I did see this one, I watched it again. There is nothing really that she and I have in common but we aren't completely different. Really I can't glean a whole lot from this. The logic is more obvious in her speech and she is less emotive than me. This is not how I act, its not how I acted in my video either. Rationality is much more obvious too.Originally Posted by Tallmo
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".
Could be a case or garbage in garbage out, or maybe he's done so many that they are exploding his ability to explain new observations and he hasn't integrated his new observations fully into his theory yet.
People whose functional accentuations and subtype matches their sociotype are easier to identify. A dominant subtype Exxj will be easier to identify than a dominant subtype Ixxp. A harmonizing subtype ESxx type will be difficult to spot etc. It's also complicated when the most accentuated function of a type is the vulnerable function of a sociotype. A normalizing IEE with accentuated Ti for example
Under what circumstances would I mistype an IEI as LSI?
1. If the IEI is turning off their emotionality and use pure Ti talks (Some IEI scholars do this, but they still feel like IEI because of Ni fluidity)
And
2. If the IEI is turning off their Ni so they become less "soft and fluid" and more hardened with Ti frame of mind.
If someone is reading their answers to a questionnaire in order to get assessed, they would 1) not using much emotionality; 2) more in the Ti hardened mode rather than Ni perceiving mode.
So yes I think the video questionnaire format is making mistyping IEI as LSI more likely. I wonder if G is unaware of these SeNi causal factors as he's Se PoLR
Which of your opinions should I trust? The one from 3 months ago when you were EIE or the new one with you as SEE?
Well, I take no part in his typing process so you know I can't say for sure. But I'd expect what he is typing is how you process information, which in turn creates ITR. There are ways to know; this man shows signs of Ne: static snapshots of reality. If we decide that he does, then as per Socionics hypothesis we know Ne base dualizes with Dynamic Si. We've just crossed out 10 of the 12 types for him. If we can do this then imagine what G. can do with 30+ years of experience, he probably knows what each type sounds like in different situations, in interviews, in groups, what they sound like when they're nervous, fronting as serious, etc. He doesn't care and he probably wouldn't ask the man from the video if he forgets his keys all the time to determine the ‘type’, which is going to show itself eventually, somehow; if you are LSI, no one that is really good at Socionics is going to meet you irl and think there goes the IEE, even if you can't see yourself objectively right now.
Because it's not going to help you if you don't. For self-study purposes if you're interested: save the typing video you sent, go over the dichotomies, watch some examples of communication styles and then go back to the video in a few months and see what you can gather from it.
Last edited by Rusal; 02-15-2022 at 10:45 PM.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
I am not seeing this LSI typing. Was going to say it in a more crass manner but I don't want to offend Mr. Gulenko. I wonder what he would type me (for the lolz; as I'm completely sure of my type), but I'm not going to spend the cash.
Does certainty guarantee correctness? Or is it better to be willing to reassess your previous worldview? I don't need you to trust me, but if you disagree you should have a reason apart from 'but G said..'
This is the problem with your argument, if I can't see what Gulenko is talking about and his explanation contradicts his own words (like I have shown above) I have no basis to trust him. Instead of any reasons as to why I'm LSI I'm implored to just trust that Gulenko knows because he has so much experience and we have so much to learn in comparison.Well, I take no part in his typing process so you know I can't say for sure. But I'd expect what he is typing is how you process information, which in turn creates ITR. There are ways to know; this man shows signs of Ne: static snapshots of reality. If we decide that he does, then as per Socionics hypothesis we know Ne base dualizes with Dynamic Si. We've just crossed out 10 of the 12 types for him. If we can do this then imagine what G. can do with 30+ years of experience, he probably knows what each type sounds like in different situations, in interviews, in groups, what they sound like when they're nervous, fronting as serious, etc. He doesn't care and he probably wouldn't ask the man from the video if he forgets his keys all the time to determine the ‘type’, which is going to show itself eventually, somehow; if you are LSI, no one that is really good at Socionics is going to meet you irl and think there goes the IEE, even if you can't see yourself objectively right now.
I've studied enough to know he is wrong. Implying I just don't know enough about socionics and that's the reason why I don't agree with Gulenko is funny. I've pointed out specific reasons why I disagree. I've shown the "analysis" it is not convincing.Because it's not going to help you if you don't. For self-study purposes if you're interested: save the typing video you sent, go over the dichotomies, watch some examples of communication styles and then go back to the video in a few months and see what you can gather from it.
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".
Yes this is the theory but how do you identify a IEE-N-Ti to a ILE? What criteria is he using? Oh I think I just need to pay for enough of his classes and then the truth will finally be revealed. Otherwise, I'm left out in the dark.
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".
Also I was thinking about this video that Tallmo linked:
This person is my identical type and subtype. She went to Gulenko because she was unsure of her type, she got the typing and agreed with it.
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".
He don't know what he's doing and no one can put up a convincing reason why I should take it seriously lol. Get some Ti smh.
Gulenko is wrong get over it.
Also, I would like to know how I am IEI. If anyone wants to tell me their ideas.
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".
Exactly my point. Because…
..just hours away from screaming to the world you're SEE you've come to identify Kristen, who's got serious Beta vibes, as your identical.
No. If you had, you wouldn't be making questions about how he can type you a certain way if you handed in your homework at school or not and you'd have realized that he's typing by how you process information. Remember, Static Ti goes with Dynamic Fe.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
This is weird, and illustrates how I suck at typing, because I would never in a million years have said Kristen is Beta LSI. I think she looks SEI.
I guess we can agree on the xxI part. Lol.
To explain, she goes back into her head frequently when talking, as introverts tend to do. Extroverts just pull the trigger and run the sequence.
She also seems to be very openly friendly, which I associate with Fe.
I usually look for hard and pinched features for NTs, even in the LIIs who can tend to fat. I see the rational hardness in their eyes. In contrast, Kristen seems like an open book. Kind of an open, dreamy book, ready to accept the judgement of someone more logical than she.
But who really knows? We don’t have a DNA test for Sociotypes yet.
*EDIT*
I have a picture on my phone of my physical therapist. Or rather, I have a picture of two pictures of her that she put on the wall of her office.
In the picture of her with her new (ESI?) husband, I’d swear she was LII.
In a more recent picture of her holding her cat, she looks fiercely ESI. I mean, if you didn’t know differently, you’d not think the two pictures were of the same person. I wish I could ethically post this picture, but I can’t.
But in real life, she’s the quintessential EII.
Believe me, as an LIE, I recognize my semi-Duals IRL. Oh, and one other thing. The rehab center had other physical therapists there, and one was, I would say, an LSI (because I’ve had two long-term LSI GFs and I know Mirage, too), and they did not like each other.
I like to speculate on what could make an EII look like an LII with her new ESI husband, and like a protective ESI with her pet cat?
Last edited by Adam Strange; 02-16-2022 at 01:38 AM.
Well, it's a short video but I can't associate the way she speaks with Si dynamic. Or rather: if she is in life the way I see in video, she is easily beta.
Edit: believe me, she's not your Conflictor.
Last edited by Rusal; 02-16-2022 at 02:22 AM.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
yh she looks SEI. Or EII. Ne + introvert + feeler
ترفرف كالأجنحة غير المنظورة حول رأسي
When I'm around EIIs, I get this weird feeling like I'm John Wayne and I should be grilling some steaks while they put a tablecloth and a glass jar of flowers on the picnic table, and our four kids are running all over the yard, screaming and playing by the pond, and the clouds are fluffy white in the blue sky and all is right on God's good Earth.
I didn't get that feeling from Kristen.
*EDIT*
For me, Semi-duality has a powerful seductiveness to it, as if it holds the key to everything I could want in life.
Similarly, Mirage has a powerful sexual seductiveness to it, like I'm at peak sex and it's never going to get better than this.
Both have problems, of course. I think Duality is less peaky but better balanced and more durable.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 02-17-2022 at 09:36 PM.
What on earth are you on about here? Who is Kristen? Is this you doing your homework? I vibe like your friend Kristen and you think this is a mic drop moment?
"I-if you did your homework then you'd know Gulenko was riiight!"
Here's a challenge explain how I am LSI without using Gulenko, if you can't this proves you can't think for yourself. What is this supposed to show me? What are you educating me on concerning static Ti and dynamic Fe?
lmao stfu and sit tf down.
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".
Well, you sound bitter and lost, for someone who understands the theory. So many questions, so much need to have specialist after specialist guide you.
See you around, maybe you'll be a diffrent type then. Take care.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
As was said before without a video it's hard to understand the type and be sure in any for you. Gulenko has nice blabla skills to convince naive and incompetent noobs, but mediocre typing skills what is worsened by his non-Socionics theories about types.
Among positive what type mistake give is to think yourself better where you are factually weak and such mb to reduce anxiety and arise selfesteem. While to think yourself worse than you are factually where you should be weak - is lesser problem as you are assured in those regions and perceive this "problem" easier.
It can be pointed that some behavior makes some types as very doubtful. So for LSI is doubtful to create so many new threads as you did.
You are creating threads since your registragion in April 2019. To now those are 103 (!) just during 3 years. And significant number of your themes relates to people and not types (Crying during sex, Fictional Characters You're Attracted To, Being called annoying, Does sex improve women's mood, etc). This fits F type, but not to nonemotional and quietly shy LSI.
Before you thought as your type seems EIE or alike. What is far from LSI and fits better to the mentioned behavior.
> Vladimir Putin (my identical)
INTP
to make signatures about your link to people points on F type. LSI are not so emotional to mess with people relations in signatures
I've noticed Gulenko's typing thread was sticked without good reasons, while VI thread was removed from sticked. This happened recently and you are recently got mods possibilities.
You rejected to give your video. Probably you so like to dream your type as LSI so want to praise Gulenko and to make censorship on methods which have best chance to show who you are indeed. As nonverbal is most appropriate way to understand types of those who knows types theory and anyway is important info to understand types in general.
By hiding from the reality you'll not change it. Your type is objective and not your mind's fantasy by which you can manipulate by irrational "thinking" and to control what goes to it by censorship. What is your type is logical and not emotional region. Emotions are mainly an obstacle to understand types correctly. And so Gulenko (or just his pleasant opinion) pressed on your emotions to convince you, similarly as he did with some others with promising them duality from nowhere. And also he has trained lecturing skills to convince noobs with bad logical criticism, especially F ones.
Then
That is not LSI talking style. You may compare yourself with @Northstar messages.
In sum, the possibility for you to have T type is low by objectively known behavior. Even without VI which you avoid without good reasons.
The situation with you reminds other Gulenko's victim @SGF. He by different(!) methods got ILE and thought his types mainly near, never Se or base T type. He switched quickly different opinions about own type in his profile what LSI should not do. But Gulenko (by his heretical ways) somehow typed him to LSI and he very liked this. Seems this made him dream that there is no basis to doubt in some of his "strong" traits. But this was an illusion, mb pleasant - but a mistake which possible to make more harm than cheap pleasure from it. Harm for him and other people.
Last edited by Sol; 02-25-2022 at 03:54 PM.
@Sol, Sol he DOESNT think he is lsi.
He is making fun of, when he is saying putin is his identical, he doesn't mean it.
This whole post is written based on false assumptions.
Harmonizing SubtypeInspector - Selector
Prototypes: Farmers, beekeepers, antique collectors, museum workers, master restorers, landscape painters, the unfortunate statesman who lacks an inclinations towards drastic measures
In communication, this subtype is an attentive and friendly conversationalist, able to listen patiently and give good advice. She empathizes with others during difficult moments, showing attention and sympathy. She is able to provide small services and is very courteous and kind. She gives the impression of a smile. When engaged in casual conversations within her inner circle, she is inclined to joke and display her abilities, although with large groups in public, she may get confused or stop, becoming distracted and unintelligible.
She loves family, children, and kinship ties. She is caring, especially when she is in a good mood and nothing is bothering her. However, she does not always maintain good stable relations, owing to irritability and a tendency to impose her views and judgements. She is often irritable and dissatisfied with everything around.
This LSI gravitates toward a comfortable life. She is demanding and picky with food, eating only what she is accustomed to or what she thinks is good. She has distinguished aesthetics in daily life and in her clothing, keeping track of cleanliness (especially hygiene, as she is squeamish and often takes a shower), as opposed to maintaining strict order.
She rarely uses procedures but carefully keeps things in order, freeing up space. She is good at making things by hand and provides everything necessary for the home. She seeks comfort, prosperity, and material acquisitions.
Due to her contradictory nature, she seems unpredictable to those around her. At the very last minute, she'll change her plans and is inclined to be late. At the same time, interpersonal confrontation quickly tired her, she she seeks compromises. Internally she is sensitive by nature. She will verbally agree with a person, but then do everything her own way. She suffers from depressive states and is prone to sentimentality, sometimes even tearfulness.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote