# quasi-identity mistyping



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

Kanerou said:


> Try again, sweetie. Maybe I just don't care for a set of overly-complex dichotomies that tend to mean jack shit or just express a concept that is already expressed by quadra or IM element anyway.


Because you can handle complex things by seeing them as simple or something? I view the Reinin Dichotomies as a tremendous help in determining the types.


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

I too have no interest in the Reinin dichotomies.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

Zero11 said:


> Because you can handle complex things by seeing them as simple or something? I view the Reinin Dichotomies as a tremendous help in determining the types.


No, I just don't like complicating things past a certain point. It's why I go no deeper into subtypes than 4-sub DCNH. Also, some of the dichotomies are just stupid (Asking/Declaring, anyone?).


----------



## sinigang (May 5, 2012)

aestrivex said:


> most people probably take tests and read a paucity of introductory material -- actually you would be surprised how varied this material is. the reality that lots of people don't pay attention to quadra values is not one that i contest; my point is that people, including newcomers, *should* be thinking about quadra values because it is the material of fundamental importance in socionics. i think a poor but working understanding of the concepts that drive quadra motivations will serve better for understanding what socionics is about -- namely, for gradually building a better understaindg of quadra motivations -- than a working understanding of what is said in some naively written descriptions.


Yes. That is true but I am actually merely stating the fact that some mistypes are caused by that, and that most people don't go in depth about quadras immediately specially from those who prefer MBTI. I am not really trying to argue about the usefulness of reading Quadras.


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

Kanerou said:


> No, I just don't like complicating things past a certain point. It's why I go no deeper into subtypes than 4-sub DCNH. Also, some of the dichotomies are just stupid (Asking/Declaring, anyone?).


DCNH ewww Ji Je Pi Pe? Asking and Declaring isn´t stupid it makes total sense and explained something I was wondering about. Thats a general pattern not a complete literal phenomenon.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

Zero11 said:


> DCNH ewww Ji Je Pi Pe?


*rolls eyes and chuckles* I consider it to have some interesting concepts. I wish there were more groupings than he gives, though. I'm either contact/initial/ignoring or distant/initial/ignoring, and he doesn't allow for the latter.



> Asking and Declaring isn´t stupid it makes total sense and explained something I was wondering about. Thats a general pattern not a complete literal phenomenon.


I still consider it stupid. 



> Askers
> 
> tendency to dialogue
> much of what an asker says seems more question-like, even statements
> ...





Yeah, that looks helpful. /sarcasm


----------



## sinigang (May 5, 2012)

The dichotomies are okay but they're not very reliable as you would get some results half way in between. Some don't really consider the Id or the super ego. Notice how LSE's are said to be judicious in that theory and yet they seem to be one of the most decisive and/or impatient of the types, due to the Se being at the 8th and Ni at the 4th.


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

sinigang said:


> The dichotomies are okay but they're not very reliable as you would get some results half way in between. Some don't really consider the Id or the super ego. Notice how LSE's are said to be judicious in that theory and yet they seem to be one of the most decisive and/or impatient of the types, due to the Se being at the 8th and Ni at the 4th.


how are LSE's decisive and/or impatient? while i agree that the reinin dichotomies are not very good indicators of how types come across, i probably don't agree with you about the nature of LSEs.


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

Kanerou said:


> [/LIST]
> 
> Yeah, that looks helpful. /sarcasm


At the first sight yes but not after you looked into it. Wikisocion isn´t really exact in this respect :crazy:



> *ASKERS | DECLARERS*
> 
> *Askers (Alpha/Beta Ns, Gamma/Delta Ss):*
> 
> ...


Source: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/106-Reinin-Dichotomies


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

Zero11 said:


> At the first sight yes but not after you looked into it. Wikisocion isn´t really exact in this respect :crazy:
> 
> Source: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/106-Reinin-Dichotomies


Nope, still strikes me as stupid. I'd sooner look at what IM element a person values than their speech pattern (whether they ask rhetorical questions, whether they prefer to take questions after, etc).


----------



## sinigang (May 5, 2012)

aestrivex said:


> how are LSE's decisive and/or impatient? while i agree that the reinin dichotomies are not very good indicators of how types come across, i probably don't agree with you about the nature of LSEs.


Well, we can derive that from analyzing their functions. So if we were to analyze the order by which their functions would come into play, it would be more or less: Te>Si~Se>Ne>Fi>Fe>Ni where Ti would be somewhere random because it is their ignoring element. So what does it mean? If I were to describe the functions in basic (because you can just read the details elsewhere), we could say Te is productivity/facts/empiricism and Se is forcefulness, qualities you would find in LIE's and SLE's. But the difference? LIE's would have Ni and SLE's have Ti and LSE's have those two in the POLR and ignored positions respectively. POLR Ni basically corresponds to a preference for dealing with things in very short term manners as to them, it would seem that things which take too long lead to uncertainty. In position, they would most certainly be the ones to give unrealistic and tight deadlines. Ti as an ignored function simply means the LSE can think about something in depth, but would almost always prefer to use the more dominant Te when working. Decisiveness basically comes from the large use of Te over Ti and impatience(in the likes of, if I sense, it's taking too long, I get angry) is Se as demonstrative and Ni as POLR. My explanation may not be the best in explaining the how it really is but you could always read about each of what I've said in depth, particularly about the POLR/PLR/superego such as in this link:
The Point of Least Resistance


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

sinigang said:


> LIE's would have Ni and SLE's have Ti and LSE's have those two in the POLR and ignored positions respectively. POLR Ni basically corresponds to a preference for dealing with things in very short term manners as to them, it would seem that things which take too long lead to uncertainty. In position, they would most certainly be the ones to give unrealistic and tight deadlines.


it's right that Ni is a "long-term" orientation and Si is a "short-term" orientation, but those orientations exist on the motivational level and how they translate to the behavioral level -- or even on the how-it-interacts with Se and Ne level -- is not straightforward. I don't agree, for example, that LSEs are impatient or impose strict deadlines -- perhaps there are some LSEs that share those traits, but my experience of the type suggests the opposite is more archetypally true; LSEs are patient and accommodating. LSEs may look impatient perhaps in the sense that they are energetic, proactive, and feel unnaturally if they are not in motion or doing something, and they have a sort of no-nonsense attitude that can come across as being gruff -- but i think this is a misinterpretation of what LSEs and delta values are. LSEs are patient, unassuming, accommodating and friendly and very moving-towards people. The truly impatient type is LIE.

What it means to have a long-term orientation is not always easy to understand because the long-term orientation of one's actions also comes with a focus on the immediate impact of one's actions in Se, and additionally the short-term orientation is counterbalanced by a focus on the potential of a situation and how it might be realized in the future. Not to say that there isn't a short term orientation -- but to conceptualize that orientation, think of LSEs as paying attention to what they are doing in the moment and the immediate changes in their lived environment. When one is oriented to the short term, and not to the long-term impact, it leads to a "relaxed" disposition in the moment, rather than something like "strict deadlines" as you suggested.



> Ti as an ignored function simply means the LSE can think about something in depth, but would almost always prefer to use the more dominant Te when working.


"thinking about something in depth" is a bit simplistic, dontcha think?



> Decisiveness basically comes from the large use of Te over Ti and impatience(in the likes of, if I sense, it's taking too long, I get angry)


and as i said, LSEs are oriented in truth to the "short term" -- they are not naturally attentive to whether it is "taking too long" -- and as a partial consequence of this, they aren't really the type that easily gets angry either.

there is this broad problem, in my view, that basically LSEs are badly misunderstood. put another way: while most stereotypes are silly and simplistic caricatures of the types, the common stereotypes of LSE are nothing like caricatures of LSE at all; the things like "harsh deadlines" and "impatience" are really much more characteristics of LSIs.


----------



## sinigang (May 5, 2012)

> it's right that Ni is a "long-term" orientation and Si is a "short-term" orientation, but those orientations exist on the motivational level and how they translate to the behavioral level -- or even on the how-it-interacts with Se and Ne level -- is not straightforward. I don't agree, for example, that LSEs are impatient or impose strict deadlines -- perhaps there are some LSEs that share those traits, but my experience of the type suggests the opposite is more archetypally true; LSEs are patient and accommodating. LSEs may look impatient perhaps in the sense that they are energetic, proactive, and feel unnaturally if they are not in motion or doing something, and they have a sort of no-nonsense attitude that can come across as being gruff -- but i think this is a misinterpretation of what LSEs and delta values are. LSEs are patient, unassuming, accommodating and friendly and very moving-towards people. The truly impatient type is LIE.


It really depends what state they are on. Notice how I mentioned Se somewhere in there? You hit Si right on, but it's not the point. Though it actually explains how they could go to a trip somewhere and relax while you work attitude as I've seen sometimes.

Unassuming is more of a trait associated with Ti, which tends to examine everything before concluding. Accommodation is more SF, definitely. You would only see this when they're using Fi, when they're not working at the moment.



> What it means to have a long-term orientation is not always easy to understand because the long-term orientation of one's actions also comes with a focus on the immediate impact of one's actions in Se, and additionally the short-term orientation is counterbalanced by a focus on the potential of a situation and how it might be realized in the future. Not to say that there isn't a short term orientation -- but to conceptualize that orientation, think of LSEs as paying attention to what they are doing in the moment and the immediate changes in their lived environment. When one is oriented to the short term, and not to the long-term impact, it leads to a "relaxed" disposition in the moment, rather than something like "strict deadlines" as you suggested.





> and as i said, LSEs are oriented in truth to the "short term" -- they are not naturally attentive to whether it is "taking too long" -- and as a partial consequence of this, they aren't really the type that easily gets angry either.


Being oblivious to the future probably does not equate to being relaxed. Relaxed is something you would get when you have mix in Si and Fe instead of Te. It basically comes into arguments when there is already a deadline, and someone wants to move it, even by a bit. They are too unsure of the future in that sense that they best decide to impose it instead of being more lenient. And as I've said, Ni is their POLR and topics involving its use basically make communication very hard, or result in anger.



> "thinking about something in depth" is a bit simplistic, dontcha think?


 Yes. Hence I said I would be very basic with describing the functions, you would know where to find the definition of Ti. Perhaps you want to focus on that instead of Te being dominant over Ti.



> there is this broad problem, in my view, that basically LSEs are badly misunderstood. put another way: while most stereotypes are silly and simplistic caricatures of the types, the common stereotypes of LSE are nothing like caricatures of LSE at all; the things like "harsh deadlines" and "impatience" are really much more characteristics of LSIs.


I would say LSI have a different kind of impatience. Maybe this is perhaps why we are arguing in the first place. I am not sure if we have the same interpretation of what is said there. LSI don't really have tolerance for Ne, their POLR, and as such, they may seem there is only a set way to do things. So when they've made their mind up about something, they become inflexible, believing everyone else that does not adhere to their principles is doing it wrong.


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

sinigang said:


> Unassuming is more of a trait associated with Ti, which tends to examine everything before concluding.


I don't at all agree with this. I find Ti is about structural logic, having nothing to do with thoroughness of examination.



> Accommodation is more SF, definitely.


I don't at all agree with this.



> You would only see this when they're using Fi, when they're not working at the moment.


in a way, but note that Fi is an important motivational drive in LSEs.



> Being oblivious to the future probably does not equate to being relaxed. Relaxed is something you would get when you have mix in Si and Fe instead of Te.


i don't agree with this.



> It basically comes into arguments when there is already a deadline, and someone wants to move it, even by a bit. They are too unsure of the future in that sense that they best decide to impose it instead of being more lenient. And as I've said, Ni is their POLR and topics involving its use basically make communication very hard, or result in anger.


i don't agree with this. i think this interpretation is way too specific.



> Yes. Hence I said I would be very basic with describing the functions, you would know where to find the definition of Ti. Perhaps you want to focus on that instead of Te being dominant over Ti.


forgive me -- rather than pointing out the simplicity of your interpretation, i should have stated that i don't agree with its emphasis or how it perceives Ti.



> I would say LSI have a different kind of impatience. Maybe this is perhaps why we are arguing in the first place. I am not sure if we have the same interpretation of what is said there. LSI don't really have tolerance for Ne, their POLR, and as such, they may seem there is only a set way to do things. So when they've made their mind up about something, they become inflexible, believing everyone else that does not adhere to their principles is doing it wrong.


i don't disagree with your image of LSIs -- rather i think i disagree with your image of LSEs, as I do with a large number of inexperienced socionists.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

@sinigang
The difference between the functions is subtle, that is where Gulenko's cognitive stuff illuminates the subtle difference largely existing in thought process difference.


----------



## sinigang (May 5, 2012)

aestrivex said:


> i don't disagree with your image of LSIs -- rather i think i disagree with your image of LSEs, as I do with a large number of inexperienced socionists.


Though I am sure you would agree that we're looking at the same kind of individual which would have that image. For you it might be the LIE which is impatient though you haven't really explained why you think that is so. But if you would care to say how the system works for them to be that way, I would appreciate it.



Boolean11 said:


> @_sinigang_
> The difference between the functions is subtle, that is where Gulenko's cognitive stuff illuminates the subtle difference largely existing in thought process difference.


I've tried reading Gulenko's material and agree to a certain point, though I'm sure it is possible for people to use multiple cognition styles instead of one. Like perhaps how mirrors could be half-way into each other's preferences.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

sinigang said:


> I've tried reading Gulenko's material and agree to a certain point, though I'm sure it is possible for people to use multiple cognition styles instead of one. Like perhaps how identicals could be half-way into each other's preferences.


It all depends on interpretation that is where the key is and the difficulty in explaining such a subtle difference, the challenge in explaining is the fact that there is a difference in thought processes, yet that is hard to make it comprehensible without exaggeration. 

For example when describing the difference between INTj LII and INTp ILI, using the distinction as being deductive/analytic logic (LII/TiNe) and inductive/synthetic logic (ILI/NiTe) is primarily metaphoric, trying to symbolize such subtlety. That is not to say the two types use their ID functions (their "shadow functions") since that is against the theory trying to emphasize the difference. The confusion we are having here is that you are our quasi-identity, so with whatever information we provide, your psyche is naturally drawn to re-translate what we say but in this instance some of the details get lost in translation. I hope you can make sense of the subtlety instead of bending theory trying to rationalize the differences between the functions have in their attitudes, but seeing your dichotomies as useless without people seemingly "consciously" valuing both.


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

sinigang said:


> Though I am sure you would agree that we're looking at the same kind of individual which would have that image.


No, i *don't* think that I would agree with that. Do you have an example among famous people of who you think is an LSE?



> For you it might be the LIE which is impatient though you haven't really explained why you think that is so. But if you would care to say how the system works for them to be that way, I would appreciate it.


I think that Se and Te values in gamma types coincide to produce a sense of impatience. There is an orientation in Te types towards measurable, tangible phenomena, and an orientation in Se types towards impactful, immediate action to get things done. In my idea of model A, the estimative function is a sort of mostly-conscious function that plays an important part of one's conscious values and outward manifestation -- the result being that Se and Te orientations are accentuated in the gamma extroverts. There is a need for the ruthlessly measurable, and also an orientation towards long term impact that is mediated by being able to see in clear and tangible terms the impact -- the "direction" of the vision, if you will -- of your current actions.


----------



## sinigang (May 5, 2012)

> No, i *don't* think that I would agree with that. Do you have an example among famous people of who you think is an LSE?


No, you misunderstood my statement. I said, we both have an image of an impatient person. Whether that is an LSE is not the point. What we are conflicting at is what we think the type is.
Either that, or you took it as an absolute. I am in no way referring to a 100% same image.



> I think that Se and Te values in gamma types coincide to produce a sense of impatience. There is an orientation in Te types towards measurable, tangible phenomena, and an orientation in Se types towards impactful, immediate action to get things done. In my idea of model A, the estimative function is a sort of mostly-conscious function that plays an important part of one's conscious values and outward manifestation -- the result being that Se and Te orientations are accentuated in the gamma extroverts. There is a need for the ruthlessly measurable, and also an orientation towards long term impact that is mediated by being able to see in clear and tangible terms the impact -- the "direction" of the vision, if you will -- of your current actions.


I see where you're coming from now. What we disagree in is whether the Id Se or the super Id Se plays a stronger role. IMO, The Se of LIE has to contend with creative Ni and demonstrative Ne, their more preferred perceiving functions. On other hand, the LSE would have Se in the strongest Id position.


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

sinigang said:


> No, you misunderstood my statement. I said, we both have an image of an impatient person. Whether that is an LSE is not the point. What we are conflicting at is what we think the type is.


okay, but more directly that means we disagree on what beta and delta values look like, which means we disagree quite fundamentally about socionics.



> I see where you're coming from now. What we disagree in is whether the Id Se or the super Id Se plays a stronger role. IMO, The Se of LIE has to contend with creative Ni and demonstrative Ne, their more preferred perceiving functions. On other hand, the LSE would have Se in the strongest Id position.


yeah, i don't agree with this; the super-id is far more influential than anything in the id block.

also, note that while i have a number of idiosyncratic views about model A, the view that i am articulating here -- that the super-id block is of driving importance and the id block of no importance -- is much more aligned with classical socionics interpretations of model A than yours.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> Logicals/Thinkers are perfectly capable of being courteous, and Ethicals/Feelers are perfectly capable of being bitchy if you irritate them.


I knew this at the back of my mind, had I seen your body language I would have seen you as an ethics type. The problem is that people innately cycle between all "functions" at any time: comprehending reality as it is (Se/Si), seeing beyond the obvious (Ni/Ne), value judgements (Fi/Fe) and raw analysis of fact (Ti/Te). So pretty much when seeing one side of an individual its hard to reach a conclusion.


Kanerou said:


> If by that, you mean spending more time in my brain than in what's in front of me or focusing too much on what should be/what might be rather than dealing with reality as it's presented, then yes.


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

Boolean11 said:


> I mistook the hostility I perceived from you as being "Ti" since I had that pattern of behaviour associated with it, plus my general bias that courtesy was exclusively "F" orientated....(thought waddle erased here). Do you relate to the aspect of undermining the present as intuitive?





> I knew this at the back of my mind, had I seen your body language I would have seen you as an ethics type. The problem is that people innately cycle between all "functions" at any time: comprehending reality as it is (Se/Si), seeing beyond the obvious (Ni/Ne), value judgements (Fi/Fe) and raw analysis of fact (Ti/Te). So pretty much when seeing one side of an individual its hard to reach a conclusion.


ah, okay, so basically what you said earlier about your thinking independently for yourself and not being influenced by the views of others, is a total crock of shit.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

aestrivex said:


> ah, okay, so basically what you said earlier about your thinking independently for yourself and not being influenced by the views of others, is a total crock of shit.


If it looks like duck and quacks like duck its probably a bear
If it looks impersonal, dry and apathetic, its probably feeling


----------

