difference between Fe demonstrative versus Fe use as 3rd function??

[Adam Strange]

There are many ways to look at a can of soup, and each one produces a different profile.

[Soupman]

Tbh. What i practice rn is harmony.. Because i already achieved what i want, so next is harmony with people.

I am able to do that successfully in real life, but Internet wise, people are assholes so, they get what they deserve

Everyone values harmony for pragmatic reasons but I don't see that as being your subtype, in fact, you are either one of the two extroverted subtype - that can deal with conflict. The fact that you retaliate to conflict rules out either Normalising or Harmonising instincts - you simply don't have that.

Also you do have an abrasive energy - something normalisers don't with their stability seeking, Or harmonisers with their aversion to tension. Harmonisers try to get along with everyone but aren't imposing and this is to unreasonable means. Nevertheless If you are harmonising, well something is weird, it's like your bravado is you pretending to be someone else.

However you are rational enough to minimise conflict (you are mixing your behaviour with core motivations), but that isn't the same instinct as the subtype. Harmonisers and normalisers - simply ignore conflict, pretending as if it isn't there until the situation becomes untenable.

[idontgiveaf]

The guy who runs WSS self-identified as a sociopath before on another forum. Not to go the “ad hominem” route but that’s just creepy. Their work is mediocre IMO.

Are you talking about the window server wss here

[idontgiveaf]

World Socionics Society - they have their own theory.

R is Ethics of relations (Fi)
E is Ethics of emotions (Fe)
P is Pragmatic logic (Te)
L is Structural logic (Ti)

F is Volitional Sensing (Se)
S is Sensation of pleasure (Si)
I is intuition of opportunities (Ne)
T is intuition of time (Ni)

The functions are polymorphic - they take different meanings depending on the type. R is heavily more tradition orientated in EII and ESi for example.

See? There's lots of psychology theories.. And all are theories.. Not proven yet. You don't even know which is correct or accurate

[idontgiveaf]

There are many ways to look at a can of soup, and each one produces a different profile.

That's my point. We have different judgement of things.

So if you see a thing as color red, but the other person who is colorblind and not aware of it, sees the same thing and saw a yellow.. And they fought each other who are correct.. The argument wouldn't be settled. Because each has different view of things.

(but i think when the other one saw it's flaws they will try to meet at one point)

Another scenario of how differently we perceive things. When we see a painting, we judge it differently.. Just like how we see someone, we judge him differently based on our own perception..

Like, would you even believe just specific someone to be right? No. No one is correct. Because it's a subjective judgement..

Socionics, and other psychological theories judges subjectively..

So it's not accurate or right to easily trust one source or another.. Since each is a mere theory.

[Tonatiuh]

See? There's lots of psychology theories.. And all are theories.. Not proven yet. You don't even know which is correct or accurate

A theory is proven, a hypothesis on the other hand is an unproven theory. No need to thank me for the education.

[idontgiveaf]

Everyone values harmony for pragmatic reasons but I don't see that as being your subtype, in fact, you are either one of the two extroverted subtype - that can deal with conflict. The fact that you retaliate to conflict rules out either Normalising or Harmonising instincts - you simply don't have that.

Also you do have an abrasive energy - something normalisers don't with their stability seeking, Or harmonisers with their aversion to tension. Harmonisers try to get along with everyone but aren't imposing and this is to unreasonable means. Nevertheless If you are harmonising, well something is weird, it's like your bravado is you pretending to be someone else.

However you are rational enough to minimise conflict (you are mixing your behaviour with core motivations), but that isn't the same instinct as the subtype. Harmonisers and normalisers - simply ignore conflict, pretending as if it isn't there until the situation becomes untenable.

So what do think i am? Dominant subtype??

It's because i cannot just blindly accept one opinion or theory to be true for me.

Saying you're a dude by someone just only because you look like a dude, but you have a vagina is unfair, right?

Do you just accept their false judgment of you? No. Because you think.

[maniac]

The guy who runs WSS self-identified as a sociopath before on another forum. Not to go the “ad hominem” route but that’s just creepy. Their work is mediocre IMO.

hahahaha what

[idontgiveaf]

A theory is proven, a hypothesis on the other hand is an unproven theory. No need to thank me for the education.

Yes..it's proven but it's not accurate.

Thank me for sending these definition for you :

Definition of*theory

plural*theories

1:*a*plausible*or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena*

the wavetheory*of light

2a*:*a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action*

her method is based on the*theory*that all children want to learn

b*:*an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances*—often used in the phrase*in theory*

in*theory, we have always advocated freedom for all

3a*:*a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation

b*:*an unproved assumption*:*conjecture

c*:*a body of*theorems*presenting a concise systematic view of a subject*

theory*of equations

4:*the general or abstract*principles*of a body of fact, a science, or an art*

music*theory

5:*abstract thought*:*speculation

6:*the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory

[Bertrand]

look saying socionics is wrong is a lot like saying your ex is a bad person, its better to just concede "we weren't meant for eachother"

[idontgiveaf]

look saying socionics is wrong is a lot like saying your ex is a bad person, its better to just concede "we weren't meant for eachother"

I did not say it's wrong. My point is, socionics doesn't define you as a person. So it's not accurate.. Plus, people are mostly wrong.

[The Reality Denialist]

�� we are making progress here. Yes, it merely tries to put some some sort of hierarchy on information processing of a type (generalized which means that almost everyone is an exception... milder or stronger).

[Tonatiuh]

Yes..it's proven but it's not accurate.

Thank me for sending these definition for you :

Nope!

[Soupman]

See? There's lots of psychology theories.. And all are theories.. Not proven yet. You don't even know which is correct or accurate

Actually it's not about any of them being correct per say - these are just people describing their observations and it's quite possible to find confirmational bias for the claims made.

[Soupman]

So what do think i am? Dominant subtype??

It's because i cannot just blindly accept one opinion or theory to be true for me.

Saying you're a dude by someone just only because you look like a dude, but you have a vagina is unfair, right?

Do you just accept their false judgment of you? No. Because you think.

There's the spunk in you, the abrasive energy - both creatives and dominants have the ability to be confrontational, they are tension tolerant. If you are one of the those two subtypes the question is:

How novelty seeking, risk tolerant, and rebellious are you (desire to be admired)? (If pronounced then it's creative for you)

Or How much do you admire winning and being in control? (If it's pronounced then it's dominant)

I don't know if you've seen Howard Stern - he talks about Trump the, dominant subtype, for all his shenanigans Howard has said Trump like to be liked and he wants to get along with people, he can't stand negativity. Trump's admiration is that from sycophants - not standing out for risk-taking.

[niffer]

hahahaha what

Yeah lol Jack Aaron.

That was a few years ago. He seems more normal and has a gf judging by Facebook though, so. Either he’s just a cult leader success or that plus he’s hiding his sociopathy well ..

No more comment though before any pants shitting about defamation.

[The Reality Denialist]

JOA was most likely doing some online larping based on his quite histrionically told stories. Apparently he was also doing theoretical cosmology (or something similar) in his teens.

[niffer]

wat LOOOOL

[idontgiveaf]

Actually it's not about any of them being correct per say - these are just people describing their observations and it's quite possible to find confirmational bias for the claims made.

See? Personal observations. Meaning subjective. You cannot easily trust a subjective judgement.

[idontgiveaf]

@Soupman

How novelty seeking, risk tolerant, and rebellious are you (desire to be admired)? (If pronounced then it's creative for you)
*** you know i don't really seek attention too much, although deep inside me i want to annoy all my friends and admire me. I only want friends and people i know to admire me, but not constantly seeking nor make it a priority to be constantly admired nor wanting attention. My level of desire to be admired is effortless. I will admire them with my personality and accomplishments. I am not the type to brag, but i will let them see it, and notice it. I pull this "humble type" arrogance in me. 🤣 like covert arrogance. Because people who are full of themselves are not cool. People who knows they're cool are not cool. You must not know it, you must not show the world you're great because it will come off as arrogant. And they won't admire you. They will admire you if they saw your accomplishments and you're feet is still on the ground.
But I'm actually rebellious type in terms of if i can do something about anything, I'll do it.. Regardless of what people think. Or even if the majority of people disapprove which i actually do.. I just do what i think is right and what would benefit me more.


Or How much do you admire winning and being in control? (If it's pronounced then it's dominant)
**i like winning a lot. It's not because i wanted to be admired, or i wanted to win only because i want admiration.. I do it for myself. It gives me confidence and self esteem.. It's more about what i get, or what benefits me... Because my ultimate goal is to better myself first. Because if you're better with yourself, it will show off effortlessly outside. It's like you must fix the inside first and it will automatically fixed the outside.

So.in short, it's all.about how you think and perceive things. By the way, i am not the type who wants to be in control of people or of a project.. Im the type who wants to be in.control of my life. My own life. I value freedom a lot. I'm actually a free spirit. Independent thinker.

[Soupman]

@Soupman

How novelty seeking, risk tolerant, and rebellious are you (desire to be admired)? (If pronounced then it's creative for you)
*** you know i don't really seek attention too much, although deep inside me i want to annoy all my friends and admire me. I only want friends and people i know to admire me, but not constantly seeking nor make it a priority to be constantly admired nor wanting attention. My level of desire to be admired is effortless. I will admire them with my personality and accomplishments. I am not the type to brag, but i will let them see it, and notice it. I pull this "humble type" arrogance in me. 藍 like covert arrogance. Because people who are full of themselves are not cool. People who knows they're cool are not cool. You must not know it, you must not show the world you're great because it will come off as arrogant. And they won't admire you. They will admire you if they saw your accomplishments and you're feet is still on the ground.
But I'm actually rebellious type in terms of if i can do something about anything, I'll do it.. Regardless of what people think. Or even if the majority of people disapprove which i actually do.. I just do what i think is right and what would benefit me more.


Or How much do you admire winning and being in control? (If it's pronounced then it's dominant)
**i like winning a lot. It's not because i wanted to be admired, or i wanted to win only because i want admiration.. I do it for myself. It gives me confidence and self esteem.. It's more about what i get, or what benefits me... Because my ultimate goal is to better myself first. Because if you're better with yourself, it will show off effortlessly outside. It's like you must fix the inside first and it will automatically fixed the outside.

So.in short, it's all.about how you think and perceive things. By the way, i am not the type who wants to be in control of people or of a project.. Im the type who wants to be in.control of my life. My own life. I value freedom a lot. I'm actually a free spirit. Independent thinker.

You are clearly a creative subtype, though I haven't described the essence of being a dominant subtype as clearly, it's apparent that you don't like "achievement" for achievement's sake - which is the instinct that leads Dominants to priorities controlling others to service "winning"/achievement. Admiration for dominants is welcomed, just like for other subtypes, but it's not driven by a desire to stand out and impress; their instinctual focus is always intrinsic achievement - so they take fewer risks to stand out, unlike creatives who want to be great.

[timber]

Don't come back again

erm... no worries BUD.

[idontgiveaf]

erm... no worries BUD.

You're quite the attached type 😏

[timber]

You're quite the attached type 

Getting called BUD like that is a bad thing. You are a cunt, was that more clear?

[Adam Strange]

@Soupman

How novelty seeking, risk tolerant, and rebellious are you (desire to be admired)? (If pronounced then it's creative for you)
*** you know i don't really seek attention too much, although deep inside me i want to annoy all my friends and admire me. I only want friends and people i know to admire me, but not constantly seeking nor make it a priority to be constantly admired nor wanting attention. My level of desire to be admired is effortless. I will admire them with my personality and accomplishments. I am not the type to brag, but i will let them see it, and notice it. I pull this "humble type" arrogance in me. 藍 like covert arrogance. Because people who are full of themselves are not cool. People who knows they're cool are not cool. You must not know it, you must not show the world you're great because it will come off as arrogant. And they won't admire you. They will admire you if they saw your accomplishments and you're feet is still on the ground.
But I'm actually rebellious type in terms of if i can do something about anything, I'll do it.. Regardless of what people think. Or even if the majority of people disapprove which i actually do.. I just do what i think is right and what would benefit me more.


Or How much do you admire winning and being in control? (If it's pronounced then it's dominant)
**i like winning a lot. It's not because i wanted to be admired, or i wanted to win only because i want admiration.. I do it for myself. It gives me confidence and self esteem.. It's more about what i get, or what benefits me... Because my ultimate goal is to better myself first. Because if you're better with yourself, it will show off effortlessly outside. It's like you must fix the inside first and it will automatically fixed the outside.

So.in short, it's all.about how you think and perceive things. By the way, i am not the type who wants to be in control of people or of a project.. Im the type who wants to be in.control of my life. My own life. I value freedom a lot. I'm actually a free spirit. Independent thinker.

Type descriptions created by an insightful observer or hashed out in committees by mutual assent are all well and good, but they don't compare to a person's self-description. Particularly if that person is careful with the truth.

This is one of the best descriptions I've ever seen of an SEE's motivations.

[idontgiveaf]

Getting called BUD like that is a bad thing. You are a cunt, was that more clear?

What's BUD???

[idontgiveaf]

Type descriptions created by an insightful observer or hashed out in committees by mutual assent are all well and good, but they don't compare to a person's self-description. Particularly if that person is careful with the truth.

This is one of the best descriptions I've ever seen of an SEE's motivations.

Oh really? Explain.

[timber]

What's BUD???

We're done this.

[idontgiveaf]

We're done this.

What's BUD??

[timber]

What's BUD??

Bud means you are a fucking retard, but like totes in a nicer way so as to not totally like undermine what like exists.

[idontgiveaf]

Bud means you are a fucking retard, but like totes in a nicer way so as to not totally like undermine what like exists.

What's totes. Like I'm nice? Oh thanks

[timber]

What's totes. Like I'm nice? Oh thanks

Its odd the way you think you can salvage this right now. I meant being nicer to people goes a lot further in life but like maybe I should have just like started with you're a cunt to begin with like omg

[idontgiveaf]

Its odd the way you think you can salvage this right now. I meant being nicer to people goes a lot further in life but like maybe I should have just like started with you're a cunt to begin with like omg

So Fi. Hihi
@Number 9 large

Hey stupid, this is An example of Fi dumbo.

[timber]

So Fi. Hihi
@Number 9 large

Hey stupid, this is An example of Fi dumbo.

Funny the way you have no clue whats going on right now.

It could be the way people talk where I live which would make it Fe. Right, but I know things are so confusing to like, figure out like omg

[idontgiveaf]

Funny the way you have no clue whats going on right now.

It could be the way people talk where I live which would make it Fe. Right, but I know things are so confusing to like, figure out like omg

Omggg

Like omgggg

[Adam Strange]

Oh really? Explain.

Sure. This evening, When I have more time.

[Rebelondeck]

So i actually think, i might be SLE with strong Fe.. H in DCNh.. What do you think?? ....... And how could you not say I'm more Fi than Fe?? .........

An SLE, who expresses strong Fe, would likely be rather insecure and or under a lot of stress - enough to precipitate a configuration change in information processing. Now Fi would exist under normal SLE processing although rather restricted because the overlap region between F and T processes is limited.

a.k.a. I/O

[Number 9 large]

So Fi. Hihi
@Number 9 large

Hey stupid, this is An example of Fi dumbo.

Admin shes bullying me

[idontgiveaf]

Sure. This evening, When I have more time.

Here's time > ⌚

[idontgiveaf]

An SLE, who expresses strong Fe, would likely be rather insecure and or under a lot of stress - enough to precipitate a configuration change in information processing. Now Fi would exist under normal SLE processing although rather restricted because the overlap region between F and T processes is limited.

a.k.a. I/O

What's I/O there