Can you find my type based on how I relate each IM?

[koffee]

I hope you can and you will (
I can send pictures if its necessary (I don't understand why though) but no video !

Si: Relaxation is nice but I can find it boring and I get bored at relaxing situations easily, I need excitement and movement. I don't think about how can I make people relax. I don't take good care of my health, this year was fine but on previous years I used to get sick often. My interaction with my surrounding is not something I often think about. Activities should be enjoyable so people would do them more and improve their skills if that activity needs skill. Goals should be about what you want, not what others want. I try to be easygoing and pleasant but honestly, I wouldn't mind forcing someone to do what I want even though they don't want it. I am more interested in satifying my mental and emotional wants than physical wants. I know when I feel discomfort. I like aesthetical details and I try to dress nicely.

Se: I am a lazy person but I desire to be organized, mobilized and be good at getting things done. Like I said above, its not something I do but I wouldn't mind forcing someone to do what I want even though they don't want it, I'm selfish like that...but I dont wanna use people to get what I want so much, I'd rather do it myself and take the credit so I feel satisfied with the situation and myself. I want immediate impact, I can be very competitive. I want real world results but nonrealistic ideas can be fun. I am ambitious(yet lazy) I am all about achieving what I want. I like actively doing something. I dont like being told what to do. Instead of aggression, I would rather passion to achieve my goals. I can see world as full of obstacles but I'm trying to be positive about it. Despite all of this, I'm bad at my responsibilities. I overreact to aggressive or confrontational behaviors of others towards me. I am deceisive about what I want.

Ne: I do not naturally see the potential but I'm interested in it. I dont really know how to make complicated things simple. I can have a really random humor. I am open-minded about other peoples opinions most of the time. I like new things but I like doing interesting old things too. I plan many thing and I dont finish them because I would get bored for some reason and just dont feel like doing it. I like relating my insights to the bigger picture. I probably have high standarts.I dont pursue opportunities and ideas for its own sake but to achieve something.

Ni: I find the present moment related to past and future, I it all belongs together, exp: doing something in the past will affect the future, one event leads to another. I have a future plan, like for years later lol. because I am so future minded, its not east for me to live in the present, I wish I could. I'm also not good at paying attention to my surroundings. I am very imaginative and a daydreamer.

Ti: This IM is the IM that I don't really understand. I don't understand why someone would call their evaluations logical if its not objective. I do think I can se logical correctnesses and maybe even see the logical connection between things (idk how to explain). I rely on external sources more. I even though I know its not logical, sometimes I do illogical things. I am open to learning new things. I want my actions to make sense.

Te: Sometimes I can find myself thinking if something makes sense or not. I generally know what do to to achieve what I want ( I just dont actually do them lol) I can see whats rational and what is not. I actually like planning. I do care about effectiveness. I like learning things that I'm interested enough, like typology, i try to make sense of it. I really wanna be a productive person (I am not) . I dont want to be harsh to people. Relying on people who has the experience rather than just books makes sense. After all sometimes you shouldn't trust everything you read.

Fe: I am not very emotionally expressive but I want to be. I naturally cant really know what makes people excited but I'd love to make people excited. I am not always good at controlling my emotional state.I dont/cant respond to the emotional flow surrounding me directly. Something's value is directly tied to how much it arouses my passion. I really want positive emotional environment with people. If I'm not happy, I can not fake happiness. I may look emotionally neutral but I'm really not. I love when I'm comfortable to be myself with people.

Fi: I know what attracts me and what doesnt. I pay attention to relationship between me and other people or something. I want to satisfy my wishes and desires, I know what I want and what I don't. I want to maintain close relationships. I am either too open or reserved. I want others to be aware of my personal sentiments and help me when I'm feeling bad.I wish I was good at easily making deep friendships with strangers but I'm shy. I am not really compassionate unless I feel close enough to that person.


Also here's a questionarrie I answered long ago but some things happened => https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...ire-(venusuwu)

[Sol]

I can send pictures if its necessary (I don't understand why though) but no video !

it's experimentally proved that nonverbal behavior is important for typing
if you may give pictures, than there is no reasons to do not make a videointerview

[EUDAEMONIUM]

it's experimentally proved that nonverbal behavior is important for typing
if you may give pictures, than there is no reasons to do not make a videointerview

Is it "experimentally proved" that the information elements empirically exist? no
Has it been proven that non-verbal behavior has been linked to socionics personality types? no

You believe in pseudo-science.

I'm sure you can read palms too? And tell me my fortune using tarot cards

[Sol]

Is it "experimentally proved" that the information elements empirically exist?

The discussed was is nonverbal info is useful for typing
"I can send pictures if its necessary (I don't understand why though) but no video !"

As proved was that with usage of nonverbal info typing matches are higher than average and comparable with IRL interview in SRT-99 experiment and typing by questionnaire - 15-20% in average and up to 30-40% among any 2 typers. This proves that nonverbal info is useful for typing.

So if someone wants to be typed correctly - this needs to make a video, as much better info about nonverbal than photos. Normal typing is IRL interview. It has nonverbal info.

Also the one who knows the theory, can be predisposed to think yourself as some types - his words mb significantly filtered/falsificated and hence are worse info for typing, especially during intentional typing process. While to change nonverbal so you'd fited to other types is much harder and even doubtful to do good.

[mclane]

This is a very good method for typing somebody. I'm very glad you've proposed it. I think you could be SEE based on your answers. A picture could confirm it.

[EUDAEMONIUM]

The discussed was is nonverbal info is useful for typing
"I can send pictures if its necessary (I don't understand why though) but no video !"

As proved was that with usage of nonverbal info typing matches are higher than average and comparable with IRL interview in SRT-99 experiment and typing by questionnaire - 15-20% in average and up to 30-40% among any 2 typers. This proves that nonverbal info is useful for typing.

So if someone wants to be typed correctly - this needs to make a video, as much better info about nonverbal than photos. Normal typing is IRL interview. It has nonverbal info.

Also the one who knows the theory, can be predisposed to think yourself as some types - his words mb significantly filtered/falsificated and hence are worse info for typing, especially during intentional typing process. While to change nonverbal so you'd fited to other types is much harder and even doubtful to do good.

Wow that you used a lot of big scientific sounding words, tell me how do you tell when someone is finally the "correct" type? Because if your answer is anything but that its just your opinion, you're lying. Your "experiments" are based on false assumptions, there's no evidence that any of these types exist in any biological way. You make the mistake of thinking that since this system is logically consistent that it must have merit in the real world, which it doesn't.