't care about physical comfort because these people who I think are IEE and ILE don't care about physical comfort". Not to mention saying "as is evidenced by the many undualized, neurotic, hyperactive IEEs and ILEs" isn't really even evidence.

[roastingmallows]

I'm pretty sure I'm either an ILE or more likely IEE. I'm going to keep an open mind, but just figuring out the main function is a great start.

[roastingmallows]

Oh yay!!! Another IEE!! You and I are very similar! We should hang out on Tinychat and compare notes

I'm a little lazy (and hurried) at the moment, but I wanted to write real quick that I love your use of the term "loyal" first and foremost to describe you. This stuck out in my mind because it's been at the forefront of how I define myself and who I want to be- a woman of my word, loyal, genuine, true. These values I consider essential and required without compromise, especially when I was searching for my husband. I love that you carry yourself that way, too, and mentioned it in your video.

Also, I'm happy to see another musical talent join the forum! We have quite the band in Delta land right now. You'll fit right in! <3

Also... in regards to



Our charm works best when we're able to engage with someone, as opposed to speaking blankly into a screen.

[/FONT][/COLOR]
Welcome!!!! *Big, warm IEE hug*

Thanks a lot! I'd be glad to talk sometime.

[roastingmallows]

Information Elements and MBTI functions aren´t compatible.

Well, I have discovered I'm also Ne dom in MBTI. Perhaps a coincidence?

[roastingmallows]

Here is my main issue with ILE: "ILEs are obsessed with how things work, and how they will work together. Understanding how something works is merely the baseline for the ILE. When the ILE finds something new or interesting he thinks about how it could be used in conjunction with other objects he has come into contact with in the past."

I don't care how THINGS work. I generally don't care about THINGS at all. So, IEE sounds good.

[Amber]

I don't know why the Alpha Quadra is here to hunt you down ...you are an obvious Fi user imo, though not in a "moralizing" way. I'd say just move around and have fun on the forum and your type will become clearer via interaction.

[anndelise]

Here is my main issue with ILE: "ILEs are obsessed with how things work, and how they will work together. Understanding how something works is merely the baseline for the ILE. When the ILE finds something new or interesting he thinks about how it could be used in conjunction with other objects he has come into contact with in the past."

I don't care how THINGS work. I generally don't care about THINGS at all. So, IEE sounds good.

Do you care how PEOPLE work?
ILE aren't much concerned about physical things, they are more theoretical than that.

Also, IEE have demonstrative Fe. Their Fe is as strong as their Ne.

If your goal in a debate is to win, but you dislike people using ethical arguments, then how do you do whatever you can to win?

[roastingmallows]

Do you care how PEOPLE work?
ILE aren't much concerned about physical things, they are more theoretical than that.

Also, IEE have demonstrative Fe. Their Fe is as strong as their Ne.

If your goal in a debate is to win, but you dislike people using ethical arguments, then how do you do whatever you can to win?

I definitely care how PEOPLE work. In general, I care ONLY about people. Not that I am obsessed with others in an emotionally dependent way by any means. I am just not interested in things unless people are involved. And maybe animals, but not in the same way. I think about people all the time, and I really like talking to people and asking the "real questions" you know, and just getting to know people on a deeper level. That said, I'm more interested in their experiences, traits and motivations than their EMOTIONS and FEELINGS per se.

My goal in a debate is to win, but not at the expense of correctness, fyi. I am willing to concede defeat with no issue if I am proven wrong with actual concrete evidence (or a reliable source). The thing is, I am unlikely to invite debate about anything where an ethical approach would be appropriate. I fully understand that ethics/feelings/opinions are subjective and impossible to prove or disprove, at least to me. To win, I employ facts and research! Wow! lol Like during an argument with my gf, I will actually research my argument while we are having the argument and she won't even try. it is quite baffling since that seems to be allowed. Neither of us consider it "cheating" if we look things up on the internet, yet she never does it. I am pretty concerned with figuring out who is actually right.

[roastingmallows]

And I am still considering ILE, kind of. I'm just glad to know I am Ne not Se. Now I can sleep a LITTLE at least.

[anndelise]

I definitely care how PEOPLE work. In general, I care ONLY about people. Not that I am obsessed with others in an emotionally dependent way by any means. I am just not interested in things unless people are involved. And maybe animals, but not in the same way. I think about people all the time, and I really like talking to people and asking the "real questions" you know, and just getting to know people on a deeper level. That said, I'm more interested in their experiences, traits and motivations than their EMOTIONS and FEELINGS per se.

My goal in a debate is to win, but not at the expense of correctness, fyi. I am willing to concede defeat with no issue if I am proven wrong with actual concrete evidence (or a reliable source). The thing is, I am unlikely to invite debate about anything where an ethical approach would be appropriate. I fully understand that ethics/feelings/opinions are subjective and impossible to prove or disprove, at least to me. To win, I employ facts and research! Wow! lol Like during an argument with my gf, I will actually research my argument while we are having the argument and she won't even try. it is quite baffling since that seems to be allowed. Neither of us consider it "cheating" if we look things up on the internet, yet she never does it. I am pretty concerned with figuring out who is actually right.

I can see you maybe having some difficulties with some of the female IEE on this forum, in that there's a sense of ethical appropriateness or lack of underlying their arguments. As in there is a concern for how another person might be affected by someone's actions/words. I don't see this happening so much with the male IEEs. However, I do notice some of these female IEEs willingly look up information to provide, or consider researched info that was provided. So in that sense I can imagine you getting along with them. I would say that if you are IEE, then an Ne subtype.

I do find it difficult to reconcile your self-claimed black and white thinking with Holographic-Panoramic Ne. Can you give a few examples of this black and white thinking? In a video would be awesome, but not if it's annoying/difficult for you to do. Have you read about the HP cog style? How well do you think it does or doesn,t describe your normal approach to info processing?

[roastingmallows]

I can see you maybe having some difficulties with some of the female IEE on this forum, in that there's a sense of ethical appropriateness or lack of underlying their arguments. As in there is a concern for how another person might be affected by someone's actions/words. I don't see this happening so much with the male IEEs. However, I do notice some of these female IEEs willingly look up information to provide, or consider researched info that was provided. So in that sense I can imagine you getting along with them. I would say that if you are IEE, then an Ne subtype.

I do find it difficult to reconcile your self-claimed black and white thinking with Holographic-Panoramic Ne. Can you give a few examples of this black and white thinking? In a video would be awesome, but not if it's annoying/difficult for you to do. Have you read about the HP cog style? How well do you think it does or doesn,t describe your normal approach to info processing?

I actually have had some difficulties RELATING to IEEs and ENFPs as well, just based on browsing the forums (though not so much this forum). These were almost all female of course, and I often cringe at the thought of being like them. They tend to be very...sparkly and "random" and hug happy and PC...haha Like I said, it's not such a problem on this forum. I think socionics being significantly more complicated kind of excludes a lot of (simple?) people that frequent MBTI forums. Any way, I breathe a sigh a relief when I hear from more male ENFPs and IEEs because they are generally not so bad, but can be as well...I am female but don't really act or present or even think as one in some ways, stereotypically, so that is interesting. Also, I don't mind ethics based or subjective conversations so much, I just don't consider them proper arguments (in that they are possible to "win") at that point if that makes any sense.

As for the black and white thinking, this only applies to objective facts, something I thought should be obvious. This does not apply to obviously grey areas of life such as morality.

Sorry if that was a little jumbled. I was kind of multi tasking.

[roastingmallows]

Oh and I don't really understand the subtypes yet. Anyone care to explain? I certainly intend to research it as well. I assume it just highlights the strength of one of your main functions?

[roastingmallows]

Oh and the HP cog style...I do not know what that is but you're the second one to have mentioned it. I will look it up.

[anndelise]

Oh and I don't really understand the subtypes yet. Anyone care to explain? I certainly intend to research it as well. I assume it just highlights the strength of one of your main functions?

You'll likely get different answers to that, it seems each person has their own idea of what a subtype means. For example someone might say you are a more introverted IEE and so label you as Fi subtype. (Extroverted given Ne.) Or someone might say you are a more abstract oriented IEE and so say you are Ne (ethics oriented given Fi). Someone might say you are more Te oriented, and give you either as a subtype, depending on how they interpret the elements working together (Fi/Te vs Ne/Te, Si/Fi).

I think if you are IEE, you could be more Ne/Te oriented. A strong Te hidden agenda which might be what prompts you to look things up to gain more info about a topic, and a more objective (less subjective and/or more abstract oriented) approach.

[anndelise]

Oh and the HP cog style...I do not know what that is but you're the second one to have mentioned it. I will look it up.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-Gulenko

[roastingmallows]

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-Gulenko

Yes, I've already read and now have a headache. I'll need to go over it again for sure. I looked into the subtypes a bit too and definitely agree with you I would seem more Ne subtype than Fi, though everyone else on this thread who thinks I am IEE has said Fi for some reason. It also seems that most of those people were going entirely off of VI however. They seem to be the same ones who say IEE without citing much of what I've actually SAID.

[roastingmallows]

Oh actually that is not the same article I read, so thank you. It seems a bit more simplified.

[golden]

Mm, I only just now saw the video! It was smooshed down at the bottom of page 1.

You're so KEWT! You remind me of my son, ILE-Ne. But based only on a general impression (your eyes, the way you move, the concerns you express), and thinking of people I feel sure are IEEs, I now favor IEE for you.

The cool thing is that by narrowing it down to IEE or ILE, Fi-polr versus Fi-ego will probably be a useful line of inquiry.

[roastingmallows]

Mm, I only just now saw the video! It was smooshed down at the bottom of page 1.

You're so KEWT! You remind me of my son, ILE-Ne. But based only on a general impression (your eyes, the way you move, the concerns you express), and thinking of people I feel sure are IEEs, I now favor IEE for you.

The cool thing is that by narrowing it down to IEE or ILE, Fi-polr versus Fi-ego will probably be a useful line of inquiry.

lol thank you! I'm starting to wonder if my supposed "kewtness" is why people are being so much nicer and more helpful to me here than on other typology forums where I've never posted a picture. That or people are just more likely to relate and see me as a real person if they actually know what I look like. Probably that one haha

[Suz]

lol thank you! I'm starting to wonder if my supposed "kewtness" is why people are being so much nicer and more helpful to me here than on other typology forums where I've never posted a picture. That or people are just more likely to relate and see me as a real person if they actually know what I look like. Probably that one haha

No, we're just cool here (for the most part, anyway).

[roastingmallows]

No, we're just cool here (for the most part, anyway).

That does seem to be the case so far! I like that.

[Olduvai]

I am female but don't really act or present or even think as one in some ways, stereotypically, so that is interesting.

My goal in a debate is to win, but not at the expense of correctness, fyi. I am willing to concede defeat with no issue if I am proven wrong with actual concrete evidence (or a reliable source). The thing is, I am unlikely to invite debate about anything where an ethical approach would be appropriate. I fully understand that ethics/feelings/opinions are subjective and impossible to prove or disprove, at least to me. To win, I employ facts and research! Wow!

more evidence for logic > ethics, IMO.

also, do you relate to this?

Introverted ethics is an introverted, rational, and static information element. It is also called Fi, R, relational ethics, or white ethics. Fi is generally associated with the ability to gain an implicit sense of the subjective 'distance' between two people, and make judgments based off of said thing. Types with valued Fi strive to make and maintain close, personal relationships with their friends and family. They value sensitivity to others' feelings, and occasionally will make their innermost feelings and sentiments known in order to test the possibility of creating closeness with others.

how about this? (even though it's MBTI, I still think it has some validity.)

Introverted Feelers are the most sensitive of all types. They can react emotionally for no obvious reason. It takes some effort to drill down and uncover these personal values that are so easily insulted.

Because Introverted Feelers are so easily insulted or offended, they know what it's like to be hurt and they will treat others with sensitivity, caring and warmth.

[Amber]

the dude above is probably a Ti creative who never gets bored of debating Fi creatives into a new type

[Olduvai]

the dude above is probably a Ti creative who never gets bored of debating Fi creatives into a new type

lol, no, I actually think my type is ENFP. and I'm not "debating her into a new type"... this is a type me thread.

to be honest, the fact that you said this tells me that you don't really understand the nature of introverted thinking.

[Amber]

lol, no, I actually think my type is ENFP. and I'm not "debating her into a new type"... this is a type me thread.

to be honest, the fact that you said this tells me that you don't really understand the nature of introverted thinking.

like hell.

please note that most Fi egos have already taken a holistic snapshot of the OP.

[Olduvai]

like hell.

because I'm debating, that means I'm Ti-ego?

please note that most Fi egos have already taken a holistic snapshot of the OP.

I don't know what this means.

[FoxOnStilts]

The cool thing is that by narrowing it down to IEE or ILE, Fi-polr versus Fi-ego will probably be a useful line of inquiry.

It is useful, but bear in mind that these two can also look similarly. A lot of Fi-polrs tend to over-obsess about their use of Fi because of how neurotic it is and focus on it and analyze it more than someone who comes by it naturally does. This can make them seem to have Fi more valued than it is.

At least I know I tend to overanalyze it, and I know @Aquagraph as mentioned it as well.

[roastingmallows]

Still find it interesting that the only argument for me being IEE is that I "look like one" or "seem like one", while the arguments for ILE are numerous and specific. Not that I necessarily agree either way. I have been checking out the ILE and IEE forums a bit. The ILEs are a little much, but so are the IEEs in a different way. The IEEs seem mostly soft and squishy and very aware of the effect of their words (and maybe longwinded). The ILEs on the other hand are almost alarmingly flippant and have a glib quality. I could say that about myself at times, but here they seem very casual and lackadaisical. Again, I could say that about myself, but only with people I know. Is this related to the merry/serious dichotomy? The concept is still new to me.