# Language expressions and IEs



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Ok, so I have an idea of how to make a hopefully accurate socionics test, and it'd rely on language and how people express themselves. I definitely think that there is something to how people speak that gives off what IEs they are using and also prefer using, for example:

1. When someone uses Fe, they are likely to project an emotion onto an object e.g. 

- "the heart's so sincere" instead of saying I feel like a sincere person;
- talking about how they notice feelings in the environment and from people, "this group gives off a stressful vibe"

vs. 

2. Fi 
- talking about how you relate to your own or that of others' feelings "it makes me feel uncomfortable"
- talking about the nature of relationships, "I am not so close to him anymore"

vs.

3. Te
- talking about procedures, standards, facts, "the more efficient way of achieving this result would be..."
- the actual source of this claim is...

vs. 

4. Ti
- ??? it's related to definitions but I am not sure how to express it, exactly
- the rule/hierarchy is...

5. Ne
- expressing fondness for new and novel ideas, "I thought of this great idea earlier today"
- seeing potential, "this could become X if..."

vs. 

6. Ni
- the development process is...
- I foresee X to happen
- [bunch of abstract and metaphorical speech patterns I am not sure how to really summarize]

vs. 

7. Se
- This/that is/are...
- focusing on external physical events, "it's cold outside" 
- edit; another subject Se types talk about a lot and seem fascinated by is power; who has power, how to utilize power, how to notice power in one's environment. I've never seen Si types instigate conversations about power or seeking to understand what power means/is, the lines of Foucault's theories etc. 

vs. 

8. Si
- focusing on inner physical states, "I feel cold"

These are just some general observations. Reinin can also show up in speech, especially negativism/positivism, though I won't go over that here. 

Do you find these accurate? Are there other observations you'd like to add?


----------



## Mr inappropriate (Dec 17, 2013)

Interesting idea. I remember you had some of these ideas before. I'm sure such correlative speech pattern questions would be better than asking "Do you like parties?" kinda tests. One objection may be; language differences need to be adjusted sometimes. For example; "heart is sincere" has no meaning in my language and I dont remember hearing anyone objectifying emotions like that.


> talking about the nature of relationships, "I am not so close to him anymore"


^^Such statments are more universal.

For personal observations;
Ne is kinda spot on. I guess you can add "Hey I've just had an idea!!!!!!" lol. 

I cant grasp the difference between Si and Se feeling cold. I say I feel cold when I want to convince others to go somewhere else or turn the heater on but normally its just weather is cold.

I remember Fi types commenting on the relationships with people.

Seems lke a good idea ! :happy:

I also want to analye the usage of smilies by quadras or Fe/Fi axis ? Even ExFP's seem so weirded to the idea of using them in texting compared to Fe poeple.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

I guess Si can further use "I feel cold" almost as a symbol. When being socially outcast "I feel cold". when blocked with feeling. When blocked with thinking it might look different. In a way Si is more about concrete symbolic language then Ni from what I understand at this point in time.


----------



## Recede (Nov 23, 2011)

I think one thing that has to be considered is that speech patterns are influenced by one's native language, culture, family, and friends. For instance, the one you have for Si, "I feel cold" would be an unusual speech pattern in English. I don't think I've ever heard anyone word it that way except in movies where the character is dying. In other languages and cultures, it's more common to word it that way, but in English and where I'm from we just say "It's cold."


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I remember there is this article on this subject:

Socionics - the16types.info - Semantics and Vocabulary of Information Elements


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

crashbandicoot said:


> Interesting idea. I remember you had some of these ideas before. I'm sure such correlative speech pattern questions would be better than asking "Do you like parties?" kinda tests. One objection may be; language differences need to be adjusted sometimes. For example; "heart is sincere" has no meaning in my language and I dont remember hearing anyone objectifying emotions like that.
> 
> ^^Such statments are more universal.
> 
> ...


What inspired it was when a coworker of mine came up to me some days ago and said, "I feel cold". I had typed her as a delta some time ago and I remember I asked her "do you think it's cold?" or something, and afterwards it kind of struck me how we approached the same subject very differently. I seem to understand physical states more objectively, not so much on my own reactions to them but just noticing that they are there, which makes sense because that's what extroversion does in general. You see this with Fe vs Fi too, for example. 

So I figured there have to be more to this and I've been very sure for a long time now that if you want to make a test it has to be based on language. 

I understand if a person's language does not have such expressions; hence for now, this would be tailored for English. Other languages work differently, so you need a different algorithm for that.

Also, how is "we are not so close anymore?" universal? Yes, it's universal in the sense that I think most people could say or express that, but do you really think an ILE or SLE would express those sentiments when losing a friend, for example? I am not so sure they would. I think they would try to describe it more in terms of emotional atmosphere, "we don't have so much fun together anymore", over "we aren't so close anymore", if that makes sense?



Recede said:


> I think one thing that has to be considered is that speech patterns are influenced by one's native language, culture, family, and friends. For instance, the one you have for Si, "I feel cold" would be an unusual speech pattern in English. I don't think I've ever heard anyone word it that way except in movies where the character is dying. In other languages and cultures, it's more common to word it that way, but in English and where I'm from we just say "It's cold."


Yeah, that's a fair point too. This was a conversation in Swedish, but in Swedish you cay say "I feel cold" as a reaction to external coldness, and you can say "it's cold" and both are valid statements. I already wrote a thread about how I think Swedish is biased towards Si in this way. There are a lot of phrasings in Swedish that are very Si-ish.


----------



## Recede (Nov 23, 2011)

Entropic said:


> Yeah, that's a fair point too. This was a conversation in Swedish, but in Swedish you cay say "I feel cold" as a reaction to external coldness, and you can say "it's cold" and both are valid statements. I already wrote a thread about how I think Swedish is biased towards Si in this way. There are a lot of phrasings in Swedish that are very Si-ish.


Maybe there could be a mental process component to the test to balance that. For example, "When you say 'It's cold'/'I feel cold', what do you really mean?"


----------



## Mr inappropriate (Dec 17, 2013)

@Entropic

Ah what i meant by fi statement being universal is that it (probably) expresses the same thing in all languages and fairly common usage. Contrasted to "The heart is sincere." This just has no meaning in my language.
Actually, yeah i, too, refrain from commenting on distance in r'ships and such; best you would get is "we havent seen eachother for a looong time, we had a lot to catch up..." or sth like that.. So i dont think(and remember) fi polr's are likely to talk like that. I mean we arent close kinda comments.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

So let's see... I will post some thoughts on here as they come up. 

Recently have had to work extensively with an IxE on some projects. He's fairly intelligent and often has good ideas about stuff. Here are some differences between me and him that I noticed.

1. He uses "may", "might" and "maybe" a lot more than I do. 

2. "Interesting" is a very important word in his vocabulary. When I talk about interest, I talk about it in terms of "capturing" or "getting" people's interest, as if interest is an object to be won. He talks about interest as if it is something more universal and natural. People should naturally just consider things interesting. During all the time we worked on presentations together, I talked more about "this will/will not get their attention" while he said stuff like "this is/is not an interesting concept/idea"

3. When I mentioned an idea to him, he would often say "yes...." while considering it, before actually agreeing or disagreeing. In contrast, I tend to let the person demonstrate the value of their idea by asking many questions about it. "Why is this gonna be useful?" "How do you plan to implement it?" "And what's the point of this supposed to be?" before actually agreeing or disagreeing.

4. In general I use "do", "complete", "goal", "achieve", "best" and similar words a lot when I'm working on a project. Standard things when dealing with people in a group project are "what have you got?" "let's see what you've done" "impress me" "go on" "you should have this done by..." "show me what you mean" "give me an example", etc. 

In contrast the Ne dom guy was like "you can have this done" "it would be better if you did this" "I think you should" -- small differences, as I used these words too, but in contrast, he never used the words I listed above as examples of my communication. More uncertain phrasing overall. My instructions tend to be more direct and concise. 

5. This is not a verbal difference, but I believe tone and body language are also pretty important aspects of communication (93%!!!). In general, his tone was a lot softer and more hesitant than mine. When I talk, I place sharp emphasis on the words that I think are important in my sentence, unless of course, I don't believe in the validity of my idea. 

When it comes to body language, I move my hands a lot and gesture to imaginary objects. I also make cutting gestures a lot, and my face is very expressive when explaining something. The Ne dom has pretty loose body language, often bends his back to lean forward when listening to something, keeps his hands loosely clasped, and nods a lot. He also narrows his eyes more than I do.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

crashbandicoot said:


> Ah what i meant by fi statement being universal is that it (probably) expresses the same thing in all languages and fairly common usage. Contrasted to "The heart is *sincere*." This just has no meaning in my language.


Yes I kinda reacted to this one too. But I guess some Fe-leads might use it. When someone talking about the vibe in the room you should quickly suspect Fe.  

I think the word "nice" is very Se but some touch of Fe? I think word choice is judging and the way the word is used is perceiving. So if you really going for it each wording could be looked from the standpoint of at least 2 functions.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> Yes I kinda reacted to this one too. But I guess some Fe-leads might use it. When someone talking about the vibe in the room you should quickly suspect Fe.
> 
> Fi would express feelings as a separate thing from everything else. What does this make me feel. (not unlike Si but different). And Fe be what is really going on. (not unlike Se but different).
> 
> People here are very load and rude. SeFe. This crowed make me feel small and insignificant (or maybe freaking awesome) Fi. When I am with these people I feel this (Fe because of the directness, like a fact. Creative Fe?. Or Fi blocked with Se.). I think the word "nice" is very Se. I think word choice is judging and the way the word is used is perceiving. So if you really going for it each wording could be looked from the standpoint of at least 2 functions.


I agree with your general sentiment but how is "nice" Se?


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Entropic said:


> I agree with your general sentiment but how is "nice" Se?


I removed text because messy and no point. I was thinking of "Trevligt", Swedish word for "nice". Which I heard a lot from ESE and expressive SEE. In general 4D Fe and Se. Moreso ESE.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> I removed text because messy and no point. I was thinking of "Trevligt", Swedish word for "nice". Which I heard a lot from ESE and expressive SEE. In general 4D Fe and Se. Moreso ESE.


I dunno, trevligt seems more Fe than Se to me. Similar sentiment to "how nice!" imo. More about pleasantness, if that makes sense.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Ni doms tend to love saying things like "seems like" "putting it this way/in a way/if we look at it this way" "on some level" "you could say that" "in a sense/in another sense" "looks like" "wouldn't be surprised if".


----------



## Graveyard (Oct 23, 2015)

Well uh, it's definitely type related. I've also come to the conclusion that the IEs have something to do with speech patterns. For example, in a Ni-dom there's a lot of doubt. Things like "it seems", "appears to be", "it might be" or "that's probably it". As if not entirely sure of what we're saying?

Fe types and Fi types (not necessarily dominants, could be aux as well) also seems to have some sort of pattern. For example, a Fe type will usually speak about how the thing /was/, instead of how they felt regarding it. "It was a fun ride!", they may. However, Fi types relate to how they felt regarding it. "I enjoyed it".

And we could probably extend this, too, to Te and Ti. I have an ESTP friend, and half-jokingly I explained this. I said:

"Spot the Fi-dom!
'I didn't like this'
'This irritares me'
'This annoys me'"

And she said she spoke like that. And it's true, she always speaks of how she felt. Haven't had much contact with Te-types, mostly because I avoid them. So I cannot say for sure.

Regarding Si and Se, I have no idea. I've been trying to see if the Fe-Te/Fi-Ti speech pattern holds true, and so far, it has been.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Night Huntress said:


> I dunno, trevligt seems more Fe than Se to me. Similar sentiment to "how nice!" imo. More about pleasantness, if that makes sense.


It is used as description yes. I find that SEE might use words like cosy or such which seem a bit more 'personal' and ESE might use more of the word nice. But in general types with same 4D functions as in ESE and SEE do share some commonalities in this area IME.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> It is used as description yes. I find that SEE might use words like cosy or such which seem a bit more 'personal' and ESE might use more of the word nice. But in general types with same 4D functions as in ESE and SEE do share some commonalities in this area IME.


Well, "cozy" is an Si kind of word, implying internal comfortable states. I think ESEs would therefore be far more likely to use those words than an SEE?


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Well, "cozy" is an Si kind of word, implying internal comfortable states. I think ESEs would therefore be far more likely to use those words than an SEE?


"This is cosy" would be Se. I just personally find that Se call it out for what it is and Si might enjoy expressing with things from old experiences or things. Like this is like sitting on a beach in hawaii or something.


----------



## Verity (Aug 2, 2014)

A minor rule of thumb that I use about Beta NFs is that they seem more comfortable expressing themselves in terms of "we" or "us" and if they speak in terms of "I", you can expect an "us","we" or "you" to follow, so when you confront them about something that only includes them as a person they tend to get really uncomfortable. For example, I play Heroes of the Storm with an IEI, and he has huge trouble explaining his own or someone elses individual actions when we lose a game, but he has an easy time explaining what we as a group should do in abstract terms such as "*I* think *we* should have focused on being more synchronized".

Maybe this is really basic, but still worth mentioning imo



Night Huntress said:


> Ni doms tend to love saying things like "seems like" "putting it this way/in a way/if we look at it this way" "on some level" "you could say that" "in a sense/in another sense" "looks like" "wouldn't be surprised if".


Oh, so _that's_ why... 

Couldn't Ni demonstratives do the same?


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Verity said:


> Oh, so _that's_ why...
> 
> Couldn't Ni demonstratives do the same?


"Could" they? Anyone "could" say these things. But I get your question, and the answer to it is that while people use some superficial language associated with their demonstrative, they don't tend to actually feel like they're saying anything of much importance in that area. So they don't do it often -- not enough to form a pattern.

Note I'm speaking of general tendencies, and outliers may exist.

Personal experience: never seen Ni demonstratives talk this way enough for it to be a common part of their speech. They tend to be like, "well, hmm, I suppose it COULD be this way..."


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Verity said:


> Oh, so _that's_ why...
> 
> Couldn't Ni demonstratives do the same?


My understanding of those with Ni demonstrative seem to be that they utilize their HA in speeches over Ni.


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

Well, this is an interesting topic, though I'm reminded of how my way of expressing myself has probably changed over time, which might also affect the impression someone has of my type, etc. And now I'm slightly worried that I'll always give a fake impression 'cause I can't find a natural way to express myself. =P

(At the same time I partly got into typology in the first place 'cause I thought it could help me express myself in a way, so I don't feel too bad for using buzz words that are associated with certain types, even if I don't want to manipulate my image towards a type too much.)


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Entropic

Would be most beneficial to do this in a dimensionality way. Ask element questions for each of the 4 dimensions. Can go through the various descriptive resources and pull common traits from them; e.g., Look at how EII and ESI have Fi described in Russian sources, then to IEE and SEE, etc.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> @Entropic
> 
> Would be most beneficial to do this in a dimensionality way. Ask element questions for each of the 4 dimensions. Can go through the various descriptive resources and pull common traits from them; e.g., Look at how EII and ESI have Fi described in Russian sources, then to IEE and SEE, etc.


You cannot capture dimensionality in this way. What you can capture is the presence of an IE and thus measure the likelihood of people favoring that IE. That's it.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

"It wouldn't make sense," "it doesn't make sense," "this is nonsense." This is a decidedly Ti / LSI phrase. The determination to bring our entire lives into conformity with our own logical conclusions leads us to talk about sense quite frequently.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Fried Eggz said:


> "It wouldn't make sense," "it doesn't make sense," "this is nonsense." This is a decidedly Ti / LSI phrase. The determination to bring our entire lives into conformity with our own logical conclusions leads us to talk about sense quite frequently.


How would you distinguish this from other logical types and how would you distinguish the negative form of this (X is NOT valid) from negativism?


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Maybe ILI would say "this is stupid" and LSI say "this does not make sense". 
edit: better example would be Te dom. like LSE. Since they got Ti ignore...


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Entropic said:


> How would you distinguish this from other logical types and how would you distinguish the negative form of this (X is NOT valid) from negativism?


I'm basing this more on observation than reasoning. Obviously other types say it, but I've heard it disproportionately often from myself and other LSIs.

But even so, when people say "this doesn't make sense" it's often used subjectively. Your choice of the word 'valid' is so much more concrete.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Fried Eggz said:


> I'm basing this more on observation than reasoning. Obviously other types say it, but I've heard it disproportionately often from myself and other LSIs.
> 
> But even so, when people say "this doesn't make sense" it's often used subjectively. Your choice of the word 'valid' is so much more concrete.


How is it more concrete? Do you think LSIs wouldn't use the word "valid"?


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

ILI's don't argue logic. They just state it and walk away, because it isn't practical to do otherwise.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Entropic said:


> How is it more concrete? Do you think LSIs wouldn't use the word "valid"?


Well, I certainly don't use it outside of contract law. Valid has a factual focus in its definition. It's absolute/concrete. Whereas "make sense" is understanding focused.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Ti-dom do not use Te. They create a structure that which where all the Te stuff fits in. But do not use those Te things. So when it come to language and how we express ourselves it is to some degree a mirror to how we reason and think of stuff from within, also how we perceive things. Of course someone who is Ti-dom hanging out with Te-dom people all day will adapt to that language but still using their Ti only. Ti-dom is very exact and refine way of thinking and if things does not match with their thinking they might want to exam it bottom up to see if they can refine with thinking even more.


----------



## Verity (Aug 2, 2014)

Ti-doms often type in short sentences. Like staccato. Which removes the sense of flow. Like androids. And I understand why. I think it makes it easier to ensure logical coherence. In the language. In the head. Quite practical actually.












Yep, that's me horribly emulating a Ti-dom.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Something I've noted about Si is that it really enjoys talking about weather and weather phenomena.

Also, when Ne types try to convince others, they talk about it in terms of interesting, eg wouldn't that be fun/interesting? Se focuses on doing and action eg I want to do that.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

*Speech patterns of the SFs~

ESE: *The Fe sub has a fluid, typically high voice. Seamlessly transitions from soft to loud and is randomly punctuated by hoarse exclamations or imitations of other people/things. The Si sub has markedly fewer hoarse punctuations, and is softer and extremely earnest in its tone. Uses longer adjectives and wordier reactions as compared to the Fe sub -- while the Fe sub could say things like "great!" "wow!" "that's terrible", the Si sub is likelier to say things like "that's absolutely beautiful" "oh no that sounds awful to hear" "what a fantastic work of art". All ESEs love using words and expressions of explicit agreement -- big smiles, long nods, "absolutely!" "I totally agree!" and things like that.

When stressed out/challenged they become inflexible and keep repeating the same words and sentences over and over. Their sentences often lose grammatical coherence and to regain it, they begin addressing their own feelings and reactions. They may often attempt to guilt trip you by saying things about their emotions like "I feel so sad that you're being this way" "I am ashamed to be associated with this" "I am very disappointed that you think that". Tend to prefer "I'm sorry" over "I apologize". 

*SEE:* The Se sub often has a coarse, throaty speech style that rises and falls abruptly for emphasis or strong reactions. The Fi sub has more even transitions between tones -- a "wave-like" voice, like the ESE-Fe, but the ESE-Fe can be described as having a wave of very high amplitude, while the SEE-Fi has a far lower amplitude and therefore less pronounced dips and highs. (Not to be confused with general amplitude, which dictates sound volume; I'm just using an analogy). The Fi sub typically has longer sentences than the Se sub, and says a lot of "I hate this" "I just love how" "I find it so fucking cool that" "so pathetic/disgusting/horrible/[insert adjective of extremely strong negative judgment]". The Se sub is likelier to love mentioning facts and random statistics, and uses WAY more verbs than the SEE-Fi, who uses more adjectives. Example: "I know that sucked" vs. "I know that was annoying". Both voices can be extremely sharp. Sentences are typically short to middling in length. All SEEs use "I want" and "I don't want" a lot. "Let's be real" "for real" "frankly" and similar words are also common.

When fighting with someone the SEE-Se is likelier to use colorful and descriptive language to describe your misdeeds, while the SEE-Fi is likelier to talk about their reactions, other people's reactions, or use some character insult. SEE-Fi has more dramatic rises and falls in their voice than the SEE-Se when angry/upset. 

*SEI and ESI coming soon!*

_Disclaimer: All of this is gathered from my own experiences, so evaluate accordingly!_


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Entropic said:


> 5. Ne
> - expressing fondness for new and novel ideas, "I thought of this great idea earlier today"
> - seeing potential, "this could become X if..."
> 
> ...


<.< lol yeah. If I get the chance I start enthusiastically ranting about technology, economy, politics, self improvement, health and so on regarding new potentials, opportunities present and patterns I have observed, which lead to understanding, solutions or profit :/...

The more information I have in my head (Te) the worse this can get. I'll see patterns and opportunities everywhere, who, how where, what and the potential of the combination .....


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Isn't this behavior? Why are we typing on behavior?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Isn't this behavior? Why are we typing on behavior?


Yes, it is behavior, which is something that can be quantified, fitting the original purpose of the thread:



> Ok, so I have an idea of how to make a hopefully accurate socionics test, and it'd rely on language and how people express themselves.


It is obvious that there are some behaviors more typical for a certain type than other types. If that was not so, we wouldn't be able to type people at all.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Verity said:


> Ti-doms often type in short sentences. Like staccato. Which removes the sense of flow. Like androids. And I understand why. I think it makes it easier to ensure logical coherence. In the language. In the head. Quite practical actually.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It is quite nice, you read something then absorb it and there are between the sentences a place to reflect if you like to. In LSI each sentence survive on their own.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Entropic said:


> Yes, it is behavior, which is something that can be quantified, fitting the original purpose of the thread:
> 
> 
> 
> It is obvious that there are some behaviors more typical for a certain type than other types. If that was not so, we wouldn't be able to type people at all.


It isn't obvious to me. I always hear you harping how behavior is not cognition. Recently I saw you saying that mental states ARE behavior and complained that somebody was using it to type. If mental states are behavior and you objected to that --when mental states are cognition by definition, why should actual behavior not be considered behavior and objected to on those grounds? It is incoherent. What is and isn't behavior, and if it is valid to type, seems to be based on your personal whim at the time.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Captain Mclain said:


> It is quite nice, you read something then absorb it and there are between the sentences a place to reflect if you like to. In LSI each sentence survive on their own.


Flattery will get you everywhere.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> It is quite nice, you read something then absorb it and there are between the sentences a place to reflect if you like to. In LSI each sentence survive on their own.


This is interesting. An ESE I know feels the same way. She thinks that sentences and ideas should have healthy pauses so that everything can sink in and leave you content, ready for the next bit of information.

In contrast I like fluidity and connection; feeling like every sentence and concept readily leads to the next and forms a beautifully unfolding sequence.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> It isn't obvious to me. I always hear you harping how behavior is not cognition. Recently I saw you saying that mental states ARE behavior and complained that somebody was using it to type. If mental states are behavior and you objected to that --when mental states are cognition by definition, why should actual behavior not be considered behavior and objected to on those grounds? It is incoherent. What is and isn't behavior, and if it is valid to type, seems to be based on your personal whim at the time.


Is this how you think you are "against" people?


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Fried Eggz said:


> Flattery will get you everywhere.


I kinda like Ti at the moment. It is not empty. 



Night Huntress said:


> This is interesting. An ESE I know feels the same way. She thinks that sentences and ideas should have healthy pauses so that everything can sink in and leave you content, ready for the next bit of information.
> 
> In contrast I like fluidity and connection; feeling like every sentence and concept readily leads to the next and forms a beautifully unfolding sequence.


Yes. I think ESE like it even more-so.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

@Entropic  I find it amusing how you manage to antagonize so many IEIs.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

FreeBeer said:


> @Entropic  I find it amusing how you manage to antagonize so many IEIs.


To be fair though, I also wonder how many of those people are not IEIs, but that's for another day.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Entropic said:


> To be fair though, I also wonder how many of those people are not IEIs, but that's for another day.


^^ hehe. Good point.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Entropic said:


> Is this how you think you are "against" people?


Can you ever use logic to make an objective argument? Another member and I already had this discussion with you. When you called a mental state a "behavior". Address my point.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Can you ever use logic to make an objective argument? Another member and I already had this discussion with you. When you called a mental state a "behavior". Address my point.


The 4D function seem to be almost a mental state. Our creative is more behavior I think. but at the very starting point it is mechanisms in brain. Why you 2 even fighting. It is obvious communication error.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> The 4D function seem to be almost a mental state. Our creative is more behavior I think. but at the very starting point it is mechanisms in brain. Why you 2 even fighting. It is obvious communication error.


No, it isn't. It is a lack of him to make his system coherent. A behavior is not a mental state. A state of mind is not a behavior. It is a cognition. He says otherwise. He says we shouldn't type on behavior as well. There is no miscommunication it is just him making things up. Where is the logic? Why are you lapping it up? This is how people end up believing in stupid things. This is where it begins. His incoherent subjective logic would become orthodoxy.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> No, it isn't. It is a lack of him to make his system coherent. A behavior is not a mental state. A state of mind is not a behavior. It is a cognition. He says otherwise. He says we shouldn't type on behavior as well. There is no miscommunication it is just him making things up. Where is the logic? Why are you lapping it up? This is how people end up believing in stupid things. This is where it begins. His incoherence would become orthodoxy.


I think we can say Fi is almost an state of mind and not behavior. Perhaps that is the source of this opinion?


----------



## AdInfinitum (Oct 21, 2014)

Entropic said:


> To be fair though, I also wonder how many of those people are not IEIs, but that's for another day.


Nah, 90% of the IEIs on PerC are LSIs as I have noticed.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

This has been a PSA.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> I think we can say Fi is almost an state of mind and not behavior. Perhaps that is the source of this opinion?


You aren't getting it, man. lol. A mental state is not a behavior. He thinks a place in my head is a behavior. You have to understand what these words mean in reality. He says we shouldn't type on behavior. Hear it all the time. He doesn't know the distinction between cognition and behavior. You don't either. But at least you don't tell people not to type on behavior all the time without knowing what it is.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> You aren't getting it, man. lol. A mental state is not a behavior. He thinks a place in my head is a behavior. You have to understand what these words mean in reality. He says we shouldn't type on behavior. Hear it all the time. He doesn't know the distinction between cognition and behavior. You don't either. But at least you don't tell people not to type on behavior all the time without knowing what it is.


Ok please enlighten me.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Can you ever use logic to make an objective argument? Another member and I already had this discussion with you. When you called a mental state a "behavior". Address my point.





FearAndTrembling said:


> No, it isn't. It is a lack of him to make his system coherent. A behavior is not a mental state. A state of mind is not a behavior. It is a cognition. He says otherwise. He says we shouldn't type on behavior as well. There is no miscommunication it is just him making things up. Where is the logic? Why are you lapping it up? This is how people end up believing in stupid things. This is where it begins. His incoherent subjective logic would become orthodoxy.


And yet you think I'm a Ti dom? Yup, that consistency.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Entropic said:


> And yet you think I'm a Ti dom? Yup, that consistency.


lol. This is the kind of things Ti actually miss by not perceiving first. Coupled with Se, which is lack of lateral thinking. You think I am Ne polr? lol. I am Se polr if anything. I don't give a damn about rules or force. I am some sort of Fi/Ne type. That is what Socionics tests usually give me. I didn't want it either. Jeremy was right.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> lol. This is the kind of things Ti actually miss by not perceiving first. Coupled with Se, which is lack of lateral thinking. You think I am Ne polr? lol. I am Se polr if anything. I don't give a damn about rules or force. I am some sort of Fi/Ne type. That is what Socionics tests usually give me. I didn't want it either. Jeremy was right.


Ti do not miss things.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> Ti do not miss things.


Yes it does. If it didn't, it wouldn't have to ask so many questions. There is more to what is going on than just logic. Somebody in another thread said Ti doms were "obtuse" I believe. lol. I agree it certainly can be.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Yes it does. If it didn't, it wouldn't have to ask so many questions. There is more to what is going on than just logic. Somebody in another thread said Ti doms were "obtuse" I believe. lol. I agree it certainly can be.


No it does not. Your understanding of Ti is very limited.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> No it does not. Your understanding of Ti is very limited.


That isn't an argument. 

Where do such absolute statements come from? Why? Like, "No, simply no." Why? Ti misses things. It misses a lot of things. Ti thinks the concept is the reality. It believes in the abstraction. That abstraction is a very small part of reality. Logic is not reality. Ti thinks it is, that is why it misses so much.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> That isn't an argument.
> 
> Where do such absolute statements come from? Why? Like, "No, simply no." Why? Ti misses things. It misses a lot of things. Ti thinks the concept is the reality. It believes in the abstraction. That abstraction is a very small part of reality. Logic is not reality. Ti thinks it is, that is why it misses so much.


Ti doesnt believe shit. So how you going to have it, is function an action, reaction or a state of being?


----------



## Zamyatin (Jun 10, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> lol. This is the kind of things Ti actually miss by not perceiving first. Coupled with Se, which is lack of lateral thinking. You think I am Ne polr? lol. I am Se polr if anything. I don't give a damn about rules or force. I am some sort of Fi/Ne type. That is what Socionics tests usually give me. I didn't want it either. Jeremy was right.


Lol, so this guy has gone from passionately ranting against Te and Fi to claiming to be a Te and Fi type in literally 24 hours. And you're actually attacking other people for being inconsistent? Do you even have a coherent thought in your head?


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> Ti doesnt believe shit. So how you going to have it, is function an action, reaction or a state of being?


What is your argument on why Ti "doesn't miss anything"? I don't think you get what Ti is.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Zamyatin said:


> Lol, so this guy has gone from passionately ranting against Te and Fi to claiming to be a Te and Fi type in literally 24 hours. And you're actually attacking other people for being inconsistent? Do you even have a coherent thought in your head?


Yeah so? I am open to change and not even invested in this.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> What is your argument on why Ti "doesn't miss anything"? I don't think you get what Ti is.


You just a click-bait. You do not offer anything in return. You do just trying to spark reactions.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> You just a click-bait. You do not offer anything in return. You do just trying to spark reactions.


Still no answer on your absolute statement that Ti "doesn't miss things". No, I believe Ti actually misses things and explained why.


----------



## Zamyatin (Jun 10, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Yeah so? I am open to change and not even invested in this.


For someone who supposedly isn't invested in these things, you spend an inordinate amount of time picking fights with people about these things, preacher.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Zamyatin said:


> For someone who supposedly isn't invested in these things, you spend an inordinate amount of time picking fights with people about these things, preacher.


I know I have a problem. 

A lot of people still don't know what the hell they are talking about though.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I know I have a problem.
> 
> A lot of people still don't know what the hell they are talking about though.


And you do, seeing how you claim to not care about this meaning you do not care for consistent application of theory?


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Entropic said:


> And you do, seeing how you claim to not care about this meaning you do not care for consistent application of theory?


I can take general concepts and do that, yes. Such as the behavior-cognition distinction. How can anyone spend so much time on this subject and have such a fundamental misunderstanding of basic definitions? I don't think it has anything to do with functions I just think people are ignorant about the philosophy and history of psychology coupled with lack of critical thinking skills and perhaps laziness. Much of this shit has been sorted by real experts. Do you think this McClain guy has any clue what Ti is for example? lol. He doesn't even know what behavior is, much less behaviorism, or the previous thought on that. Few people do apparently. What is being learned here? Why should anyone invest time in what you or others have to say? It is a waste of time.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I can take general concepts and do that, yes. Such as the behavior-cognition distinction. How can anyone spend so much time on this subject and have such a fundamental misunderstanding of basic definitions? I don't think it has anything to do with functions I just think people are ignorant about the philosophy and history of psychology coupled with lack of critical thinking skills and perhaps laziness. Much of this shit has been sorted by real experts. Do you think this McClain guy has any clue what Ti is for example? lol. He doesn't even know what behavior is, much less behaviorism, or the previous thought on that. Few people do apparently. What is being learned here? Why should anyone invest time in what you or others have to say? It is a waste of time.


Tbh you seem to be unvaluing Ti and valuing a low dimension Te (and not much Se around). Did you consider EII?


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> Tbh you seem to be unvaluing Ti and valuing a low dimension Te (and not much Se around). Did you consider EII?


Yes, I have considered most types. I do think I use Ti in some fashion tho. lol. Maybe not. But trying to put Jeremy and I at LSI is laughable. Jeremy particularly. The guy talks forever and gets nowhere. And doesn't care. He is just a pea in a pod with Myst and Fried Eggz. Are people serious? Can people not see a vast difference between them? Since this is a thread on language. How fucking dry they are? For God's sake. I am not hating, I am just saying they have a dry and rigid tone that I don't relate to and Jeremy is not even close to. They are dry and stern like supposed ILI on this forum. I think TJ are actually supposed to be dry though.


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

Have you collected any notes? They would probably help draw out the structures.


----------



## Zamyatin (Jun 10, 2014)

Captain Mclain said:


> Tbh you seem to be unvaluing Ti and valuing a low dimension Te (and not much Se around). Did you consider EII?


Nah, highly unlikely given his reactions. What he calls "dry" and "boring" conversation is straightforward discussion of facts, or Te. Dunno if you've been around many ESTJs, but they're dry as fuck. If he were an EII, he'd actually appreciate that style of communication because it's unpretentious and straightforward, two of the big things he would like about his dual. Instead, he's looking for something more flowery and shiny and organic and emotive and expressive -- Fe seeking.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Zamyatin said:


> Nah, highly unlikely given his reactions. What he calls "dry" and "boring" conversation is straightforward discussion of facts, or Te. Dunno if you've been around many ESTJs, but they're dry as fuck. If he were an EII, he'd actually appreciate that style of communication because it's unpretentious and straightforward, two of the big things he would like about his dual. Instead, he's looking for something more flowery and shiny and organic and emotive and expressive -- Fe seeking.


no.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Zamyatin said:


> Nah, highly unlikely given his reactions. What he calls "dry" and "boring" conversation is straightforward discussion of facts, or Te. Dunno if you've been around many ESTJs, but they're dry as fuck. If he were an EII, he'd actually appreciate that style of communication because it's unpretentious and straightforward, two of the big things he would like about his dual. Instead, he's looking for something more flowery and shiny and organic and emotive and expressive -- Fe seeking.


So you think the lower Fe types on here do the same? The LSI on here? Fe is shiney. It has style. Maybe dual seeking isn't real.


----------



## Zamyatin (Jun 10, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> So you think the lower Fe types on here do the same? The LSI on here? Fe is shiney. It has style. Maybe dual seeking isn't real.


Low Fe people seek people with high Fe. I mean, hell, look at what you idolize.

1. Someone who easily sees all perspectives
2. Someone who is intellectually flexible
3. Someone who doesn't stick firmly to something because of personal values
4. Someone who is capable with metaphor and vivid imagery
5. Someone who doesn't challenge you on logical grounds

You're describing a textbook EIE. DA cognition, strong Fe and Ni, poor logic skills, capable of seeing things you miss with 4d Ne. That's who you idolize.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Zamyatin said:


> Low Fe people seek people with high Fe. I mean, hell, look at what you idolize.
> 
> 1. Someone who easily sees all perspectives
> 2. Someone who is intellectually flexible
> ...


Maybe that is your problem, reading those textbooks.


----------



## Zamyatin (Jun 10, 2014)

Captain Mclain said:


> Maybe that is your problem, reading those textbooks.


Try thinking for yourself, then. 

1) Is what I said accurate for FAT? Yes, it is. The dude has been around forever and he only has one tune, and I just described it.

2) Does what I wrote describe an LSE _in the least_? Lol, no, it doesn't. Not even close.

The right conclusion shouldn't be hard to make.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Zamyatin said:


> Low Fe people seek people with high Fe. I mean, hell, look at what you idolize.
> 
> 1. Someone who easily sees all perspectives
> 2. Someone who is intellectually flexible
> ...


Or maybe I actually like myself and not something that is my exact opposite? lol. 

So about those LSI using that language? How do those other posters around here fit in with your theory? I would like to see you apply that to the other LSI on here.


----------



## Zamyatin (Jun 10, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Or maybe I actually like myself and not something that is my exact opposite? lol.
> 
> So about those LSI using that language? How do those other posters around here fit in with your theory? I would like to see you apply that to the other LSI on here.


Why don't you ask them if they'd appreciate those things?

@myst91
@Fried Eggz

The difference is they're not _pretending_ to be their dual by claiming to be great at Ni and Fe, while you do, despite the fact that you're abysmally bad at Fe and your attempts at Ni metaphor have always been wonky and kind of awkward. Which hey, isn't something to be ashamed of, I'm shit at Fe as well, but man, at least recognize that part of yourself. You're like Jeremy, someone who barges into things, derails conversations, and gets everybody annoyed at you because you have no idea how you actually come across.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Zamyatin said:


> Why don't you ask them if they'd appreciate those things?
> 
> @_myst91_
> @_Fried Eggz_
> ...


Oh, subjective judgement. It is based on the premise that I am PRETENDING but they aren't. lol. My God. Just cuz you pretended to be Ni-Fe doesn't mean I do too. Don't project. 

But why don't those two use my language? Maybe I am more dual seeking than them, because I am actually their dual.


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

Entropic said:


> Ok, so I have an idea of how to make a hopefully accurate socionics test, and it'd rely on language and how people express themselves. I definitely think that there is something to how people speak that gives off what IEs they are using and also prefer using, for example:
> 
> 1. When someone uses Fe, they are likely to project an emotion onto an object e.g.
> 
> ...


To be honest, this is not accurate at all. Actually, accuracy has nothing to do with it. The whole idea is wrong. It assumes that functions are individually in charge. This is never the case. An INTJ for example can have difficulties expressing his thoughts because Ni's perceptions come to him everything but words. He has to use Te to translate these perceptions into words. Something can make total sense while he can't explain it right away. He'll need time to think this through before he can express it.

Also, perception functions don't really express anything. Judging functions do. So Se saying "it's cold outside" doesn't happen. It depends on what their strongest judging function is for something to be expressed and what a judging function expresses depends on the perceiving function.

So you´re going to have to make it more complete/complex.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Peter said:


> To be honest, this is not accurate at all. Actually, accuracy has nothing to do with it. The whole idea is wrong. It assumes that functions are individually in charge. This is never the case. An INTJ for example can have difficulties expressing his thoughts because Ni's perceptions come to him everything but words. He has to use Te to translate these perceptions into words. Something can make total sense while he can't explain it right away. He'll need time to think this through before he can express it.
> 
> Also, perception functions don't really express anything. Judging functions do. So Se saying "it's cold outside" doesn't happen. It depends on what their strongest judging function is for something to be expressed and what a judging function expresses depends on the perceiving function.
> 
> So you´re going to have to make it more complete/complex.


SOCIONICS. NOT MBTI. SOCIONICS.

I'm done. At least know what system you are criticizing before you do. I also thoroughly disagree with your assertion of how the MBTI works, but since this isn't even the MBTI subforum, I don't give a fuck about correcting them.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Peter said:


> To be honest, this is not accurate at all. Actually, accuracy has nothing to do with it. The whole idea is wrong. It assumes that functions are individually in charge. This is never the case. An INTJ for example can have difficulties expressing his thoughts because Ni's perceptions come to him everything but words. He has to use Te to translate these perceptions into words. Something can make total sense while he can't explain it right away. He'll need time to think this through before he can express it.
> 
> Also, perception functions don't really express anything. Judging functions do. So Se saying "it's cold outside" doesn't happen. It depends on what their strongest judging function is for something to be expressed and what a judging function expresses depends on the perceiving function.
> 
> So you´re going to have to make it more complete/complex.


It is so wrong. For example, "It is cold outside" as Se. lol. Focusing on exterior sensation. It is the most literal understanding of the function that one could come up with. "I have a toothache" must be Si then. OBviously not. These are things that people say --everybody says-- when they experience those things. It is simple linguistics. lol. On cold days here, a lot of people mention that. It has nothing to do with Se. It has to do with it being cold outside. Everybody talks about the environment.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Everybody talks about the environment.


Everybody has and uses all eight IMs too...


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

The_Wanderer said:


> Everybody has and uses all eight IMs too...


But can't you see that talking about the weather has nothing to do with any of them? People talk about the weather --about it being cold-- because it is cold. And that is how one expresses that thought to others. It is the conventional way to do that. Language is a convention. A way of doing things. A shared one. It wouldn't work if it wasn't shared. 

Again, this is an issue covered by linguistics which a subject like Socionics devalues. If people understood language on a deeper level, they would see why this is superfluous. This conversation would not be happening. I have mentioned the cultural/environmental element many times and people didn't want to hear it. Jung's Psychology of the Unconscious is consistent with my views on language and how language is communal. You can't reduce it to an individual. It is corrected by society.

As the book says:

"When the child speaks, he lays before the world his suggestion for a general or common meaning. The reception he gets confirms or refutes him. In either case he is instructed."


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

The_Wanderer said:


> Everybody has and uses all eight IMs too...


But as far as a serious contribution to this thread: a casual observation is that people on Se/Ni axis seem more raw. More theatrical. Like randomly throwing "fucks" around. For example, I think Night Huntress and I have a much more similar speech style than you and her do. I consider hers more harsh than me but she has that bite and it is somewhat hip. It is lively. The LSI on the forum are not like that. The ILI aren't.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> But can't you see that talking about the weather has nothing to do with any of them? People talk about the weather --about it being cold-- because it is cold.


... and it's through the use of sensation that people notice the weather being cold...



FearAndTrembling said:


> I think Night Huntress and I have a much more similar speech style than you and her do.


I think you _want_ your speech to be more like hers. I think you're _trying really hard_ to be theatrical, raw and lively. In reality it's not working very well; you come across more as a guy who rocks backwards and forwards while mumbling about government troops in black helicopters coming to get you.



FearAndTrembling said:


> this is an issue covered by linguistics which a subject like Socionics devalues.


You're full of it.



FearAndTrembling said:


> The LSI on the forum are not like that. The ILI aren't.


So are you saying that you're an Se dominant, or that the LSIs and ILIs on this forum are mistyped? You're missing the part where you make a point.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

*Nice info:

*http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/155-Semantics-and-Vocabulary-of-Information-Elements


@_The_Wanderer_ you may find it interesting


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

Good stuff, validates the OP too.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Yes, I have considered most types. I do think I use Ti in some fashion tho. lol. Maybe not. *But trying to put Jeremy and I at LSI is laughable. Jeremy particularly.* The guy talks forever and gets nowhere. And doesn't care. He is just a pea in a pod with Myst and Fried Eggz. Are people serious? Can people not see a vast difference between them? Since this is a thread on language. How fucking dry they are? For God's sake. I am not hating, I am just saying they have a dry and rigid tone that I don't relate to and Jeremy is not even close to. They are dry and stern like supposed ILI on this forum. I think TJ are actually supposed to be dry though.


Yes laughable. @ the bolded

I see the differences very well.

The people that do not, are way too tangled up in their own intricate unfalsifiable theories. Unfalsifiable as those theories can be used to justify any typing at will. I'm surprised though that even @Zamyatin got so deep into this intellectually dishonest type of theorizing. Is this some ILI thing.




Zamyatin said:


> Low Fe people seek people with high Fe. I mean, hell, look at what you idolize.
> 
> 1. Someone who easily sees all perspectives
> 2. Someone who is intellectually flexible
> ...


Show me where FAT idolized this, I don't have time to read the whole forum.

By the way I do not look for the 5th point in your list, I instead look for someone who's willing to try and challenge me. I don't need a brainwashed follower. Also 3rd not necessarily true, depending how you interpret it.




The_Wanderer said:


> I think you _want_ your speech to be more like hers. I think you're _trying really hard_ to be theatrical, raw and lively. In reality it's not working very well; you come across more as a guy who rocks backwards and forwards while mumbling about government troops in black helicopters coming to get you.


This is your subjective POV, I see it differently. Clearly I see it differently because I'm in the same quadra he is (but NOT THE SAME TYPE).


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

myst91 said:


> This is your subjective POV


This is surprising, especially when you consider that I said it.



myst91 said:


> I'm in the same quadra he is (but *NOT THE SAME TYPE*).




Lol. Love that emphasis.



myst91 said:


> No, you're missing the point. The point was about the Se/Ni axis, him typing as IEI will be on that axis.




He mentioned Se/Ni types having a particular character, then went on to say that he has it, and that Night Huntress has it. He then added that neither the resident ILIs or LSIs have this character. Something here doesn't add up: are ILIs and LSIs not part of the same Se/Ni axis that SEE and IEI share?


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Zamyatin said:


> The difference is they're not _pretending_ to be their dual by claiming to be great at Ni and Fe, while you do, despite the fact that you're abysmally bad at Fe and your attempts at Ni metaphor have always been wonky and kind of awkward. Which hey, isn't something to be ashamed of, I'm shit at Fe as well, but man, at least recognize that part of yourself. You're like Jeremy, someone who barges into things, derails conversations, and gets everybody annoyed at you because you have no idea how you actually come across.


Ah this got skipped. So. How the fuck do you think you really know that he's pretending to be whatever. What stupid bullshit is this. Again, unfalsifiable theorizing. What's worse, it's done without respect for the other person's mind, especially in terms of the other person's autonomy about ability to know whether what they are doing is done in an authentic way.

It's really rather ridiculous. Wake up, get back in tangible reality a bit.

@FearAndTrembling is argumentative for sure, but his information processing is very different from Jeremy's. Barging into things, derailing convos, etc is not to do with sociotype or information processing whatsoever.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

The_Wanderer said:


> This is surprising, especially when you consider that I said it.


How is it surprising?




> Lol. Love that emphasis.


Yes, the gamma idiocy can piss me off.




> He mentioned Se/Ni types having a particular character, then went on to say that he has it, and that Night Huntress has it. He then added that neither the resident ILIs or LSIs have this character. Something here doesn't add up: are ILIs and LSIs not part of the same Se/Ni axis that SEE and IEI share?


I already read back and noticed he mentioned ILIs as well so I deleted that part of my post even before you replied. Originally I assumed he meant that Se/Ni axis = Se-base / Ni-base. But that doesn't make sense if ILIs are excluded. So no, I can't be bothered to figure out what he meant now. @FearAndTrembling can clarify himself if he wants.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

myst91 said:


> How is it surprising?


That was sarcasm, you were stating the obvious.



myst91 said:


> Yes, the gamma idiocy can piss me off.


And what, exactly, is _Gamma idiocy_?



myst91 said:


> By the way I do not look for the 5th point in your list, I instead look for someone who's willing to try and challenge me. I don't need a brainwashed follower. Also 3rd not necessarily true, depending how you interpret it.


Why do you assume that you're the measuring stick by which all LSIs are measured? Everything @Zamyatin has listed isn't opposing to anything Socionics has said about LSIs. 

On a side note, being the _brainwashed follower_ is actually an LSI stereotype, not an EIE stereotype.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

The_Wanderer said:


> That was sarcasm, you were stating the obvious.


Yes, I had to state the obvious because you did not see it on your own.




> And what, exactly, is _Gamma idiocy_?


What is going in this thread, the way FAT is being retyped.




> Why do you assume that you're the measuring stick by which all LSIs are measured?


You're assuming bullshit. Don't put words into my mouth. I never even implied such a thing. And you are making about zero logical sense here.




> Everything @Zamyatin has listed isn't opposing to anything Socionics has said about LSIs.


And I never said it is opposing any socionics theory. Never implied it either. Again, does not logically follow from anything I said.




> On a side note, being the _brainwashed follower_ is actually an LSI stereotype, not an EIE stereotype.


Yeah, I saw that. What exactly is your point with this? Because I am not seeing one.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Thanks for derailing my thread that had a great premise into this utter cesspool of bullshit. Really appreciate it. Like seriously @myst91, you don't understand why the fuck you think some people here think some people are X type, but just because you don't see it, it doesn't mean it's not there. You can see an object in many ways and literally seeing it on front of you is only but one way to do so. If you do not know any other way to see, you have no right to claim that you think other ways of seeing are idiotic; no, that just shows that your way of seeing is limited. Not everything in this world can be understood through the lens of concreteness and type more so than other ways, is one of them. It can take a lot of reading between the lines to get at a person's true character and in the case of some people in here for a myriad of reasons, this holds true. Now fucking shut it and discuss IEs and how they pertain to how people express themselves in speech or don't post at all. If I would have taken @Fried Eggz concretely and literally, he would probably still type as an ILI atm. 

Goes to other people as well but you specifically targeted people in here for being idiotic, which I find unacceptable.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

Entropic said:


> Goes to other people as well


No worries, apologies for the derail.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

myst91 said:


> Ah this got skipped. So. How the fuck do you think you really know that he's pretending to be whatever. What stupid bullshit is this. Again, unfalsifiable theorizing. What's worse, it's done without respect for the other person's mind, especially in terms of the other person's autonomy about ability to know whether what they are doing is done in an authentic way.
> 
> It's really rather ridiculous. Wake up, get back in tangible reality a bit.
> 
> @_FearAndTrembling_ is argumentative for sure, but his information processing is very different from Jeremy's. Barging into things, derailing convos, etc is not to do with sociotype or information processing whatsoever.


I can play the same game Zamyatin does. Obvious Ti dom he is. Aggression without seeing any points of view - Ne Polr. Wanting to be this revolutionary is Fe seeking. Wanting to fit in this crowd. Obvious Fe valuing.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

The_Wanderer said:


> This is surprising, especially when you consider that I said it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The point I am making is that you and Huntress obviously aren't the same type. And you have to resort to this ridiculous paranoid world of pretend. I can say the same about you. Not everybody is a wannabe sycophant.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I can





FearAndTrembling said:


> I can


Good. Be the Little Engine that Could. Demonstrate that _you can _with a well-reasoned argument and I will be glad to listen to your suggestions, preferably through the medium of PMs as to not further derail this thread. So far I've had SEE, IEE, ILE and EIE. Got anything to add?


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

The_Wanderer said:


> Good. Demonstrate this with a well-reasoned argument and I will be glad to listen to your suggestions, preferably through the medium of PMs as to not further derail this thread. So far I've had SEE, IEE, ILE and EIE. Got anything to add?


Why don't you ask your buddies to do the same? They gave subjective viewpoints and said I am playing pretend. lol. There is no reason to take this to PM. You think I am playing pretend so I will treat you in kind.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Entropic said:


> Thanks for derailing my thread that had a great premise into this utter cesspool of bullshit. Really appreciate it. Like seriously @_myst91_, you don't understand why the fuck you think some people here think some people are X type, but just because you don't see it, it doesn't mean it's not there. You can see an object in many ways and literally seeing it on front of you is only but one way to do so. If you do not know any other way to see, you have no right to claim that you think other ways of seeing are idiotic; no, that just shows that your way of seeing is limited. Not everything in this world can be understood through the lens of concreteness and type more so than other ways, is one of them. It can take a lot of reading between the lines to get at a person's true character and in the case of some people in here for a myriad of reasons, this holds true. Now fucking shut it and discuss IEs and how they pertain to how people express themselves in speech or don't post at all. If I would have taken @_Fried Eggz_ concretely and literally, he would probably still type as an ILI atm.
> 
> Goes to other people as well but you specifically targeted people in here for being idiotic, which I find unacceptable.



Aww. More appeal to Fe and rules. The crowd. Ti. 

Fe valuing.

"But this is just the way we view things here. You don't see it like we do!" lol.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Thanks for derailing my thread that had a great premise into this utter cesspool of bullshit. Really appreciate it. Like seriously @myst91, you don't understand why the fuck you think some people here think some people are X type, but just because you don't see it, it doesn't mean it's not there. You can see an object in many ways and literally seeing it on front of you is only but one way to do so. If you do not know any other way to see, you have no right to claim that you think other ways of seeing are idiotic; no, that just shows that your way of seeing is limited. Not everything in this world can be understood through the lens of concreteness and type more so than other ways, is one of them. It can take a lot of reading between the lines to get at a person's true character and in the case of some people in here for a myriad of reasons, this holds true. Now fucking shut it and discuss IEs and how they pertain to how people express themselves in speech or don't post at all. If I would have taken @Fried Eggz concretely and literally, he would probably still type as an ILI atm.
> 
> Goes to other people as well but you specifically targeted people in here for being idiotic, which I find unacceptable.


Lol, that's not what is idiotic, seeing beyond what is there is OK, the problem is the unfalsifiable way of theorizing. Do you even understand what that means?

I targeted people's thinking, not people personally. And sorry but yes I will speak up if I see such bs.

FAT also expressed it very well in post #73 . (_"Such as the behavior-cognition distinction. How can anyone spend so much time on this subject and have such a fundamental misunderstanding of basic definitions? I don't think it has anything to do with functions I just think people are ignorant about the philosophy and history of psychology coupled with lack of critical thinking skills and perhaps laziness."_)


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Aww. More appeal to Fe and rules. The crowd. Ti.
> 
> Fe valuing.
> 
> "But this is just the way we view things here. You don't see it like we do!" lol.


Eh I actually think Entropic is ILI alright.

edit: if you were playing the game like about Zamyatin etc, tongue in cheek, nvm.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Thanks for derailing my thread that had a great premise into this utter cesspool of bullshit.


By the way I understand your issue with derail. I do think issues of retyping don't belong here and I don't even see why people started on that. 

The OP is a good idea originally.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

myst91 said:


> Lol, that's not what is idiotic, seeing beyond what is there is OK, the problem is the unfalsifiable way of theorizing. Do you even understand what that means?
> 
> I targeted people's thinking, not people personally. And sorry but yes I will speak up if I see such bs.
> 
> FAT also expressed it very well in post #73 . (_"Such as the behavior-cognition distinction. How can anyone spend so much time on this subject and have such a fundamental misunderstanding of basic definitions? I don't think it has anything to do with functions I just think people are ignorant about the philosophy and history of psychology coupled with lack of critical thinking skills and perhaps laziness."_)


Exactly. It is a legitimate critique. These are the kind of things that are swept under the rug by this clique. Why lap this stuff up? 

This is how it starts. Bad reasoning and understanding is built on and believed by the sheep in here and then you come back a few months later and it is orthodoxy. lol.


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

Night Huntress said:


> This is interesting. An ESE I know feels the same way. She thinks that sentences and ideas should have healthy pauses so that everything can sink in and leave you content, ready for the next bit of information.
> 
> In contrast I like fluidity and connection; feeling like every sentence and concept readily leads to the next and forms a beautifully unfolding sequence.


Personally, I think I prefer shorter sentences because I have a short attention span, and might easily forget what the point was if it goes on for too long. That might be slightly different though. Not sure.


And I still don't see @FearAndTrembling as a rational type, or at least not LSI. Actually, I just noticed he seems to use short sentences a lot, yet I don't find him the most coherent or whatever. So now I'm not sure what I prefer. But I do think he perhaps has a point somewhere.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Distortions said:


> Personally, I think I prefer shorter sentences because I have a short attention span, and might easily forget what the point was if it goes on for too long. That might be slightly different though. Not sure.
> 
> 
> And I still don't see @_FearAndTrembling_ as a rational type, or at least not LSI. Actually, I just noticed he seems to use short sentences a lot, yet I don't find him the most coherent or whatever. So now I'm not sure what I prefer. But I do think he perhaps has a point somewhere.


This is a point I heard from somebody else so don't kill me... but I mentioned once how Seinfeld is a Ne show. It is a show about nothing. It fractures every situation into every possibility. And somebody said Seinfeld is ENFJ. The poster Arkigos. I respect his opinion but he may be wrong. He said that Fe has a "novel engagement". It has shock value. It purposely tries to fuck with the crowd. It does "wacky" things to get a reaction from people. There is a stereotype that Ne is like the funny function. I think it is more Fe.

Perhaps what I am seeing in Huntress is demonstrative Fe. I think she doesn't quite capture the essence of coolness that Fe has though. It is a little off.

I also see it in that prophetlala. She has a very distinct sense of humor. She acts just like my father. lol. And I have a little of that humor too as does everyone growing up in my house. I told her she could have grown up in my household.


----------



## O_o (Oct 22, 2011)

@_FearAndTrembling_ Lol buddy. What have you done here?  
I don't think his genuine points are ever really in his words, rather the atmosphere he manages to craft out of them. I think he thinks the atmosphere speaks for itself and whatever conclusion each individual might get out of it. Words as a means to get to a state that might speak louder on it's own. You can't and really shouldn't look at any one thing, focus in on it and think "Oh. This is the point". 

But I could be tottallyyy wrong


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

@__ @_Distortions_

Don't often see you guys here, have you guys narrowed down your Sociotypes?



Distortions said:


> Personally, I think I prefer shorter sentences because I have a short attention span, and might easily forget what the point was if it goes on for too long. That might be slightly different though. Not sure.


I see short sentences far more often with Ti-valuing types, I myself only tend to use short sentences when I'm conscious of my sentences being too long. When writing it can also be a useful way of increasing the pace, such as when writing a fast-moving piece.



O_o said:


> I don't think his genuine points are ever really in his words, rather the atmosphere he manages to craft out of them. I think he thinks the atmosphere speaks for itself and whatever conclusion each individual might get out of it. Words as a means to get to a state that might speak louder on it's own. You can't and really shouldn't look at any one thing, focus in on it and think "Oh. This is the point".


In the end, that appears to be a more poetic way of saying that _he's trolling_. :wink: In a way he reminds me of Jeremy, despite at the same time giving off different vibes. I don't think he trolls anywhere near as often as Jeremy does, yet he appears to read too far into things and can't provide much grounding for a lot of what he talks about; whatever message he had disappears inside incoherent babbling. There are the occasional words of wisdom in there somewhere, I think he just tries too hard to be that deep repository of insight. Jeremy just wants to be right all the time... but I really shouldn't criticise somebody for that.



myst91 said:


> By the way I understand your issue with derail. I do think issues of retyping don't belong here and I don't even see why people started on that.


My biggest issue with these boards in general is the rules against typing others; provided there is an actual reasoning behind it and it's not just being used as a personal attack, I don't see why people should be so offended by the suggestion. It's much better than subtle hints or suggestions made by people who then run for the hills like cowards seconds after.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

O_o said:


> @_FearAndTrembling_ Lol buddy. What have you done here?
> I don't think his genuine points are ever really in his words, rather the atmosphere he manages to craft out of them. I think he thinks the atmosphere speaks for itself and whatever conclusion each individual might get out of it. Words as a means to get to a state that might speak louder on it's own. You can't and really shouldn't look at any one thing, focus in on it and think "Oh. This is the point".
> 
> But I could be tottallyyy wrong


Half of what I say is meaningless but I say it just to reach you. Exactly.


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> This is a point I heard from somebody else so don't kill me... but I mentioned once how Seinfeld is a Ne show. It is a show about nothing. It fractures every situation into every possibility. And somebody said Seinfeld is ENFJ. The poster Arkigos. I respect his opinion but he may be wrong. He said that Fe has a "novel engagement". It has shock value. It purposely tries to fuck with the crowd. It does "wacky" things to get a reaction from people. There is a stereotype that Ne is like the funny function. I think it is more Fe.


Perhaps. I haven't actually watched Seinfeld, so I'm not really sure. I think both Fe and Ne can have that... novel engagement thing going for them. Which might be why ENTPs are often seen as trolls I guess. 

And well, Arkigos is a smart guy but I don't think he's always right no. Of course, who is? =P



FearAndTrembling said:


> Half of what I say is meaningless but I say it just to reach you. Exactly.


Well, that makes sense.



The_Wanderer said:


> I see short sentences far more often with Ti-valuing types, I myself only tend to use short sentences when I'm conscious of my sentences being too long. When writing it can also be a useful way of increasing the pace, such as when writing a fast-moving piece.


Yeah, I just saw some talk about Ti and short sentences, so I was like "oh, I think I prefer that. Probably." And considered how meaningful that was. 



> My biggest issue with these boards in general is the rules against typing others; provided there is an actual reasoning behind it and it's not just being used as a personal attack, I don't see why people should be so offended by the suggestion. It's much better than subtle hints or suggestions made by people who then run for the hills like cowards seconds after.


I agree. Of course, saying that might be opening a can of worms because I don't always want someone commenting on my type either... but on principle, I feel it's more... intellectually honest? If anyone is able to tell someone they might be mistyped, if they genuinely think so. This is a forum about personality types after all, so when talking about types it seems natural to also give input someone type. Although yeah, doing so respectfully is preferable. (Though I admit it's entertaining to watch some of the more mean-spirited typing arguments sometimes, a type shouldn't really be an insult lol).


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

The_Wanderer said:


> @__ @_Distortions_
> 
> Don't often see you guys here, have you guys narrowed down your Sociotypes?
> 
> ...


I don't think Jeremy is trolling. He is actually very knowledgeable. He is just unmovable. 

I swear NTP types give the best Fe descriptions. Another said that Fe plays a social role. It sees what role is missing and becomes it. I do not like the way this forum is run. There is an element missing. That is what I ratcheted it up after Jeremy. Somebody has to step in. The logic of Entropic is wrong but that is not what bothers me. It is the larger atmosphere that has been created. I admit that Jeremy disrupted this forum but this forum needs to be disrupted.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I don't think Jeremy is trolling.


He's admitted it to me, several times.



FearAndTrembling said:


> The logic of Entropic is wrong but that is not what bothers me. It is the larger atmosphere that has been created. I admit that Jeremy disrupted this forum but this forum needs to be disrupted.


I've heard you mention cliques several times, in a subtle way you've accused me of being in one also. I think the atmosphere dominated by Entropic that you see is largely in your head; you seem to think that a number of like minded people disagreeing with you/agreeing with each other means a good old fashioned "us-vs-them". Has it got something to do with you being an Aristocrat?

I've never seen it as valid, as I've seen the gammas disagreeing with each other relatively often. Shit, I think the only gamma regular here I haven't attacked or called a name is Quentyn and maybe NH.



Distortions said:


> I agree. Of course, saying that might be opening a can of worms because I don't always want someone commenting on my type either...


Alpha SF?



Distortions said:


> And well, Arkigos is a smart guy but I don't think he's always right no. Of course, who is? =P


Arkigos should get his fat head in the Socionics boards more often; we need more giant brains around here.


----------



## Zamyatin (Jun 10, 2014)

myst91 said:


> Lol, that's not what is idiotic, seeing beyond what is there is OK, the problem is the unfalsifiable way of theorizing. Do you even understand what that means?
> 
> I targeted people's thinking, not people personally. And sorry but yes I will speak up if I see such bs.
> 
> FAT also expressed it very well in post #73 . (_"Such as the behavior-cognition distinction. How can anyone spend so much time on this subject and have such a fundamental misunderstanding of basic definitions? I don't think it has anything to do with functions I just think people are ignorant about the philosophy and history of psychology coupled with lack of critical thinking skills and perhaps laziness."_)


I don't have the patience to go through literally everything you've written in this thread, but I'll start here.

How is anything I've said inconsistent with "basic definitions"? Neither Jeremy nor FAT act anything like IEI or EII. EII is particularly laughable -- Se PoLR is infamous for being conflict-avoidant yet both of them basically posted here for one purpose, to pop into threads like this one, which have nothing to do with them, and to stir up conflict to derail the conversation to benefit them in some way. Entropic was trying to get information that would allow for a better Socionics test, basically the beginning of the process that would allow someone to develop an empirical test by first getting an idea of commonly perceived patterns, a starting hypothesis, that can in turn be refined and tested more rigorously. Then FAT pops up, unannounced and unwanted, to shit on something other people are trying to do because being a decent, respectful human being doesn't jive with his self-image of a man against the system who calls out everybody for trying to build something. Why the fuck are you defending him? That's fucking reprehensible, and he does it constantly.

The reason I disagree with everything FAT has typed him as is because he will constantly talk about how he is an IEI (or lately, an EII) but his behavior is completely inconsistent with all the types he's claimed to be. Similar with Jeremy. People don't live in their role IEs. Someone who is constantly and of their own accord without pressure from others spending time making Ti judgments and engaging in Ti subjects of discussion isn't Ti superego, lol. I mean fuck, I'd never try to live in my super-ego block, I don't like Si or Fe at all and that would drain me fast. I doubt you would try to live in Fi/Ne mode either.

If anything Jeremy and to a lesser degree FAT are examples of Jung's introverted thinking type.



> The greater introverted thinking dominates this type, the greater his convictions become all the more rigid and unbending. External influences are not considered. The more he becomes unsympathetic to his immediate environment, the more dependent he becomes upon his closest friends. He becomes more focused on the self, inconsiderate of others needs and becomes goes deeper into his thoughts, yet his ideas and thoughts become less practical in the real world and he may become vulnerable susceptible to others. Outside influences are dismissed, but may reach him from within through his inferior functions. He is obliged to collect evidence against it and against things in general which to outsiders seems quite superfluous.
> 
> The thinking of the introverted type is positive and synthetic in the development of ideas that in increasing measure approach the eternal validity of primitive images. But, when their connection with external world experience begins to fade, they become mythological and untrue for the present situation. Hence this thinking holds value only for those who think similar so long as it also stands in visible and understandable connection with the known facts of the time. But when thinking becomes mythological, its irrelevancy grows until finally it gets lost in itself. The relatively unconscious functions of feeling, intuition, and sensation, which counterbalance introverted thinking, are inferior in quality and have a primitive and extraverted character to which all the troublesome external world influences this type is subject to must be recognized. The various measures of defending themselves from the external world and the curious protective obstacles that such people find necessary to surround themselves with when using the auxiliary function, are sufficiently familiar. I may therefore, spare myself a description of these functions. The functions serve as a defense against 'magical' influences and a vague dread of the other sex.


This quote describes what you found so frustrating about Jeremy, his detachment from reality, far better than Ne. I'm not exactly a fan of Ne, but it's rarely detached from reality because it's oriented towards present reality, scanning it constantly for possibility and potential. I've dated IEEs, and they weren't out of touch, just a tad impractical because they focused more on how things _could_ turn out instead of how they _would_ turn out, which means they took far more risks than I appreciated.

As for FAT, I'm not going to summarize all of his posts for you. He hasn't denied that what I wrote was true of him, so take that as confirmation. As for his ability to assess himself or others, he is notoriously bad at it. Just for myself, he has alternately typed me as LIE, LII, ESI, IEI, LSE and in this thread he's hinted I'm LSI. By his own admission, he knows very little and he doesn't attempt to remedy that and resents it when people correct his facts (yeah, that's some Te DS alright). Instead, he has this habit of popping into threads, telling everybody that they're wrong, getting shut down by people who actually know what the fuck they're talking about, and then going on a paranoid rant about a giant conspiracy against him by the Socionics Illuminati, of which I am supposedly a part.

You have talent, and I respect that, but you have this blind spot where you don't consider other variables that are influencing the situation. I don't want to sound patronizing, but try engaging your perception a bit. Just objectively, without influencing your observations by what you know of Socionics, try thinking about the way people behave. Like their objective, actual behaviors. I've done it for myself many times. Here's a couple of the things I've noticed about myself.

1. Tend to be abrasive and sarcastic when challenged
2. Often shows disinterest through the use of the word "lol" at the beginning or end of a sentence
3. Comfortable with conflict and tends to provoke it at times
4. Doesn't engage people on emotional grounds

This type of information, just direct observations of behavior rather than trying to "interpret" them according to some framework, is far more reliable than any system because it's far closer to what we're trying to measure, the way a person thinks. It's how I typed and retyped myself, because with enough of these observations it was easy to go through the descriptions of IEs and sociotypes and go "yeah, probably not" or "hmm, that sounds like it might fit". No single datapoint stands by itself, but with enough of them a reliable pattern can be detected and a best fit can be found.

The bottom line? I don't believe Jeremy is EII and I don't believe FAT is IEI/EII because when I do objective observation of them like this, their behavior is inconsistent with descriptions of those types and doesn't suggest that cognitive structure. It doesn't fit who they are. If you have different observations though, I'm more than happy to discuss them.


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

The_Wanderer said:


> Alpha SF?


Who knows.

And well, seeing Arkigos post here more could be interesting. Not sure if he's been posting much in general lately, though. (But then he changes his name, so.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

Zamyatin said:


> No single datapoint stands by itself, but with enough of them a reliable pattern can be detected and a best fit can be found.


Hold on, Hold on... I'ma let you finish but... *Science*!


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Entropic said:


> I didn't see this before; I think you are right about that. Specifically, I find that Fe valuing types are more naturally prone towards using smileys/emoticons as a way to express themselves and the purpose of them seem to be more less for the smiley's sake of representing an emotion, but sometimes almost for its own sake of existing? Like I see Fe doms for example doing spams of "  " as a way to represent their happiness or something. I've also seen Fe doms in lack of smileys, fall back on spamming exclamation marks.


I think this is much more an ESE than EIE thing with overuse of emoticons and exclamation marks like this. 

I also knew someone once who did not ever use emoticons but yet she managed to convey in her writing what I tried to convey with the emoticons, except she did it much much better than I ever would by trying to use these rather simplistic emoticons. I don't know her type, I did not do socionics back then but this really did take my attention.




> In contrast, it seems as if Fi types seem to use smileys more sarcastically usually? With that said, I used to be addicted to the "" smiley as a teenager for some reason, but then my propensity for using smileys increasingly wore off.


I still use "" a lot. My IEI ex also did. And an IEE called us out on it... yes for real, she took issue with the usage of the "" emoticon. Otoh my ESI ex did the "" a lot but he seemed to do it in a much more resentful and/or sarcastic way than I ever would. 




> The Ne valuing types very often utilize terminology towards the end of their speech with "So what do you say? Don't you think it sounds interesting?". I never do that even though it says so in the script (my company is super delta); I tend to focus more on ability/capability e.g. would you be able to/want to do that?


This seems like a good observation, it does sound real weird to imagine myself doing this sort of question to try and get someone to do the survey. I would do what you do instead.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

myst91 said:


> I think this is much more an ESE than EIE thing with overuse of emoticons and exclamation marks like this.


Disagreed, because I've seen EIEs do it, seen SLEs do it too, so I am not sure if it's quadra related.



The_Wanderer said:


> I just feel like people expect me to do it too much, kind of feel like a babysitter when I have to measure people's interest levels.


How would you prefer it?


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

myst91 said:


> I think this is much more an ESE than EIE thing with overuse of emoticons and exclamation marks like this.


Why? I see Alphas and Betas, especially the extraverts, do it all the time.



Entropic said:


> How would you prefer it?


That's the interesting part; it makes sense as to why generating interest can be a good motivator to get people moving, I just don't want to have to do it all the time; when I feel I do as it seems to be somewhat encouraged in Australia. What I'd generally do depends on who I'm talking to, but the good old mercenary line, "just think of the money", springs to mind.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Disagreed, because I've seen EIEs do it, seen SLEs do it too, so I am not sure if it's quadra related.


Reread, I didn't say EIEs never do it. I was describing a trend rather than absolutes. Also see my lines below to The_Wanderer.




The_Wanderer said:


> Why? I see Alphas and Betas, especially the extraverts, do it all the time.


It seems like it also depends on some other thing(s) outside socionics because not all of them do it. I do not however know what these other things are.


----------



## Schizoid (Jan 31, 2015)

myst91 said:


> I think this is much more an ESE than EIE thing with overuse of emoticons and exclamation marks like this.


My EIE mom has this habit of using smileys and exclamation marks in texts. Like a few days ago she was congratulating my brother about his newborn baby and she actually consulted me which smiley face to use. She was worrying that she will end up sending the wrong smiley face. And she spent like 5 minutes trying to decide which smiley face to use and she ended up using two smiley faces inside the message. She also cares a lot about the length of a message. Like I sent a one-word message to my brother congratulating him about his newborn baby and she started lecturing me away asking me why my message is so short.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

myst91 said:


> Reread, I didn't say EIEs never do it. I was describing a trend rather than absolutes. Also see my lines below to The_Wanderer.


That was utterly unclear and did not seem to follow based on what you wrote, which sounds more like since you've seen ESEs do this more, it means EIEs don't do it to the point it's a relevant point to convey. Anyway, thank you for clarifying.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Entropic said:


> That was utterly unclear and did not seem to follow based on what you wrote, which sounds more like since you've seen ESEs do this more, it means EIEs don't do it to the point it's a relevant point to convey. Anyway, thank you for clarifying.


As I was not speaking in absolutes, the absolute statement is what was not following.

And np.


----------



## Mr inappropriate (Dec 17, 2013)

Entropic said:


> I didn't see this before; I think you are right about that. Specifically, I find that Fe valuing types are more naturally prone towards using smileys/emoticons as a way to express themselves and the purpose of them seem to be more less for the smiley's sake of representing an emotion, but sometimes almost for its own sake of existing? Like I see Fe doms for example doing spams of "  " as a way to represent their happiness or something. I've also seen Fe doms in lack of smileys, fall back on spamming exclamation marks. I am in a Facebook group where an ESE ends every sentence almost, with an exclamation mark lol, like this:
> 
> This is sentence one! This is sentence two! This is sentence three!
> 
> In contrast, it seems as if Fi types seem to use smileys more sarcastically usually? With that said, I used to be addicted to the "" smiley as a teenager for some reason, but then my propensity for using smileys increasingly wore off.


Actually, I dont usually see smiley/emoticons as a way to expressing emotion but more because they look stupidly cute (this could be more Ne?) and they make friendly chatting. Otherwise text communaction seems harsh at times.
Sometimes, I spam (by spammin I mean no text, only smiely+emojis lol) similies to SEE just to annoy her. Especially, she hates whatsapp's little baby emoji. lol :laughing:
Gamma's seem more disturbed in general compared to Delta, they find it very childish. Which brings me to Se-quadras being aspired to be grown-ups. They want money and stuff. Not wanting to be grown up like an old person but beta's attitude are more like avarage Rap videos; while Gammas are more like corparate people who use business buzzwords in each of their sentences.


----------



## hal0hal0 (Sep 1, 2012)

*Thread Warning*

*Thread Warning*
*
Cool it with the ad homs, personal jabs, unsolicited typing and derails, please.*

Also, RE: Unsolicited typing. There is a type me section where people can make threads for typing advice. Otherwise, don't do it. As tempting as it may be to point out a mistype, it will certainly not kill you to sit on your hands and _not _type out that lengthy thesis if it is 1) not asked for or 2) explicitly unwanted.​


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Tangentially related to the OP, reading lyrics by lyricists who are likely ILIs, their lyrical structure tend to often follow a very specific pattern that I think fits DA cognition very well, which is that there is often a lot of repetition and each repetition changes the meaning somewhat either by switching out a word or reversing its entire meaning by using dichotomies/negations e.g. 

All that was, love
There was no love

OR

Love it
Love it
Fucking hate it

A few sample examples:


* *




*"Passive" by A A Perfect Circle*
“Dead as dead can be,” my doctor tells me
But I just can’t believe him, never the optimistic one
I’m sure of your ability to become my perfect enemy
Wake up and face me, don’t play dead cause maybe
Someday I will walk away and say, “You disappoint me,”
Maybe you’re better off this way

Leaning over you here, cold and catatonic
I catch a brief reflection of what you could and might have been
It's your right and your ability
To become…my perfect enemy…

_Wake up (why can't you) and face me (come one now),
Don’t play dead (don't play dead)
Cause maybe (because maybe)
Someday I’ll (someday I'll) walk away and say, “You disappoint me,”
Maybe you’re better off this way_

_Maybe you’re better off this way
Maybe you’re better off this way
Maybe you’re better off this way
You’re better of this; you’re better off this;
Maybe you’re better off!_

_Wake up (can't you) and face me (come on now),
Don’t play dead (don't play dead)
Cause maybe (because maybe)
Someday I’ll (someday I'll) walk away and say, “You fucking disappoint me!”
Maybe you’re better off this way_

_Go ahead and play dead
I know that you can hear this
Go ahead and play dead
Why can't you turn and face me?
Why can't you turn and face me?
Why can't you turn and face me?
Why can't you turn and face me?
You fucking disappoint me!

Passive aggressive bullshit_

*"The Mephistopheles Of Los Angeles" by Marilyn Manson*
_I don't know if I can open up
I've been opened enough
I don't know if I can open up_
I'm not a birthday present
I'm aggressive regressive
_The past is over
And passive scenes so pathetic_

_Are we fated, faithful, or fatal?
Are we fated, faithful, or fatal?_

_I'm feeling stoned and alone like a heretic
And I'm ready to meet my maker
I'm feeling stoned and alone like a heretic
I'm ready to meet my maker
Lazarus has got no dirt on me
Lazarus has got no dirt on me
And I'll rise to every occasion
I'm the Mephistopheles of Los Angeles
Of Los Angeles_

_Don't know if I can open up
I been opened too much
Double-crossed glossed over in my pathos_
_
Are we fated, faithful, or fatal?
Are we fated, faithful, or fatal?_

_I'm feeling stoned and alone like a heretic
And I'm ready to meet my maker
I feel stoned and alone like a heretic
I'm ready to meet my maker
Lazarus has got no dirt on me
Lazarus has got no dirt on me
And I'll rise to every occasion
I'm the Mephistopheles of Los Angeles
Of Los Angeles

Are we fated, faithful, or fatal?
Are we fated, faithful, or fatal?

I'm feeling stoned and alone like a heretic
And I'm ready to meet my maker
I'm feeling stoned and alone like a heretic
I'm ready to meet my maker

I'm feeling stoned and alone like a heretic
And I'm ready to meet my maker
I'm feeling stoned and alone like a heretic
I'm ready to meet my maker
Lazarus has got no dirt on me
Lazarus has got no dirt on me
And I'll rise to every occasion
I'm the Mephistopheles of Los Angeles
Of Los Angeles
_
I'm the Mephistopheles of Los Angeles

*"Bullets" by Archive*
Come touch me like I’m an ordinary man, 
have a look in my eyes,
underneath my skin there is a violence,
it's got a gun in it's hand,

_ready to make 
ready to make, read'
ready to make sense of anyone, anything
anyone, anything
anyone, anything
anyone, anything
anyone, anything

Black holes living in the side of your face,
razor wire spinning around your 
around your
around your
around your
around your
around your
around your (blistering sky)
around your (blistering sky)
around your (blistering sky)

bullets are the beauty of the blistering sky
bullets are the beauty and I don’t know why 
bullets are the beauty of the blistering sky
bullets are the beauty and I don’t know why

personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility_

Confine me let me be the lesser of a beautiful man,
without the blood on his hands,
come and make me a martyr come and break my feeling,
with your violence with the gun on my head,

_ready to take,
ready to take,
ready to take,
ready to take out anyone, anywhere.
anyone, anywhere
anyone, anywhere
anyone, anywhere
anyone, anywhere

Black holes living in the side of your face,
razor wire spinning around your,
around your
around your
around your
around your
around your
around your (blistering sky)
around your (blistering sky)
around your (blistering sky)

bullets are the beauty of the blistering sky,
bullets are the beauty and I don’t know why,
bullets are the beauty of the blistering sky,
bullets are the beauty and I don’t know why.

personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility_

Black holes living in the side of your face,
_razor wire spinning around your,
around your
around your
around your (blistering sky)
around your (blistering sky)
around your (blistering sky)
around your (blistering sky)
around your (blistering sky)
around your (blistering sky)

bullets are the beauty of the blistering sky,
bullets are the beauty and I don’t know why,
bullets are the beauty of the blistering sky,
bullets are the beauty and I don’t know why.

personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility

personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility
personal responsibility...._

*"Endtime Hearts" by Dark Tranquillity*
You burned the ruin
The torched remains
And set the precedent
Of innocence betrayed

With the coming of our ages
Will the chasm clear
To identify the pieces
And gather what is lost

_The hours feel so different
Yet everything's the same
The hours feel so different_

Now bring it out into the open
Full disclosure now
Bring it out so we can
Start all over again
Take another stab at honesty
Full disclosure now
Get it done so we can
Start all over again

Righting the imbalance
In a difference of hearts
Close to breakage
Soon to fall
Fought the urge
To carry through
Held on to the real
_Sacrifice the ego
Sacrifice the I_

_It changes the perception
And alters disbelief
It changes the perception
_
*"The Eleventh Sphere" by Scar Symmetry*
Through portals of silvery bliss
Exit the flesh, leaving all of this
I travel within, my eyes remain closed
To this body I am but a host
Disconnecting from the body
Behold creation reversed
Internal eyes are opening
The material sphere bursts

_Nothing is, nothing becomes
End and beginning unites
Nothing was, nothing will be
Time and space collides
In the eleventh sphere

Awaiting to find it all_

I begin an abstract communication
In this eerie civilization
Those who guard these doors
Lie in wait for the aeon of whores
Rejected aspects of our beings
Shunned to this obscure dimension
_I am all that I hate
I am everything in this place_

_Nothing is, nothing becomes
End and beginning unites
Nothing was, nothing will be
Time and space collides
Nothing is, nothing becomes
Nothing was, nothing will be
In the eleventh sphere_

Inside this void
A continuum beyond time
_Here's no truth, here's no lies
Its darkness brings light_
To all those led astray
Now I go, now I leave
Returning to the flesh

_Nothing is, nothing becomes
End and beginning unites
Nothing was, nothing will be
Time and space collides
Nothing is, nothing becomes
Nothing was, nothing will be
In the eleventh sphere

Awaiting to find it all_

*"Deliberation" by Katatonia*
_Visions come
Visions come
In a sickroom bed_
There's something left to learn
_Pass them on
Let it show
Let the rich meet death
Confront our own concern_

See us sleep behind the glass
Unaware of crime
Will you wake us up before it is time

_The red circle holds the only light
Break down my perspective
And notify everyone when the time is right
My mouth remains inactive_

So when you let me in
You let me justify my own reward
You put your hands on me
And I learn the words I didn't know before

_I am ice
I am clear
Let the world be cold
Our deliberation
Pass them on
Let it show
Let the words come slow
Your constant incantation_

_Repeating cycle of light/no light
There's nothing in the airspace
There's no one in the airspace
Repeating cycle of love/no love_

*"Plague Of Butterflies" by Swallow the Sun*
[I. Losing The Sunsets]

Cold was the air that the evening wind brought
Silent and so quiet were the woods
On the eve of that night.
Don't know what I stayed there for so long,
So long that I could hear that voice.
The whisper we all avoid.
Sound from within, the quiet truth

_I felt my blood slowly turning cold,
Turning cold from waiting.
Hours I spent there awaiting,
Hoping for someone to come.
To silent the voice that felt like thunder_

Evael is the light, the white light.
In the chill of my world, she is the one.
She brings the butterflies, pure light.
When ever she comes by
The darkness steps aside

But I felt my blood turn cold.
Hours I spent there awaiting,
Watching the light fading

You're losing the sunsets, you will never get them back.
The days you spend in loneliness are seconds in shades of black

_Winter was cold, but summer is even colder.
Nights have been longer, they have made me much older_

You're losing the sunsets, you will never get them back.
Every night you spend in loneliness are years in shades of black

_Years pass, but has time stopped on me?_
Morning always arises with vaster pain
And then it is sunset again

We weep the winds for your loneliness,
Choir of broken dreams for the love you had.
But now she walks forever lost in gray and woe.
She's not forgiven, she's the one for winter to own.
Not yours, old man, never again...

[II. Plague Of Butterflies]

_Silent people walking by.
They are living, again someone is leaving._
They don't seem to be well,
Quiet death on their faces

Buried a few of them today,
The children and the old by the road.
I could give them shelter but they decide to go...

Village is empty, dead, cold, empty
Only frozen bodies greet my arrival.
Tortured by the plague, a ghost town.

But her face I could not find.
I searched for her in the woods again
And kept a light on my window, for anyone to come.
But when even the trail of dead ended by the road,
I gave up waiting, hoping.

In this kingdom of my loneliness,
On this throne of my thoughts

Maybe I'm the old one, sheltered by these woods.
And when I lay my body to rest,
I watch the ballet of shadows.
Dancing through the flame of a candle.
Taking me to sleep...

But the night trembled my heart,
For black wings moved upon me.
Hoping for my time to come,
I closed my eyes and took a deep breath.
But like every night before, death did not come.

The wings, they moved and danced.
As a butterfly, they kept dancing,
Dancing around my candle.
But why are you here when Evael is lost still?

The morning came with its cold caress.
I curse your light for waking me again.
The candle burnt down, and the burnt wings beside.
Is this a sign of Evael, I arise

I opened my window, painted by thick ice,
Took a deep breath and whispered her name in the air

The freezing summer burned my lungs again
As I walked through the snow.
Looked deeper into the woods,
And the trees waved their heads in sorrow

[III. Evael 10:00]

Cold, oh so cold is this air that the night brought.
Silent, too quiet are the woods in the eve of this night.
Once again I lit the candle on my window
And waited for the sleep...

Evael, my dream has been so alive,
And this plague has cleansed this world for us.
So please, release me now

_Sink deeper to your loneliness
And you will lead her to your grave.
She's lost in gloomy light
Still trying to hold her flame.
You're losing the sunsets and you will never get them back
This life you spend in loneliness is forever in shades of black.
Wake up, old man, let it go, let it go..._

Was it a weak sound on my door that woke me up
Or the trees sheltering me from the night?
I kept my eyes closed but still felt the light,
And the room was filled by butterflies

I rose with my heart beating.
For the weak hope of the midnight's hour I prayed
And opened my door to the winter night

And she fell...
She fell to my arms.
In tears I carried her
And laid her down to sleep.
Her eyes frozen from the thousand nights alone
She trembled and whispered

"I was lost in the woods
And the trees kept me away from you
For I brought the plague with them
With the butterflies"

Hush now and let it go.
Close your eyes now.

And we drift away, together away from the pain,
Deep in this sheltering night, to a forgiving dream.
Until one minute past midnight, the room was filled.
Filled only with butterflies.

*"Ghosting" by Daylight Dies*
Saw you slipping by the way
Abiding in denial
Air that slows, with breath that weighs
Forecasting known conclusions

_As we've drifted from these shores
I find there is no turning back
The winds can only carry us so far
Until they'll carry us no more_


----------



## Verity (Aug 2, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Tangentially related to the OP, reading lyrics by lyricists who are likely ILIs, their lyrical structure tend to often follow a very specific pattern that I think fits DA cognition very well, which is that there is often a lot of repetition and each repetition changes the meaning somewhat either by switching out a word or reversing its entire meaning by using dichotomies/negations e.g.
> 
> All that was, love
> There was no love
> ...


That's interesting. I don't have much to say except that I've noticed that Thom Yorke of Radiohead does that as well, but I'm split between him being ESI or ILI.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Verity said:


> That's interesting. I don't have much to say except that I've noticed that Thom Yorke of Radiohead does that as well, but I'm split between him being ESI or ILI.


Yup, I typed Yorke ILI some time back. I've seen IEI suggested so much but just no.


----------



## Verity (Aug 2, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Yup, I typed Yorke ILI some time back. I've seen IEI suggested so much but just no.


Maybe he's one of those pesky ILI 4's...


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Verity said:


> Maybe he's one of those pesky ILI 4's...


He's nowhere as Fi as Manson though. I've seen Yorke the most commonly typed as a 5, actually.


----------

