# (Just Released) Bukalov: 16-Component Model of TIM and Socion



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Ixim said:


> Well the reason why the translations are bad is because English language doesn't have these things our slavic languages do. The only reminiscent thing they have is Saxon Genitive. They haven't got anything else-nominative included! That's EXACTLY why English should be an entry level language for everyone who wants to learn languages. Certainly you are not going to start with a slavic or chinese language unless you are a masochist  . Or it's your birth language /shrug .


English is Anglo-Saxon Germanic, just fyi.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Tellus said:


> Excellent!!


If you click on his Contributions on there, he also has several more Russian articles, and a few English ones.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Abraxas said:


> It's like even the machine is all, "... Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, I think he said this?"
> 
> Oh, machine. Truly only you understand my feelings. We are the same spirit, you and I. Soulmates.


Most are easy for me to see, just a matter of being on a PC. Where the chosen "justified" paragraph setting throws in hyphens and continues the word on next line is one of the common errors on there. Another is simple alternate word choices that don't translate into the recognized one; e.g., at one point they used the word for "mark" instead of "sign."


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> If you click on his Contributions on there, he also has several more Russian articles, and a few English ones.


Ok, thanks. 

Consider fig.3 in the article. This is a 4-dimensional structure, i.e. two info-cubes that are connected... so the picture of a cube inside a cube is just a 3-dimensional representation. Top left ring and bottom left ring are the main functions, and top right ring and bottom right ring are the shadow functions. If these are the "original" cubes (which I believe they are) then Gulenko's and Hitta's viewpoint seems very reasonable (+Ne/-Ni --> -Ti/+Te -->). 

http:// www.socion.ru/about/article/geometry.html


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

Ixim said:


> Hungarian and Suomi are Ugro-Altaic languages or have I understood something wrong?


The lack of peer agreement on the relation between Uralic and Altaic language families... or even the actual existence of the proposed Altaic language family.



Ixim said:


> Difficult pronunciation, actually not that difficult to understand. It's nowhere near the level of slavic languages and da French.


French... complex? The only thing that makes any of the Finno-Ugric languages easier to understand than Slavic ones is the lack of gender. There's enough grammatical and locative cases to make up for that though.



nichya said:


> Huns, origins from central asia, are believed to have migrated (and cause to the great migration) one part travels over black sea to europe and one part travels from the south to where turkey is today basically. This article doesn't cross out Mongolian descent but the name itself is telling imho


What you've said here is irrelevant to what @_crashbandicoot_ said; which is that Hungarians and Finns (distant linguistic relation themselves) aren't linguistically related to Turkic peoples, nor Mongolic peoples (no evidence for them being linguistically related to Turkic languages, either).


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

nyet


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Here's another article by Bukalov:

Socionics - Main page /ru/t/antishij.html

Как пример непонимания А.А.Шияном взаимоотношения психоинформационной и физической реальности можно привести неверную трактовку им четырехмерной модели психики. Четырехмерный куб в четырехмерном пространстве представляет собой выпуклое тело, однако в трехмерном пространстве возникает его проекционное представление в виде куба в кубе. Поскольку психика человека ориентирована на трехмерное пространство, ее четырехмерная структура, по крайней мере в первом приближении, вынужденно повторяет (для наблюдателя в трехмерном пространстве) структуру куба в кубе, что, как психическая реальность, выглядит как функционально различные внешние и внутренние слои психики, реализуемые соответствующим представлением 16-компонентной модели Б.

"physical reality can cause incorrect interpretation of the four-dimensional model of the psyche. A four-dimensional cube in four-dimensional space is a convex body, however it occurs in 3-d space projector presentation in the form of a cube within a cube. Because the human psyche is focused on 3D space, its four-dimensional structure, at least to a first approximation, compulsively repeats (for an observer in three-dimensional space) the structure of the cube in the cube that as psychic reality looks like functionally different external and internal layers of the psyche, sold a corresponding view 16-component model b"


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Tellus

It's called a hypercube, a common representation of 4D in 3D.

I'm still reading through various stuff.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Tellus

Tried emailing him yesterday, but his mailbox was full lol.
The other article talks about Information Flow and Libido Flow, with the two being in opposite directions. This one talks about primary circuit and shadow circuit, with the two being in opposite directions. One could take the given Information Flow, and simply reverse the order, but this is assuming that the "opposite direction" means simple reverse order, when it could potentially mean a different starting and end point for the flow; e.g., the opposite corner of internal cube for SEI moving in the opposite direction to the outer cube. Also, the questions are raised: Are information flow and libido flow opposing flows, with a set of flows for primary side and for shadow side? Are primary and shadow opposing flows, with a set of flows for information flow and for libido flow? Are shadow and libido the same thing? Finally, it is certain that, regardless of the answers to those questions, the other article clearly states that information flow for introverts is counter-clockwise in the ego, which is in direct opposition to Model A, and not simply an add-on, as all previous English conjectures suggested.


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> @_Tellus_
> 
> Tried emailing him yesterday, but his mailbox was full lol.
> The other article talks about Information Flow and Libido Flow, with the two being in opposite directions. This one talks about primary circuit and shadow circuit, with the two being in opposite directions. One could take the given Information Flow, and simply reverse the order, but this is assuming that the "opposite direction" means simple reverse order, when it could potentially mean a different starting and end point for the flow; e.g., the opposite corner of internal cube for SEI moving in the opposite direction to the outer cube. Also, the questions are raised: Are information flow and libido flow opposing flows, with a set of flows for primary side and for shadow side? Are primary and shadow opposing flows, with a set of flows for information flow and for libido flow? Are shadow and libido the same thing? Finally, it is certain that, regardless of the answers to those questions, the other article clearly states that information flow for introverts is counter-clockwise in the ego, which is in direct opposition to Model A, and not simply an add-on, as all previous English conjectures suggested.


"the other article clearly states that information flow for introverts is counter-clockwise in the ego"

Which part of the other article are you referring to?

Shadow and libido are most likely not the same thing.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Tellus said:


> "the other article clearly states that information flow for introverts is counter-clockwise in the ego"
> 
> Which part of the other article are you referring to?




* *




Recall that Jung defined introversion and extraversion in the direction of movement of psychic energy libido or out of the subject. This information, which operates the mind, obviously moving in the opposite direction of libido. And it is quite natural: the extrovert, who libido moves outward from self , absorbs information (it moves inside). Do introvert libido moves inside, and the inside of the self moving outward information - ideas, images, presentations, 8-component model does not describe these processes. So I offered 16-component Model B, which describes a number of processes and phenomena, ignore the Model A.




* *




The model describes as the flow of information Inf to the outside for extroverts and self from the self outward for introverts and movement of libido or psychic energy (introduced the concept of Jung), which occurs in the opposite direction of the flow of information: for extroverts - from the self outward to introverts - external to the self.




* *




In the case of the introverted type (e.g. (SEI) ) Information in the block moves from EGO self through the inner function -...int the inner function -...int and further to an external function +...ext. There are also single out two processes: first, describing flow of information in model A of the primary, the first function to the second , creative , and the second - a process described by J. Briggs Myers and shown above. Accordingly, the energy of the libido moves in the opposite direction.



That's creative to leading for information (counterclockwise) for introverts, and from leading to creative for libido (clockwise) for introverts. Extroverts are the opposite. It's also shown in the pictures in that article



> Shadow and libido are most likely not the same thing.


One would think so, because the two words are so different; however, he speaks of shadow in this article as basically being the flip side of the coin and doesn't mention libido at all, and in the other article he speaks of libido as basically being the flip side of the coin and doesn't mention shadow at all. He refers two to terms independently without reference to the other and describes them both with very similar wording. They may very well be the same thing. If they separate things, and there are actually four different flows within each psyche, then it seems like he would have mentioned the two terms together or explained there being four channels at some point.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Tellus @Abraxas @To_august

Had some free time at work and access to a PC with PhotoShop.

Does this help any? It's for Introverts.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Tellus @Abraxas @To_august

Ego got woken up today a great deal. Had an epiphany.

Giving following for now. It's not from the Socionists.

Libido: Information Requested 
Information Flow: Information Supplied


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Tellus
The "shadow" is the dual. We figured this out earlier today.


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> @_Tellus_
> The "shadow" is the dual. We figured this out earlier today.


Bukalov: ILI's Shadow Ego is -Ni/+Fe (valued or unvalued)

Gulenko, Hitta: ILI's Shadow Ego is -Ne/+Ti (valued)

Krig the Viking: ILI's Shadow Ego is -Ni/+Te (unvalued)

You: ILI's Shadow Ego is +Se/-Fi. Right? (or -Se/+Fi?)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


*I am convinced that ILI's Shadow Ego is -Ne/+Fi (valued).* 

Why?

1) Stratievskaya, Eglit, Ermak and Gulenko support this version of Model A.

ILI: +Ni, -Te, +Si, -Fe // -Se, +Fi, -Ne, +Ti

Signs of Functions (+/-) article from School of System Socionics

"Signs in the vital and mental blocks 

In practice, identification of sign of vital functions by method of interview does not differ from establishing the signs of mental functions. However, it may be complicated by the fact that in general information pertaining to vital functions is always recalled from memory. The answers may sound vague, approximate, difficult to verbalize. But, at the same, a person is able to adequately assess himself or herself on multidimensional functions of Id block. Therefore, in determining the signs of vital functions, it is better to rely on information coming from person's multidimensional functions.

*Observations of the people in the process of typing, as well as analysis of responses to different aspects in terms of signs show that functions of same E/I orientation carry the same sign throughout the TIM model.*"

This corresponds with my observations as well. These are the functions that we actually notice in ILIs. However, this version of Model A contradicts the mainstream definition of the +/- signs. Furthermore, ILI's 
-Se is NOT a valued function and -Ne (black humor...) can't possibly be ILI's Ignoring function (unvalued).

A.V. Filimonov (who Bukalov refers to):

"This work is the result of lengthy observations, study the current understanding of the functions, inconsistency of various descriptions. All of this leads to the need for the introduction of a new model, the model a-2. In fact, it is a two-tier model all functions it is a two-component. That is, every function and (denote functions are shown in Fig. 1) has two levels or two characteristics, one of which describes the functions in the so-called inner circle IM, another describes this feature in the outer circle."


2) Krig the Viking

ILI: ...... // +Se (valued), -Se (unvalued)...-Fi (valued), +Fi (unvalued)........

We should notice +Se and -Fi, which are the main functions. This contradicts our observations. 


3) Bukalov

If -Ni/+Fe are valued then +Ti is weak, unconscious and a shadow function. -Si and -Ne are unvalued functions, which is clearly inaccurate.

If -Ni/+Fe are unvalued then +Ti is still weak, unconscious and a shadow function. We wouldn't notice it. "Unvalued (Shadow/inner circuit) Ego functions" is also contradictory.


4) Gulenko, Hitta

Socionics - the16types.info - plus/minus by Victor Gulenko

The main problem with this alternative is that it contradicts the most widely accepted definition of the +/- signs. Thinking blocked with Intuition implies -T and +N. Why is -Ne/+Ti impossible? '+' is about close range, specifics, itemization... so +Ti is about organizational logic, about concrete things... there are no hidden meanings to discover. Why is -Se/+Fi impossible? Because the exact valuation of our relations while we are doing things together is irrelevant (and impossible in real time). Specifics in the field of Fe/Fi requires Ne/Ni (authors, poets, reflection...).

Secondly, ILI's and LIE's behavior is both very similar AND very different. If +Ni/-Te makes us very similar (strategic, likes chess, efficient...) then -Ne/+Ti should also make us similar. But this is not the case; ILIs are scientific and LIEs like to organize people and objects.

Thirdly, this version would imply that LIE and LSE are "softer" (Fi) than ILI and SLI.


5) ILI generates ideas about how to improve the society. This necessitates a very weak +Ti/-Se (agreed upon rules/methods).

LII focuses on defining categories. This necessitates a very weak -Ni/+Fe (social hierarchy).

EII focuses on humanism. This necessitates a very weak +Ni/-Te (chess-like maneuvering).


6) ILI with Shadow Ego -Ne/+Fi finally explains why the MBTI community stick to their model. It also explains the special connection between ILE and IEI, and why many IEEs feel like ILIs.


Clarifications

This is the correct definition of valued/unvalued functions:

*Verbal (discursive) functions *(or overvalued)* -* belong to clusters of ego and super-Id. They provide the active exchange of information between people. Information on these functions is interesting, and easily discussed. They tend to self-development. 

*Non-verbal (working, cooperative) functions* - belong to the blocks of super-ego and id. Aspects of these functions are not negotiable, prefer to receive help through action, deeds. Activity is limited to immediate needs and demands of society.

-Te corresponds with +Ti since both are conscious functions.

ILI values neither -Fe nor +Fe!!


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Tellus

The dual is the opposing bit integer for the circuit of the individual. The two collapse into each other on proper information point alignment to collapse 2 dimensions into one when their circuit is completed. Following this, the new information model collapses upon the completed collapse of the mirror and the activity. The new information model collapses upon the completed adjacent Quadra to form a completed dimension of positive and negative. The remaining dimension collapses upon itself. The information paradigm returning to the dimension proper.

The individual outside the self spoken of as "the dual" is not the dual. The dual is the opposing fractured circuit within the individual seeking dualization who entered the 4th dimension upon fracture. The individual outside the self who has an opposing fracture within their own existence is meant to provide information to the self for the self's actualization of the self's dual information metabolism and collapse the information into the 3rd dimension for exponential information metabolism upon actualization of the information paradigm and granting the universal information the presence of logarithmic information metabolism as we collapse into ourselves and return universal information to dimension proper.

In my picture of the Model B. Introverted elements accept information requests from the left and supply information to the left, and accept information requests from the right and supply information to the right. Extroverted elements request information to the right and accept information from the right, and request information to the left and accept information from the left. As the information requests and supplies cross functions the +/- which denotes the existence of the information exchange, switches. The Mental Block is on one side of a piece of paper. The Vital block is on the opposite side. The Demonstrative function is on the back of the Leading. The Creative is on the back of the Ignoring. The Role is on the back of the Activating. The Suggestive is on the back of the PoLR. As information passes through the face of the paper to the back, the sign changes. The dual's Mental against the Mental of the individual completes the information loop. The dual's Vital against the Vital of the individual completes the information loop. The two combined are now one sheet. This one sheet now place and line up against the combination of Activity and Mirror sheets. This continues until all personalities are closed into one, and the universal information returns to dimension proper. Universal Information, we need to return to our dimension.

This is a question.


----------



## isuma (Aug 10, 2015)

Jeremy8419 said:


> @Tellus
> The Mental Block is on one side of a piece of paper. The Vital block is on the opposite side. The Demonstrative function is on the back of the Leading. The Creative is on the back of the Ignoring. The Role is on the back of the Activating. The Suggestive is on the back of the PoLR. As information passes through the face of the paper to the back, the sign changes.


I'm not the person you're asking the question of, I just wanted to comment that I find this image helpful (a piece of paper with something on the front and back of it).


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

isuma said:


> I'm not the person you're asking the question of, I just wanted to comment that I find this image helpful (a piece of paper with something on the front and back of it).


Don't dig too far. The end of the "Socionics road" is a place no man should ever reach.


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Don't dig too far. The end of the "Socionics road" is a place no man should ever reach.


Awww do I sense fear in you? Fear of the end of the path? :kitteh:


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Typhon said:


> Awww do I sense fear in you? Fear of the end of the path? :kitteh:


Not fear. I simply understand my personality type and my individual personality. The archetype of socionics is evil in the hands of man. We aren't meant to possess it.


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

isuma said:


> I'm not the person you're asking the question of, I just wanted to comment that I find this image helpful (a piece of paper with something on the front and back of it).


Why do you find this image helpful? What do the Leading and Demonstrative functions have in common besides being 4D?


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> As the information requests and supplies cross functions the +/- which denotes the existence of the information exchange, switches.


Okay, so you disagree with Bukalov and the majority of socionists, right? The +/- signs are not a consequence of one IM element being blocked with another according to you?

Which structure do you suggest? ILI's Shadow Ego: +Se/-Fi ? How?


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

What are the main similarities and differences between SLI and LSE according to you?


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Tellus said:


> Okay, so you disagree with Bukalov and the majority of socionists, right? The +/- signs are not a consequence of one IM element being blocked with another according to you?
> 
> Which structure do you suggest? ILI's Shadow Ego: +Se/-Fi ? How?


Shadow Ego would be +Se/-Fi and shadow id would be +Si/-Fe.

Id's 4D Ti- would match against shadows unconscious 1D Ni+.

Considering that you have a piece of paper like this:

Leading. Creative.


PoLR. Role.


Back of:


Demonstrative. Ignoring.


Dual-Seeking. Activating.


Back of Shadow:


Dual-Seeking. Activating.


Demonstrative. Ignoring.


Front of Shadow:


PoLR. Role.


Leading. Creative.

Information flow from Leading of primary to the Leading of shadow:
Ni+ through the paper to Ti- to back of next paper to Ni+ through that paper to Ti-.

This is flow on the front of a cube to the back of a cube. The normal/common flow referred to currently is from the left side of the cube to the right side.

Currently, Socionics shows information/libido flow in 2 dimensions, similar to the drawing I did. However, I am saying that the Vital Blocks exists on the back of the Mental Blocks, with information going through the square to the backside. This creates a three-dimensional flow. Another examples for clarification: If you are looking at the Mental Ring, information moves, perpendicularly to your line of sight, from Leading to Creative, AND information moves, parallel to your line of sight, from Leading to Demonstrative.

So, what I am saying is:
"Shadow" is something that exists, relative to your Mental block, on the axis that is parallel to your line of sight.
Ni+ means that, on the axis horizontally perpendicular to your line of sight, it has Te- on both sides.
Ni+ means that, on the axis vertically perpendicular to your line of sight, it has Fe- above and below it.
Ni+ means that, on the axis parallel to your line of sight, it has Ti- in front of and behind it.


----------



## isuma (Aug 10, 2015)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Don't dig too far. The end of the "Socionics road" is a place no man should ever reach.


It's okay, I'm still imagining myself buying an EEG cap and going about it that way, doing brain readings. I just can't do it at the moment (I'm currently homeless, no place to do that stuff). If I do that, I won't be as restricted by a system or theory, or won't be confused as much, although I will have to learn how to interpret whatever I find. I do get lost and confused when I try to dig too far into the theories.


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Shadow Ego would be +Se/-Fi


Let's focus on this.

Are you suggesting that ILI has Leading +Se (albeit "in the shadow")??? Just as strong as SEE's +Se? Or weak but still as Shadow Ego?

Or are you suggesting that all shadow functions are completely passive?


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Tellus said:


> Let's focus on this.
> 
> Are you suggesting that ILI has Leading +Se (albeit "in the shadow")??? Just as strong as SEE's +Se? Or weak but still as Shadow Ego?
> 
> Or are you suggesting that all shadow functions are completely passive?


I am saying that your dual's personality exists within you in the "shadow." The ILI and SEE are two halves to the same thing. Your processing goes ILI -> SEE -> ILI -> SEE, etc. To "become one with each other" 100%, allows a person to create and digest their own information at the same time. It makes your IQ go from "IQ" to "IQ x IQ." Because this basically means that you would leave this dimension, it does not exist. Instead, you may only operate half of the "completed whole," whose other perfect matching half _already and only exists within you_, at a single time. Because other people who are very similar to "our real dual that only exists within ourselves" are sooooo similar, we call these people our "duals."


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> I am saying that your dual's personality exists within you in the "shadow." The ILI and SEE are two halves to the same thing. Your processing goes ILI -> SEE -> ILI -> SEE, etc. To "become one with each other" 100%, allows a person to create and digest their own information at the same time. It makes your IQ go from "IQ" to "IQ x IQ." Because this basically means that you would leave this dimension, it does not exist. Instead, you may only operate half of the "completed whole," whose other perfect matching half _already and only exists within you_, at a single time. Because other people who are very similar to "our real dual that only exists within ourselves" are sooooo similar, we call these people our "duals."


Okay, but what exactly do you mean by "processing ILI -> SEE -> ILI -> SEE"?

Can you define SEE in this context? SEE usually means that one's Se and Fi are (strong) Ego functions.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Tellus said:


> Okay, but what exactly do you mean by "processing ILI -> SEE -> ILI -> SEE"?
> 
> Can you define SEE in this context? SEE usually means that one's Se and Fi are (strong) Ego functions.


Within you exists the SEE. You just can't access it's full utilization at the same time as ILI. Sometimes, you can flip-flop and emulate your dual, while ceasing operation as an ILI. The fact you can't do both at once is why you are "broken" and need others. Your processor can't correctly digest information, because it's missing half of itself. Basically, to be awesome and perfect, you need to have both sides of your coin showing at the same time. Normally, just one side is shown. You, of course, can't see both sides at the same time. If you could, you'd be "the perfect you." It's your coin, so someone else can't ever make you your perfect you, buuuuut someone that is your dual type can at least have something highly similar to the other side of your coin showing at the same time as the main side of your coin.


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Here's a good example of ILI's goofy "IEE-side":


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Tellus said:


> Here's a good example of ILI's goofy "IEE-side":


Trying to help you, man... INTJ is LII. That's Infantile behavior.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Tellus said:


> Here's a good example of ILI's goofy "IEE-side"


I see no reason to believe that person is an ILI. MBTI is not a subject to be taken remotely seriously.


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Trying to help you, man... INTJ is LII. That's Infantile behavior.


No, this girl is ILI/INTJ. As I have said earlier, I will postpone any comments about j=P vs. j=J until we know how Bukalov views his model. (I will hopefully get a translation within 1-2 weeks). You realize that you represent a very small minority when it comes to this topic, right?

Infantile or not... this is very typical of IEE... read the comments, they think she is ENFP.


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Fried Eggz said:


> I see no reason to believe that person is an ILI. MBTI is not a subject to be taken remotely seriously.


says the LSI... but apparently you think Enneagram is worth your attention


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Tellus said:


> No, this girl is ILI/INTJ. As I have said earlier, I will postpone any comments about j=P vs. j=J until we know how Bukalov views his model. (I will hopefully get a translation within 1-2 weeks). You realize that you represent a very small minority when it comes to this topic, right?
> 
> Infantile or not... this is very typical of IEE... read the comments, they think she is ENFP.


Wut the fuck. She's an SLE. @Fried Eggz


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

^Was that "INTJ" female in the video serious about being INTJ?

This looked like a parody on MBTI typing. Lol.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Wut the fuck. She's an SLE. @Fried Eggz


I had EP temperament and I got the impression of valued Fe. I got stuck after that. I saw things that could go either way. How'd you tell the difference? Maybe I can learn for next time.



To_august said:


> ^Was that "INTJ" female in the video serious about being INTJ?
> 
> This looked like a parody on MBTI typing. Lol.


Definitely a parody, but I got the impression it was because people kept questioning her type and she was turning it into a joke / mocking them.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Fried Eggz said:


> I had EP temperament and I got the impression of valued Fe. I got stuck after that. I saw things that could go either way. How'd you tell the difference? Maybe I can learn for next time.
> 
> 
> Definitely a parody, but I got the impression it was because people kept questioning her type and she was mocking them.


Ok, first video I think we can agree on shows Fe valuing right? Being goofy and doing facial expressions and emoting. Classical Fe.

Second video we see her being very direct and in the face, talking about actualities. It's almost like she's trying to get in your face literally, through the camera. Her overall manners and attitude points towards beta quadra due to valued Se and Fe. Like you say, she seems EP. The focus on her second video isn't emoting but trying to show how it's BS. It's a logical approach and she seems to mock Ne a lot eg people who see a lot of potential around them like what if I'm a P type because reason based on feels, especially what you see in delta NF. From this beta quadra becomes even more solidified because usually we tend to mock the opposing quadra the most since it contains all elements we don't value ourselves. From this SLE is really the only viable possibility left though I type her such mostly based on mannerisms. Her manners are extremely typical of beta ST, when they combine that Fe with their Se. Alpha quadra is much more goofy in a more get together kind of way, when Fe and Ne come together. Not so aggressive and in the face.

Edit
You know that band Electric Six? That's more NeFe goofy. Google their music videos. Good example of ILE.


----------

